Jump to content

OMG!!!!! THIS IS GETTING SO RIDICULOUS


yagami

Recommended Posts

This is even more unbelievable... Just came out

 

No one should be surprised that Darren Wilson was not indicted by the grand jury. Prosecutor Robert McCulloch played the role of Pontius Pilate, washing his and Darren Wilson’s hands of impunity, while the sacrifice, Michael Brown, was deemed worthy of death because in Wilson’s words “he look[ed] like a demon.” Wilson even uses the sacred instrument to complete his sacrifice to the god of American Whiteness: the gun.

 

http://www.infowars.com/professor-says-mike-brown-sacrificed-to-racist-god/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People incorprate their observations into their perspectives, and adjust their actions accordingly. Wilson and everyone else act as they do toward black men because such reaction has been solicited via gangs, theft, violence etc. None of that is the result of the Wilsons of this world. Those factors create racists. The only way to solve the problems is to fix the individuals and their communities. When the black community is perceived better, it will be treated better. Blaming the white guy will not stop the next one from overreacting and killing the next black kid.

 

*No offense is intended. I'm just trying to keep it real.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what does a black community have to do with a guy that robbed a store and tried to kill a cop?

 

i mean is hermann cain getting this same treatment? he is black.

 

the perception of most blacks is that they are not criminals like the guy that robbed a store and tried to kill the cop. just like the perception that most whites arent criminals either.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm trying to figure out how "snitches get stitches" will fit into the narrative. Doesn't feel very Judas-y.

 

http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/11/ferguson-eye-witness-intimidation-chilling-details/

 

 

I4: Um, I’m, um, I have been, I’ve just been just kind of scared, just kind of scared.Especially, you know, with the interviews. I stopped doing the interviews, I stopped after I did one with [redacted]— [emphasis added--AFB]

 

Ms: Okay.

 

I4: –on a Friday. After that I felt sick, I started worrying.

 

Mr. Why is that?

 

I4: I don’t know, I just started something, like something may happen, you know. I started thinking about, wait a minute, I done did quite a few interviews and I don’t have a lawyer and why do everybody else have lawyers when they put out the very first interview, you know.

 

I Googled my name and I seen a lot of stuff and I come across something, uh, that somebody put, I seen my picture, and it said like snitches get stitches, and then under it says something about people keep talking, they are going to get [redacted], you know, we are going to do something to you. [emphasis added--AFB]

 

Mr.: What’s that?

 

I4: I don’t know. It’s spelled [redacted]. You know, I’m not even sure what that is, but I’ve just been nervous and scared, and I have been letting everybody know about my time in and where I’m going and stuff like that. [emphasis added--AFB]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the title of your post supposed to be a parody on click bait titles? It's all caps, has more than one exclamation mark and tells the reader absolutely northing about the contents of your post.

 

That's certainly the way I took it. It's all over my Facebook feed right now too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I was listening to the audio and imagined him as Joe Pesci in My Cousin Vinny.

 

He makes an important observation about the police and military, but gets the logical conclusion completely wrong. He says that cops that act like Darren Wilson should be in the military, not the police. What he fails to recognize is that the military was involved in Ferguson. The ultimate purpose of the military is not to protect the republic from foreign threats, but from threats that come from the domestic populace. His observations about the militarization of the police are correct, but his conclusion is based on not using all the information at his disposal (i.e. taxation is violence).

 

You can apply the same logic to immigration policy. It's not there to prevent people from coming into the country. It's purpose is to keep them from leaving when the time comes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He makes an important observation about the police and military, but gets the logical conclusion completely wrong.

 

Yeah, he should be taken with a grain of salt, but he *is* a retired prosecutor, iirc. He often comes across as biased toward the left to me (how's that for a soft judgement?). Most of the time he is pretty refreshing.

 

In a previous video he states rather emphatically to never engage the police on their own turf, as I do, simply as a matter of survival. They are trained to eliminate violent threats. Never become perceived as a violent threat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sigh.

 

http://hotair.com/archives/2014/11/29/cnn-michael-brown-autopsy-expert-may-be-a-fraud/

 

 

 

CNN: Michael Brown autopsy “expert” may be a fraud

 

Readers may not know Shawn Parcells’ name, but those who have followed the Michael Brown case know his work. Parcells worked with the Brown family and pathologist Michael Baden on a private autopsy, the results of which Parcells claimed demonstrated that Brown had been (a) shot in the back and (b) shot with his hands in the air in a position of surrender. Both claims were later discredited by the official autopsy and witness accounts to the grand jury that heard the case, but not before the claims made by Parcells on a number of news shows fueled protests and unrest across the nation.

 

So who is “Professor” Shawn Parcells? He’s not a professor, he’s not a doctor, and he’s not qualified to work unassisted on autopsies either, as CNN discovered. In fact, his interference in another case allowed a murderer to go free, and the college at which he claims adjunct status says they never hired him in that capacity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is also this article:

www.vox.com/xpress/2014/11/25/7285265/darren-wilson-grand-jury

 

I would like to hear what others here think about this

 

I think she's talking out of her patoot, since lawyers are not allowed into the Grand Jury proceedings. The jury could have asked anything it wanted, and the prosecutor went to them for a thorough investigation. What is clear is that the prosecutor didn't feel there was cause to indict. So what?

 

What is fundamental is that this Lisa Bloom character doesn't think that a large person moving to take your weapon is a threat. But if someone thinks they can take the gun away from you, that should be good enough for you to believe they can, and you should act accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's "charge people with perjury" time, if not "charge people with inciting to riot" time.

 

I think it is terribly convenient for the police and prosecutor to have a guy that has been doing autopsies on the sly without a licensed pathologist present to save cash-strapped counties money. When it comes time for someone to take the blame for what happened in Ferguson, here is your scapegoat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.