News & Politics - Tanks used to intimidate anti-war protestors in Los Angeles

Enigma, I.C. · 11-11-2004, 01:42 AM

http://la.indymedia.org/archives/arc...ry_id=3&id=740

Quote:

TANKS APPEAR AT ANTI-WAR PROTEST IN WESTWOOD

LOS ANGELES, November 9, 2004 - At 7:50 PM armored tanks showed up at an anti-war protest in front of the federal building in Westwood.

The tanks circled the block twice, the second time parking themselves in the street and directly in front of the area where most of the protesters were gathered.

Enraged, some of the people attempted to block the tanks, but police quickly cleared the street.

The people continued to protest the presence of the tanks, but after about ten minutes the tanks drove off. It is unclear as to why the tanks were deployed to this location.

*Lauren · 11-11-2004, 02:35 AM

Well there goes the hope that Bush would be less hawkish.

Seriously, that's straight out of Tianamon Square or Prague in 1956. Tanks against your own citizens?

*Circe* · 11-11-2004, 02:45 AM

I live in LA and this just disgusts me. And you wonder why Cali is staunchly democrat.

~Belle

JW77 · 11-11-2004, 04:58 AM

Thanks for posting that.

I haven't heard anything about it from any other news source (no surprise there

).

Anyway, just wanted to say that they look more like LAVs than Tanks. Not that that makes much of a difference...just wanted to add that.

Quote:

Originally posted by *Lauren
Well there goes the hope that Bush would be less hawkish.

Seriously, that's straight out of Tianamon Square or Prague in 1956. Tanks against your own citizens?

Why did you mention Bush? I mean, there didn't seem to be that many protesters. Why would the President be directly involved with that?

Quote:

Originally posted by *Circe*
I live in LA and this just disgusts me. And you wonder why Cali is staunchly democrat.

The article doesn't mention any specifics...so why bring up republicans or democrats?

*Lauren · 11-11-2004, 02:09 PM

Las time I checked, Bush was the American President, who was in charge of the American Army. In the words of Harry S Truman "The buck stops here"

Goonieforever · 11-11-2004, 05:24 PM

NOT COOL.

Thats my response to their attempts to intimidate people who are doing what is supposedly allowed in this country.

SuperDeluxe · 11-11-2004, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by *Lauren
Well there goes the hope that Bush would be less hawkish.

Seriously, that's straight out of Tianamon Square or Prague in 1956. Tanks against your own citizens?

being straight out of tianamon square would be these tanks actually shooting at the people.

lets stop with the dramatics.

SuperDeluxe · 11-11-2004, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JW77

Why did you mention Bush? I mean, there didn't seem to be that many protesters. Why would the President be directly involved with that?

The article doesn't mention any specifics...so why bring up republicans or democrats?

Because its 'easier' to blame *everything* on Bush, then blame it on some regional commander.

But lets not let logic get in the way of a good flame of the president.

SuperDeluxe · 11-11-2004, 05:34 PM

and now it wasnt even tanks..it was APC's..

of course Tanks sounds 'better'

Katis · 11-11-2004, 06:05 PM

(SuperDeluxe, please try to remember to not post multiple times in a row.)

Bush would in no way have any kind of decision on this. This is so far beneath the policy level that he deals with he probably didn't know about it any earlier than the news stations did.

Sparrowhawk · 11-11-2004, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Katis
(SuperDeluxe, please try to remember to not post multiple times in a row.)

Bush would in no way have any kind of decision on this. This is so far beneath the policy level that he deals with he probably didn't know about it any earlier than the news stations did.

One wonders if he would act to stop it if he did know. I don't believe he would.

SuperDeluxe · 11-11-2004, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sparrowhawk
One wonders if he would act to stop it if he did know. I don't believe he would.

Are you trying to say that I would openly defy the mod?

Sparrowhawk · 11-11-2004, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SuperDeluxe
Are you trying to say that I would openly defy the mod?

I meant Bush. I don't believe Bush would stop the tanks, or APCs, if he did know.

Brooklyn's babe · 11-11-2004, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by *Lauren
Well there goes the hope that Bush would be less hawkish.

Seriously, that's straight out of Tianamon Square or Prague in 1956. Tanks against your own citizens?

Or Kent State in 1970.
Although I don't like Bush, I don't think he was behind this.

JW77 · 11-12-2004, 04:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by *Lauren
Las time I checked, Bush was the American President, who was in charge of the American Army. In the words of Harry S Truman "The buck stops here"

So you believe that he's to blame for two random LAVs that just happened to show up at a protest with a few hundred people?

Ok then. It's fine that you believe that. I believe different though.

Quote:

Originally posted by SuperDeluxe
Because its 'easier' to blame *everything* on Bush, then blame it on some regional commander.

But lets not let logic get in the way of a good flame of the president.

Yup, I know how it goes.

Quote:

Originally posted by Sparrowhawk
One wonders if he would act to stop it if he did know. I don't believe he would.

The same could be said about any President, but when it comes down to it, we just don't know.


Fan Forum > General Discussion > News & Politics > Tanks used to intimidate anti-war protestors in Los Angeles