UPDATED!: Police State? Why would the Military snatch a protester? Confirmed Not Military, But Police.

I saw this over a Drudge’s site. Now, I am sure that there is a logical explanation for this. I would just like to hear it.

Watch the video:

Not to be the peddler of paranoia; but is not the enforcement of the law supposed to be carried out; by civilian law enforcement and not the military?

Just asking.

Update: After I hit publish, the thought occurred to me; it could have been National Guard or a stunt. But, you never know. I would like to hear from the local law enforcement and find out why this happened.

Update #2: Ed Morrissey has gotten Confirmation that this was NOT, I repeat, NOT Military! But rather Police arresting a guy for vandalism.

Update #3: The Sassy Republican; Who was there —-  living up to her name, stops by and offers her point of view.

4 Replies to “UPDATED!: Police State? Why would the Military snatch a protester? Confirmed Not Military, But Police.

  1. Definitely not Active Military(they are not allowed to be used for policing inside the US), all branches now use digital camouflage anyway. This could be a staged event or it could possibly be PA National Guard (They are allowed to assist with policing and their Commander in Chief is the Governor of PA), they are unarmed, and should be paired with armed Police Officers as stated in the middle of this Article . If it is real we did not see what caused the subject in question to be picked up. The story will come out sooner or later, give it a day or two for more information before jumping to conclusions…

  2. Doesn’t matter if it is military or cops, whether city, state, county or from out of town.

    Why is the black guy wearing an armband that says “MP”??????

    Somebody wants us to think that this is military. I’m certain that the govt, at all levels, will try to be as ambiguous as possible about this. This was a trial balloon to see what the reaction would be.

    It can also serve the current national regime either way. If reaction to the use, or the seeming use of the military is negative, then obama and friends can use it to deride the military and weaken it.

    You see, obama and friends think that the military is the biggest obstacle to his schemes, besides the 80 million or so patriotic firearm owning americans (if only 10% of whom oppose him, he will lose, badly).

    Obama is mistaken. The military will take his side, just as the cops will (trust me, 22 years in the USMC has taught me something). He is not sure, so he wants to keep ’em on a string either way. Maybe that’s why he wants a “civilian security force” that is equally as powerful as the military.

  3. I was there. Here’s a brief explanation. http://is.gd/3JOyt Don’t know what the deal is with your website, but I thought you might appreciate the voice of an eyewitness. Don’t forget to look at the comments beneath the post as well.
    lk

Comments are closed.