Artful Dodger: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Iran is one of them.. aka Iran-gate.

(V):One of them what?

Artful Dodger: Instances where USA citizens have been taken hostage. Then there are those taken in Iraq..

(V):Oh yeah.   That was with that wimpy ineffective moron Jimmy Carter.  He was one of the worst presidents in US history.  Iran knew that Reagan wouldn't put up with anymore of their nonsense and they released them.  You have to take a hard stand against terrorists.  No soft approach will do.  No "understanding their motives."  Take it to them.   And use lots of ammo and head aims.  Dead terrorists can't whine about international law or rights or whatever. 

Artful Dodger: With the exception of the last sentence, I totally agree.

Artful Dodger: Unfortunately in matter like this, such action has a high friendly death toll probability. If you wanted to really stop the pirates, you'd have to show that having a hostage is not a shield.

.... As for Reagan..... Sure he was tough. He traded weapons for people... A great stance against terrorists.

Here's the deal.  It's not smart to threaten a moderator with stupid threats.  I'm so NOT concerned.  So give it a rest.



If you want to be taken off hide, just delete your offending post and
simply don't misbehave again.   If you don't remove the post, you don't
come off hide.



It's up to you.

Well, the captain is free, and the Navy Seals with sniper guns shot and killed 3 of the pirates.  The Captain escaped unharmed.  The 4th pirate is in US custody.  According to a report:  "Acting on a standing order from President Obama to move in when Phillips was in "imminent danger" snipers were ordered to fire."   Way to go Obama.  That will certainly be to his credit.  The pirates had an AK47 to the back of the head of the Captain.  That and previous shots fired were enough and the Seals took their shots.

Here's a follow up story  Not a surprise.  The Pirates vow to avenge the death of their co-pirates.  hmmmm, how dare the US fight back against terrorists who threaten innocent people.  Now those terrorists are mad and will retaliate. 

So what.  Now is the time to bring it to those cowards.  A far more noble task than Iraq.  Many nations are suffering at the hands of these pirates.  I hope the international community takes this opportunity to band together for the good of humanity and defeat these pirates.  No more $$ should be given to these crooks.  That only guarentees more of the same. 

Make no mistake, the pirates will want revenge.  Stay away, and keep the gun loaded.  Head snots only.  No warning shots to approaching vessels.  Sink em.  BAM!  If every time they sink an approaching vessel, or shoot the pirates as they try to board, how long before they try their luck somewhere else?

Artful Dodger: International force of warships running escort just like in WWII... only way.

(V):Yep, it's gotta be a show of force.  And a few traps would be nice.  Run those waters later at night and why not fully arm part of the crew? 

Artful Dodger: Marines, etc on every ship. Some nice 20mm cannons and a few guided surface to surface missiles. eheheheheh.

Use the old ruse of hiding the heavy weaponry like they did in WWII to catch the U-boats out.

(V):That all works for me!  One thing for sure, if I were a US ship, I'd be sure to have an armed unit with me even if I had to hired them out!  And I'd take every precaution that is recommended by those that know.  That area of the world is not a cake walk. 

Artful Dodger: Nope. I'm actually surprised that no real action has been taken by various naval powers before hand.

It's not exactly a new problem.

(V):Yeah.  I've been trying to find some history on it but haven't found a great source yet. 

what about the poor crew?

who cares about them?

they aren't american so they have been left to their own devices.

whether this is true or not but on our news they say this is the first time americans have been pirated in 205 years?

Artful Dodger: Well.... If I go by "Wikipedia".....

It started in the 1990's but warnings have been said by many international organisations.

Actually.. I've learnt that a 'anti pirate force' called Combined Task Force 151 has been in place..

..... But the size was only 2 ships.. everyone wants to send more.. but the usual red tape... ....

Bernice: The crew was already safe. Only the captain was taken hostage.

Snoopy: Yep. The 'management' got caught out.. time to face the music and not hide behind some political spin.

And the guy who died who the police blamed the crowds.. but then video appeared of the guy with his hand in his pockets being shoved from behind by a policeman, resulting in him falling on his stomach.

... He didn't die off a heart attack, he died of abdominal bleeding.

The policeman is now being interviewed under caution on suspicion of manslaughter

More tests need to be made to be sure, to work out why the bleeding happened

But the point still arises... why make a physically aggressive attack on a man with his hand in his pockets?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8004222.stm

But then The "Territorial Support Group" is just a renamed "Special Patrol Group"..... and their record was ..... less then perfect to say the least.

(V): But the point still arises... why make a physically aggressive attack on a man with his hand in his pockets?


What a bleeder you are

The police are out there day after day, placing themselves in all kinds of dangerous situations, yours dont even carry guns do they?

Do you really think it is okay for someone to disobey a police command, and then simply turn with his hands in his pockets, and that makes him all of a sudden harmless?

People need to accept that if they willingly put themselves in a situation where they are confronted by the police, for whatever reason, then they have to accept some chance of injury, or other mishap!

To me it is the same sympathy for one of the Guantanamo inmates.... who would have never ended up there in the first place if they hadnt intentionally inserted themselves where they had no business to be

Bottom line.... you dont hear of anyone getting roughed up by the police for staying at home tending to their families

Czuch: Don't talk about something when you have not watched the video. The guy was on his way home from work, he was harmless.

And our police can carry guns, especially at airports.

The bloke had done nothing.

Bottom line is, you are talking about something you obviously don't know anything about.

(V): The guy was on his way home from work, he was harmless.

You are the one who doesnt know what he is talking about.... this guy is just walking home from work you say??? He is surrounded by police just by some random accident?

It looks quite obvious to me that he is being told to move along by the police, and he is trying to be defiant, by dilly dallying along, he is far from being some plain guy just minding his own business and the police just come at him from nowhere and decide to just push him for absolutely no reason.... he is being told to pick up the pace and move along, and he would be alive today if he was compliant

(V): The police have many things going on all the time.... it may seem like nothing to you or to this guy, but maybe they had to have this area cleared for some unknown reason to me or to you or to this guy? Maybe there was a bomb or other immediate threat that they had been warned about, and they were trying to save this guys life by getting him to move out quicker?

You really dont know, nor do you need to know, all you need to know is that it is the police telling you to move it quickly, and when you dont do it, you get a bit of a nudge... thats what I see here

Czuch: Well the Independent Police complaints commission are handling the case. His walk home was through the area of the G20 protests, his crime.. none.

They are also looking into that he might have been assaulted by the police before hand and why did he need to be git with a baton and shoved from the back to the ground.

He did nothing wrong Czuch, he just wanted to get home to watch the football.

You've got it wrong Czuch.... completely wrong. And the police are not above the law. PERIOD.

Czuch: A BIT OF A NUDGE!!!!!!!! He was shoved with BOTH HANDS from BEHIND.

NO BOMBS, NO IMMEDIATE THREATS.

The guy was just going home.

It looks to me like the guy just got shoved to the ground.  Perhaps a bit too agressively but that caused the death?

Artful Dodger: He wasn't in the best of health, and the current cause is abdominal bleeding. They are now doing more tests to be precise over the exact reason why of the bleeding. But the policeman involved ... as I've said ... is being interviewed under caution of suspected manslaughter. He is suspended until further notice, ie the results from the tests.

(V):  Id say the guy was provoking the police by his actions.  And in a tense situation like G20, that was a stupid thing to do.  But police are supposed to show restraint.  Shoving a man to the ground was way out of line IMO.  Arrest him yes, but physically assault him?  The police officer lost his cool.   If in fact that action caused the man's death, then by definition of the law, that could be manslaughter. 

OTOH, why couldn't the police officer simply have ignore the man.  He was not a threat.  He was just moving slowly.   Eventually, even a turtle makes it across the street. 

(V): And the police are not above the law. PERIOD.

i dont know your laws, but over here, it is against the law to not comply with any demand or request from a police officer.... they tell him to move along, to pick up the pace, then he decides to be defiant and slow down the pace.... he was being a dick and he knew it and the police knew it and I know it, and so do you, just that you wont admit it, and you feel for him because you would have done the exact same thing... "who are they to tell me how fast to walk, those A holes...."

Like I said, he would still be alive had he just complied with them, right or wrong...

Artful Dodger: What actions? Having his hands in his pockets and walking off home?

He did nothing wrong, but be in the line of a bad tempered police officer.. A bad apple is a bad apple.

Artful Dodger: He was not a threat. He was just moving slowly. Eventually, even a turtle makes it across the street.


Like you said before, the whole area was tense with potential violence.... this guy was just one more thing to worry about, they had more important things to worry about this day, and he was an unnecessary distraction that they needed to get rid of... the longer he was in the way, the longer their attention was diverted from their main focus... now you take time and resources to arrest him for non compliance? That doesnt make sense either....


My guess is that they will find that this shove by police was not the cause of his death, it is more likely like V said, he has previous health issues that were more a contributing factor to his death, that along with his defiant non compliance with a police order to move quicker

(V): A bad apple is a bad apple.


How do you know he wasnt purposefully trying to slow his walk home just to be in the way and piss the police off a bit? How do you know he isnt a bad apple himself?

Czuch: No.. he wasn't.. If you'd watch the video you'd know that.

There is no reason to shove to the ground someone is doing nothing violent. IT IS AGAINST THE LAW, if a policeman did that to me, I would have the right to make a citizens arrest against that police officer.

You've got it wrong. As Art said, if he had done something wrong .. like verbally abusive.. then he is arrested. As he wasn't and went on and died somewhere else just a few minutes later... then he can't have done anything AS HE WOULD HAVE BEEN ARRESTED by the police at the time of their interaction with them.

HE WASN'T ARRESTED.

Czuch: I just replied to this.

(V): He was non compliant to a request from a police officer.... that is illegal, but they had more important things to worry about than to waste resources arresting him for non compliance, so they tried to impress upon him with a bit of force that they were serious about him moving it along a bit faster....

Wait and see the results, but my bet is that this officer does not get charged with manslaughter

Czuch: For someone who says he is for less government control, you sure do seem to want to give the police the power to be thugs.

Czuch: That's illegal Czuch, to use force such as used against a non-violent person.... And as said he was not arrested, the police were hardly busy at the point of the incident.

Regardless of being charged for manslaughter, he still committed a criminal offence and will probably be given the boot. The police have had enough press over bad apples and stupid police doing stupid things.

They are supposed to uphold the law, not break it!!

(V): This guy broke the law by being non compliant with a police request.... they have a right to enforce compliance with force....

I am not the one who gave the government more control, I am mostly for less control, but we dont base what laws to break or not to break based on our individual desires... it is against the law to not comply with the commands of a police officer, it is not against the law for police to force compliance against someone ordered to comply

this guy was being an A hole for the purpose of pissing off the police, now he is dead..

my grandmother always asked me if I was better off being dead right???? ask the same to this poor slob...

Czuch:
He was non compliant to a request from a police officer.... that is illegal

That is illegal only in countries where the Police are above the law, just as (V) aptly pointed out. In democratic countries, however, even the Police have to obey the rules.

Pedro Martínez: These are obviously police in a riot control mode, it was a tense time in a volatile area... but regardless, here in the US it is against the law to not obey any command from a police officer... we dont get to decide which commands we think are valid or not... they say to move on and you move on, they say faster, you move faster...

now, just because I have broken a law doesnt give them the right to use excessive force against me, or maybe they should have arrested him instead of trying to force his compliance, but when you say he has broken no laws, you are not correct (if this were US laws anyway)

Maybe he is dead right.... ask him if being alive right might not be better?

Czuch: You know he broke the law... please show me where he broke the law? Any evidence of non compliance?? Nothing has come up in the news. In fact they tried blaming it on the protesters....

I'll give ya 24 hours to find anything

(V): I dont know anything for sure, looks to me like this bloke was"taunting" the police by being a bit belligerent and in their way....

maybe they never did give him an order to move along or to do anything... still my guess is that this shove did not cause this guys death... I also still believe no matter what happened, this guy was a dumb ass, and it doesnt look to me like he was just trying to make his way home from work, unless he was too drunk to make his way in a straight line and in an orderly way, the guy seems out of it to me?

Czuch: OK, but who cares about your Police Country in this particular case. This happened in the UK, where non-compliance with a request of a police officer (no matter if the officer requests you to move faster or to jump out of a window or to quack while jumping on your left leg) is not a crime and it's not against the law. Why would he think about some twisted US laws when walking home from work?

Pedro Martínez: I started my whole discussion with the assumption that our 2 laws are similar, and until now, nobody contradicted this... sorry


so this officer is guilty of pushing someone that got in their way, he will probably then get suspended, but not manslaughter, IMO

the guy is still an idiot, and I still think his intent was to provoke them, it seem sure that it was more than just a guy walking his merry way home, blind to anything else going on around him, unless maybe he was high on drugs or alcohol..

Czuch: I admire your deduction abilities. You should be working for CIA as a clairvoyant.

(V):
What actions? Having his hands in his pockets and walking off home?


Yes, he was not complying with the officer.  He was being a jerk about it.  It was a tense situation and  he was playing a game.  So he's not entirely innocent.  But the officer still over reacted. 

Pedro Martínez: Like I said, the guy is an idiot then... you dont have to be a clairvoyant, just know what an average person under average situation should do....

If I am trying to walk my way home from work, and that is my sole agenda, and there are a gang of police in full riot gear, and you are in a known volatile area, most prudent people would figure out a way to stay out of the way... find a different route or move a bit faster or whatever it would take... a prudent person would not likely just stroll along with hands in pockets like that in a close proximity to the police.... as far as i know too, the police dont like people with hands hiden like that, they get wary that a gun or hand grenade or something might come into play....

Again, the UK is probably different, but here in the police state of the US, that is our standard of proof, what would a normal prudent person be expected to do or how would they behave in a given situation?

The guy might only be guilty of being an idiot... and the police is only guilty of being an idiot too....

Artful Dodger: he was not complying with the officer. He was being a jerk about it. It was a tense situation and he was playing a game. So he's not entirely innocent


Hey... want to join me in the elite CIA clairvoyant unit????

Czuch:I've seen that sort of shuffle in my students when they are acting defiant.  It's like saying, "I'll get there when I get there." 

The cop said, "Here, let me help you move a bit faster."