Cell Reception Cut In San Francisco To Hinder Protest

[quote]kevinm1 wrote:

Honestly it shouldn’t matter you can’t stop a crime before it is committed if there where people who where going to riot and they organized via cell phone, why should my cell be hampered?[/quote]

I don’t exactly disagree. Being more of a altruist/pragmatist and having been in a few rather pointless riots, I’m very apathetic to riots/marches/sit-ins/flash mobs. I’m more concerned with, and consider it a partial injustice that, the police are shooting civilians and flash mobs and cell phone outages are what get attention.

[quote]lucasa wrote:

[quote]kevinm1 wrote:

Honestly it shouldn’t matter you can’t stop a crime before it is committed if there where people who where going to riot and they organized via cell phone, why should my cell be hampered?[/quote]

I don’t exactly disagree. Being more of a altruist/pragmatist and having been in a few rather pointless riots, I’m very apathetic to riots/marches/sit-ins/flash mobs. I’m more concerned with, and consider it a partial injustice that, the police are shooting civilians and flash mobs and cell phone outages are what get attention.[/quote]
I try to be as informed as possible so I already knew the transit pigs where doing this, so I was already outraged about that and to add insult to injury they go and take a private entities rights away as well? Screw that we need a serious overhaul of our police force, this good old boy blue color defend your brothers thing has to go, as well as cops feeling the rules don’t apply to them. Just look at the seriously f the police thread, now that has turned into a cluster f but the sentiment is there something has to change or you will get what you have here “normal” people protesting a miscarriage of justice.

Does anyone see this as sort of a test to gauge the public reaction and effectiveness to this? I feel like as the economy continues to worsen or in the best case not improve (I don’t want to get into that discussion right now) the government is becoming increasingly wary of the potential for civil unrest.

The longer people are out of work and when more people lose their jobs (for example Merck announced layoffs of 13,000 people in my state of New Jersey) the threat looms larger. Do people think the government is preparing for future demonstrations or potentially riots?

[quote]Bonesaw93 wrote:
Does anyone see this as sort of a test to gauge the public reaction and effectiveness to this? I feel like as the economy continues to worsen or in the best case not improve (I don’t want to get into that discussion right now) the government is becoming increasingly wary of the potential for civil unrest.

The longer people are out of work and when more people lose their jobs (for example Merck announced layoffs of 13,000 people in my state of New Jersey) the threat looms larger. Do people think the government is preparing for future demonstrations or potentially riots?[/quote]
Of course it is and it’s not the ecomony the powers that be have been doing stuff like this all the time. I hate it when “my team” does it and I hate it when the “other team” does it

[quote]Bonesaw93 wrote:
Does anyone see this as sort of a test to gauge the public reaction and effectiveness to this?[/quote]

Yes, yes very good point. The subway transit authorities in San Francisco were on the phone with the CIA. And of course the CIA said “let’s test the public’s resolve right here and right now.” You have no idea how these things are done do you?

(Eye Roll)

What’s wrong with you? No seriously what is it? Is it just youth and inexperience or are you just dumb? Do you realize that there is no unrest out there? Can you understand that? If unemployment is 9% or so those people (or most of them) are collecting benefits. Many even turn down jobs that pay on par with what the government is handing them. No unrest there. Out of The other 8% or so who stopped looking for jobs most are either collecting welfare or on some other government program. And I might add some (it’s anyone’s guess how many) on unemployment or some other government program are also working under the table and not reporting their income.

There is no civil unrest—NONE.

Stop reading the fringe posters around here. Or maybe it’s the people that you hang out with…Eh who knows?

So just take it easy, relax and breath.

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Bonesaw93 wrote:
Does anyone see this as sort of a test to gauge the public reaction and effectiveness to this?[/quote]

Yes, yes very good point. The subway transit authorities in San Francisco were on the phone with the CIA. And of course the CIA said “let’s test the public’s resolve right here and right now.” You have no idea how these things are done do you?

(Eye Roll)

What’s wrong with you? No seriously what is it? Is it just youth and inexperience or are you just dumb? Do you realize that there is no unrest out there? Can you understand that? If unemployment is 9% or so those people (or most of them) are collecting benefits. Many even turn down jobs that pay on par with what the government is handing them. No unrest there. Out of The other 8% or so who stopped looking for jobs most are either collecting welfare or on some other government program. And I might add some (it’s anyone’s guess how many) on unemployment or some other government program are also working under the table and not reporting their income.

There is no civil unrest—NONE.

Stop reading the fringe posters around here. Or maybe it’s the people that you hang out with…Eh who knows?

So just take it easy, relax and breath.

[/quote]

Zeb, I’m not saying there is some great conspiracy. What I’m saying is that the topic has to be discussed at all levels of government. When people are out of work (and more people are falling off the 99 week unemployment) and fall on hard times many will look for someone to blame. Frustration can boil over into civil unrest, that’s basically all I am saying. It’s not naive to look at history and see than when people are dealing with unemployment or loss of benefits they get angry (see recent events in Spain, France, Greece…). It’s also not naive to think that the government wouldn’t gauge public reaction to shutting off cell phone service so they can consider that if they want to use the same maneuver in the future.

[quote]Bonesaw93 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Bonesaw93 wrote:
Does anyone see this as sort of a test to gauge the public reaction and effectiveness to this?[/quote]

Yes, yes very good point. The subway transit authorities in San Francisco were on the phone with the CIA. And of course the CIA said “let’s test the public’s resolve right here and right now.” You have no idea how these things are done do you?

(Eye Roll)

What’s wrong with you? No seriously what is it? Is it just youth and inexperience or are you just dumb? Do you realize that there is no unrest out there? Can you understand that? If unemployment is 9% or so those people (or most of them) are collecting benefits. Many even turn down jobs that pay on par with what the government is handing them. No unrest there. Out of The other 8% or so who stopped looking for jobs most are either collecting welfare or on some other government program. And I might add some (it’s anyone’s guess how many) on unemployment or some other government program are also working under the table and not reporting their income.

There is no civil unrest—NONE.

Stop reading the fringe posters around here. Or maybe it’s the people that you hang out with…Eh who knows?

So just take it easy, relax and breath.

[/quote]

Zeb, I’m not saying there is some great conspiracy. What I’m saying is that the topic has to be discussed at all levels of government. When people are out of work (and more people are falling off the 99 week unemployment) and fall on hard times many will look for someone to blame. Frustration can boil over into civil unrest, that’s basically all I am saying. It’s not naive to look at history and see than when people are dealing with unemployment or loss of benefits they get angry (see recent events in Spain, France, Greece…). It’s also not naive to think that the government wouldn’t gauge public reaction to shutting off cell phone service so they can consider that if they want to use the same maneuver in the future.
[/quote]

That is not what you said to begin with. This was your initial statement:

What you were implying here is that it was done as a test. That statement is not only wrong but wreaks of conspiratorial thinking. And that’s why I called it nutty. I’m glad you’re backing away from it now. Good for you!

Secondly, as I’ve already told you there are not enough people dissatisfied in the country to come even close to a riot. I explained how government is coddling the unemployed. There is welfare, food stamps, HUD, and on and on. There are so many government programs that no one is doing without a meal (in fact have you noticed that the poor seem to be more overweight than those who are working) And how many unemployed are in fact working and not claiming it on their taxes - Call it double dipping. So how many of them are going to riot? Ha…they are fat and happy because big brother has redistributed the wealth to make sure that they don’t have to do anything but sign their name! No riot coming-

And the Obama gravy train only gets large with each passing week. And that train is paid for by people who are in fact pissed off, but they are not the type to riot in the street. They will donate to candidates of their choosing and try to beat Obama at the polls. Spain, France and Greece have entirely different problems at this point and there is no comparison to the US. Stop making generalized sweeping conclusions.

Also, stop watching Glenn Beck rant on about conspiracies (the only part of his show I dislike), or whatever movie had you thinking conspiracy theory. I know you’re not thinking that way right now, I just don’t want you to backslide.

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Bonesaw93 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Bonesaw93 wrote:
Does anyone see this as sort of a test to gauge the public reaction and effectiveness to this?[/quote]

Yes, yes very good point. The subway transit authorities in San Francisco were on the phone with the CIA. And of course the CIA said “let’s test the public’s resolve right here and right now.” You have no idea how these things are done do you?

(Eye Roll)

What’s wrong with you? No seriously what is it? Is it just youth and inexperience or are you just dumb? Do you realize that there is no unrest out there? Can you understand that? If unemployment is 9% or so those people (or most of them) are collecting benefits. Many even turn down jobs that pay on par with what the government is handing them. No unrest there. Out of The other 8% or so who stopped looking for jobs most are either collecting welfare or on some other government program. And I might add some (it’s anyone’s guess how many) on unemployment or some other government program are also working under the table and not reporting their income.

There is no civil unrest—NONE.

Stop reading the fringe posters around here. Or maybe it’s the people that you hang out with…Eh who knows?

So just take it easy, relax and breath.

[/quote]

Zeb, I’m not saying there is some great conspiracy. What I’m saying is that the topic has to be discussed at all levels of government. When people are out of work (and more people are falling off the 99 week unemployment) and fall on hard times many will look for someone to blame. Frustration can boil over into civil unrest, that’s basically all I am saying. It’s not naive to look at history and see than when people are dealing with unemployment or loss of benefits they get angry (see recent events in Spain, France, Greece…). It’s also not naive to think that the government wouldn’t gauge public reaction to shutting off cell phone service so they can consider that if they want to use the same maneuver in the future.
[/quote]

That is not what you said to begin with. This was your initial statement:

What you were implying here is that it was done as a test. That statement is not only wrong but wreaks of conspiratorial thinking. And that’s why I called it nutty. I’m glad you’re backing away from it now. Good for you!

Secondly, as I’ve already told you there are not enough people dissatisfied in the country to come even close to a riot. I explained how government is coddling the unemployed. There is welfare, food stamps, HUD, and on and on. There are so many government programs that no one is doing without a meal (in fact have you noticed that the poor seem to be more overweight than those who are working) And how many unemployed are in fact working and not claiming it on their taxes - Call it double dipping. So how many of them are going to riot? Ha…they are fat and happy because big brother has redistributed the wealth to make sure that they don’t have to do anything but sign their name! No riot coming-

And the Obama gravy train only gets large with each passing week. And that train is paid for by people who are in fact pissed off, but they are not the type to riot in the street. They will donate to candidates of their choosing and try to beat Obama at the polls. Spain, France and Greece have entirely different problems at this point and there is no comparison to the US. Stop making generalized sweeping conclusions.

Also, stop watching Glenn Beck rant on about conspiracies (the only part of his show I dislike), or whatever movie had you thinking conspiracy theory. I know you’re not thinking that way right now, I just don’t want you to backslide.
[/quote]

Zeb I think you took what I said and blew it out of proportion assuming I was talking about a conspiracy. That being said I can see after rereading it why you thought that. What I was implying was that they would certainly look at this situation and gauge public reaction to it for future use. This tactic could be very useful in the event of rioting. Don’t think the US doesn’t see what’s happening in other countries and just ignore it. And for the record I hate Glenn Beck. Where I will disagree with you though is in terms of the anger of the populace. I think in places like for example Detroit, you have enough people who have lost their jobs due to weakness in the auto industry that are no longer receiving unemployment. I do agree with you that the welfare state is keeping a lot of people happy though, for now. What happens when those people drop off the unemployment roles? If the bread and circus routine falls apart before the economy improves there will be trouble. The comparison I was drawing with some of the European countries is that it doesn’t take much for rioting to begin. The example with France was to point out when they moved the retirement age from 60 to 62 the people rioted. This seems to me like a very minor reason to start a riot. That is the parallel I was drawing. When people feel entitled to something (whether they deserve it or not) and government threatens to take it away or even reduce it people flip shit. I see it first hand here when schools asked teachers to pay 1.5% of their salary for health benefits. I don’t see this as unreasonable but every school employee I talk to (I know many and have some in the family) is up in arms over it.

[quote]Bonesaw93 wrote:

Zeb I think you took what I said and blew it out of proportion assuming I was talking about a conspiracy.

No other way to read this:

Does anyone see this as sort of a test to gauge the public reaction and effectiveness to this?[/quote]

Because you wrote it that way?

We are many years away from anything like that happening on a large scale. The Nanny state is in full swing. And before anyone actually goes hungry they will fleece the middle class (as there are not enough rich to make a difference) and they will give it to the fat and lazy among us.

We are not Europe and there is no comparison. No one will riot if the retirement age is changed in this country. And there is quite a bit more going on in Europe relative to the government. They have long, long been a much larger Nanny state than the US. Far more of them feel entitled.

[quote]I see it first hand here when schools asked teachers to pay 1.5% of their salary for health benefits. I don’t see this as unreasonable but every school employee I talk to (I know many and have some in the family) is up in arms over it.
[/quote]

Teachers are the biggest whiners on the face of the earth. I can understand your concern there. They get half the year off, full major medical, and all kinds of benefits. But if you threaten to reduce even one tiny little thing they go ape shit. That’s the union mentality and part of why jobs have gone over seas, but that’s another topic.

Glad you’re not a conspiracy nut. Sometimes when you read the written word it does not represent the feeling that it was written with.

It it just me or is all of this being blown out of proportion?

Having a cell phone booster where service had previously not been available used to be considered an amenity. Now when they turn it off to prevent disruption of a public service and avoid mob violence it is a violation of all things good and holy?

You guys are fucking kooks. Complete blithering idiots who would chew their own foot off if trapped in an elevator.

[quote]BoneSaw93 wrote:

This tactic could be very useful in the event of rioting.[/quote]

The riots I’ve been involved in and protests I’ve been around, this ‘tactic’ would’ve been spectacularly ineffective (which is sad given their abysmal lack of purpose). Rather, proof of how one side of the dispute is bad at management and the other, bad at planning/strategy, and passion/commitment.

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
It it just me or is all of this being blown out of proportion?

Having a cell phone booster where service had previously not been available used to be considered an amenity. Now when they turn it off to prevent disruption of a public service and avoid mob violence it is a violation of all things good and holy?

You guys are fucking kooks. Complete blithering idiots who would chew their own foot off if trapped in an elevator.[/quote]

First, I have a contract with my service provider, they have a contract with BART, and most of it is overseen by the FCC. What BART did violated these contracts and Federal Law, they did so under the pretense of a perceived violent mob action. Mix and match any of the various parts, and you get a pretty clear violation of the way things generally operate in this country and the principles of freedom in general. Ben Franklin, ‘those who sacrifice a little liberty for a little security’ and all that. I stand by what I said about bad management above. BART is doesn’t appear to have upheld their contracts and is poor at managing people. It’s absurd that a Rapid Transit system can’t seem to manage moving a mob of people safely without enraging them, isn’t that basically all a BART does?

The other side of what you’re saying still holds true and is the reason I was trying to point to actual dead people rather than just the loss of cell reception (or both actually). Raised voices, rocks, bullhorns, dead civilians, cans of gasoline and matches always should and hopefully always will speak louder than the ‘No Reception’ beep.

Maybe another way to look at it and question to raise is…

How pathetic and lazy are we as a society that all they had to do to squash a protest was cut the cell phone reception in that area?

Whatever did we do to organize a protest before cell phones and twitter?

Sounds like freaking Egypt or China.

I agree w/ lanchefan.

Damn I agree with the fucking goat again :slight_smile: