Selective Outrage

Featured image

TMZ Politics has a great tweet tonight that summarizes the absolute absurdity of the liberal national news media’s priorities:

The alleged child rapist is Terrence Patrick Bean. Brett Decker of USA Today reported the story on the evening of Thursday, November 20:

Conservatives complain that President Obama gets a free pass from the media, which acts as a de-facto public-relations shop for the Democrat in the White House. Never has that charge seemed truer than now as an ugly rape scandal unfolds on the West Coast.

On Wednesday, Portland, Ore. police arrested Terrence Patrick Bean, who has been charged with two felony counts of having sex with a minor last year. This man is not just any old guy accused of having sex with a 15-year-old – he’s a big-money Democratic donor and liberal political activist with connections inside the Obama White House. Bean raised more than a half-million dollars for Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign.

– See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2014/12/01/tmz-politics-twitter-account-nails-it-msm-goes-crazy-over-lauten#sthash.k6H55fGH.dpuf

As for me, every time someone talks to me about Michael Brown, I now ask if they know who John Crawford is…..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/24/john-crawford-air-rifle-video_n_5878022.html

Advertisements

Comments

  1. Just A Citizen says:

    Shaking head, feeling sad over the lost minds among us, making the work of the evil doers easier each day.

    http://michellemalkin.com/2014/11/30/exercising-your-first-amendment-right-by-calling-for-a-communist-revolution-while-recording-it-on-your-iphone-priceless/

  2. Just A Citizen says:

    This might lead to a different perspective of the ambush video of Lerner that so many condemned. Note the irony of how he is condemned for doing what others received awards for doing.

    Oh, also some great questions and evidence of the attitude in D.C. towards “we others”.

    http://www.freedomworks.org/content/crapitalism-jason-mattera-part-3-dc-media

  3. Just A Citizen says:

    I wanted to read Mr. Obama’s “Executive Order” essentially giving amnesty to all those illegal Aliens.

    There is no record of any such “executive order” on the whitehouse.gov website. In fact, here is the last Executive Order given by Mr. Obama.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/10/17/executive-order-improving-security-consumer-financial-transactions

    Now, I want everyone to think back a while ago when I pointed this same situation out on another issue. Don’t recall which one but there was all this howling about “executive orders” and “unilateral action” outside the constitution. Well just as now, there was no executive order given.

    The decisions were made through the “rule making” process within the affected agency.

    So is that what is actually happening this time? If so then where is the “unilateral” “extra Constitutional” action taken by the President HIMSELF?? This last part is key.

    You see, the Rule may be unconstitutional, but if the strategy is implemented as a rule you cannot claim the President is acting as King. You can sue the Agency issuing the Rule, however. And Congress may issue a declaration to the agency stating the rule violates the law, and directing the agency to retreat. Not that they will or have to , but the pissing match would be more appropriate than the one we are being subjected to by the various BIASED and Politically aligned media.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Oh, I forgot one key point.

      Mr. Obama has done this several times. Personally claiming responsibility for decisions that are made via normal Agency procedures. This does two things.

      First, it feeds his fan club of Progressives who wish they were ruled by a monarch.

      Second, it feeds the anger of the right wing which can later be shown to be irrational because the accusations of “King” don’t fit the reality of what happens.

      It is a great ploy on his part, one that works for him and would probably work for other Dems. It won’t go over so well if a Republican tries it, however. The media won’t be on board. And the hypocrisy of a Republican exerting, or claiming to exert, unilateral power would be the story.

    • JAC,

      If he/they do not put in writing what the order exactly covers and means, they leave it undefined for agencies to act as they see fit. Also makes it hard to challenge on specifics because it is intentionally vague. The Repug’s will have to sue based on what he said at a press conference…..

      • Just A Citizen says:

        LOI

        Eventually somebody has to put something in writing somewhere.

        I am guessing it will be an agency “regulation” or “memorandum”.

  4. 😎

  5. Just A Citizen says:

    Good example of citizens taking action without a Govt. rule/regulation/law.

    http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/12/us/cnn-guns-project/gun-shop-owner.html?hpt=hp_c2

    As for gun suicides, maybe someone should make a video for potential suicide by gun victims explaining what it is like to LIVE after their attempt at suicide.

    My new neighbor is a trauma nurse. She was explaining how half or more of “gun suicides” result in a survivor with serious brain damage. So of the 50% of suicides by gun, I wonder how many survived with serious mental health issues after their effort.

    Oh, you wonder why so many survive? They FLINCH at the last and most important split second. Cold but factual. At least according to the nurse who has to help clean up the mess.

  6. Just A Citizen says:

    Add to this Charles Barkley’s comments and those of the Milwaukee police chief interviewed by Megan Kelly. What you get is a feeling of some hope.

    http://therightscoop.com/must-see-black-minister-destroys-al-sharpton-and-the-ferguson-movement/

    • The problem, IMHO, is not going away anytime soon. Facts don’t mean anything anymore, as the black community may have finally decided their tired of being poor and having the feeling of being picked on (not to mention anyone not black is a racist). The message is being controlled by the very people they should be mad at, Liberal Democrats. As long as the hacks at MSNBC< CNN and others fueling the fire, it will continue. Obama and Holder should both be impeached anyway, and they are not helping the situation. When I envisioned what a economic collapse or a major power outage may become, it is similar to what is happening now (but far more violent).

      But, getting time to hit the tree stand, better weather this morning 🙂

      • Watched CNN’s Chris Cuomo this morning talking to a St. Louis police rep about their being offended by the Ram’s “hands up” stunt. The police are offended at the false narrative that goes with the whole movement. Brown’s accomplice, the single most discredited “witness”, his lies trump the truth. Cuomo went to lengths to explain why it’s a proper expression for this protest movement. In my view, CNN owns this movement because they are promoting it without any questions. I hope they are charged with inciting riots……

  7. David Skekabim says:

    @ Anita,

    Re: My ‘misery’

    It isn’t about worshiping your fairy tale man-god or choosing which spiritually coercive category of bullshit to indulge in.

    There is a lot I am still trying to figure out. I am not going to even try to explain it to you in any detail. There is apparently some kind of very VERY sick game in play whereby someone[s] sees me as a useful tool.

    I have three choices.

    A – Play along
    B – Wreck my integrity
    C – Die

    I play along only enough to identify the players, while doing what I can as to wreck my integrity. Early death seems imminent.

    Regardless, it is important people get along. You’re probably fuct for sake of your stupidity and egocentricity.

    Good luck.

  8. Insult the Obama daughters, and you are a nationally infamous political figure. Rape some women? Well, if you’re a Democrat, that’s a yawner of a story by comparison.

    Call it a tale of two Hill staffers. While The Washington Post put Republican aide Elizabeth Lauten’s resignation over Facebook comments on page 1 on Tuesday with an 1,161-word report, a Wednesday story on a former Democratic congressional aide pleading guilty to sexual assault ended up on the far-right edge of page A-5 and was just 281 words long.

    This inspired conservatives on Twitter to link to the report and ask “Where’s the wailing and gnashing of teeth over rape culture?”
    – See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2014/12/03/after-putting-lauten-page-1-washpost-buries-democrat-sex-assault-plea#sthash.SOz4nJK0.dpuf

  9. Just A Citizen says:

    OK, this has finally gotten under my skin enough to make a comment.

    That is the big money “Obama/Democrat” donor from Portland, OR who has been arrested for pedophilia.

    The last mayor of Portland was openly gay. He had a lover who was under the age of 18 before being elected. May have even lasted the first year of his first term.

    NOBODY gave a shit and the police and State AG did NOTHING.

    Any wonder that this guy was embraced by the Dems in Oregon?? A perfect example of how “exceptions” to moral standards do in fact create a slippery slope. To bad for this guy he was only a donor and did not become Mayor or a Congressman. Then maybe they would have ignored his behavior.

    http://michellemalkin.com/

  10. Now the Staten Island Grand Jury has voted “No Bill” to indict the police officer who used the Choke hold or headlock on Eric Gardner last summer.

    Nowhere near as clear as Ferguson, the case was expected to generate some type of indictment for manslaughter or reckless indifference.

    Buck, your take?

    http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nypd-eric-garner-chokehold-death-not-indicted-article-1.2031841

    • David Skekabim says:

      NYC needs to burn.

      All voters, government officials, police, and anyone in support thereof, deserve to die as they are all collectively guilty of conspiracy to commit murder.

      R.I.P. Eric Gardner

      • Just A Citizen says:

        HYPERBOLE much there David????

        What a bunch of bulldookey!

        • David Skekabim says:

          No, I am dead serious.

        • David Skekabim says:

          (LOI has edited this post, language & personal attacks)

          JAC,

          I know I am screwed up, just an average nobody . But you can’t understand the wrong in what has transpired.

          Millions of people collectively agree and conspire to use force against others for innocuous acts like selling cigarettes, noncompliance with their ridiculous demands of (especially high) taxes/theft.

          He had every right to buy and sell anything he wants to/from whomever he wants, so long as it is a willing free exchange that does not violate anyone, …and he should be able to do so without the interference of a bunch of punk ass cops regularly harassing him.

          Watch the video. Watch him do absolutely nothing wrong. Watch him complain and plea to simply be left alone. Watch him get jumped and murdered by a bunch of assholes who think funny clothes and bullshit on paper makes them gods.

          I truly hope that the people rise up and burn that shit-hole to the ground and make Ferguson look like a picnic.

          I truly hope that EVERY time someone is similarly victimized, the municipality in question gets burned to nothing.

          If you willingly vote, participate or actively support a government, knowing there is even ONE edict that uses force against an act that does not violate, you are just as guilty as the pig, for it is you that pays his salary. You are essentially hiring an organized crime syndicate.

          • David Skekabim says:

            Change it back.

            I am sick and tired of people trying to stuff me into a little box that I will not fit.

            I am tired of being stifled, controlled, manipulated, stepped on, dismissed, and silenced.

            DO NOT TEST ME.

            • Or else what? You come in here making threats and name calling. What do you expect?

            • David,

              Not trying to test you but also not willing to be pushed. US Weapon set up this site to allow polite discussion. He stipulated no personal attacks, F-bombs, etc. If that is intolerable to you, you know your options. No one should come here and expect anyone to agree with them. There will always be differences of opinion. Attack the viewpoint, not the person.

              • I wish you would come up here! 😉

              • Just A Citizen says:

                LOI

                Looks like I missed the entertainment, again.

                Nice to see you staying on top of things. I promise to start kicking in my share very soon.

                You probably could use a break. LOL

      • David Skekabim says:

        Correction:

        ERIC GARNER – R.I.P.

  11. David Skekabim says:

  12. David Skekabim says:

  13. It’s interesting when I’m out in the woods all day for days at a time. In just a short time tonight, while taking care of my fantasy football teams, I have the T on and switching between the weather channel and all the news networks (just for fun). The Liberal Democrats and Liberals in general seem to want a race war. That’s my impression of what I’ve heard.

    That’s fine, I guess. If they truly want blacks to be slaughtered in a race war, they may get their wish, after all, welfare is a small price to pay to keep them in the cities where they can be controlled (a quote from a Democrat). Apparently, the Democrats want to really reduce their population numbers (only to replace them with Latino’s). This, after only a few short hours of channel flipping. My guns are all loaded, are yours? 😉

    • David Skekabim says:

      Gman,

      I just snapped out of 3 years of internal hell from being programmed.

      My mind is back to acute and fully operational, and I am one pissed off muffin humper (LOI was here)with a great big wish list.

      I am ready for war.

      • I guess it’s good that your thinking clearly 🙂 Right now, it’s a hissy fit because they’re not getting their way. But it can get much worse quickly. The Republicrats will not let this crisis go to waste. The good news…..you have time to prepare, this will take some time.

        • David Skekabim says:

          ” I guess it’s good that your thinking clearly ”

          Indeed.

          I cannot tell you what an unbearable hell I have been through. I am kinda surprised I made it. They’re messing with people’s heads, Gman. I think I was ‘supposed’ to shoot up an elementary school. ( I, instead, planted flowers 🙂 )

          And there is a foreign government (among others) paying attention, which I believe can back me up on this. I just hope they actually do. …putting the evidence out there for the whole world to see, but anonymously in an unofficial capacity would be ideal.

          ” Right now, it’s a hissy fit because they’re not getting their way.”

          I don’t know about the Brown case, but any others where there is a clear instance of police brutality, I am in full support of ‘their’ hissy fit. It’s time to unite with our black brothers and sisters, and anyone else for that matter.

          Asking for the system to correct things, demanding justice, …ain’t working. It all needs to burn and be rebuilt, because people can’t get it through their thick skulls.

          ” The Republicrats will not let this crisis go to waste. ”

          I make no distinction of anything beyond defining it as statism. It’s all evil.

          ” But it can get much worse quickly. ”
          ” The good news…..you have time to prepare, this will take some time. ”

          The sooner the better.

  14. David Skekabim says:

  15. David Skekabim says:

  16. Is this not just admitting guilt!

    “Lew cannot release information about improper disclosures of confidential taxpayer information because that would be an improper disclosure of confidential taxpayer information.”

    http://dailycaller.com/2014/12/03/obama-administration-refuses-to-release-documents-about-white-house-role-in-irs-scandal/

    • Catch 22!

    • David Skekabim says:

      Shuck them and their paper.

      Don’t waste time trying to play their game, trying to pin them down with/for some legal horse shit.

      The bottom line is that they are coercive thieves stealing money they did not earn from the hard working men and women that DID earn their fiat currency.

      What we need is a tax revolt and full blown revolution.

      DC needs to burn like NYC.

  17. David Skekabim says:

    Here is a very interesting documentary. I recommend everyone watch it.

    It demonstrates clear evidence/proof that a lot of people have been duped.

    • David Skekabim says:

      Snopes suggests that the above video was a hoax. But I cannot dismiss that there was definitely something wrong with the way the incident was sold to the public.

      Like, …how do you explain unnatural behavior such as what looked like very bad acting? When considering that there is a clear pattern of bullshit being spewed from government and media such as with 9/11, I am inclined to not believe anything government or media says or does.

      Judge for yourself.

      http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/newtown.asp

  18. In a radio appearance Wednesday night, Judge Andrew Napolitano told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt the death of Eric Garner was a case of “criminally negligent homicide,” while also saying that this case is not “Ferguson, Missouri.”

    “I think it is clearly a case for criminally negligent homicide,” Napolitano said during an appearance on The Hugh Hewitt Show Wednesday night.

    “This is not Ferguson, Missouri,” Napolitano continued. “This is not somebody wrestling for your gun, this is not where you shoot or be shot at. This is choking to death a mentally impaired, grossly obese person whose only crime was selling cigarettes without collecting taxes on them. This does not call for deadly force by any stretch of the imagination.”

    “Are you shocked that no indictment came down?” asked Hewitt.

    “I am,” the Judge told the host. “This tells me that the district attorney didn’t want an indictment.”

    “If any DA wants an indictment, he can get one,” Napolitano said. “The cliche is that a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich.”

    http://dailycaller.com/2014/12/03/judge-napolitano-eric-garners-death-was-criminally-negligent-homicide-audio/

    • Bo Dietl, former NYPD cop and security expert said something this morning that really needs more study.

      “Back in 1969, when I was a rookie, you had to be 5’8″ tall to be on the force. Did you see the size of Eric Gardner and those cops?” Well, back when I was a high school grad in NYC (1964) and looking at the police test, you had to be 5′ 10″! Starting with the politically correct Lindsay Administration, we were going to change the nasty old Police force. We did. Eventually the height requirement was totally eliminated. Today, you have 4′ 11″ women on the force.

      Now, I don’t know about you folks, but in both the Gardner and Brown cases, there was a severe disparity between the size of the cop(s) and the guy they were arresting. In cases like that, they lack the physical “presence” to convince the guy being arrested that they can deal with him, one on one. In Ferguson, that led in part to the shooting (120lbs and 7 inches). In Staten Island, the “take down” looks like Gardner is being swarmed by Munchkins. Of course, if you watch the video, at the very end, a cop, Gardners size does come into the picture. Apparently, he was too fat and out of breath himself to participate in the take down. One can only wonder if he had done the confrontation if it would have turned out differently.

  19. “Why are members of Congress repeating something that they know is not true?” asked host Sean Hannity.

    “Oh, for political reasons. I thought of Joseph Goebbel’s doctrine: The people will believe any lie if it’s repeated often enough and loud enough,” said Sowell. “They’re repeating it often enough and loud enough, and it will pay off for them personally and politically.”

    “I think what has happened in Ferguson, Missouri is going to adversely affect blacks yet unborn, who will still be paying the price for it 10, 20 years from now because they’re not going to have businesses there that you had before. I’ve seen this happen in other cities,” said Sowell, naming Detroit and Harlem as specific examples.

  20. plainlyspoken says:

    Computer hiccup – will try again.

    Read through the comments on the last two topics threads. Wow……just wow. *sigh*

    • plainlyspoken says:

      Let me explain my “wow”. (Please note that my use of caps is for emphasis only – I am not “yelling”)

      To start, it makes me shake my head at the comments about both the Ferguson and NYC cases comments (and I am not speaking to everyone;s comments, just some). Had either of these men been white, no one would give a damn. There would be no protests, there would be no Al Sharpton shooting off his mouth, there would be no media coverage of any note. No one would really give a darn. But, because they were black – well it is obviously racist and cities should burn. The President & US Attorney General wouldn’t even bat an eye were these cases not involving blacks. *sigh*

      I’ve seen comments coming out of both sides of some mouths in the comments. The cops are condemned, with justice being demanded. Yet, the Grand Jury (regardless of how it is run) decline to indict, so condemn them racists too. So, what does that leave – lynch mob to enact “justice”? The cops (government) are hated but the government is the only entity that can – supposedly – enact “justice”. People should make up their minds.

      The cops in either case, or generally, are NOT here David to protect the rights of anyone. They are to protect government – period. They do that by carrying out the laws enacted by government and really are being given more and more leeway by government to do so regardless of whether anyone’s “rights” are violated. You will NEVER see any police agency openly state they are violating anyone’s rights – instead they will speak to doing their “jobs” enforcing the laws.

      Why weren’t the protestors in Ferguson burning down the police station? Because they’d be shot dead in the street for trying. They know private business owners – who had nothing to do with what happened – can’t fight back, so lets be lawless – the ugly side of human nature in the fore.

      How come these protestors in Ferguson aren’t being called terrorists?

      Did the cop choke this guy in NYC? Don’t know, but from watching the video I see no “choke” hold. Look carefully in the part shown – the cop does not have his arm fully around the guy’s neck. Anyone calling it a choke hold needs to come see me and I’ll demonstrate – on you – the difference. And as a past defensive tactics instructor I clearly know the difference.

      Should the cops have been bothering the guy over his petty violation of the law? Yes, because the government made the petty law and told their cops it is to be enforced. Your trouble should be with the law, not the cop enforcing it. Did they use excessive force? Maybe, but I need to see all the evidence to decide that. Plus, had the guy not given them a reason to get physical – i.e. “resisting” his “arrest” – then there would have been no physical confrontation. You will not win in a confrontation with the cops – EVER. They WILL use force, enough to overcome resistance, NO MATTER THE OUTCOME.

      Destroy the government because it is corrupt? ALL governments are corrupt. Why? Because governments are composed of HUMANS, that’s why. And humans – in the main – want control over others, or want to be controlled to have a “safe” society. That will never change until you bright minds figure out of to change the hard-wiring in humans. Good luck with that.

      Ah well, enough said. Life will go on tomorrow and everyone will refocus on whatever next “big” story comes along. *sigh*

      • Plainly,

        I do not agree with you but respect your well spoken viewpoint. Chocking or not chocked should show in the autopsy? Perhaps it was the sitting on his chest that caused respiratory distress? Judge Napolitano also mentioned excessive force. Did this escalate because the police decided to treat a minor crime like a major one? Write him a ticket and go on. Issue a “John Doe” warning. How about look for violent criminals to open up that can on?

        • plainlyspoken says:

          LOI,

          Not necessarily. It can determine if death was by asphyxiation. And several things could have caused that. The guy’s size (shall we use the government’s “morbidly obese”) along with being handcuffed, or any weight placed on him during the arrest can seriously imp0act one’s ability to breath. These are aspects I taught in my tactics classes to consider when affecting an arrest – ANY arrest. “positional asphyxiation” is the term they use for it.

          Could the cops have handled things differently – yes. You have pointed out some different ways that would have – IMHO – been more appropriate in such a situation for such a minor law violation. However, I wasn’t there for the whole incident, so I am unaware if they tried and his refusal to cooperate (identifying himself for instance) caused the cops to move to the next step in dealing with the guy. BTW – courts really don’t like signing off on John Doe warrants. But, they chose the route they went for reasons we are not aware of and I’d need to know those reasons as well to determine whether I believe they went very wrong deciding to actually arrest the man. Yet, even that doesn’t mean they weren’t acting with the law, policies and guidelines dictated by the government.

          “How about look for violent criminals to open up that can on?”

          Maybe, but then “violence” comes in many forms and cops see a failure to submit to arrest as a “violent” act, and so does the government that decided force is legal to use in affecting an arrest.

          • Well put plainlyspoken – one of my favorite submissions when I compete in Jiu Jitsu is a chest compression “choke” from kesa gatame position (a “judo pin”). When I get it – the opponent isn’t going to say “tap” because they cannot talk. They have to tap using their hands. 🙂

      • Now would be a good time to stop the sound byte tv shows. Gather up the Obamas, Holders, Sharptons, Ferguson bussed in crowd, vs the Wests, Carsons, Cosbys, two young black ministers, Milwaukee police chief…give up a couple two hour time slots, and get to the heart of the problem…first meeting sets the stage, second meeting suggests solutions. Maybe even a third and forth to see if solutions are being implemented.

        I never really weighed in.. I agree with the Ferguson GJ, disagree with the NYC GJ. Good to see you Plainly

        • plainlyspoken says:

          Hello Anita, hope all is well with you and yours. 🙂

          Sound bite TV is a real problem, and comes from all sides (including FOX). I don’t know whether I agree or disagree with either grand jury really. I would need to see the evidence presented to them first. Either way, they made their decisions and they have to be lived with as far as any criminal charges go. There is civil court, which will likely see both cases at some point (though the NYC family supposedly planning to sue for 75 million is outlandish).

  21. Hi Ya’ll 🙂 A few things on the NYC issue. The individual who was choked had 30 previous arrests and clearly stated that it ends now in the video. I’m going out on the limb and guess the cops knew him fairly well at the time of this incident.

    The facts don’t matter in either case, as the race pimps (to include the Left wing media) will keep fueling the fire. The best ending is that the people get tired (or get off welfare and get jobs instead of spending all their time listening to the race pimps…..LOL, joking of course 🙂 ).

    HI Plainly, your right on the choke hold, everyone should try saying “I can’t breath” when you REALLY can’t breath. By the time one gets too “eleven” times of saying “I can’t breath” while in a real choke hold……well, they would be unconscious long before the eleventh time.

    I do disagree with why he was being arrested, hence my position of the government being nothing more than a criminal cartel. 😀

    • OH, it seems the legacy of Bill Cosby has been destroyed.

    • “Race pimps” – I love it. I exited several unproductive social media discussions because you can’t use facts or state a position that doesn’t support the media generated race angle w/o being accused of being a racist. Fun times we live in……

  22. I said in May that this person wouldn’t make it in the NFL, because he didn’t have the talent. But I also saw this coming too! http://conservativebyte.com/2014/12/michael-sam-im-not-nfl-im-gay/

  23. Some more to think about. I also read that the law about selling “loosies” was passed in 2010-I remember they used to sell individual cigs. at some stores.

    I do wonder about all the people talking about stupid laws-how many of them would agree that cigarettes shouldn’t be taxed or that they should be sold to children-easy to say stupid laws but which ones would most people actually disagree with-so maybe it is more the enforcement of these laws that people have a problem with-not the actual laws. We also complain about Presidents and others choosing to ignore the laws as written-do we want the cops to pick and choose too. As far as the choke hold-I don’t know who’s right about that-but I do think we need to look at the enforcement of these laws-like many have suggested-a ticket?-of course even with tickets at some point the cops will have to get a warrant and arrest someone if they don’t pay or come to court.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/12/03/actual-facts-Eric-Garner

    • plainlyspoken says:

      Hi VH, hope you are and yours are well? 🙂

      Whether or not one agrees with a law, the cops are the enforcers. There are many, many laws people somewhere disagree with. Good luck getting government to change their stance one way or the other. Now, mind, the cops had a choice – they could have ignored it (heck that might have been recorded and we could be hearing complaints about their lack of doing their job). Cops pick and choose when it comes to minor law violations all the time. They ignore speeding (thankfully the last time I was speeding the cop on the side of the road never moved) for instance. Either way, the cop was “doing his job”. But, what we really should discuss is HOW they chose to enforce it. And, whether this incident rises to a level of “national outrage” that seems to be in vogue right now. I believe there would be no outrage if the “suspect/victim” were white. It would have been a yawner to people and the media.

      @GMan, howdy friend. 🙂 His past arrests really don’t matter beyond whether or not the person is known to be violent, carry weapons, etc. And that is something to consider whether someone has been arrested 100 times or never. Heck, there are many variables.

      • That’s the point I was trying to make-we need to have a real discussion of our laws and how we want them enforced-after something bad like this happens people are quick to condemn-but what do they expect out of our police? Do we not want them to enforce the laws-do we want those without all the information to convict based on a video.The man was breaking the law-they decided to arrest him for doing so-He decided to resist-I’ve never seen a video where the cops stopped putting someone down who was resisting before they had control of them just because they were screaming about some problem-I suspect that is because they have learned the hard way that to do so is a mistake.

        It’s not the cops fault that there’s a law against selling cigarettes, hell they’re trying to make smoking a federal offense but are surprised that suddenly the law is being actively enforced.

        It’s not the cops fault that the man decided to resist arrest. And I suspect that the way this went down isn’t unusual-this mans health issues unfortunately were.

        Now if the cop used an illegal chokehold than he’s guilty of a crime but the Grand Jury obviously were convinced that he didn’t.

        Course, I will note that one of the problems I think most people have is it seems like cops very seldom are convicted of anything-so maybe that needs to be addressed too-maybe the law protects them too much-maybe intent to do harm is too open for abuse?

        • VH & Plainly,

          You have brought up an angle I had not considered. Money. The “crime” was so minor, why would they even bother? But cop’s are paid by the city. The city is funded by taxes. Any evasion of taxes is an attack on government including police. This small crime is actually costing billions…..

          http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-25/cigarette-smuggling-increase-prompts-crackdown-by-states.html

          • I’d say in states like New York we basically have a different form of prohibition-The article I posted pointed out:

            The law that led to this confrontation was pressed forward by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg; Garner had been arrested some eight times for selling “loosies.” As Lawrence McQuillan reported in The Washington Times:

            In January 2014, tough new penalties for selling untaxed cigarettes took effect in New York City. In July, emboldened by the new law, the city’s highest-ranking uniformed cop, Philip Banks, issued an order to crack down on loosie sales days before Garner died.”

            So the cops in New York were ordered to crack down on this type of crime.

  24. JAC has already highlighted this but here’s some more info.-and isn’t this Johnson guy expected to take over Holder’s position at the DOJ?

    http://www.wnd.com/2014/12/amnesty-shocker-the-secret-behind-obamas-order/

  25. I think this is real and not a parody. But OMG! A great big chuckle!

  26. This I did not know.

    Holder NYC Civil Rights Investigation Is Not News

    by
    J. Christian Adams

    Bio
    December 4, 2014 – 6:40 am
    Share on facebook5 Share on twitter6 Share on email Share on more
    Email
    Print
    Decrease Font Size Increase Font Size

    Last night Eric Holder tried to make news where there was none. Holder announced that a “civil rights investigation” will be opened in the death of Eric Garner on Staten Island, New York. I was on Lou Dobbs tonight explaining how this announcement is not news, and is actually part of a narrative driven by the Left. Mainstream media will, naturally, treat the announcement as major news. In fact, a federal review is opened in every single case where police officer action results in a death. As I said on Lou Dobbs, it’s like holding a press conference to announce that the lights were turned on that morning at the DOJ. The video:

    http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/12/04/holder-nyc-civil-rights-investigation-is-not-news/

  27. Why don’t we just have NO police……and see what happens.

    By the way, those of you whom are not armed….better get that way.

    • Why?

      • You of all people in New York…….I am watching all of these so called ” protests “,,,,,and I am listening to the Al Sharpton’s and I am seeing who the President invites to round table discussions….and I am seeing the unwarranted mood of the black population and listening to all the 1960’s rhetoric and BS of the 60’s….I am watching high school students walk out of classes in support of racial overtones and inflammatory speeches and such and I am willing to bet that less than 1 percent of them even know what a grand jury is……..I am seeing a resurgence of violence….I will not ask questions…I will stereotype and I will profile and if I see one hammer, stone, rock, club or anything coming out…..I am a very good shot.

        That is why……with all of this selective enforcement around…perhaps it is time we just take care of ourselves.

  28. Just A Citizen says:

    Watching video of demonstrations last night and it occurred to me that we have seen many of these protesters before.

    WHO are the people on the megaphones repeating the same idiotic chants with different words?

    Who were all the “white” people with long hair and beards torching buildings and breaking windows in Ferguson??

    Looks to me like the “Anarchist” crowd is right in the middle of all this.

    Now considers what it is that the “Anarchist” wishes to accomplish, tactically.

    Namely, turn the people against the police. Because once the people lose respect for the police the ridicule and fall of the broader govt becomes more possible. As one Cop stated last night, the “police are the first line of Govt. people come in contact with”.

    So if you cannot trust the Cops, how can you trust anything of Govt.??

    Just some thoughts for your musing and mulling.

    • David Skekabim says:

      You blame the people for lashing out after many instances of police brutality?

      You call them anarchists with nothing but rhetoric to back up your statement?

      You imply there is something wrong with anarchy although it is largely premised on the respect for rights? …as if coercion and violence against nonviolent people by default is better?

      Typical statist.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        David

        First of all, there is no unified theory or philosophy tied to Anarchy.

        From Wiki: “The central tendency of anarchism as a social movement has been represented by anarcho-communism and anarcho-syndicalism, with individualist anarchism being primarily a literary phenomenon[26] ” Note: The last version is embodied in the movement called Anarcho-capitalism. Which shares certain tendencies with the Libertarian thinking. The others most certainly are NOT BASED on the concept of Individual Rights.

        Why do I claim they are Anarchists? Because the look the same, talk the same, make the same stupid chants no matter where the event, and they resorted to the same mindless violence as those in prior demonstrations where they were open about who they were.

        Do I claim all were Anarchists? No. But I do think they were a large part of the “white” crowd involved in the violence and instigations. It is called OBSERVATION and EXPERIENCE which leads to making JUDGMENTS. Whether I am right or not is yet to be revealed.

        Perhaps you should ask yourself why these Anarchists you claim are righteous are always spouting Marxist and Leninist rhetoric and carrying signs about the need for a global communism. Got any answers for that?

        Yes, I blame those idiots who were burning private property and assaulting innocent people. Care to explain how their response fits your theory of proportional response against those directly responsible for the violence?

        Rationalization of violence against innocent people by other people. All is OK just because they are not the Govt.

        Typical Anarchist.

        • David Skekabim says:

          “First of all, there is no unified theory or philosophy tied to Anarchy.”

          ” From Wiki: “The central tendency of anarchism as a social movement has been represented by anarcho-communism and anarcho-syndicalism, with individualist anarchism being primarily a literary phenomenon[26] ” Note: The last version is embodied in the movement called Anarcho-capitalism. Which shares certain tendencies with the Libertarian thinking. The others most certainly are NOT BASED on the concept of Individual Rights.”

          Anarchy simply means “NO RULERS”, as in self-governance. And what every anarchist, who has actually thought it out, understands, …is that it is a social order, a means of organization in which respect for rights and personal, as well as communal, responsibility is key.

          You can have all the same benefits of the current modern world in an anarchist society. The difference is that things like a police department are actually a service to the community, operating as a security service to protect rights rather than killing people in favor of draconian laws such as selling tax/theft free cigarettes.

          ” Why do I claim they are Anarchists? Because the look the same, talk the same, make the same stupid chants no matter where the event, and they resorted to the same mindless violence as those in prior demonstrations where they were open about who they were. ”

          ” Do I claim all were Anarchists? No. But I do think they were a large part of the “white” crowd involved in the violence and instigations. It is called OBSERVATION and EXPERIENCE which leads to making JUDGMENTS. Whether I am right or not is yet to be revealed.”

          So you are basically guessing.

          ” Perhaps you should ask yourself why these Anarchists you claim are righteous are always spouting Marxist and Leninist rhetoric and carrying signs about the need for a global communism. Got any answers for that? ”

          Where did I claim they are so righteous? What reference did you provide for me to make such a judgement? If you care to re-read, you will see I put things in form of questions.

          ” Yes, I blame those idiots who were burning private property and assaulting innocent people. Care to explain how their response fits your theory of proportional response against those directly responsible for the violence? ”

          Where did I suggest that their response was proportional? I distinctly remember making the point the other day citing the policeman in the Brown case was actually doing his job by protecting the rights of the business owner who Mr. Brown robbed. I also remember making the point that protesters’ anger was misdirected, that they should not be targeting business owners simply because they are convenient targets.

          ” Rationalization of violence against innocent people by other people. All is OK just because they are not the Govt. ”

          False premise. Governments are not “innocent”. Government is premised on violence and coercion against even nonviolent people.

          “Typical Anarchist.”

          I am not sure I am so typical, but am indeed an anarchist.

  29. Just A Citizen says:

    Oh the irony, or should I say hypocrisy of the leftwing mind.

    Set the stage: Daily Kos is ridiculing Rand Paul for blaming Garner’s death on the stupid cigarette tax. And those that decided selling cigs. needed priority enforcement. The ridicule is that of course it was a “white cop” and had nothing to do with the law.

    The hook: What is it that the likes of Daily Kos blames for all those “Black” kids being put in prison for possessing and/or selling Crack Cocaine????

    Come on now……………. any guesses???????

    That’s right……..it is the stupid crack cocaine laws.

    So maybe if Rand Paul had claimed the cigarette tax is an inherently racist law he might have gotten more respect from the Jack Snipes at DK.

    Just sayin…………….

  30. Just A Citizen says:

    Garner

    Ferguson

    All the BS artists commenting on Ferguson and the NY case, and those soon to follow completely muddle the issue. While each is different they are all the same in one very important respect. Which gets to V.H.’s comment about lets explore what is wrong.

    The Grand Juries declined to indict either officer, along with others in the past and more in the future, because those Police Officers DID NOT BREAK THE LAW.

    Got it now???????????? Not you SUFA. That was for those who might cruise by.

    Now how many more hints will you need before you move your focus to where it should be and stop chasing the “squirrels” being thrown at you by the grand manipulators?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Charlie

      Good morning back at ya, although still evening here.

      Re the Garner case. Good comment from a “Black” person tonight who does not think these are good examples of “racism” or “black lives don’t matter”.

      His anger was aimed at the stupid laws which create increased antagonism between police and citizens. This is of course intensified in Black communities because they are convinced of “unfair treatment”. Which I personally think cuts both ways. Sometimes it is fair and sometimes it is not.

      The comment was that we need to fight the increased use of the Police as tax collectors by City and State Elected Officials. This is a valid point when you expand it to many other stupid laws criminalizing behavior that does not cause harm to others.

      One more thing. I do in fact accept that the take down of Garner is standard procedure. But I do not accept that it should be standard procedure. There also needs to be a more concerted effort to screen out the RoboCops.

      You are the first to take note of the thing that angered me more than the choking down. That being how the cop kneeled on the side of his head as hard as he could.

      One more thing. He did in fact resist arrest. However, the nature of his resistance did not warrant a Pack Attack.

      • Hey Charlie! I’m laughing at your black avatar…channeling your inner BF….

        The thing I have only seen reported a little bit with black guests on the shows, and what I think is important, is that hundreds or thousands of black guys are stopped daily…and everything goes according to script as long as the guy has a decent attitude. There is no epidemic of cops treating blacks poorly….it just all depends on the guy’s attitude. If a white guy gives a cop grief, he gets grief back. If a black guy gives a cop grief, he gets grief back. Everybody knows cops have a chip on their shoulder. Can you blame them with what they see daily? You probably didn’t see my story recently where the cops greeted me at my door with a warrant and proceeded to search my house. Someone tried to pin some grafitti on my kid. I was stunned and pissed but I cooperated and the cops were cool with me/us and 4 hrs later we were done with them, scott free. I’m sure it cold have went down much differently if I or my son had acted differently.

        • Anita, my love … this is just wrong, dear … “There is no epidemic of cops treating blacks poorly” … it is an absolute epidemic. Not even debatable.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            charlieopera

            It is absolutely debatable. Of thousands upon thousands of encounters each year most do not end in harm to the suspects or those being questioned.

            This does not mean that in some places black people are not stopped more than white. But what exactly is the context for those stops?

            Many of the stories about being pulled over for being black are from time periods before changes in police policies. And many are from areas where such things did in fact occur regularly.

            But an “epidemic” would have to, by definition, be widespread and pretty common. Yet the reports of this abuse are not widespread and common. Note how many come from the same places and the same police force.

            In my town there is in fact “profiling” and “harassment” by the local police and the Sherriff. Can you guess which group it is that is being disproportionately stopped, checked, ticketed, etc.????

        • I’ve had good and bad experiences with cops … this is the USA, not Beirut … far many more civilians get killed than do cops … I’m not one of those who sanctifies people who become police officers “to serve and protect” … most of them become police officers (in NY) because of a 20 year retirement package and quickly increasing income (41K to 90K in 6 years) … this martyr halo people put around their heads is absurd … and it’s getting old fast.

      • Here’s a video I hadn’t seen. The “concerned” officer in question at 6:58 or so, waves to the person filming the incident. How was that not brought up by the prosecutor during the completely manipulated grand jury process? Well, manipulated says it all. Tough stuff, but I think the kettle will boil and explode if it keeps up … and frankly, rightly so.

        http://www.ifyouonlynews.com/videos/new-video-cops-pretended-eric-garner-was-alive-for-crowd-as-he-lay-dead-for-7-minutes-video/

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Charlie

          Did you notice the FALSE testimony being provided by the guy making the video? Notice the cops don’t go off on the guy recording the video?

          Now how is this supposedly manipulation to make it look like he was alive. The one officer is obviously checking his pulse.

          Why would this have meant anything in a grand jury indictment of a “single” officer? It would not.

          It will however, come in handy for the massive Civil Lawsuit against the police department.

          It has bees reported that the Grand Jury was not offered a choice of “negligent homicide”. If this is true, then I believe such a charge could still be made against the one officer or all officers involved.

          It would also call into question what the DA was up to with the Grand Jury.

          • This was a really troubling case for me. I generally give the benefit of the doubt to the cops but I have met too many assholes in the NYPD to give them blanket immunity. The “munchkin” cop with the glasses, DD shirt and tatts on his arm, and legs seems to be one of those over zealous clowns suffering from what we used to call “small man disease”. Pantaleo, the one in the green shirt who was expected to be indicted was busy yuking it up and grabbing at his junk to see if it was still there I guess. Like I said, troubling. Shame that it came on the heels of the Ferguson case one I could live with and understand, this one, no way. I have had many street confrontations in my time. Was there such a big damn rush to get this guy on the ground? The video shows they must have had 20 cops there within minutes.

            It is so obvious they knew he was dead. It was also pretty obvious they told that to the EMS lady and told her to cool it. Wonder if that video was played for the GJ?.

    • Charlie, glad you survived turkey day. Mostly I like & agree with your comments on this whole mess. Don’t see eye to eye on Ferguson, but what else would you expect.

  31. David Skekabim says:

    *test*
    *rest*
    *best*
    *pest* (yes I am & good morning to all from LOI)

    • David Skekabim says:

      Play along, LOI.

      Every keystroke I make is apparently being watched and recorded. If I am about to post something undesirable, it disappears into oblivion.

      Someone doesn’t care if I promote chaos, but doesn’t want me to ‘spill the beans’.

      • Plainly mention ‘puter issues yesterday. I had a bout two weeks ago. Had to call an outside expert to re-load firefox. Seems to be OK now. If I were conspiracy minded, I would think the government might cause an increase in people’s computer problems to use for their push for control thru “Net Neutrality”.

      • Don’t know if I can block your ip, not something I have looked into before. Tried changing a setting, see if that works…

  32. @JAC

    I still think Obama is using some deliberate strategy on immigration. Maybe waiting for the Repug’s to put their opposition on paper so he can come back with a then published order that does not include the language they use???

    http://www.wnd.com/2014/12/head-fake-obama-never-signed-amnesty-order/

    • Just A Citizen says:

      LOI

      I agree he has a deliberate strategy and a “modus operandi” when it comes to this stuff. As I said, this is not the first time we get a TV announcement about “I did xyz” to find out a new policy is being issued by an Agency head or Secretary, NOT Mr. Obama.

      I am still not convinced Mr. O and his people are great chess players. I think they are more of the kind to have a few moves planned then they just go with the flow as it happens but ALWAYS with the intent to play politics.

      There broader goal is the “reformation of America”, this requires weakening their opposition in the long run in order to convince enough people they have the correct answers. To accept the reformation. We are dangerously close in my view to the tipping point.

      Despite how bad it seems to many of us, there is still a chance of turning away and returning to the American concept of governance. But each step by the “P” Progressive movement moves us closer to a point of no return. The debate over Govt. Health Care was what I always thought was that tipping point., Which is why I believe it was their highest priority once Mr. Obama was elected.

      Now, thanks to other failures and revelations about how these people work, other people are waking up. So maybe we still have a chance to turn this massive ship around.

      I for one intend to continue trying and to do what it is I can to build on that opportunity.

      • Yep, Chicago style politics. He/they are boxing/forcing the Repug’s into a corner or to take a certain position that then lets them attack/blame them….

        And yes, I would like some help with SUFA. I don’t mind putting up fresh pages for open mic, but think it’s better with some original articles.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          LOI

          Notice how quickly the R’s are willing to run into the corner??

          I would add more but then I would simply be repeating myself here, on the state of the R’s brain trust.

          • I find it interesting that no one, not National Review, Not Fox, not no one has pointed out the President’s words. Unless I am totally missing it., he is demanding that they give him a bill with absolutely everything he wants in it. Nothing left out, a xeroxed copy. If there was a Republican leadership living in this century and not caught up with pre 1970 congressional protocols which no longer count since the radicals took over the Democratic Party, they might just point out that they are not there to rubber stamp the President’s agenda!

            • Just A Citizen says:

              SK

              That has been the case in all disputes. Reid provided him cover by producing “bipartisan” bills or “Senate bills” that were what he wanted. Then he could claim obstruction because the House would not simply adopt HIS legislation.

              This will be one place he loses leverage next year. He will have to try and paint BOTH houses as radicals. Depending on how stupid the R’s get, this should be very difficult to do.

              One thing for sure. If the new Congress passes anything looking like compromise legislation, Mr. Obama will take full credit for “forcing” the compromise with his “superior political skills”. Well at least his minions will try to play it that way.

  33. Just A Citizen says:
  34. Just A Citizen says:

    Change Up.

    Recall some of my comments about other “environmental” issues and those relating to the Bundy Ranch/Grazing dispute in Nevada.

    Here is a prime example of why our natural resources have become entangled and strangled to the point of killing jobs and the economy of small towns. The “federal rules” have been driven not by policy alone the past three decades, but by the decisions of various Wizards in Black Robes.

    Note that the judge “agrees” that wolves are “recovered” yet then rejects a memorandum of understanding between USFWS and the state of Wyoming. Well if the wolf is “recovered” under an existing policy allowing wolves to be killed “on sight” then continuing that policy will obviously not jeopardize the “existence of the wolf”.

    This is the kind of “I am God/King” attitude that has been coming from the federal bench for decades. One of the first that opened the flood gate was a judge who declared that an Environmental Impact Statement should be required for the killing of a “single tree”.

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/wyoming-feds-to-appeal-restored-wolf-protections/ar-BBgmmZX?ocid=HPCDHP

  35. Just A Citizen says:

    LOL, my sides are hurting.

    Might be the only R with a plan, due to his own dumb luck.

    George wraps his arms around Clinton and Clinton. The most reviled man in the world among the “left” and he has openly claimed his affection for the Clintons. All while supporting his brother running against them.

    I agree with him that Jeb can beat Hillary. Because if the Clintons become linked to the Bush’s she will not get out of the Dem Party primary. No matter how hard the sheep try to anoint her.

    Oh, anyone remember when I tried to tell you Bush was a PROGRESSIVE back in the early days of SUFA????

  36. Just A Citizen says:

    Here we go again. The following provides a few points.

    First is the deliberate effort by the author and Huffington Post to INFLAME the audience. To the point of actually distorting the factual information. This is done in the headline on HP and in the first paragraph. Claiming that the cop mistook a pill bottle for a gun.

    This is not what the police claimed happened. Of course if you completely discount what they say because you have now been conditioned to think all police lie, then any theory becomes fair game.

    Second, the shooting was not justified in my view. Fearing, thinking, suspecting someone has a gun is not “just cause” to shoot them without first SEEING the actual gun.

    This goes again to the various policies and procedures in place among police in this country. Way to quick to pull the trigger. Unfortunately there appear to be no witnesses or video, so we only have the police version.

    Third, the police were “responding” to a call from citizens. This is the cause of the confrontation. Remember the guy killed, or was it beaten, for supposedly just sitting in front of a store? Somebody called the cops and they responded. The same thing happened with the 12 year old killed the other day for having a BB gun.

    So who is really doing the “profiling”?? How can we blame the cops for responding to our calls? And if the young black men have been convinced they are “targets” and “free game” then what is going to be their response when the cops, WE CALLED, approach the young man?

    Maybe the American Public need to chill a little themselves. If there is no violence ongoing or obvious threat of violence escalating maybe we should mind our own business.. At least until we can get our “law enforcement” community to change their approach to dealing with people who are not absolutely compliant with their demands.

    I am reminded of a good friend who once decided he would not let some cop hassle/arrest him for walking home drunk. It took 8 officers to subdue him and get him to the station. He was pretty battered and bruised but mostly from hitting the sidewalk and from the grips of those grabbing his arms and legs. Today there is a good chance he would have been killed or permanently injured because of his obstinate behavior.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/04/phoenix-police-shooting_n_6273278.html

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Continuing along the lines of deliberate media misinformation on this case, lets consider how many times it was reported that the “chokehold” was ruled a homicide. Notice how “it was a homicide” has been used by those claiming no justice in this case.

      “It was ruled a homicide”……..well DUH…….. a “homicide” is the “killing of a human” by another human. Following is a link to the LEGAL discussion about homicide and all its variants.

      http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/homicide

      Now lets move to the autopsy report on Mr. Garner’s death. It was reported the ME declare Mr. Garner was killed by a chokehold. But that he also died because of trouble breathing due to the way he was handled on the sidewalk,. AND that his health condition contributed to his death. All this is reported as part of the ME findings.

      So if the chokehold killed him, then he was dead before any of the other factors could come into play. The truth is that he was NOT strangled or choked to death. Not according to the reported findings of the ME. The choking cut off air supply, the handling of him on the sidewalk continued to reduce air supply. Because of his health this increased his risk of dying due to reduced air supply.

      In my opinion there seems something very wrong in the combination of the ME’s claims, the reporting of the same, and now the accusations being made in various media. The death of this man is crime enough, but there is much more at play that is also criminal.

      • Howdy JAC 🙂 Seems that the use of “chokehold” is misused by everyone. Garner was not in a “chokehold”, or he would not have been able to speak. Was his breathing difficult, probably, but still not a “chokehold”. That seems to be what the Liberal media wants to portray, to fuel the fire, to keep it in the news.

        Now, I agree that the cops overreacted and the whole Garner situation should have never occurred. This is what happens when the government sends their goons out to harass those who are not paying taxes. The government don’t like competition, so, this should be a lesson to continue to allow those with the monopoly on violence to steal from us or else 😀

        The NYC and Ferguson issues are totally different. The cops in NYC should have some repercussions for their actions, the cop in Ferguson should be given a medal for getting a violent thug off the street forever. In both cases, the main message is simple: don’t resist arrest when your outnumbered and not in good health and don’t attack a cop with a gun (or anyone with a gun).

        It used to be that the race pimps had specific names, like Sharpton. Now, the media, as a whole, can be included.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          gman

          I think the cop used a chokehold on Garner when he first jumped him. The crying out to breath, etc, came after he was on the ground. Chokehold was still applied while on the ground for some time. I just don’t think it is FACTUAL to claim this was THE cause of death.

          As for Ferguson I do NOT share your views on cheering for Officer Wilson. I do NOT believe he needed to keep firing at an unarmed man, just because he was being charged or had been hit by him. The much thinner and in shape Wilson could have side stepped and avoided the guy until his backup could help him subdue the guy.

          Oh, and I don’t think he should have shot at him when he was running away. The officer should have followed him so the combined force could affect arrest. Hopefully before he ran into someone’s home or place of business.

          Behaving badly and displaying a bully attitude towards other should not get you shot to death in this country. That includes civilians as well as the police.

          Many of the police in this country have become trigger happy. It needs to stop. It is OUR JOB to stop it.

          Claiming that the victim in Ferguson was a violent thug is a gross overstatement. Where is the evidence this guy had a “history” of violence against others? That he was in fact a “thug” that was known as such in his community??

          I urge you G to think a little more about your tendency lately to classify any black man as a thug or “barbarian” due to a single incident. It doesn’t take long before it starts looking like racism. I don’t believe you to be a racist, so I think you should reflect on your comments a little more. Just sayin……….

          • JAC, I think you have to factor in he was operating in a reduced state. Brown fractured his orbital socket. Impaired vision and thinking would be normal after such trauma. In baseball, the tie goes to the runner. In this instance, attack a cop and the cop on the scene determines how much force is reasonable. On the other hand, I don’t think it applies to Garner. Yes he resisted, but they had opportunity to use lesser force.

          • I have G’s back on the violent thug part. at least in reference to Brown. I’m going to use your words on this one. OBSERVATION of drug use, flashing gang signs, and comments made on his facebook page, plus his actions on tape at the store to begin with, ending with him assaulting then charging at a cop…leads me to make a JUDGEMENT that he is in fact the true definition of a violent thug. Thugs DO NOT HAVE TO BE BLACK either. There are plenty of white boys…WIGGERS…who I would call thugs…lots of those around SE Mich…and the cops hassle those guys just as much as the black guys….because they normally run together anyway…those two groups mix well together from what I can tell…look at all the mixed couples these days…they’re all tatted up, baggy, have their own language…blacks and whites setting up ‘hook ups’ or ‘situationships’…both of the words meaning friends with benefits and no strings attached…mixed children…it’s common around here. I assume it’s like that around the country…which is why I don’t see any of these cases as being racist. Because I see it here…the cops hassle the white guys just as much as the black guys. The word would be closer to profiling than racism. I’m rambling…

            • Hi Anita,
              it’s common around here. I assume it’s like that around the country

              No such stuff occurring around here. In Youngstown Ohio, you bet. The cops are constantly on guard and I’m surprised they haven’t killed more young people there. They seem to be doing a fine job on each other though, much like Chicago, blacks killing blacks a lot.

              I don’t blame skin color. I blame the welfare system that has led a generation into believing they don’t need to be responsible for the existence. I blame decades of Democratic rule within these areas. This is what the whole country will look like if we don’t reel in both political cartels and rebuild our government structure that removes their monopoly on violence. As D13 said, WE the people need to take care of ourselves better. We should only need cops to clean up and investigate REAL crimes, not the Garner issue that occurred.

              Want to end thuggery, shoot straight and don’t retreat. That’s not a license to start anything either. Minding one’s business is what I call a peaceful life. Thanks for having my back 🙂

            • Just A Citizen says:

              Anita

              I am sorry to say you have not tripped me up on this one. I think you have gotten my in the past and may again, but not this time. I think you simply misunderstood my points. And one of these was not calling G a racist but warning him that his rhetoric was beginning to look and sound racist. Not a PC matter but one of attitude. When we start grouping people into categories and assigning labels, such as “thugs” and “barbarians” , and when they always are of one color it LOOKS and SOUNDS racist. Even if it is not intended as such.

              Now lets address the issue of “thug”. Yes, a thug is a “violent” person, by definition. The question was why would a person “be” a thug based on one incident. “Thug” denotes a pattern of violent/bullying/controlling and often criminal behavior. Like Charlie when he was in the debt collection business.

              You tried to use my experience to justify classifying Brown a thug. There is a key difference between the two situations. My accusation of Anarchists is a continuation of known and observed behavior PRIOR to my latest judgment. Yours of Brown is based on POST event information.

              This is important because the information you cited tends to rationalize something that already happened rather than objectively explain why it happened.

              Furthermore, your examples do not connect to the meaning of “thug”. Flashing signs, smoking pot, hanging with bad people and acting like a banger on facebook does not a “thug” make. This was why I challenged you on “association”, using your son’s case as an example.

              It is the ACTUAL practice of violence against others that makes a “thug”. Brown displayed “thuggish” behavior if you will to the shop owner and to the cop. But to our knowledge this is the only example of such behavior. And none of us, including the cop, had any prior knowledge of Mr. Brown being violent with others, as a habit. No such claims have ever been made by the Ferguson P.D.. Which I agree, probably had some experience with Mr. Brown.

              Thus my question to GMan, does “one” incident make a person a “thug”.

              So to claim that Brown was a “thug” and “thugs” deserve being shot down, and that maybe “killing” more thugs will stop the thugs (G’s words, not yours) is not rational nor reasonable. Brown was shot down and killed because he hit a cop and then ran away. Trying to assign the label “thug” has all the appearance of trying to rationalize the shooting because of some “pattern of behavior” that nobody knew about before he was shot. Including the police.

              I also admit I came at you a little harshly. Sorry about that if it stung more than deserved.

              • Bah! Didn’t sting at all. I think stuff like body language gets lost in cyberspace on the way thru. Written comments are great…gives each person a chance to get a point across uninterupted…cuts both ways though, because tone of voice and things like that can get points across too. I do think we have differing definitions of thug, though….that’s part of the problem. We both know the cop is going to keep his eye on the thug and let the guy in a suit pass on by. That’s just reality, not rationalization.

          • One is clearly a thug. He attacked a man. The other isn’t. Skin color is of no matter to me as I would refer to both as such if they were white guys killed by black cops. The media is getting into your head JAC. One is an example of why we have Castle and Stand Your Ground Laws. One is an example of tax evasion. One died attacking someone, one died because he wasn’t paying taxes on what he was selling. One was a thug, one wasn’t. I would have emptied my gun at the thug. I would have simply walked passed the cigarette salesman, as I quit smoking a few years ago and he would not have attacked me. One strong arm robbed a store and most likely threatened him verbally, one didn’t.

            Can you guess which one is clearly a thug and which one isn’t? D13 and I most certainly can 😀

            • Just A Citizen says:

              gman, Anita

              My point was whether you classify a man a “thug” due to once incident. The man strong armed a store owner and hit a cop within a few minutes. Basically a single event. But take note the cop was NOT AWARE of the first incident when he shot Brown.

              Per your remarks it is OK to gun down THUGS because they may threaten harm or because they may hang out with someone who does harm or “may” threaten harm sometime in the future.

              What the hell kind of thinking is that??

              Remember the Sci Fi. story/movie where people are executed because some Govt. computer predicts they might commit a crime in the future?? Well that is the world you two just described.

              You going to tell me that a trained cop cannot dodge a great big fat man who he already wounded? That this man is posing a DEADLY threat just because he came rushing at Wilson? Remember, Wilson knew backup was going to arrive soon. But what the hell, he punched someone so he should be shot to death!!

              As for some other comments. We going to execute by cop those who post violent and anti social stuff on the internet?? Wonder when some folks here will get the knock on their door? Be careful what you ask for, you might just get it.

              The other was GUILT BY ASSOCIATION. Anita you should especially be aware of this mistake. Why did you get the visit by the cops and get the strong arm procedure? Because of your son’s “associations”. Tell us again how much you enjoyed that little event. What if you had made just the slightest move they could have perceived as a threat? After all, you have openly stated you support people owning guns. Therefore, it would be reasonable for the cops to assume you had one stuffed in your pants, under your shirt.

              LOI………… Wilson’s orbit was NOT fractured. I had that happen to me. There is no way that happened to him based on the pictures of him in the ER. Furthermore it was refuted by the Doctors and Police Dept. But notice how it spread to urban legend, thanks to the likes of Sean Hannity.

              Now don’t any of you confuse my comments with me exonerating Brown or thinking Wilson committed murder. My point in that case is that different training and policies, and “attitudes towards citizens” might have prevented Brown from being killed. Instead he could have faced trial for 1. Robbery and 2. Assault on an Officer, and 3. Resisting arrest.

              The Garner case is a different matter, although just a different version of the same issues. Negligent homicide is appropriate in that case, in my opinion.

              • Sorry JAC, the responsibility of Mike Browns death lies with Mike Brown. Pretending that you could handle “the heat of the moment” with different results is lacking in reality. I’ve read the police report, I would have unloaded my pistol to stop him. I’m white and likely would have faced the same BS Zimmerman faced, with the same results. The cop acted correctly in this case.

                Garner did not attack anyone, threaten anyone or hit anyone. Totally different events.

              • Hooooold up JAC. You threw me too far under that bus. I was defending G’s use of thug and you’re saying his use of the word invites the racist label. G and I had hindsight to help us label Brown. You used Gs hindsight to label him racist. I know you didn’t actually call him racist but it was close. We were saying it’s not a race issue, it’s a thug issue. You used our comments to cushion the blow for Brown. Yes, associations matter. I spent much time with my son after our encounter on just that issue. Notice how the two incidents ended. Ours with cooperation, ended well. Brown’s actions ended in his death. Bottom line, don’t fight authority, you’ll lose.

                Also, not hatin JAC, but I think you’ve left out some details. I’m not going to chase after links but I thought I’d heard that Wilson was on another call at the moment Brown was in the store. As he left the call he heard radio to advise cops of what just happened in the store..meaning…Wilson was aware of the store incident and Brown fit the description. Another thing. Ferguson is only so big. The cops are going to know whos who in town. Brown had a juvenile record…Wilson may not have known that…but as you say, associations matter. Lots of stuff came together to justify Wilson’s JUDGEMENT on how to deal with Brown.

              • ROFLMAO! 🙂

                Good Morning Anita. JAC sometimes seems to play BOTH sides of the issue. Now, in New Jersey (I think) a white cop killed an unarmed black man in an apartment building and the Grand Jury is looking at this. I have to look more into this situation, but would it not be possible, yes, possible, that the Grand Jury will indict to avoid adding fuel to the fire?

                What I’m seeing from the Liberal’s is that facts don’t matter, race is far more of the story. The “hands up, don’t shoot” BS is an example of this. “I can’t breathe” is at least legitimate.

                When the Liberal’s start screaming about “black lives matter” over the murder rate in Chicago (over 220 black men killed since the Brown death) then I might listen. Until then, they’re just playing to the race pimps.

                Glad your taking a strong position with your son! KUDO’S to you and him! Best wishes to you and your family 🙂

              • G

                Flag thrown on casting shade on JAC. To the SUFA you go. JAC has kept clarity to 99.9% of the issues around here. I’m forever greatful to him for helping keep me sane these last five or so years. But just like with BF…I KNEW I’d trip him some day! Love both of yas. 😉

              • David Skekabim says:

                @Anita

                ” Ours with cooperation, ended well. ”

                You were violated.

                Well? …sure. …slave.

                ” Bottom line, don’t fight authority, you’ll lose. ”

                April 19, 1775 – Lexington, Concord, Lincoln, Menotomy

  37. They better hurry up and get their protesting done before Sunday in NYC. Doubt the NYPD will allow it for a few days, if they can even control it. The Royals, Kate and Will, are due to land Sunday for their first official visit. Could get interesting.

  38. Just A Citizen says:

    Lets chase the issue of Police policies and mission for a while. Here is the site for the Portland, OR police dept. I picked it because it is the only major city I have actual experience with. Well that and Reno, NV, but that was a long time ago.

    http://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/

    Now note the mission statement. “Reduce crime and the fear of crime”. When the mission become to reduce something then proactive action is required and all kinds of cans of worms are opened as the police now need to determine what “might” happen and “who” might be the problem. All with MIGHT BE attached. As opposed to “seen/known to be doing” something.

    What if this were changed to simply “catching criminals in order to facilitate their trial”???

    Or maybe, “preventing/reducing violence between citizens”. The old Peace Keeper as opposed to LE officer.

    Now the other thing to note on this web page is the number of CALLS to police by Citizens in the past 24 hours. This ties in with my prior comments about these incidents which are caused by someone calling the cops when they probably were not needed in the first place.

    • Reports of cheering from protesters after 4 cops on bikes get hit by out of control car. And people wonder why their not treated better by cops 🙄

      • Just A Citizen says:

        http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/04/police-union-protesters-cheered-when-officers-hit-by-car/19929261/

        Wait for the video to play. Listen to the undercover cop’s comments.

        Find anything disturbing????

        Anyone??????????

        • David Skekabim says:

          He said the police were protecting the demonstrator’s right to free speech, then called it an unlawful protest.

          So free speech is unlawful if it is disrespectful to police?

          • Just A Citizen says:

            David

            You got the first part correct. Well at least the question of lawfulness. How about the notion they are “protecting” the demonstrators? I call BS on that as nobody was going to threaten them. What they were doing was making sure the protestors did not block traffic or disrupt the lives of to many other folks. They were HERDING.

            The answer to your question is NO.

            Lawful is not based on the sensitivity of the police. It is based on the law established by the Nine Wizards in black robes.

            • David Skekabim says:

              I don’t disagree with you that they were probably “herding”.

              I was simply pointing out and questioning what I note as a subtle indication of how he thinks. He essentially implied that harsh sentiments against policemen are unlawful.

              The driver hitting the cops was deemed an accident as a result of poor judgement during an emergency. The police were there to ‘protect free speech of demonstrators’. But the cheers when a cop got injured are ‘unlawful’?

              No wonder there is such an issue with police brutality in the land of the ‘free’.

      • David Skekabim says:

        Countless examples of police brutality, …and cops wonder why they aren’t respected by the people.

  39. Just A Citizen says:
  40. Just A Citizen says:

    Buck

    and of course everyone else. MUST READ………..

    Buck, this article addresses the concepts we were discussing about old laws of restitution vs. the criminal justice system we now have.

    Warning; Not for reading at your desk in between phone calls. Needs time to digest.

    http://mises.org/library/punishment-and-proportionality-0

  41. Just A Citizen says:

    Rolling Stone backs away from rape story. Yet the University suspended all “greek life” on campus and the chapter was attacked by its own national organization. Talk about a STIGMA placed on an entire group of men. Wonder how their dating lives have gone the past few weeks. Wonder how many “boyfriends” have been put in front of the bright lights and interrogated by their ladies???

    We still do not know the truth, but we do know that far to many are making knee jerk reactions to accusations these days. You can thank the left wing hate mongers for this.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/12/05/rolling-stone-retracts-uva-story/19954293/

  42. Just A Citizen says:

    A perfect example of where the Progressive left and Progressive right collide, well, er……….. where they reveal they are similar in their desire to control for the betterment of society, and differ only in what they think that means. Clipped from a story at Red State, in case you want the whole thing.

    “Shortly after the odious Lawrence v. Texas decision in which the US Supreme Court, in a grim foreshadowing of the short shrift it has given the desecration of the concept of marriage, decided to toss a couple of millenia of Western Civilization so no one’s libido would be restrained by law, Rick Santorum gave an interview with Associated Press:

    And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn’t exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution, this right that was created, it was created in Griswold — Griswold was the contraceptive case — and abortion. And now we’re just extending it out. And the further you extend it out, the more you — this freedom actually intervenes and affects the family. You say, well, it’s my individual freedom. Yes, but it destroys the basic unit of our society because it condones behavior that’s antithetical to strong healthy families. Whether it’s polygamy, whether it’s adultery, where it’s sodomy, all of those things, are antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family.”

  43. Just A Citizen says:

    Man I love the way this guy does his business. If only all Congress critters used their brains as much.

    Question for ya’ll in case you don’t catch it. WHY does this lady from a private group seem to know so much about what the White House is planning to do and what it means by certain things within the memorandum, which nobody can find a hard copy???

    • I hope that this guy has no skeletons in his closet. He is what has been needed for a very long time. A clear thinking, logical, take no prisoners kind of guy who does not fall into traps.

  44. JAC……..in reading your responses…..I do not understand why you think that there can be a benevolent police force. Why have one at all? Police, like the military, are trained law enforcement. They are NOT trained to side step, or shoot in the shoulder or shoot in the leg.You are trained to stop a threat and you use deadly force if necessary. I certainly will not gauge a threat on the basis of anything other than protecting myself. If I am out weighed and a bull rush is coming at me…I will not retreat….I will stop the threat.

    If I were the police now….I would just simply stay out of the way. Do not respond to robberies nor homicides nor family violence…..just let it play out and pick up the pieces when it is over. Let them direct traffic and that is it. Simply back out of the way and then let the criminals take over and see who starts yelling.

    I do not expect the police to be referee’s or anything else. I expect them to enforce the laws. ALL LAWS. And I expect a policeman/woman to protect society….this racism is just pure crap and it has been set back decades…..Now, no one….is going to pay attention to police. If I were a black man today…I would certainly take advantage of it…and scream racism at everything….I will get away with it.

    • David Skekabim says:

      ” ALL LAWS. ”

      Therein lies the problem.

      If there is no victim, the law serves the state, by force. People are forced into obedience whether or not they did anyone harm.

      Voters ‘deserve’ it for demanding theirs and others’ enslavement. Those who do not consent to be governed are violated. …One group collectively violates the other, hence my comparing government and voters to an ‘organized crime syndicate’.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      d13

      I am not calling for a benevolent police force. But I want one that uses deadly force ONLY when absolutely necessary to protect their lives of lives of others.

      Killing UNARMED people or people with weapons that cannot hurt anyone at long distance is not acceptable.

      Examples: Sandpoint, Idaho, a woman with knife sitting in her car is shot to death by TWO officers while still sitting in her car. They are 15 to 20 feet from the car. The threat? She told them to go to hell and this shit is going to end today. Notice the similarity in provocation? This shit ends today……..so they open fire.

      Retarded man holding a knife 20 feet from cops. Does not drop the knife, police shoot him and kill him. Same for a man with Autism in Montana a few years back. Another case in Oregon, no knife this time, he just didn’t get on the ground and wouldn’t take his hands out of his pockets. All DEAD………….ALL JUSTIFIED UNDER THE LAW.

      You know I am not trying to support the idea that actual bad guys should get away or that deadly force is NEVER called for. But the number of incidents is far to high and the fact that virtually everyone of them was deemed “WITHIN THE LAW” should send chills down all our spines.

      And if a TRAINED cop cannot side step and take down a 300 pound FAT man running at them, they should find another line of work. Or maybe the police had better conduct some better training.

      Now notice that in all my comments I focused on training, policies and laws as the primary issue. We get the cops we deserve, just like with all govt. If we allow stupid laws to be passed and then ask cops to enforce them, we are going to see non violent people killed for no good reason.

      • ” But the number of incidents is far to high and the fact that virtually everyone of them was deemed “WITHIN THE LAW” should send chills down all our spines.”

        I’m in full agreement. I have posted numerous video links on police over reach and abuse of power.

        And if a TRAINED cop cannot side step and take down a 300 pound FAT man running at them, they should find another line of work.

        WHY? If a 300 pound fat man has acted towards me the same as Mike Brown acted towards a cop, and I shoot him as he is bull rushing me, is that OK because I’m not a trained cop? Or does the responsibility to act with respect for ALL people not apply to large 300 pound men?

        Maybe you should consider that the world is changing quite quickly, we espouse personal responsibility, that also applies to the Mike Browns of the world. More so the cops, who many have failed in that area. In retrospect, the media don’t spend time enlightening us of those times when deadly force was absolutely warranted, it’s just a small blurb on the local news report.

        Mike Brown fucked up, period. Take the badge away from the cop and make him a armed citizen and the same results could have easily occurred. Or, Mike Brown could be in prison for murder.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Gman

          The POLICE must adhere to a greater standard than ordinary citizens.

          Why? First of all because we provide them with protection of “legal killing, battery, force, etc”.

          When you grant that type of power/authority it should carry greater responsibility on their part. Just as it should with the elected politicians.

          You standing your ground is not the same as a “trained LE Officer”. Which is the second reason. They are or should be trained to avoid deadly force and the risk of the same except where absolutely necessary.

          As for the ability to dodge a 300 pound man charging you, anyone playing football learned that skill. How is it our Cops cannot???

          • Maybe if the thugs of the world thought that it could be the “wild west”, we would have far less thugs 🙂

            • That comment belongs below.

              Life isn’t a football game. When a 300 man is charging, after the first shot, the game has changed from football to life. No incident is exactly the same, nor are the individuals. Wilson acted within his authority.

              But, the Garner case is much different.

              Skin color is an issue that is of no matter and likely had nothing to do with it.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                gman

                You continue to misread my statements. I NEVER questioned Wilson’s authority to shoot.

                I questioned the attitude which caused him to shoot what he knew was an unarmed man while running away. Then continuing to shoot when he turned and ran forward. You keep mentioning the shots after Brown turns. What about the shots fired while his back was to the police officer??? That is when the game changed and Mr. Wilson was the one who changed it. He is the once that escalated this to a “killing” event. The critical questions relate to WHY, not whether it was “legal”.

                The issue is not “responsibility” or “authority” or what is “legal”. The question is WHY are we seeing so many examples like this. Why didn’t Mr. Wilson think of some other solution as quickly as he thought of pulling his weapon.

            • Just A Citizen says:

              gman

              Well it hasn’t worked so far, so what makes you think it will in the future?

              Crime is reduced when two things happen. Either independently or in concert.

              One, people can find good jobs that can support them and their family.

              Two, the real criminals are removed from the street.

              By real criminals I mean those who have chosen a life of crime against other’s property and lives. Not those who resort to a single crime due to their circumstances or who simply smoke dope, regardless of its form.

              • gman

                Well it hasn’t worked so far, so what makes you think it will in the future?
                AH JAC, You couldn’t be more wrong on this one. I could link thousands of articles on the correlation of conceal carry law enactment and immediate impact on crime rates, both local and state level crime rates, beginning with Kennesaw Georgia and moving on to the states that now permit concealed carry (although I’m still against the permit part). If you recall, the Left and gun haters used the “wild west” fear mongering to the hilt. They lost, the people won and crime went down, without a reoccurrence of the faux wild west. In other words, the Left used that fear mongering to stop something that proved to be a positive, and does every single day. Thugs are not very thuggish when they do not have the advantage.

                As to the Brown case. One thing that has not been mentioned is that Brown was not alone. That may have played into Wilson’s thinking during the incident. Just a thought.

                Have a great day my friend, best wishes to you and yours today 🙂

          • As for the ability to dodge a 300 pound man charging you, anyone playing football learned that skill. How is it our Cops cannot???

            JAC…different scenarios and I see some relevance to what you are saying but the things that you posted are the exception…

            Sorry, sir….a 300 pound person charging me is going to get cut down……regardless of my level of hand to hand combat which is significant. There is a responsibility of the civilian populace to NOT FIGHT OR ANTAGONIZE…..

            We get confronted all the time at the border….we do not look at a potential threat, size it up, and then take what is called an appropriate response. There is NO appropriate response when confronted with injury. But therein lies the difference in our philosophy. Now, we do not go carte blanche on everybody….I have never had any type of weapon pulled on me by an immigrant ;looking for work…..never. But this I will say and it is what we do on the border. If a weapon is spotted….there is exactly one warning in ENGLISH…..there is no second warning. They are going down. This aspect of “rules of engagement” gets the LE dead and we basically have no rules of engagement. On the frontier… it is survival.

            Now, if we are in a position to use tazers ( which is a joke the same as “non lethal ammunition ) we are obliged to use them IF we determine that a tazer will work. I have seen men hit with several at once and still not go down. But the determination rests with the enforcement…there is no rule that says,,,1,2,3…..

            What is going to happen in civilian LE ( mark my words ) is a lessening of enforcement and I do not blame them….it would be better for the police to just walk away and avoid the hassles.

            On the New York incident….I wonder why the police did not use their batons….a sharp rap by the business end of the baton into the kidneys….will put you down pretty quick.

            • Just A Citizen says:

              d13

              Your only point that I disagree with is the “responsibility” of people to not fight or harass the police. I never want to live in a society where absolute and unquestioning “obedience” to the police force is required and expected. That my friend is just not American, or Texican for that matter.

              At the same time, I accept that someone resisting arrest is going to get roughed up as taking them down cannot always be a simple and gentle thing. That doesn’t require beating them half to death, especially once they are on the ground.

              On the other hand, it shouldn’t get them shot. In fact there should not be any guns pulled on the “suspect” when they are obviously not armed. The presence of a weapon in his/her belt obviously “escalates” the situation.

              Hopefully we agree that someone holding a knife 20 feet away and refusing to drop it doesn’t warrant the same threat and doesn’t warrant two cops emptying their clips into the person.

              As for the NY incident, not only baton but the little fella could have just rolled up on the back of his legs. His friends had the guy’s front and sides covered. There were 7 cops there, not just the one who was charged.

              I still have one other question on the NY deal. In the videos I never heard a cop actually say “you are under arrest”. They simply started reaching for him. It might be in there but I never heard them. So lets play an alternative scenario, if it was not said, then Garner slapping their hands away and “backing away” from them should be appropriate. They initiated the force in that case. They are acting inappropriately.

              I also think of my Autistic son. If he were surrounded by cops and they started reaching for him, he would have reacted the same way. Yelling don’t touch me, and slapping at their hands. He cannot stand to be touched when feeling stressed. And he has been taught that touching people, except for hugs and backrubs, is not appropriate. I know it is not the same a Garner but the police mentality would be the same. Even when the mind set of the suspect was entirely different.

              Fortunately for us, our son’s actual experience with LE was in a place where they had been recently trained to recognize his “condition” as different. Their approach was completely friendly so they could get his name and address. Then they came to our house to discuss the situation. This action was after Portland had suffered some major lawsuits over the brutal treatment of mentally impaired people. A trained psychologist accompanied the officer to our house to make sure the visit turned out positive and there were no real concerns. When you see how positive such an interaction can be you begin to wonder why they don’t do the same with “normal” people.

              By the way, I BELIEVE what you are saying about the border and give thanks Texas has much of it covered. As best you can. You have my gratitude each day on that account.

      • plainlyspoken says:

        Sorry JAC (and any others) who are complaining about the training given to cops. You aren’t competent to speak to their training until you have gone through it yourself to see/experience what that training is. It is not that the training is inadequate, it is the use of that training by the cops JAC. Judgement failed? Likely in the NYC case – could have been handled differently I think, but that’s me and how – as when I was a cop – I would have approached the situation.

        Ferguson – real can of worms there. I have said I feel our cops have become too militant in many ways now-a-days, certainly has changed from back when. I have some problems with the cops decisions to shoot and keep shooting (but, likely not for reasons those reading this may think). Stepping aside and letting the attacker “pass by” – yeah, again go through the training first. Which particular defensive tactics program was he trained in? Dang, you’d be surprised at the number of them out there.

        Does this mean I support the cops and their actions – no. Certainly I have railed against what I see as a continual deterioration of the police in this country. Yet, so much of that you would have to blame on governments who employ them and ‘bless” them to do the work they want done.

        “Proactive policing” has been a nice way of police administrations/government speaking out both sides of their mouths. I could rant on that and “community policing” all day long – but won’t now.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          plainly

          With all due respect, I do not have to undergo their specific training to question whether that training is part of the problem.

          We agree we have a problem. Training may be part of that. Hell it might be the quality of people being hired. I am guessing it is a combination of many factors.

          I did not condemn any specific training, but did “question” whether training is a problem. My pointed comment, relative to the Brown case, was that I do not accept that a well trained cop has no option but to shoot an unarmed person just because they are running at him. That was not a question of the training but gets to what you mentioned. What is the culture and attitude that causes them to resort to the last option first, or at least far to often.

          What is it that causes them to be so harsh and brutish when dealing with almost anyone anymore? This I suspect also gets to the laws and policies they are trying to work under.

          But frankly, I know many cops and far to many of those simply have a crappy attitude. I have been around the Mark Furman crowd up here. They may not think they are racist but the put the Neo Nazis who used to live here to shame, when it comes to stereotyping and denigrating those minority groups living in the big cities. They tend to be arrogant, condescending and most of all, closed off to regular people. They tend to be a closed group, associating mostly with others of their tribe. That is not healthy and indicates to me a bigger problem within the culture.

          Did they start out that way? I am guessing not. My neighbor shows a little of this and he is from around here, not LA. Thankfully for him and his family he recently transferred to a different division and is not longer a patrolman. So I suspect part of it is too much time dealing with the real thugs and criminal punks of society.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          plainly

          I posted to quickly and forgot an important point.

          When I questioned training I did not limit that inquiry to just the training on restraining methods, self defense or shooting.

          Part of training should deal with the “judgment” part that you raised. Along with proper attitude and relationship of their mission to the people.

          Where this training is done but problems persist then we have to look at the other factors, such as attitudes, psychology, laws, policy, culture, etc, etc….

          I think we agree fully on this. You just misunderstood my questioning of the training.

  45. David Skekabim says:

    https://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/georgia-justice-city-officials-grant-special-zoning-exemptions-to-a-church

    A Georgia city council has rejected a zoning request for a mosque, despite previously approving a similar request for a Christian church.

    The Kennesaw City Council voted 4-1 to deny the Suffa Dawat congregation a permit for a storefront worship space. Council members cited concerns about traffic, but congregants argued that the space would have simply acted as a temporary home during the construction of a permanent mosque.

    “I believe it’s a retail space. It’s as plain and simple as that,” Councilwoman Debra Williams told the Marietta Daily Journal. Williams did not explain how a storefront mosque would have differed from the storefront church she voted to approve in July. The Redeemed Christian Fellowship Church, a Pentecostal congregation, now occupies space in a strip mall at a busy local intersection.

    Councilwoman Cris Eaton-Welsh, the only vote in favor of the mosque, said she was saddened by the decision. “The amount of anger that has come out of this was not something I ever thought Kennesaw was all about,” she reflected.

    That anger roared outside City Hall during the vote, as local residents protested the potential mosque and likely influenced the council’s final decision. “We have heard so many bad things about the Islamic religion, about Shariah law and you see it on TV, and we’re scared of you. I’ll tell you I’m scared to death of you,” Ann Pratt said at a public hearing on the matter.

    “[Muslims] are moving into all these small towns, and they’re camping out,” said Karen Untz, another protester. “There’s no such thing as a temporary mosque. They claim the space and they teach Shariah law.”

    “I think that the terrorist organizations fund Islam and that they’re not peaceful and even the moderates eventually become violent,” added Tammy Pacheco.

    But NPR’s Atlanta affiliate reports those sentiments weren’t universal. Arden Stone, who identified herself as a Christian, said of the vote, “Wherever you live, you want it to reflect what the ideals of what our country are all about and [that] didn’t happen tonight. Sorry about that.”

    Stone is correct: The Kennesaw City Council’s vote did not reflect the principles of American democracy, and neither did the rhetoric employed by protesters. If the council had denied Redeemed Christian Fellowship Church’s permit as well, they would perhaps be able to argue that they have applied a consistent zoning standard. By approving a church and rejecting a mosque, they have invited a legitimate civil rights complaint from Suffa Dawat.

    And this is not an isolated phenomenon. Muslim communities are frequently singled out for extra scrutiny by local officials. A mosque in Murfreesboro, Tenn., battled for years to build, and then occupy its worship space in peace. And as the International Business Times notes, another Georgia city attempted to deny a similar permit for a mosque, forcing the Department of Justice to take legal action.

    American Muslims cannot be denied the rights that all religions receive under the First Amendment simply because there are Muslims extremists active abroad. The vast majority of U.S. Muslims are not sympathetic with groups like ISIS, and they eschew violence.

    Indeed, there is significant statistical evidence that the majority of our Muslim neighbors reject fundamentalism and violent extremism. The New York Times reports that in 2011, the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security’s Charles Kurzman deemed extremism from the Muslim American community “a minuscule threat to public safety.” (How many U.S. Muslims, for example, have assassinated abortion doctors? None.)

    If Kennesaw’s protesters, and its city council, could produce evidence that Islam is really a front for a dangerous political movement bent on the destruction of the U.S. government, perhaps then they would have been justified in treating the Suffa Dawat congregation differently from the congregation of Redeemer Christian Fellowship Church. They have not produced that evidence and they can’t because there is none.

    Muslims deserve First Amendment protection and that includes the right to worship freely. To deny them that right is to employ a definition of religious liberty that is so selective it can hardly be called liberty at all.

    It is ultimately of little consequence whether the officials and residents of Kennesaw like Islam. The law is not based upon their personal preferences; it is based upon the government’s compelling interest to ensure the equitable protection of religious liberty. That principle applies to Christians, non-theists, and others as well as Muslims, and it is dangerously undermined when one religious group is singled out for unfair treatment based on inflammatory and inaccurate rhetoric.

    The leadership of Suffa Dawat congregation has indicated that they may sue the city of Kennesaw. If they do, they are likely to win.

  46. Facts don’t matter to Liberal racist’s. Yes, the real racist’s are the ones who do all the card throwing : http://dailysurge.com/2014/12/dem-happily-admits-didnt-look-ferguson-evidence-doesnt-care/

    If the cop would have been black in Ferguson, we wouldn’t even know about this death.

  47. David Skekabim says:

    https://www.au.org/media/press-releases/florida-officials-agree-to-permit-display-by-satanic-temple-at-state-capitol

    Florida Officials Agree To Permit Display By Satanic Temple At State Capitol Rotunda
    Church-State Separation Watchdog Group Welcomes Reversal Of Policy

    Dec 3, 2014

    Americans United for Separation of Church and State today announced that officials in Florida have agreed to allow the Satanic Temple to erect a holiday display at the State Capitol in Tallahassee this month.

    Although officials had previously labeled the display “offensive,” they reversed themselves after Americans United threatened to file a lawsuit on the Temple’s behalf.

    The state has designated the rotunda as an open forum for private speech, and private groups in December often erect holiday-themed displays at their own expense. In 2013, the rotunda housed a nativity scene, an atheist-themed message, a “Festivus Pole” and a rendering of the Pastafarian Flying Spaghetti Monster – yet the Temple was denied access on the grounds that the proposed display was “grossly offensive.”

    In an attempt to avoid similar problems this year, the Temple submitted its application in October, to give the Department of Management Services plenty of time to deal with it. Americans United, on behalf of the Temple, also sent a letter to the department explaining that rejection of the Temple’s proposed display would violate the Satanic Temple’s freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and right to equal protection under the law.

    Americans United, which had been preparing to file suit on the Satanic Temple’s behalf, welcomed state officials’ decision but warned that the department’s written policy excluding “offensive” displays continues to present constitutional problems.

    “Free speech is for everyone and all groups,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “State officials simply can’t get into the business of deciding that some unpopular messages are ‘offensive’ and must be banned.”

    The Temple’s proposed display depicts an angel falling from the sky into flames, accompanied by Bible verses and the message “Happy Holidays from the Satanic Temple.” The Temple describes itself as a religious organization dedicated to principles of empathy, personal autonomy and empirical reasoning.

    In an email sent yesterday, state officials informed the Satanic Temple that its display may be erected Dec. 22-29.

    “Although we are pleased that the state has finally agreed to allow the Satanic Temple’s display, our clients should not have been forced to find legal counsel and plan a lawsuit just to get access to an open forum,” said AU Senior Litigation Counsel Gregory M. Lipper. “The state can’t give itself the authority to decide whether certain religious messages are ‘offensive’ – it needs to allow everyone’s speech or no one’s speech.”

    Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.

  48. Sounds like the two sides are together on this : http://personalliberty.com/ron-paul-reckless-congress-declares-war-russia/

    • David Skekabim says:

      ” Maybe we ought to consider a Golden Rule in foreign policy; Don’t do to other nations what we don’t want happening to us. We endlessly bomb these countries and then we wonder why they get upset with us? ”

      – Dr. Ron Paul

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      Would anyone on SUFA see the abnormally low oil prices and the continued high volume of production by Saudi Arabia and elsewhere as an attempt by the west and their allies to crush the Russian economy? Also the EU’s decision to block the proposed pipeline, by-passing Ukraine. The EU’s excuse was their “LAW” prohibiting a single provider to handle full cycle of production, transport and sale of energy products. With the current prices will this not also wipe out the smaller producers in this country and elsewhere? Question I have is where is the EU making up their oil and gas short falls with one of their largest providers still in a shambles after their intervention in Libya. Ukraine is in a shambles. The North Sea certainly is not making up the difference. The desired NG pipeline the Saudi’s and the UAE want to go up through Syria certainly isn’t happening.

      I believe we are still fighting the cold war with Russia and even though the alleged focus is the M/E fundementalism the target is still Russia.

      • Dale, I fear that you are correct. The friggen “Cold Warriors” have been hiding away all these years. Heard Larry Kudlow this morning droning on about Russia’s economy collapsing because of the low price of oil. Went on about how Putin is our enemy. Seems that few remember it was us that engineered the coup in the Ukraine and encouraged the dopes in Georgia a few years back to stick the bear in the eye. Kudlow is funny because you can actually imagine him genuflecting every time Reagans name is mentioned yet he mocks Reagan’s greatest achievement with his words.

        Anybody catch Gorbachev the other day and his comments? The media, who can never stop fawning over him, seems to have slept late and not set their clocks for these comments. Thank God for British news. .

        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/vladimir-putin/11213081/Gorbachev-to-use-Berlin-Wall-festivities-to-defend-Putin.html

      • I can see that. Have an article in the works that touches on the oil prices and their effect. Think late this week.

  49. Just A Citizen says:

    GMan

    I would like to point out that NOT ONCE have I claimed Brown was NOT responsible for his death.

    Just because you can assign blame and rationalize his death does not mean it was actually necessary or that it should have in fact occurred.

    Your various comments are calling for a “wild west” that did not even exist in the true wild west.

    • Well, I don’t know the answers but too many questionable shootings are happening, hell too many pets are being killed-Something needs to be changed. From prohibition type laws, to looking at police training, to actually putting criminals and thugs in jail. But police are not required to die to satisfy the people’s anger-so their being able to protect their own lives is wayyyy up there in this discussion.

      • We are entering a replay, God help us, of the 1960’s. All lessons have been forgotten. We are back as a society to the old excuses that poverty and education cause bad behavior. More money will solve everything! I can remember thinking as a young teen that if poverty and lack of educational opportunities caused crime, my Grandmother, my Dad and his three brothers would have given Ma Barker an her brood a run for the money. Somehow despite crushing poverty during the Depression we, as a society, saw less crime and a strengthening of moral values which allowed us to grind the Axis into the ground and rebuild the world.

        I just keep spotting in the younger folks this foolish notion that this time it will work. Basic human behavior has not changed a bit in the past 30,000 years nor will it in the future.

        • This new NY City Mayor, as bad as John Lindsay was for NY in the late 60’s, this guy is going to be worse. Lindsay had an excuse, it had never been done before. This clown has it all laid out in front of him and like Obama, he does not care. The end justifies the means and even if the end is bad, if it fits some looney preconceived notion of righteousness in his head, we must do it! It is like the damned French Revolution out there.

  50. It has been said that government has the monopoly on violence. Let it be said now, that left wing liberals have the monopoly on racism (and their two stupid to know it) : http://eaglerising.com/12318/white-liberal-black-cop-dont-understand-racism/

    The Gruberites are alive and well, and they vote Democrat 😀

  51. I find it very interesting about the border….some months ago, I warned people on here that the southern border is not secure and that terrorists of all types are crossing with the permission of the Mexican authorities….I also posted on here that we caught 4 terrorists…..they were turned in…..and now two have been released and have fled to Canada….

    I promise each of you that the Southern border is wide open….there is only so much that we can do….the four that came through my area….well there are hundreds more. But no one wants to believe it.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      V.H.

      Remember, you heard it here first. I hope David reads this to see what I was trying to explain the other day.

      From within the story:

      ““The CEO of Apple knows we shut his store down–that means capitalist America is going to take us seriously,” he said. “We are going to shake up your business and we want to hit you where it hurts. “”

      Same chants, same megaphones, same tactics… like the falling down playing dead.

      The only remaining question is whether there are any links between Mr. Obama’s organizing America groups and those that have been organizing this current effort.

      And they called the Tea Party “Astroturf”.

      • I found this statement ““This is our house,” shouted Brown, 25.” familiar-they kept screaming it in Wisconsin-which actually was a governmental building-but in this case it shows their mentality and points out why they are dangerous to a society that is supposed to be based on liberty-these business’s are not their house-the fact that they think they are is the root of our problems.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          V.H.

          Well said.

          There is another problem I see connected to this. The more these “types” dominate the “demonstration” business the more the credibility of those demonstrations is harmed.

          Remember the fake demonstrators acting badly at Tea Party rallies?? A deliberate attempt to undermine credibility.

          In this case I think their goal is to capitalize on another issue to do what they failed with Occupy Wall Street. In the end it could harm the actual push by citizens to get police brutality reduced.

          I wish the massive nationwide demonstrations were ONLY focused on the abuses of our Govt. Then we could all join in the march.

          The presence of this force has another destructive affect, relative to Citizen driven action. The Tea Party and the OWS movement had several issues in common. They should have “joined hands” in the effort. The reason this did not happen was the presence of the Anarchist and free loader/socialist crowed that showed up with OWS.

          Ironically, in Portland, OR the people who organized the OWS sit it disavowed the demonstration shortly after it started. Because it was taken over by these “other” types.

  52. Plainly, can you comment on this chest compression problem this man is talking about. Did ths come up in training when you were there?

    http://thefederalist.com/2014/12/05/what-everyones-missing-by-focusing-on-nypd-chokehold-of-eric-garner/

  53. opinions-this points to discrimination but it also points to how much communities rely on money for small local crimes.

    http://www.cato.org/blog/petty-offenses-police-community-relations-ferguson

    • This also talks about how much they rely on the money for small local crimes and also an attitude of taking care of the small crime will help stop big crime.

      I don’t think people realize how much all these laws hurt the poor. Eample-you drive without insurance-some people can’t afford insurance but they find it very hard to work and live without a car-so they drive anyway-so when they get caught they get a ticket for driving without insurance-have to take a class about driving without insurance-all of this cost them money-which makes insurance buying even harder-then if they can’t get insurance they will lose their license to drive at all-which comes with another fine that comes into effect when and if they ever manage to pay all these costs, plus get insurance. So what do many do-they drive without insurance and without a license-next stop-who knows the consequences. Don’t know the answer-people should have insurance-but ……….

      http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/12/qa-an-nypd-officers-real-talk-on-garner-case.html

  54. Just A Citizen says:

    OK, let all the jokes loose.

    Now he knows how the rest of us feel.

    Now he knows how all the Dems in Congress have been feeling lately.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/06/us-usa-obama-throat-idUSKBN0JK0RA20141206

  55. Just A Citizen says:

    College Football National Championship………..not.

    My take on the final four.

    Florida State has had to many close calls against teams not even in the top ten anymore. Their conference is far weaker than the Big 12, PAC 12 and SEC.

    So here is how I think it should end up, providing Baylor wins tonight.

    Oregon vs. Baylor
    Alabama vs. TCU

    Of these four, there is a high chance Baylor and TCU would play each other again, for the title.

    That ends all the debate over the Baylor/TCU game, which Baylor won but only due to a major collapse of TCU defense, which has not happened since that game.

    Sorry Ohio State…………..just not feelin it for ya. Maybe Ohio St vs. Florida State for the Consolation Bowl???

    Now if the Broncos can just take care of business tonight.

  56. David Skekabim says:
  57. David Skekabim says:

    @ Anita

    While I am thinking about it….

    I want to address something you said the other day in regard to implying I did a ‘Peter’ in denying God three times.

    My intent in posting those articles was to bring up social issues regarding conflicts of a religious nature. I wasn’t denying god.

    I certainly do not deny there is a god. By order of reason, there must be a god, as it all had to originate from something. Whatever that is, is how I define god, and in my opinion, must be of some kind of intelligence.

    But more so than that, I CANNOT deny there is a god, as I have had some very powerful and profound experiences that essentially proves to me there is indeed something beyond the physical realm, something omnipresent in which I was at times connected to.

    Furthermore,

    While I do not consider myself a Christian by the normal popular definition, I also cannot deny certain anomalous things I have discovered in The Bible, as well as other places via my own inquiry, that suggests the existence of one or more beings of a ‘holy’ nature or having ability or access to something metaphysical.

    I will say, however, that I cannot accept an unreasoned belief or something that sounds similar to a fairy tale, simply because someone said so.

    My personal position in regard to religion is that I do not restrict myself by espousing a set or prescribed belief as if it were fact. I feel that it is rather arrogant to pretend that I or any mere human has all the answers to the universe.

    This is why, when asked, I refer to myself as a student. There is a lot to know, a lot to learn, and a lot of wondering to do.

    Three years ago, almost like a switch was flipped, my normally acute mind turned to absolute chaos. It was very turbulent. I was doing all sorts of inexplicable things that basically caused me to go bat-shit crazy and be rather dysfunctional up until recently. I only remember about half of it.

    The most frustrating thing about it is the inability to explain it, and also a vulnerability and feeling of loneliness. It was not without sacrifice of social status and integrity, and a couple years of my life.

    It was just so weird.

    For example; Everyone on the work crew would walk past the radio, and it would have no effect, but when I got within a few feet, it crackled.

    ..or that night I was sitting on the front porch watching the neighborhood pet stray cat about 30 feet away. I focused on it, and it snapped it’s head back to look right at me. As a test, I did it again a minute later, only to get the same result. That cat felt my thoughts, and didn’t stick around too long afterward.

    …or the day when, for about 4 hours, I felt as if I was feeling time distortion, as if I was existing at about a 1/2 second slower pace than the rest of the universe.

    …or all the weird channeling of what seemed to be a connection to something ancient. I even did so while reading The Bible one day. I had to close it.

    There is more, but you get the idea.

    I keep telling myself that it was maybe that I have been hypnotized and was simply delusional, or that I was being zapped with some kind of technology, that I am a test subject or something, or maybe ET’s are doing it, or it is the effects of a connection to an alternate universe, or whatever. …but nothing seems to fit quite right.

    God? Christ consciousness? …maybe. Who knows? It really makes me wonder, though.

    So please do not suggest that I deny god simply because I do not believe the same as you, or because I bring up social issues.

    It is very frustrating to me to know from experience of something metaphysical, to recognize something much greater than ourselves, to live in a world whereby we are limited in our freedom to express and explore because some simply cannot accept or tolerate differences.

    • Oooow, creepy. “Everyone on the work crew would walk past the radio, and it would have no effect, but when I got within a few feet, it crackled.” I have the same effect. I can and have walk near a vehicle antenna with the radio playing & cause static. Others try usually with no effect. Also have problems using an ohm meter. If I touch both leeds while ohming the wire, it screws up the reading. An open ground show continuity. I am very conductive, electrically. Have ohmed other people and many do not read. Funny, screwy things…

      • David Skekabim says:

        It seems there is a connection between RH- blood and certain anomalous electronic interference, …or so I’ve read. I can’t be sure I am RH-, as I’ve have different results. I know I have ancestors with RH- blood. And part of my lineage does come from the Basque region where it is thought to originate.

        Of course, It could be a naturally high iron or copper content in blood or something.

        And that is not the only time I have done things like that. There have been a few times where the computer would activate from sleep mode when I would walk into the room, or a few times where I would have a strange dream and wake up, and it would come on about the same time I was waking.

        I don’t think that can be caused by iron content. Creepy indeed.

    • You thinkers crack me up sometimes.

      It is very basic. Our lives are only relevant when we accept that there is a difference between good and evil. You’ve never heard me advocate that Christianity is THE ONLY or THE BEST way to promote good. I accept any religion that advocates that the only reason you exist to begin with is by the grace of God. That includes Islam. For all I know, Jehovas have the best angle. I really don’t care. I’m no biblical scholar. I know very little about the bible to be quite honest, and I have 12 years Catholic school under my belt. I’m no longer a practicing Catholic (black sheep of the family for that). I own a bible, but don’t cling to it. I have many many questions about the bible. There are no two people on this earth who believe exactly the same in regards to the bible. I guess that’s all by design. The best thing my Christian background has done for me is to instill faith in God. I have faith that he guides me toward GOOD. I also have faith that He advocates me speaking against evil.

      Satan. Metaphor? Who knows? Who cares? Perception: adversary. Against who? GOD! End result: EVIL. It is that simple.

      For you to demand that I accept EVIL, is EVIL.(stay spiritual here please, not political) Get over the fact that our country has a Christian slant. Would you rather us have an evil slant? The founders who didn’t have faith got over it, you can to. They’re the ones who founded the country. They’re the ones who started the traditions that have been accepted for 250 years. And look what happened. We are the most blessed nation on earth. That certainly didn’t happen by the grace of Satan. For you to advocate Satanism to even exist makes you a HYPOCRITE since you also advocate for the Golden Rule, the epitome of good vs evil.

      Think about that for a while.

      • David Skekabim says:

        First, I want to thank you for sharing your position. It helps understand you better.

        I don’t advocate you or anyone accept evil, nor do I exclusively advocate Satanism, but rather religious freedom for all, respecting rights, keeping an open mind, and tolerance. ..Hence me also advocating for Islam and others.

        And so what if I WERE a Satanist or a Muslim?

        (God I wish I could get in touch with my Muslim friend. She was a good teacher. And what a sweetheart!)

        Maybe you are unfairly equating Satanism with evil? What are they doing that is so evil? As I have stated before, after researching Satanism, I see they are not what they are often portrayed to be. They are more about freedom and indulgence in life, and not being restricted by a set of spiritually coercive rules. I don’t think it is all about being anti-god. What makes them evil? …because some people say they are? Is questioning things evil? Did god not give us a brain to use? So what if they ARE anti-god? …so long as they aren’t violating people, what’s the issue?

        Are their religious displays evil? Does that make nativity scenes evil too? What’s the difference? If anyone is being evil, it is those that seek to dominate over others.

        I do indeed advocate for the golden rule, although I sometimes have a difficult time with it myself. I am human after all, and thus naturally apt to be a ‘sinner’. Hypocrite? …perhaps. And the golden rule is not exclusive to Christian sects either. It can be found in almost every popular religion.

        As for the US being founded on Christian principles, that simply isn’t the case. And I don’t have an issue with the majority of the USA being Christians.I rather like Christians, and very much agree with the message and philosophy Jesus espoused. What I do have an issue with are those that use it as an excuse to dominate, to restrict the freedoms of others.

        I do find it very frustrating (even disgusting) that there are so many unreasonable stubborn self-righteous religious zealots in the USA, (many of which are Christian fundies). They simply refuse to respect anything that isn’t them.

  58. David Skekabim says:
  59. David Skekabim says:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2863819/Demonized-NYPD-officers-claim-obese-asthmatic-chokehold-victim-Eric-Garner-contributed-death-shouldn-t-resisted-arrest.html

    ‘Demonized’ NYPD officers claim obese, asthmatic chokehold victim Eric Garner contributed to his own death and that he shouldn’t have resisted arrest

    Police officers in the NYPD have hit back at outraged protesters furious at the death of Eric Garner, a black man who died in a police chokehold, saying he brought it upon himself.

    Union officials and police supporters have seized on findings showing that Garner’s asthma and obesity contributed to his death, and say they feel ‘thrown under the bus’ by demonstrations and politicians.

    They also said that more people should have been pointing out that Garner was wrong to resist arrest when confronted by officers in State Island, New York City, this July.

    He was wrestled to the ground and repeatedly told officers ‘I can’t breathe’ as white patrolman Daniel Pantaleo held him round the neck.

    He died in the wake of the confrontation – over the illegal sale of loose cigarettes – but a grand jury this week decided there would be no indictment over this death.

    The verdict, following close behind the decision not to charge officer Darren Wilson for shooting dead Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, prompted waves of ongoing protests – which have left officers sore.

    Mayor Bill de Blasio also weighed in, saying the case underscores the NYPD’s need to improve relations with minorities.

    Policemen say the outcry has left them feeling betrayed and demonized by everyone from the president and the mayor to throngs of protesters who scream at them on the street.

    ‘Police officers feel like they are being thrown under the bus,’ said Patrick Lynch, president of the police union.

    But Lynch said: ‘What we did not hear is this: You cannot go out and break the law. What we did not hear is that you cannot resist arrest. That’s a crime.’

    At the noisy demonstrations that have broken out over the past few days, protesters have confronted police who had nothing to do with the case.

    Signs read: ‘NYPD: Blood on your hands,’ ‘Racism kills’ and ‘Hey officers, choke me or shoot me.’ Some demonstrators shouted, ‘NYPD pigs!’ More than 280 people have been arrested, and more demonstrations were planned Friday.

    In private and on internet chat rooms, officers have said they feel demoralized, misunderstood and ‘all alone’.

    Some are advising each other that the best way to preserve their careers is to stop making arrests like that of Garner’s, in defiance of the NYPD’s campaign of cracking down on minor ‘quality of life’ offenses as a way to discourage serious crime.

    ‘Everyone is just demonizing the police,’ said Maki Haberfeld, a professor of police studies at John Jay College of criminal justice.

    ‘But police follow orders and laws. Nobody talks about the responsibility of the politicians to explain to the community why quality-of-life enforcement is necessary.’

    The fatal encounter occurred in July after Pantaleo and other police officers responded to complaints about Garner, a heavyset 43-year-old father of six.

    The video showed Garner telling officers to leave him alone and refusing to be handcuffed. Pantaleo, an eight-year veteran, appeared to wrap his arm around Garner’s neck and take him down to the ground with the help of other officers.

    Garner could be heard saying, ‘I can’t breathe,’ several times before he went motionless.

    The medical examiner later found that a chokehold resulted in Garner’s death, but also that asthma, obesity and cardiovascular disease were contributing factors.

    While many have decried the death of another black man at the hands of a white officer, no evidence has come to light to suggest that Pantaleo’s actions were racially motivated. His supervising sergeant at the scene was black, and so were some of the officers involved in the confrontation.

    As the video sparked accusations of excessive force, the police unions mounted a counter-narrative: that Garner would still be alive if he had obeyed orders, that his poor health was the main cause of his death and that Pantaleo had used an authorized takedown move – more like a headlock than a chokehold – to subdue him.

    While the grand jury proceedings were secret, Pantaleo’s lawyer has said that the officer testified that he never tried to choke Garner and did not believe the man was in mortal danger.

    Pantaleo’s defenders have included Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., who argued that the grand jury outcome would have been the same if Garner had been white, and that police were right to ignore his pleas that he couldn’t breathe.

    ‘The fact that he was able to say it meant he could breathe,’ said King, the son of a police officer.

    ‘And if you’ve ever seen anyone locked up, anyone resisting arrest, they’re always saying, `You’re breaking my arm, you’re killing me, you’re breaking my neck.’ So if the cops had eased up or let him go at that stage, the whole struggle would have started in again.’

    • David Skekabim says:

      They’re not getting it. They’re not likely to.

      This is why it may very well come down to a violent revolution some day.

      Those idiots actually think they have a right to enforce artificial laws. They actually think it is okay to tell people what to do, to harass people and boss them around, instead of protecting rights.They actually think they have the right to kidnap and/or murder people who victimize no one.

      Mr. Garner not only had a right to resist their phony arrest, but had the right to exercise self defense.

      If a cop tries to kidnap you for a faux crime, you have the right to kill it in defense.

      • These cops are in NYC, who has one of the most socialist Mayors in the US. It shouldn’t be a surprise that Liberals who work for what they believe in think this way. I see a difference between Liberals and Conservative/Libertarian (and even your Anarchist ideology). However, this difference is far less in DC, where I think that both parties are more closely aligned (no matter what they say).

        When Liberal who work for government get slammed, they are not very happy when their authority is questioned, that is the mindset of these left wing loons. When the populace votes Left wing, they get what they ask for. This includes every major city where the crime rate is super high.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Quality of Life enforcement……..or, live as we tell you to live. Why I simply hate modern day socialist government . Yet, some want more of this, aka Obamacare

      • David Skekabim says:

        Agreed.

        Did you know that only 1/3 of the US population voted last election cycle?

        It says a lot.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Yes, I know. I like D13s ideas on the cops standing down and just cleaning up after the fact, we could live without 99% of current laws if people would just show responsibility for their safety and property.

          • David Skekabim says:

            Again, I agree. (of course)

            Plainly made a very interesting point the other day in citing that police enFORCE laws, and aren’t so much there to protect rights.

            So, why do people tolerate it? What is the reasoning behind having a police FORCE if they are not there to protect the rights of the people?

            And even if it WAS about protecting rights, government/police are only so effective. Ultimately, it still boils down to people taking responsibility for their own protection.

            • Oy Vey, What exactly do you think officer Wilson was doing when he confronted Micheal Brown-he was trying to protect the rights of the citizens! Or is it now okay to take what is not yours and intimidate and threaten another citizen. Micheal Brown walked into that store and not only stole from the business he treated the man working there like a piece of garbage. He obviously thought he had the RIGHT to do whatever the hell he wanted to. I keep hearing people claim that arguments based on black on black crime don’t matter in this discussion because it’s the polices job to protect the people -so again I ask was the officer doing just that when Micheal Brown attacked him?

              • I wonder what the outcome have been if the clerk/owner had pulled a gun to protect himself? I’m guessing the same thing, Brown would have been shot. However, the police didn’t protect anyones rights, nor is it their job to do so. We’ve had this discussion before. It’s not the cops responsibility to protect the people or their rights. It’s solely up to the individual. Wilson simply defended himself against an attacker. Cop or not, it was within his rights to use deadly force.

              • I disagree-it may be impossible for the police to stop every crime from occurring- so I understand your point from that angle-but making someone take responsibility for usurping someones rights is protecting ones rights-it’s called JUSTICE-and it’s importance in a civil society shouldn’t be dismissed.

              • David Skekabim says:

                How many times do I have to repeat myself in making the exact point you just made? I think I have been very clear in making the distinction between the Brown case and others, defending the position of Officer Wilson.

                I don’t expect you to read everything I post, but please understand I am not defending the actions of Mr. Brown or anyone else who violates rights.

                …including policemen who think they have a license to harass, beat and murder, simply because the law says so.

              • I didn’t say you were-but you were dismissing the value of police work. So why do you support officer Wilson-if he hadn’t been an officer-he in all probability wouldn’t have interacted with Brown at all. So Brown would have gone on his merry way until he decided he had the right to break another law. Brown was a bully but when you cross the line into illegal actions you become a thug-And those need to be taken off the streets. In our society the cops, our laws, and the court system provide that service. But I too, don’t think police can just do whatever they want to do in fulfilling that service. I think this issue is very complicated and all these attempts to blame the problems solely on racism or based on the police over-reacting and ignoring all the other factors is in my opinion stupid and just exacerbating the situation. And just an FYI :)-I’m not accusing you of doing that either.

              • David Skekabim says:

                @ VH,

                Police are supposed to be a security service to the community, to provide a secure environment as to protect the rights of people against violators. I support Officer Wilson because he was standing up for the rights of the business owner, doing what policemen should be doing.

                Breaking government laws is perfectly acceptable if there is no victim. Any cop that tries to enforce laws where there is no victim, is a criminal, a thug, a piece of shit. Any member of the organized crime syndicate(government) that prosecutes or imprisons nonviolent people (prosecutors, judges, etc) are equally criminals. Anyone who willfully supports them and their crimes (voters, lawmakers) are also criminals.

                Anyone who is confronted by policemen who seek to enFORCE a victimless ‘crime’, unequivocally has the right to resist and defend themselves by any and/or all means available and/or necessary.

                For example; Eric Garner wasn’t victimizing anyone, and was therefore well within his right to resist his faux arrest. If, at the point where they attempted to do so, he were to have shot and killed them all dead. He would have been completely justified.

  60. One note to all are Wisconsin Badger fans. Ohio State wiped the field with your team yesterday. I hope at least Green Bay can make your weekend better 🙂

    The Lions should win easily. Go Dolphins!

  61. Just A Citizen says:

    Watching the Browns vs. Colts and seeing an unbelievable example of “Confirmation Bias” in all the commentary about Hoyer, the Browns QB.

    It doesn’t matter what he does, the comments quickly move to casting doubt or outright criticizing. Just made a negative comment about a tight pass, caught by the tight end, that if Luck had made would have been “spectacular”.

    It seems sports announcers have joined the “new culture” driven by the new media. Everyone has to criticize and evaluate everything and everyone.

    • I’ve noticed that with Sparty over the last two years…Seems every game the announcers hype the opposing team, going out of their way to not give the Spartans credit. Thought it was just me so I haven’t complained.

      Now how did i miss yesterdays college games? I tuned out after Spartys last game. What was yesterday about? Can not believe OSU vs Wisconsin? Whoa!

    • JAC, I agree that those talking always want “the other guy”. He is only as good as those around him. It’s often that good players are destroyed by bad teams. However, this isn’t the same as the Marino days. The rules have changed to make scoring easier. Much like government and their regulations and laws, teams will defeat the new rules. Not very often, but it happens. I’m not happy with the Dolphins after their loss, as their O-line failed again. The refs were not very good in the game either, in my opinion.

      @Anita, I, like you, am surprised by what happened to Wisconsin, which vaulted the Buckeyes into the NEW playoff stuff. OSU is very well coached, and despite the injuries to big name players, their in it. OSU vs Alabama should be great, but I just don’t see Bama losing.

  62. Just A Citizen says:

    Yeee Haaawwwwwwwwwwww

    Seahawks looking good for a change.

    However, lost two starting O line men. That has been why the Offense has struggled all year. Now they may be using subs going into the final home stretch.

    But I will take it for now.

    Boise State………….Mtn. West Conf. CHAMPIONS

    Selection Committee……….WEASELS. How do you select a team #3 one week, have them dominate a team they are supposed to and then drop them to #5.

    We need riots in the street DEMANDING a Div I PLAYOFF, same number of teams as FCS teams have.

    • Happy for you JAC. Still can’t believe I missed yesterday..figured there would be a bye week before the conference championships. Gonna have to root for the Buckeyes v the Tide. Have some very good friends who roll with the Tide. Should be fun.

    • You mean like the riot in New York where the rioters broke into the Disney Store and looted it? They did not like the outcome of a case and so they stole Goofy. Or the Berkley rioters that taught the police a lesson by stealing Sony products. That will show them….

      And have you seen the age of these progressive rioters? They do not know “come here” from “sic ’em” but those progressives have the right stuff….tear everything up…that will change perception.

  63. So this committee for college football…..still picking the teams that they want….and the chair person of the committee this morning saying that the Big 12 will never have a representative as long as he is on the board. You gotta love it.

    Let’s see….last year Florida State was undefeated and number one…..this year Florida State is undefeated with a 29 game win streak and is not number one….you put TCU at number three,,,and then you move them to out of the playoffs to make room for Ohio State.

    Oh well….

%d bloggers like this: