16 ms·

The police specifically allowed the terrorists into the building. They are on the same side. https://twitter.com/i/status/1346924307692318723 https://twitter.

by awnird 6y ago

The police specifically allowed the terrorists into the building. They are on the same side. https://twitter.com/i/status/1346924307692318723 https://twitter.com/i/status/1346924307692318723

pat2man 6y ago
Or perhaps they were more focused on getting the people inside to safety than they were about the actual physical building.
- IgorPartola 6y ago
  https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1346920198461419520?s=09 https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1346920198461419520?s=0... And, you know, taking selfies with them.
- nsilvestri 6y ago
  The point stands: the summer BLM protests in DC were marching in the closed-off streets around the White House and were met with even stronger resistance from the police.
- RIMR 6y ago
  Why would capital police escort armed rioters into the Senate building for "safety" if their job is to ensure the safety of the Senate building, Senators, and staff? This is a backwards argument. The police didn't do their jobs. They were even seen taking selfies with the trespassers: https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1346920198461419520 https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1346920198461419520
rattray 6y ago
Wow, that's unbelievable. What possible explanation could there be for this?
- bradlys 6y ago
  84% of police are Trump voters. That's the explanation.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Merman_Mike 6y ago
  A handful of cops and hundreds of people in an angry mob? Is it really a mystery why they didn't fight too hard to keep the barriers shut?
  - gdubs 6y ago
    It’s the US capitol, it’s incredibly surprising. It’s outrageous. There’s no lack of adjectives.
    - MichaelZuo 6y ago
      Police, like everyone else, are not perfect automatons... there is always the possibility of any, physically possible, behaviour occurring in any place and in any time. Of course it is always possible to modulate people’s behaviour through incentives and so on, to achieve a very high probability that they will behave in certain ways. In this case it seems that the balance was in favor of the protestors.
      - sharatvir 6y ago
        Yes, how convenient this time, in comparison to the BLM protests which were met with militarized police against peaceful protestors.
        jimmygrapes 6y ago
        I think the definition they used of "peaceful" (given context) was different.
- 6y ago
cltby 6y ago
It's quite unfair to call them terrorists when they've harmed no one and destroyed nothing. Remember, riots are the voice of the unheard!
- radicalriddler 6y ago
  They are disrupting political process via force in the name of ideology. They're domestic terrorists.
  - cltby 6y ago
    The standard was set last summer. Leftists spent three months torching police stations, attacking courthouses, looting businesses, and confronting politicians in their homes. I continue to be assiduously reminded that none of this constituted terrorism. Don't see why this should be treated any differently.
    - birdyrooster 6y ago
      Sure, but they didn't interfere in the election of the President. Open your eyes.
      - tubbyjr 6y ago
        Yas, open your eyes, but please close them when the videos come up showcasing and encouraging the burning of ballots within the USPS from Republican neighbourhoods.
        orf 6y ago
        Feel free to link then here so everyone’s eyes can be opened to the clear evidence of election fraud and definitely not some wakko randomer running their mouth on Facebook live.
    - 8note 6y ago
      Both you and the folks replying to you are painting with a broad brush. Only some small portion of these protests are likely to be violent bad actors, and the proper protesters should not be disrupted by law enforcement
croissants 6y ago
I'm confused by this video, what evidence is there that this is "allow[ing] the terrorists into the building"? All I see is law enforcement opening a gate. The Twitter account appears to be a random unverified person, so I can't rely on that either. Not saying the police response has been perfect, but this video doesn't say much about that.
- bradlys 6y ago
  > All I see is law enforcement opening a gate. That is literally letting them in. They didn't stand their position. They literally walked backwards and let the crowd in.
  - croissants 6y ago
    "Allow[ing] the terrorists into the building" doesn't follow from a single shot of opening a gate. For all I know, law enforcement is funneling people away from a position that they recently decided should be cleared. I have no idea (and as far as I can tell, neither does anyone else here).
    - dj_mc_merlin 6y ago
      That shot is right in front of the building basically. The police opened barricades to let people even closer to the building. Unless the police has some sort of amazing 4D plan they are not letting us in on, which is not likely given the events of today, there is no strategic reason to clear that area. They're just letting the protestors in.
  - wowowowow 6y ago
    The last few seconds very clearly shows more people already "let in" on the other side of the gate. More context is needed.
- dillondoyle 6y ago
  The biggest problem to me is twofold: - there were very very few law enforcement there beforehand. Compare to BLM where there were thousands of storm troopers, tanks, etc camped out before the similarly obviously publicized protests occurred. Here is a comparison photo of what they had in front of the monument before the LEGAL BLM protest this summer [1] - the 'resistance' was very weak at least at first. The videos of the 'storming' didn't show much resistance, no gas, no rubber bullets, no attempt to hold the line. here is a 'selfie' [2] which to be fair doesn't show cop actively participating, but does show him just standing there. There are some photos of guns drawn trying to protect the floor, obviously out numbered once they secured Members I understand completely retreating. But the main uniformed officers at the entrances didn't act. It's a stark difference. My story is that here in Denver I was gassed, before curfew, before an unlawful assembly was declared, during a peaceful protest this summer. They shot more than a few eyes out of their sockets with rubber bullets. A judge had to restrain the Denver police for their violence. Compare to today it took a LONG time for them to deploy these same weapons, and it doesn't even look like they used tear gas/irritants at least in the first videos, just smoke; unlike what they gassed us with and those in Lafayette Park and across the country. 1 https://s.abcnews.com/images/US/national-guard-lincoln-memorial-1-abc-200602_hpMain_16x9_992.jpg https://s.abcnews.com/images/US/national-guard-lincoln-memor... 2 https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1346920198461419520 https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1346920198461419520

by awnird 6y ago

The police specifically allowed the terrorists into the building. They are on the same side. https://twitter.com/i/status/1346924307692318723 https://twitter.com/i/status/1346924307692318723

pat2man 6y ago

Or perhaps they were more focused on getting the people inside to safety than they were about the actual physical building.

IgorPartola 6y ago
https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1346920198461419520?s=09 https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1346920198461419520?s=0... And, you know, taking selfies with them.
nsilvestri 6y ago
The point stands: the summer BLM protests in DC were marching in the closed-off streets around the White House and were met with even stronger resistance from the police.
RIMR 6y ago
Why would capital police escort armed rioters into the Senate building for "safety" if their job is to ensure the safety of the Senate building, Senators, and staff? This is a backwards argument. The police didn't do their jobs. They were even seen taking selfies with the trespassers: https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1346920198461419520 https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1346920198461419520

rattray 6y ago

Wow, that's unbelievable. What possible explanation could there be for this?

bradlys 6y ago
84% of police are Trump voters. That's the explanation.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Merman_Mike 6y ago
A handful of cops and hundreds of people in an angry mob? Is it really a mystery why they didn't fight too hard to keep the barriers shut?
- gdubs 6y ago
  It’s the US capitol, it’s incredibly surprising. It’s outrageous. There’s no lack of adjectives.
  - MichaelZuo 6y ago
    Police, like everyone else, are not perfect automatons... there is always the possibility of any, physically possible, behaviour occurring in any place and in any time. Of course it is always possible to modulate people’s behaviour through incentives and so on, to achieve a very high probability that they will behave in certain ways. In this case it seems that the balance was in favor of the protestors.
    - sharatvir 6y ago
      Yes, how convenient this time, in comparison to the BLM protests which were met with militarized police against peaceful protestors.
      - jimmygrapes 6y ago
        I think the definition they used of "peaceful" (given context) was different.
6y ago

cltby 6y ago

It's quite unfair to call them terrorists when they've harmed no one and destroyed nothing. Remember, riots are the voice of the unheard!

radicalriddler 6y ago
They are disrupting political process via force in the name of ideology. They're domestic terrorists.
- cltby 6y ago
  The standard was set last summer. Leftists spent three months torching police stations, attacking courthouses, looting businesses, and confronting politicians in their homes. I continue to be assiduously reminded that none of this constituted terrorism. Don't see why this should be treated any differently.
  - birdyrooster 6y ago
    Sure, but they didn't interfere in the election of the President. Open your eyes.
    - tubbyjr 6y ago
      Yas, open your eyes, but please close them when the videos come up showcasing and encouraging the burning of ballots within the USPS from Republican neighbourhoods.
      - orf 6y ago
        Feel free to link then here so everyone’s eyes can be opened to the clear evidence of election fraud and definitely not some wakko randomer running their mouth on Facebook live.
  - 8note 6y ago
    Both you and the folks replying to you are painting with a broad brush. Only some small portion of these protests are likely to be violent bad actors, and the proper protesters should not be disrupted by law enforcement

croissants 6y ago

I'm confused by this video, what evidence is there that this is "allow[ing] the terrorists into the building"? All I see is law enforcement opening a gate. The Twitter account appears to be a random unverified person, so I can't rely on that either. Not saying the police response has been perfect, but this video doesn't say much about that.

bradlys 6y ago
> All I see is law enforcement opening a gate. That is literally letting them in. They didn't stand their position. They literally walked backwards and let the crowd in.
- croissants 6y ago
  "Allow[ing] the terrorists into the building" doesn't follow from a single shot of opening a gate. For all I know, law enforcement is funneling people away from a position that they recently decided should be cleared. I have no idea (and as far as I can tell, neither does anyone else here).
  - dj_mc_merlin 6y ago
    That shot is right in front of the building basically. The police opened barricades to let people even closer to the building. Unless the police has some sort of amazing 4D plan they are not letting us in on, which is not likely given the events of today, there is no strategic reason to clear that area. They're just letting the protestors in.
- wowowowow 6y ago
  The last few seconds very clearly shows more people already "let in" on the other side of the gate. More context is needed.
dillondoyle 6y ago
The biggest problem to me is twofold: - there were very very few law enforcement there beforehand. Compare to BLM where there were thousands of storm troopers, tanks, etc camped out before the similarly obviously publicized protests occurred. Here is a comparison photo of what they had in front of the monument before the LEGAL BLM protest this summer [1] - the 'resistance' was very weak at least at first. The videos of the 'storming' didn't show much resistance, no gas, no rubber bullets, no attempt to hold the line. here is a 'selfie' [2] which to be fair doesn't show cop actively participating, but does show him just standing there. There are some photos of guns drawn trying to protect the floor, obviously out numbered once they secured Members I understand completely retreating. But the main uniformed officers at the entrances didn't act. It's a stark difference. My story is that here in Denver I was gassed, before curfew, before an unlawful assembly was declared, during a peaceful protest this summer. They shot more than a few eyes out of their sockets with rubber bullets. A judge had to restrain the Denver police for their violence. Compare to today it took a LONG time for them to deploy these same weapons, and it doesn't even look like they used tear gas/irritants at least in the first videos, just smoke; unlike what they gassed us with and those in Lafayette Park and across the country. 1 https://s.abcnews.com/images/US/national-guard-lincoln-memorial-1-abc-200602_hpMain_16x9_992.jpg https://s.abcnews.com/images/US/national-guard-lincoln-memor... 2 https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1346920198461419520 https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1346920198461419520