We want to see the interview but from the speaking tiny mustache head of that guy.

Apparently, "Merka's facing some tough challenges right now."

I know this ain't open-mic, but I thought it relevant enought to bring up re Occupy Wall Street and especially with the militarized response being seen in Oakland. This is a link to an Army Field Manual for Civil Disturbance and Crowd Control. This is how it is done RIGHT and what the response from the authorities SHOULD be. And it underscores where the response we are getting in Oakland is WRONG. http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-19-15.pdf

excerpt:

"Operational Threats of the Civil Disturbance Environment

As the Cold War ended with the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of

Soviet communism in 1989, the Army was no longer concerned with

containing the aggressive Soviet Union. The US Army began to transform

because the battlefield on which it would fight had changed. Operations

Just Cause, Joint Endeavor, Desert Shield, and Desert Storm have all

been recognized as containing nontraditional battlefields. Following these

operations, the Army was called upon to conduct peacekeeping, peace

enforcement, and humanitarian assistance operations. These operations

required US forces to protect refugees and humanitarian workers and

keep hostile factions separate to enforce peace.

GENERAL CAUSES FOR CIVIL UNREST

1-1. In these modern times, demonstrations, civil unrest, public disorder, and

riots happen for a number of reasons. Some of these reasons are economic

hardships, social injustices, ethnic differences (leading to oppression),

objections to world organizations or certain governments, political grievances,

and terrorist acts. An event can be triggered by a single cause or a

combination of causes. For example, operations in the Balkans involving civil

unrest and riots were the result of ethnic hatred, a lack of civil authority, food

shortages, a revolution, and religious-based fighting factions.

1-2. Demonstrations may range from simple, nonviolent protests that address

specific issues, to events that turn into full-scale riots. Gatherings in protest

are recognized rights of any person or group, regardless of where US forces

may be operating. This fundamental right is protected under the

Constitution of the US

. During peacekeeping or peace enforcement

operations, US forces should never violate basic civil or human rights. Most

protesters are law-abiding citizens who intend that their protests be

nonviolent, but some protest planners insist that the event involve some kind

of violence. Often, in the media, protesters can gain sympathy for their cause

by prompting authorities to take physical action against them. Violence is

often the result of demonstrators beginning to conduct unlawful or criminal

acts and authorities (who are responsible for the safety and welfare of all)

enforcing the laws of the municipality, state, or nation. The depth of violence

is determined by the willingness of demonstrators to display and voice their

opinions in support of their cause.

1-3. Commanders must be aware of the possibility that some individuals or

groups within an organized demonstration may have the intent to cause

disruption, incite violence, destroy property, and provoke the authorities. The

tactical situation and actions of the crowd should dictate control and

enforcement options. Agitators and criminal infiltrators within the crowd can

Operational Threats of the Civil Disturbance Environment

1-2 FM 3-19.15 18 April 2005

lead to the eruption of violence. Inciting a crowd to violence or a greater

intensity of violence through the use of brutish enforcement tactics should be

avoided. Publicity can be detrimental to authorities and beneficial to crowds

because it can further their causes.

1-4. Community unrest results in urban conflicts that arise from highly

emotional social and economic issues. Economically deprived inner city

residents may feel that they are treated unjustly or ignored by people in power

and authority. Tensions can build quickly in a community over a variety of

issues, such as hunger, poor employment opportunities, inadequate

community services, poor housing, and labor issues. Tension in these areas

creates the potential for violence. When tensions are high, it takes a small

(seemingly minor) incident, rumor, or act of injustice to ignite groups within a

crowd to riot and act violently. This is particularly true if community relations

with authorities are part of the problem.

1-5. Significant ethnic differences in a community can create an atmosphere

of distrust, even hatred. Unrest among ethnic groups competing for jobs,

living areas, and sparse essentials can cause an eruption of civil disorder and/

or riots. As emotions run high, violence becomes likely.

1-6. Terrorist organizations may infiltrate groups within a demonstrating

crowd. These terrorist groups may intend to embarrass their government or

other governments. Terrorist infiltrators can be used to provoke crowds as a

diversion, as part of a demonstration, or as cover for terrorist acts."

Good stuff!

Ah, shades of J. Edgar returning from the grave, Cointelpro on a larger scale. The reason we have a Department of Homeland Security is to keep the citizens in line, we are the terrorists they fear. The Wall St./Washington Axis of Evil knew that sooner or later folks would figure out the never ending war, boom/bust/bailout cycle and the massive theft of the world's wealth that is underway. DHS has funded all of this riot control equipment being deployed against Americans, DHS has trained the police in quelling domestic disturbances, DHS is cooperating with industries to infiltrate grass roots environmental and citizens groups, and DHS is coordinating its activities with DoD, particularly in developing the training manuals for the armed forces. The power elite knew an uprising was only a matter of time and they have been spending years preparing for it.

Why aren't the Republicans pro-lifers being pushed to explain who is going to pay for the education, healthcare, housing, feeding, childcare and jobs for the huge population boom of unwanted children if birth control is ruled illegal?????

Why aren't they asked to explain why they don't each have 10 kids if they oppose birth control??

There also seem to be more than a few who hippocritically have had affairs. What on earth did they think was allowing all of them to do so without pregnancy resulting??

How are men going to support their families when their wives have to leave the job force while they are perpetually pregnant, and they go from being two-income families to one-income families with more mouths to feed?