National Gaurdsman attacked on U.S. soil

In Parkland Washington a National Gaurdsman was attacked by five men and beaten badly. Evidentally these guys were opposed to the war so they took their frustration out on one of our servicemen. What a bunch of cowards, I'd like to see them dropped off in the middle of a war zone and try to defend themselves, much less an entire nation.


www.kirotv.com...

That's very sad, but thank you for bringing it to our attention, I had not heard about this. What a shame, I mean, I see Guardsmen patrolling every single day. I am vehemently against the war, and I am against their presence. However, I still respect them. They are only following their orders and doing what they are told to do.

I don't know if what they did was an act of cowardace though. I think that would be giving cowards a bad name. I think this was purely an act of malice, and this group would have attacked a police officer or some other authority figure if they didn't get this Guardsman.

They won't be liked in jail, that is for sure. I'll notify Bubba.

Hmm… I'd like to see these five brave A holes meet a few people I know who are currently service members, see what happens then…
Anyway to me this isn't surprising though, I once saw two recruiters get attacked by this guy in a school parking lot, he apparently had a problem with them being in his "neighborhood". Thankfully there were enough people there with common sense to break it up fairly quickly because trust me that guy would have gotten his handed to him by the Marine recruiters.

Hummm....
any other sources?

not that i doubt this, but attacks happen on people all the time, for various reasons...
and from a SPAM i recieved this morning... there appears to be a e-mail campaign to start a villianization of war opposers...

from the Spam subject titled:

NO PUNCHES PULLED HERE: excerpt -
No, Commander-in-Chief, you don't get off the hook either. Our country has two enemies: Those who want to destroy us from the outside and those who attempt it from within. Your soldiers are dealing with the outside force. It's your obligation to support them by confronting the axis of idiots. America must hear it from you that these people are harming our country, abetting the enemy and endangering our safety. Well up a little anger please, and channel it toward the appropriate target. You must prosecute those who leak national security secrets to the media. You must prosecute those in the media who knowingly publish those secrets. Our soldiers need you to confront the enemy that they cannot. They need you to do it now!

So i wonder of more an more of these type of incidents will occur...
This was truly sad, and really doesn't make any sense...
hate violence, so you administer violence? either the combined IQ couldn't reach 100, or these guys wanted to make anti war protesters look bad...


Update: i tried to find another source, but all the search responses came up with were the instances where National Guardsmen attacked anti war demonstrators...
so perhaps there is a long term animosity between these groups?

Still no more sources...
I am checking again...
I checked, and KIRO seems to be the only source for this news...
isn't there another channels affiliate up there?


[edit on 31-8-2006 by LazarusTheLong]

[edit on 31-8-2006 by LazarusTheLong]

I hav'nt run across any other sources, but the article originated from the Drudge Report which I use often to sift through news.

IMO this is total BS, expect to seee more reports of this type. I think the war on the anti-war crowd has begun...

This is an often used tactic by those who wish to control us, please take it with a huge pinch of salt. 'They' control the information you receive.

[edit on 31/8/2006 by ANOK]

Originally posted by ANOK
IMO this is total BS, expect to seee more reports of this type. I think the war on the anti-war crowd has begun...

This is an often used tactic by those who wish to control us, please take it with a huge pinch of salt. 'They' control the information you receive.

[edit on 31/8/2006 by ANOK]

They already begun, in Belgium, they want to CRIMINALIZE riots and alter-mondialists associations. So if you participe in one of those riots, even peaceful, you're a CRIMINAL. There's goes the First Amendment, freedom of speech and association.

Here's the article, in french...

Source : journal belge « Le Soir » du mercredi 23 août 2006, p. 6.

Altermondialisme/Les grandes oreilles de la justice liégeoise

LE MILITANTISME CRIMINALISE ?

Les altermondialistes sont-ils des hors-la-loi ? Malgré un non–lieu, le parquet de Liège veut poursuivre.

Curieuse volte-face du parquet liégeois : alors qu’en septembre 2003, il prônait le non-lieu à l’égard de quelques altermondialistes qui avaient appelé à manifester contre le sommet européen des Finances, il réclame aujourd’hui que ces mêmes activistes soient renvoyés, sur la base du même dossier, devant le tribunal correctionnel. Pour appartenance à une « organisation criminelle ».

Si trois des inculpés sont « surpris », le quatrième est carrément « ahuri » : preneur de son à la RTBF, il n’a jamais milité au sein des mouvements altermondialistes et n’a jamais appelé au moindre rassemblement. Ce qui n’a pas empêché, vient-il d’apprendre, une juge d’instruction liégeoise de le mettre sur écoute pendant 6 semaines au moins.

Tout commence donc à la veille de ce sommet européen organisé le 22 septembre 2001 à Liège. Pressée d’assurer le calme de cette rencontre, une juge d’instruction autorise les forces de l’ordre à surveiller les animateurs de l’association « S22 vers D14 » ainsi que, curieusement, un preneur de son de la RTBF. Ecoutes téléphoniques (facturées 17.240 euros par les opérateurs), interception de SMS, filatures, rien n’est épargné aux militants. Ils ne découvriront pourtant ces atteintes à la vie privée que plusieurs mois plus tard, lorsqu’un courrier recommandé leur signale que l’instruction est terminée et les invite à prendre connaissance du dossier.

En 2003, la chambre du conseil donne raison aux inculpés et au ministère public, qui réclamait lui aussi un non-lieu. Aucune infraction n’a été commise, personne ne sera donc renvoyé devant le tribunal correctionnel.

Fin de l’épisode ? « On vient d’apprendre que le parquet avait fait appel et que nous étions convoqués au mois de novembre devant la chambre des mises en accusation », s’étonne Didier B.

Le ministère public, qui avait pourtant requis un non-lieu, s’est-il soudainement ravisé ? Ou a-t-il été effrayé par la manière dont le juge dénonçait, dans son ordonnance, des « analyses téléphoniques susceptibles de se révéler gravement attentatoires au respect de la vie privée » ?

Ivo Flachet, l’avocat des jeunes militants, devrait prendre connaissance du dossier dans les jours qui viennent.

Plus saugrenu encore est le renvoi devant la chambre des mises en accusation de Xavier M., employé par la RTBF : « Je n’avais auparavant reçu aucune convocation, jure-t-il. Je ne savais même pas que j’avais été mis sur écoute, que l’on avait voulu me poursuivre puis que j’avais bénéficié d’un non-lieu. Je n’ai pas d’activité militante, j’ai seulement approché du sommet européen car je travaillais à la RTBF.

Joël Matriche.

Will they pass a similar law in the USA? Certainly!

Well anti-war crowd better stear clear of me, this was the final straw....

All they do is get American Soldiers killed and praise their efforts as patriotic
yeah, you guys are real heros alright...cowards apparently and drive around in SUVs!!!! (yeah, love using that oil huh?) and hop out beating them. yeah, steer clear of these moral morons

First things first....
Westpoint that picture you have is a disgrace to the United States flag.
Many good men have died for that flag. It is something to be honored and respected. To see it draped across some whore as if it were a nitegown does them a HUGE dis-honor. It would be like putting a ball field on top of the tomb of the unknown because baseball is the national pass-time, only worse. For you to display a picture of it being used as a nightie is outragous. Perhaps you are too young to understand what I am saying to you. I do wish you would reconsider your choice of pictures as it is very demeaning. In the end it is your choice and your right to put whatever picture you want up, but understand that what you may see as 'cool' or 'patriotic' is actually very disturbing to many people who have actually served. Im sure I am not the only person to ever tell you this, if I am then God help us all.

ON TOPIC
I can tell you that I personally was targetted twice while in the service.
I wont go into details but I will tell you that many times at military bases the local (civilian) youths (18-25) will have a defininate disdain for the military men (18-25)
That is a period of much bravado in young men, and local stomping grounds, women, alcohol, all combine to produce a sometimes volatile mixture.

That being said I myself find this story suspect.
Many details pop out to me and many possibilities.
At the very least I would say the soldiers account of the events are probably fabrications.
Im willing to believe that he got jumped. I can testify that that happens. But I also believe there are omissions or distortions that have been applied to tilt this towards a demonization of the growing anti-war sentiment.

Not to mention the premise is flawed......show your opposition to violence with...violence? Anti-war activists running around with guns?
And gee, if I was a conspiracy theorist I would ask myself "Who drives around in black suburbans?"

So we see history repeating itself. Doesn't anyone learn?

Why does this remind me of, oh, say...hm....Vietnam? This crap happened then too. I had hoped the horrors inflicted on returning soldiers was past, and we wouldnt do it again, blaming those who served for the descisions of those who ordered.

Originally posted by 11Bravo
First things first....
Westpoint that picture you have is a disgrace to the United States flag.
Many good men have died for that flag. It is something to be honored and respected. To see it draped across some whore as if it were a nitegown does them a HUGE dis-honor. It would be like putting a ball field on top of the tomb of the unknown because baseball is the national pass-time, only worse. For you to display a picture of it being used as a nightie is outragous. Perhaps you are too young to understand what I am saying to you. I do wish you would reconsider your choice of pictures as it is very demeaning. In the end it is your choice and your right to put whatever picture you want up, but understand that what you may see as 'cool' or 'patriotic' is actually very disturbing to many people who have actually served. Im sure I am not the only person to ever tell you this, if I am then God help us all.

I thought it was a transexual? Wasn't it discussed in another forum?

Not to mention the premise is flawed......show your opposition to violence with...violence? Anti-war activists running around with guns?

Not really that odd. Some radical anti-war movements do it. They are usually revolutionaries and extremists though.

And gee, if I was a conspiracy theorist I would ask myself "Who drives around in black suburbans?"

Best point youve made in favor of it being bunk.

This does not entirely suprise me. Much the same happened during Viet Nam. Things are not nearly as bad as it was then, but it does not suprise me that violet anti war protests will start to happen. I do hope this will not grow more frequent.

In responce to the above post
I rather think West Points pic helps represent what those in service are fighting for

Originally posted by 11Bravo
Im sure I am not the only person to ever tell you this, if I am then God help us all.

Actually no you're not, not by a long shot, but I have my reasons for not taking it down, but do know that my intent is not to offend anyone or anything, especially not vets.

And Skadi no, she is not a transsexual, that's just something some members came up with.

Now out of respect for this thread I have to ask that any further comments about my avatar be sent to me via U2U. Thank you.

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Originally posted by 11Bravo
First things first....
Westpoint that picture you have is a disgrace to the United States flag.

I thought it was a transexual? Wasn't it discussed in another forum?

Dear God....it IS a tranny isnt it?? Thanks for pointing that out to me, I think.
No, on second thought I would have prefered to remain ignorant of that fact.

I dont even know what to say.
I know its not the topic but am I the only American that finds his pic in bad taste, and nausiating at the same time?

Well, since my own submission on this story was about 2 hours later than this one, I'll just move my commentary over here.

To be honest, I could see one of three situations here.

1.) It is entirely possible (in the story's area) for this to have been an act by very ignorant and over-zealous antiwar activists. I used to live in Seattle, Washington. I lived through the WTO riots. I was downtown when the city was terrorized to the point of being a demilitarized zone. Activists in Washington are nuts. I'm sorry if that offends anyone, but they are. Sane people don't overturn busses, set them on fire, and toss other people through plate-glass windows. The other 3 years I lived there, I witnessed similar ideas of what constituted a "protest". Now before the flames start, I didn't say all of them were like this, or that protesting the war is bad, just that I know for a fact that these kind of people exist in prolific quantities in that area.

2.) It is equally possible that the soldier witnessed a car full of protestors (via a bumper sticker, or some such) and started verbally abusing them first. There are a large number of vets in the area, and they do not smile kindly upon the anti-war protestors. Ironically, it is not because these soldiers like war any more than the protestors, but because the protestors typically have no idea what they are talking about (again, I am a first-hand witness to the scale of ignorant zealot this area houses, not all anti-war protestors are bad and neither are soldiers).

3.) Far less probable is the possibility that this is the beginning of a series of coordinated assaults against troops at home. I'm really not going to consider this possibility too much unless I start hearing about a lot of copycat crimes. However, if they do start happening in numbers across the U.S., it would almost seem a precursor to revolution.

The assailants were all white, and most wore red baseball caps and/or red sweatshirts. So this also brings to mind a fourth possibility,

4.) It may have just been coincidence by a gang looking to have a good time beating someone up, and the fact that their victim was a uniformed National Guardsman simply made the hit that much more novel for the group. Extra punk points, if you will.

In any event, it is a mystery for the moment. What is known is that this has sparked an angry round of outcries from veterans and non-veterans alike about the ever-growing schism tearing apart the country.

Originally posted by 11Bravo
First things first....
Westpoint that picture you have is a disgrace to the United States flag.
Many good men have died for that flag. It is something to be honored and respected. To see it draped across some whore as if it were a nitegown does them a HUGE dis-honor.

11Bravo, this is a subject that interests me. See, I actually see it as flattery (flaggery?) that a flag becomes so beloved by its people that it is interwoven into a fashion statement. Remember Bruce Springstein's pants? American flag. His most famous songs were about how great America was.

Anyway, this isn't really the topic of this thread, but I'm going to start another thread on it and your input would be welcome.

[edit on 9/1/2006 by thelibra]

After 20 years in the military I feel that it's okay to say that there are lots of knuckleheads in the service who get themselves into fairly ridiculous situations off base/post with the civilian population. There are also some fairly rabid anti-military types who actively seek out confrontation with the military. There was one that sticks in my mind till this day. About 11 years ago, my vehicle was egged outside of RAF Lakenheath in the UK by a woman protesting the anniversery of the Libya bombing. It always struck my as a bit odd. We bombed Libya on very good intelligence that the Libyan Govt had blew a Pan-Am 747 over Scotland that actually killed quite a few British subjects. The Libyan govt has since admitted its roll in this despicable act. From what I understand this same protester has been arrested a couple of dozen times at various anti-whatever rallies throughout the UK. She was told that if she ever vandalized a govt vehicle or trespassed again on Ministry of Defense property again she would spend a year in jail. I believe that you have the right to protest peacefully outside any military base or wherever you want till you blue behind your gills but if you interfere with the personal movement of a citizen going about his/her business, you're on your own,Buddy.

I think it's entirely possible the soldier made up a nonsense story to cover up the fact he owed those dudes money. Or maybe he was in a gang, and suffered the penalty for leaving to join up with Uncle Sam's own gang.

It wouldn't be the first time something of that sort has happened.

I'd like to know more about the soldier before jumping to any conclusions - if he seems like a stand-up guy without a lying bone in his body, maybe it is a case of a bunch of random idiots who happened to be anti-war, anti-military, or anti-that guy..

We may never know. More fuel for the fires of speculation though - God knows the right-wing radio nutters will have a blast spinning this until it throws up all over the tattered remnants of journalistic integrity.