ChrisWeigant.com

Please support ChrisWeigant.com this
holiday season!

Friday Talking Points [316] -- Dog Days

[ Posted Friday, August 15th, 2014 – 17:01 PDT ]

Welcome to the "Dog Days" of summer, at the height of the political Silly Season. This year, one dog did indeed have his day in August, as 7-year-old "Duke" just won a rather bizarre election to become mayor of Cormorant, Minnesota. The strangest thing (to us) was that the "12 people in the village each paid $1 to cast a vote." Um, didn't we make poll taxes illegal quite a while back? The job (and the election) are assumably only "ceremonial" (at least we hope so), but still "Dog Elected Mayor," as a headline, is right up there with "Man Bites Dog." As for Duke's mayoralty, well, it's a "Ruff!" job but someone's got to do it, we suppose. So to speak (or roll over, or shake... good boy!)

In other news, dumping a bucket of ice water over your head is, apparently, now no longer reserved for winning football coaches, and has instead become an activity for the whole family to enjoy. Or something.

Two separate stories came out this week on -- Gasp! -- President Obama actually uttering profanity. In one, he called some criticism from opponents "horseshit," and in another was quoted as saying what guides his foreign policy is a core idea: "Don't do stupid shit" (although he reportedly cleans this up for public consumption: "Don't do stupid stuff"). This last story was one of those shiny, shiny objects within the Beltway that the press (on a regular basis) chases after like a pack of rabid hounds, mostly since Hillary Clinton was the source of the quote and -- Gasp! -- her foreign policy stance is still (as it always has been) more hawkish than Obama's. Somehow, this was what passed for "news" at the height of this year's Silly Season.

Over at the Drug Enforcement Agency, some silliness was exposed this week. Or perhaps "rampant incompetence" is a better term, you decide. Seems they paid an Amtrak employee for confidential passenger information that they could easily have gotten for free. From the story:

The Amtrak inspector general's office said the employee handed over the information "without seeking approval from Amtrak management or the Amtrak Police Department." The report, released in June, said the company removed the worker from service and filed charges against the individual.

. . .

According to the report, the secretary provided D.E.A. agents with passengers' "name reservation identification," which can include travelers' names, the names of people traveling with them, travel dates, seat numbers, credit card numbers, emergency contact information, baggage information, passport numbers, gender and date of birth.

Under an agreement with the D.E.A., the Amtrak Police Department provides such information for free in exchange for receiving a share of funds seized through resulting investigations. The report said D.E.A.'s purchase of the records deprived Amtrak police of money the department could have received by supplying the data.

This story is interesting for a number of reasons, not least of which is the news that any Amtrak passenger is essentially turning all their personal information over to the government (who knew?), and that the entire venture of arresting (assumably, it being the D.E.A.) drug smugglers is seen as a healthy profit-making operation by both the D.E.A. and Amtrak. But the "rampant incompetence" part is where they paid out taxpayer dollars for information they could have gotten for free. Yet another reason why the head of the D.E.A., Michele Leonhart, needs to be shown the door.

In other marijuana-related news, Oklahoma's Republican governor has come out in favor of legalizing medicinal cannabis oil for sick children. She also expressed support for the state to conduct medical trials on its effectiveness. But she drew the line at legalizing any other medical marijuana. Perhaps her support for the oil was in response to the petition drive to put medicinal marijuana on the Oklahoma ballot (which is currently facing a deadline to collect signatures, but which is still short of the goal). Meanwhile, in Florida, the political fight over medical marijuana seems to be heating up.

August is a fairly slow month for election news, but Hawai'i is holding the final part of their primary today (in areas affected by the hurricane which hit right before the rest of Hawai'i voted). One candidate filed a lawsuit to get this special election delayed or expanded, but the judge ruled against her. Look for results, late tonight. In Montana, the race to replace Senate candidate John Walsh (who dropped out after his plagiarism was exposed) lost one candidate this week. The Democrats will be announcing their nominee within the next week, but no matter what name appears on the ballot, not many people give them any realistic chance to retain what used to be Max Baucus's seat. And in New York, gubernatorial candidate Randy Credico (running against Andrew Cuomo in the Democratic primary) was arrested for videotaping the police in public (which is not actually a crime). It'll be interesting to see how this one plays out, in the current political atmosphere.

Of course, this brings up the big not-silly-at-all news of the week, the nights of rage in Ferguson, Missouri. This subject has been adequately covered elsewhere (see: the entire media universe), so we don't have much in the way of commentary to add (except about the political fallout, which we'll address in a moment). But the glaring fact that did strike us as being more newsworthy than the rest of the story is why nobody can come up with a good answer to the question: "In a town which is two-thirds African-American, why are 50 out of 53 police officers white?" A few in the media tried to ask this question of various Missouri politicians, but nobody seemed to have any good answers, to put it politely.

The only other thing we feel obliged to say on the matter is to denounce the treatment that Huffington Post reporter Ryan Reilly (as well as a reporter for another media outlet) received at the hands of the police, while trying to cover the incident from inside a McDonald's. There was -- obviously -- no need for him to be harassed or arrested, and I would urge both him and the Huffington Post to explore legal action for false arrest and/or false imprisonment.

 

Most Impressive Democrat of the Week

This is known as striking while the iron is hot, folks.

House member Hank Johnson of Georgia announced this week that he'll soon be filing legislation to stop the militarization of America's police forces. He's been working on his bill, the "Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act," for some time now, but sent out a letter to fellow House Democrats asking for their support when they all return to Washington next month.

Several other legislators have echoed these calls, from Senator Claire McCaskill to Representative John Conyers to Republican Rand Paul. But they all merely suggested studying the issue or holding hearings, while Representative Johnson will be ready with a bill to vote on. We'll have a quote from his letter later on in the talking points segment, where he explains in his own words what motivated him to act.

But for being prepared on this issue, and for getting out in front of it in a timely manner, Representative Hank Johnson is our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week. Strike while the iron is hot! It's often the best chance to actually get something done, instead of just expending a lot of hot air in fruitless hearings.

[Congratulate Representative Hank Johnson on his House contact page, to let him know you appreciate his efforts. Or, alternatively, contact your own House member and tell them to support his Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act.]

 

Most Disappointing Democrat of the Week

Getting quoted using profanity (see: earlier bit on Obama) is one thing. But typing a big old "f-bomb" out in a tweet to your governor is taking it to another level, we have to admit. Missouri state senator Maria Chappelle-Nadal, after being tear-gassed at a protest in Ferguson, let Jay Nixon, Missouri's governor, know exactly how she felt this week. But it's tough to criticize the depth of feeling that "getting tear gassed" brings out in people, so we can't see our way to giving her any sort of negative award for doing so.

In other non-award news this week, several readers in New York have contacted me to ask when Governor Andrew Cuomo will be getting an award for what seems to be politically corrupting an independent agency (ironically, the special commission was supposed to fight corruption), but we're reserving judgment until the investigation's results are announced. Maybe there'll be an MDDOTW in his future, but we'll just have to wait and see.

And to slow down this narrative yet another notch, we are often criticized here for focusing in on very minor Democratic politicians for some of these awards. While we do agree with the basic concept of the bigger the fish, the more important the story; we also use another scale to measure both impressive and disappointing behavior in Democrats. When the awfulness of the story goes up, to put this another way, it can trump the relative importance of the politician.

Which, in a very roundabout way, brings us to this week's Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week. In Connecticut (of all places), candidate for probate judge Anna Zubkova was called to account for the views of her husband, Rob Freeman, who was shown to have had "a long history of being involved in white supremacy causes." Zubkova's explanation was, shall we say, less than impressive:

For her part, Zubkova told the [Norwich] Bulletin that her husband became involved with white nationalism after they were married and that she did not share his views.

"What am I supposed to do? Divorce him? It's not unusual for husbands and wives to have different views," she said. "As a judge, I can assure you I would not discriminate against anyone, even based on their beliefs."

Speaking only for myself, if my spouse suddenly began writing for white supremacist websites, then, yes, the concept of divorce would indeed cross my mind. I mean, there are "different views" and then there are "views which are morally abhorrent in a person I choose to share my life with."

Elsewhere in America, some citizens took a stand against white supremacy, at a Ku Klux Klan rally -- by showing up in greater numbers and shouting them down. That is a proper public response to racial hatred. Not: "Oh, it's just my hubby's hobby -- it's totally harmless and doesn't affect my life at all!"

The happy ending to this story is that Zubkova was defeated in the Democratic primary for the spot, and says she's not going to run an independent campaign for the seat. Instead, all she's taking home from this election is a Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award.

[Since Anna Zubkova is no longer a candidate for office (as far as we can tell), she falls under our policy not to provide the contact information for private citizens, sorry.]

 

Friday Talking Points

Volume 316 (8/15/14)

Since this has so far been a Dog Days sort of column, we're going to slow down the pace once again. Before we get on with this week's talking points, there are a few things worth mentioning.

The first is: "Oh, thank you, thank you, thank you NBC News for finally getting rid of David Gregory as moderator of Meet The Press." I explored this feeling in much snarkier detail yesterday, so check that out if you like.

The second is to give credit where credit is due to the opposition. Every once in a while -- while not agreeing with the statements, mind you -- we come across a brilliant bit of talking-pointery (to coin a term) from a Republican which we have to at least acknowledge on a professional level.

This week (are you sitting down?) we have to at least offer up a hat tip to none other than Senator Ted Cruz. Hey, you were warned to brace yourselves!

HBO's vampire series True Blood apparently recently had a storyline with a vampire rampage at a Ted Cruz rally. Cruz responded, on Facebook:

Of all the places I never thought to be mentioned, HBO's True Blood vampire show would have to be near the top of the list. Sunday night, they aired a misogynist and profanity-ridden episode where Texas Republicans are murdered attending a "Ted Cruz -fundraiser."

Well, I'm sorry to have lost the vampire vote, but am astonished (and amused) that HBO is suggesting that hard-core leftists are blood-sucking fiends.

Ouch! He later tweeted:

Then again, I guess I never had a chance w/ the vampire vote since the dead tend to vote overwhelmingly for Dems.

As mentioned, we have to admit that this was indeed a pretty funny way to react. Again -- while not agreeing with anything he said -- he certainly reacted in an amusing fashion. Rather than whine and moan about Hollywood values, etc., Cruz lobbed the ball right back with style. Which we felt was worth some sort of recognition, these days.

Silliness aside, one last item before we get on with the show. President Obama is getting ready to make a major announcement on immigration reform, and the political shock waves are going to be enormous (as we also wrote about earlier this week). Democrats who back Obama's move would do well to avail themselves of a new memo from a Democratic organization which lists 10 past incidents of presidents using executive power to change immigration and deportation policy on their own. This is going to be an enormous political issue, in the very near future, so Democrats should be using the Dog Days to prepare their responses. Reading this memo (PDF download) would be the first step in doing so.

OK, that's it, let's get on with it, shall we?

 

1
   Brilliant sloganeering

As with the "99 percent" slogan created by the Occupy Wall Street movement, occasionally a protest slogan is so jaw-droppingly brilliant that you can tell it's going to have some staying power in the political world. Whoever came up with the chant heard in Ferguson, Missouri deserves a whole lot of credit, because not only is it short, simple, and easily-understood, it also has a taunting aspect to it, when chanted at lines of police in military gear. The slogan speaks for itself:

Hands up -- don't shoot!

 

2
   First Amendment absolutist

There's a very basic principle that needs repeating this week.

"You can call me a First Amendment absolutist, because I believe that the protection of journalists -- the only profession named in the entire United States Constitution, mind you -- should be one of the first things taught in police academies across the nation. Police are sworn to uphold the Constitution, and they need to learn the First Amendment by heart, on their first day of training. The right of the people to peaceably protest and the right of journalists to peaceably cover such newsworthy events is guaranteed to every single American. Period. This includes, by the way, the clear right of any American anywhere in public to film or record the police while they are doing their jobs. This is not only legal, it is constitutionally-protected behavior. George Orwell warned of 'Big Brother' keeping watch over the citizenry, but the power of 'Little Brother' -- the power of citizens to keep the government honest -- is nothing to be sneered at, either. See a cop doing something questionable? Whip out your phone and record a video -- it is your constitutional right to do so, and it might just make that cop think twice."

 

3
   Not tanks and M16s

As promised, the following is a quote from the letter Representative Hank Johnson sent out to fellow House Democrats, to gain support for his Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act:

Our main streets should be a place for business, families, and relaxation, not tanks and M16s. Our local police are quickly beginning to resemble paramilitary forces. This bill will end the free transfers of certain aggressive military equipment to local law enforcement and ensure that all equipment can be accounted for. Before another small town's police force gets a $700,000 gift from the Defense Department that it can't maintain or manage, it behooves us to rein in the Pentagon's 1033 program and revisit the merits of a militarized America.

 

4
   Twitterwar!

This could get very amusing indeed, if he makes it a regular habit.

"I see that New Jersey Governor Chris Christie thinks the best use of his time is to conduct an argument on Twitter with his constituents -- over traffic problems. Hoo boy! I really hope this sort of thing becomes common, if he runs for president. Journalists won't even have to bother sifting through hours of videotape for choice Christie quotes, as they'll all be available in text form, 140 characters at a time. I heartily encourage Chris Christie to answer every complaint on Twitter he gets, in the future!"

 

5
   Faux News

If you can't make it, fake it, right?

"Not content with Fox News, I see that the National Republican Campaign Committee -- the folks who are trying to get Republicans elected to the House -- has decided to create their own 'Faux News' websites. Yep, that's right -- Republicans think the voters are so stupid they can't tell the difference between real news websites and a piece of fakery designed to post hit pieces on Democrats. Republicans are so afraid of what real journalists might have to say about them that they're just going ahead and spending their money creating fake news sites. The contempt for the voters is pretty obvious, isn't it?"

 

6
   Who deserves a raise?

This just reeks of chutzpah, or (as they usually call it) nothing but sheer elitism.

"Remember the House Republican who refused to give up his pay after voting to shut down the federal government last year? At the time, he said, and I quote, 'I've got a nice house and a kid in college,' and went on to boldly declare: 'Giving our paycheck away when you still worked and earned it? That's just not going to fly.' Well, the elitist scorn of Representative Lee Terry was on display again this week. Terry's against raising the minimum wage, but he is apparently all in favor of giving himself a raise -- because 174,000 taxpayer dollars a year is just not enough for him. He's now complaining on the campaign trail that he hasn't had a raise in six years. Poor Lee! Having to eke out a bare existence on $174,000 a year is so tough these days! It's almost as tough as trying to live on a frozen minimum wage, right? The chutzpah of Republicans knows no bounds, apparently."

 

7
   Are you kidding me?

This one, technically, isn't really a partisan talking point, because from where we sit, all of Congress is guilty, all the way back to 1970. Hmmph.

"America has no mandatory paid-vacation law for any hardworking wage-earners in the entire country -- with one glaring exception. There is indeed a law which absolutely requires an enormous amount of vacation time... for Congress. The Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970 dictates at least thirty days off in August for each and every member of Congress, at taxpayer expense. An official Senate historian explains what happened, noting that in the early 1960s, Congress stayed in session for much longer periods. 'In 1962 the Senate met from January to October with no recess.' The poor dears! The next year, they actually worked from January to December with no more than three-day weekend breaks. Oh, the horror! Oh, the humanity! You know -- having to work all year long, just like every other full-time hardworking American! So instead of relying on just a tradition, they actually wrote a law guaranteeing themselves a full month off every single year. The United States is the only Western country that doesn't have a law requiring all employers to provide paid vacation (four to six weeks is common, in Europe) -- except for one very privileged type of employee: members of Congress. Nice work if you can get it, eh?"

-- Chris Weigant

 

All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground
Cross-posted at: Democrats For Progress
Cross-posted at: The Huffington Post

 

277 Comments on “Friday Talking Points [316] -- Dog Days”

  1. [1] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    I second your Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week. These zombie SWAT goons must be stopped.

  2. [2] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    #8 Bienvenidos a los Estados Unidos de América!

  3. [3] 
    Michale wrote:

    while trying to cover the incident from inside a McDonald's.

    Not so.. The McDonalds was being used as a base of operations for reporters.. No covering of the riots was being accomplished...

    There was -- obviously -- no need for him to be harassed or arrested, and I would urge both him and the Huffington Post to explore legal action for false arrest and/or false imprisonment.

    When in the midst of a riot, where lives are in danger, if an LEO tells you to evacuate, you don't retort with a smart ass "Can I finish my chicken nuggets first"

    And, for the record, NO ONE was arrested.. They were detained based on a universally accepted charge..

    Being An Asshole In A NO ASSHOLE Zone...

    "In a town which is two-thirds African-American, why are 50 out of 53 police officers white?"

    Uh.... No black applicants???

    Our main streets should be a place for business, families, and relaxation, not tanks and M16s. Our local police are quickly beginning to resemble paramilitary forces.

    When scumbags employ incendiary devices and other weapons of war, then it's only prudent, AND logical, that LEOs be allowed to deploy weapons of war in defense..

    Have you ever seen what a molotov cocktail does to a patrol car?? Hence, the logic of deploying MRAPs...

    Our main streets should be a place for business and relaxation, not scumbags rioting and looting. And the fact that they would use the death of an American as an excuse to steal that new pair of shoes they have always wanted makes the action all the more pathetic..

    Wouldn't you agree???

    Personally, I feel that looters are the lowest of the low and should be shot on sight..

    Take down a few in that manner and the rest will get the message...

    Michale

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yep, that's right -- Republicans think the voters are so stupid they can't tell the difference between real news websites and a piece of fakery designed to post hit pieces on Democrats.

    And Democrats would NEVER stoop to fake news to attack Republicans, right??? :D

    Again... Stones... Glass Houses...

    Michale

  5. [5] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Scalia: sneakers are people too!

  6. [6] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Scalia: Sneakers are victims too!

  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    And, in the YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP department...

    Republicans in Texas are whining because Democrats are.... are you ready for this???...

    They are whining because Democrats are using the courts to further a political agenda... :D

    Ya gotta just LAUGH at the irony... :D

    Michale

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ya gotta just LAUGH at the irony... :D

    AND the hypocrisy..... :D

    Michale

  9. [9] 
    TheStig wrote:

    M-3

    The McDonald's was being used as a base of operations for the exercise of 1st Amendment rights. Kind of puts things in a different light IMHO.

    CW -"House member Hank Johnson of Georgia announced this week that he'll soon be filing legislation to stop the militarization of America's police forces."

    Sounds to me like it will just preserve an overly militarized status quo. Better than nothing I guess, but how about a mandatory buy back of excess armor and fire power?

    The militarization of police didn't start as a response to terrorist threat, it started as a response to heavily armed drug criminals using high powered arms readily available on the open market. The United States is simply overly militarized, period. As a Nation we seem powerless/oblivious to walk this back to a sane balance somewhere closer to well regulated militia and farther from armed mob.

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    The McDonald's was being used as a base of operations for the exercise of 1st Amendment rights. Kind of puts things in a different light IMHO.

    Public Safety trumps 1st Amendment rights..

    The old Fire/Theater argument..

    As a Nation we seem powerless/oblivious to walk this back to a sane balance somewhere closer to well regulated militia and farther from armed mob.

    Who decides the "sane" part of "sane balance"??

    Seems to me, it should be those that have experience with terrorists and the criminal element..

    Wouldn't you agree???

    Michale

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    Seems to me, it should be those that have experience with terrorists and the criminal element..

    Ever read THE JESUS FACTOR??

    Michale

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    The McDonald's was being used as a base of operations for the exercise of 1st Amendment rights. Kind of puts things in a different light IMHO.

    I am also constrained to point out that the Left only cares about *THEIR* "1st Amendment Rights"..

    When dissenting opinions want their 15 mins, the Left can't try to quash them fast enough...

    Michale

  13. [13] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    "Zubkova was defeated in the Democratic primary for the spot"

    She should move to Mississippi. She would fit in with Republicans and they could vote for her in the open primaries. On the other hand, the racist baggers (redundant, I know. Sorry) might find her name suspiciously Russian. I don't know if they'd vote for one of those commies even if she is a white supremacist. She'd have to rely on the racist GOP-E, so she'd need to brush up her crony capitalism.

    She might do OK in St Louis too.

  14. [14] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    There should be a law against Fox "News".

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    There should be a law against Fox "News".

    TS.... See what I mean???

    Left Wingers only value 1st Amendment Rights if they agree with what is being said....

    Michale

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    On the other hand, the racist baggers (redundant, I know. Sorry) might find her name suspiciously Russian. I don't know if they'd vote for one of those commies even if she is a white supremacist. She'd have to rely on the racist GOP-E, so she'd need to brush up her crony capitalism.

    And WHICH Political Party is responsible for the KKK???

    Oh that's right.. The Democrat Party...

    If Left Wingers didn't have the Race Card, they wouldn't have shit...

    Michale

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    "You can call me a First Amendment absolutist, because I believe that the protection of journalists -- the only profession named in the entire United States Constitution, mind you -- should be one of the first things taught in police academies across the nation.

    And, apparently, the first things taught to Left Wingers.... :^/

    Michale

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://fox2now.com/2014/08/16/police-presence-in-question-during-overnight-looting/

    Well, that's one way to make sure cops and looters don't interact...

    Take the cops off the street....

    Good call..... NOT...

    Michale

  19. [19] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Michale -

    You contradicted yourself so fast, I'm surprised you didn't get whiplash.

    Not so.. The McDonalds was being used as a base of operations for reporters.. No covering of the riots was being accomplished...

    So you're saying they weren't "covering the riots". This is an inane statement for other reasons ("covering" means, to a print journalist, viewing an event and then going somewhere with WiFi that you can type about it at a table).

    But then you say:

    When in the midst of a riot, where lives are in danger, if an LEO tells you to evacuate, you don't retort with a smart ass "Can I finish my chicken nuggets first"

    So, was the McDonald's part of the riot or not? You can't have it both ways.

    What law is being broken by sitting and typing in a public space, where no rioting is taking place? First Amendment, my friend.

    And, for the record, NO ONE was arrested.. They were detained based on a universally accepted charge..

    Being An Asshole In A NO ASSHOLE Zone...

    There is no difference between "being arrested" and "being detained by police." Legally, they are pretty much one and the same. Look up the dictionary definition of "arrest" -- it means "to stop". If police are detaining you, they have stopped your freedom -- you have indeed been "arrested," whether charges are subsequently filed or not. Which the courts would likely agree with, especially since they were locked in a cage. False arrest means the cops and the town pay big bucks for violating the citizen's freedom. That's how it works in America.

    If being an asshole was an arrestable offense, I can think of entire STATES which would have to go to jail... (heh).

    -CW

  20. [20] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    I knew Michale was going to go off the deep end of fascist justification for the police, but damn dude.

    First of all, every action by Ferguson police department has screamed, we're guilty as shit and just want this to go away, but we are far too dumb to figure out how to do that. Just think about the optics on a basic tactical and strategic level, when people are protesting police brutality and murderous violence, you don't respond by employing more brutality. That was and is plain old stupid. Not only just stupid, but horrifying, the pictures that came out of Ferguson make the police look like something out the 1960s south. For example, using attack dogs, that doesn't have any bad connotations, no sir. Especially with an overwhelmingly white police force and black protesters.

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/74/Birmingham_campaign_dogs.jpg

    Not only were their tactics counter-productive and stupid, but the Ferguson PD had their noses rubbed in it Thursday night. State Cops took over the security situation, didn't play soldier, treated the protesters with the respect they deserved and to absolutely no one's surprise it was peaceful and uneventful night.

    Since the only difference between peaceful protest and confrontational riot was the presence of the Ferguson and St. Louis county police forces, It's insanely obvious that THEY and no one else is the problem here. Even on the night the convenience store got burned down, the protests started out peaceful, but once the police showed up, quite literally swinging batons and driving cop cars through the crowds, all hell broke loose. Your job is to keep the peace assholes, not escalate the situation to the point where buildings burn down.

    And this is another thing, the police have all the power, both the judicial and fire varieties in these situations. Since they have ALL the power, they bear the responsibility for the situation. When you have total control, it's your fault when things go to shit, and events moved far far beyond shitty in Ferguson.

    And it's not like they would have had to something extraordinary or unusual to prevent or head off the situation. All they had to do was not be murderous violent thugs. I manage this every day, it is a ludicrously low standard for human behavior. Ferguson PD showed over and over again that they cannot meet that standard and that they can and will take active measures to remain underneath that bar.

    Throw in the posturing that resulted from really basic questions. Like, who was invloved? The fact their records can't be trusted, police brutality complaints are kept in the case files in Ferguson, not the personnel files, they are also written up by the officers themselves, aka obviously no conflict of interest. So if you want to find out if an officer is violent, you would have to sort through everything single case he's ever worked, not just look at a single comprehensive personnel file, this is obviously a bureaucratic decision intended to make it as difficult as possible to find out about police brutality. I wonder why they have that as a policy? (no one is wondering by the by)

    They arrest, without charges or Miranda rights mind you, reporters lawfully reporting. Another example of how stupid they are, the on the ground forces are so poorly trained and led that they can't even think through the legality, let alone the optics of their actions. It's not like their job requires a basic understanding of law and civil rights.

    Oh it does? They must be real real shitty at their jobs.

    And this brings me to militarization. First of all, COPS ARE CIVILIANS. You are not in the army, you did not join a para-military militia, your job, first and foremost, is the safety of everyone. And when cops decide to play soldier, they make the situation less safe for everyone involved, including themselves. Don't believe me? Look at last Wednesday night and then compare it to Thursday. On Wednesday the cops decided to play soldier and people were seriously comparing Ferguson to Baghdad. On Thursday, the cops acted like civilians, and there was a peaceful protest. The only variable that changed was police actions and approach.

    I need to repeat this for Michale, he's a bit hard of hearing these days. *ahem*

    THE ONLY CHANGED VARIABLE BETWEEN A NIGHT OF VIOLENCE AND A NIGHT OF PEACE WERE POLICE TACTICS.

    SINCE THAT IS ONLY THING THAT CHANGED IT IS THE CRITICAL POINT OF DETERMINATION FOR THE EVENTS AS THEY UNFOLDED.

    "But looters!" Cries Michale.

    Property damage and theft is a lesser crime than the ending of human life. Do I really need to say that?

    The Ferguson PD made a conscious decision to go to war to protect an officer WHO KILLED AN UNARMED TEENAGER. They DECIDED, no one forced them to play soldier, to take the most extreme and violent route in this crisis. And they did it to protect someone who only deserved the protection his attorney could provide.

    Michale, the basic point is that if you really cared about cops and the current state of policing, you would not be defending Ferguson PD. They are incompetent. They brought this on themselves. They took a bad situation and turned it into something so much worse. Defend people who are worth defending, not a police dept that has obviously gone into a tailspin of violence.

    No Justice, No Peace.

  21. [21] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/15/the-day-ferguson-cops-were-caught-in-a-bloody-lie.html

    You need to ignore the provocative headline or anything else that might prevent you from reaching the real meat of this article, which is the bureaucratic practices employed by Ferguson PD. Those are fucked so hard it makes the head spin. Institutions are fundamentally the method by which paperwork makes its way through them, and this "method" incentivizes the worst sort of behavior and after the fact report padding. The real point is the Ferguson PD was INSTITUTIONALLY incapable of responding effectively. That point is so harsh that no one has really dealt with it besides complaining about the also very real problem of militarization.

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    YoYo,

    As usual.. Long on hysteria... Non-existent facts...

    The Ferguson PD made a conscious decision to go to war to protect an officer WHO KILLED AN UNARMED TEENAGER.

    FACT: The scumbag attacked a police officer.

    FACT: The scumbag attempted to take the officer's weapon.

    These two facts are not in dispute..

    Therefore, the scumbag was a felon..

    The shoot was a good shoot..

    PERIOD.

    The fact that the scumbag was unarmed is not relevant to the determination that it was a good shoot...

    The response of city and county PD was just that.

    A RESPONSE to the looters... The cops did not instigate the looting.

    The scumbag looters initiated the response from LEOs...

    I would also be interested in your justification for the looting..

    How does shooting a fleeing felon justify the looters destroying the stores and the lively hood of people in their own neighborhood??

    People who had absolutely NOTHING to do with the incident at hand??

    I would LOVE to see your justification for that..

    Finally, your claim that, once the State Cops took over, everything was hunky dorky is ALSO not factual...

    There were more rioting and more looting last night...

    The only difference between last night and the other nights is that the citizens of Ferguson were on their own.. Law Enforcement took the night off...

    Your entire hysterical diatribe is based on ONE total bullshit conclusion..

    That the shooting of the scumbag was not justified..

    It was. Pure and simple...

    "These are the facts. And they are undisputed."
    -Captain Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN

    Michale

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    So, was the McDonald's part of the riot or not? You can't have it both ways.

    Actually, I can...

    Let me put it this way..

    Postulate a scenario where you are a soldier in a war. You are stationed at a Forward Operating Base... You are at the base chow hall taking a break and going over your shit... You are not actively engaged in combat...

    MPs come into the chow hall and state that there is a risk that the enemy will be overruning the base any minute..

    Now, I ask you. Are you going to stand there and argue with the MPs and ask to finish your chicken nuggets??

    Or are you going to do what your told??

    The reporters were not actively engaged in reporting. They were eating..

    They got mouthy with the cops and they got slammed down..

    That is the beginning and the end of the issue..

    There is no difference between "being arrested" and "being detained by police."

    Actually there is..

    An arrest, in the LEO vernacular, is where you are fingerprinted, photographed and processed...

    Detained is when your movements are restricted or controlled for a period of time...

    The reporters were detained. They were not arrested..

    If being an asshole was an arrestable offense, I can think of entire STATES which would have to go to jail... (heh).

    Touche' :D

    But in the midst of a riot, BEING AN ASSHOLE IN A NO ASSHOLE ZONE can get people killed...

    It all boils down to one simple truth.

    You DO NOT argue with cops when they are doing their jobs.. If you do, the odds are 99 to 1 that you will be arrested or detained..

    A corollary to that one simple truth is that you DEFINITELY don't argue with cops when they are doing their jobs in the middle of a frakin' riot!!

    The simple fact is, had those reporters just obeyed the lawful orders of the police, none of it would have happened..

    But the "reporter" had an agenda.. He was a HuffPoop reporter, after all....

    Would ANY OF YOU have said dick if it had been a FoxNews reporter???

    I know YOU would have, CW...

    But no one else here would have given a rat's ass if it was a Fox News reporter that was detained..

    Now, tell me I am wrong.. :D

    Michale

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    YoYo,

    Since the only difference between peaceful protest and confrontational riot was the presence of the Ferguson and St. Louis county police forces,

    Yea???

    FERGUSON • Police fired smoke grenades and moved toward a small group of defiant protesters who had gathered in the otherwise empty West Florissant Avenue after the midnight curfew went into effect. Other police officers, many in helmets and body armor, stood guard in front of neighborhood businesses.
    http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/after-day-s-calm-a-storm-erupts-in-ferguson/article_fd8c251f-ff3e-51ed-bfcb-2be8fbe252b4.html

    Apparently, you are not up on current events....

    Like I said...

    Long on hysteria... Non-existent facts...

    Michale

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    Property damage and theft is a lesser crime than the ending of human life. Do I really need to say that?

    Yes you do..

    But you need to say it to the people who have lost their livelyhood.. THEY lost their "lives"... Their employees lost their jobs...

    And stack it up to a scumbag who attacked a cop, tried to take the cop's gun and got shot for the action..

    So, yea... You DO need to say it.. You need to say it to the victims of the looters....

    Michale

  26. [26] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    We should really just get on with the Rant Paul (R) plan for dealing with these "Democrat" terrists. They should be Predator Droned as they leave the Seven Eleven with the cigars. Then the cops won't have to deal with serious crime like walking. They could step up their arbitrary enforcement of marijuana laws for fun and profit instead. Win-win.

    If you quote me, you're lying.

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    JFC

    You DO realize that Paul has been a staunch opponent of the Drone Program AND the militarization of civilian PDs, right???

    Like I said...

    Big on hysteria... Not a fact to be found...

    Michale

  28. [28] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    "I have never argued against any technology being used when you have an imminent threat, an act of crime going on. If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and $50 in cash, I don't care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him." - Rant Paul (R) on Fox Business Network before he disappeared down the rabbit hole again.

  29. [29] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    You have no facts Michale, you do have an alleged statement from the person who shoot that teenager. Which is directly contradicted by eye-witness statements.

    Since the cop has every single incentive to lie in this situation, I give no shits what he says. The only FACTS that are available about the incident is that Michael Brown was unarmed, he interacted with a white police officer, and at the end of that encounter he was dead on the street. Where he laid for hours I might add, Is that proper police procedure? To let a crime scene sit unattended for hours? To let a body lie in the street?

    The ambulance and follow up responders should have been there within minutes. The entire area should have been cordoned off and preserved for csi. Statements from witnesses should have been taken on that day at the very least, not several days later after the news story went national. All of this tells us that Ferguson PD is incompetent at the very least, or far more likely actively trying to prevent a comprehensive investigation.

    Also, COPS ARE NOT SOLDIERS. you cannot seriously think that you can use militaristic justification to defend the arrest of journalists. They showed themselves to be ignorant of the very law their job is to enforce.

    Ferguson PD, the only thing we're good at is force and violence.

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    You have no facts Michale.

    "Of course, you can PROVE that, right?? Oh yea, that's right. I forgot.. You were absent the day they taught LAW at Law School..."
    -Tom Cruise, A FEW GOOD MEN

    you do have an alleged statement from the person who shoot that teenager. Which is directly contradicted by eye-witness statements.

    Eyewitness statements are not facts. Further, the "eyewitness" was with Brown during the strong-armed robbery. And HIS statements are contradicted by photographic evidence PLUS the testimony of ANOTHER eyewitness...

    Against that, we have the OFFICIAL report from the officer, corroborated by responding officers.

    We have an officer with six years on the job, numerous commendations and not a SINGLE IOTA of indication that he is anything but what he appears to be. A dedicated public servant and professional officer.

    Since the cop has every single incentive to lie in this situation, I give no shits what he says.

    Of course you don't care..

    You would rather believe the scumbag who is a bona-fied criminal..

    This is Trayvon Martin all over again.. ALL the facts, ALL the evidence, ALL the reality points to a good shoot...

    But those that want to profit from this scumbags death will try to twist it into something it's not..

    Wonder how soon til uber-racist Crump files the lawsuit...

    Where he laid for hours I might add, Is that proper police procedure? To let a crime scene sit unattended for hours? To let a body lie in the street?

    Actually, yes.. If it is nothing but a body, and if circumstances dictate such as an unruly crowd that threatens the safety of med units, then yes.. The body can stay there as long as necessary...

    Also, COPS ARE NOT SOLDIERS. you cannot seriously think that you can use militaristic justification to defend the arrest of journalists.

    The journalists weren't arrested...

    You have no facts, YoYo..

    Just unsubstantiated hysteria...

    Michale

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:

    Also, COPS ARE NOT SOLDIERS

    And yet, they are facing an enemy that utilizes incendiary devices and other weapons of war...

    I am still waiting to hear your justification for the looting..

    How does a scumbag felon getting shot justify destroying other people's lives and livelyhood???

    Michale

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    I am curious.. AND can use a good laugh..

    What, EXACTLY, do you consider "unjustified" by this shooting??

    Michale

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    YoYo,

    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/168698-eyewitness-recalls-important-detail-background-video-mins-ferguson-shooting/

    You were saying something about me not having any facts???

    From several separate eyewitness testimony, we can piece together what likely happened..

    Brown attempted to flee. Wilson yelled "FREEZE" and fired twice. It is not known for certain whether Brown was hit.

    Brown then turned and advanced on Wilson. It was at that point that, for certain, Wilson fired several times more. Brown was hit and then went down..

    Now, again I have to ask..

    What about that shoot was unjustified???

    Michale

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    CW,

    Had a comment go NNL.....

    Michale

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    YoYo,

    From several separate eyewitness testimony, we can piece together what likely happened..

    Brown attacked Wilson and pushed Wilson into his patrol car.. Brown attempted to relieve Wilson of his weapon and a shot was fired..

    Brown then attempted to flee. Wilson yelled "FREEZE" and fired twice. It is not known for certain whether Brown was hit.

    Brown then turned and advanced on Wilson. It was at that point that, for certain, Wilson fired several times more. Brown was hit and then went down..

    Now, again I have to ask..

    What about that shoot was unjustified???

    Michale

  36. [36] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Don't forget - there was some good news this week. It was heartening to see Four Eyes Perry get indicted. It's about time something gets done about these ruthless and blood-thirsty Republican crime bosses like Perry and McDonnell. We follow the law here north of the Rio G. They execute people down there in Texas - especially the unrepentant.

    ". . . if I had to do it again I would make exactly the same decision" - Oops Perry

    "It's hard -- I suppose the force of circumstances -- for instance, not to accept gifts." - McDonnell

  37. [37] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    Bullshit.

    I always knew you were blind to the obvious, how many unarmed black men need to die at the hands of armed white men until you see the truth?

    Everything about that shooting was unjustified. Need I remind that brown was unarmed and "he went for my gun," is one the most common lies told by by shooters after the fact. He is not a reliable source, Ferguson PD personnel records cannot be trusted, and every action taken by the police in the crisis has been incompetent and demonstrably made things worse.

    I mean seriously, that dept can afford a goddamn tank, but doesn't have pepper spray or tazers? That killer had every legal and moral obligation to de-escalate the situation and make sure everyone came out of it alive. But no, he had to shoot a teenager who was on the ground with his hands up repeatedly.

    He literally had every option open to him. Brown was unarmed, physical take down, non-lethal albeit disabling options, but the dumbass went strait for his glock. He DECIDED to use lethal force, he deserves to suffer the consequences for his actions.

    Which, by the by, the looters are. They're in jail unless they have bail money. Their mug shots are all over the internet. Has the killer been processed? There's absolutely no doubt that he killed a teenager, why isn't he in jail pending a bail hearing? That's all he deserves, and it's what would happen to anyone else, especially when witnesses at the scene contradict his statement.

    And your excuse about the crime scene is bullshit. They didn't respond immediately because they were aiding and abetting a child-killer. Too busy trying to cover their collective asses rather than handle the situation according to basic common sense procedure.

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:
  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    I always knew you were blind to the obvious, how many unarmed black men need to die at the hands of armed white men until you see the truth?

    Which is completely irrelevant to this situation..

    You have NO FACTS...

    Your ENTIRE hysterical spiel rests on ONE completely unproven idea..

    That the cop lied...

    Yet there is NO EVIDENCE that the cop lied..

    There is PLENTY of evidence that supports the cop's report..

    ijreview.com/2014/08/168698-eyewitness-recalls-important-detail-background-video-mins-ferguson-shooting/

    Michale

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    YoYo,

    We are not talking about a child.

    We are talking about a scumbag adult THUG who had just committed a strong arm robbery...

    You see why you have no case?? You have no facts??

    All you have is totally bogus, utter bullshit hysteria...

    http://tinyurl.com/kt7tpj9

    Michale

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    JFC,

    Don't forget - there was some good news this week. It was heartening to see Four Eyes Perry get indicted.

    And yet, even David Axelrod says the Perry indictment is bullshit...

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/17/rick-perry-indictment_n_5685735.html

    Once again.. No facts..

    Just hysteria...

    Michale

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    JFC,

    Don't forget - there was some good news this week. It was heartening to see Four Eyes Perry get indicted.

    And yet, even David Axelrod says the Perry indictment is bullshit...

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/17/rick-perry-indictment_n_5685735.html

    Once again.. No facts..

    Just hysteria...

    Michale

  43. [43] 
    Michale wrote:

    He DECIDED to use lethal force, he deserves to suffer the consequences for his actions.

    You weren't there, YoYo..

    You have absolutely NO RIGHT to question the cop's actions.

    You also have absolutely NO EXPERIENCE that would allow you to render an intelligent opinion on what the cop should have or should not have done..

    All you have is hysteria..

    Michale

  44. [44] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    And all you have is the word of a killer, who will lose his job and go to jail unless he justifies his actions. Totally trustworthy! No conflict of interest! We shouldn't even question him!

    After all, if you call the victim a scumbag and thug enough times, the violence was not only justified, it was necessary! After the fact name calling and victim blaming based on blurry video is totally more convincing than the FACT that an unarmed black man interacted with a white police officer and ended up dead in the street.

  45. [45] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    I have every right.

    Cops are civilians, they answer to civilian authority. And when cops get murderously violent, we call them on it.

    I don't defend killers, I'll leave that to scumbags.

  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:

    But no, he had to shoot a teenager who was on the ground with his hands up repeatedly.

    Once again..

    NO FACTS whatsoever...

    Just the hysterical rantings of a convicted felon...

    Michale

  47. [47] 
    Michale wrote:

    I have every right.

    You are speaking from ignorance and hysteria....

    But, yes.. That is your right to do so...

    After the fact name calling and victim blaming based on blurry video is totally more convincing than the FACT that an unarmed black man interacted with a white police officer and ended up dead in the street.

    AND the fact that the scumbag had the stolen property in his pocket..

    But why let facts interfere with your hysteria..

    Like I said.. Trayvon Martin (another scumbag) all over again...

    Michale

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    For the record, there is absolutely NO EVIDENCE that race had ANYTHING to do with this incident..

    NONE.. ZERO... ZILCH.... NADA....

    Only after the racists like Sharpton, Jackson and Crump get involved, does race even enter into the issue..

    Michale

  49. [49] 
    Michale wrote:

    YoYo,

    It's actually ironic..

    You are judging this Brown scumbag based on the color of his skin...

    I am judging the scumbag on his character..

    Who do you think Dr Martin Luther King would side with here??

    Ya just gotta appreciate the irony...

    Michale

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    And all you have is the word of a killer, who will lose his job and go to jail unless he justifies his actions. Totally trustworthy!

    An office who has many commendations and has never had an IOTA of indication that he wouldn't be trustworthy..

    A scumbag with a long criminal record of violent crimes..

    But, by all means.

    Ignore the facts...

    Pursue the racist angle.

    Because, a black person was involved..

    It HAS to be racism.. It just CAN'T be anything but, right??

    How utterly and completely pathetic....

    Michale

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/huffpo-reporter-mistakes-earplugs-rubber-bullets

    BBWWWAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    A HuffPoop reporter doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground...

    Color me surprised...

    Michale

  52. [52] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    The only thing pathetic and ignorant is your insistence that giving someone a piece of metal and a firearm makes them automatically innocent of any wrongdoing.

    Cops do criminal actions constantly, just like everybody else, they aren't angels, and they sure as shit don't get the benefit of the doubt when they kill civilians. They get charged, they go to trial, and if found guilty they go to jail. Because that is the due process for a civilian when they kill someone. 'cept that ain't happening is it? Instead he gets preferential treatment when there is NO DOUBT that officer's actions resulted in violent death.

    This officer had at his disposal a full range of tactical option given to him by his gear and "training." A tazer will put you on the ground paralyzed while you piss and shit yourself. Pepper spray will have you clawing at your eyes screaming while you vomit because of the pain. But he went for the gun. He made a conscious decision to do so. Unless of course that gun of his is sentient being with free will, in that specific case I'll absolve him of responsibility.

    Race. It's a thing Michale, it pervades everything. Just like History, just like gender, just like socio-economic class status. All of these things are interrelated and work with and against and through every moment of our lives. Just because you can't hold more than one concept in your head at a time doesn't mean the rest of us can't.

    P.S.
    Martin Luther king would be marching with the protesters, Duh.

  53. [53] 
    Kevin wrote:

    YoYo,

    You're wasting your breath. You nailed things with comment #20, Michale's blatherings were predictable going back to his triumphant crowing over Trayvon Martin. I'm a bit surprised that LewDan hasn't commented yet but then again I think he's just tired from putting up with Michale's usual racist B.S. If authorities ever did ANYTHING about the Bundy ranch situation, you can be sure the all-knowing Michale will be there to criticize their actions. As you said in comment #20, Michale is nothing if not predictable.

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    The only thing pathetic and ignorant is your insistence that giving someone a piece of metal and a firearm makes them automatically innocent of any wrongdoing.

    No... The evidence and the facts makes the officer innocent of any wrongdoing..

    Cops do criminal actions constantly, just like everybody else,

    Yes, that's true.. But not in this case..

    This officer had at his disposal a full range of tactical option given to him by his gear and "training."

    And you know this how??

    You do not have a CLUE what this officer had at his disposal..

    Yet, you still feel qualified to comment from ignorance..

    Race. It's a thing Michale, it pervades everything.

    Maybe in your world..

    Not in mine...

    I really feel sad for you that your entire existence is based on race...

    Martin Luther king would be marching with the protesters, Duh

    No, he wouldn't..

    He would have looked BEYOND the skin (something you are incapable of) and looked at the character of Brown...

    ALL you have is skin color, YoYo..

    You have absolutely NOTHING else..

    Kevin,

    As you said in comment #20, Michale is nothing if not predictable.

    As are you..

    Why don't you point to ANY fact or evidence that race was an issue in this shooting.

    You can't because there is none...

    Go ahead... Show me ONE SINGLE fact or ONE piece of evidence that race was a factor..

    JUST ONE...

    You can't...

    And that is what makes ya'alls argument totally and utterly pathetic...

    You have NO FACTS... All you have is false and utterly UNSUPPORTED accusations of racism...

    Michale

  55. [55] 
    Michale wrote:

    Kevin,

    You nailed things with comment #20, Michale's blatherings were predictable going back to his triumphant crowing over Trayvon Martin.

    EXACTLY...

    "TRIUMPHANT"...

    I was dead on ballz right about the Martin shooting..

    YOU were completely, utterly and demonstrably WRONG about the Martin shooting..

    Just as I am dead on ballz right about this shooting...

    Ya'all speak from hysteria and false accusations of racism..

    I speak from logic and the facts..

    That's why I win every time...

    Michale

  56. [56] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    Oh I know Kevin, no worries. :-)

    "Maybe in your world..

    Not in mine."

    False. Willful ignorance is still ignorance, just because you stick your fingers in your ears and scream LALALALALALA, doesn't mean the world ceases to exist or effect you. The color of your skin affects who the world sees and interacts with you. That's why it's called prejudice. Right there in the word. Pre as in before, judge as in an opinion. You exist in world where the color off your skin matters, we both agree that's sad, but you can't then jump to therefore it doesn't apply to me.

    ANY fact or evidence?

    Sure, the victim was black and unarmed and killer was white and armed. Right there. In merely describing the situation, race enters into it. This is because As I have repeatedly said, Race is not something you switch on and off, or only apply when it meets your "requirements." It is a constant current in our society. Has been since the 1600s when Africans were first brought to these shores, and will still be once both of us are dead. So you have a choice, you can help push the Sisyphean boulder a littler farther up the hill in our lifetime. Or you can stand off to the side and show your ignorance.

    Now lets take a case study. Two boys on the street, one of them white, one of them black. One of them is armed with a loaded wepon, the other is not. One ends up dead, and other is taken home to his parents. Who is who?

    http://kdvr.com/2014/08/01/aurora-teen-walks-on-busy-streets-with-shotgun-videotapes-encounters-with-police/

    It's even a fox news affiliate link! Gotta throw you a bone sometimes.

  57. [57] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    You mean the part where everyone agreed he killed martin and got off on a technicality?

    Defend the armed white killers! They're the only ones who deserves sympathy and protection!

  58. [58] 
    Kevin wrote:

    No Michale,
    You showed your racism in your glee at the Trayvon Martin verdict. And your statement that Brown was a thug with a lengthy record (and thus "deserved" to be shot) seems to be unconfirmed in all my readings so far. I'm sure you'll correct my ignorance on that subject.
    FACT: unarmed black man shot by white cop. I'll defer to LewDan to comment on that. That you consider Martin and Brown as thugs (unarmed at that) speaks to your racism.

  59. [59] 
    dsws wrote:

    Speaking only for myself, when I got married I said stuff like "for better or for worse, til death do us part".

  60. [60] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I'm a little surprised that no one here has voiced any concern about the serious implications that flow from the decision by the Ferguson Police Department not to identify, in a timely fashion, the law enforcement officer who used lethal force and took the life of one of Ferguson's citizens.

    What does this say about the FPD and the citizenry it serves and protects and about the broader relationship between the law enforcement community and the citizens of America with respect to the concept of law and order in a democratic society?

  61. [61] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    What does this say about the FPD and the citizenry it serves and protects and about the broader relationship between the law enforcement community and the citizens of America with respect to the concept of law and order in a democratic society?

    Do you think the fact that there were death threats against the officer and his family might have had something to do with it??

    Did you read the article where the shop owner that Brown committed the strong armed robbery in is petrified that he will now be murdered???

    So, it's not just the LEO that have a bad relationship with the community.. It's also the shop owners and business people that have a bad relationship with the community..

    So maybe, JUST maybe, it's NOT the LEOs or the shop owners/business people that are the problem..

    MAYBE it's the community... MAYBE it's the uncivilized nature of the community??

    Isn't that possible???

    Kevin,

    You showed your racism in your glee at the Trayvon Martin verdict.

    What is your evidence that the "glee" I showed had ANYTHING to do with race??

    NONE... ZERO... ZILCH.... NADA....

    I would have shown the same "glee" if Martin had been white... Anyone here who knows me, knows that is a fact...

    You, on the other hand, wouldn't have given two shits about Martin if he was white..

    So, tell me.. Who is all about racism??

    I'm sure you'll correct my ignorance on that subject.

    I always do... :D

    FACT: unarmed black man shot by white cop.

    You are all about irrelevant facts. White?? Black?? Irrelevant..

    The ONLY pertinent fact is that the scumbag assaulted the cop and tried to take the cop's gun..

    THAT is the only pertinent fact..

    That you consider Martin and Brown as thugs (unarmed at that) speaks to your racism.

    They are thugs because of their actions and character.. NOT because of their skin color..

    I follow Dr MLK's wisdom in that..

    It's YOU who can't see past the color of their skin...

    YoYo,

    You mean the part where everyone agreed he killed martin and got off on a technicality?

    Again... Nothing but hysteria.. No facts whatsoever.

    Zimmerman was found innocent due to it was a clear case of self-defense..

    Do I have to bring out my CHAINS OF EVIDENCE again??? :D

    Yer fighting a losing battle here, my friend.. I have all the facts, all the evidence and all the logic on my side..

    You have nothing but hysteria and non-existent racism...

    Can you point to ONE piece of evidence that supports the claim of racism??

    Just one???

    No, you can't...

    Oh wait.... :D

    ANY fact or evidence?

    Sure, the victim was black and unarmed and killer was white and armed. Right there.

    How sad for you...

    Your ONLY evidence is that the guy was black???

    That is just a sad sad commentary on your entire outlook..

    It's a black guy and a white guy. So it MUST be racism..

    That is all you need to convict someone???

    No wonder being called a racist doesn't mean crap anymore..

    You wingers have so diluted and so denigrated the charge to the point where it's meaningless..

    "YOU RACIST!!!"
    "Yea, I know.. hoo huumm.. Wanna go get a burger??"
    "Sure, I'm buyin' "

    Congrat, wingers..

    Michale

  62. [62] 
    Michale wrote:

    YoYo,

    Have you noticed how the violence and the looting has continued, even after the city/county PDs stood down and the State Patrol took over???

    So, maybe it's NOT the police response that is the problem, eh??

    Maybe, JUST MAYBE, the problem is the scumbag looters and the lawlessness and uncivilized nature of the people??

    Isn't that possible??

    I know you will say 'no'...

    Because for you to admit that, you would have to admit that I could be right and you could be wrong...

    And NO WEIGANTIAN in the HISTORY of Weigantia has ever been able to concede THAT!! :D

    Michale

  63. [63] 
    Michale wrote:

    Let me re-iterate a point because it's an important point..

    MY reaction to Brown is SOLELY, COMPLETELY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY based on his actions and his character..

    Ya'alls reaction to Brown is SOLELY, COMPLETELY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY based on the color of his skin...

    Which position do ya'all think Dr Martin Luther King would approve of??

    That pretty much says all that needs to be said.. :D

    The prosecution rests.... :D

    Michale

  64. [64] 
    Michale wrote:

    Dr. Michael Baden, a former New York City chief medical examiner, told The New York Times that one of the bullets entered the top of Brown's skull, suggesting his head was bent forward when he suffered a fatal injury.

    Brown also was shot four times in the right arm, and all the bullets were fired into his front, Baden said.
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_POLICE_SHOOTING_MISSOURI?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-08-17-18-17-22

    Let me re-emphasise the relevant part..

    ALL THE BULLETS WERE FIRED INTO HIS FRONT

    So, the witness who ya'all are basing your ENTIRE CASE on is lying...

    Color me shocked.. I am SHOCKED that this witness, this criminal, this strong arm robbery partner of Brown's would lie to make Brown looked like the victim...

    I am SHOCKED!!!

    Face it people.. Yer wrong.. AGAIN....

    It's as I said back on Friday...

    This was a good shoot... The officer did the right thing... The ONLY thing that this cop is guilty of is being a lousy shot...

    End of story...

    Until my next comment, of course. :D

    Michale

  65. [65] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Oh, it's entirely possible that the officer who used his authority to use lethal force to take the life of a citizen MAY be facing substantiated death threats.

    Are you suggesting that the (militarized) FPD, with all of its obvious resources along with the full force of the rest of law enforcement at its disposal is NOT able to protect a single officer after he or she is identified after taking the life of a citizen? Really?

    Are you saying that the police should not take full responsibility for the taking of a citizen's life because of fear for the officer's safety?

    If the police cannot protect one of their own then how can the citizenry of ANY community trust that the police can protect them?

    I suppose that your thinking on this may reflect the thinking of many LEOs but, it doesn't make your views on this comport with the responsibility of the police or with keeping law and order in a democratic society.

    The uncivilized nature of some community members needs to be properly dealt with and, if the FPD is competent, it will be. But, that is a separate issue from the FPD taking full responsibility for its actions and, in so doing, maintaining a level of trust with the community that is necessary for preserving any semblance of law and order.

  66. [66] 
    Michale wrote:

    Oh, it's entirely possible that the officer who used his authority to use lethal force to take the life of a citizen MAY be facing substantiated death threats.

    The officer shot and killed a fleeing felon...

    That's the entire issue with all the hyperbole stripped away...

    Are you suggesting that the (militarized) FPD, with all of its obvious resources along with the full force of the rest of law enforcement at its disposal is NOT able to protect a single officer after he or she is identified after taking the life of a citizen? Really?

    Do you know what kind of budget cuts LEO offices are facing these days???

    Gone are the days of two man patrols...

    Are you saying that the police should not take full responsibility for the taking of a citizen's life because of fear for the officer's safety?

    To the best of my knowledge no one in Ferguson PD has abdicated their responsibility for the shooting..

    The officer AND HIS FAMILY... His wife.. His 2 little children.. have received NUMEROUS death threats...

    Are YOU suggesting that those kids should be thrown to the wolves just because morons think that the shooting had something to do with race???

    The uncivilized nature of some community members needs to be properly dealt with and, if the FPD is competent, it will be.

    Yea?? To hear Weigantians, those uncivilized members should be allowed FULL carte blanche in their looting and their assaults and their murdering...

    Now that YoYo's "vaunted" and "non-racist" State Patrol has been augmented by the MO National Guard, maybe those uncivilized types will be taken out of the equation...

    But, that is a separate issue from the FPD taking full responsibility for its actions and, in so doing, maintaining a level of trust with the community that is necessary for preserving any semblance of law and order.

    There is a BIG difference between taking responsibility and throwing little kids out there to be brutally murdered...

    There has been absolutely NO ABDICATION of responsibility on the part of the police forces in the area...

    There has been COMPLETE abdication of responsibility by the racist scumbags in the black community and also by Weigantians here....

    No one here want's to hold Brown responsible for the assault on the officer (who WAS injured, if anyone cares) and the strong-armed robbery...

    If you want to discuss abdication of responsibility, let's start there..

    Since THOSE incidents were the incidents that set the whole thing in motion...

    Brown would still be alive and even likely out of jail, if he had just said, "Yes sir." when the officer told him to get out of the middle of the street...

    THERE is where the responsibility is..

    And it has been COMPLETELY abdicated...

  67. [67] 
    Michale wrote:

    I am also constrained to point out that YoYo et al puts ALL THE BLAME for the looting on the shoulders of city/county LEOs...

    Doesn't that sound like a complete and utter abdication of responsibility, eh?? :D

    I mean, if we're discussing abdication of responsibility, we can add that to the list...

    Michale

  68. [68] 
    Michale wrote:

    I am also constrained to point out that YoYo et al puts ALL THE BLAME for the looting on the shoulders of city/county LEOs...

    Doesn't that sound like a complete and utter abdication of responsibility, eh?? :D

    I mean, if we're discussing abdication of responsibility, we can add that to the list...

    Michale

  69. [69] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/08/peaceful-protesters-vandalize-loot-destroy-ferguson-businesses-photos/

    Store owners have to put "BLACK OWNERS" on the storefront in hopes that their businesses and their lives won't be destroyed..

    How pathetic is THAT!!??

    But it does indicate who is motivated by racism and who isn't...

    Michale

  70. [70] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    You, at least, appear to want to discuss this issue rationally and logicly, without any hysteria...

    Why, exactly, do you think this was a bad shoot??

    Michale

  71. [71] 
    Michale wrote:

    The officer shot and killed a fleeing felon...

    Actually, even that is not entirely accurate..

    According to evidence, the officer shot AT a fleeing felon...

    The felon then turned and ran at the officer, head down.. At that point, the officer fired and hit the subject 6 times.. 4 wounds were superficial. The final two shots struck the felon in the head and were the fatal rounds...

    NOTHING about this shoot says that it was a bad shoot...

    These are the facts.

    And, after all, isn't that what we're all about around here??

    Facts??

    Michale

  72. [72] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ya'all were whining and complaining about the militarization of LEOs in Ferguson MO..??

    Now the REAL military is there...

    Good call!! :^/

    Michale

  73. [73] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    I found your initial response [63] to be wholly non-serious and I will not respond to it.

    Where did I say that it was a "bad shoot"? I said no such thing.

    On the contrary, I am in no position to make any judgement, whatsoever, about whether the officer was justified or not. I will leave that to the justice system to sort out. In any event, it really has no bearing on the question of identifying the police officer who has taken the life of a citizen.

    One of the differences between a democratic society and a police state is that when the police use their authority in a democracy to employ lethal force thereby taking the life of a citizen, then the police are fully accountable to the citizenry and take full responsibility for their actions. That starts with identifying the officer involved in the shooting. The FPD failed from the get-go to uphold this democratic principle.

  74. [74] 
    Michale wrote:

    I found your initial response [63] to be wholly non-serious and I will not respond to it.

    Hell, that was the MOST serious of all my responses.. :D Because it addressed your points one by one in a clear, logical and rational manner..

    On the contrary, I am in no position to make any judgement, whatsoever, about whether the officer was justified or not. I will leave that to the justice system to sort out. In any event, it really has no bearing on the question of identifying the police officer who has taken the life of a citizen.

    Ding!! Ding!!! Ding!!! We have a winner!!!

    Waiting until all the facts are in!!! What a radical concept...

    Too bad our fellow Weigantians and the scumbag looters in Ferguson couldn't show a minuscule of your wisdom, eh?? :D

    That starts with identifying the officer involved in the shooting. The FPD failed from the get-go to uphold this democratic principle.

    Ferguson DID identify the officer involved in the shooting..

    They simply delayed it until they could get the officer's wife and children to safety..

    Doesn't that make the most logical sense, considering what's happening??

    Michale

  75. [75] 
    Michale wrote:

    YoYo, Kevin...

    Ya'all are on record as stating the fact that the scumbag was black and the officer was white is PROOF that racism was the factor..

    So, this begs the question..

    Every time a white officer arrests a black perp, is racism the factor???

    Do you see how completely hysterical and untenable ya'alls position is???

    How it defies logic and rational thought??

    In ya'alls mind, the ONLY factor is the color of the perp's skin..

    If it's black, it MUST be racism..

    Dr MLK would be VERY disappointed in you two...

    Michale

  76. [76] 
    Michale wrote:

    That starts with identifying the officer involved in the shooting.

    Why???

    Why must the officer be identified BEFORE it's determined whether he did anything wrong??

    Michale

  77. [77] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    One of the more sane stipulations of a civilized society is that a person is innocent until proven guilty...

    Do you think that the uncivilized elements in Ferguson CARE whether Officer Wilson is innocent??

    Michale

  78. [78] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/08/death-wish-media-draws-map-to-home-of-ferguson-police-officer-who-shot-mike-brown/

    THAT is exactly why FPD didn't identify the officer right aways...

    They took a lesson from what happened with the Zimmerman shooting where scumbags released the address of Zimmerman's parents.. And it was the WRONG address anyways!!

    Michale

  79. [79] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    I am afraid that you are completely missing the point I'm making here. It makes no difference if the police officer was justified in shooting Brown or not - he should have been indentified, in either case.

    The reason given for not identifying the officer involved in the shooting doesn't pass muster, by any measure. And, if you really believe that the police cannot protect one of their own, then what hope is there for the rest of you!?

    By not identifying the officer in a timely fashion, the FPD acted dishonestly and dishonourably and lost an opportunity to gain or maintain the trust of the very community they have sworn an oath to serve and protect. That has some very serious implications for the maintenance of law and order - in Ferguson, to be sure, and probably well beyond that community.

  80. [80] 
    Michale wrote:

    I am afraid that you are completely missing the point I'm making here. It makes no difference if the police officer was justified in shooting Brown or not - he should have been indentified, in either case.

    Why??

    The reason given for not identifying the officer involved in the shooting doesn't pass muster, by any measure. And, if you really believe that the police cannot protect one of their own, then what hope is there for the rest of you!?

    LEOS *CAN* protect their own..

    But such protection takes time to get into place..

    By not identifying the officer in a timely fashion, the FPD acted dishonestly and dishonourably and lost an opportunity to gain or maintain the trust of the very community they have sworn an oath to serve and protect. That has some very serious implications for the maintenance of law and order - in Ferguson, to be sure, and probably well beyond that community.

    That's your opinion and I respect that..

    But, as someone who is intimately familiar with the issues from an LEO standpoint, I can assure you that what FPD did was prudent and necessary, given the level of violence that is occurring and the level of the THREATS of violence that was received..

    I can understand where you are coming from...

    But the safety of the officer and his family trumps all other considerations..

    Michale

  81. [81] 
    Michale wrote:

    But the safety of the officer and his family trumps all other considerations..

    And it certainly trumps any PR moves....

    Michale

  82. [82] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Why must the officer be identified BEFORE it's determined whether he did anything wrong??

    That, I'm sorry to say, is non-serious and unworthy of a response.

  83. [83] 
    Michale wrote:

    That, I'm sorry to say, is non-serious and unworthy of a response.

    It's a very serious question and here is why...

    The officer's name should not have been disclosed in the same context that rape victim's names or children's identities are not disclosed..

    The harm caused to the disclosee trumps the public's "right to know"...

    Michale

  84. [84] 
    Michale wrote:

    The harm caused to the disclosee trumps the public's "right to know"...

    Amend that to say:

    The POTENTIAL harm caused to the disclosee trumps the public's "right to know"...

    My bust...

    Michale

  85. [85] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale, you are saying that the safety of the officer trumps all other considerations.

    I can only assume that you would include in that list of considerations the fundamental principles of a democratic society and of what allows for the successful maintenance of the general law and order of any given community in that society.

    I think your views on this provide quite a good basis for a general breakdown of law and order.

  86. [86] 
    Michale wrote:

    I can only assume that you would include in that list of considerations the fundamental principles of a democratic society and of what allows for the successful maintenance of the general law and order of any given community in that society.

    Releasing the officers name immediately before his family has a chance to be taken to safety will not serve the fundamental principles of a democratic society..

    It would simply serve the agenda of the lynch mob that has already tried the officer, found him guilty and would wish to execute the officer and his family..

    Yes... The safety of himself and his family trumps all other considerations..

    ESPECIALLY when one considers all the facts and all the evidence points to a good cop just doing his job...

    Michale

  87. [87] 
    Michale wrote:

    We'll just have to agree to disagree, Liz..

    You will never convince me that the potential execution of this officer and his family for the "crime" of serving the public good is outweighed by ANY other consideration..

    Michale

  88. [88] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    The officer's name should not have been disclosed in the same context that rape victim's names or children's identities are not disclosed..

    Not even close.

    A law enforcement officer has sworn an oath to serve and protect the community at large and has been given the legal authority to employ deadly force in the course of his duties and responsibilities.

    In an open, democratic society based on the concepts of law and order, an office who has taken the life of a citizen must be identified and be accountable and responsible for that deadly use of force.

    Without that accountability, you are on a steep decline toward living in a veritable police state.

  89. [89] 
    Michale wrote:

    In an open, democratic society based on the concepts of law and order, an office who has taken the life of a citizen must be identified and be accountable and responsible for that deadly use of force.

    The officer WAS identified...

    And, if he did anything wrong, he WILL be held accountable.

    But, as the evidence shows, he didn't do anything wrong..

    The problem here is that the uncivilized elements in Ferguson don't want to hold him accountable..

    They just want to kill him...

    That's the point you continue to overlook...

    Michale

  90. [90] 
    Michale wrote:

    Are you advocating the IMMEDIATE disclosure of the officer's identity, even though it would have had the VERY REAL possibility of the death of the officer and his wife and 2 little children??

    Is that what you are HONESTLY advocating for??

    Michale

  91. [91] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    The officer was not identified in a timely fashion and that added to the already growing mistrust of the police on the part of law-abiding citizens who now must deal with the notion that if the police cannot protect their own then they cannot be protected and there can be no law and order.

  92. [92] 
    Michale wrote:

    The officer was not identified in a timely fashion and that added to the already growing mistrust of the police on the part of law-abiding citizens who now must deal with the notion that if the police cannot protect their own then they cannot be protected and there can be no law and order.

    I submit that, given the circumstances and the aftermath, releasing the officer's identity before his family could be secured would have had little affect on the looting and the rioting..

    I see your point.. I understand your point..

    But, having seen incidents such as this from the LEO perspective, I simply disagree with your point..

    Michale

  93. [93] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    The officer shot and killed a fleeing felon...

    That's the entire issue with all the hyperbole stripped away...

    Can you link to Michael Brown's previous felony conviction?

    Until he is convicted, he is suspect in a crime that might end in a felony conviction. From the store video, i could easily see that being plea bargained down to a misdemeanor.

    So much for hyperbole stripped away. More like replaced....

  94. [94] 
    Michale wrote:

    Judging from our conversation here, it appears that your only issue with the incident is that the cops did not release the identity of the officer..

    Would that be an accurate assessment??

    I submit that such is a procedural that I am perfectly happy to leave that in the hands of the people on the scene. In THIS particular instance, they know what was best for all concerned...

    But I can understand your position as well...

    Also keep in mind that the politicians were involved in the decision and they likely signed off on withholding the identity until the officer's family was safe..

    Michale

  95. [95] 
    LewDan wrote:
  96. [96] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well slap my face and call me silly!! :D

    I actually agree to a certain point, with LD's article..

    So why isn’t everyone saying, “Maybe I’ll refrain from making a judgment here until this starts to make more sense”?

    The extent of course, is the fact that, when people are under the influence of narcotics, they do stupid shit..

    Like Trayvon Martin who was high when he attacked Zimmerman.

    When the toxicology report comes back on Michael Brown, I bet a million quatloos he was drugged up as well..

    ALL the credible evidence supports the officers story and also corroborates other pieces of evidence..

    Don't make me bring out my CHAINS OF EVIDENCE lecture!! :D

    Ya'all are going to find that, once the official report is released, the incident will have gone down nearly exactly as I laid it out back in comments above...

    Officer told SUBJECT to get out of the middle of the street.. SUBJECT attacked officer, pushing him into his patrol car and trying to take the officer's weapon.

    A shot was fired in the vehicle, which scared said SUBJECT, who disengaged and attempted to flee.. Officer exited the vehicle and ordered SUBJECT to freeze. At this point two shots were fired which missed the SUBJECT.

    SUBJECT, realizing he couldn't flee before being shot, turned around and with his head down, charged at the officer. The officer fired 6 times, the last two shots hitting the SUBJECT in the head and putting SUBJECT to the ground.

    This is what the evidence shows occurred..

    A good shoot.. PERIOD...

    Michale

  97. [97] 
    Michale wrote:

    A good shoot.. PERIOD...

    And not a scintilla, an iota, a ingot of racism to be found at all....

    Michale

  98. [98] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    marijuana is not a narcotic and rarely causes violent behavior. One of your more ridiculous claims...

  99. [99] 
    Michale wrote:

    marijuana is not a narcotic and rarely causes violent behavior. One of your more ridiculous claims...

    And yet, Trayvon Martin attacked Zimmerman...

    'nuff said...

    Besides, I never claimed that scumbag's tox screens would show marijuana. I simply maintain that said scumbags actions COULD be easily explained by having drugs in his system..

    If you can dispute that claim, by all means..

    Give it yer best shot... :D

    Michale

  100. [100] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yep.. Drugs found in Brown's system...

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/08/18/county-investigation-michael-brown-was-shot-from-the-front-had-marijuana-in-his-system/

    Let's see.. Marijuana found in Trayvon Martin's system.. Martin attacked Zimmerman...

    Marijuana found in Brown's system.. Brown attack a police officer..

    Maybe this " rarely causes violent behavior" creed needs to be re-examined, eh??

    Maybe it enhances violent behavior in those who are already prone to violence...

    Michale

  101. [101] 
    Michale wrote:

    Maybe it enhances violent behavior in those who are already prone to violence...

    Martin and Brown surely fit that category....

    Michale

  102. [102] 
    TheStig wrote:

    M- 97

    Hmmm, but both subjects M and B were people of color.... Maybe it's not the marijuana; it's their excess melanin that's to blame! This notion is supported just as strongly by your two point nonrandom sample. And, since your data ever so slightly implicates melanin in violent behavior among the allegedly violence prone, it's logical we ought to not go off un-half-cocked and take a look at the tanning practices of pale folk.

    Or, perhaps we ought to leave these questions of statistical inference to statisticians who know something about teasing out genuine cause and effect.

  103. [103] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    Reserving judgment until the facts are known is not claiming:

    "FACT: The scumbag attacked a police officer.

    FACT: The scumbag attempted to take the officer's weapon.

    These two facts are not in dispute..

    Therefore, the scumbag was a felon..

    The shoot was a good shoot..

    PERIOD.

    The fact that the scumbag was unarmed is not relevant to the determination that it was a good shoot..."
    Michale [22]

    Those are not facts. That are disputed by eyewitness testimony. And no one is a felon unless convicted of a felony.

    As always, Michale, you simply lie. And claim that your lies are "fact."

    The rioting occurred after the militarized police response, not before. No rioting caused the response by police. That's another of your lies.

    And you wonder why people take out their anger and frustration on "innocent" shopkeepers instead of attacking their actual adversaries, standing around with tanks and automatic weapons?--Uh, because they're not suicidal?--Or stupid? As a "military man" you, of course, would never engage in indirect attacks instead of direct assaults merely because direct action would be no productive and suicidal. Now would you?--Yet more lies from Michale.

    Just as, to Michale, the release of allegations by police, that the politicians all disavow any knowledge of, except for Justice, who advised against it, that are not only unproven, but irrelevant, (The police chief said Brown's stop had nothing to do with any robbery,) is not only "proof" that Brown was a strong arm robber, but also "proof" that the shoot wad justified?!--More lies from Michale.

    As presented the eyewitness account is unlikely. But official police account is impossible.

    "Ya'all are going to find that, once the official report is released, the incident will have gone down nearly exactly as I laid it out back in comments above..."

    That's Michale's version of "reserving judgment."--Lying every time, all the time.

    "And not a scintilla, an iota, a ingot of racism to be found at all...."

    Michale just picks sides at random, at just happens, to always think any white gunning down a black, or Hispanic, or Latino, or Arab, is "a good shoot."--Just because...! No racism at all!

  104. [104] 
    Michale wrote:

    TS,

    Hmmm, but both subjects M and B were people of color.... Maybe it's not the marijuana; it's their excess melanin that's to blame!

    Well, I don't really care about the color of the skin..

    It's more their actions, their character that defines them...

    Wouldn't you agree???

    LD,

    The rioting occurred after the militarized police response, not before. No rioting caused the response by police. That's another of your lies.

    Actually, it is you who is lying..

    The police presence was in response to the rioting and looting..

    Your entire problem, LD is that you can't see past the color of the skin..

    In your eyes, the scumbag is black so he HAS to be innocent...

    Dr Martin Luther King would be deeply ashamed of that...

    Michale

  105. [105] 
    Michale wrote:

    Actually, it is you who is lying..

    The police presence was in response to the rioting and looting..

    Regardless of "who started it" the simply fact is those "uncivilized elements" destroyed businesses and other people's lives.

    THEY are responsible for their own actions. They can't hide behind "the devil made me do it" or "the big bad scary cops made me do it"..

    THEY are responsible...

    Not the cops...

    Only lusers constantly play the victim...

    Michale

  106. [106] 
    Michale wrote:

    Further, none of you would give a rat's ass about Michael Brown if he had been white...

    I, on the other hand, would have the EXACT same opinion of Michael Brown, regardless of his skin color...

    All that matters to ya'all is skin color..

    Dr Martin Luther King would be ashamed of all of you....

    Michale

  107. [107] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    More lying. The rioting did not occur first. If it had there wouldn't be all the criticism.

    And, just how does an unarmed black teen reaching through a patrol car window for an officer's gun justify killing him when he's thirty-five feet away trying to escape? Just what law authorizes LEOs to perform summary executions? You seem to think police have such authority.--They do not. So even if the police allegations were true, its still murder.

    Your entire problem, Michale, is that you can't see past the color of the skin..

    In your eyes, he's black, so he's a scumbag who HAS to be guilty....

  108. [108] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    Those businesses are also the ones who support and pay for the thugs in uniform murdering black children in the street. They are the excuse used by police for attacking black people. They aren't "innocent" bystanders. One side or the other they're involved too.

    You have no concern over taking lives of blacks but cry crocodile tears over property damage?! You just can't get any more racist than that!

    Peaceful protest is always preferred. But "peaceful" means easily ignored. This wouldn't be getting the national, Presidential, Congressional, and international attention it has if it weren't for the rioting.

    This isn't the first time this has happened. Your irrational opinion that black people should be content to be murdered rather than cost others money is insane. And racist. And hypocritical.

    When YOU feel threatened you don't give a damn about the property rights of "innocents." Iraq?! Gaza?! Your not "principled," you're lying.--As always.

  109. [109] 
    Michale wrote:

    And, just how does an unarmed black teen reaching through a patrol car window for an officer's gun justify killing him when he's thirty-five feet away trying to escape?

    Forensic evidence and eyewitness testimony show that the scumbag was advancing on the officer, not running away..

    Further, even if he WAS running away, deadly force would still be authorized..

    Your entire problem, Michale, is that you can't see past the color of the skin..

    Actually, it is you who can't see past skin color..

    I don't give a rats ass what color Brown was. He attacked a cop...

    YOU, on the other hand, wouldn't give two shits about Brown if he was white..

    As I said.. Dr Martin Luther King would be ashamed of you..

    In your eyes, he's black, so he's a scumbag who HAS to be guilty....

    You are the only one who sees skin color..

    All I see is a scumbag..

    Michale

  110. [110] 
    Michale wrote:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxthl0d7Dek

    Yea... The pillar of civilized behavior....

    And THESE are the people ya'all defend??

    Pathetic... Absolutely pathetic...

    Michale

  111. [111] 
    Michale wrote:

    In your eyes, he's black, so he's a scumbag who HAS to be guilty....

    For the record.. Michael Brown is a scumbag because he attacked a cop and because he beat up on a small shopkeeper and stole from said shop...

    Now, why YOU would want to defend such a scumbag is a mystery..

    Oh yea.. That's right. He is a black man and you can't see past his skin color..

    You judge him by the color of his skin and not his character...

    That pretty much says it all...

    Michale

  112. [112] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Let's hear it for rock bottom!

  113. [113] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    "For the record.. Michael Brown is a scumbag because he attacked a cop and because he beat up on a small shopkeeper and stole from said shop..."

    Not ONE of those is a fact. Not ONE is proven. You choose to believe them because you don't care about the life of a black child. Brown's not important to you.--Now, the cop, him you care about.

    "Forensic evidence and eyewitness testimony show that the scumbag was advancing on the officer, not running away..

    Another bald-faced lie. Neither is remotely true. You keep making things up and flat out lying because you are not objective. You don't care about the facts. You're all for Israel attacking Gaza over the death of an Israeli teen, but indifferent, hostile even, to an American teen death because one is white and the other is black.

    Your opinion isn't based on fact. That's why you keep inventing lies to justify your opinion and calling them "facts." Your opinion is based sole on prejudice.

    BTW, I knew Dr. King, you didn't. Your opinions about what Dr. King would believe are just more lies, invented by you, being palmed off as "facts." As it happens I know exactly what Dr. King would do, because I know what he did in similar situations. When police attacked, claimed "self-defense" and "resisting arrest," protesting resulted, anti-riot police responded, and rioting resulted. Dr. King wasn't "ashamed" of the protesters. He led them. And at the time people had only been beaten, not killed.

    You seem to think the lies you make up are arguments because you aren't trying to persuade others, you're trying to deceive them.--That's the modern "conservative" version of "debate." And claiming you're not racist is just one more lie. One more attempt to deceive. One more self-delusional denial of reality.

  114. [114] 
    Michale wrote:

    Not ONE of those is a fact. Not ONE is proven.

    Yes, those ARE facts..

    Yes, those ARE proven.

    There is video tape evidence of those facts..

    You just refuse to acknowledge the facts because you can't see past the color of Brown's skin.

    You choose to believe them because you don't care about the life of a black child. Brown's not important to you.-

    AGAIN, it is YOU bringing up the color of Brown's skin... Not I..

    Further, Brown was NOT a child.. He was an adult who was over 6 feet tall and over 300 lbs..

    You have absolutely NO FACTS whatsoever..

    All you have is hysterical racist bullshit..

    Another bald-faced lie. Neither is remotely true

    Actually, two different autopsy reports show the exact same thing..

    Michael Brown was shot from the front.. There are NO WOUNDS that indicate Brown was shot in the back..

    Once again.. You have NO FACTS whatsoever..

    You're all for Israel attacking Gaza over the death of an Israeli teen,

    Not that Israel has anything to do with this, but I am all for Israel wiping out Gaza because Hamas just can't seem to go a day without firing missiles indiscriminately into Israel..

    but indifferent, hostile even, to an American teen death because one is white and the other is black.

    Once again, it is YOU who is always bringing up the color of the skin..

    I have not said ANYTHING that would indicate that I care about the color of Brown's skin..

    BTW, I knew Dr. King, you didn't.

    Yea... SUUUREE you did... :D

    Dr King would be ashamed that you would overlook the gross and perverse character of Michael Brown just because Michael Brown happens to be black..

    You wouldn't give a rat's ass about Brown if he were white..

    You know it. I know it..

    You are judging Brown by the color of his skin..

    I am judging Brown by his actions...

    You seem to think the lies you make up are arguments because you aren't trying to persuade others, you're trying to deceive them.

    That's the funny thing..

    *I* am not the one telling lies..

    The autopsy results are public knowledge. Even YOU could read about them if you were so inclined. ONE of the autopsies was done by Brown's family!!!

    And they PROVE that Michael Brown was not shot in the back..

    So, it is YOU who are lying when you claim that it is not true...

    You have nothing but lies and racism, LD..

    THAT is why Dr King would be ashamed of you..

    I judge Michael Brown based on his actions, not his skin color..

    THAT is why Dr King would support my position...

    Michale

  115. [115] 
    Michale wrote:

    Dr. Michael Baden, a former New York City chief medical examiner, told The New York Times that one of the bullets entered the top of Brown's skull, suggesting his head was bent forward when he suffered a fatal injury.

    Brown also was shot four times in the right arm, and all the bullets were fired into his front, Baden said.
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_POLICE_SHOOTING_MISSOURI?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-08-17-18-17-22

    Let me re-emphasise the relevant part..

    ALL THE BULLETS WERE FIRED INTO HIS FRONT

    Let me add that Dr Baden WAS HIRED BY THE BROWN FAMILY to do the autopsy..

    You are wrong, LD...

    Admit it...

    You are wrong and I am right...

    Com'on.. You can say it...

    You ain't Fonzie, after all... :D

    Michale

  116. [116] 
    Michale wrote:

    So, let's recap what we know for a FACT...

    Michael Brown had drugs in his system when he died.. FACT

    Michael Brown with an accomplice committed a strong armed robbery in the minutes before the shooting.. FACT

    Said accomplice lied about how Michael Brown was shot. FACT

    Michael Brown was fighting with the cop for the cop's weapon inside the cop's patrol car. FACT

    Michael Brown was not shot in the back. FACT

    He was shot from the front as he charged the police officer... FACT

    These are all proven, accepted and undisputed facts...

    Michael Brown was a thug and a scumbag and this world is a better place without him in it..

    That is my opinion based on the facts..

    Michale

  117. [117] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    Once again you are lying. Dr. Baden's conclusions were preliminary. He said all the bullets struck the front, not that Brown was shot only from the front. Baden said he didn't know, for example if Brown had his arms raised. He also found no gun powder residue.

    And, I repeat, if Brown reached through the car window grabbing for the gun, how was he shot at without any residue getting on him?

    And while you may think it makes sense that Brown reached in, struggled over a gun, got shot at, ran away, decided to attack an armed officer unarmed again and returned to get shot some more attacking once again is a reasonable scenario--you'd be the only one.

  118. [118] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    I'll play. Let's recap!--Not ONE of your "facts" is indeed a fact! You are lying!--See, that was easy. Want to play again?

  119. [119] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again you are lying. Dr. Baden's conclusions were preliminary.

    And the conclusions are identical to the autopsy that the state of MO did..

    You can tap dance all you want, LD... But the facts are the facts...

    He said all the bullets struck the front, not that Brown was shot only from the front.

    Ahhh... So NOW your theory is we have MAGIC bullets.. Bullets that are fired at someone's BACK but magically circle around the scumbag's body and strike him in the FRONT...

    Are you really so blinded by racism that you would stoop to such fantasies???

    And, I repeat, if Brown reached through the car window grabbing for the gun, how was he shot at without any residue getting on him?

    Simple.. Brown wasn't shot in the patrol car...

    And while you may think it makes sense that Brown reached in, struggled over a gun, got shot at, ran away, decided to attack an armed officer unarmed again and returned to get shot some more attacking once again is a reasonable scenario--you'd be the only one.

    Yes, I can see that reasonably happening. I outlined exactly how it happened in my comments above..

    I know that YOU can't see that happening because you can't see past the color of Brown's skin...

    Michale

  120. [120] 
    Michale wrote:

    I'll play. Let's recap!--Not ONE of your "facts" is indeed a fact! You are lying!--See, that was easy. Want to play again?

    I have documented the factual nature of my facts..

    You haven't....

    All you have is racism and hysteria....

    Michale

  121. [121] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ahhh... So NOW your theory is we have MAGIC bullets.. Bullets that are fired at someone's BACK but magically circle around the scumbag's body and strike him in the FRONT...

    Maybe they are the same type of "MAGIC BULLETS" that the HuffPoop reporter found...

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BvPX1U1IMAAPttB.jpg

    hehehehehehehehehehe :D

    Michale

  122. [122] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    It doesn't take "magic bullets" to be shot in the front from the rear. All it takes is turning enough to to make the front vulnerable. This may come as a shock to you, but people have hips! And their upper bodies swivel!

    The reason the good doctor doesn't know if Browns hands were raised is that while he knows that he was shot in the arm, he doesn't know the direction the bullet came from. So, contrary to Michale's Law, the doctor doesn't think being shot in front means you were charging at the shooter!

    Nor does anything about being shot in front with no gun residue indicate a "struggle." I know you outlined exactly what you say happened above. That's why I say you're lying. There is no supporting evidence and your hypothesis is both absurd and contrary to what little evidence there seems to be.

  123. [123] 
    Michale wrote:

    The reason the good doctor doesn't know if Browns hands were raised is that while he knows that he was shot in the arm, he doesn't know the direction the bullet came from. So, contrary to Michale's Law, the doctor doesn't think being shot in front means you were charging at the shooter!

    Did you even READ the autopsy report??

    Michael Brown was shot in the TOP of the head. It was this shot that was likely the final mortal shot..

    Such location and trajectory can ONLY be present if the subject had his head down and was leaning forward...

    Such a position is ONLY consistent with a charge forward...

    I know you don't like what the facts say, LD..

    But regardless of your personal preference, they ARE facts nonetheless..

    Get over it, LD... You are wrong... Just like you were wrong with the Trayvon Martin shooting..

    I am right... Just like I was right with the Trayvon Martin shooting...

    Here's the problem. You just CAN'T conceive that a black person is guilty of ANYTHING...

    You are wrong.... Plain and simple...

    Michale

  124. [124] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    "Such a position is ONLY consistent with a charge forward..."

    Hands up head down.

    http://www.visualphotos.com/image/2x3515303/man_scowling_head_down_and_hands_up_head_and

    Not only racist and ignorant, but basic human anatomy is beyond you.

  125. [125] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    Here's an interesting fact about police shootings from Wisconsin of all places, but again shows yet another facet of systemic police violence.

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/08/what-i-did-after-police-killed-my-son-110038_Page2.html#.U_KDxfldWuI

    129 years of records on police shootings, and every single time they investigated themselves, suprise suprise, no officer was found culpable.

    Police lie, they cannot be trusted, and killers belong in jail.

  126. [126] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    The police autopsy hasn't been released yet you claim to know what it says?--You are lying!

    Michael Brown high on drugs? What autopsy said that!--You are lying!

    No gun residue means Brown not shot in car? Gun residue doesn't stay in the car. You can't struggle in the car, fire "in self-defense" and be too far away for the suspect to have gun residue.--You are lying!

    The police allege Brown is a suspect in a robbery. There's no proof he' a robber. He is not a felon.-- You are lying!

    There is no proof the eyewitness is an accomplice or that he is lying.--You are lying!

    The witness claimed Brown was shot from the back. No one claimed Brown was shot in the back.--You are lying!

    The only video thus far beyond is of the convenience store robbery which has nothing to do with Brown's shooting.--You are lying!

    That is all proven and undisputed.--YOU are lying!

  127. [127] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hands up head down.

    There was no exit wound...

    Therefore the trajectory of the bullet would have taken it thru the brain and into the neck..

    If the head was down, as your ignorance indicates, there would have been an exit wound.

    But I am glad you are here, YoYo...

    You want to discuss your claim that it was the city/state PDs that caused the problems?? And your claim that, now that the State Patrol was on the scene, there would be no more problems???

    :D

    Cuz I would LOVE to discuss that with ya... :D

    Michale

  128. [128] 
    Michale wrote:

    The police autopsy hasn't been released yet you claim to know what it says?--You are lying!

    Michael Brown high on drugs? What autopsy said that!--You are lying!

    No, I am not.. The information has been released in the wild..

    County investigation: Michael Brown was shot from the front, had marijuana in his system
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/08/18/county-investigation-michael-brown-was-shot-from-the-front-had-marijuana-in-his-system/

    Once again, I have proven that it is YOU who are lying...

    The police allege Brown is a suspect in a robbery. There's no proof he' a robber. He is not a felon.-- You are lying!

    There is video tape of the robbery and Brown had possession of the stolen property when he was killed...

    You are the one lying, LD....

    Your racism must run deep that you would put up with being proven wrong time and time and time and time again...

    Like I said. MLK would be ashamed of you...

    Michale

  129. [129] 
    Michale wrote:

    YoYo,

    Police lie, they cannot be trusted, and killers belong in jail.

    Sounds like someone has a beef against cops..

    What was it?? Speeding ticket?? DUI?? :D

    Do you have ANY evidence of wrong doing??

    No, you don't...

    All you have got is hysterical emotionalism...

    Michale

  130. [130] 
    Michale wrote:

    OK, it's getting to be past my bedtime..

    What it all boils down to is this..

    There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE that Officer Wilson or the cops did anything wrong...

    There is a PLETHORA of evidence that Michael Brown was a thug, a bully and a scumbag...

    That is the beginning and end of this issue...

    Michale

  131. [131] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    You can't have Marijuana in your system. It isn't taken intravenously. And THC, the active chemical they found, can persist for up to 70 days after use. Marijuana is also known for decreasing aggression, it doesn't cause it.

    --Like the robbery video... Irrelevant. Proves absolutely nothing.--Except, maybe, that Brown really was a teen! No bearing whatsoever on his shooting death.

  132. [132] 
    Michale wrote:

    Marijuana is also known for decreasing aggression, it doesn't cause it.

    And yet, Martin and Brown had marijuana in their system (your nitpicking notwithstanding) and both attacked and assaulted people and both are now dead because of that..

    Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out...

    But it DOES take someone not in the thralls of racism...

    --Like the robbery video... Irrelevant. Proves absolutely nothing.--Except, maybe, that Brown really was a teen!

    It proves that Brown was violent, a thief and a bully....

    Maybe that is a "teen" from your neighborhood...

    But in my neighborhood (and probably every civilized person's neighborhood) that is a scumbag...

    No bearing whatsoever on his shooting death.

    It proves a propensity for violence...

    Michale

  133. [133] 
    LewDan wrote:

    And Michale,

    Unofficial reports are not "releases into the wild." They are "leaks." Not always accurate, and never official "facts."

  134. [134] 
    Michale wrote:

    Unofficial reports are not "releases into the wild." They are "leaks." Not always accurate, and never official "facts."

    And yet, it's more evidence than YOU have stated...

    Further, if these "leaks" showed that Brown had been shot a dozen times in the back, you would be all over it like stink on rice...

    So, please...

    Quit trying to make a case when you have absolutely NOTHING but hysteria and emotionalism......

    Michale

  135. [135] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    Your going around in circles reaffirming your unsubstantiated lies as "fact," no matter how often they're shown to be lies, is boring me. I'm done here. Goodnight.

  136. [136] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:
  137. [137] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2014/08/_4_dead_unarmed_men_and_the_police_what_you_need_to_know.html

    Four this month. It's barely half over.

    An average of two black citizens were killed by white police officers every week from 2006 to 2012.

    Look away, look away, look away Dixie Land!

  138. [138] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    The Shooting of Amadou Diallo occurred on February 4, 1999, when Amadou Diallo, a 23-year-old immigrant from Guinea, was shot and killed by four New York City Police Department plain-clothed officers: Sean Carroll, Richard Murphy, Edward McMellon and Kenneth Boss, who fired a combined total of 41 shots, 19 of which struck Diallo, outside his apartment at 1157 Wheeler Avenue in the Soundview section of The Bronx. The four were part of the now-defunct Street Crimes Unit. All four officers were acquitted at trial in Albany, New York.[1]

    Diallo was unarmed at the time of the shooting, and a firestorm of controversy erupted subsequent to the event as the circumstances of the shooting prompted outrage both within and outside New York City. Issues such as police brutality, racial profiling, and contagious shooting were central to the ensuing controversy.

    Courtesy of wikipedia
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Amadou_Diallo

  139. [139] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    The Sean Bell shooting incident took place in the New York City borough of Queens, New York, United States on November 25, 2006, when three men were shot at a total of fifty times by a team of both plainclothes and undercover NYPD officers, killing Sean Bell on the morning before his wedding, and severely wounding two of his friends, Trent Benefield and Joseph Guzman.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Bell_shooting_incident

  140. [140] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    The Danziger Bridge shootings were police shootings that took place on September 4, 2005, at the Danziger Bridge in New Orleans, Louisiana. Six days after Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans, members of the city's police department killed two people: 17-year-old James Brissette and 40-year-old Ronald Madison. Four other people were wounded. All victims were unarmed. Madison, a mentally disabled man, was shot in the back. New Orleans police fabricated a cover-up story for their crime, falsely reporting that seven police officers responded to a police dispatch reporting an officer down, and that at least four people were firing weapons at the officers upon their arrival.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danziger_Bridge_shootings

  141. [141] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    The only publicly identified eyewitness in the killing of a Brooklyn teen by two New York City police officers is standing by her claim that the young man was empty-handed when he was gunned down, and now says one of the cops involved threatened her life.

    http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2013/03/kimani_gray_4.php

  142. [142] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    the tragic case of Kendrec McDade (pictured), the California college student and football star who was killed by Pasadena cops while they were responding to a robbery. Now that McDade’s autopsy report has been released, it’s been revealed that he was shot seven times at close range and handcuffed afterward, according to the L.A. Times.

    http://newsone.com/2015110/kendrec-mcdade-shooting/

  143. [143] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    It's like there's a mountain of evidence and examples that cops are racist and violent and cannot be trusted to not murder people on the street.

  144. [144] 
    Michale wrote:

    YoYo,

    Now that McDade’s autopsy report has been released, it’s been revealed that he was shot seven times at close range and handcuffed afterward, according to the L.A. Times.

    It's standard police procedure to handcuff a perp, even if they appear to be dead..

    Nothing unusual about that at all.. Which you could see if you had ANY experience beyond your own bigoted biases..

    Regardless, NOTHING you have posted has ANYTHING to do with the Michael Brown shooting...

    You have NO FACTS... NO EVIDENCE...

    Nothing but hysterical emotionalism and a bigoted hatred of cops...

    LD,

    I'm done here. Goodnight.

    You were done a LONG time ago..

    I have proven beyond ANY doubt that you are so completely absorbed in your racist views that you can't see the facts that are blatantly obvious...

    Michale

  145. [145] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    Ohhh I'm so sorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry Michale I didn't realize that is was standard procedure to handcuff someone after you shoot them point blank seven times.

    "Well I saw he black so he's obviously guilty, so me and my partner shot him seven times and then to protect ourselves from his bleeding corpse, we arrested him."

    Come on Michale, keep on defending killers, I'm all ears.

    Look away, look away, look away, dixie land.

  146. [146] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuF-VPAnvE0

    0:25

    The only thug in Ferguson, MO.

  147. [147] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    It's also standard police procedure in Ferguson to charge a man with destruction of government property when he bleeds on the thugs beating him.

    http://rt.com/usa/180680-ferguson-henry-davis-blood/

    Don't worry the cameras monitering the jail we're mysteriously "turned off," during the beating.

    It's Hysteria! cops are such upstanding citizens, they don't commit perjury and felonious assault for no goddamn reason.

    Except that they do, constantly, systemically, and without remorse. And then their internal investigations turn nothing wrong! whodda thunk? It's precisely as if by joining a police force you become complicit in a thuggish violent institution that protects killers and racists.

  148. [148] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    If we must die, let it not be like hogs

    Hunted and penned in an inglorious spot,

    While round us bark the mad and hungry dogs

    Making their mock at our accursèd lot.

    If we must die, O let us nobly die,

    So that our precious blood may not be shed

    In vain; then even the monsters we defy

    Shall be constrained to honor us though dead!

    O kinsmen! we must meet the common foe!

    Though far outnumbered let us show us brave,

    And for their thousand blows deal one death-blow!

    What though before us lies the open grave?

    Like men we’ll face the murderous, cowardly pack,

    Pressed to the wall, dying, but fighting back!

  149. [149] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    Arm up, fist clenched.

  150. [150] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ohhh I'm so sorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry Michale I didn't realize that is was standard procedure to handcuff someone after you shoot them point blank seven times.

    I understand your ignorance..

    Arm up, fist clenched.

    So YER the New Black Panther Party.. :D

    More than a dozen witnesses have confirmed Officer Wilson's version of events.. According to those witnesses, things went down pretty much as I described above...

    How many more facts must become evident before you concede that Michael Brown was nothing but a thug and a bully??

    This world is a much better place without the Trayvon Martins and Micheal Browns...

    Face it, YoYo.. You have been wrong about EVERYTHING....

    It wasn't just the city/county PDs that were the problem as you claim. There are STILL riots and looting going on by the scumbags...

    Michael Brown WASN'T shot in the back, as you claimed..

    Michael Brown WASN'T running away from the officer, as you claimed..

    You have been WRONG at every juncture and I called it dead on ballz accurate at every juncture...

    Michale

  151. [151] 
    Michale wrote:

    Grand Jury is meeting to determine whether charges will be filed against Officer Wilson..

    Anyone wanna lay bets on if charges are going to be filed?? :D

    I got a million quatloos that says no charges will filed..

    All the facts and the vast majority of witnesses are all indicating the same thing..

    Brown attacked Wilson, fought for Wilson's gun and then was shot while charging at the officer..

    The ironic thing is, even if Brown HAD been shot running away, it STILL would have been a good shoot..

    Michale

  152. [152] 
    Michale wrote:

    Here is a screen cap of a statement made on Twitter ostensibly from Officer Wilson..

    http://sjfm.us/temp/wilson_statement.jpg

    According to sources close to the investigation, this is an accurate statement and is identical to the statement that Wilson gave..

    More than a dozen reliable eyewitnesses have signed affidavits that corroborate Officer Wilson's version of events..

    Face the facts.. Ya'all have been wrong about this event from the get go...

    Logic, facts and justice will prevail...

    Personally, I am waiting for Brown's partner in crime to do the perp walk...

    Michale

  153. [153] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    Your "dozen witnesses verify" claim comes from a police leak. The police who've demonstrated their bias by confronting concerned citizens with assault rifles, refusing to name Wilson "to protect him," leaking their irrelevant video smear of Brown, and now--surprise! Rumor is police find no evidence of any wrongdoing on the part of officer Wilson!

    Bullshit!

    If your sitting in a patrol car just how does someone reach through a window and try to grab your sidearm? I can't wait for forensic recreation on that one because I just don't see it. The kid bumrushed the cop and punched him in the face? Taunted him? That may be your idea of how black kids behave but I find that far less likely than the idea of a black man executed because he didn't jump high enough, or fast enough, when ordered to jump by a white cop.

    Unlike you, I don't claim to know what happened between Brown and Wilson without having any facts to go on. But the complaints of black folk are being plainly validated for all to see.

    That the only concern of police when a black teen jaywalker ends up dead on the street at the hands of police is that police officers may be endangered.

    The police responded to expected citizen outrage by preparing to engage the enemy, with armored vehicles and automatic weapons.

    The police response was to "serve and protect" the police, not the black public, refusing to disclose information to protect police officers from the enemy, the citizens they're ostensibly serving.

    The police response was to smear the victim, releasing irrelevant video and unsubstantiated allegations while protecting the police officer who killed him, a public employee, from accountability to the public.

    That police break the law with impunity. Arresting people for absolutely no reason. And illegally demanding that their unlawful orders be obeyed under penalty of false arrest. Objectors being subject to assault and summary execution should they be so foolish as to exercise their supposed right to defend themselves.

    And both you, Michale, and the police both think that shooting an unarmed teen to death, even if in the back, would be just fine. Somehow that would still be "self-defense."

    You both think killing an unarmed black teen is a "good shoot" because police are empowered to use lethal force simply to subdue black suspects?

    What black people are pissed about is that, as demonstrated by Ferguson PD, police don't serve black communities, they occupy them. That no amount of force is ever excessive when dealing with black people whether they're suspects or not. That lethal force is authorized if a cop is angered. That lethal force is always justifiable self-defense no matter how harmless, or distant, a black man. That police believe their blatant lawbreaking and perjuries are just part of the job and entitle them to respect and instant obedience, whether legal or not, because they're not there to enforce the law, they're there to threaten, coerce, and intimidate people. The occasional killing for noncompliance being an object lesson. Police are unaccountable, citizens have no rights, least of all, any right to defend themselves. There is no rule of law.

    Just as "self-defense" is the police get-out-of-jail-free card "restoring order" is the go to excuse for employing force to put people in their place should they resist police oppression.

    When the evidence is in on Brown's shooting the prosecution, or lack thereof, of Wilson may be an issue. The issue now is America's racist policing practices. Whites are bitchin' and moanin' over their delusional fantasies of Obama's "police state." Black people are outraged and angry over the realities of living in American police states. And unlike white America we're not just paranoid we've got the dead bodies to prove it.

  154. [154] 
    Michale wrote:

    You both think killing an unarmed black teen is a "good shoot" because police are empowered to use lethal force simply to subdue black suspects?

    Once again, NO ONE is mentioning color but you..

    You simply CANNOT see past the color of the skin...

    And both you, Michale, and the police both think that shooting an unarmed teen to death, even if in the back, would be just fine. Somehow that would still be "self-defense."

    LEOs are required to stop fleeing felons so they can't victimize more people in the future..

    Michael Brown was a threat to society.. This is fact.. Officer Wilson merely eliminated the threat..

    You were completely, utterly and unequivocally wrong when it came to the Trayvon Martin shooting..

    Why should anyone think you would be right here??

    Michale

  155. [155] 
    Michale wrote:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BvZGU1jIQAIZ6f7.jpg

    Ferguson protester holding up ISIS IS HERE sign..

    These are the people ya'all are defending..

    Pathetic... Absolutely pathetic...

    Michale

  156. [156] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/08/breaking-report-po-darren-wilson-suffered-orbital-blowout-fracture-to-eye-socket-during-encounter-with-mike-brown/

    Video evidence that Michael Brown was a scumbag...

    The world is definitely a better place without him in it..

    Michale

  157. [157] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/1237/1076/original.jpg?w=600&h

    Yea...

    Michael Brown was such a peach.. A pillar of society..

    NOT!

    Michale

  158. [158] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    Ex-LEO. Prolific chronic liar. Refuses to even consider possibility of police misconduct. Ignores and makes excuses for police misconduct. No regard for lives of people of color. Thinks cops who falsely arrest and imprison people, lawbreakers, criminals, are "heroes," while black teens suspected of shoplifting who jaywalk are "scumbags." Ignores evidence he doesn't want to hear, falsely proclaims unsubstantiated lies and rumors that suit his prejudices as "facts" and imposes judgment accordingly. No presumption of innocence. No interest in the truth. Just misguided delusions of superiority and blind prejudices.

    Exactly the kind of LEO I'm talking about. Dishonest, unprincipled, bigoted, racist, abusive, deceitful, dishonorable, and dangerous.

    According to the eyewitness Officer Wilson grabbed Brown through the window. That would be the cop assaulting the teen, not the other way around. But to you, Michale, officer Williams word is inviolate. The contradictory testimony of the eyewitness summarily ignored and discounted. Because you are prejudiced, biased, and dishonest. Interested only in your determination to smear the dead black teen victim with supreme indifference to discovering the truth.

    That's exactly the kind of "justice" black people receive from LEOs. That's why there's rioting in the street. You're not morally superior, as you imagine yourself to be. You're morally bankrupt and self-delusional.

    We don't yet know what really happened to Wilson and Brown, the point I'm making is that the corruption, indifference, denigration, abuse of authority, and excessive use of force by police against blacks is systemic, institutional, pervasive, and universally ignored. "Those facts are not in dispute."--And you, ex-LEO Michale, are a perfect example of the problem.

    This isn't just about Wilson and Brown. The protests, the true outrage, are because of the conduct of Police. LEOs like you, Michale. LEOs who behave the way you do. LEOs who, like you, think they're better than we are. LEOs who think that we are insignificant, unimportant "scumbags." LEOs who imagine themselves to be gods with the right to render judgment on whether we should live or die.

    Its not "protecting the public," its racist delusions of grandeur.

  159. [159] 
    Michale wrote:

    Refuses to even consider possibility of police misconduct.

    Not true..

    I would be HAPPY to consider the possibility of police misconduct...

    If there were even the SLIGHTEST evidence to warrant such consideration..

    There isn't, so I won't...

    According to the eyewitness Officer Wilson grabbed Brown through the window.

    That's the same scumbag who was an accomplice in Brown's strong armed robbery...

    Hardly a credible witness...

    That's exactly the kind of "justice" black people receive from LEOs. That's why there's rioting in the street. You're not morally superior, as you imagine yourself to be. You're morally bankrupt and self-delusional.

    Says the guy who supports the scumbag looters, the ISIS-wannabees....

    This isn't just about Wilson and Brown.

    You are exactly RIGHT... It's not just about Wilson and Brown..

    It's about uncivilized animals who think that the world owe's them and they will take what they want and hurt, shoot or kill anyone who gets in their way..

    You are absolutely right. It's NOT just about Wilson and Brown...

    Its not "protecting the public," its racist delusions of grandeur.

    Again, you are right... It's about the racism of people like Sharpton and Jackson and Crump and all the other racists who feed the victim mentality...

    Michale

  160. [160] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's about uncivilized animals who think that the world owe's them and they will take what they want and hurt, shoot or kill anyone who gets in their way..

    I know you'll try to make this into a racist statement, but I say the same thing when a bunch of white college kids tear up a neighborhood after their sports team gets their asses kicked.

    Those "people" are uncivilized animals as well and should be shot...

    Michale

  161. [161] 
    Michale wrote:

    According to the eyewitness Officer Wilson grabbed Brown through the window.

    That's the same scumbag who was an accomplice in Brown's strong armed robbery...

    That's also the same witness who stated that Brown was shot in the back..

    The facts clearly show that this is not the case..

    So that witness is a liar and anything he says cannot be believed...

    Michale

  162. [162] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    Exactly the kind of lying I'm talking about. The pathologist stated that he couldn't tell if all sots struck from the front. He also never said that no shots were fired at Browns back. Yet you insist on lying that the preliminary report contradicts the witness. It does not.

    And the witness is not an accomplice to anything.--Another lie. The witnesses credibility is easily as good as the suspected murderer you're so determined to protect.

    And you defend scumbag police who are caught red-handed breaking the law with false arrests and false imprisonment while claiming black suspects are criminals with no credibility.

    Racist. Prejudiced. Lying. Bigoted.--You prove my point without question.

  163. [163] 
    Kevin wrote:

    To LewDan and the other non-hysterical readers of this thread, you may find this interesting:

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/19/1322989/--The-fear-and-desperation-in-their-voices-is-something-I-can-t-shake?detail=email

    I've gone back to re-read all the comments so far on this thread, and Michale has really outdone himself in showing his character.

    Comment number#50: "a scumbag with a long criminal record of violent crimes"...this was news to me, but I said I was sure that Michale would correct my ignorance. No link to back his claim, he laughed me off.
    Comment #93: Bashi asked for link about Brown's felony record...crickets from Michale.
    Comment #114: "gross and perverse character of Brown"
    After 50+ comments about Brown being a thug and scumbag, he's progressed to being gross and perverse.
    I had no idea he was so evil, but Michale "knows" with his facts. Much crowing about Brown being shot in the front instead of his back...that's justification in Michale's world.
    He's the Energizer Bunny of racism, and seems to be genuinely unaware that's how he's coming across.
    Then again, he says he takes no political sides, and if he believes that he should be in a padded cell. And he takes great pride in being the only person in Weigantia who shares his views. Now THAT'S pathetic.

  164. [164] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    "Holy crap on a cracker!"
    -Penny, "Big Bang Theory"

    163 comments! Dang, I was busy this weekend, missed these.

    OK, I'm going to promise to read all of these, but I don't know if I'll have time to answer them...

    163! Jeez...

    -CW

  165. [165] 
    Michale wrote:

    Exactly the kind of lying I'm talking about. The pathologist stated that he couldn't tell if all shots struck from the front. He also never said that no shots were fired at Browns back. Yet you insist on lying that the preliminary report contradicts the witness. It does not.

    It's been well established by TWO different autopsies that Brown was shot from the front and there were NO SHOTS fired to Brown's back..

    I have provided the links to BOTH autopsies...

    Why you insist on continuing your fantasy that this is not true is beyond me..

    And the witness is not an accomplice to anything.--Another lie. The witnesses credibility is easily as good as the suspected murderer you're so determined to protect.

    Again, you are living in a fantasy.. The witness is IN THE VIDEO of Brown committing the strong armed robbery.. The only reason the scumbag coward hasn't been arrested is because he is in hiding..

    And you defend scumbag police who are caught red-handed breaking the law with false arrests and false imprisonment while claiming black suspects are criminals with no credibility.

    Once again, it is ONLY you who are bringing up the color of the scumbags skin... I am absolutely and completely color blind.. You cannot find ONE SINGLE instance where I have stated that race was relevant..

    NOT... ONE... SINGLE.... INSTANCE...

    Racist. Prejudiced. Lying. Bigoted.--You prove my point without question.

    You haven't proven *ANY* of your claims..

    NOT... ONE... SINGLE... CLAIM....

    Kevin,

    Comment number#50: "a scumbag with a long criminal record of violent crimes"...this was news to me, but I said I was sure that Michale would correct my ignorance. No link to back his claim, he laughed me off.

    So, I guess you have given up all pretext of "ignoring" me, eh Kev??? :D

    I could post the links but, as has been proven by LD perfectly, ya'all don't care about the facts..

    Michael Brown was a criminal. The video of the strong-armed robbery proves that beyond any doubt...

    Comment #114: "gross and perverse character of Brown"

    Also well established...

    I had no idea he was so evil, but Michale "knows" with his facts. Much crowing about Brown being shot in the front instead of his back...that's justification in Michale's world.

    Nope, it just proves that ya'all don't know ANYTHING about this incident..

    And he takes great pride in being the only person in Weigantia who shares his views. Now THAT'S pathetic.

    Nope.. What's pathetic is your support for this scumbag and the fact that you haven't answered the ONLY salient question..

    Would you have given two shits about Michael Brown if he had been white???

    Of course you wouldn't...

    So who here is motivated by race???

    It's definitely not me...

    Look forward to you "ignoring" me in the future, Kev... :D

    Michale

  166. [166] 
    Michale wrote:

    CW,

    OK, I'm going to promise to read all of these, but I don't know if I'll have time to answer them...

    You needn't bother.. Let me sum it up for ya...

    LD, Kevin & YoYo think that Michael Brown is an innocent "gentle giant" who was just walking along minding his own business when this renegade racist cop jumped them for no reason, threw Michael Brown to the ground and shot him 20 times in the back..

    Further, LD, Kev and YoYo believe that all the looting and destruction and rioting and assaults are utterly and completely the fault of the Ferguson PD/County SOs, the the State Police's fault and now the National Guard's fault..

    The rioters and looters are completely blameless and justified in their actions..

    That's THEIR story. Of course, they have absolutely NO FACTS to back it up..

    But it's their story nonetheless...

    My story, the one backed up by facts, is that Michael Brown assaulted Officer Wilson, went for Officer Wilson's gun, turned to run when the gun went off, stopped when Wilson yelled "FREEZE" and fired off two shots that missed. Brown turned and taunted Wilson and then put his head down and charged Wilson. Wilson fired 6 times striking Brown 4 times in the right arm and twice in the head...

    This is what the FACTS show...

    Oh and Liz jumped in and stated that Ferguson PD shouldn't have waited so long to release the identity of the officer involved in the shooting.

    I stated that the officer AND his wife and two small children had received numerous and credible death threats and that it took some time to get them to a safe location..

    That's the gist of the entire comment thread.. :D

    Aren't you glad I save you all that reading?? :D

    Michale

  167. [167] 
    Michale wrote:

    “I’m proud of us. We deserve this, and this is what’s supposed to happen when there’s injustice in your community.”
    -Looter DeAndre Smith

    You see the mentality here??

    They are justified in looting and burning and taking and destroying and shooting...

    They are "PROUD" of what they are doing..

    Pathetic... Absolutely pathetic..

    Michale

  168. [168] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2729287/ISIS-beheads-journalist-James-Wright-Foley-warning-US.html

    That's who the protesters in Ferguson, MO are trying to emulate...

    Pathetic... Absolutely pathetic..

    And yes, Kevin.. Gross and perverse...

    Michale

  169. [169] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    So now that Jesse Jackson has injected race into the situation by encouraging people to register to vote, the town council needs to pass a voter ID law before some white people lose their jobs.

  170. [170] 
    Michale wrote:

    So now that Jesse Jackson has injected race into the situation by encouraging people to register to vote,

    And your link for this is...???? Where????

    Michale

  171. [171] 
    Michale wrote:

    ‘Time To Kill A Cop': Ferguson Protesters Throw Urine, Bottles At Police

    Ferguson city leaders said the mayor, the City Council and municipal employees have been exploring ways to increase the number of African-American applicants to the law enforcement academy
    http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2014/08/20/time-to-kill-a-cop-ferguson-protesters-throw-urine-bottles-at-police/

    Yea... They made a series of movies about that..

    POLICE ACADEMY

    :^/

    Michale

  172. [172] 
    Michale wrote:

    So, let me see if I understand this properly..

    The claim is that cops are killer cops and are out of control..

    So, the solution to that is to LOWER the standards for police officers??

    On WHAT planet does THAT make ANY kind of sense???

    Michale

  173. [173] 
    Michale wrote:

    YoYo,

    Race. It's a thing Michale, it pervades everything.

    So, when Democrats were attacking Herman King during the last Presidential Elections, it was all about race???

    Let your back-pedaling begin!!! :D

    Michale

  174. [174] 
    Michale wrote:

    YoYo,

    Race. It's a thing Michale, it pervades everything.

    So, when Democrats were attacking Herman King during the last Presidential Elections, it was all about race???

    Let your back-pedaling begin!!! :D

    Michale

  175. [175] 
    Michale wrote:

    YoYo,

    Race. It's a thing Michale, it pervades everything.

    When Left Wingers are attacking Justice Clarence Thomas, it's all about race??

    I could go on for hours.. :D

    I just love it when wingers are hoisted by their own Picard... :D

    Michale

  176. [176] 
    Michale wrote:

    I could go on for hours.. :D

    And often do!!! :D

    Michale

  177. [177] 
    LewDan wrote:

    "Prof. Parcells said a wound on Brown’s right arm was 'consistent with a witness statement' that Brown was first shot while facing away from Wilson, but he stressed that he and Dr. Baden could not determine conclusively the trajectories of the bullets that hit Brown—or which direction he was moving—when he was shot. The wounds 'could be consistent with going forward or going backward,' Dr. Baden said"
    http://www.newsweek.com/what-we-learned-michael-browns-autopsy-265247

    Not according to scumbag Michale! Scumbag Michale has read the reports and he knows more than the pathologists who wrote them! Scumbag Michale needs no forensic or investigative reports. Scumbag Michale has always known exactly what happened.

    Contrary to police and witness statements, and forensic evidence, according to scumbag Michale, Wilson was attacked by Brown. Heroically repelled his attacker who then retreated thirty-five feet to await Wilson exiting his vehicle before attacking Wilson again. Wilson then, in fear of his life, heroically removed this deadly unarmed teen jaywalking menace to society by shooting him six times.--All from the front.

    Scumbag Michale would be happy to offer the definitive links proving his omniscience, if only he felt it was worth his time!

    Scumbag Michale is a none too bright, racist, bigoted, chronic serial liar with no credibility.

  178. [178] 
    Michale wrote:

    It was Dr Baden who stated unequivocally that all the shots hit Brown from the front..

    Only after uber racist Crump met with Baden, did Baden change his story..

    Further, Baden's credibility is SEVERLY questionable because he was hired by the Brown family..

    Baden is going to dance to the tune that uber racist Crump/Sharpton/Jackson want him to dance to..

    Do you have any RELIABLE evidence??

    No??

    Didn't think so...

    Like I said, LD... You were completely and utterly wrong re: Trayvon Martin and I was right..

    How are things different this time??

    You have NO facts and unreliable evidence..

    Sounds like Trayvon Martin redux...

    Also, why do you refuse to answer the question??

    Would you give a rat's ass about Michael Brown if he was white???

    Michale

  179. [179] 
    Michale wrote:

    Scumbag Michale is a none too bright, racist, bigoted, chronic serial liar with no credibility.

    TRANSLATION:
    I have no logical or rational argument to make so I am just going to resort to childish name-calling and immature personal attacks

    I accept your concession, LD...

    But I have to be honest and say I am, like Dr Martin Luther King would be, very disappointed in you...

    I thought you were better than this...

    Apparently, I was wrong..

    Apparently, acting like a racist maniac is more important than logic, facts or rational discourse...

    Michale

  180. [180] 
    Michale wrote:

    Obama calls on nations to excise jihadi ‘cancer’
    http://nypost.com/2014/08/20/us-continues-airstrikes-on-jihadists-after-horror-beheading-of-us-journalist/

    Looks like we can start with the scumbag protesters in Ferguson MO who carry ISIS signs...

    Michale

  181. [181] 
    Michale wrote:

    Scumbag Michale is a none too bright, racist, bigoted, chronic serial liar with no credibility.

    And *I* am the one that get's called on
    personal attacks.. :D

    Go figger... :D

    Michale

  182. [182] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    "Slumbag" is a personal attack?! I thought it was just an colloquial honorific, since you use it in referring to everyone else.

    Thanks for the update!--Now all I need us to know where it says "Michale is authorized to make personal attacks but cannot be referred to in kind."

    'Cause that's just SO rude!

    I'd've suggested you stop calling others "scumbag." But maybe you can make whining about being picked work for you.

  183. [183] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Oh, Michale,

    As for being called "none to bright, racist, bigoted, chronic serial liar," those are accurate adjectives.

    If you consider them "personal attacks" I suggest behavioral modification.--Yours.

  184. [184] 
    Michale wrote:

    "Slumbag" is a personal attack?! I thought it was just an colloquial honorific, since you use it in referring to everyone else.

    Wow...

    You can't even keep your own personal attacks straight.. :D

    For the record, it's SCUMBAG and I only use it for scumbag and cowards who strong arm rob a guy half his size...

    Michale

  185. [185] 
    Michale wrote:

    Why do you refuse to address the points, LD??

    Would you care about Michael Brown if he were white??

    What makes you so right about Michael Brown when you were so wrong about Trayvon Martin??

    You had NO FACTS back then either.. And when the story came out you were flat out dead on ballz wrong...

    So, why should anyone believe you now??

    Especially when, once again, you have absolutely NO FACTS whatsoever...

    Michale

  186. [186] 
    Michale wrote:

    I have given up asking you to prove that I have made any racist comments or that the scumbag's shooting death had anything to do with racism..

    You always ignore what you can't respond to...

    Michale

  187. [187] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    The protesters in Ferguson should do like the gunnuts did when they rallied to defend that racist gunnut out there in Arizona who was stealing from We The People. (Now granted, he wasn't doing serious crime like jaywalking or shoplifting.) Anyway, Ferguson's oppressed citizens should get some big guns and point them at those Big Government SWAT zombie/employees and drive them off. I'm sure it will turn out exactly the same way it did in AZ.

    When there's no future, how can there be sin? - Johnny Rotten

  188. [188] 
    Michale wrote:

    Anyway, Ferguson's oppressed citizens should get some big guns and point them at those Big Government SWAT zombie/employees and drive them off.

    Yea, have the looters and assorted scumbags take up arms against LEOs...

    THAT's the smart call... :D

    Michale

  189. [189] 
    Kevin wrote:

    John From Censornati:

    Good one :)
    And Michale - you're racist because you constantly refer to all the citizens as scumbags, while refusing to provide proof every time you're asked for it...and you seem oblivious to LewDan's sarcasm...he was mocking your use of your favorite epithet. I still seem to have missed Brown's record confirming your opinion of him being a menace to society. Your glee at Trayvon Martin's legal murder only confirms your racism. What do YOU think the authorities should do about Bundy, surely they're "scumbags" too.

  190. [190] 
    Kevin wrote:

    And Michale, JFC was being sarcastic too.

  191. [191] 
    Michale wrote:

    Kev,

    And Michale - you're racist because you constantly refer to all the citizens as scumbags,

    That is simply not true..

    I only refer to the scumbags as scumbags..

    Even if what you say is true, I wasn't aware that "scumbag" is a racial slur...

    When did this happen???

    while refusing to provide proof every time you're asked for it.

    I provided proof..

    Video tape evidence of Michael Brown's scumbagedness...

    You just refuse to accept the proof because it PROVES you wrong...

    I still seem to have missed Brown's record confirming your opinion of him being a menace to society.

    Provided... Ask the shop keeper that Brown robbed and assaulted..

    Your glee at Trayvon Martin's legal murder only confirms your racism.

    Not at all. Martin was another thug and scumbag... My "glee" is that he is not alive to victimize anyone any longer..

    No evidence of racism whatsoever..

    What do YOU think the authorities should do about Bundy, surely they're "scumbags" too.

    Ted Bundy or Al Bundy???

    If any of those Bundys assaulted innocent people and assaulted cops and beat them severely.. then.. Yes.. They are scumbags too..

    Do you have a point??

    Or are you just ignoring me again, Kev?? :D

    Michale

  192. [192] 
    Michale wrote:

    Kevin,

    Take a gander at comment #160...

    Should answer your "racist" personal attack perfectly...

    I understand you won't accept it though..

    You never accept any facts that prove your delusions are just that..

    Delusions.. Fantasies.. Not Reality...

    Michale

  193. [193] 
    Michale wrote:

    Your glee at Trayvon Martin's legal murder only confirms your racism.

    For the record, "legal murder" is an oxymoron..

    If it's legal, it ain't murder...

    I am surprised I have to explain this stuff...

    Maybe you should leave Law Enforcement to the professionals..

    Michale

  194. [194] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ya know I get why ya'all falsely accuse of racism..

    It's a well known winger tactic of trying to intimidate opponents into silence..

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList

    But ya'all should know me well enough to know that I don't intimidate...

    So, you might as well give it up..

    You have NO FACTS to support your accusations... It is nothing but utter bullshit.. Like JFC's bullshit that I called him a nazi...

    Give it up, kiddies...

    Ya'all ain't gonna silence me... :D

    Michale

  195. [195] 
    Michale wrote:

    “If we are to stop angry clashes between police and poor black men, it is time to admit that thuggish behavior creates legitimate fear in every community.”
    -Juan Williams

    Couldn't have said it better myself...

    Let the false accusations of racism commence!!

    Michale

  196. [196] 
    Kevin wrote:
  197. [197] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    160?!

    I thought you were talking about the cop!!

  198. [198] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale [193],

    Congratulations! You're the only white person in America who thinks O.J. Simpson is innocent.--Good to know....

  199. [199] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michael [195],

    What other communities are suffering "thugish behavior" other than Black, Hispanic, and Latin?!

    ...That's why its about racism. When white communities have police routinely presenting "thugish behavior" we'll have equal opportunity thugishness!--And it will no longer be about racism.

    But as long as we're being "not profiled" and "just happen" to be stopped and arrested twice as often as whites; as long as we're still getting longer sentences and are prosecuted and incarcerated at twice the rate of whites, as long as we're being killed unarmed "in self defense" twice as often as whites--it's about racism.

  200. [200] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Kevin,

    Good piece! I'd add three points. One, I've seen this movie before. Blacks have been complaining about the way we're policed for about a century. Nobody believes us because complaint of racism obviously means you're racist! You therefore have no credibility.

    The last time it wound up on TV white folk were "outraged" and "shocked," the national guard wad called out, the President ordered the F.B.I. to do their damn jobs! And things were better.--'Til they left.--Problem solved! Welcome to "post-racial" America!

    And anybody who says different is obviously racist with zero credibility.... Now it's on TV once again. America is "outraged" and "shocked"--again.--That's American racism.

    Two, Ferguson PD tried to quell unrest by terrorizing the community. A "show of force" that would make it clear that a LOT of people could be killed if everyone didn't stay in their place, weren't sufficiently subservient to police.

    Apparently, no one told Ferguson PD that instilling fear causes a "fight or flight" response.--Their terror campaign came up snake-eyes, and they got "fight" instead of "flight."

    Third, for some reason I can't even begin to fathom! white folk don't seem to realize what sort of reaction they get from twenty-first century black Americans when they tell them if they don't want to be beaten, tased, or shot, all they have to do is be subservient enough. This country too will run out of body bags before they can make that happen again by threatening us with personal assault and murder again.

  201. [201] 
    LewDan wrote:

    CW,

    Just wanted to make it an even century for your reading pleasure!

    ...Oops! Damn! Now we'll have to start over!

  202. [202] 
    Michale wrote:

    LD,

    Congratulations! You're the only white person in America who thinks O.J. Simpson is innocent.--Good to know....

    I just go where the facts take me..

    As always..

    What other communities are suffering "thugish behavior" other than Black, Hispanic, and Latin?!

    Uhhhh... College communities, as I have pointed out time and time again..

    ...That's why its about racism. When white communities have police routinely presenting "thugish behavior" we'll have equal opportunity thugishness!--And it will no longer be about racism.

    It's not the COPs that are presenting thuggish behavior.

    It's the uncivilized elements within the communities..

    THAT's the point you refuse to accept..

    It's not the cops that are the problem, as evidenced by YoYo's insistence that it was the Ferguson PD/County SO that was "causing" the riots and the looting...

    It's the people....

    "Idjut"
    -Bobby Singer, SUPERNATURAL

    :D

    Michale

  203. [203] 
    Michale wrote:

    Still not going to answer if you would care about Michael Brown if he were white, eh LD??

    Not going to address the fact that you were completely and utterly wrong about the Trayvon Martin shooting and I was right..

    I guess I have my answers... :D

    The Brown shooting is going to be the same..

    The Grand Jury MIGHT vote to go to trial, but they will do so SOLELY to appease the black community, just like Angela Corey did with Zimmerman..

    IF it goes to trial, Wilson will be found innocent, like Zimmerman was...

    But I doubt the Grand Jury will vote to charge Wilson. If they did, you would see MASSIVE amounts of Blue Flu all over the country..

    Michale

  204. [204] 
    Michale wrote:

    Third, for some reason I can't even begin to fathom! white folk don't seem to realize what sort of reaction they get from twenty-first century black Americans when they tell them if they don't want to be beaten, tased, or shot, all they have to do is be subservient enough.

    As usual, you miss the point because you can't see past the color of the skin..

    It has absolutely NOTHING to do with being subservient at all..

    It has EVERYTHING to do with obeying the law and not attacking and assaulting anyone who disagrees with you...

    It has to do with CHARACTER...

    Like I said... Dr Martin Luther King would be VERY disappointed in you and how you excuse, condone and accept the thuggish behavior that preceded Michael Brown's interaction with LEOs.

    MLK would be ashamed of you that you would excuse and condone the victimization of that diminutive little shop keeper that Michael Brown bullied and terrified...

    Juan Williams called it dead on balls accurate..

    People like you REFUSE to accept that the, in 99% of the cases, it's the thuggish behavior of the scumbags that cause the problems, NOT the reactions of the police to that thuggish behavior..

    By not holding the scumbags accountable, you are in violation of EVERYTHING that Dr Martin Luther King stood for...

    MLK had hoped that the black community would exemplify the likes of Herman King or Condeleeza Rice or Clarence Thomas...

    Instead, YOU push the black community to exemplify racists like Al Sharpton, Ben Crump, Jesse Jackson, Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown..

    YOU, and people that think like you, LD are part of the problem...

    NOT part of the solution...

    Until you and the black community realize this, it's going to happen time and time again..

    Because, in CIVILIZED societies, it's the rule of law that wins out. NOT the rule of violence and thuggery...

    Michale

  205. [205] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    It makes more sense now why Ferguson PD waited a week to release the identity of the officer involved in the shooting.

    According to LEO statements, Brown had beaten Officer Wilson severely causing major damage to the side of Wilson's face. So brutal that it had exploded the bones around Wilson's eye socket..

    Given this fact, it makes sense that the could not get Wilson and Wilson's family to safety right aways. The needed that time to make sure Wilson was well enough to be moved to a safe house..

    As I indicated above there had to be logical and rational reasons why Ferguson PD waited to release the name.

    Now we know what those reasons are..

    Michale

  206. [206] 
    Michale wrote:

    LD

    It has EVERYTHING to do with obeying the law and not attacking and assaulting anyone who disagrees with you...

    You exemplify this exact attitude here on CW.COM..

    I disagree with you..

    And you react (verbally) violently and assault and attack me with name calling. Name calling that you KNOW not to be true... You get emotional and you attack people whose ONLY "crime" is disagreeing with you...

    If we were face to face and having this discussion, you would likely physically assault me.. You would EXEMPLIFY and employ the exact thuggish behavior that you ignore in the likes of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown..

    SOLELY AND COMPLETELY because I disagree with you..

    As I said.. YOU and people like you are part of the problem..

    NOT part of the solution..

    Michale

  207. [207] 
    Michale wrote:

    Congratulations! You're the only white person in America who thinks O.J. Simpson is innocent.--Good to know....

    Would a racist think OJ's innocent???

    Betcha this is another one of those questions you refuse to answer because it totally negates your BS claims...

    Michale

  208. [208] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Just watched the cellphone video of the St Louis cops shooting Kajieme Powell. I am just shocked that it doesn't validate the police department's lies!

  209. [209] 
    Michale wrote:

    Just watched the cellphone video of the St Louis cops shooting Kajieme Powell. I am just shocked that it doesn't validate the police department's lies!

    You have a link???

    And an apology for accusing me of calling you a nazi??

    Michale

  210. [210] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    "I disagree with you..

    And you react (verbally) violently and assault and attack me with name calling. Name calling that you KNOW not to be true... You get emotional and you attack people whose ONLY "crime" is disagreeing with you..."

    You keep posting horseshit like that and I will have to revisit the adjectives I use to describe you. Comments like 178, 179, and 206 cause me to seriously doubt your sanity.

    Unlike you Michale, I am an honest person. Also, unlike you, I don't say things that I know to be untrue.

  211. [211] 
    Michale wrote:

    Unlike you Michale, I am an honest person.

    Despite ALL the evidence to the contrary.. :D

    Also, unlike you, I don't say things that I know to be untrue.

    You call me racist which you know to be untrue and you haven't backed up with one single fact..

    So much for your claims, eh? :D

    Michale

  212. [212] 
    Michale wrote:

    Your problem, LD is that (like YoYo) you think EVERYTHING is about race...

    Maybe in your little world, it is.. Everything you say, everything you do is governed by the color of one's skin..

    My world, the kind of world that Dr Martin Luther King envisioned, is that skin color is completely and utterly irrelevant...

    Hell, the ONLY time I bring up race at all is in response to ludicrous, ignorant and self-serving claims from people like you and Kev and YoYo that everything is about race...

    You can't see anything but skin color.

    Michale

  213. [213] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale [212],

    "Hell, the ONLY time I bring up race at all is in response to ludicrous, ignorant and self-serving claims from people like you and Kev and YoYo that everything is about race..."

    Michale [178]
    "Only after uber racist Crump met with Baden, did Baden change his story.."

    Precisely what "ludicrous, ignorant and self-serving claims" were you responding to?

    Michale [170],
    "I know you'll try to make this into a racist statement, but I say the same thing when a bunch of white college kids tear up a neighborhood after their sports team gets their asses kicked.

    Those 'people' are uncivilized animals as well and should be shot..."

    Wrong! That's not racist. That's insane. That's sociopathic. That's a callous indifference to the lives of others.

    If you're really sure of the inappropriateness of being labeled racist I can be persuaded, in the interest of truth and accuracy, to adjust my position.

    Michale: Chronic serial liar.--And quite possibly clinically insane.

    --You see, Michale, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt in assuming you're merely racist. But you've convinced me that I was in error.

  214. [214] 
    Michale wrote:

    Precisely what "ludicrous, ignorant and self-serving claims" were you responding to

    Every one of your comments that mention race..

    Wrong! That's not racist. That's insane. That's sociopathic. That's a callous indifference to the lives of others.

    Yea??? Yet, you have NO PROBLEM with them looting and destroying and hurting other people..

    I am seeing a pattern..

    Well, at least you admit that I am not racist.. :D

    Michale: Chronic serial liar.--And quite possibly clinically insane.

    I understand that you have no rational or logical response and must therefore resort to childish name-calling and immature personal attacks..

    I accept your concession of my superior argument..

    Michale

  215. [215] 
    Michale wrote:

    Face, LD..

    You have nothing..

    No logic, no facts, no nothing...

    It just KILLS you that MLK would be on my side in this debate...

    And let me again, ask the three questions you simply cannot answer..

    If I think OJ is innocent, how can I be racist??

    Would you give a shit about Michael Brown if he were white??

    Why should anyone believe what you say now when you were 1000% dead on ballz WRONG over the Trayvon Martin shooting??

    Michale

  216. [216] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    For some reason you believe that I know you are not racist.

    Let me be clear: I genuinely know that you are racist. The dozens of examples that I've been pointing out, for months, are not partisan personal attacks. They are not hyperbole. They are not straw-men. They are explicit examples of racism which have informed my sincere belief that you are a racist bigot.

    As I said, unlike you I am an honest man. I'm not trolling. I don't say things that I know to be untrue. I'm not attacking your character. I consider racism to be a product of ignorance, not poor character.

    But your racist hate speech is not just political speech. The prejudice and bigotry you espouse hurts people. Its a real problem in America. It does real damage to real people.

    You have every right to speak your opinion. You do not have a right to speak with impunity. You do not have a right to speak without consequence. You do not have a right to incite fear and hatred. You do not have a right to promote lawlessness. You do not have a right to speech that harms others.

    Do not mistake me. I am dead serious. Don't think for a second that I know you're not racist. I know nothing of the kind.--What I know is that you are, beyond doubt, a racist bigot. And emblematic of a huge and deadly dangerous problem in America. This isn't about scoring some kind of points in a political debate. This is a life and death issue. Ee aren't "playing the race card" as you're always so quick to claim. We're talking about actual threats to our lives and freedom

    Michael Brown will never see nineteen years of age. He is not some scumbag the world is better off without to me. He's a mothers son, who should not have died.--And I've known and buried far too many Michael Browns in my life.

    You may delude yourself that a community of thousands of blacks went up in flamed because they're racist or just want an excuse to loot, but I'm telling you the anger is real. The fear is real. The outrage is real. And just about every black in America feels it, and understands it.--And your cavalier indifference to our genuine outrage is yet another proof of your very real racism.

    We too are Americans. We are entitled to the same protection under the law as white people. Police are empowered to enforce the law. Only lawful commands must be obeyed. Lethal force is justified only in defense of lives. Police have no right to kill because of noncompliance. Police have no right to kill because they've been assaulted. Police have no right to kill to stop a suspect from fleeing. And police have no right to kill because they're angry at being disrespected.

    Any officer who does is a criminal. Any officer who protects, harbors, or covers-up for an officer who does is a criminal. Any officer who does any of those things is far more dangerous than any unarmed shoplifting jaywalker who assaults an officer.--And far more criminal.

    You are not colorblind. You are indifferent. But you are far from indifferent about everyone. You are hypocritical. You are prejudiced. You are a proponent of racial stereotypes and hate speech. And that makes you a racist. That makes you a very real danger. That makes you a very real threat to the lives of others.

    Do not ever think that I know you are not racist. That's one self-delusion I suggest you abandon immediately. You are indeed very much a racist.

    This isn't some meaningless political debate. My life, my family's life, the lives of those I care about are at stake. I, and we as black people, do not take racism lightly. Whatever Fox News may have told you. This is about our lives. Its about our very survival. That's why Michael Brown matters a great deal to us. Even if it turns out that he did assault Officer Wilson. He should not have been killed. His life does matter. Police are not empowered to execute anyone, under any circumstances. They are not above the law. Peoples lives are not insignificant.

  217. [217] 
    Michale wrote:

    I genuinely know that you are racist.

    No, it is your OPINION that I am a racist..

    It's an opinion borne, not of facts, but of your own skin-color centric existence..

    Michael Brown will never see nineteen years of age.

    He will also never victimize, bully or attack anyone..

    That's why this world is better without him in it..

    He is not some scumbag the world is better off without to me.

    I know. Because ALL you see is a person with black skin...

    He's a mothers son, who should not have died.-

    So was Jeffery Dahlmer.. ANOTHER scumbag who this world is better off without..

    "Jeffery, I don't like your friends."
    "Fine, mom... Just eat the vegetables, then.."

    :D

    -And I've known and buried far too many Michael Browns in my life.

    Were they scumbags who hurt, assaulted, bullied and victimized innocent people???

    If not, then I am sorry for your loss..

    If they are, then the world is better off without them too...

    Here's the entire issue in a nutshell, Dan..

    If I call President Obama an incompetent moron, it's not because he is black, it's because I think he is an incompetent moron and have facts to back it up.

    If I call Governor Jay Nixon a scumbag, it's not because he is white, it's because I think he is a scumbag and I have facts to back it up.

    If I call Michael Brown a scumbag it's not because he is black but rather because he has assaulted and bullied and victimized innocent people...

    The color of the person's skin has absolutely NO MEANING or RELEVANCE to me...

    Your problem is that, to you the color of the skin is ALL the relevance..

    That's why you can't see past it... That's why you refuse to answer if you would give two shits if Brown had been white. That's why you refuse to answer why you were so wrong on the Trayvon Martin issue.. That's why you can't answer how I could be racist and think OJ was innocent...

    Feel free to argue the point more...

    It won't change two simple facts..

    1. I care NOTHING about the color of one's skin. Like Martin Luther King Jr, the character of the person is my SOLE guide.

    2. You can't see ANYTHING past the color of someone's skin...

    Michale

  218. [218] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Oh, and I wasn't a friend of Dr. King. That would be my dad. I was just a child. Dad's business partner, also named King, though no relation, was married to a classmate and friend of Dr. King's wife Coretta. Whenever either was in Chicago they'd guest at the partner's (King's) home. And dad would typically join them for dinner.

    Dad was always rather proud of having talked Dr. King out of marching in Chicago do to concerns over violence. The Democratic National Convention Chicago hosted a few years later made dad's concern seem prescient. I always thought that he had every right to be proud. As I've always been proud of him.

    As I say, unlike you, I don't say things I know to be untrue.

  219. [219] 
    Michale wrote:

    As I say, unlike you, I don't say things I know to be untrue.

    Except, of course, when you make false accusations and personal attacks.. :D

    Michale

  220. [220] 
    Michale wrote:

    FERGUSON, Mo. – Many news media services already had begun packing tents and television transmission vehicles as word circulated through the Ferguson community of further evidence that the black teen shot and killed by a police officer was the aggressor, resisting arrest after his suspected role in a convenience store robbery.
    http://www.wnd.com/2014/08/ferguson-calm-amid-further-evidence-backing-officer/#DLPvYKx2hDbBtGs7.99

    Once again....

    Michale: DEAD ON BALLZ ACCURATE

    Everyone Else Screaming "RACISM!!!!": EPIC FAIL

    It's Trayvon Martin all over again...

    Yea, I know, I know.. I should be the adult and not gloat..

    But, with all the abuse I have endured since last Friday??

    Dammit, I've EARNED the right to gloat...

    "Arrogant!?? OF COURSE I'm arrogant! I've EARNED it!!"
    -Q

    :D

    That about sums things up perfectly...

    Michale

  221. [221] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:
  222. [222] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Lol Michale, please!

    You think the media is packing up because of an unconfirmed rumor on social media of an unconfirmed rumor on social media of an unconfirmed rumor on social media that Wilson is innocent?! And that proves that you are right!

    As I've said--repeatedly, chronic serial liar.

  223. [223] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    When will "comments" FINALLY be closed on this thoroughly useless thread, may I ask?

  224. [224] 
    LewDan wrote:

    LizM,

    If you don't want to view them, don't view them. Asking speech be shut off because you don't want to hear it is offensive.

  225. [225] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Oh, give me a break ...

  226. [226] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I am asking that speech be terminated on this thread because NOTHING is being said.

  227. [227] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    There is free speech and there is intelligent discourse.

    I prefer the latter.

  228. [228] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I happen to care about the integrity of this site, by the way.

    Do you, Lew Dan?

  229. [229] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Lew Dan,

    Unfortunately, the number of comments on threads around here these days is directly proportional to what amounts to a total degeneration of the discussion.

    I expect much, much more from CW.com.

  230. [230] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    Ehh, we all knew this was going to get ugly. Nothing gives Michale a fascism boner quicker than thuggish cops killing people.

  231. [231] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:
  232. [232] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OauOPTwbqk

    Not that the headline is actually true mind you.

    See much resistance in that video?

  233. [233] 
    LewDan wrote:

    LizM,

    Grow up. If you don't want to read comments, if you think they've no value--stop reading. No one appointed you to decide what others should discuss. If you're so concerned about the integrity of the site, go be a prima donna somewhere else. No one here, least of all me, must answer to you.

  234. [234] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    That's actually a perfect note for this horrible thread to end on.

  235. [235] 
    YoYoTheAssyrian wrote:

    Come on lew, don't attack liz, save it for michale, trust me you need your energy, he can be indefatigable.

    I know she can be irksome and wrong, but a reaction of disgust isn't exactly unsound. This is an ugly topic, and these situations bring out the worst aspects of the conservative mindset.

  236. [236] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    The End is near . . . again.

  237. [237] 
    LewDan wrote:

    YoYo,

    Yeh, Dutta's remarks have raised some eyebrows. Don't know why, its what most cops are trained to believe. It's what Black folk have always been complaining about. If you presume to act as if you have rights, as if LEOs are bound by the law, the majority of LEOs devoutly believe that they, at their discretion, have the right to assault you, to punish you, for faring to pretend to be their equal. They have guns. They have tasers. No matter what the law may say they can do whatever the feel like doing.

    The law is for citizens, not cops. Citizens who violate the law are criminals, not cops who violate the law.

    That's the corruption, the abuse of power, the presumed right to violate the law, that comes of a total absence of any accountability.

  238. [238] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    In future, I shall endeavor to be less irksome and wrong - especially at the same time - but, there is precious little chance that I'll be taking my prima donna act anywhere else, anytime soon.

    "I have nowhere else to go! I have nowhere else to go!"

    :-)

  239. [239] 
    Michale wrote:

    YoYo,

    When you're on the same side of an issue as the KKK, you're a racist.

    OK... OK... If you want to go that route..

    So when you and all the Democrats are on the same side of an issue as Al Qaeda, then that makes ya'all terrorists..

    Do you REALLY want to go that route???

    Like dynamiting fish in a barrel...

    :D

    LD,

    You think the media is packing up because of an unconfirmed rumor on social media of an unconfirmed rumor on social media of an unconfirmed rumor on social media that Wilson is innocent?! And that proves that you are right!

    No, the media is packing up because the overwhelming FACTS are showing that Michael Brown is the same kind of punk thug scumbag that Trayvon Martin was..

    And THAT's what proves me right and ya'all wrong.. :D

    You lost, LD.. Admit it gracefully and with maturity and move on...

    Liz,

    When will "comments" FINALLY be closed on this thoroughly useless thread, may I ask?

    "Those who hate and fight must stop it themselves or it is never really stopped."
    -Spock, STAR TREK, Day Of The Dove

    :D

    YoYo,

    Ehh, we all knew this was going to get ugly. Nothing gives Michale a fascism boner quicker than thuggish cops killing people.

    Facist??? Is that like 'nazi'???

    Godwin!! Yer out... :D

    Liz,

    "I have nowhere else to go! I have nowhere else to go!"

    AN OFFICER AND A GENTLEMAN

    :D

    YoYo,

    Come on lew, don't attack liz,

    LD attacks ANYONE who disagrees with him. Doesn't matter if it's me, Liz or even CW...

    As far as the cop's quote, let me break it down for your ignorant asses...

    It doesn't matter if one is black or white or red or green or purple..

    If a cop gives you a lawful order, you obey it..

    THEN you haul his ass before IA and make your case...

    Being BLACK has absolutely NOTHING to do with anything..

    Except in the minds of racists..

    THAT is the point that ya'all constantly miss...

    This IS a post-racist country..

    Ya'all simply refuse to accept it. Ya'all want the good old days of the 60s....

    Ain't gonna happen..

    Michale

  240. [240] 
    Michale wrote:

    LD,

    Why do you refuse to answer these questions??

    1. Would you care about this issue if Michael Brown had been white?

    2. Why should anyone listen to you about Michael Brown when you were so dead on ballz wrong about Trayvon Martin?

    3. How can I be racist when I think OJ Simpson is not guilty???

    Michale

  241. [241] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ferguson Prosecutor Says No Charge Decision Until October
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-20/ferguson-prosecutor-says-no-charge-decision-until-october.html

    OK, it's official...

    There will be no indictment of Officer Wilson..

    Justice has prevailed..

    Everyone can go home now...

    :D

    Michale

  242. [242] 
    Michale wrote:

    And the sad thing is, none of you have learned any lessons.

    The next time a white cop shoots and kills a scumbag who happens to be black, ya'all are going to once again, ignore all the facts and immediately claim it was a racist incident and the scumbag was pure as the driven snow and the cop was a racist hell-bent on killing black people..

    What a sad sad world ya'all inhabit. Where everything is about race and character is a non-existent vector or parameter...

    Sad...

    Michale

  243. [243] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    BREAKING -- FOX NEWS ALERT -- Sources close to the investigation tell us that the officers who shot Kajieme Powell had soiled undies due to their assailant's aggression. Some people say that they shit their pants at the very sight of a black man, but our sources tell us that they were only afraid until the corpse was handcuffed and the pants shitting occurred sometime after that. We report rumors, you decide. -- BREAKING -- FOX NEWS ALERT

  244. [244] 
    Michale wrote:

    “We have to know the truth about what really happened in the Michael Brown shooting.

    How can you have justice if you don’t have the truth? If you don’t have truth, then what you have is vigilante justice.

    If the facts show the police officer went over the line, then he should be prosecuted.

    If the officer was in the line of duty and the young man was not right in everything he did – if he was belligerent over what he did in the convenience store and it carried on down the street – then that’s a different story.”
    -Pastor Stoney Shaw, Ferguson MO

    A man who gets it..

    And it doesn't matter WHAT color his skin is...

    He gets it.

    You see my point?? Skin color is completely and utterly irrelevant..

    It's only what the facts show that is relevant..

    Michale

  245. [245] 
    Michale wrote:

    BREAKING -- FOX NEWS ALERT -- Sources close to the investigation tell us that the officers who shot Kajieme Powell had soiled undies due to their assailant's aggression. Some people say that they shit their pants at the very sight of a black man, but our sources tell us that they were only afraid until the corpse was handcuffed and the pants shitting occurred sometime after that. We report rumors, you decide. -- BREAKING -- FOX NEWS ALERT

    TRANSLATION:

    KING -- Some the very tery wassionly ant's wers, you decide. -- FOX NEWS ALERT BREAKING -- Sometionly well und undies corpse was aftell thad the ants they shot ourrepors, your people as decidecide. We peopled aggred und unt's the officession they aggred sho soil they thandcurcers the close Powery shit the people cors as that on their as atime pant's their shittil us as the vered they soiled the on their at on. We pand that their aggres and saide. We Powell us sho that. We that the sight their sight

    Still working on that apology, JFC?? :D

    I won't even bother asking you to concede you were wrong about that "chat bot" accusation..

    Others have put that little piece of moronic-ness to rest.. :D

    Michale

  246. [246] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    Assuming Brown did assault Wilson the law requires Wilson to arrest Brown so that he can stand trial. Wilson has no authority to summarily execute Brown for assaulting a police officer.

    The law requires citizens to obey the lawful orders of police officers. If an order of not lawful citizens have every right to disobey. If an officer unlawfully assaults a citizen the citizen has alegal right to defend themselves.

    Your, and Dutta's claim that citizens are required to obey any police order is not true. Enforcing that unlawful belief is illegal and criminal. You and Dutta are supporting,defending, and promoting criminal behavior. You are not promoting the rule of law. You are accomplices to criminal behavior. You are participants in gang activity.

    And you are arrogantly confident of your supreme superiority, as murderers, gang members, accomplices to murder who routinely violate the law, over the black and brown "scumbags" who are murderers, gang members, and routinely break the law.

    But you are not. There is no difference. No difference at all between the unarmed blacks woo die at the hands of police every week and those who are killed in drive-by shootings or gangland executions. They're all murder. They're all illegal. They all must be prosecuted.

  247. [247] 
    Michale wrote:

    Assuming Brown did assault Wilson the law requires Wilson to arrest Brown so that he can stand trial. Wilson has no authority to summarily execute Brown for assaulting a police officer.

    Unless Brown was a threat to the safety of Wilson.

    Which, from all the evidence, he was..

    Using your reasoning, there wouldn't be any need for cops to carry guns because deadly force would never have to be used..

    The law requires citizens to obey the lawful orders of police officers. If an order of not lawful citizens have every right to disobey.

    Unless the citizens knows for an absolute fact that the order IS unlawful.

    For example. If a police officer comes up to you and orders you to shoot YoYo in the head, yea.. It's a safe bet that THAT is not a lawful order..

    On the other hand, if you had just committed a strong armed robbery at a convenience store and assaulted the clerk and a police officer orders you to FREEZE and put your hands on your head, then it's a safe bet that THAT is a lawful order...

    Of the two, which situation more closely describes what happened in Ferguson MO???

    Your, and Dutta's claim that citizens are required to obey any police order is not true.

    That may be your opinion. But the facts are clearly different..

    But hay, why don't you test that theory??

    Go stand in the middle of a busy intersection and refuse to obey the cop's orders when they order you to get out of the street..

    Report back to us what happens. :D

    And you are arrogantly confident of your supreme superiority, as murderers, gang members, accomplices to murder who routinely violate the law, over the black and brown "scumbags" who are murderers, gang members, and routinely break the law.

    But you are not. There is no difference. No difference at all between the unarmed blacks woo die at the hands of police every week and those who are killed in drive-by shootings or gangland executions. They're all murder. They're all illegal. They all must be prosecuted.

    Again with all the skin color references..

    I bet you have not made ONE COMMENT here in Weigantia that didn't reference skin color in one fashion or another.. :D

    When are you going to learn that skin color is completely and utterly and unequivocally irrelevant to me??

    Michale

  248. [248] 
    Michale wrote:

    I am beginning to agree with Liz..

    This comment thread has run it's course...

    It was a good shoot. This is fact..

    There is NO credible evidence to dispute that fact..

    The Grand Jury has refused to indict..

    These are the facts...

    And they are indisputable...

    Michale

  249. [249] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Tell me Michale,

    When police riot are they "scumbags" too? Since you don't seem to think police breaking the law makes them "felons" to.

    And just how is Obama "breaking the law" by exercising administrative discretion, prosecutorial discretion, by declining to prosecute illegal immigrants, while the county prosecutor declining to prosecute Wilson is "Justice has prevailed..?"

    And how is a prosecutor declining to prosecute Wilson proof of innocence while Obama declining to prosecute immigrants has no affect at all on their legal status?

    Finally, how does your inconsistency and hypocrisy not make you "biased?" Not leave you with "no credibility?"

    How does your taking diametrically opposed positions when the subject is a white man than when he's a black man not make you racist?

    If "being black has nothing to do with it" why do your inconsistent hypocritical positions "just happen" to always condemn the black and exonerate the white?

    "You see my point?? Skin color is completely and utterly irrelevant..

    It's only what the facts show that is relevant.." is total bullshit.

  250. [250] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    Wilson has no legal authority to kill people who "are threats to his safety," as you well know. If he doesn't have to deploy Letha force to protect his own life, or the lives of others, he is not authorized to use lethal force.

    Your careful wordplay in attempting to conceal the truth is clear evidence that you know that as well as I do.

    Wilson gunning down Brown simply because Brown had or might physically assault him is murder.

  251. [251] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Interesting, Michale, that a thread has gone on to long when you've no rational response to justify your racist bigotry and support for criminals.

  252. [252] 
    LewDan wrote:

    As always, Michale,

    You simply lie. Obsessively. Compulsively. Stupidly.
    The grand jury has not declined to indict. They haven't even heard the case yet.

  253. [253] 
    Michale wrote:

    When police riot are they "scumbags" too? Since you don't seem to think police breaking the law makes them "felons" to.

    Could you give me an example??

    But, just in the limited context of your question...

    Yes.. If cops looted and rioted and assaulted people etc etc etc ala the type of crap we saw in Ferguson, then.. Yes..

    They would be scumbags...

    while the county prosecutor declining to prosecute Wilson is "Justice has prevailed..?"

    In the same manner that Justice prevailed in the George Zimmerman trial..

    If scumbag Corey hadn't sought to appease racists in the black community and had present the Zimmerman case to the Grand Jury as is the norm, then THAT Grand Jury would have decided NOT to indict just as THIS Grand Jury has done...

    Justice has prevailed...

    As I said, to me skin color is completely and utterly irrelevant...

    But, since you (ALWAYS) bring it up, let me ask you..

    In your world, is it possible for a white cop to shoot a black person and it be a good shoot and NOT be racism???

    Is that even possible in your world???

    You simply lie. Obsessively. Compulsively. Stupidly.
    The grand jury has not declined to indict. They haven't even heard the case yet.

    Actually they have.. And if there was ANY indication that the GJ would vote to indict, it would be announced to appease the racists in the black community..

    The fact that the announcement won't be made til October is proof positive that the Grand Jury will not indict Officer Wilson..

    Would you like to place a little wager??? :D

    Michale

  254. [254] 
    Michale wrote:

    Interesting, Michale, that a thread has gone on to long when you've no rational response to justify your racist bigotry and support for criminals.

    I, unlike you, HAVE no racist bigotry... And you have offered NO FACTS to show other wise..

    Further, you are on record as supporting scumbag criminals like Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown...

    This is documented fact..

    So it is YOU who supports criminals, not I...

    Michale

  255. [255] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Liz,

    I apologize. I'm angry over this, not you.--Would never want you to go any further than the next thread!

    Again--sorry...

  256. [256] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    Google "police riot." That should have been obvious.

  257. [257] 
    Michale wrote:

    Google "police riot." That should have been obvious.

    No, YOU brought it up..

    YOU provide the context...

    But I have already answered..

    If cops were rioting and looting in the same manner as the scumbags in Ferguson were rioting and looting then YES... They would be scumbags..

    Notice how skin-color doesn't even enter into the equation??

    THAT is how it should be for non-racists...

    Michale

  258. [258] 
    Michale wrote:

    I apologize. I'm angry over this, not you.--

    Well, it certainly proves that you can't be rational when discussing this topic..

    :D

    Michale

  259. [259] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Since "police riot" has brought it to mind, and Michale has given me an opening...The '68 Chicago. Police riot was awesome to behold!

    23,000 strong the CPD had been training for weeks to protect the DNC from protesters. They were expecting, and ready, to take on the Black Panthers, the Communists, and anybody else who might think that the could disrupt something in Richard J. Daley's town!--Unfortunately, they were not prepared for the Yippies.

    The Yippies were a Hippie parody of a political party. They mocked the CPD to death. It was David and Goliath, and David kicked ass!..CPD had drilled for weeks. They were primed and ready. They were stoked! Word had gone through the black community grapevine to stay away from the DNC because the cops were looking to collect scalps!

    I, of course, being at that time of the requisite age that practically requires stupid behavior was curious, and wanted to see what would happen....

    The CPDs downfall began with Pigasus. The Yippies in the park across from the DNC staged their own nominating convention, drafted and nominated, Pigasus for President.--An actual live pig. Then the organizers and Pigasus took a victory lap. The "pigs" were not amused.

    The leaders, and Pigusus! were arrested.

    The Yippies were undeterred.--By the time they got to taking down an American flag to burn it, the CPD lost their collective minds!

    They removed their badges and attacked anyone they could get. Protesters, reporters, convention delegates--anyone! And it was all captured live on nationwide TV!

    CPD unleashed so much tear gas it formed a cloud a quarter mile long and ten stories high! People miles way were gassed. Humphrey, the Dem nominee, was gassed in his hotel room shower because the windows were open.--It. Was. Awesome!

    Those Flower Children did what the Black Panthers and Communists couldn't. They broke the Daley machine in Chicago, destroyed the Democratic party, elected Nixon and ended Johnson's war, discredited the police and the government, prompted a Congressional inquiry and caused the term "police riot" to be coined.--They just totally humiliated the police and Mayor Daley.

    They Democratic party still hasn't recovered. The Yippies are why Republicans have been so powerful since Nixon.

    I will never forget the sight of that cloud of tear gas! And, now that I'm not running in terror! looking back, its hilarious!

  260. [260] 
    Michale wrote:

    After the Chicago protests, the demonstrators were confident that the majority of Americans would side with them over what had happened in Chicago, especially because of police behavior. They were shocked to learn that controversy over the war in Vietnam overshadowed their cause.[13] Daley shared he had received 135,000 letters supporting his actions and only 5000 condemning them. Public opinion polls demonstrated that the majority of Americans supported the Mayor's tactics. It was often commented through the popular media that on that evening, America voted for Richard Nixon.[29]

    You mean THAT "police riot"...

    Hardly qualifies... Nothing like the Ferguson MO rioting and looting..

    Sorry, fail... fail... IMPRESSIVELY fail... :D

    Michale

  261. [261] 
    Michale wrote:

    Tom Hayden, one of the leaders of Students for a Democratic Society, encouraged protesters to move out of the park to ensure that if they were to be tear gassed, the whole city would be tear gassed, and made sure that if blood were spilled in Chicago it would happen throughout the city.[25]

    So, apparently, this Hayden scumbag was a terrorist as well...

    Color me surprised... :D

    Michale

  262. [262] 
    Michale wrote:

    They removed their badges and attacked anyone they could get. Protesters, reporters, convention delegates--anyone! And it was all captured live on nationwide TV!

    If that, indeed, did happen then yes.. Those cops SHOULD have removed their badges because they were scumbags and didn't deserve to wear the uniform...

    Happy?? :D

    I know I am.. :D

    Michale

  263. [263] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Lol

  264. [264] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    The Vietnam War is what the Yippies were protesting. The spin was predictable. But the Yippies won, hands down!--I mean, "Hands Up--Don't shoot!"

  265. [265] 
    Michale wrote:

    But the Yippies won, hands down!-

    Apparently history (as espoused by WikiPedia) paints a different picture..

    But who am I to begrudge you your victories.. :D

    Michale

  266. [266] 
    LewDan wrote:

    What defeated the CPD was their arrogance. Their belief in their right to punish those who disrespect them. (Just like every other gang.)--And that's what is has to do with Ferguson.

    The CPD erroneously believed an overwhelming show of force would cow protesters into submission, instead it lost police any semblance of respect.--And that's what it has to do with Ferguson.

    23,000 LEOs simultaneously assaulted citizens without cause proving police can be guilty of illegal behavior, and assault, just like anyone else.--And that's what it has to do with Ferguson.

    A badge and a uniform does not automatically put you on the side of the angels, or the law. Citizens have every right to gather, to protest, to question police authority, and to fight back if assaulted by police.--And that's what it has to do with Ferguson.

    It proves you can't just assume the Police were upholding the law, just assume the suspect was the aggressor, assume that whatever the police officer did he was lawfully enforcing the law.--And that's what it has to do with Ferguson.

  267. [267] 
    John From Censornati wrote:
  268. [268] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Actually Michale,

    "After the Chicago protests, the demonstrators were confident that the majority of Americans would side with them over what had happened in Chicago, especially because of police behavior. They were shocked to learn that controversy over the war in Vietnam overshadowed their cause."

    shows that even if police misconduct is flagrant, violent, massive, undisputed, and "caught in video" the "justice system" may still ignore it and try to cover it up.--And that's what it has to do with Ferguson.

    As for Wikipedia... Unlike you I don't need Wikipedia to tell me what happened.--I was there.

    --Maybe I should straighten Wikipedia out if they've got it wrong?! What do you think? Lol

  269. [269] 
    LewDan wrote:

    John From Censornati,

    Amusing piece.--As I read I thought it might inform Michale on "what race has to do with Ferguson." (I know, then sanity reasserted itself.) Then I wondered if it was an Onion piece. After realizing it was a discussion of Robert's Court "opinions" I realized The Onion writers would be redundant.

    Aside from the authors confusion and difficulty in trying to make sense of the opinion, (queue 'Mission Impossible theme) which should surprise no one, I couldn't help but wonder what would make any one who's up on current events believe SCOTUS would honor its word even if one could make sense of an "opinion?"

  270. [270] 
    Michale wrote:

    As for Wikipedia... Unlike you I don't need Wikipedia to tell me what happened.--I was there.

    You don't accept my cop experiences.. Why should I accept your protest experiences?? :D

    --Maybe I should straighten Wikipedia out if they've got it wrong?! What do you think? Lol

    WikiPedia is open to updates and corrections..

    If yer sure of your facts, go for it! I support ya to the hilt...

    Amusing piece.--As I read I thought it might inform Michale on "what race has to do with Ferguson."

    I'de be happy to entertain the idea that race had something to do with what happened between Wilson and Brown...

    But to do so I would need evidence...

    I don't just consider it because someone wants me to..

    Just with with the Trayvon Martin shooting.. Race had nothing to do with the incident itself..

    Racists in the black community had EVERYTHING to do with the aftermath..

    Just like in Ferguson MO...

    Michale

  271. [271] 
    Michale wrote:

    JFC,

    Sidewalk Counselors!

    Deanna Troi??

    Can I assume from your silence that you have absolutely NO PROOF that I "several times" called you a nazi??

    Michale

  272. [272] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Michale,

    Maybe JFC's proof is in the mail with yours?!

  273. [273] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    "I have nowhere else to go! I have nowhere else to go!"
    AN OFFICER AND A GENTLEMAN

    Yes. And, as you might imagine, I do a very good impression of Gere's face contortions and whining in that scene. Heh.

  274. [274] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Liz,
    I apologize. I'm angry over this, not you.--Would never want you to go any further than the next thread! Again--sorry...

    Thanks for that, LD - I really appreciate it.

    There is quite a lot about this that should compel people to work to change how police departments operate - from recruitment to training to enforcement and everything in between. Hopefully, the changes that need to be made will be made or at least the work toward that end will begin.

    Maybe one of Chris's upcoming columns will focus on what has been learned from all of this and what could and should be done to improve the situation. But, not before he writes a piece on geopolitics in the Middle East. Heh.

  275. [275] 
    Michale wrote:

    Maybe JFC's proof is in the mail with yours?!

    Or more likely, his is non-existent, unlike mine..

    You know what you have to do to see the proof.. I am not going to read thru 316 FTPs to find the evidence only to have you ignore it like you do everything else you don't want to address. :D

    You agree to concede that I was right and you were wrong and I'll find the evidence...

    Liz,

    There is quite a lot about this that should compel people to work to change how police departments operate - from recruitment to training to enforcement and everything in between. Hopefully, the changes that need to be made will be made or at least the work toward that end will begin.

    This pre-supposes that Officer Wilson did anything wrong..

    There is no evidence of this.

    Sometimes bad things happen. It's a fact of life..

    Over-thinking the process and making changes where none are warranted is a fool's errand..

    Further, there is no evidence that Ferguson PD's hiring practices are a problem.. If there is evidence that FPD has refused quality applicants based on skin-color then I would say a case can be made for making changes..

    But no such evidence has been brought forth..

    Making changes simply for the purpose of making changes is never a good idea..

    I am glad we can end this on a positive note.. :D

    Michale

  276. [276] 
    LewDan wrote:

    Was going to let this thread die a natural death, but since the new ftp topic is this topic--and Michale's inane "logic" is even more inane than usual. (Who'd have thought that possible?!)

    "After the Chicago protests, the demonstrators were confident that the majority of Americans would side with them over what had happened in Chicago, especially because of police behavior. They were shocked to learn that controversy over the war in Vietnam overshadowed their cause.[13] Daley shared he had received 135,000 letters supporting his actions and only 5000 condemning them. Public opinion polls demonstrated that the majority of Americans supported the Mayor's tactics. It was often commented through the popular media that on that evening, America voted for Richard Nixon."

    "You mean THAT 'police riot'..."

    135,00 letters of support? Chicago population 7,000,000. 135,000 less than two percent. Friends and family of the 23,000 officers involved would get you more than 135,000!--And how do you get "the majority of Americans supported the Mayor's tactics." if "It was often commented through the popular media that on that evening, America voted for Richard Nixon."?

    Like Michale, the author of this particular spin has a problem with the concept of "logical consistency."

    "Sorry, fail... fail... IMPRESSIVELY fail... :D"

    [258]
    "I apologize. I'm angry over this, not you.--"

    "Well, it certainly proves that you can't be rational when discussing this topic.."

    lol. Michale, I'm more rational in a towering rage on ANY topic than you would be, outdoors, in meditative trance, discussing whether its raining!

    [261]
    "Tom Hayden, one of the leaders of Students for a Democratic Society, encouraged protesters to move out of the park to ensure that if they were to be tear gassed, the whole city would be tear gassed, and made sure that if blood were spilled in Chicago it would happen throughout the city."

    "So, apparently, this Hayden scumbag was a terrorist as well... "

    So Israeli jews are terrorists because they disperse throughout Israel instead of concentrating in one spot so Hamas can try to kill them without hurting anyone else?!

    --An example of your calm, cool, rationality?!

    [262]
    "The Chicago police riot

    "August 28, 1968 came to be known as the day a 'police riot' took place. The title of 'police riot' came out of the Walker Report, which amassed a great deal of information and eyewitness accounts to determine what happened in Chicago.[20]

    "At approximately 3:30 pm, a young boy lowered the American flag at a legal rally taking place at Grant Park. The demonstration was made up of 10,000 protesters.[10] The police broke through the crowd and began beating the boy, while the crowd pelted the police with food, rocks, and chunks of concrete.[23] Police fought with the protesters and vice versa..."

    Only you, Michale, could be so dishonest, and lie so stupidly as cite a Wikipedia entry on 'The Chicago Police Riot' and then say "If that, indeed, did happen...?!"

    According to the Congressional investigation, 'The Walker Report,' the millions who viewed it on live TV, and the tens of thousands, such as myself, who were present--it happened.

    You have some evidence to the contrary?!

    [265]
    "Apparently history (as espoused by WikiPedia) paints a different picture.."

    No. It doesn't. You have reading comprehension issues.

    [270]
    "You don't accept my cop experiences.. Why should I accept your protest experiences?? :D"

    Because my "protest experiences" are recollections of events I actually witnessed, that are documented, verifiable, and common knowledge.

    Your "cop experiences" are a Great Kreskin routine where you prognosticate on events of which you have absolutely no first hand knowledge supposedly based on your "experience."

    To be blunt, unlike you, Michale, I testify to events that I actually have knowledge of, and can prove."

    [275]
    "You know what you have to do to see the proof.. I am not going to read thru 316 FTPs to find the evidence only to have you ignore it like you do everything else you don't want to address. :D

    You agree to concede that I was right and you were wrong and I'll find the evidence..."

    Heads you win. Tails I lose?

    I "confess" so if you provide proof your allegations are confirmed; and if you don't, since none exists, your allegations are confirmed!

    Another example of your rationality?--Or another example of your immaturity?--I outgrew that game by the time I was three years old.

  277. [277] 
    Michale wrote:

    Was going to let this thread die a natural death, but since the new ftp topic is this topic--and Michale's inane "logic" is even more inane than usual. (Who'd have thought that possible?!)

    TRANSLATION:

    I can't stand it when Michale is actually decent and forgiving so I have to make MORE disgusting personal attacks..

    {{{{sssiiiiigggghhhhh}}}}

    So Israeli jews are terrorists because they disperse throughout Israel instead of concentrating in one spot so Hamas can try to kill them without hurting anyone else?!

    WOW....

    How you got there from what I said simply shows the depth of your illogic and irrationality..

    Hayden was advocating dispersing amongst the population as an OFFENSIVE measure.. "Make sure as many people get gassed as possible, Make sure as many people as possible get blooded"

    When Israelis disperse, they do so for DEFENSIVE purposes...

    But I am not surprised you would be taking Hamas's position and side in the conflict...

    Not at all...

    I "confess" so if you provide proof your allegations are confirmed; and if you don't, since none exists, your allegations are confirmed!

    If I link the proof that you stated CW made racist comments, will you acknowledge you were wrong and I was right.. That you did, in fact, claim that CW made racist comments.

    yes or no??

    It's a simply question..

    But like always, your Coward Of The County persona simply won't allow you to acknowledge ANYONE that points out your errors and your mistakes..

    Michale

Comments for this article are closed.