Thursday, August 23, 2007

More on Montebello body language

Further to my comments yesterday about the body language of the three mysterious protesters/cops (or whatever) at Montebello, Mike (not Mike of Rational Reasons, as I mistakenly stated before -- okay, I'm an idiot!!!), a former police officer, made these observations about their behaviour (from the comments at Dust My Broom):

"Watch the way the three ‘protesters’ stand. It is called the I stance or bracketing and is taught to police officers from day one as a way to minimise your bodies exposure to a threat. Agressive/squared off stances are what the riot officers are doing to intimidate.Defensive posturing is what the Provocateur’s are doing.They can’t help it. They are reading the crowd and smartly, trying to desingage.

Watch their left hands. They tend to stay close to their bodies center line. On most Sam brown belts that police wear, the OC spray, cuffs, etc are worn towards the center as well as for protection against threats.Their right hands stay further away, to their side to protect where their firearm would be if they were in their normal uniform that they wear 8-10 hours a day, everyday.(1/2 of all police deaths are from their own weapon. Retention is highly stressed in all forms of law enforcement training). They have muscle memory of where things ’should’ be when working.

Watch the ‘protestor’ on the right. When one of the real organisers gets too close, he grabs the organizer, deliberetly, by the wrist. This is an open handed control technique taught in the earliest days of academy training. It doesn’t get you caught up in the suspects grip while providing an easy way to index the placement of handcuffs.

All of these are taught and taught and taught some more so that they become second nature and one does not have to think about it in the heat of the moment. Having left law enforcement a decade ago, I till catch myself moving, standing and ‘looking’ at people the same way I was taught.

Going ‘plain’ cloths does not change the person wearing them.I don’t like bad cops since it made things difficult for us good ones.A good cop would have laid low and been a good witness instead of becoming the story."

Interesting! Mike's comments would certainly seem to bear out the notion that the behaviour and body language of the three "protesters" was not that of typical protesters, but of policemen.

Mike (the Real Mike of Rational Reasons) makes another very salient point in the comments here:

"Well, having lived and gone to school in Ottawa, knowing cops I can safely say that when you are on duty that is guarding the President of the United States - one of the most hated Presidents of the US, I might add - you don't take a shit without orders from Secret Service adminisphere. You certainly don't pull a stunt like this on your own."

Which obviously makes one wonder, IF these guys were, as it appears, undercover cops sent into the crowd to cause trouble and instigate arrests, who sent them? IF it was the Secret Service, is it acceptable for our government to attempt to suppress our dissent at the behest of the White House? Of all the questions surrounding this situation, that one should be the easiest to answer.