4 ms·

Do you have any proof to support your "obvious" claim? They were arrested live on air- early in the morning- I saw the 2 minutes or so leading up to their arres

Do you have any proof to support your "obvious" claim? They were arrested live on air- early in the morning- I saw the 2 minutes or so leading up to their arrest, but not anything before.

cryptica 6y ago
Do you actually believe that the police force would send 50 heavily armed and shielded police officers to an area for the sole purpose of arresting 5 CNN reporters? Clearly, they were not actually sent to arrest 5 CNN reporters. The CNN reporters were arrested for interfering with the work of police officers on the site of a violent riot. If there was fire and broken stuff all around and a small army of police officers arrived at the scene and told me to leave, I would leave the area immediately and I wouldn't feel that this is impeding my freedom in any way. Given the extreme situation, CNN people had no right to interfere with the work of police officers. What if there was a bomb in the area which had to be diffused urgently?
- kevstev 6y ago
  For your first question- I have no idea. There was a heavy police presence in the area- I think they could have very well been sent to intimidate. Your second statement is not clear to me at all, and you appear to have absolutely nothing to back up your statement. In the video they clearly asked where they should move to and got no response aside from "You are under arrest." You are making baseless claims and don't even appear to have even watched any of the incident's video.
  - cryptica 6y ago
    Obviously a lot of stuff happened long before the live stream started... The fires and thoroughly vandalized infrastructure indicate that. Based on my own experience with the media, I wouldn't be surprised if they only started transmitting the video when the situation started to fit their rhetoric. That's how the media works these days.

4 ms·

Do you have any proof to support your "obvious" claim? They were arrested live on air- early in the morning- I saw the 2 minutes or so leading up to their arres

by kevstev 6y ago

Do you have any proof to support your "obvious" claim? They were arrested live on air- early in the morning- I saw the 2 minutes or so leading up to their arrest, but not anything before.

cryptica 6y ago
Do you actually believe that the police force would send 50 heavily armed and shielded police officers to an area for the sole purpose of arresting 5 CNN reporters? Clearly, they were not actually sent to arrest 5 CNN reporters. The CNN reporters were arrested for interfering with the work of police officers on the site of a violent riot. If there was fire and broken stuff all around and a small army of police officers arrived at the scene and told me to leave, I would leave the area immediately and I wouldn't feel that this is impeding my freedom in any way. Given the extreme situation, CNN people had no right to interfere with the work of police officers. What if there was a bomb in the area which had to be diffused urgently?
- kevstev 6y ago
  For your first question- I have no idea. There was a heavy police presence in the area- I think they could have very well been sent to intimidate. Your second statement is not clear to me at all, and you appear to have absolutely nothing to back up your statement. In the video they clearly asked where they should move to and got no response aside from "You are under arrest." You are making baseless claims and don't even appear to have even watched any of the incident's video.
  - cryptica 6y ago
    Obviously a lot of stuff happened long before the live stream started... The fires and thoroughly vandalized infrastructure indicate that. Based on my own experience with the media, I wouldn't be surprised if they only started transmitting the video when the situation started to fit their rhetoric. That's how the media works these days.