Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29

For those of you who have been living in a cave in Afghanistan, and haven't seen this latest manufactured event given maximum coverage on every channel...


Timeline: Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Mo.(USA Today chronology)


Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29



To date, there is no evidence of racism, just the allegation.
But race-baiters are on the ground in Ferguson in force, stoking the situation up to a nice bonfire.

Including Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and the Trayvon Martin family's attorney, from the last manufactured racial hate-fest, giving a press conference today that there is basically no other explanation for what happened than full hard-on "racism".

Myself, I'll wait for results of the actual investigation.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
Dorian Johnson, the friend who was walking with Michael Brown when the officer approached them, and his eyewitness account...



...has been proven false by the facts.
1) He alleged Brown was a "peaceful" guy, but store video shows him bullying and roughing up a retail store employee and stealing cigars.
2) Just today, a press conference revealed the independent second autopsy report. And even that autopsy shows no shots entered the body through the Brown's back, as Johnson alleges.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29


Following up on Dorian Johnson saying Michael Brown was a "peaceful guy"...

 Originally Posted By: USA Today timeline above

Friday, August 15, 2014

Noon – An attorney for Dorian Johnson, who is an eyewitness interviewed by law enforcement, says that Dorian Johnson and Brown took part in the convenience store robbery prior to the shooting.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
And...

 Quote:
12:30 p.m. – The family of Michael Brown releases a statement saying they are "beyond outraged" by how the information was released in a way to "assassinate the character of their son," tying him to the robbery.



Yeah, that evil, racist video of what actually happened.
"Character assassination" is apparently disclosing the facts.


Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
New Black Panthers, leading a good-size crowd in chants of wanting officer Darren Wilson dead:



And these fanatics are different from jihadist muslims... how?




Gee, why would the Ferguson police department withhold the officer's name from the public? I can't imagine...

The weasels on CNN did a report in front of Darren Wilson's house, so all the local black mobs now know where his house is. Thus endangering Wilson, his neighbors, and possibly his extended family.

Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Offline
Fair Play!
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,792
Likes: 40
Less than 5 minutes on a thread you titled, Ferguson, Missouri: Just another manufactured case of "racism"
 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy

...

Myself, I'll wait for results of the actual investigation.


\:lol\:

I wonder what you not waiting for the results would look like?


Fair play!
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
I think I'm pretty clear in thinking the Michael Brown shooting could be racism, or more likely excessive police force. But that there is a clear burden of proof. I'm more open-minded on the subject than you give me credit for, M E M.

But on the race-baiters in the side lines and the complicit media, and the rioters exploiting the situation to loot stores, there's no need to reserve judgement. They can plainly be seen from the starting gate for what they are.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29


Just out of curiosity, does anyone here consider looting stores a legitimate form of protest?

In a war situation, looters are shot dead.
I don't think it would be out of line for police to shoot these looters. At least injuring them so they can't run away, and can be arrested. Tasering them at least. Let them feel some deterrant pain for their criminal (as opposed to legitimate political) actions.
The softness demonstrated so far to violent and looting protestors just encourages them to come back and do it again every night.

And I separate the thugs from the people who are peacefully protesting, and just want an above-board and publicly visible investigation of what happened.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29

And another point I thought from the beginning: What happens, if after all the investigation, and possibly even a trial for officer Darren Wilson, all the evidence, or even a jury, finds no evidence of racism or excessive force?

Do you think that any amount of proof and investigation that doesn't lynch Wilson will ever be acceptable for these people?
This mob of blacks is not interested in the facts or justice, and will just use any verdict to rationalize their victim-culture of "injustice", to continue looting and attacks on whites.

As has already been proven in the aftermath of the George Zimmerman verdict.
And the Rodney King verdict.
And in many other manufactured racial controversies by the likes of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
Fantastic insight into the problem: Black attacks on whites consistently occur at a ratio of about 50-to-1 of the reverse, over many decades. And are selectively not reported by the [liberal] media.



It's not about "racism" or "social justice".
It's about a virulently dangerous attitude in the black community, that out of political correctness, no one in the media or government wants to address.
Blacks have the highest ratio of high school dropouts.
The highest ratio of crime.
The highest ratio of gang membership.
The highest ratio of children born out of wedlock.
The highest ratio of welfare use.

It's not about "racism". It's about the poisonous culture of black America, and the individual choices of millions of black Americans.
And the displaced rage in Ferguson, MO --in a city with no previous police officer shooting of blacks, and no previous racial tension!-- is just the latest manufactured crisis to try and divert attention away from these blazing facts, and try to blame white America for their own choices.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29

Dinesh D'Souza, discussing how black failure is about something toxic in black culture, not because of external [white] racism.



How other immigrant non-white groups "leapfrog ahead" of American blacks.

That includes other blacks immigrating from places like Jamaica, the Bahamas, Haiti and Africa. These immigrants, though also black, are moving up in education and income, despite that they, too are non-white.


Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
http://townhall.com/columnists/walterewi..._this/page/full

 Quote:
Each year, roughly 7,000 blacks are murdered. Ninety-four percent of the time, the murderer is another black person. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, between 1976 and 2011, there were 279,384 black murder victims. Using the 94 percent figure means that 262,621 were murdered by other blacks. Though blacks are 13 percent of the nation's population, they account for more than 50 percent of homicide victims. Nationally, black homicide victimization rate is six times that of whites, and in some cities, it's 22 times that of whites. Coupled with being most of the nation's homicide victims, blacks are most of the victims of violent personal crimes, such as assault and robbery.



How does black America deal with this reality?
By shoving their heads in the sand, and obsessing over the lone random white-on-black shooting that occasionally happens, and incongruously blaming "white racism".

Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster
15000+ posts
Offline
terrible podcaster
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
I wasn't there. I wasn't in anyone's head who was there. it's not my place to say whether racism caused the shooting of mike brown. but racism sure as shit has become a hell of a lot more visible after the shooting. these events aren't windows on how society 'really works', they're mirrors that confront us with every ugly little detail of what's in our own minds. me personally, unless mike brown had a gun somewhere on his person, produced it during the altercation, and attempted to point it at a police officer, there's absolutely no reason he should've died. none.


go.

ᴚ ᴀ ᴐ ᴋ ᴊ ᴌ ᴧ
ಠ_ಠ
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Offline
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
 Originally Posted By: Captain Sammitch
...me personally, unless mike brown had a gun somewhere on his person, produced it during the altercation, and attempted to point it at a police officer, there's absolutely no reason he should've died. none.


I see. So a man--or woman--isn't dangerous or lethally threatening unless he or she has a gun in hand.

Do you even know why police officers are issued firearms in the first place?

Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster
15000+ posts
Offline
terrible podcaster
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
I'm acquainted with law enforcement officers. I'm related to several. I'm aware. I'm also aware that there is (in most departments) an extremely intensive training regimen where the 'rules of engagement' are drilled into officers' heads and it's made absolutely clear that lethal force is only to be applied as an absolute last resort. in many cases, not only must the suspect be demonstrably armed, he or she must visibly demonstrate intent to use a lethal weapon before officers are taught to discharge their firearms. (I'm aware RoE in the military are significantly different.) from everything we've been told (again, we're still finding things out) the officer was not given adequate cause for opening fire. I personally wonder if it might even have been a flinch on the officer's part - even highly-trained officers and military personnel have inadvertently discharged weapons in pressure situations, which is part of the reason my wife's uncle always insists you keep your weapon pointed at the ground until you're ready to line up a shot and take it. but regardless of the intent behind firing that first round, once you're committed, you're committed. I'm not alleging that this was an open-and-shut case of racially-motivated homicide. I'm saying it appears (again, based on what we have so far) very much like a colossal fuckup that happened to involve a white cop and an unarmed black man.


go.

ᴚ ᴀ ᴐ ᴋ ᴊ ᴌ ᴧ
ಠ_ಠ
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Offline
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
Soldiers aren't policeman, but the principles behind issuing weapons to either one aren't different--despite what over-scrupulous liberals would have us believe. Firearms aren't meant to level the playing field, but rather stack the odds in the favor of the enforcer. As such, there's no arbitrary rule that dictates whether or not an officer or soldier is put in a situation that suitably weakens him enough before he can use the tools of his trade. More often than not, deadly force can't be adequately interpreted until the assault has already been initiated. To that point, an attacker is very capable of using deadly force without a weapon--and I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but not every cop or grunt is a fucking judo master with the hand-to-hand experience required to pacify anyone let alone the late 6'3, 240+ lbs Michael Brown.

RoE is an infinitely abstract protocol, the existence of which peculiarly tends to vindicate a perspective such as yours--not to mention this fucking mob of cognitively dissonant dipshits. By virtue of the fact that most assaults will be perpetrated by people not as well armed as the enforcer, the interpretive nature of the RoE will always give the incensed cause to say that the enforcer used excessive force. Case in point: these Ferguson Fucktards.

It's like how Marc Lamont sympathized with Hamas simply because they couldn't fight the Israelis as effectively as the Israelis could destroy them.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
 Originally Posted By: Captain Sammitch
I wasn't there. I wasn't in anyone's head who was there. it's not my place to say whether racism caused the shooting of mike brown. but racism sure as shit has become a hell of a lot more visible after the shooting. these events aren't windows on how society 'really works', they're mirrors that confront us with every ugly little detail of what's in our own minds. me personally, unless mike brown had a gun somewhere on his person, produced it during the altercation, and attempted to point it at a police officer, there's absolutely no reason he should've died. none.



Have you seen this, Sammitch?


Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster
15000+ posts
Offline
terrible podcaster
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
it's secondhand. much as I appreciate your efforts to find a useful source corroborating the other side of the story, it'd really hold a lot more weight if it came at least from a member of the police department - I understand why the officer in question isn't available for comment. it's not that I automatically disbelieve her, it's that by nature of the source it's no more inherently credible than any other third-party accounts. I don't think we're going to get anything more reliable from that camp until after the investigation simply because otherwise the process would be contaminated.


go.

ᴚ ᴀ ᴐ ᴋ ᴊ ᴌ ᴧ
ಠ_ಠ
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 24,593
Timelord. Drunkard.
15000+ posts
Offline
Timelord. Drunkard.
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 24,593
Aren't police in the 21st century also trained in several non-lethal deterrents? Six shots to an unarmed man is excessive. While I don't know the whole story of what happened (stories are conflicting and the physical evidence that I've read hasn't been 100% sussed out as to what was what), I think it's clear that this guy shouldn't be an officer anymore. If he couldn't of used a taser or pepper spray or even just waited for back-up, his judgement seems to be in question.


whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules.
It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness.
This is true both in politics and on the internet."

Our Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man said: "no, the doctor's right. besides, he has seniority."
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
 Originally Posted By: Captain Sammitch
it's secondhand. much as I appreciate your efforts to find a useful source corroborating the other side of the story, it'd really hold a lot more weight if it came at least from a member of the police department - I understand why the officer in question isn't available for comment. it's not that I automatically disbelieve her, it's that by nature of the source it's no more inherently credible than any other third-party accounts. I don't think we're going to get anything more reliable from that camp until after the investigation simply because otherwise the process would be contaminated.


I agree that the ability for the officer or his department to respond is restrained until the investigation is completed, for precisely the reasons you stated.
And that "Josie", the anonymous caller is a second-hand source who wasn't there (i.e., hearsay).

My point is that while officer Darren Wilson is restrained from responding to a media court of public opinion that has already convicted him, there is a counter-argument that the shooting was justified.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
 Originally Posted By: thedoctor
Aren't police in the 21st century also trained in several non-lethal deterrents? Six shots to an unarmed man is excessive. While I don't know the whole story of what happened (stories are conflicting and the physical evidence that I've read hasn't been 100% sussed out as to what was what), I think it's clear that this guy shouldn't be an officer anymore. If he couldn't of used a taser or pepper spray or even just waited for back-up, his judgement seems to be in question.


I don't pretend to know all the facts that haven't been disclosed, and am just offering the conceivable counter-argument:

1) the officer was treated for injuries and has a damaged eye-socket. He was dazed after having already been struck by suspect Michael Brown, when (his account, apparently supported by several on-site witnesses) Brown charged him.
2) As is evidenced from the half-baked response of the Ferguson police department in the 7 days after the shooting, this is not the best-trained police department, with the most up-to-date equipment. I'd agree that under normal circumstances, pepper-spray or just wrestling the suspect to the ground and cuffing him would have been a possible better alternative.

But (by "Josie"'s radio-call acount) Wilson fired at least 6 rounds at Brown, and Brown still kept on coming at him, and not until the 6th shot to the head did Brown stop. If this account is accurate (and the three autopsies back it) Wilson tried to just wound Brown several times in the arm and shoulder, and only shot Brown in the head when, Wilson already dazed with a head injury and unable to further fight, was about to be overtaken by Brown.


Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster
15000+ posts
Offline
terrible podcaster
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
 Originally Posted By: Wonder Boy (emphasis added)
...As is evidenced from the half-baked response of the Ferguson police department in the 7 days after the shooting, this is not the best-trained police department, with the most up-to-date equipment... If this account is accurate (and the three autopsies back the it) Wilson tried to just wound Brown several times in the arm and shoulder, and only shot Brown in the head when, Wilson already dazed with a head injury and unable to further fight, was about to be overtaken by Brown.


that's a problem. despite what movies and TV keep insisting, you can't 'shoot to injure' someone. there is nothing but shoot to kill - once you've committed to pulling the trigger, you're acknowledging that you accept the moral and legal ramifications of killing that person. you can hit someone in the arm and kill them (radial artery), you can hit someone in the leg and kill them very quickly (femoral artery), pretty much the entire torso is off limits (scapula and ribcage can 'bounce' a .22, a .38, or a 9mm and generate lethal internal ricochets)... it's a mess. firearms are made for the sole purpose of killing what you shoot with them. that keeps coming back to poor training, which you cited and which I still maintain had more to do with the actual killing than anything else. though I'm still not sold on how the confrontation began or unfolded.


go.

ᴚ ᴀ ᴐ ᴋ ᴊ ᴌ ᴧ
ಠ_ಠ
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
Well...

Even if you shoot someone in the arm or leg, yes, there's always the chance you could hit something more vital, and/or they could bleed to death before EMT help arrives.
But I think the intent of Wilson is clearly established by the five previous shots that consistently shot Brown in non-vital areas, before he finally went for the instantly fatal head-shot (that again, the multiple autopsies confirm the shooting order of).

A normal and sane person would have stopped after being injured with the first shot, knowing that the officer could wound him further or kill him with the remaining rounds. As ultimately happened with Michael Brown.
Alternately, officer Wilson could have kept firing after Brown was down, out of fear or anger. But there are witnesses who support that Brown was advancing on Wilson. And witnesses to the contrary. What a mess...

Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster
15000+ posts
Offline
terrible podcaster
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
I'm not ruling out that he might have been trying to do that. I'm saying no police department I've heard of or any relative or friend in law enforcement has heard of trains officers to nonlethally shoot someone. even civilian gun safety and concealed-carry courses repeatedly hammer into you that when you discharge a loaded firearm at another human being, you are doing so with the understanding such a course of action will most likely result in that human being's death, and you are doing so with a willingness to accept the consequences of taking that course of action. if you're a law-enforcement officer and you're not prepared to kill that person, you should have at least one less-than-lethal (the term nonlethal is generally discouraged following numerous instances proving otherwise) measure for subduing or incapacitating a hostile individual. again, it seems like a question not of intent, but of training and discipline. confrontations can escalate, but it ultimately comes back to how and why the confrontation was initiated, which leaves us right back where we started - some people say this, some people say that.

Last edited by Captain Sammitch; 2014-08-21 2:32 AM.
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 17,843
Likes: 3
Son of Anarchist
15000+ posts
Offline
Son of Anarchist
15000+ posts
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 17,843
Likes: 3
I hope Spike Lee didn't release the wrong address this time.


Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Offline
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
I think you're missing a larger issue here in that you, and by-and-large the Ferguson protestors, claim that the amount of force used by the police officer was excessive on the sole virtue that Michael Brown wasn't carrying a weapon. But if the accounts of Michael Brown assaulting the officer, and severely damaging his face, are true--and it is looking that way--then that calls into question your, and their, standards of "excessive." If his life was in jeopardy, it wouldn't matter what his intent was when he fired at him.

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 24,593
Timelord. Drunkard.
15000+ posts
Offline
Timelord. Drunkard.
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 24,593
The story that the cop is putting out there (or at least that his friends who are talking to the news are saying that he told them) is that Brown started running into the door of his cruiser keeping him inside. If you have two suspects and one is clearly too much for you to handle, you call in back-up. Hell, cops around here won't go all in on a traffic stop until another unit arrives. If one guy's too much for you, why would you put yourself out in the open with two? The cop should have called for back-up and waited. It's bad police work all the way around. Anyone with that shitty of a judgement should not be allowed back on the streets.


whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules.
It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness.
This is true both in politics and on the internet."

Our Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man said: "no, the doctor's right. besides, he has seniority."
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29


According to "Josie" in the radio call-in account, officer Wilson (1) from his car told the two thugs to get off the road and walk on the sidewalk to not obstruct traffic, and got a response of defiance and profanity. But he still rolled on by and let it go. Then (2) he got a police radio-call of the strong-arm robbery and put 2 + 2 together, and (3) called for backup before reversing to further scrutinize the two thugs. At which point (4) he was assaulted.

Again, sketchy details at this point, the investigation will reveal the exact details. If he called for backup, the backup request will no doubt have been recorded.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29





Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29


http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/kwmu/files/201408/BlackOwner.jpeg


Because it's perfectly okay to riot and loot stores that don't have black owners.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29





And it's laughably absurd when protesters allege at this point that Michael Brown was "innocent", as if a cop just approached and shot him for "walking while black".
As I cited earlier, Brown's partner in crime Dorian Johnson admitted to both of them robbing the convenience store, has since lawyered up, and will inevitably face prison or a lesser plea deal for their crime.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29



The first few days after the shooting the father wore a T-shirt that read "NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE".

Which translates basically to: Unless you abandon rule of law and convict officer Wilson without a trial, we will riot and loot stores until you give in to what we want.

The father hypocritically calls for non-violent protest, while stoking violence with that very statement of "NO PEACE".

I increasingly have no sympathy for the parents of Michael Brown. They had to have seen the criminal tendencies of their son previously, and their lack of parenting and discipline unleashed this violent criminal on the convenience store clerk, and on officer Darren Wilson, and who knows how many others before Michael Brown was finally taken down. All this is what Michael Brown is documented doing in less than 30 minutes of his thug life.

Look again at the store clerk in the surveillance video.

Look also at the belligerence to the officer when Wilson simply asked Brown and Johnson (who had just burglarized a store and had the stolen goods in their hands when they responded with profanity and defiance when simply asked to get out of the street! And likely would never have been caught if they had simply complied and said "Yes officer.") And further assaulted officer Wilson with a head fracture, before shots were fired.
Look at the roughed-up store clerk. THAT'S who my sympathy is with.




Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29




One more up-close look at the "innocent kid" in action.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29



Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
Only NBC Acknowledges Gov. Jay Nixon Calling For ‘Vigorous Prosecution’ [as opposed to a BALANCED INVESTIGATION] of Missouri Cop

 Quote:
On Tuesday, August 19, Governor Jay Nixon (D-Mo.) called for the “vigorous prosecution” of Darren Wilson, the Missouri police officer who shot and killed Michael Brown last week.

Despite the highly charged rhetoric by the state’s Democratic governor, NBC’s Today was the only network morning show to acknowledge Nixon’s comments, giving it a mere 41 seconds on its Wednesday morning broadcast. ABC and CBS’s morning shows ignored the governor’s contentious comments. All three networks failed to cover Governor Nixon’s comments on their Tuesday evening newscasts. [See video below.]



Ah,, well. Who really expected balanced coverage among a Democrat/liberal-biased media that openly campaigned for Obama? And also eagerly promoted the talking points in the Trayvon Martin case, and Obama's war-on-women, war-on-Hispanics, etc.


The pick of the litter was this irresponsible bomb thrown by [black] Missouri state Senator Jamilah Nasheed:

 Originally Posted By: Jamilah Nasheed, to St. Louis prosecutor Robert McCulloch:

"if you should decide not to indict this police officer, the rioting we witnessed this last week will seem like a picnic compared to the havoc that will likely occur.



The black political class that forever exhorts the spectre of black lynchings a century ago, is eager to lynch white officer Darren Wilson without an investigation of the true facts.


Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
I recently ran across an article I wrote after the 1992 Rodney King police verdict and subsequent riots, and was saddened by how there has been absolutely no improvement in race relations in 22 years. The issues in the Michael Brown shooting, the Trayvon Martin shooting, and the Rodney King verdict are exactly the same.

In each you have a black thug who has a history of stereotypical black criminal behavior, who when in contact with law enforcement (or in Trayvon Martin's case, a neighborhood watch guy acting as an appointed lookout for his community) and when approached by police/watch, reacted violently and did not cooperate. And yet in each case, the black community overwhelmingly reads racism into the situation and reacts with violent outrage, blindly defending a black criminal despite the facts of each's own (King's, Martin's, Brown's)contribution to triggering the violence that was unleashed on them.

In the current Michael Brown case, black protestors, on up to leaders like Al Sharpton, and political leaders like Eric Holder and Jamilah Nasheed want to bypass the rule of law and essentially lynch officer Darren Wilson.
That, arguably, is even worse than 22 years ago.

An entire generation of black America has been indoctrinated in a sense of being "owed" for past racial discrimination, and indoctrinated in terms like "white privilege" and "institutionalized racism". A generation that has never known true racism, that has far more equality and opportunity than existed at the time I was born (1963). And is oblivious to the fact that their own belligerence, not racism, is what truly triggers these events.


Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29

Missouri law could protect Ferguson Officer Darren Wilson

 Quote:
As The Christian Science Monitor points out, not everyone agrees that Wilson should be taken into custody. That divide can even been seen among law professors within the same university.

The Monitor quotes another Harvard law professor who says, "We should not arrest [Officer Darren Wilson] until there's a substantial level of proof of criminality, even if it appeared that the police acted improperly."

But opinions aside, there are also some practical obstacles to moving ahead with any prosecution of Wilson.

Missouri's Defense of Justification statute gives police officers broad authority to use deadly force in cases when, "He or she reasonably believes that such deadly force is necessary to protect himself, when he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest" and when the subject "May otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay."

It's the same law that was invoked in 2000 after two unarmed men were shot and killed by police at a Berkeley, Mo., Jack in the Box.

Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29


Blacks protesting their innocence, and touting their worth as citizens should make a greater effort not to look like criminal thugs and gang members.

Any rational person would be clutching a concealed weapon under their shirt if these guys were within 100 feet of them.





Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
OP Offline
brutally Kamphausened
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 24,963
Likes: 29


And these 4 clowns with masks and threatening gang demeanor with the message "STOP KILLING US"...

...oblivious to the fact that 94% of black shootings are black-on-black.
"STOP KILLING US"?!?
You're killing you, not cops or white people!

Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5