# UC Davis 2.0



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

Alright, so I feel strongly that the incidents at UC Davis should be analyzed in depth, because they will give us a deeper understanding of how such incidents form and develop, mob mentality, The Blame Game, proper use of force, and a great many other things. 

*What this thread IS about:*
-The reasons behind the UC Davis protests in the first place.
-The events leading up to the pepper spray incident.
-The pepper spray incident, its legality or lack thereof, and its appropriateness or lack thereof.
-The fallout and subsequent reactions of the various parties involved in the incident.
-Videos and articles (especially first hand accounts) pertaining to the above lines.

*What this thread is NOT about:*
-The Occupy movement as a whole. There is already a thread for that. This is SPECIFICALLY about UC DAVIS.
-Who is the Bad Guy in all this. If we look at things reasonably, everyone involved in this incident was trying to act with the best of intentions (Yes, even the Occupiers, Yes, even the chancellor, YES, even the cops)
- Any pictures built off of the Pepper Spray men's. They detract from the conversation. They don't add to it.

*THINGS TO SERIOUSLY CONSIDER BEFORE POSTING:*
-Your fellow martialtalker is not your enemy, and should be treated with respect.
-* YOUR FELLOW MARTIALTALKER IS NOT YOUR ENEMY AND SHOULD BE TREATED WITH RESPECT!!!*
- You can guarantee the mods up to and including the Gawd Emperor will be watching this thread _very closely_, ready to lock the thread without the slightest bit of hesitation. They very well may be sharpening their mighty banhammers as I type this.

So without further adieu, let's try this again. You put down your rock, i'll put down my sword, and we'll try and kill eachother like civilized people. Battle of wits. To the death. Any sicilians on this board?

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

So here is the first video, showing the students moving the tents (not taking them down as was claimed in verious places on the internet, and you can see that the tents remain, in the film). It also shows the arrival of the police.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Makalakumu (Nov 26, 2011)

When is it okay to disobey orders from the police?


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

In this video, you see the crowd circling the police and locking arms. This act is specifically meant to block them in. They make this clear by chanting "if you let them go, we will let you leave". There are also more colorful chants as well.

You also see Lt. john Pike informing the seated line that they will have to use force if they will not get up and go peacefully. The first time he does this, he informes each person individually and makes sure they understand. The second time, he addresses one member as a representative of the group.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

Makalakumu said:


> When is it okay to disobey orders from the police?



When the orders are illegal.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

Makalakumu said:


> When is it okay to disobey orders from the police?



Or when they are extremely immoral or unethical. Neither was the case in this incident.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

This is the final video, which shows the students being pepper sprayed, and arrested, and finally shows the police being granted permission from the student blockade to leave.
Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

This is a video from 11/15/11-- three days before the incident. it shows the reason the Occupy movement at Davis formed- namely tuition hikes, and the use of batons at UC Berkeley. It also has a great many teacher interviews. 

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

This is a video of protest, march, and the beginning of a general assembly.


Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Makalakumu (Nov 26, 2011)

Josh Oakley said:


> When the orders are illegal.
> 
> Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk



Does this apply in all cases?


----------



## Makalakumu (Nov 26, 2011)

Josh Oakley said:


> Or when they are extremely immoral or unethical. Neither was the case in this incident.
> 
> Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk



If you consider what the OWS stands for as a whole, then that is up for debate.

Let's put it this way, if we reduce this down to a separate, local, phenomenon, blocking sidewalks and ignoring police orders is way over the top.  When put into the bigger picture of what this is all about, it suddenly starts to make a little more sense.  It's all a matter of how you choose to look at it.  

At any rate, here are some important questions to consider.

How would you know what the UC Davis protesters believed?  Were you there?  Did you ask them?

Did you know that pictures and videos can be taken out of context to show something that may or may not be accurate?

Might what you be seeing fall into that category?  

Lastly, why do you want to reduce this to a separate and local phenomenon?  Do the protesters think they are part of a separate and local phenomenon?


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

The protest and march ultimately led to Mrak Hall, which was to be both their first general assembly and an occupation of the building. For the most part it is not bothersome. Even the comment at the end when they say the board of regeants are right to fear them. I strongly stand by the statement, "people should not be afraid of their governments; governments should be afraid of theor people".

However, pay attention to the statement Joshua Clover makes: 





> The law doesn't mean s$&*. They don't care about you. They'll get done what needs to get done, and we're going to have to figure out what we are going to do about it. Right now... we're the law.



Now go back and watch the interview of protesters from earlier that day. Most of the interviews, I honestly believe, are peaceful calls to civic action. However, Mr. Clover's sounds a good deal less than peaceful.



> INTERVIEWER: To what extent would you go to see change happen with this whole movement?
> JOSHUA CLOVER: Oh, there's only some things you can say on camera. I've certainly been arrested before on this campus as part of a protest at Mrak Hall. I do think that dire times call for serious responses. I think that people are starting to organize around responses that are not purely rhetorical, or do not purely involve taking a position, but involve actually taking action, putting your body in a place where thongs need to be done, and I think we should all commit to doing that."



Frankly, these statements are disconcerting, when taken together. They may be referring to non-violent restistance, but they are by no means peaceful. 

The prior protest he refers to happened in 2009. Here is a video from that protest:





There was another protest on March 4, 2011 where students were actively blocking the roads. This lead to police pushing back the crowd, who continued to resist, until policed fired rubber pellets and used "pepper spray". That is what the video calls it, but I am fairly certain it is CS gas, which sucks a lot more, an I speak from experience, having been the recipient of both. Here is the video:





These protests establish a history that certainly is background for the demeanor of both police and protesters in 2011, though there was no public outcry either of those years. Those years weren't subject to the rhetoric of "police brutality", however, nor were they aligned with the Occupy movement.

Incidents like those at UC Davis in 2011 don't just happen. They are a result of  number of influences boiling over. Honestly, I think the students have a legitimate beef on both primary reasons for protest: tuition hikes and the agressive police response at UC Berkeley.

However, their tactics for the last three years, predating the Occupy movement, have been to intentionally disobey the law. Mixed in now with the rhetoric of revolution supplied by the occupy movement, the possibility for REAL disaster looms close.

I don't buy that this movement is purely disorganized, especially in regards to UC Davis (and let's please KEEP things on regards to UC Davis please). When I hear statements from people like Joshua Clover and Nathan Brown, already leaders in the campus community (and in Joshua's case for good reason-- Google him), I stongly suspect a core group of leaders acting with a definite agenda. Listening to Joshua Clover, I suspect there will be blood.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

Makalakumu said:


> Does this apply in all cases?





> Or when they are extremely immoral or unethical. Neither was the case in this incident.



This.


----------



## Makalakumu (Nov 26, 2011)

Do the UC Davis protesters consider themselves as part of the Occupy movement?  Do you think the Occupy movement, as a whole, stands for something that is worth breaking the law over?


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

Makalakumu said:


> If you consider what the OWS stands for as a whole, then that is up for debate.



On this let's agree to disagree, for the purposes of this thread, and duke it out over this point on a different thread dedicated to such a topic.



> Let's put it this way, if we reduce this down to a separate, local, phenomenon, blocking sidewalks and ignoring police orders is way over the top.  When put into the bigger picture of what this is all about, it suddenly starts to make a little more sense.  It's all a matter of how you choose to look at it.



I agree, but likely for different reasons. The UC Davis community has a history of such tactics that predate the Occupy movement, as I have shown in previous posts.



> How would you know what the UC Davis protesters believed?  Were you there?  Did you ask them?



No, and I assume neither were you. However, there is quite a lot of coverage  for this event, both from the media and from the students themselves. This is why I have watched as much coverage as I can, to get as much perspective as possible. 

However, I would absolutely LOVE for someone who was there, ideally a protester AND a policeman, to come on and tell theory sides of the story. Short of that, we work with what we have.



> Did you know that pictures and videos can be taken out of context to show something that may or may not be accurate?



Yes, and I have made the point myself. That is why I am posting as much video as possible. The first three videos l posted, for instance, are very straightforward: taped by a student, unmodified, uncut, unedited. I can say with a high degree of confidence that those videos are reliable. 



> Might what you be seeing fall into that category?



Perhaps, but not likely. This is why I chose videos from student news groups on that campus and individual student videos. Not FOX, not MSNBC, not CNN. And for the very reason that those sources likely WOULD be slanted. If there is any slant here, it is for the students, since the videos are by THE STUDENTS.



> Lastly, why do you want to reduce this to a separate and local phenomenon?  Do the protesters think they are part of a separate and local phenomenon?



Multiple reasons:
1. If we keep it focused on this specifically, we can discuss in more and finer detail what went on at UC Davis.

2. I recognize the Law of Raspberry Jam: the wider you spread it, the thinner it gets. I aim to dig DEEP on this topic. The broader you spread the pool of inquiry in ANY subject, the shallower the waters. Don't we already have enough threads covering the broad movement?

3. The issues at UC Davis predate the Occupy movement. I have already shown that, and I think conclusively. But you are welcome to present evidence to the contrary.

4. The Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures at UC Davis are specific to UC Davis and predate the Occupy movement. Although the students now DO identify with the Occupy movement, and this Occupy movement is involved with Occupy movements in neighboring Occupy efforts (and I show that in the videos I posted, each local Occupy effort is different. 

4. To better understand the whole, it is beneficial to unerstand the parts that make up the whole. I plan on treating other Occupy efforts with the same deep information gathering and analysis as I am currently treating UC Davis (especially Occupy Seattle and Occupy Tacoma, as I can personally attend both with ease. I wholeheartedly encourage you to go indepth with the Occupy efforts in Hawaii, as that will add to our community's understanding of the occupy movement as a whole... However, in another thread. I further encourage people in other cities to do the same... Again in their own thread.

6. Unlike you, I may very soon have to make a decision where I stand, assuming my fears are realized and we are looking at the beginning stages of a revolt. I am a soldier, and it is not only possible that at some point the military becomes involved with this, it's bloody LIKELY. when I get to that point of no return, I intend to make my decision with as much information as possible, as I will have to live (or maybe even die) with the consequences of that decision. 

5. Most importantly, I fear and respect the power and intentions of the Gawd Emperor, his mighty banhammer, and that of the moderators and supermoderadors. This is how I have set up THIS thread, and based on the fact that Bob was the first to thank me, I can safely assume I have his support for my approach. If you would like to take a different approach, feel free. But please do it on a different thread, if for nothing other than out of respect for a fellow martialtalker. 

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

Makalakumu said:


> Do the UC Davis protesters consider themselves as part of the Occupy movement?  Do you think the Occupy movement, as a whole, stands for something that is worth breaking the law over?



To answer the first question, yes. I refuse to answer the second question on this thread. Feel free to ask me that question on a different thread, so we do not derail this one.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

This is coverage from UC Davis' student news the day before the pepper spray incident, after they had been evicted from Mrak Hall and moved the protest to the quad. Contained is footage of a campus officer (security? police?) Asking them if they understand what they were in violation of the law. I am still looking for footage showing this from the students' perspective. Can anyone help with that?

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

This is a documentary filmed the night before the pepper spray incident on the views of protesters within the occupation of UC Davis. I think it does a fair job. Bob, Bill 1, Bill2, and those who stand in opposition to the protesters, I strongly encourage you watch the video. 

Like I said at the beginning of this, I don't want to demonize any side involved, but to gain a fuller understanding of the situation.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

Just in case the YouTube does not cooperate with you, here is the video again. There is an obvious slant on them to the Occupy movement, so keep that in mind when you view them. I don't entirely agree with the views expressed in these videos. In fact, I disagree with about half of both videos simply based on my primary ethic of TANSTAAFL alone. But let's look at these to get an understanding of the mindset of students.

Also one of these videos has some bad music from a stringed instrument I don't recognize. Apologies in advance.

[video=vimeo;32336578]http://vimeo.com/32336578[/video]
[video=vimeo;32193643]http://vimeo.com/32193643[/video]


----------



## Makalakumu (Nov 26, 2011)

Josh Oakley said:


> To answer the first question, yes. I refuse to answer the second question on this thread. Feel free to ask me that question on a different thread, so we do not derail this one.
> 
> Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk



First of all, thanks for posting the videos.  It will be interesting to watch when I have more time.

Secondly, from my experience, I felt a sense of solidarity with the Occupy movement as a whole when I went to events.  From what I've seen, there seems to be that at UC Davis as well.

Thirdly, I can't really converse about the pepper spray incident without putting into the larger context.  Without the larger context, I don't think breaking the law is defensible.  The students could have made their point about local issues more effectively in a regular demonstration.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

Makalakumu said:


> First of all, thanks for posting the videos.  It will be interesting to watch when I have more time.
> 
> Secondly, from my experience, I felt a sense of solidarity with the Occupy movement as a whole when I went to events.  From what I've seen, there seems to be that at UC Davis as well.
> 
> Thirdly, I can't really converse about the pepper spray incident without putting into the larger context.  Without the larger context, I don't think breaking the law is defensible.  The students could have made their point about local issues more effectively in a regular demonstration.



1.You're welcome.

2. I'm not disputing that at all. There definitely _is_ a sense of solidarity at UC Davis with the larger Occupy movement, and it is made clear in the videos. However, focusing on the individual characteristics within the UC Davis movement allows us to dig _deep, _something I feel hasn't really happened with this or a number of other topics within The Study, and it really is a shame. That is why I am taking this thread from a point of deeper understanding, without politicking, demonizing, etc., and encouraging others to do the same. I really mean this to be a _study_ of the UC Davis Occupy movement, especially in relation to the pepper spray incident, rather than yet another _soapbox _thread. If we only ever voice our views without hearing one another's views, there really is no point to The Study. We can intellectually masturbate on the blogs provided us in MartialTalk. Or in front of a mirror. Intellectual masturbation doesn't require a partner, and an intellectual circle jerk is just... gross.

(Too far? Moving on!)

3a. I fully intend to see the pepper spray incident within a larger context. Specifically, the larger context of the history leading up to the incident, the stakeholders involved, the fallout of the incident, and what this means for UC Davis. You can get into a _lot_ of detail focusing on just these points. And some of the statements of the greater Occupy movement will indeed be brought up, but by focusing on how that pertains to UC Davis _specifically, _we might gain greater insight to how the Occupy movement interacts in other communities, and figure out in which ways those interacts are of an accord with one another, and in which ways they are different. And there are _significant _differences between individual Occupy efforts, just as there are significant different differences between the cultures from from which the various protesters come.

3b. Frankly I think they could have made their point about both local and national issues more effectively in a regular demonstration. Period. I don't believe breaking the law in this or in prior protests is or was defensible, both in local context or otherwise.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

http://www.occupyucdavis.org/

This is the official website for Occupy UC Davis. My motivation for sharing this link is to show the stated motivations, goals, and plans of the Occupy UC Davis effort. It should be taken as such. This is not an endorsement nor reprisal of those motivations, goals, or plans. Furthermore, statements by movement leaders such as Joshua Clover and Nathan Brown. 

This website also contains official letters from Linda B. Katehi, Chancellor of UC Davis. I encourage those following this thread to read, in its entirety, the contents of the website.


----------



## Makalakumu (Nov 26, 2011)

Josh, I'm out fishing and can't read your links, but I read your posts and I'm curious why you, as a soldier, think the occupy movement will turn into a full scale revolt.

Sent from my Eris using Tapatalk


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Nov 26, 2011)

Just a side note. I'm keeping 1 eye on this, but am refraining from comment at this time.
Carry on.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

There is a large amount of rhetoric that colors the coverage of the pepper spray incident, referring to those who were pepper-sprayed as "victims". Demands of redress to those "injured" by the pepper spray. References to the pepper spray as "chemical gas". Descriptions of the police response as "brutality". Descriptions of protesters as "peaceful". I have a big problem with using phrases and words which color incidents in a light more favorable to one's opinion, because it frames the entire discussion in a way that focuses the reader, viewer, or participant on the speaker's preferred interpretations of the event, to the exclusion of other, possibly more accurate interpretations.

Let's look at these terms:
*Victim:* generally this term implies a sense of unwillingness, helplessness, etc. By the videos, we can see that they weren't helpless, nor very unwilling.  After repeated warnings, they chose to remain, though it was entirely possible to make their point made without violating the law.
*Injury:* All of us here are martial artists. And we _know _the difference between *injury* and *pain*. And as far as any reports have gone, there have been _no _injuries as a result of the police response. Not one (But feel free to prove otherwise). Now those of us who have been exposed to pepper spray and CS gas know that such an experience unequivocally _sucks. _A _lot. _But the effects from both pepper spray and CS gas last hours at most. Usually minutes. And then you're fine. Now both used on the extremely old or young can cause actual _injury,_ and we are experiencing media coverage here in Seattle from just such an event. But this simply wasn't the case at UC Davis.
*Chemical gas:* The method of employment in the pepper spray was aerosol. This is not the same as gas. Nor is the term "chemical" entirely appropriate. Were CS gas used in this, the term would be more appropriate. However, the employment of this term is a rhetorical device that is meant to call to mind the vivid and grotesque images of the effects of weapons such as mustard gas and vx gas. The emotive context that "chemical gas" draws up is a far _far _cry from either pepper spray or CS gas.
*Brutality: *Having viewed the videos, I can state with confidence that this is hyperbole _at best_. Brutal actions are savagely violent. This might be more applicable at Berkeley, where people actually went to the hospital, or Tienanmen Square, where people got killed.
*Peaceful:* Almost universally, "peaceful" and "non-violent" are being equivocated, and again, this is not accurate. Just as "hostile" is not the same as "violent". Just as you can be violent and peaceful at the same time (which is very tough to do, but Aikidoka somehow manage to pull it off, as well as competitors in Tae Kwondo, jujitsu, and UFC events, in general), you can be non-violent and hostile at the same time as well (ask those of us who are married... or _were_). This rhetoric is being used to sanctify the protesters and vilify the police officers.
So when reading these reports, pay attention to the language used, and ask, why are they choosing to use the language they use. Try to find an emotively neutral way to say the same thing. This is not an attempt at political correctness, but factual accuracy. This is also how we can avoid tense situations on _this_ thread. This is an emotionally charged event as it is, there is no need to add to that tension through sabotage by rhetoric.

Perhaps read through your posts before putting them up to see if you yourself are not guilty of this as well.

(This is not directed at makalakumu, he just happens to be the only one to post so far, and has been pretty amiable in conversation. This is an exhortation to future posters.)


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Just a side note. I'm keeping 1 eye on this, but am refraining from comment at this time.
> Carry on.



understood.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 26, 2011)

Makalakumu said:


> Josh, I'm out fishing and can't read your links, but I read your posts and I'm curious why you, as a soldier, think the occupy movement will turn into a full scale revolt.
> 
> Sent from my Eris using Tapatalk



First off, I'm envious of you going fishing in Hawaii in late November!

Second, ask me that question on a thread about the Occupy movement as a whole and I'll gladly answer it. Not here. And you'll hear that from me every time you ask me a question about the Occupy movement on this thread without direct application to UC Davis specifically.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Nov 27, 2011)

*MOD NOTE:
  Embedded video links for easier viewing here.*


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 27, 2011)

I'm interested in seeing where this goes.  I think the points Josh has made are very clear.  Protest is part of American culture and history.  Civil disobedience is also part of our political and social landscape; it's a time-honored tradition.  But it seems that some want to see the act of civil disobedience as a protected status, and it's not.

Let me explain.  To engage in civil disobedience is fine.  It's OK.  It's even healthy.  People should protest when they feel strongly about something, and even risk being arrested, going to jail, being convicted of crimes.  This is part of the process; it is the act of being willing to take what comes that makes it a powerful statement.

However, one does not enter a protected status when one protests.  Do people have the right to speak freely?  Yes.  Do they have the right to peaceably assemble?  Yes.  Do demand redress?  Yes.  And if the laws they violate to do those things are in fact unconstitutional limits on those civil rights, then that is the question to be answered.  In court.  After the arrest.

It does *not* convey a status whereby the police must stand back and not enforce the law because the person or people are engaging in 'official protest'.  The entire concept of civil disobedience is that the people engaging in it intend to violate the law and take what comes.  That can and does include being pepper sprayed and arrested.  In fact, they *must* be arrested to challenge the law; without the arrest, there is no court case.  Without the court case, there are no judges getting involved in Constitutional questions.  The arrest is absolutely required. 

As to the pepper spray, I think that has been argued to death.  It's pretty clear that the demonstrators knew they were about to be pepper sprayed and accepted that role.  They absolutely had the opportunity to get up and leave and avoid being pepper sprayed.  I realize they wanted to demonstrate their right to not leave; that's cool.  That means they also accepted what came next.  And why did the police pepper spray them?   Simple.  Any other solution (prying them apart by hand) would have exposed both the students and the police to injury.  Pepper spray, as un-fun as it is, is not permanently damaging.  It is just persuasion.

As I've stated before, the entire event was role-playing.  The protesters played their part, the police played theirs, the media played theirs.  The tableau unfolded for the public, and then we reacted.  There is no part of this that was unscripted.

If I were to be angry at anything, I'd be angry at being manipulated this way.  Obviously, my role was to get angry at the heartless evil police.  That is how the story was portrayed.  I am not a tool, and I resent being treated like one.  Others don't seem to recognize that they are being manipulated in this way.

As to revolution, I don't think this incident is the straw that broke the camel's back.  That's not to say we could not end up in a similar situation as the waning days of the Students for a Democratic Society / Weather Underground days.  I think that could happen; I've said so.

What the overall OWS movement does is bring many disaffected individuals together at the same time; it puts them in close contact.  Many will find common ground, many will discover they don't find other protesters very much in tune with their beliefs at all.  The groups will splinter and divide based on their beliefs; some will be less dangerous and some more dangerous.  This is what happened in the SDS.  The SDS was peaceful and remained so for a number of years.  But there were those who disagreed with their methods if not their aims; and they formed the Weathermen and started building bombs.

I realize that no one seems to want to talk about this; people want to pretend that this never happened in the USA, or that it this is somehow different, or that it could never happen again, and etc.  But the fact is that history repeats itself.  If the OWS is enough like the SDS, a group like the Weathermen will arise; it's a matter of time.  You can turn your head if you like; it won't change what happens.

What the OWS lacks at the moment are leaders.  I get that they are priding themselves on being both leaderless and objectiveless, but I do not believe that this condition will remain the case indefinitely.  When charismatic leaders arise, when OWS starts to develop a platform, then we may begin to see real danger of rebellion or revolution of a kind.

I doubt that this will become serious, if the economy eventually recovers.  If the economy tanks again, then things will change.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 27, 2011)

Thanks for coming on, Bill. I appreciate your comments. stay tuned, because my next post will be a write-up of Lt. John Pike, his exemplary record, how he is getting raked over the coals, etc.

And I agree that this was a big role play.

My request, however is we keep comments focused on UC Davis, rather than the Occupy Movement as a whole. While I agree that the Occupy movement as a whole lacks leadership, I honestly don't think this is the case at UC Davis. I plan to make my case later today after I have enough research to back me up.

But before that I wanted to focus on John Pike. Write up soon to come.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 27, 2011)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobil...ing-officer-previously-honored_n_1108865.html

So I want to spend some time on Lt. John Pike. He has been, in my opinion, unfairly raked over the coals. Here is a man who served his country honorably in the USMC, who continued his service the police force, earning not one but _two_ Meritorious Service Awards from the police force, both times showing a judicious use of force and a concern for safety.

I think it is likely that he was one of the police responding to protests in 2010 and in 2009, though I cannot prove that for sure. But likely, he had experience in dealing with UC Davis Protests prior to 2011. 

Now keep in mind, escalation of force was required in 2010, and to a greater deal than we  saw just over a week ago. Yet that time no names of any officers were released.

So what is different about this time? 

Well, this time, there's a massive outcry. This time there was a media frenzy. This time the rhetoric is being tossed around like to the degree that even attempts at unbiased reporting fall into the trap of non-neutral language.

This time, the chancellor's job is on the line.

I want to make clear that John Pike administered pepper spray under a lawful order to do so, from his proper chain of command. He did his job, and the videos show that he did it with a high degree of professionalism, especially in an emotionally tense situation.

And for doing his job, he was placed on suspension. He is facing an investigation, and his job is in jeopardy.

And that's not the worst of it. Linda Katehi did something that in my mind was unconscionable. She released John Pike's name to the press. The effect of this: Pike became a target for harassment, vandalism, fraud, etc. Hacker group Anonymous released his information on YouTube. 

Why would Katehi release John Pike's name if, as she claims, she accepts full responsibility for the actions that took place on November 18th? She wasn't required to do so. In general, officers' names generally are NOT released in circumstances where there is a pending investigation. 

Because what could happen to these officers DID happen to John Pike.

I have really been trying to figure out why she would release his name, and I can only come up with two reasons that make sense to me:
    1) She is an idiot.
     2) She was trying to distract attention away from herself.

Proposition 1, when looking at her resume, does not seem likely. She holds a doctorate in electrical engineering, has mentored over 70 post-doctoral fellows, holds 19 patents, and has authored or co-authored about 659 journal publications. She was recently elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. So I really don't think she is an idiot.

I think what remains is that she released his name to take some heat off herself. In the end, it didn't work for her, but it sure screwed up the life of a good officer.


----------



## granfire (Nov 27, 2011)

I think that pretty much sums up the situation around the police officer in this case.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 27, 2011)

Josh Oakley said:


> My request, however is we keep comments focused on UC Davis, rather than the Occupy Movement as a whole.



I don't think you can talk about 'revolution' without talking about the larger movement.  If you want to leave OWS to one side, then that's fine, but in that case I have to reject the idea that this one issue has anything to do with 'revolution'.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 27, 2011)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I don't think you can talk about 'revolution' without talking about the larger movement.  If you want to leave OWS to one side, then that's fine, but in that case I have to reject the idea that this one issue has anything to do with 'revolution'.



Understood, and I will get to that later.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 27, 2011)

http://www.ucop.edu/ucophome/coordrev/ucpolicies/documents/policepol_adminproc.pdf

So this is the University of California Universitywide Police Policies and Procedures manual. I am still reading it, as it is 86 pages long, but I would be interested to hear the insights of anyone willing to tackle this with me.


----------



## Makalakumu (Nov 27, 2011)

Josh Oakley said:


> So, I want to spend some time on Lt. John Pike. He has been, in my opinion, unfairly raked over the coals.



When people choose to enforce the rules for the Government, they put themselves in a position that can become extremely unpopular.  When one considers the amount of anger out there directed toward the government and all of it's corrupt minions, it doesn't matter what the Officer did before.  It's a risk of choosing that line of work.

Is it fair?  You tell me.  OWS, as a broader protest, stands against the policies and finance of fascism.  By enforcing the Law for the State behind all of this stuff, you risk having the label applied.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 27, 2011)

Seriously, malakumu, if you aren't able to focus it to UC Davis, let's just talk on a different thread altogether.


----------



## granfire (Nov 27, 2011)

Makalakumu said:


> When people choose to enforce the rules for the Government, they put themselves in a position that can become extremely unpopular.  When one considers the amount of anger out there directed toward the government and all of it's corrupt minions, it doesn't matter what the Officer did before.  It's a risk of choosing that line of work.
> 
> Is it fair?  You tell me.  OWS, as a broader protest, stands against the policies and finance of fascism.  By enforcing the Law for the State behind all of this stuff, you risk having the label applied.




While I am strongly against the actions taken at UC Davis, the way the officer was dealt with is rotten.

No, it's not ok, because you chose to be a police officer and to uphold the rules of society that you have to expect to be thrown under the bus to safe some brass.

What he did was not wrong by the letter of the law, not really morally questionable either. he is not at fault.
And yet, he is in trouble.

How can you make excuses for that, honestly!



Now, this is a drift back to the OWS movement, which as above clearly stated, should be avoided as to not mix the issues.
UC Davis is not financing fascism. 

I can understand the people in protest. They have been told all their lies that without college degree their lives will be wasted.
Their college savings don't hardly cover the expenses any more, before they are done, it will be much more they will owe all while prospects of receiving jobs that can actually help them pay the dept down are getting slimmer.


----------



## Makalakumu (Nov 27, 2011)

granfire said:


> ...you chose to be a police officer and to uphold the rules of society...



This is the key.  Choice.  The officer chose a profession in which he must uphold the rules of the society no matter what they are.  In this case, upholding the rules has a hefty political penalty because of what the larger OWS movement stands for.  If he was just enforcing the law on a local protest at UC Davis, I don't think it would have been such a big deal.  UC Davis fits into the larger context of a general struggle against fascism and that explains the firestorm, IMO.



granfire said:


> Now, this is a drift back to the OWS movement, which as above clearly stated, should be avoided as to not mix the issues.
> UC Davis is not financing fascism.
> 
> I can understand the people in protest. They have been told all their lies that without college degree their lives will be wasted.
> Their college savings don't hardly cover the expenses any more, before they are done, it will be much more they will owe all while prospects of receiving jobs that can actually help them pay the dept down are getting slimmer.



When gigantic financial institutions merge with the government in order to offer low interest loans that cannot be forgiven in bankruptcy and drive up the overall price of education, that's fascism.  It's also another tragic bubble because the jobs aren't there to pay this debt off.  Students have a right to be pissed.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 27, 2011)

Makalakumu said:


> This is the key.  Choice.  The officer chose a profession in which he must uphold the rules of the society no matter what they are.  In this case, upholding the rules has a hefty political penalty because of what the larger OWS movement stands for.  If he was just enforcing the law on a local protest at UC Davis, I don't think it would have been such a big deal.  UC Davis fits into the larger context of a general struggle against fascism and that explains the firestorm, IMO.When gigantic financial institutions merge with the government in order to offer low interest loans that cannot be forgiven in bankruptcy and drive up the overall price of education, that's fascism.  It's also another tragic bubble because the jobs aren't there to pay this debt off.  Students have a right to be pissed.


Makalakumu, I made you a present.  http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?99993-police-responses-to-occupy-behavior Post there to your heart's content. Please.


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 27, 2011)

Makalakumu said:


> This is the key.  Choice.  The officer chose a profession in which he must uphold the rules of the society no matter what they are.  In this case, upholding the rules has a hefty political penalty because of what the larger OWS movement stands for.  If he was just enforcing the law on a local protest at UC Davis, I don't think it would have been such a big deal.  UC Davis fits into the larger context of a general struggle against fascism and that explains the firestorm, IMO.


The officer was thrown under the bus due to a Boss that was afraid she was going to loose her job and needed a scape goat.  She gave the order and when her left wing friends decided not to talk to her any more she back tracked and said "Oh Oh it wasnt me it was Lt Pike 123 Main St , anytown Ca.  Get him Get him.  Il even suspend him so we know hes home"  





> When gigantic financial institutions merge with the government in order to offer low interest loans that cannot be forgiven in bankruptcy and drive up the overall price of education, that's fascism.  It's also another tragic bubble because the jobs aren't there to pay this debt off.  Students have a right to be pissed.


Students dont have a right to be pissed.  if you cant afford to go to that school with out big loans then guess what you dont go to that school.  You go to community college to get rid of the stupid manditory classes at a much cheaper rate.  If you cant afford school in So Cal you dont go you find a cheaper school in Iowa or Texas or where ever you can afford.  They Choose that school they have to deal with it. If you cant afford it transfer.  Your argument is no different then all the people that got home loans on houses they could never afford used screwy financing that even a 6th grader could see was not right like only paying the interest for the first 4 years and then cry when it got forclosed on and blame everyone else but your dumb butt for signing the contract.


----------



## granfire (Nov 27, 2011)

just noted my Freudian spelling mishap....yes, the lies that only a college degree gets you wealthy in this lifetime...

In any case: as I said before, much to the dismay of Bill, no, I think the actions were bogus.

But as the Germans say it it was a huge load of crap to blame the cop. Schweinerei, no, Sauerei it is called. In chess you call it 'Bauernopfer' sacrifice the pawn. 

He did not kick puppies, burn tents...he did not even deserve to be suspended. 

Now, as to the person calling the shots....

And going back to the tuition prices...sheesh, people in Germany got all rowdy when they had to pay 500 Euro...


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 28, 2011)

ballen0351 said:


> The officer was thrown under the bus due to a Boss that was afraid she was going to loose her job and needed a scape goat.  She gave the order and when her left wing friends decided not to talk to her any more she back tracked and said "Oh Oh it wasnt me it was Lt Pike 123 Main St , anytown Ca.  Get him Get him.  Il even suspend him so we know hes home"
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Their community college is going up too. Though I agree. But frankly, at the University level, $22,000 a year for PUBLIC UNIVERSITY really is obscene. I think the students really do have a legitimate beef here. And I ALSO think they've been going about opposing this hike in all the wrong ways.


----------



## granfire (Nov 28, 2011)

Josh Oakley said:


> Their community college is going up too. Though I agree. But frankly, at the University level, $22,000 a year for PUBLIC UNIVERSITY really is obscene. I think the students really do have a legitimate beef here. And I ALSO think they've been going about opposing this hike in all the wrong ways.





how long do you have to be instate to qualify for instate tuition rates?

(crap, at that rate, the out of state tuition rate in most states is a bargain!)


----------



## crushing (Nov 28, 2011)

Makalakumu said:


> *When people choose to enforce the rules for the Government, they put themselves in a position that can become extremely unpopular. *When one considers the amount of anger out there directed toward the government and all of it's corrupt minions, it doesn't matter what the Officer did before. It's a risk of choosing that line of work.
> 
> Is it fair? You tell me. OWS, as a broader protest, stands against the policies and finance of fascism. By enforcing the Law for the State behind all of this stuff, you risk having the label applied.




I'll bet no one knows this better than _imperialistic fascist _Vietnam Veterans.


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 28, 2011)

Josh Oakley said:


> Their community college is going up too. Though I agree. But frankly, at the University level, $22,000 a year for PUBLIC UNIVERSITY really is obscene. I think the students really do have a legitimate beef here. And I ALSO think they've been going about opposing this hike in all the wrong ways.


Thats where the move part comes in.  If school is too expensive in Cal. refuse to pay and go to a school in another state.  I just looked up the price at my local community college its $90 per credit hour.  if enough people take their money elsewhere the price will go down to compete unless of course the Govt steps in and bails them out.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 28, 2011)

crushing said:


> I'll bet no one knows this better than _imperialistic fascist _Vietnam Veterans.



What does this have to do with UC Davis?


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 28, 2011)

ballen0351 said:


> Thats where the move part comes in.  If school is too expensive in Cal. refuse to pay and go to a school in another state.  I just looked up the price at my local community college its $90 per credit hour.  if enough people take their money elsewhere the price will go down to compete unless of course the Govt steps in and bails them out.



You actually make a good point. And I will piggyback that with a statement that college is a choice, not a divine right.


----------



## crushing (Nov 29, 2011)

Josh Oakley said:


> What does this have to do with UC Davis?


Please disregard my sarcastic comparison between good people being treated extremely poorly for their hard work and sacrifice.


----------



## Makalakumu (Nov 29, 2011)

crushing said:


> Please disregard my sarcastic comparison between good people being treated extremely poorly for their hard work and sacrifice.



As with anyone, good people are judged by their actions, not our preconceived notions. Be they protesters or otherwise.

Sent from my Eris using Tapatalk


----------



## Josh Oakley (Dec 3, 2011)

[video]http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fw  atch%3Fv%3DgV8hsGzPuX8%26feature%3Dfeedu&feature=feedu&v=gV8hsGzPuX8&gl=US[/video]

Sorry for the delay in posts (college takes precedence.over forums). So, this is probably the first video I have posted that makes me take a hard look at my basic standpoint when it comes to the use of pepper spray at UC Davis, and it comes from the _creator_ of modern pepper spray. I have to mull over his statements before I give an oppinion.


----------



## Makalakumu (Dec 3, 2011)

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011...and-then-pepper-spray-down-their-throats.html



> When students covered their eyes with their clothing, *police forced open their mouths and pepper-sprayed down their throats*.   Several of these students were hospitalized. Others are seriously   injured. One of them, forty-five minutes after being pepper-sprayed down   his throat, was still *coughing up blood*.



Is this true?


----------



## Josh Oakley (Dec 3, 2011)

Makalakumu said:


> http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011...and-then-pepper-spray-down-their-throats.html
> 
> 
> 
> Is this true?



Not true at all. You can see from the EXTENSIVE amount of videos (taken by the protesters, mind you) that nobody's mouth was forced open. The SOLE source of that claim was by Nathan Brown, who was not even in attendance at the protest during which the pepper spray incident took place.

Even if he were, he would still face the problem that the incident, in its entirety, from multiple angles, was on film.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Dec 3, 2011)

Josh Oakley said:


> [video]http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fw  atch%3Fv%3DgV8hsGzPuX8%26feature%3Dfeedu&feature=feedu&v=gV8hsGzPuX8&gl=US[/video]
> 
> Sorry for the delay in posts (college takes precedence.over forums). So, this is probably the first video I have posted that makes me take a hard look at my basic standpoint when it comes to the use of pepper spray at UC Davis, and it comes from the _creator_ of modern pepper spray. I have to mull over his statements before I give an oppinion.




I don't know why it didn't embed, so here is the second attempt at embedding:


----------

