Hardcore Democrats Go Nuts Over Short-Haired Photographer

Here's a link to a thread over at the Democrat Underground, a big web forum for nutty dems (at least I hope they don't represent mainstream dems!)

Apparently, there was a protest march for something in DC recently.

Lots of assorted kooks. One kook took offense to a man who was taking photographs and, well, read for yourself:
http://www.democraticunderground.com...89x71258#77549

Quote:

---

I promised this guy HIS picture would be on the web:

Mr. NoSheep, in red the sweater in the background, brought to my attention 2 men with military haircuts and no protest signs, badges or anything, taking pictures of a particular group of marchers. This group was near the back of the march, with a wide yellow banner calling for an end to discrimination against Middle Eastern/Islamic peoples and justice for Palestinians.

I remembered a video I watched on the web not too long ago, where cops and other official agents were taking photos of protesters at a march (perhaps in Oregon?) and the cops basically incited a riot and singled out those who they believed to be "leaders" in these activist groups. I wanted to knock the camera out of his hand but this guy was steroid HUGE with an unmistakably deadly vibe. So I put my sign in front of his camera. He turned and literally growled and sneered "BACK OFF!!"

I asked him why he was taking these kids' pictures and he said I was all about "rights" until it came to his.
:eyes: I don't have to tell you what a nonsequitur that was.

Anyway...I yelled at him a little bit because it made me so angry that someone like this even exists. I told him I thought he should leave these people alone. Then I just thought "I need to take this guy's picture!" So I did. I wonder what was going through the mind of his buddy standing there with him. You can see his eyes behind the glasses. Maybe the scenario will make him think for just a split second in the future. Or maybe he has a chip in his head too like the other guy. He felt like Robo-cop or the Terminator or something. Programmed.

Who does he work for I wonder? He was not taking photos for a memento of the march. He was collecting info.

---

So, a kook sees some well dressed guy with short hair taking pictures and instantly starts hating him, and might have physically assualted the photographer if the kook wasn't such a coward or if the photgrapher was smaller.

They seem to decide that this person is not allowed to take pictures. So much for tolerance, huh?

Of course, in the thread the nuts go wild, calling him a facist, 'nazi scum' (3rd comment), inhuman, etc.

To some people's credit, they did try to calm the hysterics down, but they were in the minority.

CR

I think he assumed that the photographer was some sort of CIA or FBI agent who was trying to pick out targets to kill because BUSH HATES DEMS!

It's in the eye of the man. The two short haired photographers could have been for the BBC, photographing the march about how America is so Tolerant of marches.

If they don't want anyone to see or notice them, you have to wonder why they go out and join a protest march... :dizzy2:

Quote:

---

and might have physically assualted the photographer if the kook wasn't such a coward or if the photgrapher was smaller.

---

That part was priceless... "I would've assaulted him, if I wasnt such a wuss".
Also, wasnt this a "peace" protest?:laugh4:

Well if you ask me, those guys probably were gathering information. Given this likely fact, I don't see anything too unreasonable about the poster's reaction.

He was not offended by their appearance, he reacted because he put two and two together and realized what they were probably up to. This is nothing new folks, it is something that our various intelligence and law enforcement agencies do. It's not like they're looking to snuff anyone, just trying to keep tabs on people.

Around here it was long a running joke among Greenpeace members that fact alone was enough to earn them a SuPo (the Finnish state intel agency) file...
:inquisitive:
...waittasec, that'd mean I had one too. Oh well, I'd have achieved something in life then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Arroyo

Well if you ask me, those guys probably were gathering information. Given this likely fact, I don't see anything too unreasonable about the poster's reaction.

He was not offended by their appearance, he reacted because he put two and two together and realized what they were probably up to. This is nothing new folks, it is something that our various intelligence and law enforcement agencies do. It's not like they're looking to snuff anyone, just trying to keep tabs on people.

---

What they did was immediately judge the man by the clothing he was wearing and his haircut, and then wanted to hurt him, became confrontational, while they were at a 'peace march'. A filthy hipocrite.

Crazed Rabbit

This is the heart of America. :balloon2:

I consider myself a left-leaner (runs in the family) but this is a little paranoid. Shouldn't they have the freedom to take pictures of the march?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

Around here it was long a running joke among Greenpeace members that fact alone was enough to earn them a SuPo (the Finnish state intel agency) file...
:inquisitive:
...waittasec, that'd mean I had one too. Oh well, I'd have achieved something in life then.

---

Do you guys have a "Freedom of Information" law, where you can request to see what info the gov't has on you? Could make for some fun reading, especially if they've redacted some stuff (blacked out the text, etc), allowing you to fill in the blanks.

o'Course they'll keep track of THAT, too (the request), so use wisely...

:)

Did the guy ever think that he might work for the press. Why doesn't he yell at the video cameramen, aren't they collecting information too.

Such a hypocrite, putting forward ideas of peace, and automatically resorting to violent thoughts. Such a wimp.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kooky dem

I asked him why he was taking these kids' pictures and he said I was all about "rights" until it came to his.
:eyes: I don't have to tell you what a nonsequitur that was.


.

---

:horn:

Don’t you just love pseudo-intellectuals! Obviously he had no understanding that the protest was about rights and that he was infringing on someone else's rights.:gah2:

Of course logic is not the strong suit for these people…its all about feelings man, like I got all these hostile vibes from across the street and there were these two guy see…and they had army haircuts yaknow…so we killed'em man. Fight for peace…Right man! It was obvious man, they were fascist pig man… These are the people who see themselves as tolerant and most everyone who disagrees even slightly as oppressors. The last time they saw Logic they beat him up and left him in the gutter man.

But worse than that! These are the political activists that are influencing Democratic Party policy….:flowers:

These are the lefts equivalent of the 4000 year old earth bunch.:gah:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Apparently, there was a protest march for something in DC recently. Lots of assorted kooks.

---

Speaking of prejudice and judgmental attitudes. Pot, meet kettle. :2thumbsup:

I would say he has some grounds for that assesment if you read the post/posts on the link provided…

The last post I saw on that thread made the most sense thought. "Some guy taking pictures, what's the big deal".

Quote:

---

"Some guy taking pictures, what's the big deal".

---

"Just some camera opposite the street, taking pictures of my house, what's the big deal".

Not happening of course...yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adrian II

Speaking of prejudice and judgmental attitudes. Pot, meet kettle. :2thumbsup:

---

Moi? I daresay I am not prejudiced, but am merely stating facts- one needs only look at the protestors or the persons posting in that thread to know that there were, indeed, a lot of what are known scientifically as 'kooks'.

Crazed Rabbit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cataphract_Of_The_City

"Just some camera opposite the street, taking pictures of my house, what's the big deal".

Not happening of course...yet.

---

Well if your attempting to sell your house - no big deal.

If it is the tax assesor - its a big deal - but its still legal.

If your house is of historical significance or of an age that makes it a historical artifact - again no big deal.

If its a part of a criminal investigation - still no big deal. Taking pictures regardless of the purpose is not a violation of one's rights unless it is done in conjecture (SP) of another illegal act. For instance being a peeping tom and taking pictures that way.

When one is in the public setting - one can expect that certain things will happen - because why - your in public.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Moi? I daresay I am not prejudiced (..)

---

Aye me hearty, I think ye be bein' a bit paranoid yerself. :pirate:

Everyone in that thread is a complete wackjob. The thread poster deserves to be in a straightjacket though.

There is a residual fear in the left of things like Project MINARET from the 60s and 70s. People are still afraid the FBI is photographing marchers and forming FBI files on them. Its not that strange, a friend of mine's mom has/had an FBI file because she was at a number of rallies in the 60s. Their fears are not totally unfounded.

Oh! Right then, so it is a good idea to beat up or threaten FBI Agents!

Yea! That will stop them form making files on us poor demonstrators!:dizzy2:

Outstanding Logic! :help:


You know you just can't make this kind of thing up! :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

'Tis the heart of America. :yes:

Possible dodgy internal security activities, popular paranoia and conspiracy theories, and hysterical and inappropriate nevermind bloody stupid reactions.
:book:
Yup, nothing seems to be missing.

Quote:

---

Oh! Right then, so it is a good idea to beat up or threaten FBI Agents!

Yea! That will stop them form making files on us poor demonstrators!

Outstanding Logic!


You know you just can't make this kind of thing up!

---

When did I say its was okay to want to hit the guy? And when did he actually hit the guy? Feeling anger and acting on it are two different things. And maybe it was a figure of speech? Ever thought of that?
What I'm saying is blocking the guy's ability to take pictures would make sense if you don't want and FBI file. If he really were a reporter wouldn't he just say "I'm from The Daily Newspaper I'm taking pictures for a story"?

...and flash a press card. Odds are he'd have it - if nothing else for all the neat entrance fee discounts and the like you can get with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

Oh! Right then, so it is a good idea to beat up or threaten FBI Agents!

Outstanding Logic! :help:

---

I disagree. They may claim they are FBI detectives but I don't buy that at all. And even if they are, I think their win conditions go against mine.

Vote: Fisherking

Select: Jimbob

"I asked him why he was taking these kids' pictures and he said I was all about "rights" until it came to his."

What the carp is that supposed to mean?

That people at the rally trumpet rights, and then disrepspect/fight against his right to take pictures.

If the two guys were reporters, they would have interviewed him. They would have at least identified themselves.

Reporters are very used to dealing with people who don't want to have their picture taken. It is part of their job. Reporters would not have reacted the way these two men did.

Also, if the two guys had the right to take pictures, I'm pretty sure the protester had the right to block their cameras with his sign. It's a public place, right? Short of actual violence, anything goes.

Furthermore, it is well within the mandate of our police/intelligence services to be gathering this kind of information. If violent groups were forming among individuals who had attended these protests, and our cops weren't on top of it, who do you think would get blamed? They have a duty to cover their own asses and ours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kanamori

That people at the rally trumpet rights, and then disrepspect/fight against his right to take pictures.

---

That's a 'right'? I thought it was illegal to take photos of non-consenting folk in public..there was that whole thing about upskirts.

It's legal to take pictures of people in public; it is the public domain. Taking pictures up somebody's skirt is different and I have no idea about the various state laws, and have no interest in them. I was just saying what I thought the guy was getting at.

ROFLOL

Just fort he record that last comment came from my wife…who is a left leaning German…but that is very law and order….

She didn't mean you Jim Bob, but just the mind set you portrayed there.


I don't know who those guys were, they could have been rugby players on holiday…look very English, don't you think? But they said Army Haircuts….

As to FBI files…I know I have one…had a clearance when employed by Uncle Sam, it should have my fingerprints and everything my neighbours and teachers had to say about me…none of it good I am sure…they don't want that kind of information…Maybe some day they will drown in it.

As to nutcases, if you are on the left and don’t think there are any on your side…you must be one of them, if you are on the right and don’t think you have any…you must be one of them. If you are a Democrat or a Republican and think your party is right and the other guys are bad…you’re a nutcase.

Both are so tied up in group think they don’t know where they are going and as for corruption, well, the corruption in the Republican Party is endemic throughout its history and only exceeded by that of the Democratic Party (it's much older and has had much more practice).

Both Parties are composed of intelligent thoughtful people when banded together become a group of idiots.

But that's ok, play the game your way!
I'll pretend I am a militant moderate trying to stop the great insanity…. :charge:

Ha! If the photographer wasnt so big (he didnt look big in the picture) and the crazy democrat attacked him. Then THAT would be a article worth reading :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IrishArmenian

I consider myself a left-leaner (runs in the family) but this is a little paranoid. Shouldn't they have the freedom to take pictures of the march?

---

Just because he's paranoid doesn't mean that those guys aren't gathering intel.
I mean, what do you think the CIA does all day? yes thats right, spooky type things.


FBI Link
CIA Link

Thats just what Wikipedia says.
I'll try and find some better stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

What they did was immediately judge the man by the clothing he was wearing and his haircut, and then wanted to hurt him, became confrontational, while they were at a 'peace march'. A filthy hipocrite.

Crazed Rabbit

---

"Filthy hypocrite?"

American police, military, and airport security agents do this thousands of times every day, but you seem to be okay with that...

Do those same police and assorted folks preach ideas of tolerance and acceptance of everything that is different (In reality, lefties just demand mainstream aceptance of whatever kooky stuff they do), of violence as a last resort, always using non-violent means, etc.?

Therein lies my reasoning for calling the posters hypocrites.

Quote:

---

Aye me hearty, I think ye be bein' a bit paranoid yerself.

---

Arr, me hearty, just seein' as ye be paranoid doesn't mean they not be chasin' ye.

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Do those same police and assorted folks preach ideas of tolerance and acceptance of everything that is different (In reality, lefties just demand mainstream aceptance of whatever kooky stuff they do), of violence as a last resort, always using non-violent means, etc.?

---

No, but they do claim to be warriors in the cause of freedom while they are stomping on civil liverties.

Point taken, but that's a different kind of hypcrisy which was not raised in this dicussion, and not the kind of hypocrisy you first mentioned, and it's not a given that guy was a part of the FBI/CIA/NSA/ABC agency.

(As a side note, I'd say only our soldiers are warriors for freedom, and they aren't supressing civil liberties right now)

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Point taken, but that's a different kind of hypcrisy which was not raised in this dicussion, and not the kind of hypocrisy you first mentioned, and it's not a given that guy was a part of the FBI/CIA/NSA/ABC agency.

(As a side note, I'd say only our soldiers are warriors for freedom, and they aren't supressing civil liberties right now)

CR

---

For what it's worth, I agree that the guy who was freaking out about the short-hairs probably does wear a tinfoil hat while watching TV...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoreBag

"I asked him why he was taking these kids' pictures and he said I was all about "rights" until it came to his."

What the carp is that supposed to mean?

---

I think it is supposed to mean something like this: I asked why he was taking these kids' pictures and he said; they are all about "rights" until it comes to mine. Eg. meaning he is from the opposition,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sjakihata

I think it is supposed to mean something like this: I asked why he was taking these kids' pictures and he said; they are all about "rights" until it comes to mine. Eg. meaning he is from the opposition,

---

You...just repeated the quotation.