# Are you listening to the news? Officer Wilson Not Indicted in Brown Shooting



## Ina

I'm listening to the statement being read about the investigation of the Missouri case in the news lately.  The grand jury decided no charges.


----------



## JudyB

Yep i'm listening to it...


----------



## drifter

I felt they would not indict. The grand jury looked at all the evidence and made a difficult decision. It's over.


----------



## jujube

*Ferguson Grand jury does NOT indict*

Let's pray for peace.


----------



## SeaBreeze

Yes, the Grand Jury has decided not to indict officer Wilson in the Brown shooting.  I haven't heard too many details, hopefully they will share more of the evidence involved...http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/u...n-shooting-michael-brown-grand-jury.html?_r=0


----------



## Warrigal

I listened live too. I am very impressed with the process and the verdict appears very soundly based on evidence, both physical and from witnesses, not all of whom proved to be reliable.


----------



## Ina

I agree, now the president is talkihg about moving forward. :wave:


----------



## Bettyann

Will withhold most of what I am thinking ... I KNEW it would turn out this way. Cops are never held accountable for whatever they do. So, it came as no surprise whatsoever... I believe it was all orchestrated in order to further stir up and divide Americans... people best wake up and smell the coffee...


----------



## SeaBreeze

I figured it would go that way too Bettyann, and the decision has been made and we have to deal with it.  I hope Michael Brown's father gets his wish about the police cameras, that way the next time this happens, it will be more clear as to what really went on during the encounter.  I still didn't hear any clear details from the announcement, I didn't hear mention of him struggling for the gun, etc.  

Anyway, I hope that there is not too much violence, and the police department looks into the way they handle some of these situations, there's definitely some internal problems.  And I agree, many cops get away with their actions, even if they weren't justified.  If there is an improvement with the police working with the communities, then that is a step in the right direction.


----------



## Warrigal

Blood and DNA evidence supported accounts that Brown reached inside the police vehicle and there was evidence of the police officer having been hit in the face. No bullets entered Brown's body from behind and witnesses were all over the place as to where his hands were at the time of the fatal shots. 

The police officer, Wilson, had established that Brown fitted the description of the person who had stolen the cigarillos from the convenience store. He didn't just stop him for walking down the centre of the street. In other words, he didn't just pick on the black kid.

The only thing I didn't hear was any evidence from toxicology tests on Brown or breath/blood tests from Wilson. Presumably they weren't relevant.


----------



## SeaBreeze

I'm sure they made a decision that they thought was fair Warrigal, just a shame...high price to pay for stealing cigars.  I accept the decision, everyone needs to just move on and hope for more peace in the future.


----------



## Warrigal

Agreed, SeaBreeze, but I think the officer was attempting to make an arrest and things went wrong. I don't think the boy's colour was the fundamental issue.


----------



## QuickSilver

By the looks of the news this AM.... Ferguson had a really rough night..


----------



## Ralphy1

And we have to go back to the original video showing this kid intimidating the shop keeper to realize what probably the grand jury found out about what happened...


----------



## rkunsaw

Rioting, looting and destruction.  Do any of them think they are going to earn respect from the rest of the country? I think they are creating prejudice where it didn't exist before.


----------



## QuickSilver

I have a few questions....  Not about the results of the Grand Jury, but about the way it was rolled out.   I'm not a conspiracy person, but one has to ponder.. WHY!  Why was this brought out in prime time.. after dark... after HOURS of build up.  Every news station had a notation at the bottom of the screen. "results of Grand Jury coming soon"!!!!!   Hour after hour the media and the Ferguson officials waited... baiting... teasing.... letting the crowds build.  Almost like they wanted to incite violence.  What better way than to wait till dark and give people plenty of time to congregate and stew.   Why the 30 minute grandstand by this prosecutor?... blaming the media and the internet.. calling the witnesses favoring the victim LIARS...  then dropping the bomb.   It was like flicking a match into a gasoline can.. and done on purpose IMO.   The results of the Grand Jury were available all day... yet they waited..   Waited until they knew what would happen.   Those results could have been release at a better time.. early in the day.. tomorrow.. the day before Thanksgiving when perhaps there wouldn't have been such a reaction.  

The whole thing stinks to high heaven.   The Prosecutor had no business handling this case... particularly knowing his history of having his father, a police officer, killed by a Black man... and his history of being favorable to the Police..   HE could have brought charges himself.. He did not have to go this way.  So instead of a trial of law, we had a SECRET trial in front of the Grand Jury.   This is a travesty of justice. Now we will never know the truth.


----------



## QuickSilver

rkunsaw said:


> Rioting, looting and destruction.  Do any of them think they are going to earn respect from the rest of the country? I think they are creating prejudice where it didn't exist before.




never mind....  I'm removing my remark.


----------



## ClassicRockr

Totally agree!



Dame Warrigal said:


> Agreed, SeaBreeze, but I think the officer was attempting to make an arrest and things went wrong. I don't think the boy's colour was the fundamental issue.


----------



## QuickSilver

Dame Warrigal said:


> Agreed, SeaBreeze, but I think the officer was attempting to make an arrest and things went wrong. I don't think the boy's colour was the fundamental issue.



Perhaps not...  However I DO think the way it was handled afterward had a lot to do with color.  There are two justice systems here in the US and color is the demarcation between the two.  I'm White..  I don't pretend to understand what it is to be Black.. particularly a Black man dealing with the police.  The numbers of just too staggering.   This whole thing was handled ineptly.  To me, almost with the intent on inflaming this community.  I hate to say this, but it seems like it was intended to show "Look... Look how THESE PEOPLE are!!"   "Look at what they do... the animals."   Sickening.


----------



## Ralphy1

He fought the law and the law won.  A corruption of that old Green Day song...


----------



## QuickSilver

Ralphy1 said:


> He fought the law and the law won.  A corruption of that old Green Day song...



One question remains... and now will NEVER be answered because of the Prosecutors mishandling of this case.  Yes.. Brown stole cigars...  YES.. Brown probably leaned in the squad and perhaps hit the officer and reached for his gun...   YES... Brown was running away and turned around to face the officer..  WHY did the officer kill him?  Why did he fire 12 shots hitting him and additional 5 times AFTER he ran?   Did he HAVE to kill the kid?   We will never have answers now because it will never see a court of law.  THAT is what has infuriated the Community.


----------



## rkunsaw

The grand jury is a court of law and they saw all the evidence and made a decision based on that evidence.


----------



## QuickSilver

rkunsaw said:


> The grand jury is a court of law and they saw all the evidence and made a decision based on that evidence.



No... the Grand Jury's sole purpose is to decide if an indictment should be issued..  The Prosecutor can also do that.  He did not have to bring it before the Grand Jury.  This particular Grand Jury overstepped it's role.  This was a "Secret" trial and violated the rights of the victim.   We will now NEVER know what really happened.. and it's a shame.   I do not advocate the violence... but I understand it.   The Community feels that justice was not served.


----------



## ClassicRockr

Yep!! 



Ralphy1 said:


> He fought the law and the law won.  A corruption of that old Green Day song...


----------



## ClassicRockr

Mr. Brown *CHARGED* Officer Wilson. He was using his body as a weapon, like he did on the liquor store clerk. Officer Wilson was in fear of his life, in which many of us would have been as well.......with the size of this teen. It was pretty obvious that Brown had no respect for law enforcement! Should he been killed? Well, Wilson had to stop the kid someway or he might not be alive today. 



QuickSilver said:


> One question remains... and now will NEVER be answered because of the Prosecutors mishandling of this case.  Yes.. Brown stole cigars...  YES.. Brown probably leaned in the squad and perhaps hit the officer and reached for his gun...   YES... Brown was running away and turned around to face the officer..  WHY did the officer kill him?  Why did he fire 12 shots hitting him and additional 5 times AFTER he ran?   Did he HAVE to kill the kid?   We will never have answers now because it will never see a court of law.  THAT is what has infuriated the Community.


----------



## Butterfly

I, for one, do not think rioting, looting and burning is an acceptable reaction to feeling that justice was not served.  Is justice being served to the people whose businesses, homes and cars are being looted and burned??


----------



## BobF

I see nothing in many of these posts that insist the riots must be justified due to the panels judgements.   Why it that so?    Why do we have courts and panels to determine right and wrong and the mobs of one sided thinkers can just shrug off attempts for fairness and call it wrong and destroy other peoples property in response.   I saw a number of white trash in the mob views on TV just recently.   White trash as they just do not believe in the ways of the US court system as being good, honest, fair, whatever.   The same goes for all the folks using the grand juries responses as an excuse to destroy other peoples properties.   Just pure hateful folks and no matter what their color might be.   Just like a rowdy gang pushing the communist ways of justice or even the far left socialist attitudes toward showing authority over the others in the community.   

Not only in Ferguson but in other cities around the US as well.    Spontaneous responses?    I doubt it as it does take time to gather materials and stir up crowds into destructive thinking.    More like something had been in the planning stage for some weeks and just needed the final statement to get things rolling.   If folks really looked into what has happened they could see that much effort went into thinking through what all has happened and what and why they jury decided as they did.    These destructive mobs did not take any time to review anything, they just attacked irrationally.   They should at least have listened to the family of the dead son.   They have been asking for no violence since the very beginning of this jury trial of the situation.

There is not excuse for these rioting mobs of whites and blacks.   It is just an excuse for some to pretend to be fighting for some cause or reason.   The only reason visible is their love of destruction and the ability to steal lots of items.    Pure mob psychology for many of the low brain participants.


----------



## QuickSilver

Sadly... another case of trying the victim... not the murderer.   It's what has come to be expected in the Black community..  This seems to be the rule of thumb now.  The dead person has to prove they were innocent in their murders, and didn't deserve to die.


----------



## Twixie

I actually don't see the point of rioting..looting, and setting fire to buildings..

It is just re-inforcing some peoples views..

What good does it do?

Everytime a black guy gets shot..it's the same old..same old.....

Robbery..arson...WHY???


----------



## QuickSilver

Twixie said:


> I actually don't see the point of rioting..looting, and setting fire to buildings..
> 
> It is just re-inforcing some peoples views..
> 
> What good does it do?
> 
> Everytime a black guy gets shot..it's the same old..same old.....
> 
> Robbery..arson...WHY???




This is exactly what was wanted.  Get all the White folks to focus on the riots, looting, and arson, (which I have said is wrong) and even stage an event like was staged last night to incite it.. so we all forget about what has driven this community to this.  They don't feel they get to participate in the same justice system that Whites do..  Can you blame them?  They don't.  They are many more times likely to be convicted of the same crime as Whites..   They have to prove their innocence in a system where Whites are innocent until PROVEN guilty.  AND they sometimes go on trial for their own murders... as in the Trayvon Martin case.. and now sadly Michael Brown.  Make no mistake about it..  Brown was the one being tried in the Grand Jury hearings.

And judging from the comments being made here... they have succeeded.  Just look at THOSE PEOPLE!!  Look how they behave..


----------



## QuickSilver




----------



## rkunsaw

Mike Brown is the one who was guilty.


----------



## BobF

QuickSilver said:


> Sadly... another case of trying the victim... not the murderer.   It's what has come to be expected in the Black community..  This seems to be the rule of thumb now.  The dead person has to prove they were innocent in their murders, and didn't deserve to die.



This was not a case of try the victim at all.   It was a case of deciding just if to try and why.   So in the end, the accused was released from any malevolent act and was determined to be more of self defense.   Both blacks and whites on this jury agreed so I see no problems at all.   I have read some of the comments that were released and those comment purely put the blame on the victim as he was noticed to have charged and recharged toward the policeman and photos of the policeman after the shooting showed red marks on his face an neck from apparent hits from the victim.

I really admire the victims parents and their wishes for no more violence.


----------



## Twixie

QuickSilver said:


> This is exactly what was wanted.  Get all the White folks to focus on the riots, looting, and arson, (which I have said is wrong) and even stage an event like was staged last night to incite it.. so we all forget about what has driven this community to this.  They don't feel they get to participate in the same justice system that Whites do..  Can you blame them?  They don't.  They are many more times likely to be convicted of the same crime as Whites..   They have to prove their innocence in a system where Whites are innocent until PROVEN guilty.  AND they sometimes go on trial for their own murders... as in the Trayvon Martin case.. and now sadly Michael Brown.  Make no mistake about it..  Brown was the one being tried in the Grand Jury hearings.
> 
> And judging from the comments being made here... they have succeeded.  Just look at THOSE PEOPLE!!  Look how they behave..



But it's true QS..what possible change to the outcome can doing this do..It's always the same...a black guy was shot in London..I was in Birmingham..looting took place..It was just people thieving..did they know the victim??..Did they care?..

It's wrong!!...and it is not going to help their cause..it will just alienate them even further..


----------



## QuickSilver

Twixie said:


> But it's true QS..what possible change to the outcome can doing this do..It's always the same...a black guy was shot in London..I was in Birmingham..looting took place..It was just people thieving..did they know the victim??..Did they care?..
> 
> It's wrong!!...and it is not going to help their cause..it will just alienate them even further..



So what is going to help their cause?

If there are definite inequalities in our Justice System.. What would the course of action be to have it corrected?  Pass laws?  Yes.. Didn't we have a whole bunch of legislation passed regarding Civil Rights and Voting rights?   Somehow that hasn't seemed to help and those rights are being slowly eroded by more legislation from Conservative courts and legislatures..    OK....  Be nice... don't complain.. Don't protest, . accept the inequalities and somehow the powers that be will see that it's wrong and change the system..   sure.. right......   I agree, rioting, looting, and arson are wrong and counter productive.. BUT peaceful and unrelenting protests.. and registering to vote and making sure that every single eligible Black person VOTES... will change a few things.    It certainly will get the attention of Conservatives.


----------



## BobF

And who is Syreeta McFadden?    I did a look up and found nothing of any description of the person or their ways.


----------



## Twixie

QuickSilver said:


> So what is going to help their cause?



Thieving won't..that's for sure..

A quiet dignity might..a search to know the truth?..

I hear Michael's father has already applied for compensation..

I would be too busy going insane!!


----------



## SeaBreeze

rkunsaw said:


> Rioting, looting and destruction.  Do any of them think they are going to earn respect from the rest of the country? I think they are creating prejudice where it didn't exist before.



They don't have to create the prejudice, it's existed for a long, long time, and from the looks of it, will continue long after we're all dead.



QuickSilver said:


> WHY did the officer kill him?  Why did he fire 12 shots hitting him and additional 5 times AFTER he ran?   Did he HAVE to kill the kid?   We will never have answers now because it will never see a court of law.  THAT is what has infuriated the Community.



I agree,  I don't see why he had to kill the young man either, but it's easier to defend your actions that way, dead men can't talk back.



QuickSilver said:


> No... the Grand Jury's sole purpose is to decide if an indictment should be issued..  The Prosecutor can also do that.  He did not have to bring it before the Grand Jury.  This particular Grand Jury overstepped it's role.  This was a "Secret" trial and violated the rights of the victim.   We will now NEVER know what really happened.. and it's a shame.   I do not advocate the violence... but I understand it.   The Community feels that justice was not served.



The whole thing was very suspicious and secretive from the beginning, and we actually know nothing more than we did when it happened.  Many of us don't feel that justice was served, but that's our justice system, and we have to live with the findings of that jury now.

You could see during the lead up to that decision, what the result was clearly.  Why focus on the street witnesses with no credit, why not elaborate on the issue of the murder, and exactly why it happened?  If the jury was encouraged to decide on hearsay, that's pretty pathetic, IMO.  Even they received no real details on why the killing was needed, why so many shots, etc?  Was stealing cigars and jaywalking enough reason to take a life, I don't think so.

The media blew this whole thing way out of proportion from the getgo, they love the drama, they got their ratings, so that's all they care about.  I heard that a lot of the protesters were not even Ferguson residents.  A lot of the rioters came well prepared to cause destruction and be part of the whole scene.  They were saying last night that social media, like twitter and fb, played a big part in helping the rioters organize and plan with each other, not only in Missouri, but also in other states.  Luckily the protests where I live were peaceful.

I feel sorry for the innocent people that were driven away from the area, and who will never feel safe there.  I've said it before, they not only have to address serious crime in America, like senseless murders, but they have to make some changes in the way the police handle themselves too.  It may just be a small percentage of precincts, but this issue cannot be ignored.


----------



## Don M.

The Riots, Looting and Burning started last night...right on cue.  The Ferguson residents will not only have to deal with the tragedy of this shooting, but also the destruction that the outside agitators have brought to their community.  The grand jury heard the evidence, and made their decision, so people should behave like adults, and take peaceful means to proceed, if they are not satisfied.  Those involved in these riots should be treated as Home Grown Terrorists, and dealt with accordingly.  

As I understand it, the full transcript of the grand jury hearing will be made public in coming days, and will be available for all to read.  Those who do not agree with this decision should at least have the good sense to read and review this evidence before they go off on a rampage....or a rant.


----------



## QuickSilver

Don M. said:


> The Riots, Looting and Burning started last night...right on cue.  The Ferguson residents will not only have to deal with the tragedy of this shooting, but also the destruction that the outside agitators have brought to their community.  The grand jury heard the evidence, and made their decision, so people should behave like adults, and take peaceful means to proceed, if they are not satisfied.  Those involved in these riots should be treated as Home Grown Terrorists, and dealt with accordingly.
> 
> As I understand it, the full transcript of the grand jury hearing will be made public in coming days, and will be available for all to read.  Those who do not agree with this decision should at least have the good sense to read and review this evidence before they go off on a rampage....or a rant.



Unfortunately NONE of the transcripts of the Grand Jury hearing will answer the fundamental questions.  WHY did Daren Wilson have to get out of his squad and kill Michael Brown!...   He was killed far away from the squad where he allegedly tried to take Wilson's gun.  108 feet away from the squad to be exact.   WHY did he have to be shot dead when he was trying to get away.  With no trial, we will never know.. nor will justice be done.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/...g-death-of-Mike-Brown-that-just-won-t-go-away#


----------



## Don M.

If you have the above questions, you might want to read the transcripts when they become available.  The prosecutors interview, last night, and the various news reports this morning, addressed the questions you seem to have, and seem to have been verified by the witnesses.  Besides, How do you Know that the transcripts Will Not answer your questions before you have even read them.....


----------



## ClassicRockr

Have already said "why" in this Thread and the "why" has been on CNN all morning.......Brown ran away from Wilson, stopped, turned around and *CHARGED* at Wilson. All evidence and creditable testimony says this. One lawyer stated that Brown wasn't scared of Wilson or the gun in Wilson's hand. Brown was on a mission to hurt Wilson seriously, by trying to get his gun in the patrol car and then charging him, or even kill him! 

What more needs to be said?? 



QuickSilver said:


> Unfortunately NONE of the transcripts of the Grand Jury hearing will answer the fundamental questions.  WHY did Daren Wilson have to get out of his squad and kill Michael Brown!...   He was killed far away from the squad where he allegedly tried to take Wilson's gun.  108 feet away from the squad to be exact.   WHY did he have to be shot dead when he was trying to get away.  With no trial, we will never know.. nor will justice be done.
> 
> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/...g-death-of-Mike-Brown-that-just-won-t-go-away#


----------



## ClassicRockr

Good reply!



Don M. said:


> If you have the above questions, you might want to read the transcripts when they become available.  The prosecutors interview, last night, and the various news reports this morning, addressed the questions you seem to have, and seem to have been verified by the witnesses.  Besides, How do you Know that the transcripts Will Not answer your questions before you have even read them.....


----------



## QuickSilver

ClassicRockr said:


> Have already said "why" in this Thread and the "why" has been on CNN all morning.......Brown ran away from Wilson, stopped, turned around and *CHARGED* at Wilson. All evidence and creditable testimony says this. One lawyer stated that Brown wasn't scared of Wilson or the gun in Wilson's hand. Brown was on a mission to hurt Wilson seriously, by trying to get his gun in the patrol car and then charging him, or even kill him!
> 
> What more needs to be said??



Well... that's what Wilson *CLAIMS*  But without a proper trial with cross examination and a REAL Prosecutor.. we will NEVER know if that's the truth.  So.. I guess if this is good enough to put everyone's conscience at ease... so be it.


----------



## BobF

Some on this thread are far to ready to keep the anger and hate going and growing.    The trial so far has been run by our countries legal system.   To bad some don't like the end result but not enough to justify all the riots and burnings that have been going on.   Nothing in the US justifies such wild and unjustified actions.   That is the kind of crap that you might find in some countries and their ideas of justice in return are nothing we would want in the US.

And it is not the "Somehow that hasn't seemed to help and those rights are being slowly  eroded by more legislation from Conservative courts and legislatures."  Want to start blamig the conservatives is a dumb thing to do.   We all live in this country together and today we are all about the same number 1/3 conservative, 1/3 liberal, the remaining independent.   The country has plenty of room for all of us and such finger pointing proves nothing at all.   Far too much legislation has taken freedom from our lives and turned it into government regulations.   Not all good at all.   Crimes such as these we see today should be treated tightly for they are destroying others investments for their and their children's futures.   How many of the businesses and properties are owned or operated by the blacks of those commumities?   Likely a lot.   Which means to me those rioters are doing a lot of damage for those they are pretending to support.   Darned fools.   All of them.   This country does not need to change its laws, just enforce them and make the penalties fit the crime.   Walking away from these riot crimes with no penalties is a shame for all engaging.   They are hurting the community for no valid reasons and need punished for doing so and to discourage others from doing the same in the future.


----------



## Twixie

BobF said:


> Some on this thread are far to ready to keep the anger and hate going and growing.    The trial so far has been run by our countries legal system.   To bad some don't like the end result but not enough to justify all the riots and burnings that have been going on.   Nothing in the US justifies such wild and unjustified actions.   That is the kind of crap that you might find in some countries and their ideas of justice in return are nothing we would want in the US.
> 
> And it is not the "Somehow that hasn't seemed to help and those rights are being slowly  eroded by more legislation from Conservative courts and legislatures."  Want to start blamig the conservatives is a dumb thing to do.   We all live in this country together and today we are all about the same number 1/3 conservative, 1/3 liberal, the remaining independent.   The country has plenty of room for all of us and such finger pointing proves nothing at all.   Far too much legislation has taken freedom from our lives and turned it into government regulations.   Not all good at all.   Crimes such as these we see today should be treated tightly for they are destroying others investments for their and their children's futures.   How many of the businesses and properties are owned or operated by the blacks of those commumities?   Likely a lot.   Which means to me those rioters are doing a lot of damage for those they are pretending to support.   Darned fools.   All of them.   This country does not need to change its laws, just enforce them and make the penalties fit the crime.   Walking away from these riot crimes with no penalties is a shame for all engaging.   They are hurting the community for no valid reasons and need punished for doing so and to discourage others from doing the same in the future.



I did actually watch the riots in B'ham...the police were too scared to intervene...so as not to inflame them any more..


----------



## AprilT

Twixie said:


> I actually don't see the point of rioting..looting, and setting fire to buildings..
> 
> It is just re-inforcing some peoples views..
> 
> What good does it do?
> 
> *Everytime a black guy gets shot..it's the same old..same old*.....
> 
> *Robbery..arson...WHY???*



So not true, but, that's what many spout and often believe.  Why is that?  There have been numerous cases of black men being shot just while doing nothing more than driving while black in recent news, but those stories don't get as much consideration when all we see are the cases where others do wrong.  I agree that what's going on in Ferguson is disgusting and uncalled for and no way to get expect or bring about positive changes to the community.  The ones wrecking havoc aren't really the ones seeing change, they are just hoodlums, there were many peacefully protesting till the hooligans decided to create mayhem. 

I've said it before, I've little sympathy for someone out committing crimes that gets caught in crossfire, I do however feel for the parents.  There is something wrong with the mindset of those who think destroying their own community looting and harming, shooting and being destructive in such manners is a means to change.  I don't think that's what those doing so seek to begin with, but then again I'm not in their heads.  I'm sickened by the behavior.  

My sister lost her son, one of my beloved nephews, who was an innocent bystander in a store to some hoodlum, whom was never brought to justice, the shooter was never identified.  Her heart never healed.  I'll never understand the minds of these criminals who harm others without the blink of an eye whether that be with a gun or their bare hands bunching and choking someone.  You strong arm someone, expect to pay the price.  At the same time, please stop thinking all black youth and men are the same as what's portrayed on your screen, even in those communities there are intelligent gentle loving hard working young black men trying to make a difference, but are out shadowed by the thugs and attention given to them by the media.

Twixie, I do agree with you, there's no point of looting, setting fires and the like, but as far as reinforcing some people's points of views, only those that have a limited view to begin with will continue to believe as they always have; there are those that understand the virus and that it does not exist within all people due to the color of their skin.  Just as I understand not all white people secretly feel they are superior to other ethnic groups or have private kkk meetings nor send in money to support stormfront or all love green been casserole for that matter.    Imagine if that's how we thought in such a way.


----------



## Butterfly

The point is that rioting, looting and burning other people's property is plain wrong -- regardless of whether the grand jury's "no true bill" was right or wrong, fair or unfair.  Violent mobs do not get to decide the fairness or truth of the outcome of a grand jury.    

We have the right to peacefully protest -- NOT to riot and burn!  There is NO justification for this kind of behavior.


----------



## QuickSilver

Butterfly said:


> The point is that rioting, looting and burning other people's property is plain wrong -- regardless of whether the grand jury's "no true bill" was right or wrong, fair or unfair.  Violent mobs do not get to decide the fairness or truth of the outcome of a grand jury.
> 
> We have the right to peacefully protest -- NOT to riot and burn!  There is NO justification for this kind of behavior.



Absolutely..   there is no justification.  However, I can understand the frustration felt.   Doesn't excuse it, but it makes me understand it.  When people feel powerless to effect change they can behave badly.


----------



## Denise1952

Thanks for this info Dame, I don't have TV News, and it's hard to figure which "online" reports are good.  Denise


----------



## QuickSilver

nwlady said:


> Our country has come a long way, and much more equal opportunity then we did have.



From the article



> Among the “childish things” we need to put aside, white people, is the idea that America’s tormented racial legacy belongs to the past. You know exactly the attitude I mean: We have twice elected a biracial president and LeBron James and Jay Z are zillionaires, so no more talk of racism, please. In the more paranoid formulation prevalent in the Fox News demographic (but not limited to it), this becomes the idea that the federal government has spent the last 50 years giving away money, housing, education and other “free stuff” to black people who don’t work or pay taxes, while vigorously grinding down the white man. So either the vision of healing and reconciliation conjured up so eloquently by Martin Luther King, Jr. more than 50 years ago has now been fulfilled (and black people need to stop complaining), or America is being not so slowly turned into a gay-Muslim-socialist totalitarian state where every day is Kwanzaa. Both scenarios come up against the nettlesome fact that African-Americans stubbornly persist in being poor, living in disadvantaged circumstances, getting shot by the police for no particular reason and going to prison in large numbers.



http://www.salon.com/2014/08/23/white_privilege_an_insidious_virus_thats_eating_america_from_within/


----------



## Davey Jones

Ina said:


> I agree, now the president is talkihg about moving forward. :wave:




Sorry but if it wasnt for a black kid ,he would never appeared on TV.

There are black kids killed and murdered everyday,anybody care`about those but does Obama come on TV?


----------



## QuickSilver

Davey Jones said:


> Sorry but if it wasnt for a black kid ,he would never appeared on TV.
> 
> There are black kids killed and murdered everyday,anybody care`about those but does Obama come on TV?




So you want him on TV for every black person killed?   This is kind of a high profile situation and I think it can encompass the larger problem..


----------



## BobF

In the US we have blacks, native Americans, whites, in just about everything you can think of.   Hard at work to improve their lives, the communities, the schools, the governments.   Big idea is to get off your butts, stop crying about others doing better, and do something about that for yourself.    We have had native Americans become Senators in our US government.

We have plenty of blacks that have done quite well.   Obama for one in today's time.    Go back into Bush's days and we had a black lady in high level positions, we also had a black man in high level positions.   We have millionaire's in business efforts that are blacks that started the business and drove it into big success.

Those that really do wish success for themselves and family can not do it by just sitting around bitching about how others are doing well and they are stuck in a poor situation.   They must do more than fail to go to school and learn things or become drug dependent or drunks or selling drugs or stealing cars or whatever that is illegal.   There future will be that of having much of their lives wasted in jails or in early deaths.

I don't have much pity for whites or blacks that end up in jail for not following the laws.   Many who came out of our poor class areas worked their way towards the successful ones.    Some made it big and some only got better than they had seen.   Those that do not try end up in the trash area they have earned for themselves, jail, or early death.


----------



## SeaBreeze

Davey Jones said:


> There are black kids killed and murdered everyday,anybody care`about those but does Obama come on TV?



There is no question that there are a lot of shootings and murders of blacks all the time, most are done by the criminals in the streets, or gang-related.  I believe that most of those killers are sent to trial and put in jail for their crimes.  When someone in power and authority commits the murder, for no apparent good reason, then yes, it does gain national recognition on the media.  We are supposed to have some fear for our safety from the criminal element, but over the years, it seems we also have to fear those in power, like the police. 

 If I ever get stopped for a traffic violation, you better believe that I will not make any sudden moves, keep my hands in full sight at all times, and do exactly as I am instructed.  Years ago, I would have cooperated just out of respect for the officer, these days I would cooperate to avoid getting senselessly tased, beaten or shot by some trigger happy individual, sometimes cooperation isn't enough.  I'll repeat, I'm not saying all cops are like this, but there are enough for all of us to be painfully aware of, regardless of our color.


----------



## Don M.

These rioters were well prepared to create havoc...no matter which way the grand jury verdict came down.  You don't set buildings and cars on fire with a cigarette lighter...it takes containers of flammable liquids and some careful planning to achieve the damage done to Ferguson last night.  While the bulk of the protesters kept the police occupied, a few of the Terrorists sneaked in behind the cops, and quickly ignited their homemade firebombs.  This was not a sudden impulse action...rather it was a well rehearsed plan.  

All they will have accomplished, in the end, is destroying a largely Black neighborhood, and hardening racial attitudes even further.


----------



## QuickSilver

SeaBreeze said:


> There is no question that there are a lot of shootings and murders of blacks all the time, most are done by the criminals in the streets, or gang-related.  I believe that most of those killers are sent to trial and put in jail for their crimes.  When someone in power and authority commits the murder, for no apparent good reason, then yes, it does gain national recognition on the media.  We are supposed to have some fear for our safety from the criminal element, but over the years, it seems we also have to fear those in power, like the police.
> 
> If I ever get stopped for a traffic violation, you better believe that I will not make any sudden moves, keep my hands in full sight at all times, and do exactly as I am instructed.  Years ago, I would have cooperated just out of respect for the officer, these days I would cooperate to avoid getting senselessly tased, beaten or shot by some trigger happy individual, sometimes cooperation isn't enough.  I'll repeat, I'm not saying all cops are like this, but there are enough for all of us to be painfully aware of, regardless of our color.



I agree with you Seabreeze..  I am leary of cops now..  I woundn't put anything past them.  I have a disabled adult son who is sometimes "difficult".  I would never call police to help.  They would shoot him dead I am certain of it.   Don't trust a single one of them. They are just a little too trigger happy. Instead of serving and protecting, they all want to play Rambo.


----------



## SeaBreeze

I don't blame you for being leery QS, this is just one of many cases where the mentally handicapped were abused (or killed) by police.  http://www.naturalnews.com/032882_tasers_police_brutality.html#


----------



## QuickSilver

I wouldn't have been hesitant 20 years ago, but something has happened to police.  They have become quasi-military and unpredictable. No more image of the friendly cop on the beat.. Now they are driving armoured tanks and carrying assault weapons..  Boys with toys want to use them... right?


----------



## Don M.

QuickSilver said:


> I wouldn't have been hesitant 20 years ago, but something has happened to police.  They have become quasi-military and unpredictable. No more image of the friendly cop on the beat.. Now they are driving armoured tanks and carrying assault weapons..  Boys with toys want to use them... right?



Since the Iraq war began to wind down, the Pentagon has been giving surplus military vehicles to local police departments....in the Name of "combating terrorism".  As a result, when there is Any kind of disturbance, the police are likely to show up in armored vehicles, wearing heavy body armor, and carrying surplus automatic rifles.  This "Macho" image has to effect the thinking and actions of some of those carrying a badge.


----------



## SeaBreeze

I know what you mean, there used to be cops patrolling the neighborhood on foot when I was young and living in the city.  They were very friendly, and didn't look for trouble, we always talked to them and felt very comfortable...no more of that!


----------



## QuickSilver

SeaBreeze said:


> I know what you mean, there used to be cops patrolling the neighborhood on foot when I was young and living in the city.  They were very friendly, and didn't look for trouble, we always talked to them and felt very comfortable...no more of that!



I remember my parents telling me that if ever I were lost or afraid to be sure to go to the nearest policeman and ask for help.  What parents are so eager to give that advise these days... especially Black parents.


----------



## BobF

As I remember from news casts that some, if not many, of the police there were blacks.   Do they also scare you so badly.

I think there is too much scare talk about the police these days.   One thing for sure is that they do have to be prepared to defend themselves with so many drug doped folks to try to control.


----------



## ClassicRockr

I've *NEVER* had a problem with law enforcement! I've shown them respect by saying "yes Sir" and "no Sir" with no problems. I think it's more of people giving *them* problems and disrespecting *them *than what they do to the public. I have noticed that they aren't nearly as "talkative" to the public as they once were, but then again, they don't know who they are talking to either.

The officer that lives in our apartment complex asked me to jump-start his patrol car (in the complex) when the battery went dead. I had no problem pulling our Dodge Ram over next to his patrol car and giving him a jump. Patrol car stated right up, he said "thanks", I said "you're welcome" and that was it. I did meet him, and his son, at a complex party in the clubhouse. Very nice officer!


----------



## ClassicRockr

Funny, a Congress Woman on CNN said that Brown was just getting ready to attend college.......yea, right (sarcastically saying that). The teen had just robbed a liquor store. He wasn't heading to college, he was heading to jail!


----------



## QuickSilver

Feels like we have our very own Brown shirts.


----------



## QuickSilver

ClassicRockr said:


> Funny, a Congress Woman on CNN said that Brown was just getting ready to attend college.......yea, right (sarcastically saying that). The teen had just robbed a liquor store. He wasn't heading to college, he was heading to jail!



How can you make a statement like that?   How do you know?  OR are you just giving in to your preconceived stereotypes and prejudices?  Your statemet reeks of bigotry.


----------



## QuickSilver

ClassicRockr said:


> Sorry, didn't like my own reply......deleted it.



Too late... I quoted it..   Words have consequences.


----------



## ClassicRockr

That wasn't the reply I was talking about! The reply I had was deleted by me. 



QuickSilver said:


> Too late... I quoted it..   Words have consequences.


----------



## ClassicRockr

I never said that I "disliked" the dude! Other than that, I have no idea what you are talking about in your reply here. But, we all have to watch it, because the Administrator would let any of us know that we can't talk others on the forum like this (below).  



QuickSilver said:


> How can you make a statement like that?   How do you know?  OR are you just giving in to your preconceived stereotypes and prejudices?  Your statemet reeks of bigotry.


----------



## Meanderer

This is an important topic, that needs light, not heat shed on it.  I have enjoyed following the discussion and would feel bad if it were closed by the Moderator.


----------



## QuickSilver

ClassicRockr said:


> I never said that I "disliked" the dude! Other than that, I have no idea what you are talking about in your reply here. But, we all have to watch it, because the Administrator would let any of us know that we can't talk others on the forum like this (below).




My apology...  I misread your post.


----------



## BobF

QuickSilver said:


> How can you make a statement like that?   How do you know?  OR are you just giving in to your preconceived stereotypes and prejudices?  Your statemet reeks of bigotry.



The act of the teen robbing a store was filmed by the store camera and has been shown on TV more than once.   He not only stole, he also pushed and slapped around the clerk that tried to stop him.   Being a teen does not make one a peaceful and kind person.   He was not such.   Maybe that is why the policeman had tried to stop him.


----------



## Denise1952

ClassicRockr said:


> I never said that I "disliked" the dude! Other than that, I have no idea what you are talking about in your reply here. But, we all have to watch it, because the Administrator would let any of us know that we can't talk others on the forum like this (below).



Yes, I'm in agreement CR, I recently read the rules again myself, and there are not to be any personal attacks or name calling.


----------



## Denise1952

BobF said:


> The act of the teen robbing a store was filmed by the store camera and has been shown on TV more than once.   He not only stole, he also pushed and slapped around the clerk that tried to stop him.   Being a teen does not make one a peaceful and kind person.   He was not such.   Maybe that is why the policeman had tried to stop him.



I really don't believe it would have went any different if the teen had been white either.


----------



## QuickSilver

nwlady said:


> Yes, I'm in agreement CR, I recently read the rules again myself, and there are not to be any personal attacks or name calling.



Excuse me.... but calling someones remarks bigotted is expressing an opinion about the remark or position... NOT the person.. and it's not a personal attack...  Just wanted to set the record straight...   AND I did misread CRs post... thinking it was HIS remark... not the CNN reporter... AND I have apologized to him for doing so.    There is really no need to stir the pot... is there?


----------



## Denise1952

I think everyone here knows how the record stands, and most know the rules and abide by them.


----------



## QuickSilver

nwlady said:


> I think everyone here knows how the record stands, and most know the rules and abide by them.



As Do I..


----------



## tnthomas

*Some sorrows*

Sorry that the young man died, but he put *himself* in harm's way.  So sorry that he happened to be black, and that the officer is white.   Sorry that there are those that view this  incident as race-related, it was a response to criminal acts, nothing else.

Sorry that the criminal element in the Ferguson community rose-up and took the opportunity to loot and vandalize, in the name of 'protest'.


----------



## Meanderer

I have always liked Martin Luther King's words about how one day we will judge a person by the content of their character, rather than the color of their skin.  Sadly. that day is not fully here yet.


----------



## rkunsaw

Meanderer said:


> I have always liked Martin Luther King's words about how one day we will judge a person by the content of their character, rather than the color of their skin.  Sadly. that day is not here yet.



I think that day is here and has been here for a long time for most of us. 

 There are those whose livelihood depends on keeping things stirred up so they can get donations and votes. They are the racists.


----------



## QuickSilver

I'm done with this thread...  seems like everything has been said... no minds changed.... and racial and political ideology appear hardened and carved in stone.  Guess we have to wait until the entire electorate changes before real change will take affect.


----------



## Meanderer

rkunsaw said:


> I think that day is here and has been here for a long time for most of us.
> 
> There are those whose livelihood depends on keeping things stirred up so they can get donations and votes. They are the racists.


Personally, that time has arrived for me also, Larry.  I was speaking of the situation in news.  We have to apply those words not as a magnifying glass, but as a mirror.


----------



## ClassicRockr

You didn't misread my post, QS. The Congress Woman on CNN stated that Brown was getting ready to attend college. The words I said about what she said was "yea, right", was being sarcastic (sorry, the way I talk sometimes). What I said is that Brown wouldn't be headed to college right away because, if caught/arrested for stealing those cigaritto's (or whatever they were), he would be going to jail first. Which was just a fact. 

To his friends/family, Brown was a nice teen, but just how nice was he? Stealing from a Convenient Store, using his size/body to push around the store clerk who tried to stop him from stealing and then disobeying officer Wilson telling him and his friend to get out of the middle of the street and go on the sidewalk. If this teen is being this way towards a cop and a store clerk, how will he act if he gets upset with a college teacher?


----------



## tnthomas

QuickSilver said:


> I'm done with this thread...  seems like everything has been said... no minds changed.... and racial and political ideology appear hardened and carved in stone.  Guess we have to wait until the entire electorate changes before real change will take affect.



I used to believe that others minds could be changed by presenting the "truth" in a palatable way, I have since abandoned that belief.

We can only express our personal views, but the desire to "change" other people's way of thinking will never be fulfilled.


----------



## QuickSilver

ClassicRockr said:


> You didn't misread my post, QS. The Congress Woman on CNN stated that Brown was getting ready to attend college. The words I said about what she said was "yea, right", was being sarcastic (sorry, the way I talk sometimes). What I said is that Brown wouldn't be headed to college right away because, if caught/arrested for stealing those cigaritto's (or whatever they were), he would be going to jail first. Which was just a fact.
> 
> To his friends/family, Brown was a nice teen, but just how nice was he? Stealing from a Convenient Store, using his size/body to push around the store clerk who tried to stop him from stealing and then disobeying officer Wilson telling him and his friend to get out of the middle of the street and go on the sidewalk. If this teen is being this way towards a cop and a store clerk, how will he act if he gets upset with a college teacher?



To this, all I can say is I'm glad all of us had perfectly behaved teenagers who never did stupid, dangerous or illegal things while out of our sight.

So this begs the question.  Do you believe a middle class white kid from a nice neighborhood would go to jail for stealing a box of Swisher Sweets?


----------



## ClassicRockr

I know what my answer is, but will let others "chime-in" on that question. 



QuickSilver said:


> To this, all I can say is I'm glad all of us had perfectly behaved teenagers who never did stupid, dangerous or illegal things while out of our sight.
> 
> So this begs the question.  Do you believe a middle class white kid from a nice neighborhood would go to jail for stealing a box of Swisher Sweets?


----------



## QuickSilver

ClassicRockr said:


> I know what my answer is, but will let others "chime-in" on that question.
> 
> 
> [/COLOR]




First let me clarify... all things equal..  Remember Michael Brown had no criminal record. 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/14/michael-brown-no-record/14041457/

 My answer would be no.   He would get probation at most... perhaps some community service with an expunged record..  So it wouldn't affect his future.


----------



## rkunsaw

Probably not for stealing cigars and Michael Brown wouldn't either,  but white or black they would go to jail for assaulting a police officer. Or get shot.


----------



## BobF

I wonder it that is the same story as told to the jury folks.   According to the reports about the jury folks, they said the medical reports said there were no shots in the back.   Lots to worry about such individual reports compared to he compiled and thought through reports of the 12 people.   And there were blacks on that committee too.


----------



## ClassicRockr

Well, we can debate Michael Brown's personality, and what happened, on and on. You have your thoughts/feelings and others have their thoughts/feelings. 

Time to move on! I thought you made a reply that you were done with this Thread?  As for me, I think I am.


----------



## ClassicRockr

True, but there will still be those that won't accept/agree with this either.



rkunsaw said:


> Probably not for stealing cigars and Michael Brown wouldn't either,  but white or black they would go to jail for assaulting a police officer. Or get shot.


----------



## QuickSilver

rkunsaw said:


> Probably not for stealing cigars and Michael Brown wouldn't either,  but white or black they would go to jail for assaulting a police officer. Or get shot.



They may....  unless mom and dad could pay for a good attorney.  I'm not sure they would be shot either..  

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...-wilson-ferguson-killing-grand-jury/70076886/



> Officer Darren Wilson testified before a St. Louis County grand jury that* Michael Brown looked "like a demon"* as the bigger man repeatedly punched and assaulted him in an Aug. 9 scuffle that turned deadly.
> Wilson said Brown became overpoweringly violent after the officer asked him to stop walking in the middle of a street. "I've never seen that much aggression so quickly from a simple request to just walk on the sidewalk," Wilson testified.
> Documents released by the prosecutors office offer a detailed account of the usually secret grand jury proceedings. In them, Wilson describes to the grand jury that he thought Brown was much stronger than him, and that he felt he needed to defend himself with bullets.
> Wilson said he initially tried to subdue Brown by physical means, but that *"when I grabbed him, the only way I can describe it is I felt like a five-year-old holding Hulk Hogan."* Brown was described as 6-foot-4 and weighing well over 250 pounds.



Now you have to remember... Brown was not that much bigger than Wilson.. who is also 6'4" and weights 210.   I'm not sure such FEAR would have been generated by a White teen.   Wilson is in the wrong business if that much fear was generated.  It's the stereotype of Blacks having some superhuman strength and physical ability... almost animal like that seems to have colored Wilsons judgment.    Of course he was testifying to save his butt too... so of course he is going to make it sound like he was really terrified of this kid who was not that  much bigger than him.    One would think that a trained police officer would be able to defuse this situation without killing someone....


----------



## Happyflowerlady

I think that this is a police issue, which has been made to look like a racist issue, mostly by the media's reporting and stirring up of the incident. The truth is that police shoot criminals every day in America, and criminals also shoot police officers every day in America.  Most of it goes unnoticed by the media, or is only barely mentioned. 
If this had been two white people, or even two black people, it would have never made the news at all.  Brown was not shot becasue  of the color of his skin; he was shot because he was resisting arrest and (probably) assaulting a police officer. Whether the officer was justified in shooting Brown is the important issue, not what race they are. 

However, the media has turned this into a racist debate, and black people everywhere (and white people, too) are now seeing it as that. 
Pretty much, all of the races can get along fine. As several have mentioned, we have friends of different races, and sometimes neighbors as well. If one of the neighbors falls  while walking down the street, I am going to run out and help them, and color does not even come into the question. 

However, that being said, there are issues here that have not been brought out in all of the pages of this thread, and I believe that they are not only important; but possibly critical. 
    Obviously, anger between black and white people is being stirred here, that part is obvious; the question is , who is stirring the pot ? ? 
Something that is never mentioned is Brown's Islamic background. 
Yes, he was a Muslim. We never hear that part. 
The radical Islamic  leaders are very likely the ones who are pushing all of this fighting, rioting and looting. They are the ones that are recruiting our black youth into ISIS, and other terrorist groups.  
We all understand that radical Islamic terrorists are using whatever methods they can against white people, especially white Christians. 
Now, they are also starting a civil war that does not ever need to be, by playing both sides of this issue. 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/11/1...co-opt-ferguson-protests-says-watchdog-group/


----------



## QuickSilver

now, for sure CR... I'm done with this thread.  lol!


----------



## drifter

tnthomas said:


> I used to believe that others minds could be changed by presenting the "truth" in a palatable way, I have since abandoned that belief.
> 
> We can only express our personal views, but the desire to "change" other people's way of thinking will never be fulfilled.



I tend to mostly agree with this. I'm not sure who pulls the strings in Norta Americano, but it may be white  men. Maybe we don't deed all that change, maybe change is liken to our presidential elections, we think we vote to elect a president, but nay, it's that college elects our president, that Electrorial College. Maybe that's a good thing.


----------



## SeaBreeze

I don't look to change anyone's opinion here, everybody is entitled to their own opinions on any subject.  Also, changing a couple of minds on a forum is not going to change the realities of what's happening in our country regarding the police department, crime, and the justice system.  I don't know much about jury and court proceedings, but thought this was interesting information I heard yesterday about the prosecutor and 'data dumping' on the grand jury, seems like a common strategy.  I was particularly interested in what Mike Papantonio was saying, after around minute 10 of this 11/25/14 clip.  http://www.msnbc.com/the-ed-show


----------



## BobF

I watched that entire film.    I do agree that there will be more hearings and court actions ahead.   I do not agree that this act was done illegally at all, nor do I agree that the shooting victim had run away and got shot in the back nor do I agree that the victim was standing there with his hands in the air while the policeman took aim and shot him down.   Far too many other reviews and talks have said that the victim had been reaching inside the police car and personally attacked the policeman and tried to take his gun.   They also have said he was moving toward the car and his hands were not in the air.

Another review in another court is needed now to take all the twisting out of the story and either free the policeman of any false charges or get some sort of court hearing to clear up the story and correct police ways and rules or send the patrolman off with real charges and a lot less of this political nonsense we seem to be getting far too much of.


----------



## shedevil7953

Don't smack me, but I have to ask.............if it were a white kid killed, would there be the protesting, looting, rioting?  Just askin'.  If you act ghetto, you'll be treated like ghetto.  If you act like white trash, you'll be treated like white trash.  I don't care what color you are.  Prejudices live on because people's actions keep them alive.


----------



## Falcon

Thanks Shedevil.  FINALLY somebody tells it like it IS !


----------



## WhatInThe

QuickSilver said:


> They may....  unless mom and dad could pay for a good attorney.  I'm not sure they would be shot either..
> 
> http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...-wilson-ferguson-killing-grand-jury/70076886/
> 
> 
> 
> Now you have to remember... Brown was not that much bigger than Wilson.. who is also 6'4" and weights 210.   I'm not sure such FEAR would have been generated by a White teen.   Wilson is in the wrong business if that much fear was generated.  It's the stereotype of Blacks having some superhuman strength and physical ability... almost animal like that seems to have colored Wilsons judgment.    Of course he was testifying to save his butt too... so of course he is going to make it sound like he was really terrified of this kid who was not that  much bigger than him.    One would think that a trained police officer would be able to defuse this situation without killing someone....



Brown wasn't much taller but out weighed Wilson by 80 pounds at 290 pds. Brown by weight looks much beefier. And the Hulk Hogan description would fit. 210 pounder trying to control a 290 pounder from a seated position would be awkward to say the least regardless of any training(street fights are not in a ring/controlled conditions). I think during the initial scuffle after the gun was fired for the first time tripped both combatant's andrenal glands with both already agitated/in combat mode. The forensic evidence seems to tell the most including a 20 ft trail of blood from where Brown was first hit heading toward Officer Wilson. The "demon" word was a poor choice but I would assume there are many other words he really wanted to use.

The thing with the cigar/arrest of suburban kids-around here in many police departments just asking a police officer a question is considered a wtf act so reaching into a policeman's car is all but a death sentence which is basically accepted. Think about the scenario and not race. True, any police department should have a policy where non lethal force is the primary tool to subdue someone but there are some lines you simply don't cross and most seem to know what they are.


----------



## AprilT

shedevil7953 said:


> Don't smack me, but I have to ask.............if it were a white kid killed, would there be the protesting, looting, rioting?  Just askin'.  If you act ghetto, you'll be treated like ghetto.  If you act like white trash, you'll be treated like white trash.  I don't care what color you are.  Prejudices live on because people's actions keep them alive.



If it were a systemic condition in the white community, yes.  It's not so cut and dry,  as in if you act like "A"  you get treated like A B or C.  In some instances that may well be true, but there has been a system in place that people continue to ignore.  I personally don't know the history of Ferguson, but what the people who are protesting about and are so angry about at least as been reported by those not out committing thievery or other misconduct in general is that they have endured mistreatment by the police department in that area no matter what they are doing or not doing.  But all everyone keeps doing is pointing to the thugs and equating all people in the community as being one and the same and no matter how you shade it, by the statements, that's how it's coming across when people refuse to hear what the non-criminal element have to say about how they're being mistreated and people just dismiss their feelings because they rather cling to what they've already made up their minds to believe.

Do you know there were people in the community standing out protecting properties from as many vandals as they were able others pleading with those foolish trouble makers to stop what they were doing?

And here you have sides divided again, people had their minds made up one way or another as to what took place in and outside of the police vehicle, there's nothing that's going to change some people's opinion depending on which side they fall.  People acting like they have all the evidence in front of them to make factual analysis, as if they were there to hear witness testimony.  Even some lawyers are divided as to how that was handled.  Give anyone time and they can line up all the dots.  Now I'm not saying it isn't as it was described, but without proper cross examination of the evidence, how can any of us lay people be so sure to the facts other than basing things on hearsay and what we've already convinced ourselves of to begin with.

I agree if you act in a certain way often that's how you will be perceived and treated, but, as often depending how many zeros follow your closing balance on your bank acct it will be a whole other story.  There are many thugs living it up with swiss bank accounts acting all kinds of trashy, putting on airs for the public.  

Some people do indeed like stirring the pot and keeping it going, could be there are many doing it in this case as well, but, I believe there may be just as many hoping for dialogue and change for the better.

PS.  At the moment though, I think, they need to call a halt to the street protest and a curfew needs to go into effect; what good is coming from the protesting in the immediate, they need to regroup and find a new way to solve what's wrong in their community, not just the people that serve it. At this moment the ones that don't really care are going to take them all down to the bottom of the gutter.


----------



## SeaBreeze

AprilT said:


> I personally don't know the history of Ferguson, but what the people who are protesting about and are so angry about at least as been reported by those not out committing thievery or other misconduct in general is that they have endured mistreatment by the police department in that area no matter what they are doing or not doing.  But all everyone keeps doing is pointing to the thugs and equating all people in the community as being one and the same and no matter how you shade it, by the statements, that's how it's coming across when people refuse to hear what the non-criminal element have to say about how they're being mistreated and people just dismiss their feelings because they rather cling to what they've already made up their minds to believe.
> 
> Do you know there were people in the community standing out protecting properties from as many vandals as they were able others pleading with those foolish trouble makers to stop what they were doing?
> 
> Now I'm not saying it isn't as it was described, but without proper cross examination of the evidence, how can any of us lay people be so sure to the facts other than basing things on hearsay and what we've already convinced ourselves of to begin with.
> 
> Some people do indeed like stirring the pot and keeping it going, could be there are many doing it in this case as well, but, I believe there may be just as many hoping for dialogue and change for the better.



I agree that there are law abiding good citizens of Ferguson that are completely against the rioting and violence, and have done their best to assist store owners and try to reason with those causing all the trouble and destruction there.  They showed some of that on the news, but like you said, some people would just like to lump all those in Ferguson into one category of unreasonable violent protesters.  Also, there are outside people engaging in the fires, theft and shootings, people who are not from that area at all, and who really don't care about Ferguson or its residents/police force.

I was hoping for proper cross examination and more real evidence to come out, unfortunately we never got that, so everything is hearsay.  There needs to be a dialogue in order to have some positive change.


----------



## AprilT

SeaBreeze said:


> I agree that there are law abiding good citizens of Ferguson that are completely against the rioting and violence, and have done their best to assist store owners and try to reason with those causing all the trouble and destruction there.  They showed some of that on the news, but like you said, some people would just like to lump all those in Ferguson into one category of unreasonable violent protesters.  Also, there are outside people engaging in the fires, theft and shootings, people who are not from that area at all, and who really don't care about Ferguson or its residents/police force.
> 
> I was hoping for proper cross examination and more real evidence to come out, unfortunately we never got that, so everything is hearsay.  There needs to be a dialogue in order to have some positive change.



What's funny is I was even leaning more to the officers side in the matter and still might be, but listening to what his cold synopsis of what happened some of it just didn't sound right for me.  I'm sure I'm missing something, what were the toxicology reports for Brown, I really haven't heard much about that.  For him to have said and reacted in the way Wilson relayed it.  I'm not saying I don't believe Wilson, it just all sounds too biazar unless the kid had a death wish or was on some kind of psychotic drug. 

 I don't care how big, how much bravado you think you can muster, you have to be working with an off switch to charge an armed person in such a manner.  Wilson's comment to the effect that he had no alternative but to shoot to kill, is what bothers some people as well, no other option, not even a hesitation on the matter.  That sounds like something he was told to say.  And not a blink of the eye so to speak.  I wasn't there, I was thinking, yes, I could understand that, but, just the way he relayed the story didn't sit right.  I don't feel we were hearing from him, we were hearing from his coaches, except maybe he was too nervous and forgot to tilt the head with just the right amount of show in compassion.  He probably would have been better off telling in his own words. 

 Can you imagine being in that situation, no, most of us can't.  So still, I don't know what to think.  It's not the death of Brown, I have a problem with, it's the thought of how the officers in the community see the people they serve, do they even view many of them as human beings or just something to be dealt with.


----------



## QuickSilver

AprilT said:


> What's funny is I was even leaning more to the officers side in the matter and still might be, but listening to what his cold synopsis of what happened some of it just didn't sound right for me.  I'm sure I'm missing something, what were the toxicology reports for Brown, I really haven't heard much about that.  For him to have said and reacted in the way Wilson relayed it.  I'm not saying I don't believe Wilson, it just all sounds too biazar unless the kid had a death wish or was on some kind of psychotic drug.  I don't care how big, how much bravado you think you can muster, you have to be working with an off switch to charge an armed person in such a manner.  Wilson's comment to the effect that he had no alternative but to shoot to kill, is what bothers some people as well, no other option, not even a hesitation on the matter.  That sounds like something he was told to say.  And not a blink of the eye so to speak.  I wasn't there, I was thinking, yes, I could understand that, but, just the way he relayed the story didn't sit right.  I don't feel we were hearing from him, we were hearing from his coaches, except maybe he was too nervous and forgot to tilt the head with just the right amount of show in compassion.  He probably would have been better off telling in his own words.  Can you imagine being in that situation, no, most of us can't.  So still, I don't know what to think.  It's not the death of Brown, I have a problem with, it's the thought of how the officers in the community see the people they serve, do they even view many of them as human beings or just something to be dealt with.



The problem is that the fix was in from the beginning.  The Prosecutor had no intention of getting an indictment.. Now we will never have answers because there will be no trial... No cross examination of Wilson, or all of the witnesses under oath.  We will never know unless the family files a civil wrongful death suit.. or the Govermnent files a Federal Civil Rights case against him.


----------



## WhatInThe

Don M. said:


> These rioters were well prepared to create havoc...no matter which way the grand jury verdict came down.  You don't set buildings and cars on fire with a cigarette lighter...it takes containers of flammable liquids and some careful planning to achieve the damage done to Ferguson last night.  While the bulk of the protesters kept the police occupied, a few of the Terrorists sneaked in behind the cops, and quickly ignited their homemade firebombs.  This was not a sudden impulse action...rather it was a well rehearsed plan.
> 
> All they will have accomplished, in the end, is destroying a largely Black neighborhood, and hardening racial attitudes even further.



Saw a report today they think it was the same crew that started most of the fires. The reaction was orchestrated after months of conditioning from the media and social media just like the guy mentioned. They were misused AND misinterpreted. I think too many confused or assumed an indictment was just like a guilty verdict after a trial. They also failed to account that in a trial there must be a preliminary and administrative hearings to see if there even enough evidence to proceed to trial(evidence of a crime)-other than testimony what was the physical evidence the officer was malicious. Also people boast Wilson would've been called out on the witness stand. You don't think witnesses who said they saw hands up wouldn't be crossed examined? They should be so lucky they there was even a grand jury. In many communities a police oversight board might have investigated for a few months-not the state police, FBI and/or Justice Department. 

Back to the orchestration. As much as I don't agree with the anti police crowd using Brown as a martyr or inspiration there are places like New York where I'm stunned they didn't have massive protests years earlier. It seems at least once a year a suspect in New York gets shot like a 50 times or something. This summer they choked a guy to death. Or after years of stop and frisk I would've been marching long before this. I think was Arizona or New Mexico a suspect was shot 38 times while surrendering. In LA the police shot two innocent women hunting down Christopher Dorner. In my mind I find many but not all of the protestors too finicky or insincere with their "causes" and will not forgive them for their CRIMES.


----------



## SeaBreeze

Happyflowerlady said:


> Something that is never mentioned is Brown's Islamic background.
> Yes, he was a Muslim. We never hear that part.



Really?  Michael Brown Jr. was a Muslim?? I never heard that!  Even if he was, does that mean he was a radical Islamic terrorist?  I have no doubt that those involved with Hamas and Islamic terrorism step into _any _riot situation that presents itself to them in the US. 

I would like to see proof that Michael Brown Jr. was even a Muslim.  I'm suspicious that this is just more of Fox news biased media drama.  Any real documentation of Michael Brown Jr.'s religious affiliations would be appreciated.



> Walid claimed Brown was a Muslim, although when pressed, Walid denied he had made such a claim. Brown was buried in August after a memorial service at the Friendly Temple Missionary Baptist Church in St. Louis.


----------



## QuickSilver

This is telling...

http://us7.campaign-archive1.com/?u=b493e6c4d31beda32fdaf8e2d&id=73514e334b

*



			WASHINGTON, DC
		
Click to expand...

*


> – The National Bar Association is questioning how the Grand Jury, considering the evidence before them, could reach the conclusion that Darren Wilson should not be indicted and tried for the shooting death of Michael Brown. National Bar Association President Pamela J. Meanes expresses her sincere disappointment with the outcome of the Grand Jury’s decision but has made it abundantly clear that the National Bar Association stands firm and will be calling on the U.S. Department of Justice to pursue federal charges against officer Darren Wilson. “We will not rest until Michael Brown and his family has justice” states Pamela Meanes, President of the National Bar Association.




I would imagine if any group would know that this was a fix... this group would.    I would go so far as thinking the Prosecutor McCullough should face disbarment.


----------



## BobF

Fox News is one of the US's most reliable and honest news stations.    They have folks of both liberal and conservative and libertarian and Democrat and Republican all running news periods or as guests on the news periods.   Something most of our US news broadcast groups can not claim for their honesty and fairness.

Yes Brown is a Muslim.   If you see his father on TV you will see the cultural long beard on his face and chin.


----------



## AprilT

QuickSilver said:


> This is telling...
> 
> http://us7.campaign-archive1.com/?u=b493e6c4d31beda32fdaf8e2d&id=73514e334b
> 
> 
> 
> I would imagine if any group would know that this was a fix... this group would.    I would go so far as thinking the Prosecutor McCullough should face disbarment.



I, just a little while ago, watched, CNN where McCullough admits that the investigation was sloppy and wouldn't have stood up to cross examination in court.  I was flabbergasted.  Part of the excuse he and another guest on the show went on to say is that Ferguson is a small town and doesn't have the resources of those bigger cities.  If they want them to do better, give them better resources otherwise don't expect similar performances from their force.  Deal with it is what they are saying about sloppy work, we're doing what we can, mistakes be damned.  

It's no FOX news, but um, it was all in their own voices.

All I was asking for is something I could work with to let my mind rest at ease that they do their job and the people were mistaken about how they operated at least this time.  I really was hoping this was done and over, but, seems there are way too many eyes on what might not should just go away.  This really sucks.  I was hoping for a nice quiet holiday weekend, I hope no one ask me about this situation at tomorrow's dinner, it's getting exhausting.  

I'm sure there will be replays of the Anderson Cooper interview featuring McCullough if people really want to comment based on what's coming out of the people's mouths involved in this case.  I'll see if the interview is available to post already, if it is, I'll post it here.

There is good news, within the community, there are multi-cultural, multi-denominational and other groups of people that have been prior to and continuing to make strong efforts to improve relations in general amongst themselves in Furgerson.  There were comments stating that the people themselves need to work on what's wrong with them and taking personal responsibility.


----------



## SeaBreeze

BobF said:


> Fox News is one of the US's most reliable and honest news stations.    They have folks of both liberal and conservative and libertarian and Democrat and Republican all running news periods or as guests on the news periods.   Something most of our US news broadcast groups can not claim for their honesty and fairness.
> 
> Yes Brown is a Muslim.   If you see his father on TV you will see the cultural long beard on his face and chin.



That's your opinion, as you are likely a loyal follower of Fox, and believe all they say as bible.  As far as I've seen, their reports are extremely biased, and often times untrue or exaggerated. I do watch both Fox and MSNBC to see what each side is saying about an issue.  As far as Brown being a Muslim because his father has a beard, I would like more documentation than that, lol.

http://fair.org/extra-online-articles/the-most-biased-name-in-news/




> "But when *Fox News Channel*, Rupert Murdoch's 24-hour cable network, debuted in 1996, a curious thing happened: Instead of denouncing it, conservative politicians and activists lavished praise on the network. "If it hadn't been for *Fox*, I don't know what I'd have done for the news," Trent Lott gushed after the Florida election recount (*Washington Post*, 2/5/01).
> 
> George W. Bush extolled *Fox News Channel* anchor Tony Snow--a former speechwriter for Bush's father--and his "impressive transition to journalism" in a specially taped April 2001 tribute to Snow's Sunday-morning show on its five-year anniversary (*Washington Post*, 5/7/01).
> 
> The right-wing Heritage Foundation had to warn its staffers not to watch so much *Fox News *on their computers, because it was causing the think tank's system to crash.When it comes to *Fox News Channel*, conservatives don't feel the need to "work the ref." The ref is already on their side.
> 
> Since its 1996 launch, *Fox* has become a central hub of the conservative movement's well-oiled media machine. Together with the GOP organization and its satellite think tanks and advocacy groups, this network of fiercely partisan outlets--such as the *Washington Times*, the *Wall Street Journal* editorial page and conservative talk-radio shows like Rush Limbaugh's--forms a highly effective right-wing echo chamber where GOP-friendly news stories can be promoted, repeated and amplified. *Fox* knows how to play this game better than anyone.
> 
> Yet, at the same time, the network bristles at the slightest suggestion of a conservative tilt. In fact, wrapping itself in slogans like "Fair and balanced" and "We report, you decide," *Fox* argues precisely the opposite: Far from being a biased network, *Fox* argues, it is the only unbiased network. So far, *Fox*'s strategy of aggressive denial has worked surprisingly well; faced with its unblinking refusal to admit any conservative tilt at all, some commentators have simply acquiesced to the network's own self-assessment. FAIR has decided to take a closer look."




http://www.salon.com/2013/01/05/12_most_despicable_things_fox_news_did_in_2012/







> "2012 was a dismal year for Fox News. The PR arm of the GOP failed to fulfill its prime directive: advancing the interests of Mitt Romney and the Republican Party. It spent much of the year constructing an alternative reality that left millions of its flock in shock when President Obama won an overwhelming reelection.
> 
> It refused to accept the facts on the ground and denigrated polls (even its own) when the results conflicted with the fictional narrative it was peddling. And perhaps most painful of all, Fox surrendered its ratings lead to MSNBC. Two-thirds of its primetime lineup (Hannity and Van Susteren) dropped to second place behind the competition on MSNBC (Maddow and O’Donnell).
> 
> However, Fox’s travails did not occur for lack of effort. It was clearly operating at the top of its capacity to distort and deceive. In the process it unleashed some of the most feverishly biased reporting, even for Fox News. What follows are a few of the worst departures from ethical journalism by Fox in the last year.
> 
> 1) Romancing Petraeus: Fox News CEO Roger Ailes tries to recruit for the GOP.
> 
> The Washington Post’s Bob Woodward revealed that Fox News CEO Roger Ailes had dispatched a Fox News defense analyst, to Kabul, Afghanistan to recruit Gen. David Petraeus as a GOP candidate for president. The notion of a news network soliciting candidates for political office is a perversion of the role journalists play in society. In response, Ailes claimed that it was “a joke” and that he “thought the Republican [primary] field needed to be shaken up.” Where Ailes got the idea that it was his right and/or duty to shake up the GOP primaries is unexplained. News people are supposed to report the news, not make it. Woodward’s story affirms that Fox News is a rogue operation. Its intrusion into the political process debases journalism by breaching all standards of ethical conduct. And it debases democracy as well by exploiting its power and wealth to manipulate political outcomes.
> 
> 2) Fox News produces its own anti-Obama video.





> Last May on Fox & Friends, the program’s hosts introduced a video that purported to examine “Four Years of Hope and Change.” What it was in reality was a four-plus minute campaign video that presented a variety of soundbites by President Obama accompanied by ominous graphics and eerie music that falsely implied his campaign promises were unkept. The video (which Media Matters thoroughly debunks here) could not have been a more pro-Romney, anti-Obama attack had it been produced by the Republican National Committee. Apparently Fox News also recognized the gross inappropriateness of its anti-Obama attack ad. Minutes after the video was posted online it was removed. Later, an edited version was re-posted, and then that too was removed. Eventually, Fox EVP Bill Shine issued a statement scapegoating an “associate producer” and concluding that the matter “has been addressed.” But it’s difficult for Fox to absolve itself of responsibility for this atrociously unethical affair. By now it is so obvious that Fox exists only to promote Republicans and bash Democrats that this video fits squarely within its mission.
> 
> 3) Question for Fox News: How much rape is too much?
> 
> In a discussion of the role of women in the military, Fox News contributor Liz Trotta expressed an opinion about new rules from the Pentagon that would permit women to serve closer to the front lines. Trotta’s take on this centered on the problems faced by servicewomen who are sexually assaulted by fellow soldiers whom she regards as whiners because they won’t shut up and accept the fact that if they work closely with men they should expect to be assaulted. And if that weren’t bad enough, Trotta went on to complain about the expensive military bureaucracy set up to “support women in the military who are now being raped too much.” I would really like to know precisely how much rape is acceptable before it crosses Trotta’s line. Is there any context in which she might have meant that that isn’t unfathomably repulsive?
> 
> 4) Fox News conning Latinos for politics and profit.
> 
> Fox viewers are accustomed to stories about “illegals” swarming across the border to take up residency in the U.S. and sponge off of our prosperity. There is hardly a mention of immigrants on Fox that isn’t associated with crime, joblessness or drug cartels. Lately, however, someone at Fox News has recognized a major flaw in its strategy to demonize immigrants, particularly Latinos, who are a growing constituency of both consumers and citizens who can vote and are registering in record numbers. So how does Fox maintain its editorial animosity toward immigrants without alienating an increasingly important voter group? The answer appears to be by developing news content specifically for this demographic and sequestering it from the rest of its viewership. This has resulted in a flurry of disparaging articles on the Fox News flagship, while the same story is presented on the new Fox News Latino in a far less bigoted fashion. The pinnacle of this hypocrisy occurred during a Fox report on the election when it displayed video of illegal border crossers with a caption reading “The Hispanic Vote.”
> 
> 5) Fox lies about military access to voting in Ohio.
> 
> This year Republicans in the state of Ohio sought to amend their early voting law so that only members of the military would be permitted to vote early in the three days prior to the election. Democrats objected to this as it discriminates against certain voters, and they filed suit to preserve the right of every Ohio citizen to vote early. Fox News picked up the story advancing the premise that Democrats were seeking to take something away from our military. Anchor Shannon Bream falsely declared that “If President Obama gets his way, the special voting rights of some of America’s finest will be eliminated.” The truth is that Democrats in Ohio were suing to ensure that nobody’s rights were eliminated. The Ohio GOP was deliberately attempting to suppress the votes of citizens they presumed would vote Democratic. And Fox News helped them in that mission by brazenly lying about the substance of the debate.
> 
> 6) Graphic evidence of the racism of Fox News: racial photoshopping.
> 
> Coverage of the Trayvon Martin shooting was handled by Fox News in a manner that is revealing and offensive. On the day that Florida law enforcement authorities planned to file charges against George Zimmerman, Fox ran a story featuring a photo of Zimmerman with a beaming smile alongside one of Martin that looked foreboding and was obviously darkened. The editors were demonstrating their overt hostility to both African Americans and journalistic ethics. Later in the day, a more impartial photo was inserted that was not as overtly disparaging of the victim. You think they got a few complaints about the previous photo? Fox had numerous pictures from which to choose of both Martin and Zimmerman, and it chose the most negative picture of Martin which it paired with the most positive picture of Zimmerman. This was not an accident. It was the result of deliberate editorial judgment. And it tells us everything we need to know about Fox’s editors.
> 
> 7) The polling schizophrenia at Fox News.
> 
> Throughout the year Fox News led its audience on a roller coaster ride of propaganda and censorship as it shifted from celebrating what it regarded as positive electoral news to suppressing the negative. It persistently sought to cloister its audience in a bubble that filtered out any facts that might upset its viewers or political patrons. Fox was so determined to shut out anything that might challenge its narrative that it even failed to report its own Fox News polls if Obama was ahead. This was a part of a broader effort to deceive its audience by castigating or ignoring polls when it didn’t like the results and praising the same pollsters when their numbers were more favorable. They launched a campaign to demean professional pollsters and prop up disreputable charlatans with its “unskewed” versions. Not surprisingly, this led to the unprecedented post-election state of shock experienced by those who were foolish enough to rely on Fox for information.
> 
> 8) Fox News psycho analyst: Newt Gingrich’s adultery means a stronger America.
> 
> The in-house Fox News psychiatrist, Keith Ablow, has offered his embarrassingly ridiculous diagnoses on a number of occasions. Without ever having examined (or even met) President Obama, Ablow has declared him to be contemptuous of the judiciary and devoid of all emotion. He further assessed that Obama has “got it in for this country” and doesn’t like Americans. These are the delusional ramblings of a quack who is more preoccupied with his own animosity for the president than with credible psychiatric analysis. During the GOP primary, Ablow chimed in on criticism of Newt Gingrich for his serial marriages that ended when his wives became ill or failed to serve his political purposes. Ablow’s astonishing diagnosis was that Gingrich as president would make America stronger specifically because of his multiple infidelities. Ablow actually thinks that three wives and two extramarital affairs (that we know about) enhances Gingrich’s qualifications to be president. His reasoning had something to do with the fact that multiple homewreckers found him to be marriageable material and that was a mark of character. This is what passes for family values in today’s GOP.
> 
> 9) Fox News airs hour-long commercial for anti-Obama film on Hannity.
> 
> In the heart of the presidential campaign season, Sean Hannity’s program on Fox News devoted the full hour to a blatant infomercial promoting an anti-Obama movie by the people who brought us Citizens United. The program featured lengthy clips from the film as well as interviews with the film’s creators, David Bossie and Steve Bannon. Bossie is the head of Citizens United, the organization that prompted the abhorrent Supreme Court decision that made it possible for individuals and corporations to donate unlimited sums of cash to political candidates and causes. Bannon is chairman of Breitbart News and was the director of the monumental flop, Sarah Palin: Undefeated, a movie that managed to fail miserably despite millions of dollars in free publicity courtesy of Fox News. What’s particularly disturbing about this is that the producers freely admit that their purpose was not so much to promote the film, but to let their ads serve as disguised political messages aimed at disparaging the president and affecting the outcome of the election. The reason they chose October to release the film was so their advertising would appear during the campaign season and they could pretend it was merely marketing for the movie. This is not a conspiracy theory; it is something they specifically admit to and boast about. Fox News was merely the first stop on their media blitz.
> 
> 10) Fox News “Democrat” Kirsten Powers accuses Obama of sympathizing with terrorists.
> 
> The next time you hear the Fox News slogan “fair and balanced,” be sure to remember that its rendering of fairness is to trot out covert conservatives and label them Democrats. A perfect illustration of this is alleged Democrat Kirsten Powers, who took to Fox News to attack President Obama in an article titled “President Obama, stop blaming the victim for Mideast violence.” Powers was addressing the violence at American facilities in Libya and Egypt when she wrote that respecting religious beliefs “is implicit sympathy for the claims of some of the attackers and rioters.” So Powers thinks that respect for the diversity of faith is tantamount to sympathizing with terrorists. She cannot comprehend that such respect is offered to the vast majority of peaceful Muslims who had nothing to do with the violence. And allowing her to spew that bile while posing as a Democratic analyst is part of how Fox distorts its presentation of fairness and balance.
> 
> 11) Fox News spinning furiously on unemployment rate.
> 
> Behaving entirely consistently with a network that harbors politcos who want to see President Obama fail, Fox News cavalierly dismissed the October unemployment report showing a drop from 8.1 to 7.8 percent. Heaven forbid anything good happens in this country while President Obama is in charge. Fox spent the whole morning trying to hatch skeptics. It brought in former General Electric CEO Jack Welch to explain his delusional Tweet: “Unbelievable jobs numbers…these Chicago guys will do anything…can’t debate so change numbers.” Fox’s Stuart Varney concurred along with Donald Trump and a bevy of correspondents and guests. None of them could explain why an independent agency of career economists, without a single Obama appointee, would fudge the numbers for a president to whom they owed nothing.
> 
> 12) Fox opposes ban on assault weapons but imposes ban on talking about it.
> 
> The most heartbreaking news of 2012 was surely the massacre in Newtown, CT, where 20 schoolchildren and six adults were senselessly murdered by a deranged gunman. The resultant outcry from concerned Americans about the easy access to weapons that are capable of such carnage was met by Fox News as an attack on the Second Amendment and free enterprise. Its response was to slaughter the First Amendment by prohibiting any discussion of gun safety on the network. Sources told Gabriel Sherman of New York Magazine that “David Clark, the executive producer in charge of Fox’s weekend coverage, gave producers instructions not to talk about gun-control policy on air.” It’s also worthwhile to note that while Fox banned all talk of gun control, it did not banish talk of other explanations for the atrocity in Connecticut. Fox had no problem with laying the blame on mental illness, movies or video games. Fox host Mike Huckabee was permitted to go on the air and blame the killings on the absence of God in the classroom (which does nothing to explain similar shootings that have taken place in churches).
> 
> While Fox News broadcasts flagrant distortions of reality on a daily basis, the examples above transcend the conventional dishonesty and bias that is its hallmark. These assaults on ethical journalism demonstrate how dangerous it is to permit a political enterprise to disguise itself as a news network in order to shape an extreme political agenda. It is evidence of social programming and manipulation at its worst. The sad part is that we can expect much more of this in 2013. Happy New Year!






​
​


----------



## tnthomas

BobF said:


> Fox News is one of the US's most reliable and honest news stations.    They have folks of both liberal and conservative and libertarian and Democrat and Republican all running news periods or as guests on the news periods.   Something most of our US news broadcast groups can not claim for their honesty and fairness.
> 
> Yes Brown is a Muslim.   If you see his father on TV you will see the cultural long beard on his face and chin.



I'm glad to see that FN has cleaned up it's act, they used to have an easily recognizable Right-wing bias.


----------



## Debby

Hey AprilT, I'm with you on Fox News.  I think they even tried to set up a studio in Canada and our regulators  refused them.

This is how that refusal went down:  Canada regulators announced last week they would reject efforts by Canada's right wing Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, to repeal a law that forbids lying on broadcast news. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rober...be-moving-into-canada-after-all_b_829473.html

Note the part where it says our Prime Minister, good ole Stevie-boy, want to repeal a law that forbids lying on broadcast news!  Since he couldn't get Fox across the border,  he made up for it by sticking us with Sun News which has a pathetically puny listenership of about 20,000. Those people at Sun are open liars at the best of times and at the worst of times they are bullying, liars!  And if I understand correctly, one of their top guys (the head creep) headed up Steven Harpers campaign group in the early days of trying to get elected.

I never watched Fox on TV when we had more stations and when we are in the car, we whiz right by their station.  Unless we're really bored and falling asleep in the car and Hannity is on.  Doesn't take long and we're wide awake and wiping the 'I'm so mad I could spit' stains off the dash.


----------



## WhatInThe

The media like CNN, FOX and MSNBC, not news networks hyped, contorted, omitted, misconstrued this and many other stories for an agenda. If you are reading or posting here you have to the ability to be your own news network and not get your news spoon fed to you. I cannot sit through anyone one hour telecast without flipping channels or turning it off because of all the bs & waste of my time which is better spent researching stories on my own. The mainstream media is a starting point. I've actually found myself watching the evening news on the old three letter  broadcast networks much more often. I used to stick with cable only. Point is you need multiple sources and to know your sources especially if it is a foundation, center for, think tank or dot org. Also go to the local newspaper & tv for local reporting which might have more unspun facts. 

The problem here in the Ferguson story was the bias and going with emotion instead of facts. Several of the networks are trying to play up the grieving parents, ok I get that but today they spent more time reporting what the parents and lawyer thought of Darren Wilson ie he's a liar, cold blooded etc rather than point out improbabilities. Yet how many networks reported or noted the fact that testimony had Wilson saying at one point while it was right hand to right hand contact in the struggle at the car. Think about that. Position your self in the drivers seat, think where your right hand is and think how a person could stick their right hand in the window and reach over or across your body for right hand to right hand contact. And I believe the finding of the grand jury but this needs explaining. Then when it came out that blood was found in the car a week or so ago some networks and commentators didn't report that then or even now. It's convenient reporting shaped to fit their hole oops ment agenda.

If you are on the internet and still relying on spoon fed information not reviewing it or thinking about it shame on you.


----------



## Debby

I agree with everything you said WhatInThe and would add this...there used to be multiple news outlets across the country(s) so you had a wide variety of opinions offering information.  Now those 'many' have been bought up by a few and they hogtie journalists and screen the 'news'.  Not only that, but those few are part of the 1% who have a vested interest on making sure the news comes across a certain way to support what, the status quo perhaps?

I've seen a specific example of how the news can be fed lies and that's what they put out there and the beneficiary was a certain global corporation.  When I saw that, I pretty much lost faith in the big news outlets (unless it's a 'cat saved from tree' story) and look all over the internet for credible, alternate sources.


----------



## Ralphy1

And don't be too sure that what you read on the Internet is credible...


----------



## Denise1952

We will have to change the name of our country if people don't stop working so hard to take "sides" (including myself).  It is the "United States of America", or was  Things do change, that's one thing I've known to be true.


----------



## Lon

*Looters & arsonists*

There is absolutely no justifiction or excuse for Looting or Arson as a means of protest. Looters and Arsonists should be warned ahead of time by the media and public authorities and then shot on site.
Too harsh? I don't think so. A civilized society has the right to protect and preserve it's property from those less civilized.


----------



## Denise1952

Debby said:


> I agree with everything you said WhatInThe and would add this...there used to be multiple news outlets across the country(s) so you had a wide variety of opinions offering information.  Now those 'many' have been bought up by a few and they hogtie journalists and screen the 'news'.  Not only that, but those few are part of the 1% who have a vested interest on making sure the news comes across a certain way to support what, the status quo perhaps?
> 
> I've seen a specific example of how the news can be fed lies and that's what they put out there and the beneficiary was a certain global corporation.  When I saw that, I pretty much lost faith in the big news outlets (unless it's a 'cat saved from tree' story) and look all over the internet for credible, alternate sources.



The word "opinions" stood out for me Debby, it was a good reminder that not only with news sometimes, people only have opinions due to what they hear.  We can't all be eye-witnesses, thank goodness.  But it does get confusing for me when one show says one thing (reports) and another says something else.  Whatinthe has the right plan of action and that is to take what the say, and then weed out what you can, or maybe come to a conclusion that is mostly what is actually happening, or happened.


----------



## AprilT

Lon said:


> There is absolutely no justifiction or excuse for Looting or Arson as a means of protest. Looters and Arsonists should be warned ahead of time by the media and public authorities and then shot on site.
> Too harsh? I don't think so. A civilized society has the right to protect and preserve it's property from those less civilized.



How would this work, do you have to be holding a match and loot when the shooter takes the shot? does it matter if their doing one or the other as om arson or looting or do they have to be doing a combination of both. How about muggers, child molesters, scam artist, can people take aim at them as well in future scenarios? This could be an interesting proposal to write into law.

Anyway, I'll have to come back and read more interesting proposals such as this later, I now have to turn off the noise and go get ready for happier things like spending time with friends on this day to try for thinking of things to remember something to be grateful for instead of focusing on looking to stir up more hate

Looking forward to chatting you all up later.  Enjoy the rest of your day as best you allow yourselves to.


----------



## Denise1952

AprilT said:


> How would this work, do you have to be holding a match and loot when the shooter takes the shot? does it matter if their doing one or the other as om arson or looting or do they have to be doing a combination of both. How about muggers, child molesters, scam artist, can people take aim at them as well in future scenarios? This could be an interesting proposal to write into law.
> 
> Anyway, I'll have to come back and read more interesting proposals such as this later, I now have to turn off the noise and go get ready for happier things like spending time with friends on this day to try for thinking of things to remember something to be grateful for instead of focusing on looking to stir up more hate
> 
> Looking forward to chatting you all up later.  Enjoy the rest of your day as best you allow yourselves to.



This is going to wander off topic I think (maybe?) but if fines/punishments were stiffer in the US I don't believe there would be so much crime, so I can see Lon's point.  But I also would be asking the same things April does.  To me, to many "good" (hey they have to be good at finding all the loop-holes) lawyers get people off of crimes.  If that's our reputation, the US, what's to stop folks from doing the crime?  Some crimes are rightly punished, some I don't agree with.  What is that saying, the punishment should fit the crime?  I guess that what we have to decide, what fit's what.  Whenever I start looking for answers, I get overwhelmed because things are such a mess.


----------



## Denise1952

Ralphy1 said:


> And don't be too sure that what you read on the Internet is credible...



Never be to sure until you can "maybe" find the truth another way.  I learned that the other day when I accidentally posted some damn flyer from a white supremicist


----------



## QuickSilver

Now Supreme Court Justice Scalia explains what was wrong with the Ferguson Grand Jury ruling and how McCullough rigged the result.  Can we believe Justice Scalia?  He's hardly a bastion of Liberal law decisions..

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/20...-what-was-wrong-with-the-ferguson-grand-jury/


----------



## BobF

Certainly obvious a lot of the posters on this site are both lefties and non receptive of those that will accept other than far left news on TV or where ever.

I am not a lefty nor am I a hard core conservative.   I only watch some shows on FOX NEWS and more on NBC, CBS, and others.   One station I do occasionally do listen to is MSNBC, but they are far too left for real news or facts about things in this country.   They are also seeing their number of listeners going down in the recent years.    So watch what you wish but you should not waste so much time and effort posting all the twisted crap about FOX NEWS.   Some may be true but much might be twisted, something others could do about other TV news stations if in a hurry to destroy competition rather that demand greatness of your favorite stations.   MSNBC is not at great or honest place to listen to news.   They have a lady that once had her own station running but when there were no listeners left for her the station was closed.   Now at least she is on MSNBC and killing their listeners count.

Yes I did say see his fathers beard, and factually so, as he has been described as a Muslim in more than one place since the killing event.    Sounds like some here just do not read enough to know what is really going on.   Sad for so many to just want to lay their very own narrow mindedness on to everyone or you will be called names for sure.   People that can say Obama is doing great in spite of all the problems caused to the US treasury and the rejections by over 60% of the people in the US just are not people to trust or believe.   This seems to be a large group on this thread.   I won't say for this forum as I have only been on a couple threads.

OK, I am not far enough left for some of you folks, but that is OK on most forums that do listen to both sides and allow the other posters to have there thoughts too.


----------



## Denise1952

I think anyone, anywhere that bad-mouths the others side, calls names, and insists only they know the true facts are childish, as well as ignorant..  There is truth on both sides.  That's why I don't want to take sides.  See what both say and then make a decision.

There are lots of folks in the middle now Bob, then there used to be, and there is such a handful of people that even speak up here.  Did you ever notice how many just "read" a post without commenting?  Who knows what they think, but I can't blame them for avoided some of these threads


----------



## QuickSilver

So you don't believe Supreme Court Justice Scalia????  I would imagine that if you get to be a Supreme Court Justice... you probably know what you are talking about regarding the law...


----------



## SeaBreeze

BobF said:


> Certainly obvious a lot of the posters on this site are both lefties and non receptive of those that will accept other than far left news on TV or where ever.
> 
> I am not a lefty nor am I a hard core conservative.   I only watch some shows on FOX NEWS and more on NBC, CBS, and others.   One station I do occasionally do listen to is MSNBC, but they are far too left for real news or facts about things in this country.   They are also seeing their number of listeners going down in the recent years.    So watch what you wish but you should not waste so much time and effort posting all the twisted crap about FOX NEWS.   Some may be true but much might be twisted, something others could do about other TV news stations if in a hurry to destroy competition rather that demand greatness of your favorite stations.   MSNBC is not at great or honest place to listen to news.   They have a lady that once had her own station running but when there were no listeners left for her the station was closed.   Now at least she is on MSNBC and killing their listeners count.
> 
> Yes I did say see his fathers beard, and factually so, as he has been described as a Muslim in more than one place since the killing event.    Sounds like some here just do not read enough to know what is really going on.   Sad for so many to just want to lay their very own narrow mindedness on to everyone or you will be called names for sure.   People that can say Obama is doing great in spite of all the problems caused to the US treasury and the rejections by over 60% of the people in the US just are not people to trust or believe.   This seems to be a large group on this thread.   I won't say for this forum as I have only been on a couple threads.
> 
> OK, I am not far enough left for some of you folks, but that is OK on most forums that do listen to both sides and allow the other posters to have there thoughts too.



I'm not a lefty either, I've voted both Republican and Democrat in the past.  I also listen to different news stations, including Fox and MSNBC.  I still believe that Fox news is biased and has a lot of issues reporting the truth about what really happened, without all their spin.  From the owners and the powers that be in the shadows, I understand this and am not surprised.

I'm sure he's been described as a Muslim in more than one place, as many others quote what they hear on Fox news and such conservative media talk shows, etc.  I wouldn't be too quick to call anyone narrow-minded, without a true look in the mirror.  So, enlighten us about Michael Brown Jr being a Muslim, not that it matters, but I'd like some kind of verification, something I have trouble finding...perhaps you can give some proof of this?

It's unfortunate that people who hate the President of the United States so much as to dismiss any and all information provided by the Democratic Party and its newsfeeds, won't stop to consider the other side of the story.  I am an Independent, but I have to say, that the more I pay attention to the conservative news media and right-wing talk shows, the less I trust or respect that side of the aisle.  Issues like gun rights are few worth listening to anymore from the right.


----------



## QuickSilver

What does Muslim have to do with this thread anyway?   I'm more interested in the disgusting ruse Prosecutor McCullough pulled with the Grand Jury that will let Wilson go without a trial.  As I posted even Justice Scalia... about as far Right as you can get as Justices go.. thinks so.


----------



## SeaBreeze

HFL brought up in this thread that Michael Brown Jr. was a Muslim, trying to explain Islamic terrorist activity in the rioting, and alleging that the media was trying to hide the fact of his religion, except for Fox news....that is where the Muslim question comes in, and I for one would like to see proof of his religion, I understood him to be Baptist.  Even if he was a Muslim, as I've said in the past, it doesn't matter because it doesn't mean he is an Islamist terrorist.  I think if people are going to make these assumptions, then they should offer some validation...none of which I've heard or read.

I agree the Grand Jury procedure was very irregular, and the prosecutor obviously worked things in such a way as to get no indictment.  Some info and a video by lawyers here on the matter...http://thinkprogress.org/justice/20...rand-jury-in-ferguson-was-set-up-for-failure/


----------



## BobF

nwlady said:


> I think anyone, anywhere that bad-mouths the others side, calls names, and insists only they know the true facts are childish, as well as ignorant..  There is truth on both sides.  That's why I don't want to take sides.  See what both say and then make a decision.
> 
> There are lots of folks in the middle now Bob, then there used to be, and there is such a handful of people that even speak up here.  Did you ever notice how many just "read" a post without commenting?  Who knows what they think, but I can't blame them for avoided some of these threads



Yes and I am sure there are many who read but don't post.   Often that is me.   In this recent post I did not post any names to identify anyone, and some were a bit overdoing things, I was just trying to say facts for one are pure nonsense to others and both could be absolutely correct.   Some of these folks are so political they just determine anyone not posting their favorite way are totally wrong and they publish pure nonsense to prove it.

For one, I am not far right in my ways and thinking, nor am I so far left that I will just detest and smear those that are  not way far left.   

You are right, I should just read and move on.   I thought about it but decided some real way out far left nonsense needed some attention.


----------



## QuickSilver

SeaBreeze said:


> HFL brought up in this thread that Michael Brown Jr. was a Muslim, trying to explain Islamic terrorist activity in the rioting, and alleging that the media was trying to hide the fact of his religion, except for Fox news....that is where the Muslim question comes in, and I for one would like to see proof of his religion, I understood him to be Baptist.  Even if he was a Muslim, as I've said in the past, it doesn't matter because it doesn't mean he is an Islamist terrorist.  I think if people are going to make these assumptions, then they should offer some validation...none of which I've heard or read.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree the Grand Jury procedure was very irregular, and the prosecutor obviously worked things in such a way as to get no indictment.  Some info and a video by lawyers here on the matter...http://thinkprogress.org/justice/20...rand-jury-in-ferguson-was-set-up-for-failure/



Oh... ok, but I still fail to see why Muslim was even brought up.  Makes no sense to me. Nothing  more than a red herring.


----------



## Denise1952

I appreciated your post Bob.  I'm not all that smart about politics, but my faves to discuss things with (and hopefully learn more) are those that can do it without being a smart-ass.  It's just like cigarettes for me, no, I don't like cigarettes, but I certainly do NOT hate the smoker.  Here, at times, because someone believes differently it's suddenly "burn the witch", sick


----------



## SeaBreeze

Exactly, and Fox news loves the red herring, very effective obviously.


----------



## QuickSilver

SeaBreeze said:


> Exactly, and Fox news loves the red herring, very effective obviously.



Agreed... apparently Muslim is the scariest thing some can think of... so if you are able to somehow work it into a debate you win I guess.  It's even trumping Hitler these days... lol!


----------



## BobF

Without wasting any more time on this thread, I think I read about the family being Muslim right here somewhere.   But I am not going to waste my time reading back.

You have distorted my opinion of Obama into a hate thinking thing.   Not so at all.   Very tired though, of watching him ignore our financial situation and keeping on raising the level of debt.   Before Obama our debt was in the 7 trillion level and both Clinton and Bush had tried to contain it to that level or lower it.   In Bush's last two years the Democrats took over the Congress and drove the debt up to 10 trillion.    After Obama came on he kept driving the debt up to now nearing 20 trillion and it does not look like any attempt to end this spiral to bankruptcy for the US any time soon.    So I object to his ignoring our Congress for so many years and just spending his way along.   You also paid no attention to my saying I don't spend all my time on FOX NEWS but when I do I do see some very interesting articles about how wasteful some groups are and how better this or that other groups might be.   Not all on FOX NEWS are conservatives at all.   There are some that are very much tending to the far left path of politics and government.    There are also some Libertarians, so much of both sides does get exposed.

Sorry you do not seem to understand what I am posting as I do watch normal NBC programs and some programs on Fox News.    I do not sit and just watch Fox News all the time as some might do with their favorite news program and nothing else.   Mix up the stations and get a better idea of what is really going on.   I think you are on a good path, being an independent.


----------



## SeaBreeze

Well, back to the thread topic, I hope some answers and justice come out of this senseless shooting, the Grand Jury did what they could with the way they were manipulated in this case.  I just hope the violence dies down, and people's lives in Ferguson can get back to normal, and the people in power who can make some positive changes for all communities, and police departments begin to have some constructive dialogue on the issues.

As far as Obama, he'll only be around for two more years, then everyone can focus on dogging someone new.


----------



## QuickSilver

SeaBreeze said:


> Well, back to the thread topic, I hope some answers and justice come out of this senseless shooting, the Grand Jury did what they could with the way they were manipulated in this case.  I just hope the violence dies down, and people's lives in Ferguson can get back to normal, and the people in power who can make some positive changes for all communities, and police departments begin to have some constructive dialogue on the issues.
> 
> As far as Obama, he'll only be around for two more years, then everyone can focus on dogging someone new.



Not sure WHAT people think Obama is supposed to do about this whole thing.   All he can do is speak for non-violence.  Do they think because he is Black he can orchestrate the reactions in Ferguson?  Wave his magic Black wand and everyone will obey?   Give me a break.


----------



## SeaBreeze

Obama has done all he can by asking for people to protest in a peaceful manner.  Some have him secretly meeting with the protesters, just to tell them to stay on course with their violent looting and rioting.  I don't know how many times I heard 'stay on course' from the right-wing talking heads, they all assume it's encouraging chaos.  But funny, as usual, nobody has come up with any other words in this alleged conversation, to even put those three words in their intended context.  One has to be really gullible to fall for all those sound bites/quotes that are repeated endlessly to convince others of their position.  Lots of folks take the bait hook, line and sinker.


----------



## QuickSilver

SeaBreeze said:


> Obama has done all he can by asking for people to protest in a peaceful manner.  Some have him secretly meeting with the protesters, just to tell them to stay on course with their violent looting and rioting.  I don't know how many times I heard 'stay on course' from the right-wing talking heads, they all assume it's encouraging chaos.  But funny, as usual, nobody has come up with any other words in this alleged conversation, to even put those three words in their intended context.  One has to be really gullible to fall for all those sound bites/quotes that are repeated endlessly to convince others of their position.  Lots of folks take the bait hook, line and sinker.



OOOOOHHHHHH.....  NOW I get the Muslim connection..  hahahahahahahaha!!   What a hoot!  Since I wouldn't listen to Faux noise or any other in the Right wing echo chamber  on a dare, I had no idea that this was the latest..  Obama... muslim.....   Brown..... Muslim...  Now it's making sense... NOT!


----------



## SeaBreeze

This was the link referenced in post #117...http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/11/1...co-opt-ferguson-protests-says-watchdog-group/


----------



## SeaBreeze

Unorthodox police procedures emerge in Grand Jury documents...http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...-11e4-bd1b-03009bd3e984_story.html?tid=pm_pop


----------



## QuickSilver

The Justice department should investigate the entire system in Ferguson.. including Prosecutor McCullough, the mayor and all the way up to Govenor Nixon.


----------



## Ralphy1

Sure, just keep calling for more investigations until you get the results you want...


----------



## Jackie22

When a Supreme Court judge has doubts, maybe it's time for more investigations.


----------



## Ralphy1

We can all have doubts but that doesn't mean the decision not to indict was wrong...


----------



## Jackie22

This is an incident that happened during the GJ's decision making...

http://crooksandliars.com/2014/11/how-robert-mcculloch-hoodwinked-ferguson

I apologize if this has been posted before.


----------



## QuickSilver

Ralphy1 said:


> We can all have doubts but that doesn't mean the decision not to indict was wrong...



I would say Ralphy... that when a Conservative Supreme Court Justice doubts the validity of a Grand Jury decision, it's time to take off the blinders and see that there was a problem.  It was railroaded through by a Prosecutor who had absolutely NO intension of charges being brought against the killer.  It's apparent to nearly everyone who understands law... Including the National Bar Association whose President came out against the way it was handled...   For me?   That's enough to know there was a fix in from the start and it was handled in an unorthodox fashion to engineer the results.  Remember, the grand jury is nothing more than laymen.. and they were manipulated by a skilled prosecutor intent on having the results go the way he wanted.


----------



## rkunsaw

That is pure bull. The prosecutor could have decided to not bring charges without a grand jury. He used the grand jury so that there would be no question the right decision was reached. That sure as hell didn't convince the people stupid enough to listen to the race baiters.


----------



## QuickSilver

rkunsaw said:


> That is pure bull. The prosecutor could have decided to not bring charges without a grand jury. He used the grand jury so that there would be no question the right decision was reached. That sure as hell didn't convince the people stupid enough to listen to the race baiters.



Seems to me his actions have brought on a hellava lot of questions... and from people who are law experts too.. (can't get more expert than the SCOTUS)..  So Are you calling Justice Scalia a "stupid race baiter"  lol!!

http://www.nationofchange.org/2014/11/26/justice-scalia-explains-wrong-ferguson-grand-jury/

It is the grand jury’s function not ‘to enquire … upon what foundation [the charge may be] denied,’ or otherwise to try the suspect’s defenses, but only to examine ‘upon what foundation [the charge] is made’ by the prosecutor. Respublica v. Shaffer, 1 Dall. 236 (O. T. Phila. 1788); see also F. Wharton, Criminal Pleading and Practice § 360, pp. 248-249 (8th ed. 1880). As a consequence, *neither in this country nor in England has the suspect under investigation by the grand jury ever been thought to have a right to testify or to have exculpatory evidence presented.

*Compare Justice Scalia’s description of the role of the grand jury to what the prosecutors told the Ferguson grand jury before they started their deliberations:
And you must find probable cause to believe that Darren Wilson did not act in lawful self-defense and you must find probable cause to believe that Darren Wilson did not use lawful force in making an arrest. If you find those things, which is kind of like finding a negative, you cannot return an indictment on anything or true bill unless you find both of those things. Because both are *complete defenses to any offense and they both have been raised in his, in the evidence.

*
As Justice Scalia explained the evidence to support these “complete defenses,” including Wilson’s testimony, was only included by McCulloch by ignoring how grand juries historically work.
There were several eyewitness accounts that strongly suggested Wilson did not act in self-defense. McCulloch could have, and his critics say should have, presented that evidence to the grand jury and likely returned an indictment in days, not months. It’s a low bar, which is why virtually all grand juries return indictments.​


----------



## 911

*St. Louis Rams*

Anyone see the Rams protest by five of their players? They had their 'hands up.' Thoughts?


----------



## Don M.

Peaceful protest and demonstration is the Right of everyone in this nation....at least they didn't join the idiots who have been rioting, looting and burning.  If they wish to demonstrate their obvious rejection of the Facts in this case, that is also their privilege.  Maybe if they concentrated their thoughts and efforts on doing their overpaid jobs, St. Louis might not be ranked at the bottom of their division.


----------



## AprilT

Maybe if more people understood the root of what the hands up meant, they wouldn't make outrageous comments, but, then if one hasn't experienced what most people of color have experience, it would be very difficult to relate.  But why even try to understand, easier to disconnect since some have never lived it on a nearly daily basis at one time or another in life.  

It's funny, I have had a couple of friends witness what happens up close and personal during a shopping excursion some years ago, it was mind blowing for them, they just didn't understand what was happening, I just grinned, wasn't much of a way to explain it other than to say, it's because you are with me.  they'd never experienced that kind of harassment before.  I don't get it often, just once and a while depending on where I've gone.  Never held a grudge, but, the accumulation of experiences of the nature can where on the psyche after a while if it happens too often and depending on just how blatant it is.  But why would others that this doesn't effect get it or care right.  This support these athletes are displaying isn't about Brown, it's about an across the board system that is in play that many deal with daily in life.  

How many of you have had a child come home from a playdate the child is in tears, unconsolable, you have to get the information out of your child and you find out the playmate's grandmother had sat your daughter and her playmate down and told them they can't be friends, they shouldn't be playing together, your daughter was beneath her friend so to speak and it just wasn't right.  Like me, many of my daughters playmates were of various ethnic groups, mostly white, just happened by chance.  I couldn't console my child, she'd never been spoken to like that about her skin color before this was back in '85 '86, my daughter was around 10 y/o, changed her in ways that I couldn't convince her to not hate that women and continue that friendship regardless of those words spoken to her.  I've had similar things said in my youth, many of my closest friends were white and on one occasion in another situation, one of my best friend was bi-racial, but looked white, we were walking down a road and ran into a woman that knew her, the woman made a comment that she thought we shouldn't be together, this was late 60's.  I'm not going to talk about all the instances since those days.  I've always just brushed it all off as no big deal until more recently when too much stuff just keeps getting forced upon me and I can't any longer just ignore every little thing.  As I've said it wears on you after a while.  I haven't been called nig_er many times, but the one time that stood out in my mind was coming out of a club and some guys called it out to one of my friends and I as they drove by us, this was, in the mid '90s. In NJ, there were still the occasional cross burnings on a few lawns even then.  Anyway back to those bad boys, we had the last laugh since the police pulled them over as they sped just outside of the stripe mall; we saw them getting a ticket.  LOL.

I don't have anything against any people based on skin color, I just feel annoyed these days more often than not due to more and more instances of things being pushed in my face and on top of it people acting like everything is just hunky dory because it's not happening to them and they don't witness it up close and personal.  I'm forever grateful for the folks that don't have blinders on.  I know most minds won't be affected, touched, changed or even sympathetic, just had to get this off my chest. At times it's a pain the weighs heavily on the heart, just had to release.

Anyhoo, rant over.


----------



## QuickSilver

If anyone thinks this is JUST about Michael Brown.. they are short sighted and sadly mistaken..  He may be the catalyst... BUT this protest is about years of inequality in our justice system.  This is about the fact that we have TWO justices systems.. one for whites and another very different one for blacks.  This is about White parents telling their children that if they are ever in trouble and need help... find a policeman..  AND Black parents telling their kids if they are ever in trouble and need help AVOID the police because it can get out of control very quickly.   NO.. this is not about Michael Brown... it was just the last straw.  

Also.. no one.. not even the majority of Blacks are condoning the looting and violence.  These are  the bad apples.. and the whole race shouldn't be blamed.. Just like the White college kids that get drunk and trash the town after a sporting event do not represent the whole white race.


----------



## WhatInThe

There is a time and place for everything. True, the government gives you free speech. Employers and customers do not have to. This is why most businesses want their employees behavior on field apolitical because it's the workplace with workplace rules which are designed with business in mind. The fans had a right to boo as well. Now you have counter free speech: this is where "a" protest/free speech can morph into something else in a crowded stadium at that. That being said yes it was much better than rioting, looting, vandalism or stalking customers at the local Target.


----------



## AprilT

WhatInThe said:


> There is a time and place for everything. True, the government gives you free speech. Employers and customers do not have to. This is why most businesses want their employees behavior on field apolitical because it's the workplace with workplace rules which are designed with business in mind. The fans had a right to boo as well. Now you have counter free speech: this is where "a" protest/free speech can morph into something else in a crowded stadium at that. That being said yes it was much better than rioting, looting, vandalism or stalking customers at the local Target.



For the most part, I actually agree with you, I personally just took issue with a different comment that was made about the connection to the meaning of the show of solidarity.


----------



## SeaBreeze

I don't see a problem with it, it was a show of support for their community.  I imagine the only ones who are blowing it out of proportion are the police and perhaps the Raider's fans and coaches.  They were getting a message across about a problem that needs to be addressed in America, and they did it in a peaceful way, hopefully something positive will come out of it.  This is from SBNation.

*





 RAMS SUPPORT OF FERGUSON 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


*

Rams players show support for Ferguson protestorsRams invite 225 Ferguson-area HS kids to game

​


> After the game, the players explained that their motivations were benevolent, meant as a sign of support for the larger community and the need for healing.





> "We just understand that it's a big tragedy and we hope something positive comes out of it," Bailey said.
> 
> "We kind of came collectively together and decided we wanted to do something," Cook told Nick Wagoner of ESPN. "So we wanted to come out and show our respect to the protests and the people who have been doing a heck of a job around the world."
> 
> "We wanted to show that we are organized for a great cause and something positive comes out of it," Britt said to Wagoner after the game. "That's what we hope we can make happen. That's our community. We wanted to let the community know that we support the community."
> 
> Protesters massed outside the Dome on Sunday, but there were no reports of trouble with the crowds. Rams security and the local police were stationed in and around the building to prevent any serious disruption. The team thanked local police after the game.


----------



## WhatInThe

QuickSilver said:


> If anyone thinks this is JUST about Michael Brown.. they are short sighted and sadly mistaken..  He may be the catalyst... BUT this protest is about years of inequality in our justice system.  This is about the fact that we have TWO justices systems.. one for whites and another very different one for blacks.  This is about White parents telling their children that if they are ever in trouble and need help... find a policeman..  AND Black parents telling their kids if they are ever in trouble and need help AVOID the police because it can get out of control very quickly.   NO.. this is not about Michael Brown... it was just the last straw.
> 
> Also.. no one.. not even the majority of Blacks are condoning the looting and violence.  These are  the bad apples.. and the whole race shouldn't be blamed.. Just like the White college kids that get drunk and trash the town after a sporting event do not represent the whole white race.




I see the years of frustration with many groups and individuals. But to hang your hat on someone like Michael Brown and try to myrtarize him like MLK takes away credence to many. Also if these same groups and individuals were paying to attention to the news they would've protested stop & frisk in NYC years ago. Or one of the NYC police shooting victims where several dozen rounds were shot into an individual. I also find it a contradiction if many other groups protest law enforcement/behavior they are considered anti government.

One of the issues that came out of the summer Ferguson riots were actually existing issues reported by some BEFORE this summer and that was the militarization of the police including weaponary, vehicles and tactics. I was infuriated when a Georgia police raid burned an infant with a no knock warrant/grenade-how many protests there. Ferguson brought out or confirmed a lot of issues with current law enforcement. But if you are going to protest or are sincere/serious change you can't cherry pick the issues.


----------



## QuickSilver

If not Michael Brown.. then the next killing... or the next..  Eventually something was going to make the pot boil over..  Just like the Church bombings that brought on the Civil Rights movement, leading to change in voting and segregation.  This police force of today is NOT the kindly cop of yesteryear.  This is a scary bunch of kids all wanting to be Rambo.   AND unfortunately, the Black Community has taken the brunt of their force.  Maybe this too will bring about change to our justice system.


----------



## AprilT

WhatInThe said:


> I see the years of frustration with many groups and individuals. But to hang your hat on someone like Michael Brown and try to myrtarize him like MLK takes away credence to many. Also if these same groups and individuals were paying to attention to the news they would've protested stop & frisk in NYC years ago. Or one of the NYC police shooting victims where several dozen rounds were shot into an individual. I also find it a contradiction if many other groups protest law enforcement/behavior they are considered anti government.
> 
> 
> 
> One of the issues that came out of the summer Ferguson riots were actually existing issues reported by some BEFORE this summer and that was the militarization of the police including weaponary, vehicles and tactics. I was infuriated when a Georgia police raid burned an infant with a no knock warrant/grenade-how many protests there. Ferguson brought out or confirmed a lot of issues with current law enforcement. But if you are going to protest or are sincere/serious change you can't cherry pick the issues.



How is showing support for the greater issue cherry picking when your emotions overflow and you stand up with others.  I imagine sometimes people have a moment when they have had enough, who determines when that moment is and gets to label it cherry picking.  One can say that it's cherry picking when someone only calls people out for only standing up for one issue or another.  Does everyone have something to say when other issues come to the forefront that have nothing to do with people outside of their own ethnic groups behaving against their comfort level?  I rarely see people posting about the non-minority protesters at college campus or after major games where all kinds of mayhem breaks out.  Pot kettle comes to mind.


----------



## ClassicRockr

For me, *THIS* is the only thing I will say about what they did...........


----------



## ClassicRockr

Now, what do YOU think 911?



911 said:


> Anyone see the Rams protest by five of their players? They had their 'hands up.' Thoughts?


----------



## SeaBreeze

ClassicRockr said:


> Now, what do YOU think 911?



My question also 911, since you started this thread, and you were in law enforcement, what do _you _think of this show of support?


----------



## Falcon

How long is this going to go on?  Enough is enough ! Let's get on with something else.

There are much more serious things to worry about.

A few: terrorism, beheadings, worldwide starvation, global warming etc. just to name a few.  IMO


----------



## AprilT

Falcon said:


> How long is this going to go on?  Enough is enough ! Let's get on with something else.
> 
> There are much more serious things to worry about.
> 
> A few: terrorism, beheadings, worldwide starvation, global warming etc. just to name a few.  IMO



Of course, since one isn't affected in any way, lets all just forget about how it affects the rest of the people.  These very I don't care attitudes are what has effects on the very thinking of the people who commit such heinous crimes as growing terrorist factions, beheadings and worldwide disdain and hate. and remember terrorist exist in all shapes sizes and colors. Ignore it till it becomes unignorable and people start making bigger, not necessarily justifiable actions, but attention getting actions to make it so people pay attention.  Then the big guns get sent in, another band aide is placed and the soar pops up elsewhere.  But ok, as we were.

I'd really like to let it go, but some people keep piling hits on till you just have to start screaming or at least a yelp.  I myself never would have said a word of any of this if people on here didn't keep broaching the subject.


----------



## QuickSilver

I think that people of all races are slowly waking up to the obvious inequalities..  The Civil Rights movement of the 60's was accomplished by a unrelenting PEACEFUL protest and a Congress willing to work with President Kennedy and then Johnson to pass legislation to effect change.  What is so sad is that I really don't see that happening under a Republican Congress.  They seriously couldn't care less about the people.  They will only work for those stuffing millions into their campaign coffers or into PACs enabling them to be re-elected.   The welfare they are concerned with is that of the rich.. NOT the poor or middle class. and certainly NOT for Blacks or Hispanics.   I am afraid if they don't do something this is going to continue to fester and get only worse.

My personal hope is that this will inspire ALL Blacks and minorities to secure the proper IDs and register to vote.. and of course VOTE...  no mater how long the lines are or no matter how many roadblocks are thrown at them.  If all eligible minorities voted, there would be change for sure as those blocking it would be voted out of office.


----------



## Falcon

That's EXACTLY what I'm talking about.


----------



## QuickSilver

Falcon said:


> That's EXACTLY what I'm talking about.



So you are not saying that there isn't an inequality problem..  you are saying that there are better ways to deal with it than rioting and looting.  I fully agree.. There needs to be an immense mobilization of voter registration.   The system needs to be changed for sure.


----------



## AprilT

QuickSilver said:


> So you are not saying that there isn't an inequality problem..  you are saying that there are better ways to deal with it than rioting and looting.  I fully agree.. There needs to be an immense mobilization of voter registration.   The system needs to be changed for sure.



That I can fully agree with as well, but, as I saw it, the players featured in the thread weren't rioting nor looting, so I took it as lets get over talking about these issues related to the principles period, that is how it came across, I'm sure I am not alone in how I read that post.  But then, it appears, I'm not one to be addressed, I'm just another angry minority.  Though for most of my 56 years, I've not complained about much till I joined message boards where all I ever hear is people discussing or complaining about people that look like me day and night, night and day.  I was at one point just going to go away, but, since there were a few decent folk that seemed to be open to various opinions, I'm still here, but it ain't easy, knowing what I now know about some others feelings that have kept quiet in more ways than one.


----------



## QuickSilver

AprilT said:


> That I can fully agree with as well, but, as I saw it, the players featured in the thread weren't rioting nor looting, so I took it as lets get over talking about these issues related to the principles period, that is how it came across, I'm sure I am not alone in how I read that post.  But then, it appears, I'm not one to be addressed, I'm just another angry minority.  Though for most of my 56 years, I've not complained about much till I joined message boards where all I ever hear is people discussing or complaining about people that look like me day and night, night and day.  I was at one point just going to go away, but, since there were a few decent folk that seemed to be open to various opinions, I'm still here, but it ain't easy, knowing what I now know about some others feelings that have kept quiet in more ways than one.



I agree April.  The players were showing support, and it was a form of peaceful protest.  Let's hope it continues.. and people understand the need to make change peacefully through the ballot box.  I'm so sorry you have been subjected to the less than "Christain" remarks coming from some.   It's a lot easier for them with the anonymity of a message forum.  Like has been said.. there are folks of all races participating here..  and some should understand how hurtful their words are.  But sadly.  I suspect they just don't care.


----------



## SeaBreeze

QuickSilver said:


> The players were showing support, and it was a form of peaceful protest.  Let's hope it continues.. and people understand the need to make change peacefully through the ballot box.  I'm so sorry you have been subjected to the less than "Christain" remarks coming from some.   It's a lot easier for them with the anonymity of a message forum.  Like has been said.. there are folks of all races participating here..  and some should understand how hurtful their words are.  But sadly.  I suspect they just don't care.



I think it was just a sign of support, respect and solidarity, I couldn't really even call that a protest.  People are slowly becoming aware of some of the injustices taking place in many areas, and that's a good thing.  I'm sorry too that those of color have to live with remarks like that and be treated with less respect in America.  I think that those who have grown up with all different kinds of people, like we who come from a big city environment, are more aware than some others.  Nobody should be hurtful with their words, either online or in real life, IMO.


----------



## Ralphy1

*Why is it that more men accept the Ferguson verdict than women?*

Perhaps men recognize a thug when they see one and women allow their maternal instincts to take over.  This seems to be the case on this forum and from what I have seen and heard elsewhere...


----------



## rkunsaw

They are showing support for a criminal. That's what Mike Brown was, a criminal.


----------



## QuickSilver

never mind....   I'm going to behave


----------



## Ralphy1

That's OK, the truth requires no response...


----------



## rkunsaw

Ralphy1 said:


> Perhaps men recognize a thug when they see one and women allow their maternal instincts to take over.  This seems to be the case on this forum and from what I have seen and heard elsewhere...



I hadn't noticed before but I believe you're right Ralphy.

All those who are showing support for this criminal are just promoting the violence and hurting race relations in this country. We should all be supporting law and order and standing behind our police when they are attacked by lawless thugs.


----------



## Debby

Not all women are responding to the 'maternal' instinct.  I've asked my husband repeatedly why the majority seem to be ignoring the video from the store where the 'gentle giant' stole and then shoved the store owner against the counter when he attempted to intervene and save his property.  

As a white person and one who's been lucky to lead the kind of sheltered life that many can only dream of, I understand that I don't understand what it's like to be a black person or a person of any other colour in North America.  I also realize that racism is an evil that not only hurts the individual but also society.  Personally, I don't think making Michael Brown into the poster boy for this change is reasonable.  How about instead all that energy was turned towards the horror of that twelve year old boy who was killed because he was black and a kid just playing a stupid and turns out, dangerous game on that playground?  Or maybe that little hispanic baby who had a grenade blow up beside his face in his crib?  Seems to me that either of those would make more sense.


----------



## Debby

QuickSilver said:


> So you are not saying that there isn't an inequality problem..  you are saying that there are better ways to deal with it than rioting and looting.  I fully agree.. There needs to be an immense mobilization of voter registration.   The system needs to be changed for sure.




An immense mobilization of voter registration?  If the system is set up so that you have no different choices, what difference would that make?  You wind up with more voters only being able to vote for 'dumb or dumber'.  And yes QS that question could apply here in Canada too.  Although we have four parties to chose from, we seem to only go back and forth between two of them.

How do you change a system when the guys who are using the system for their own benefit have set it up so that unless you have multiple millions of dollars to get into the race, you don't have a hope of changing it from the inside?  They are supported by the corporate heads who want the system to continue just as it is because it benefits them personally to the tune of billions of dollars so the millions they donate to their favourite horse in the race is peanuts.  Peanuts to them, impossible for the little guy with the great idea and the real heart.

Chris Christy is a great example of how it works.  The pork industry was facing a change in how they are allowed to abuse the animals in their care, but now Chris Christy who wants to run for President voted against the bill that would have seen those sad animals get some relief in their miserable lives......because Idaho is full of pig farmers!  That's how he is mustering his support, on the backs of suffering!  Anything less and he'd lose a state apparently, but now he's shoring up the pig farmer vote.


----------



## QuickSilver

Ralphy1 said:


> That's OK, the truth requires no response...



I think you have totally misunderstood the position against the Grand Jury decision to mean that it is felt Darren Wilson is guilty and that Michael Brown an innocent victim.    Ralphy..  Do you EVEN read other posts?    The problem with this Grand Jury was that it was totally  manipulated by the Prosecutor  Robert McCulloch.  He used the Grand Jury in a completely unorthodox manner... which was even commented on by Supreme Court Justice Scalia. AND the National Bar Association.  The Fix was in from the start.  There should have been a trial so all the evidence was presented and a REAL Jury was able to deliberate the outcome.  This way there was NO trial at all... no cross examinations..  nothing but what McCulloch wanted.   It may very well have been determined in a trial that Wilson was innocent.  NOW we will never know.

As for why women are more inclined to not accept the Grand Jury farce?   For the reasons above.  Women seem to want all evidence weighed for a real investigation and the truth be brought out.  We perhaps are less inclined to bend to prejudice when the truth is at stake.  Please read all the posts.. Ralphy... All this was talked about at length.


----------



## QuickSilver

Debby said:


> Not all women are responding to the 'maternal' instinct.  I've asked my husband repeatedly why the majority seem to be ignoring the video from the store where the 'gentle giant' stole and then shoved the store owner against the counter when he attempted to intervene and save his property.
> 
> As a white person and one who's been lucky to lead the kind of sheltered life that many can only dream of, I understand that I don't understand what it's like to be a black person or a person of any other colour in North America.  I also realize that racism is an evil that not only hurts the individual but also society.  Personally, I don't think making Michael Brown into the poster boy for this change is reasonable.  How about instead all that energy was turned towards the horror of that twelve year old boy who was killed because he was black and a kid just playing a stupid and turns out, dangerous game on that playground?  Or maybe that little hispanic baby who had a grenade blow up beside his face in his crib?  Seems to me that either of those would make more sense.




If YOU had read all the other posts you would see that NO ONE was making Brown into a poster child of innocence...  What has been asked is only was did Darren Wilson have to shoot him dead.  Was it absolutely necessary.   We will never know this because the Grand Jury was misused and manipulated.  Hopefully the Federal Court will pick up this case and we can have some real courtroom testimony from BOTH sides of the witness pool, along with cross examination....  REAL cross examination of the inconsistencies from BOTH sides.


----------



## QuickSilver

rkunsaw said:


> They are showing support for a criminal. That's what Mike Brown was, a criminal.



Yes... and NOW the penalty for stealing a box of Swisher Sweets is DEATH!!  lol!1


----------



## Ralphy1

Please consider materials other than the posts here.  The grand jury saw all of the evidence and could not indict as many legal experts have concurred with.  And I remember the Trayvon Martin case which brought the same outrage with a disproportionate amount from women...


----------



## QuickSilver

Ralphy1 said:


> Please consider materials other than the posts here.  The grand jury saw all of the evidence and could not indict as many legal experts have concurred with.  And I remember the Trayvon Martin case which brought the same outrage with a disproportionate amount from women...




What they were shown was a law that was deemed unconstitutional in 1985..  Do you not pay attention.  The whole thing was a massive farce to put the fix in.  Even FOX reported that. 

http://radio.foxnews.com/2014/11/27...-grand-jury-on-law-that-was-unconstitutional/



> For the entire proceeding, jurors weighed the evidence in light of a law that was deemed unconstitutional almost 30 years ago. Then they corrected the record at the very end, but by then it was too late.
> To me, this invalidates the entire decision. While I believe jurors acted in good faith, the prosecutor did not, and intentionally confused jurors as to the applicable law. Correcting it at the end is not adequate or acceptable.


----------



## rkunsaw

And you know the grand jury was misused and manipulated because you were there, right. You trust a jury but not a grand jury. Hmmmm. A jury decided O J Simpson was innocent.

You just want to keep trying Officer Wilson until you get the verdict you want.


----------



## Jackie22

"We perhaps are less inclined to bend to prejudice when the truth is at stake." 

...........there is your answer.


----------



## Ralphy1

Yup, when you attack a police officer and try to grab his gun.  Have you wonder what the punk might have done with gun had he got it?  Probably a dead officer...


----------



## QuickSilver

Ralphy1 said:


> Yup, when you attack a police officer and try to grab his gun.  Have you wonder what the punk might have done with gun had he got it?  Probably a dead officer...




Sure... lets ignore the fact that he was killed long after that alleged grab for the gun.  Ralphy... he was shot 108 feet from the squad after running away.


----------



## rkunsaw

Ralphy1 said:


> Yup, when you attack a police officer and try to grab his gun.  Have you wonder what the punk might have done with gun had he got it?  Probably a dead officer...



That's just what I was going t say, Ralphy.  Mike Brown got what he deserved.


----------



## QuickSilver

Jackie22 said:


> "We perhaps are less inclined to bend to prejudice when the truth is at stake."
> 
> ...........there is your answer.




Excellent reply..  and likely the case.


----------



## BobF

Good comment Ralphy1.   Far too much publicity is going to these out of order mobsters that are blocking streets and highways around the US.

We had a Grand Jury, as we should have had, and it worked just fine.    Except for those that insist the hanging squad forgot to form and a honest group debated and came to a conclusion that some, mostly a minority number of folks, to disagree with.   Many of the blacks of that community have taken it too them selves to try to repair the unnecessary damages put on them by the radical thinking folks.   They do not need, or seem to want, the out of order type of responses being pushed now by outsiders, and that includes these outsiders that came and made hate speeches about our US court systems and how they work.   Hateful men that just will not accept the way things work and insist on trying to change things with their mob action and calls for total disrespect for our laws.    If they do not like what the Grand Jury has done there are ways they could have gone other than starting street riots all across the US, as they have.   So instead of hearings and court reviews we now have street riots across the US.    Nothing smart or sensible in that type of response to what was should have been a court style of hearing and court style of review.   Maybe it was not the best response for many, but it was not a street riot either and there were likely solutions that could have been taken without these street riots coming around.

Pure out of order, no solution to the imagined wrongs.   This confused idea should have been corrected in legal ways rather that though illegal street riots around the country.


----------



## QuickSilver

rkunsaw said:


> That's just what I was going t say, Ralphy.  Mike Brown got what he deserved.



Well, we will never know that now... considering the trial was held by a Grand Jury who are not supposed to try a dead man for his own murder. Which is what happened.  You call that justice?   I call it a travesty.


----------



## Ralphy1

Seems that the evidence showed that he was charging the officer when he was shot, not running away...


----------



## Ralphy1

Protesters blocked Interstate 95 here and the state police had to disperse them for the safety of themselves and the driving public.  Six protesters would not move and were arrested.  An outrage poured out because they were all black.  The police said that they were the only ones that wouldn't move.  It seems like some are just using any excuse to try and make race an issue...


----------



## Debby

QuickSilver said:


> If YOU had read all the other posts you would see that NO ONE was making Brown into a poster child of innocence...  What has been asked is only was did Darren Wilson have to shoot him dead.  Was it absolutely necessary.   We will never know this because the Grand Jury was misused and manipulated.  Hopefully the Federal Court will pick up this case and we can have some real courtroom testimony from BOTH sides of the witness pool, along with cross examination....  REAL cross examination of the inconsistencies from BOTH sides.




Sorry but I don't agree with YOU.  On the one hand you're right, I didn't wade through all the comments here, but it seemed to me that anytime I saw anything on the television (talking heads or interviews with Sharpton and the family and friends) nobody addressed the store crime.  It was all about the gentle giant, yada, yada, yada.  Not a single mention of his crime, or the possibility that the policeman was trapped in his car and responded to that threat accordingly and suggestions of incompetence, or the fact that the guy wasn't shot in the back unlike the witnesses who said he was, etc.


Yesterday on Michael Smirconish's radio talk show (he's a lawyer), I listened to him talking to some law professor who had looked at what evidence the grand jury had to go on and both of them concurred with the verdict.  Evidence is what counts, not emotionalism.  And don't get me wrong, I'll join the crowd in saying that there are lots of very bad cops out there who need to be reined in, retrained, thrown out, jailed....whatever it takes, but I'm not hearing much except emotionalism when it comes to public mood.


----------



## QuickSilver

Ralphy1 said:


> Seems that the evidence showed that he was charging the officer when he was shot, not running away...




Again... you completely MISS the point and function of a Grand Jury.  There was NO evidence Ralphy.. only the testimony of Darren Wilson and one witness..  There was NO cross examination of the inconsistencies. Like the fact that the sole witness to the "charging" was a football field away.. and THEN changed his story to him being only a half a football field away.   The numerous witnesses to the contrary were just dismissed..  There was no trial.   Wilson was found innocent without a trial..  how is that OK?  There are so many problems with the way this was conducted it isn't funny.   This was nothing more than a Kangaroo Court.


----------



## rkunsaw

The grand jury was the proper place to decide if the evidence supported an indictment. The grand jury heard the evidence and made their decision. That is the proper way. You want rioters and looters to make decisions evidence be damned.


----------



## Ralphy1

Sorry, but reasonable people using a reasonable procedure, neither had to be perfect, have spoken...


----------



## rkunsaw

QuickSilver said:


> Again... you completely MISS the point and function of a Grand Jury.  There was NO evidence Ralphy.. only the testimony of Darren Wilson and one witness..  There was NO cross examination of the inconsistencies. Like the fact that the sole witness to the "charging" was a football field away.. and THEN changed his story to him being only a half a football field away.   The numerous witnesses to the contrary were just dismissed..  There was no trial.   Wilson was found innocent without a trial..  how is that OK?  There are so many problems with the way this was conducted it isn't funny.   This was nothing more than a Kangaroo Court.


That is totally untrue!


----------



## QuickSilver

rkunsaw said:


> That is totally untrue!



Unfortunately it is NOT.

http://oreaddaily.blogspot.com/2014/11/witness-ten-was-length-of-football.html




> Witness 10's testimony at the Ferguson grand jury (the key testimony according to the prosecutor and the only one besides Darren Wilson he mentioned in his press conference) was the only one who matched Wilson's narrative from start to finish, especially Wilson's claim that Brown bull rushed him (while his body was full of multiple bullets). When Witness 10 was first interviewed by investigators he said he was 100 yards way from the scene. But by the time he testified before the grand jury, his story had now changed. He now claimed he was 50 to 75 yards away. This witness also said he saw Mike Brown make some sort of bodily movement but he was not sure what it was. He said he was not sure three times about that at the GJ. He added, thought, amazingly, that he knew Brown was not surrendering. McCulloch found his testimony more compelling than unchanged testimony from witnesses who were 20 ft and 20 yards away, who saw Brown stumbling forward, reeling from multiple gun shot wounds. We have been given no further information on this witness but that he did not wear glasses. We don't know if he is twelve years old or eighty years old, if he ever had his eyes examined, if he needed glasses, if he was on drugs or in trouble with the law. The prosecutor didn't ask and we don't know. We do know he changed his testimony. My question, would we trust an official standing in one end zone to call a holding penalty in the other end zone, seriously. Would we trust an official standing even on the fifty to seventy-five yards away to make that call?



Yet ALL the other witnesses were deemed to by LYING?   Give me a break.  calling this a Kangaroo court is too good for this proceeding.  It was a lynching of a dead kid.


----------



## Ralphy1

Seems like the color of your post might be indicative of your blood pressure rising and I wouldn't want you to have a stroke so I am signing off now.  Also, I need to make a donation to my F.O.P., as I should put my money where my mouth is... nthego:


----------



## rkunsaw

Nothing anyone says is going to change your prejudiced views, QS, but at least the criminal thug is still dead. All the ranting and rioting won't change that.


----------



## AprilT

What is this the 5th thread to rehash the same old opinions on the matter.  :thumbsup1:


----------



## QuickSilver

AprilT said:


> What is this the 5th thread to rehash the same old opinions on the matter.  :thumbsup1:



True April...   Those that wanted it.... got the ruling the "wanted" and they are very very happy with it...  Who needs a trial?... who needs the truth?.. so long as the preconceived notions and sterotypes were upheld..    Those so convinced justice was done will never be convinced otherwise.  Hopefully the Federal Courts will fix this travesty.


----------



## QuickSilver

rkunsaw said:


> Nothing anyone says is going to change your prejudiced views, QS, but at least the criminal thug is still dead. All the ranting and rioting won't change that.




MY prejudiced views...   :lofl:


----------



## AprilT

QuickSilver said:


> MY prejudiced views...   :lofl:



My thought exactly.  My side is still hurting.


----------



## Jackie22

Some do not want the truth because their illusions will be destroyed.


----------



## SeaBreeze

AprilT said:


> What is this the 5th thread to rehash the same old opinions on the matter.



You're right, we don't need a million different threads on this same topic, that's for sure.  A couple have been merged.  And no Ralphy, I don't see the men agreeing with that Grand Jury "decision" not to indict.  There are plenty of men protesting, and my husband sees through all the funny business that went on with that prosecutor's tactics and the jury.  They made the fairest decision that they could make with the "evidence" or lack of that was selectively provided.  Let's not keep on beating this dead horse either, it's becoming repetitive and frankly annoying.


----------



## rkunsaw

Jackie22 said:


> Some do not want the truth because their illusions will be destroyed.



Now that is the truth!!!


----------



## Pappy

SeaBreeze said:


> You're right, we don't need a million different threads on this same topic, that's for sure.  A couple have been merged.  And no Ralphy, I don't see the men agreeing with that Grand Jury "decision" not to indict.  There are plenty of men protesting, and my husband sees through all the funny business that went on with that prosecutor's tactics and the jury.  They made the fairest decision that they could make with the "evidence" or lack of that was selectively provided.  Let's not keep on beating this dead horse either, it's becoming repetitive and frankly annoying.



I, for one, thank you. SB


----------



## Debby

Okay, just when you thought the smoke had settled, along comes another tidbit of information.  If you go to the following site, you will see an image of an audio thingy (really techy eh?) and while it doesn't work itself or at least didn't for me, if you look just above it you will see where it says 'obtained audio'.  Clicking on that phrase will take you to an audio file that does work and you will hear a series of gunshots in the background.

Going back to the Daily Kos page, that author has written out an evaluation of the police officers story and the relevance to the audio file.  I haven't read through the Daily Kos page at this point, but my husband did sort of and gave me his 30 second synopsis and it's his suggestion that maybe those who are not accepting the grand jury's decision might have a good point.

So while I'm still not thrilled that the mood on the street seems to have totally ignored the actions of Michael Brown in that store, there might be validity to their concerns strictly as it pertains to the actions of the policeman and the grand jury.  So have a listen, read through the Daily Kos breakdown of events and maybe adjust your thinking or stoke your fire some more.  I'll be giving it a quick read myself later as I'm not really 'married' to either possibility at this point.


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/...-Darren-Wilson-s-story-is-false?detail=email#


----------



## Denise1952

Debby said:


> Not all women are responding to the 'maternal' instinct.  I've asked my husband repeatedly why the majority seem to be ignoring the video from the store where the 'gentle giant' stole and then shoved the store owner against the counter when he attempted to intervene and save his property.
> 
> As a white person and one who's been lucky to lead the kind of sheltered life that many can only dream of, I understand that I don't understand what it's like to be a black person or a person of any other colour in North America.  I also realize that racism is an evil that not only hurts the individual but also society.  Personally, I don't think making Michael Brown into the poster boy for this change is reasonable.  How about instead all that energy was turned towards the horror of that twelve year old boy who was killed because he was black and a kid just playing a stupid and turns out, dangerous game on that playground?  Or maybe that little hispanic baby who had a grenade blow up beside his face in his crib?  Seems to me that either of those would make more sense.



LOLLLLLLLLLLLLL, Debby, I LOVE your avatar!! Hilarious!!


----------



## Denise1952

Pappy said:


> I, for one, thank you. SB



LOL, omg Pappy, just when I think I've seen the best Avatar!!

And you are right on Seabreeze


----------



## WhatInThe

Debby said:


> Okay, just when you thought the smoke had settled, along comes another tidbit of information.  If you go to the following site, you will see an image of an audio thingy (really techy eh?) and while it doesn't work itself or at least didn't for me, if you look just above it you will see where it says 'obtained audio'.  Clicking on that phrase will take you to an audio file that does work and you will hear a series of gunshots in the background.
> 
> Going back to the Daily Kos page, that author has written out an evaluation of the police officers story and the relevance to the audio file.  I haven't read through the Daily Kos page at this point, but my husband did sort of and gave me his 30 second synopsis and it's his suggestion that maybe those who are not accepting the grand jury's decision might have a good point.
> 
> So while I'm still not thrilled that the mood on the street seems to have totally ignored the actions of Michael Brown in that store, there might be validity to their concerns strictly as it pertains to the actions of the policeman and the grand jury.  So have a listen, read through the Daily Kos breakdown of events and maybe adjust your thinking or stoke your fire some more.  I'll be giving it a quick read myself later as I'm not really 'married' to either possibility at this point.
> 
> 
> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/...-Darren-Wilson-s-story-is-false?detail=email#




The biggest piece of forensic evidence seems to be the 20 ft blood trail which seems to show Brown still being able to come at Officer Wilson after being shot.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...cop-Darren-Wilson-Michael-Brown-shooting.html

There is much more including Wilson did not have a Taser that day, he had mace. So those who complain about why not tase the point is moot.


----------



## QuickSilver

Pretty much disproves most of what Wilson had to say...   

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/...hooting-proves-Darren-Wilson-s-story-is-false#


----------



## BobF

No need for anyone to read the Daily Kos.    It is a far left, progressive, liberal operations.   That should be enough for most anyone to realize that its output will be plenty biased to fit the far left thinking.   Which in itself means not really open minded and ready to accept other than their own biased thinking.


----------



## Debby

nwlady said:


> LOLLLLLLLLLLLLL, Debby, I LOVE your avatar!! Hilarious!!





What's the matter?  Is my mustache not trimmed nice?  Damn I hate this whole menopause thing.  How unfair, can't even keep my mustache tidy.   I'm so embarrassed.......


----------



## Debby

The point is Bob, to read it in conjunction with the audio that is on another site and in fact even showed up on CNN at one point.  But hey, if you don't want to, okie dokie.


----------



## Denise1952

WhatInThe said:


> The biggest piece of forensic evidence seems to be the 20 ft blood trail which seems to show Brown still being able to come at Officer Wilson after being shot.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...cop-Darren-Wilson-Michael-Brown-shooting.html
> 
> There is much more including Wilson did not have a Taser that day, he had mace. So those who complain about why not tase the point is moot.



Man, that one would be hard to fake.  I know some folks thinks the police set it all up, I don't.


----------



## QuickSilver

The point of this whole Grand Jury thing was NOT to hold a trial and review evidence.  That should have all been done at a real trial with a real Jury and a defense, and a prosecution and cross exam.  Wilson may well had had reason to kill Brown.  The Point of this debate is that the Grand jury was misused, by a prosecutor who had an agenda...  This was confirmed by a Supreme Court Justice AND the National Bar Association.  The Grand Jury was given an unconstitutional law to base their decision on.. only at the very last minute was the actual law handed to them on a piece of paper with no instruction.  These are LAY PEOPLE...and they were give all this to cypher through with nothing to base anything on.   This debate should be taking place in an actual courtroom in an actual trial.  If Wilson is innocent.. it would have been proven.. NOW we will never know who did or didn't do what... because a zealot prosecutor decided to put the fix in.


----------



## QuickSilver

Just to put this into perspective... It is INCREDIBLY rare for a Grand Jury to NOT return an indictment..

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/ferguson-michael-brown-indictment-darren-wilson/




> The decision wasn’t a surprise — leaks from the grand jury had led most observers to conclude an indictment was unlikely — but it was unusual. Grand juries nearly always decide to indict.





> Or at least, they nearly always do so in cases that don’t involve police officers.
> Former New York state Chief Judge Sol Wachtler famously remarked that a prosecutor could persuade a grand jury to “indict a ham sandwich.” The data suggests he was barely exaggerating:* According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. attorneys prosecuted 162,000 federal cases in 2010, the most recent year for which we have data. Grand juries declined to return an indictment in 11 of them*.


----------



## BobF

A Grand Jury in Missouri.

http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/how-does-a-grand-jury-work.html

How does a Grand Jury work?

The Grand Jury plays an important role in the criminal process, *but not one that involves a finding of guilt or punishment of a party.*   Instead, a prosecutor will work with a Grand Jury to decide whether to bring criminal charges or an indictment against a potential defendant -- usualy reserved fro serious felonies.

(And more)

At this point it seems that the Grand Jury did work as it was supposed to work.   Lots of unhappy folks around but that does not mean that the Grand Jury was wrong at all.

Read the entire artical as it seems to me to be a very flexible and open place to make a decision.   I do wonder too about all these claims about evidence given or not given in a Grand Juey as the evidence is supposed to be kept private to protect those on the Grand Jury.


----------



## Denise1952

Debby said:


> What's the matter?  Is my mustache not trimmed nice?  Damn I hate this whole menopause thing.  How unfair, can't even keep my mustache tidy.   I'm so embarrassed.......



Yeah well, you've encouraged me to just say hell with the new facial hair.  I'm tired of "tweezing"  I mean when it gets to about 100 unwanted hairs, yeah, hell with it, LOL!!


----------



## Denise1952

Yeah, this is where I am at with it all Ina

"Peace  among protest: A Portland police officer noticed a 12-year-old boy  holding a sign that read "Free Hugs" during a Ferguson demonstration in  Oregon. The officer started talking to the boy about the demonstration,  school and life. When they were done talking, the officer asked if he  was going to get a hug."


----------



## Ralphy1

Testing, testing...


----------



## BobF

By golly Ralphy1, you finally did get connected.


----------



## WhatInThe

*Police & Verdict Prostestors Causing Another Christie Bridge Gate*

The Ferguson and Staten Island no indictment protestors now have their own bridge gate(and it will get worse). Women goes into labor stuck in Berkley protests.

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...-after-protesters-shut-down-i-80-in-berkeley/

Funny how many of these same protestors and commentators were trying to hang Chris Christie for Bridge Gate yet these protestors are getting a free pass and even encouragement. You have free speech but can't yell fire in a crowded theatre. Shouldn't public highways be considered a theatre. This is why they want permit for legal valid and traffic controlled protests. 

I get the Staten Island/Garner No indictment but the 4 1/2 minute "die-ins" to symbolize the four and a half hours Michael Browns body was left on the street in Ferguson "on purpose" are perpetuating a lie. Agitated bystanders and crowd wouldn't leave the scene and made it difficult for the body to be removed.

http://fox2now.com/2014/09/08/medic...el-browns-body-lay-on-the-ground-for-4-hours/


----------



## AZ Jim

Bettyann said:


> Will withhold most of what I am thinking ... I KNEW it would turn out this way. Cops are never held accountable for whatever they do. So, it came as no surprise whatsoever... I believe it was all orchestrated in order to further stir up and divide Americans... people best wake up and smell the coffee...



I respectfully disagree.  Imagine a world without the thin blue line.  Would it have been a more satisfying situation had Brown, who was much bigger, been able to gain control of the officers weapon and shot him instead?  One a thief and bully the other just a cop doing his job.


----------



## Ina

Housto police will be getting body cameras.  And more cameras will be added to our police force shortly.  It will be interesting to see how the cameras help or hinder the police abuse situation.  :wave:


----------



## Ina

i forgot to include that the police force will start with 1,000 cameras, and more will come until all policemen are equiped.


----------



## SifuPhil

Ina said:


> Housto police will be getting body cameras.  And more cameras will be added to our police force shortly.  It will be interesting to see how the cameras help or hinder the police abuse situation.  :wave:



I think I'll buy some stock in YouTube - you just KNOW a lot of those videos will end up there.


----------



## AprilT

SifuPhil said:


> I think I'll buy some stock in YouTube - you just KNOW a lot of those videos will end up there.




A little late to that party, almost every news, entertainment and educational source can be found posting and viewing videos from youtube, so FOR SURE, they will .  As far as their stock, you'll have to go through Google, they own youtube.


----------



## WhatInThe

Camera's can work both ways too. Gotcha!-smile, your assault on a police officer was just caught on tape. I'm worried how these camera's will be used for evidence in other crimes. I wonder how many clarity or camera angle defenses there will be now. You wanted it you got it.


----------



## SifuPhil

AprilT said:


> A little late to that party, almost every news, entertainment and educational source can be found posting and viewing videos from youtube, so FOR SURE, they will .  As far as their stock, you'll have to go through Google, they own youtube.



I forgot about that - I think I'll pass on the stock acquisition. 



WhatInThe said:


> Camera's can work both ways too. Gotcha!-smile, your assault on a police officer was just caught on tape. I'm worried how these camera's will be used for evidence in other crimes. I wonder how many clarity or camera angle defenses there will be now. You wanted it you got it.



I think the employment picture for video editing pros just got a lot brighter ...


----------



## AprilT

Speaking of Ferguson, News source and Youtube and what will likely work it's way into my dreams tonight.  I realize that last bit belongs elsewhere, but just sayin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxJPKeqfn7c


----------



## kcvet

AprilT said:


> A little late to that party, almost every news, entertainment and educational source can be found posting and viewing videos from youtube, so FOR SURE, they will .  As far as their stock, you'll have to go through Google, they own youtube.



has Google always owned youtube?? I see they've take over the movies and now charge to rent or buy them. really ticks me off


----------



## AprilT

kcvet said:


> has Google always owned youtube?? I see they've take over the movies and now charge to rent or buy them. really ticks me off



No, they haven't always owned them they acquired them almost two years after it was started back say late 2006; youtube official  startup date Feb 2005.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/15196982/ns/business-us_business/t/google-buys-youtube-billion/


----------



## WhatInThe

And NO federal civil rights violations either. Darren Wilson has been basically cleared by the federal investigation.

http://nypost.com/2015/01/21/justice-department-wont-pursue-civil-case-in-ferguson-shooting/

The Ferguson Police Department itself is still under investigation.


----------



## QuickSilver

That's because the only way the Feds could prosecute him was under the Hate Crime laws..  The burden of proof is very high.. So he walks..


----------



## Denise1952

WhatInThe said:


> And NO federal civil rights violations either. Darren Wilson has been basically cleared by the federal investigation.
> 
> http://nypost.com/2015/01/21/justice-department-wont-pursue-civil-case-in-ferguson-shooting/
> 
> The Ferguson Police Department itself is still under investigation.



Really glad to hear this, thanks for the update WIT denise


----------



## BobF

It was hard to understand why the policeman was charged.   The guy had just robbed a store and he should never have tried to rush at the policeman who wanted him to stop and talk with him.   His robbery was on camera at the store so he was in no way innocent of problems.


----------

