Ramblings, thoughts, observations, and inane banter. Oh, and a bunch of stuff about food too...
I think it supports the "highly edited video" by showing "what really happened." I was waiting for something to change my mind and it never came.Is there a reason why you felt strongly enough to post this?..
Yes. I think it's important to be fair and balanced. While I do not agree with the use of pepper spray on the students who sat there, blocking the path of the officers, I do agree with the law. There were more than enough warnings issued and the situation became a potentially dangerous one for the officers. I believe they could have left the area simply by moving the students through arresting them or forcing their way through rather than the pepper spray. There is a group of officers that were able to get through right before that incident so I have to believe it was possible for the larger group to do the same. I think it's important to see both sides of the story, or rather the ENTIRE story, rather than just the dramatic part.
So I guess I'm not following you. Do you feel that the officers were justified in what they did or not?Because this:"I believe they could have left the area simply by moving the students through arresting them or forcing their way through rather than the pepper spray."and this:"While I do not agree with the use of pepper spray on the students who sat there, blocking the path of the officers, I do agree with the law."...seem totally at odds with each other although, I have to admit, I'm having some problem with the syntax of each sentence..
Syntax? Is it really that hard for you to understand or are you just being a smartass? I really dont see any contradiction. Let me put it in simple terms for you:Yes - officers were right to remove tents and others who were breaking the law.No - officers were not right in using pepper spray to move the mob of students who held them hostage for arresting other students. They should've simply arrested those students blocking the path (aka obstructing justice) although I'm saying that without consideration for what kind of scene that may have caused, one that could be potentially dangerous for the officers.
No, actually I was referring to the construction of those sentences. Twitter is killing your syntax, my friend.BTW, we agree on this situation.I think..
I think your hatred of Twitter has clouded your ability to comprehend. Maybe if I said, "I believe the officers..." instead of "they" you would've understood better?Either way, you could've figured it out with a little effort. But I guess you were just waiting for a handout explanation like a typical hard-left liberal and instead chose to "occupy" the comments section of my blog.Sorry but that was too good to pass up. Hahaha ;)
I don't hate Twitter, but I think it's way over rated as an effective device to communicate complete thoughts and information to readers. That's why I still blog and supplement my posts with an occasional tweet.As far as the other stuff goes, you forgot the words "socialist" and "communist" and "Birkenstocks" as part of your descriptors. Careful. You're too young to be falling for all that bigoted BS just yet..
Post a Comment