Burning or smoking?

Indybay editors or whatever can you please place this file near the post about the discussion over the burning or smoking police car. A discussion needs to continue.

you can post the video into a comment in any thread you like on Indybay. comments can only hold one media file per comment, though.

enjoyed your title work and music, btw

to save filespace and not actually post the same video twice, you can make a comment anywhere you like and just provide the link to your video source

thanks

Wow thanks for that info. I will try that. I do not intend to take up any more of the server space than what is needed.
More video will be posted later. Thanks for the placement.

Thanks. Many people saw the police car coming at high speed towards people crossing the street at the corner, and people leaping out of the way. This should clarify that the smoking thing was plastic and not a mattress, and that there was not a crowd running to lynch the officer, but instead was running out of the way.

Hey - I herd new's to day that Mayor Newsom is offering a 10,000 reward leading to the arest of the person who hit the officer on the head , I was lising to P.R.I in my car around 6:30 Am 7-12 05 . The message also said the officer is also suffering brain swelling do to the hit on the head .

If they don't know who did it, why are they holding innocent people hostage?

You know I was there and did not see an officer get hit. I saw an officer fall against a car and then to the ground.

The video is helpful, but inconclusive.

It looks like the police ran over one of the white styrofoam banners from the march. The heat of the engine could be burning the styrofoam. All the smoke is coming from under the car.

A CHP car was fire bombed during the Gulf War I protests. It was not smoking, it was completely engulfed in flames. If some one wants to torch a car that car does not smoke, it burns and may explode.

This video is of a smoking car or maybe the material under it.

The real problem here is how the corporate media uses selected images from the action to portray @ to the general public. This does not serve @ in a constructive way.

The movement needs to address this. If we can not control the presentation of the images we create then we will lose the media battle. Our actions will continue to be used against us to justify police repression and the public will support the police.

Suggested reading on the importance of images in the success of any social or political movement:

The Society of the Spectacle, Guy Debord

Strategic Political Communication, Karen S. Johnson-Cartee & Gary A Copeland

Activism!, Tim Jordan

Changing anarchism, Anarchist theory and practice in a globe age, Jonathan Purkis and James Brown

The point was to show that even with video evidence it is easy to perceive the situation either way, as a burning or smoking car.

The bigger point was to draw attention to what the commercial media has totally ignored, as well those in these parts that focus on the burn/smoke debate, is that the cop car came quite near to running people over, thereby sparking the ugly incident moments later that the media loves so much, with graphic photos of bloody cops shown on TV 1,000 times and video of tasers.

I really hope the person that posted this burn/smoke video can find some way to edit his/her tape to show the police car nearly creaming protesters without revealing identities of anyone who might stand accused of various crimes. It would be of great value to any discussion of that night's events.

If anyone wants to see the video footage of the car speeding towards the protesters then watch a show called Tranny Talk on August 7 2005 at 11:30 a.m. on channel 29. This show is featuring the police car and other relevant drama from the rally on July 8.

I'm confused. If the Anarchists had stayed away, no one would have been hurt either. Period. Why should people be allowed to block traffic and destroy property (just watch the videos) and expect the police to stay away ? I'm not getting the logic here.