Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

Amendmend to the Article:

The date is wrong. The event took place on November 9th. The source I used for the date was not correct. Many apologies.

-the author

Hey, uh — how come regular bloggers get censored for name calling and derogatory comments but the editors can post flame stuff like this? How about some even-handedness?

Hi Alejo,

Sorry, I didn’t mean to imply all left wingers are insane or anything like that. But if you read some of the postings and articles on this event, and then watch the video, you’ll have to admit that the reaction is not exactly rational. Sorry if you felt offended in a personal way.

“What has this nation come to when military vehicles, in cities, obey traffic codes?”

What has this nation come to when military vehicles are patrolling our streets?
Why were military vehicles even sent there?

While deadly force was not applied, intimidation was.

hi kctim,

As far as I know, there are no special roads designated for military use to get around most cities. Non-tracked vehicles use the same roads we do everyday. The best info seems to indicate that these guys were indeed lost. I think if they -had- been deployed to intimidate, they might have, well, tried to be more intimidating, don’t you think?

-d

Military vehicles ARE intimidating. Especially when armed.
They were lost? So instead of stopping at a gas station for directions, they chose to stop at anti-military, anti-war demostration and ask for directions? No way.
That would be like me (dumb redneck) stopping in downtown harlem and asking directions to the david duke rally.

I’m sorry, but the martial law practices being slowly implemented do not appeal to me.

www.infowars.com

“best info seems to indicate that these guys were indeed lost.”

Tank guy #1: I don’t know - I looked up Falluja on mapquest and this the route it gave! You think you can do better?

Tank guy #2: I told you not to use map quest - they’re always wrong…

Tank guy #1: ..Listen - your complaining about it isn’t helping..

Tank guy #2: Well your driving around all night isn’t helping either. Listen - theres a group of people up there - just pull up and ask them.

Tank guy #1: I don’t need to ask for directions okay!? Jesus - will you stop nagging me for ine second and help me with this map!?

Tank guy #2: fine.

Tank guy #1: Your mad.

Tank guy #2: I’m not mad.

Tank guy #1: I can tell your mad.

Tank guy #2: Oh! So now you know how I feel too!? Well I guess you know everything…

Tank guy #1: I didn’t say that…

Tank guy #2: If you’re so smart - why have we been driving around in circles for the past hour? We’ve pasted this Dairy Queen 4 times.

Tank guy #1: Fine! Jesus Christ! I’ll ask for directions!

Tank guy #2:…

Tank guy #1:…

(tank pulls up to protesters)

Tank guy #1: Excuses me, we seem to have made a wrong turn, we’re looking for Fallu…whoa…jesus…did you just throw a rock at me..what the…

(tank drives away)

Tank guy #2: Nice work.

Tank guy #1: What?

Tank guy #2: ‘Get Directions’ Its a simple task.

Tank guy #1: Fine. Fine. You know - next time - you drive.

Tank guy #2: You’re not going to roll through this cross walk are you?

Tank guy #1: ‘you’re going to roll this cross walk are you’ No I’m not goin to roll through this cross walk. (under breath) It’s like driving with your mother…

Tank guy #2: What did you just say?

Tank guy #1: Nothing.

Tank guy #2: Fine.

Tank guy #1: You’re mad again.

Tank guy #2: …

Tank guy #1: …

Justin
You just described my last family vacation.

With the use of “slimy,” “crazed,” “crazies,” and “nut-jobs” in reference to the left, you did a pretty good job invalidating your own article.

Too bad, really, as the second half of it was worth reading. I doubt many people will bother to read that far, when the first half is wasted on cliched rhetoric.

I’m not too worried about losing that slice of the audience, burger. If anyone need’s convincing that this was anything more than a random event, they’re already well in the “reason won’t reach them” category. I think you’ll find that there is a segment on the left that wants, even needs, to believe that we are a nation at crisis and the the Bush administration is some kind of fascist monolith. Fortunately that simply is not the case, and those who choose to believe otherwise are hardly ever interested in reasonable examples to the contrary, in my experience.

-D

As usual, let me caviat everything by saying, again: I’m more of a libertarian than a republican, although I choose to be a member of the GOP because I think it is much more closely aligned with what i believe than the Democratic Party. The Libertarian Party is not ready for prime time, and may never be. I’m not an enthusiastic Bush supporter, but I don’t buy into the anti-bush zealotry. There are plenty of -real- things the Bush admin has done wrong, that don’t need to be enhanced by fanciful imagined injustices etc.

Its tough not being an extremist these days. Extremists seem to have all the fun, on both sides.

See, Damon, the problem is that you think you know what happened and what the motivations were, just the same as the “slimy underbelly” people do, which puts you in the same assumptive stance.

I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but I have to say I’m tired of being told, “Oh, you’re just overreacting.” Overreacting when I found out that the Patriot Act gave the government tto much power to look into our private lives, overreacting when I found out our own government was operating a concentration camp in Cuba, overreacting when I found out our soldiers were torturing and murdering prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan.

You know what — BULLSHIT. This is the most arrogant administration I have ever seen and I’ll be damned if I’m going to keep accepting their “coincidences” and “mistakes.” (Just for the record, it would be slightly more believable if Bush and Rumsfeld didn’t smirk while talking about their “mistakes.”)

I’m also tired of people name-calling and categorizing and then saying, “Oh, I didn’t mean you,” when confronted with their obnoxious behavior. If you’re going to spout garbage at least have the guts to stand behind the stinking mess.

Alejo,

Sorry you feel that way. I don’t know what the mindset was, but I -do- know that if those men were under orders to intimidate, they probably would have done just that. They didn’t. Look at the video. Its right there. Do you see them doing anything intimidating?

Honestly, think about it. A couple dozen protestors in one of the Country’s largest metro areas, and the US is going to send tanks to intimidate them?

How many better ways of handling this situation are there? Tons. How often do these kinds of protests occur? Often.

Why send two APCs, why now, why in a place where you know your chances of being seen are high, and then why back off? I don’t think they were scared off by the ferocious protestors.

It doesn’t sound like a military op at all. It sounds like an error.

You’re right, I do have to make assumptions, but there’s this thing called Occam’s Razor. When you have to make assumptions, make the ones that are most likely.

Frankly I don’t care if you’re mad. I only care if you are irrational.

I don’t know what the mindset was, but I -do- know that if those men were under orders to intimidate, they probably would have done just that. They didn’t. Look at the video. Its right there. Do you see them doing anything intimidating?

You do know they probably would have. That’s not exactly knowing, is it?

Unfortunately I can’t look at the video right now because it requires a download and I’m on my work PC. I’ll be checking it out later. But to look at this from another angle, isn’t it clear that their mere presence was intimidating?

Look, I’m not saying it was or wasn’t an accident. I don’t know — and NEITHER DO YOU. You can say it as certainly as you want to, but that doesn’t change the fact that you weren’t there and haven’t talked to the soldiers, their commanders, or the protesters. You’ve taken your own perception of protesters and the military and patriotism and drawn your own conclusions about what happened, then presented them as fact, while denigrating an entire group of people.

I’m aware of Occam’s Razor. Fact is, though, you weren’t forced to make any assumptions at all. You chose to.

I’m afraid I missed the point of your last sentence. Are you saying I’m irrational, or that the protestors were?

I’m saying neither. What I’m saying is that the emotional reaction you have from reading my article is not as important as the logical reaction.

If you want to get right down to it, no one writing anywhere “knows” anything then, do they Alejo? Why write about Iraq, Arafat, Camp X-Ray, WMD, or anything else unless you have first hand knowledge then?

Reason is about taking available evidence and forming conclusions from it. It doesn’t require complete information, only tha ability to draw sound conclusions from information. If direct experience is the only kind of acceptable knowledge, then I guess we’d all better stop having opinions on the vast majority of things in the world, yes?

I think if I were attacking one of your opinions using this same argument, you’d probably point out how weak it is.

Damon —

You would be right if you hadn’t shown by your partisanship that your judgment was suspect. Of COURSE you’re going to come to the conclusion you did — you think one side involved is “slimy.” Who’s going to give credence to your thought process unless they already think like you?

Your logic is sound, but your premise is false. You assume that I reach my conclusion because I think these folks are “slimy.” In fact, I think these people are “slimy” because of the conclusion I reached. A lot of people on the left have the same problem identifying the correct antecedent in a logical string. I suspect this is one of the reasons there are so many disagreements.

Don’t you think that people who use obvious manipulation of facts to spur political zealotry are slimy? I see it on the left and the right, and in both cases its foul. In this case, I’m talking about an incident in which extreme members of the left are making political hay over what appears to be a non issue. I think, therefore, that they are “slimy.” They are not slimy -before- and -independent- of these actions.

More-over, I’m not a partisan. I am an idealogue. I have no dedication to any party. If the ideology changes, I jump ship.

My judgement is quite sound. I can’t speak for your interpretation of it. That’s your own business.

Your logic is sound, but your premise is false. You assume that I reach my conclusion because I think these folks are “slimy.” In fact, I think these people are “slimy” because of the conclusion I reached.

I see. So, prior to this particular incident you had no animosity to the Left and since then you feel strongly enough to speak about them as a group to use the phrases you use in your post. Wow. That’s quite a conversion, I must say. I mean, I’d be willing to willing to bet there are Democrats who have done much worse things than get angry at guys in tanks.

A lot of people on the left have the same problem identifying the correct antecedent in a logical string. I suspect this is one of the reasons there are so many disagreements.

Another conclusion you reached after the tank incident? Remember, if you start talking about causation and antecedents you have to be consistent about it — within the same paragraph, at least.

Don’t you think that people who use obvious manipulation of facts to spur political zealotry are slimy? I see it on the left and the right, and in both cases its foul.

Yes, I do. This is the first indication I’ve seen that you feel that way though.

In this case, I’m talking about an incident in which extreme members of the left are making political hay over what appears to be a non issue. I think, therefore, that they are “slimy.” They are not slimy -before- and -independent- of these actions.

It appears to be a non-issue to you. Has it occurred to you that the people who are outraged about this could be honestly outraged, even if they are in fact wrong?

My judgement is quite sound. I can’t speak for your interpretation of it. That’s your own business.

It’s good to have faith in yourself. Speaking for myself, I’m going to have see some more convincing (and less inflammatory) arguments from you to come to that same cofidence in your judgment.

Alejo,

You’re arguing pretty strongly for a person who has admitted to not having seen the tape. Maybe you should take a breath, and stop arguing yourself into a corner before you make yourself look silly.

When you see the video, you’ll also see how these APCs were doing nothing.

My conclusion about antecedent errors comes not from the tank incident, but from conversations like this, with people like you. You’ll notice I said “a lot of people on the left” as oppose to “the left” in reference ot the antecedent argument. If you’ll direct your attention to that, I think you’ll notice this is a reference to a finite group, not a blanket statement. I know that doesn’t server your needs to execute yet another straw man argument, but it happens to be the case.

As for the left, of course I have postjudeces based on previous experiences. That’s what humans do, categorize based on history. Unlike what you seem to feel, I am not emotionaly attached to any stereotype of either side. This incident, to me, is simply a sad example.

Again, I urge you to watch the video. This conversation has gone on overly long considering that you’ve not even seen the event that spurred you into this conversation. Camp X-Ray and the Patriot Act aside (both of which are serious and do raise questions), this isn’t even in the same sport, let alone the same league.

Damon —

I suggest you re-read your first paragraph. It’s highly pejorative and there’s no backing out of that.

Maybe after you recognize that fact, you’ll realize why you’ve gotten some people’s panties in a knot.

Damon:

Tell you what: I’ll shut my mouth until I can watch the video and you can stop being condescending. Deal?

CER,

I am absolutely being pejorative, and I am aware of it. The tone of the article is intentionaly inflamatory, because I believe this issue needs attention. It is a great example of myopic distortion. A small event start to churn until it is this political urban legend that people vaguely remember the facts of.

CER, I know my tactic on this one is not the most diplomatic, and that is intentional. If you read some of my other articles, you’ll see that I don’t often go for the emotional jugular. I find it distasteful. I make an exception this time because of the nature of the incident, and my offense at how overblown the situation is. I did my best to apologize to Alejo early on, but he seemed to want to take it further. I too would rather be discussing the ACTUAL INCIDENT this article is about.

My conversation with Alejo is just parsing hairs. I don’t think all left wingers are “left wing crazies” but I do think that anyone who sees this incident and believes in some kind of huge anti-civil rights event is indeed a bit of a nut. Just like people who throw blood on folks at abortion clinics are nuts, just like people who swallow michael moore documentaries without doing their own research are nuts, just like people who embrace Bill O’Reilly without examining his logic (should they agree or disagree is not as important) are nuts. I’m unabashed about my contempt for people who slack-jaw their way to political beliefs. You and I both know that there are plenty, and in all the corners of politics.

CER, I can’t help but be angry and feel contempt for the people writing about this incident like its Tiananmen. That is insulting a. to my mind, and b. to everyone who has faced -real- oppression. I’m sorry, but two armored vehicles driving by, most probably lost, is not exactly the iron hand of diplomacy swinging down to crush free speech.

If it were to turn out that some bumbling commander ordere this, you’d see me swing 180 degrees right around on this, but it jus strikes me as hugely, massively unlikely.

Alejo, to you, that’s a deal.

I understand your anger. Extremists on any side are frustrating.

However,

1) I for one wouldn’t have heard about this story if it weren’t for your post. After doing a Google search, the so-called Axis of Logic is the only place that is up in arms. And since this happened 2 days ago, I doubt it’s going to be in the MSM at all. One website does not equal an overblown reaction to some LCVs trying to find their parade. This legend, I think, is over. This is demonstrated by the DailyKos site which you yourself link to.

2) Even though you profess otherwise, by going emotional, you make it almost impossible to discuss the actual incident, as pointed out by more posters than just Alejo.

I’m not trying to join the fray in any way. I am just trying to point out that there’s a reason you find going for the emotional jugular distasteful. Most of us do here.

Re protestors in the U.S.

It is more satisfying to believe you are being oppressed than ignored. The tanks made their day. They can now go home and brag so that their friends shall think themselves accurs’d they were not there, and hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks that heckled the tanks that day. With apologies to Henry V, that is the legend these few, these happy few will have created by next week. NPR will commemorate the annivesary.

Jack —

Ha! You’re so right.

CER,

Point taken.

Jack,

Nice.

FYI
More on this story.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/la_tanks.htm

Sorry all, I messed up the link somehow.
You can try free internet press also.

Damon:
What the hell was that thing doing there?!?! Tank or Light Armored vehicle, Why were they there at all? Last I heard this wasn’t Beirut or Fallujah!

Damn, don’t get the idea I’m Serious. I’m just sitting here laughing because you somehow think that a multi-ton military vehicle with a mounted howitzer is somehow not intimidating or meant to be intimidating!

At the very least, somebody screwed up and just happened to park a LAV in the middle of a peace protest. At the worst, this is somebody with a real tin ear for politics acting out an impulse he or she should promptly get slapped down for.

Stephen
They were just LOST.
Quit being a conspiracy nut.
In fact, I think they even gave out Happy Meals and hugs to those protesters.

Lost? I doubt they got lost. If it’s all the same to you, I’d just say I don’t think this was somebody high up who approved. I think this might have been some hormone charged idiots pulling a prank on the protestors and getting in above their heads. We’re lucky nobody got hurt. then the kimshi really whould have hit the fan.

Nonetheless I find it very annoying that the Right is asking us not to be alarmed at the sight of a huge military vehicle coming to visit, especially given what happened in our nation’s past in living memory.

Maybe I should make like James Garner, steal a Sherman and drive it to an anti abortion protest. See how long it would take the Right Wing to start protesting the iniquity of it.

These are not vehicles brought out against peaceful protestors.

Why was the protest at that location?

I don’t know, but I do know that it was on the other side of the freeway from a National Guard base. If these protestors were staging a demonstration against the war near a military facility, then is it really so shocking that military vehicles would be in the area?

After watching the video, it’s abundantly clear that the vehicles only stopped because protestors ran out to block them—you can hear them yelling to each other to do so.

Okay, I’ve watched the video. I’m now as qualified to make comment on the proceedings as Damon is. Here’s my perception of the proceedings: A couple of 20-year-old tank commanders got lost, saw some protesters, decided to get in their faces a little. The protesters latched onto the presence of tanks and their fervor grew (just as Jack said). The young tank commanders, realizing they didn’t want to run over people to get away, had to wait for police to come and disperse the protesters so they could go on their way.

The beginnings of a program to quash free speech? Most likely not. Fuel for the fire of a defensive left? Obviously so. Reason to dismiss an entire political movement? Well … I don’t know. Was the Iran-Contra affair a reason to dismiss conservative politics? Of course it wasn’t.

There has been a lot of back-tracking in this post: Oh, I didn’t mean YOU, it was all for dramatic purpose, well you’re just silly, and I see your point but —- Let’s be honest. Ideologue, partisan, whatever. The purpose of the post was to discredit a political ideal and it failed. There are assholes on both sides, we all know that. Let’s have a discussion of something worthwhile and interesting.

I think this is a fine way to discredit people who use obviously un-sinister events to construct elaborate mythology about government crackdowns. As for the purpose of my post, you wouldn’t know.

I guess I’m just a little mistified. Am I the only person on this list who’s seen military vehicles driving down streets? Is it that much of an alarm bell? It shouldn’t be. Military vehicles use ROADS, there’s no secret military tunnel that leads from bases to the countryside. American cities are HUGE, and bases inside and around cities use the same roads everyone else does. The military doesn’t airlift vehicles when there are perfectly good transporation arteries all around. There’s a reason that these vehicles have traffic signals, blinkers, etc. Its so they can drive around on civilian roads.

I think people who want this to be an issue, are making it into an issue. I’m even willing to buy the possibility that some soldier with a bad attitude wanted to get in someone’s face. I think that’s seriously unlikely since you can get a court martial for that kind of thing, but let’s say it happens to be the case, well then its still a bit of an over-reaction to say “THEY sent tanks.” I think this is pure opportunism by people who desperately want this to be an “incident.”

Damon-
Obviously unsinister? Just say these words to yourself “A tank rolled up to a peace protest.” Nice, neutral, but implies some tension. After all, this is a military armored vehicle.

Okay, how about “A tank rolled up to my peace protest.” Not so innocuous, especially in a time that’s coming to mirror the late sixties in many respects, with a government many people are fearful has grabbed too much power too ruthlessly. Because these people aren’t equipped with a private line to the military, the National guard, or any such organization on such things, and such information hasn’t really been volunteere, a protester really doesn’t have obvious alternatives to thinking they are there on official business. What reason would they have for thinking otherwise? I mean, most of the time, military vehicles don’t exactly take rides down American streets.

What saves this from being worse is that nobody got hurt. I think you should consider for a moment the consequences of downplaying this kind of military vehicle showing up at a peace protest. You’re already one step away from saying that people shouldn’t mind these things showing up at their protests for real. At least you should admit that it wasn’t exactly the best intersection of men and machinery.

What then? I think you’re allowing your government to get away with a lot of things they really have no business getting away with.

Stephen, I think we’re communicating on different wavelengths. You are thinking the “tank showed up at the peace protest” and I’m thinking “the tank showed up on a road in LA.” In the 4 times I have visited LA, I have seen one or more protests -every- time I’ve been. It’s almost like protesting is the official municipal hobby of LA. In my world view, it would be hard, if not impossible, to guarantee that a military vehicle would never be seen near a protest. I don’t know the relative location of -this- protest, but there seems to be some indication from some posters that it was near a National Guard base, making it even more likely that this kind of run in could happen.

I grew up in Germany. I often saw protestors near US military bases. Sometimes, tanks driving from base to base would pass these protestors. That doesn’t mean the tanks “were sent” to intimidate the protestors.

If, on the other hand, this was an intentional act by the driver (which I maintain is very unlikely) then it still doesn’t cause me any great concern about a military crackdown, only about the behavior of the individual in question.

The third permutation is the possibility of an actual planned intimidation. What does this require:

1. Someone gives the order. This means someone has to believe that this intimidation is needed, that they will not be held accountable, and that they have the authority.

2. Troops have to carry out the order. This means the troops have to think this is perfectly plausible. We know they showed up at the event. If they showed up, following orders, why would they leave as soon as the opportunity presented itself? Wouldn’t that be disobeying an order?

3. The city police would have to find nothing wrong with this. We see in the video that there are municipal police watching the protest. (i bet they have loaded weapons too, but no one thinks they are there to intimidate anyone) When the vehicles arive, the protesters swarm, the police then try to move the protestors out of the way. If the police are “in on it” then they would have had to be informed, and hence gotten approval, from the city municipality. Considering the political landscape, that’s bloody unlikely in the first place, but even if it happened, there’d be a paper trail or a chain or witnesses. Now let’s assume they aren’t in on it. Well, if the police thought the military was doing something out of the ordinary, you’d think they would have commented. Not all people with a uniform are fascists. And again, they were trying to clear the protestors from around the tank, which again indicates to me that they were trying to let the tanks “move on” not stay put.

4. The “powers that be” would have to assume that no one is going to notice this or make a big deal out of it. That’s poppycock as we see right here. People are so sensitive that I half expect protesters at the next superbowl to report a “menacing airforce presence” at the next Superbowl Fly-Over. That’s flippant, to be sure, but the point is just that -someone- was bound to notice the event, planned or not, and report it. Ranking military officers are not numbsculls. They are trained to recognize and avoid situations that could cause the military embarassment. Does that mean they always do what’s right? No, but certainly they are less likely to order something so flagrant out in public.

5. Finally, you have to ask, if indeed there was a need for intimidation, or if indeed someone thought these 3 or 4 dozen protestors needed to be frightened, why do it this way? If we’re already assuming a military action, why such a paltry, badly executed, stupid action? Military police in riot gear? ok. maybe. but APCs? I’m just not buying it.

As I said to you, Damon, I’m not assuming this was done under official authority. What I gather was that some National guard soldiers who were supposed to deliver these things for a standing display somewhere, and decided to have a little fun with the protestors.

The experience you cite may have skewed your perspective on things. Houston is an absolute hub for all kinds of traffice, with two encircling loops, several major highways running through and around the area, and I’ve never seen a military vehicle run down a street in my life, outside of media coverage or movies.

The presence of a heavy military vehicle at a protest in America is alien to my experience as well. Such vehicles are only employed, to my knowledge, when things are about to get ugly, or somebody in authority wants to show the protestors how ugly things can get.

Let me reiterate: I think this is National Guardsmen playing a joke in bad taste. But that said, the presence of a tank raised eyebrows for good reason in my opinion. You can go into a whole intellectual argument as to why the protestors were wrong to assume official motivation, but the thing I think you should understand is that these people were not going to sit down and analyze the reason why a rather large military vehicle like that showed up. They’re going to go off of their gut feeling, and these were peace protestors whose gut feelings were determined by experiences like the the responses to the WTO demonstrations, as well as their political opposition to Bush. As a conservative, such interpretations may seem wrong to you, but you don’t share their context of thought and action to begin with. For people of this mindset it is a reasonable concern, given the limited information they had at the time, and the past behavior of this administration.

Here in Arizona the National Guard move their vehicles over the road all the time.

On flatbed trucks.

First let me say this: I’m not a conservative. I have some issues I agree with conservatives on, but it would be very hard to categorize me as a conservative.

Second: Jarin, its not that hard to get lost in a US city, especialy if you haven’t lived there. Military personnel are humans too. I don’t know for certain that these people were lost, though I’m not convinced they knew where they were going. I’m also not convinced that they were trying to ask the protesters for directions. If the directions scenario is the case, I think the more likely target would be the police who appear to be on the scene already. I know that’s where I’d go for directions if I were lost in LA. See a cop on the corner? That might be my first stop. That being said, i have no evidence to indicate that any directions were a part of the situation. As for the GPS question, you’ll have to ask someone who’s driven one of these things. I don’t know if GPS is particularly helpfull in navigating LA streets, which i find to be nightmarish with or without a map.

Third: Again, Jarin, by the time the protesters cleared, we see the cops are now in the situation. It would be a bade idea for the military personnel to just speed off at this point, I would think. Maybe they were explaining what happened, thanking the cops, giving the cops their identification information (most likely) or maybe even asking for the afforementioned potential directions. Anyone who’s been a witness to an accident or crime knows that there’s some information exchange that goes on before cops will let you go, but again, this is speculation.

Fourth: Sterve. Its ture, I did grow up in the military world, however, I -have- seen military vehicles driving in two of the four metro regions i have lived in. In addition, there’s still this talk about a Veterans Day event, which would also provide yet another possible reason (outside of basic transportation) for moving these vehicles around. Instead of assuming (i know there is no offense intended, don’t worry, and i’m offering this as something to think about, not a gauntlet thrown to the ground) that my view is skewed by exposure to the military, one could just as well assume that other peoples’ views are skewed by lack of exposure, predisposing them to over-reaction the way that someone who hasn’t seen a firecrackers might assume they are looking at dynamite.

Rocky mentions he’s seen vehicles on flatbeds only. I’ve seen them on flatbeds too, but only chained wheel vehicles, actual tanks that is. I have seen wheeled military vehicles on roads. I’m sure there’s someone out there reading that can tell us if there are rules about APCs on civilian roads. I would assume that they are designed with that in mind, one of the reasons for this assumption being the fact that these things do have blinkers/indicators which are not called for in battlefield situations.

Finallly, I think we are all getting carried away. Let me submit that I believe the start of this debate, with Alejo, may have taken a turn south because a. Alejo was offended by my pointed and perjorative rhetoric (which it most certainly was) b. He had not yet seen the tape, though I believe him when he says he still is concerned after seeing it. and c. even after that, like most people, once we’ve taken a stance we don’t like backing down. I suspect that if the article has been titled “What happened in LA” and had been more of a “here’s what we know, what could this mean” article, there wouldn’t be any strong debate. Maybe some concern, but not this kind of debate.

Yet, to be fair to Alejo, and to be honest with my convictions, I completely and honestly think that the people writing about this like its the iron fist of oppression are, indeed, nutty. There’s a difference between raising an eyebrow and raising an alarm.

In conclusion, i am a person who reacts to truth, and I believe the truth will out. If it turns out that somewhere along the line this was an “offical action” then i can guarantee you’d see me on the other side of this issue.

damon, yes I have seen military vehicles on the road, however they were always in a convoy. Hummers, tankers, communication vehicles, and yes apcs but never out by themselves.
Our sherrif Joe Arpio has a tank (wheeled) he takes out once in a while for effect on a bust.
We only have a National Guard base close here in Phoenix, and they always trailer their large equipment.

I live in West Virginia, a few miles from a National Guard base. With a fair amount of regularity we see military vehicles on the road here, yes with the occasional (very occasional) Tank. There is a very liberal university near here as well.

Neither the liberals nor the conservatives have ever, to my knowledge gotten upset over the military moving their equipment around, or thought anything sinister or intimidating was going on.

Give it a break everyone. Assume the best. Use common sense. I’m sure you have that on the west coast, as well as the east?

Damon:

Who’s raising an alarm? I was merely trying to point out that there were other possible scenarios than the one you came up with and that yours was tainted by the disdain you carry for certain of the people involved. I’m glad that others finally decided to put their two cents in so you could stop behaving as though I were a moron. There ARE other possiblities than the one you came up with, that’s all I was ever trying to say.