Said Anthea Butler, associate professor of religious studies and Africana studies at The University of Pennsylvania, quoted in "Should Obama Do More on Ferguson and Other Racial Issues?"
Belief in the power of Obama's speaking has faded. And yet... there's still a belief that he could solve problems through great speech. The word "dispassionate" reveals that remaining hope. As if injecting passion might work.
Obama’s caution on what happened in Ferguson is not surprising. It’s not just a racial issue, but one of policing and local control. Early in this tenure, Obama, at a press conference, had said Massachusetts police “acted stupidly” in arresting Harvard professor and Obama friend Henry Louis Gates, Jr. in front of his home. The police action was probably unwise, but the president was criticized for weighing into a local law enforcement matter.So passionate speech doesn't do the trick either.
पोस्ट्स
१०१ टिप्पण्या:
Speaking of "the past"...
Priorities: Where is the Holder Justice Department's Community Relations Service Team that was sent to Nebraska when a parody papier-mâché Obama appeared in a parade?
http://www.justice.gov/crs
(Bumped)
More diversity programs should do the trick.
Obama can't win on this one. He will be criticized no matter what he says or does.
Yesterday's thread caused me to read up on the 12th Street riot, and recall something I had forgotten, which was the very negative role Lyndon Johnson played in that event. He let the fact that George Romney might be his opponent in 1968 influence his statements and actions.
So maybe Obama needs just to be bland.
Jason Riley, who is black, wrote this in the WSJ the other day. He makes several good points which he has been making for some time.
I, like many others, do not know the facts in the Ferguson case. Blacks have reason to be suspicious of the police because of "the past" but they should also recognize that police - white or black - are reacting to the actions of blacks in the present. It astounds me that Daniel Moynihan identified the problems 50 years ago and what we have done since has done nothing but make it worse.
Soooo.....now we have photos of Mr. Brown robbing a convenience store. It was called a strong arm robbery, and the photos show him pushing a little old lady around.
Why were the photos not immediately released??
Why was the police report not immediately released??
It is always difficult to distinguish conspiracy from stupidity, but WTF is going on here??
We have photos of a man who may or may not have been Mr. Brown.
The photos were not immediately released for the same thing I said above; they give us no new positive information, just more maybes.
It is a terrible idea to release flimsy maybes into a powder keg. I guess they decided they were more confident in their beliefs; decided that it had already blown up, so why not?; or maybe it just took that long to get approval to release the evidence of an on-going investigation cleared?
Who knows? As it is, I'm still firmly in the "Need more data" camp before deciding on much more than: "Burning things down is, in general, bad."
It was pretty obvious from the first campaign that Obama had no interest in improving race relations, but would just milk it to his personal advantage.
Sister Anthea Butler is a Cornell West, Michael Eric Dyson, Marc Lamont Hill, Oswald Bates wanna be bullshitter Affirmative Action token Ivy League hire (Louis Gates appears to be a real scholar). Next thing you know, she'll be sayin that Obama has been livin in the big house too long, servin the Master.
I would like to take issue with the Professor. Swaggy Black English Spice doesn't speak dispassionately, he READS dispassionately. It really is funny how all these womenz have lost that squishy feelin for his passionate readin. Lady parts are so gullible.
The problem with the President and AG getting involved in this matter is partially that they did get involved in the Travon Martin issue, took a side, and it turned out to be the factually wrong side. They supported a wanna be gangsta, trying to play the knockdown game with an innocent and defenseless looking guy who turned out to have been legally carrying a concealed firearm, thus winning a Darwin Award. The more facts come out, the more this is looking similar. Obama and Holder pandering to their Black constituencies just makes them less credible, and sets back the cause of a color blind society.
We shall see. Still not nearly enough facts definitely known so far to make any sort of opinion of what actually happened.
This seems not to have been a racial incident between the cop andBrown.
Perhaps we can talk instead about excessive police force in general. Like beating Kelly Thomas to death, shooting up a whole neighborhood (and two women delivering newspapers), the shooting of John Winkler, etc.
It isn't about race. It's about citizens becoming a source of income and irritation for police (who are supposed to protect and serve us).
I'm just glad we have an universally respected professional AG known for his non-partisan approach to law enforcement matters. Something like that really comes in handy in difficult situations like this.
The only people who still believe in Obama's magic speechifying powers are Blacks. Everyone else laughs or rolls their eyes.
Where the hell is "Africana"?
Hmmmm....it looks like the cop was black as well.
How are they going to fix the narrative?
Matthew Sablan said...
We have photos of a man who may or may not have been Mr. Brown.
Yeah, six foot four, almost 300 pounds. Might not be the same guy.
Looks like Michael Brown was a big, mean criminal.
See photos of him commiting a crime just before he was shot
MayBee said...
... Perhaps we can talk instead about excessive police force in general. Like beating Kelly Thomas to death...
It isn't about race. It's about citizens becoming a source of income and irritation for police (who are supposed to protect and serve us).
Except that Kelly Thomas was white. Did Obama speak about Kelly Thomas's death? Why not? Dozens of black men, women, and children are shot every day by other blacks but Obama makes a specific statement about a black man killed by a 'white hispanic'. Again, why speak in one case and not the other?
or maybe it just took that long to get approval to release the evidence of an on-going investigation cleared?
Or maybe they were a little too busy dealing with looting and rioting to finish the police report as quickly as normal? (around here, police reports are routinely released)
This certainly gives us some context for the situation (and to me makes the witness/accomplice statement a bit more suspect because he clearly left out a few things).
We still have issues with police being too militarized but we also have issues with crime. I dont' think we'll ever completely fix one without fixing the other.
This will be amazing if the police have been withholding proof they had the first hour for over 5 days showing this 18 year old was even a suspect fleeing a robbery that happened 10 minutes earlier. Why would sane police withhold that information?
Even if Brown was only similar in appearance , that would have exculpated the officer for use of force trying to arrest what he thought was a fleeing felon.
This is not a poker game.
broomhandle said...
The only people who still believe in Obama's magic speechifying powers are Blacks. Everyone else laughs or rolls their eyes.
===================
Not the liberals and progressive Jews running most of the media. To them, Obama is still the Black Messiah, and The Narrative requires concealing news of white or black victims (yes and Asians and Hispanics too!) of young black thugs.
Same Jews and liberals are totally committed to hyping cases of supposed white on black violence...and pimping for wealthy race baiters like Sharpton, Benjamin Crump without shame.
This will be amazing if the police have been withholding proof they had the first hour for over 5 days showing this 18 year old was even a suspect fleeing a robbery that happened 10 minutes earlier. Why would sane police withhold that information?
It was not withheld. It was known. That's why the Quikie Mart was burned down.
Hmmmm....it looks like the cop was black as well.
How are they going to fix the narrative?
If true I’m sure the media will start referring to him as “white black.”
I'm sorry. Quick Trip.
He really only wanted their votes, they expected something to change. But he's like every other Democratic presidential candidate in the last 50 years. But somehow its the Republican's fault and Hillary will use the same game plan.
Yeah, because what this situation calls for is MORE emotion.
Matthew Sablan said...
We have photos of a man who may or may not have been Mr. Brown.
The photos were not immediately released for the same thing I said above; they give us no new positive information, just more maybes.
If they implicated Brown, they would be out there. So I assume that they do not implicate Brown in the robbery.
David wrote;
"Obama can't win on this one. He will be criticized no matter what he says or does."
We've come a long way baby. It used to be, "Obama can't lose. He will be praised and lauded by the media because, well, The One is speaking!"
"If they implicated Brown, they would be out there. So I assume that they do not implicate Brown in the robbery."
-- Remember how long it took to get the video and images clearly showing the injuries sustained by Zimmerman?
I was wondering if you'd get around to #Ferguson.
It's in situations like these that FB, Vine and Twitter really shine with real time, ground level coverage. The first report I received was in the early evening of August 11.
Yet another reason Net Neutrality is so crucial.
David @ 11:58,
If the photos in this link are accurate, you assume wrong.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3193198/posts?page=16#16
Meanwhile, we now learn that Michael Brown and his friend were suspects in the strong-arm robbery of a $49 box of cigars at the local QuikTrip store. There's a surveillance picture in the article, which doesn't clearly show the criminal's face, but he does appear to have about the same build as Michael Brown. Take that as you will.
It looks like somebody is trying to sell us another "Little Saint Trayvon" story, where they say just an innocent little unarmed kid being murdered by racists for no reason at all. Then we found out that Trayvon was neither little nor a saint (burglary tools and stolen jewelry at school, etc.). In this case we've been told, "Oh, he was unarmed and he was about to start college."
A large person with criminal intent doesn't NEED to be armed to cause violent trouble. The cops say their guy was pushed into his vehicle and physically assaulted and that the shot that killed Brown came from within the vehicle as the suspects tried to grab the cop's gun. If you look at the surveillance photo from the store, you can see that the suspect there is unarmed, but he certainly is menacing the scrawny little store clerk effectively enough. If that IS Brown, then it's clear that he didn't need a gun in his hand to be a threat to others.
CNN is saying the cop is white.
Where did anyone see different?
I’d have a lot more respect for Obama if he just said “I learned my lesson from the George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin case and other than urging people to keep calm until the facts come out, I’m keeping my mouth shut.”
"I’d have a lot more respect for Obama if he just said “I learned my lesson from the George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin case and other than urging people to keep calm until the facts come out, I’m keeping my mouth shut.”
Does that sound anything like the POTUS we've come to know is in over his head & learns NOTHING from the many mistakes he's made?? But is convinced he's always the smartest guy in the room?
I don't think so.
A large person with criminal intent doesn't NEED to be armed to cause violent trouble. The cops say their guy was pushed into his vehicle and physically assaulted and that the shot that killed Brown came from within the vehicle as the suspects tried to grab the cop's gun. If you look at the surveillance photo from the store, you can see that the suspect there is unarmed, but he certainly is menacing the scrawny little store clerk effectively enough. If that IS Brown, then it's clear that he didn't need a gun in his hand to be a threat to others.
A cop isn't the same as a scrawny little store clerk. He should have been able to physically subdue Brown without the use of a firearm.
Peter
Crack, I deleted your duplicate just as you were deleting the other one. You can repost.
He should have been able to physically subdue Brown without the use of a firearm.
I have not seen enough details to know for sure, but it sounds like the officer was in the car and Brown assaulted him through the window, or possibly through the open door. I'm not sure how you physically subdue someone from that position, and I'd be willing to bet that such a scenario was not covered in training.
If you have taken a blow to the head, and have no reason to assume that the attacker is planning on stopping, then you have every right to defend yourself, up to and including the use of deadly force.
Once the assault has stopped, then you may not continue to use deadly force.
If the actual events were similar to the scenario I just described, then the big question is what was going on at the time the officer fired his last shot.
It is difficult to imagine this as a justified shooting.
Having said that, the Al Sharpton, Crack MC black community doesn't care either way because slavery, because racism, and for some, because new TVs,AKA, reparations.
tradguy wrote: "Even if Brown was only similar in appearance , that would have exculpated the officer for use of force trying to arrest what he thought was a fleeing felon."
I don't know Missouri law, but I would guess the circumstances where a police officer may use deadly force on a fleeing felon are limited.
The other stories say that Brown and the cop was wrassling either inside the car and the open door, or through the window, and that the first shot was fired from within the car. Brown then apparently broke loose and took off, and the cop continued firing.
So it sounds more like "in the heat of battle."
Thanks Ann, just what we need, More Crack.
As an aside, there are interviews of people saying that isn't Michael Brown, so, we're still in wait and see mode.
>>A cop isn't the same as a scrawny little store clerk. He should have been able to physically subdue Brown without the use of a firearm.
So, Peter, how many violent felons have you subdued? Please share your wisdom with folks like me who have actually done it...
If a police officer is getting his a** severly kicked (it happens more than you might think) and is in fear for his life, shooting to defend yourself is justified. You have the same right, of course, in almost every state.
I guess you think that just before he passes out, the officer should say "No fair taking my gun and blowing my brains out while I'm knocked out...."
As you surely know, people who beat police officers always fight fair, and retreat to a neutral corner as soon as they win the fight.
Woops. Never mind; the guy allegedly with Brown has confessed to the crime. That's them on the video.
[At least, per what Hot Air is quoting/reporting]
The Latest on Ferguson: Officer Who Stopped Michael Brown Did Not Know He Was a Robbery Suspect
hombre,
It is difficult to imagine this as a justified shooting.
Having said that, the Al Sharpton, Crack MC black community doesn't care either way because it is difficult to imagine this as a justified shooting.
Slavery, racism, and for some, because new TVs,AKA, reparations are just the payback for hundreds of years of deaths that are difficult to imagine.
When whites say they are "sick of hearing about it," they remind blacks why the deaths happen in the first place:
White supremacy. White sociopathy. White pathology. White's narcissism (valuing their comfort as worth more than other people's very lives) hundreds of years has produced quite the list.
Those unfeeling Nazi-like beliefs, that make whites mostly follow orders (and expect blacks will no matter what whites do) and notions of superiority that make many of you incapable of talking about blacks without a cutting remark, or some slant on history that's angled, just so, then whites look good and blacks are left out.
Until the truth comes out, and blacks aren't, and whites don't.
There's a looooong history here - unbroken. I wish I could write that it's been, for death, but Michael Brown proves that's not true.
Whites have stopped hanging bodies up in the public square - they let them bake in sun on the street for a few hours now.
That's "progress" of a sort.
With all the credit going to the Al Sharpton, Crack MC black community wing of America.
Whites still don't care any more than when they were lynching full-time, of course,...
DanTheMan,
"So, Peter, how many violent felons have you subdued? Please share your wisdom with folks like me who have actually done it..."
I've done it - tons of times - with no weapon.
What's "your wisdom" on why killing unarmed Americans is justified,...
Crack: "Whites still don't care any more than when they were lynching full-time, of course,..."
Clearly crack has not been sent his quota of african slave girls from his black muslim allies yet.
No wonder he is so bitter.
Poor Hot Air - they just don't get it:
"So Wilson wasn’t looking for a robbery suspect? Why’d he stop Brown and Johnson, then?"
Life as a jello shot,...
Raciiiiiiiiiiiiiism.
/crack broken record
With all the credit going to the Al Sharpton, Crack MC black community wing of America.
Couldn't agree more. With real leadership, on the other hand, we'd have educated and productive African Americans that wouldn't be killing each other by the thousands. But instead, we have Al Sharpton, Crack MC, and lots and lots of dead black males.
So, congratulations, Crack.
"So Wilson wasn’t looking for a robbery suspect? Why’d he stop Brown and Johnson, then?"
I love that question - it's a shining example of why, innocent or guilty of stealing cigars, I don't have to change my position on Michael Brown:
I KNOW why he stopped Brown and Johnson - just as I know why Brown is dead.
WHITE RACISM.
He followed Brown and Johnson just like George Zimmerman did - because that's what white men with guns do.
Without 'em, they tend to have more sense.
Hmm.
We might have to outlaw white men - alone - from having guns in the future,...
Isn't it more disturbing that a cop stopped a random person on the street and that person had just robbed a store? Shouldn't that be, well, an amazing coincidence? Extremely unlikely to occur?
crack: "He followed Brown and Johnson just like George Zimmerman did - because that's what white men with guns do"
LOL
Hilarious.
With real leadership, on the other hand, we'd have educated and productive African Americans that wouldn't be killing each other by the thousands.
There are plenty of people who fit this description, I work with many of them, they just dont' get interviewed in the middle of riots.
We might have to outlaw white men - alone - from having guns in the future,...
Because to Crack, the thousands of blacks killed by other blacks are expendable. He's indifferent to violence that he can't blame on the imaginary racists under his bed.
But at least he's not a 'Tom'!
There are plenty of people who fit this description, I work with many of them, they just dont' get interviewed in the middle of riots.
Very true, thank goodness. I think it should and could be much more common, but I probably wasn't clear.
crack: "He followed Brown and Johnson just like George Zimmerman did - because that's what white men with guns do."
Whereas there are no black men with guns and they never kill anybody, rob anybody at gunpoint, etc., etc.
Crack, like most black race-baiters, ignores the fact that based on per cent of population blacks commit a hugely disproportionate amount of the crime in the US - particularly gun crime. Despite the fact that blacks often victimize other blacks, depending on the source, data shows that blacks commit 6 to 8 times as many crimes against whites as the other way around.
Maybe those black dads who warn their sons about racist, white cops need to expand the conversation to include the broader consequences of black violent crime.
The narrative that this man who was killed by the police was minding his own business turns out to be a lie. And the people who told us that lied to us. Maybe they lied about the rest of what happened, too?
Perhaps some skepticism is in order?
"So Wilson wasn’t looking for a robbery suspect? Why’d he stop Brown and Johnson, then?"
He stopped them because they were walking in the middle of the street blocking traffic:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/08/15/ferguson-police-chief-encounter-between-officer-and-michael-brown-did-not-relate-to-robbery/
And the police chief only said that the initial stop wasn't related to the robbery. Although you wouldn't know that if you only read the headline.
Next, it will turn out he was on drugs.
Yes crack, police engage in racial profiling. When they see young black men on the street at night they assume they are up to no good. In this case the officer was spot on.
Next, it will turn out he was on drugs.
Information does tend to come out in that order, doesn't it? Innocent angelic child, large older teenage man, who was robbing/beating someone, who was on drugs...
Not that it isn't still possible that the cop used too much force, but we just plain don't know the facts on that.
I will say, people walking in the middle of the road, not even attempting to get out of the way of cars, is not polite behavior. If he was walking on the side of the road and letting cars pass it would be different. So, what actually did happen?
If unarmed black teenagers want to take some cigars, push the store owner out of the way, and walk in traffic I think that is ok because of slavery and housing redlining. We can just deduct the value of the cigars from his reparations payments administered by the IRS under the Affordable Reparations Act.
This case is progressing similar to the Martin case, where Trayvon applied lethal force without provocation or cause, followed by the formation of mobs to intimidate and injure innocent bystanders. The preliminary evidence suggests that this was a justifiable murder for reason of self-defense. Obama should, once again, recuse himself. He has demonstrated poor judgment and leadership in similar cases, which contributed to postponing reconciliation.
What more do people want Obama to do? The last two times there was a racial incident he inserted himself and took sides. Both times to his detriment. And ours.
Let the case go forward. The cops name was released. He is being investigated. What more do people want?
Self loathing. Horrible to watch.
There is conflicting evidence whether the cop knew that he was a suspect in a robbery earlier in the day. But even if the cop didn't know, I know. And so I saw him steal something, then when confronted by the store manager push him out of the way then come back in threateningly as if to say "yeah I stole the cigars, what are you going to do bout it?"
Not a meek soul. So did he push a cop when told to get off the street and then fight with him over his gun? Well, he isn't the saintly beatific teen just walking down the street with skittles. I wouldn't be surprised at all. He was a thug, apparently. And not surprisingly. Did that mean he deserved to get shot? No, but it doesn make his interactions with the cops a lot less innocent.
And was the guy who was there in the video when he pushed the store owner, the same guy who said that the cop just shot him for no reason when he had his hands up? I notice he never mentioned his friend was just involved in a robbery and an assault. So, maybe he's also lying about something else.
Here we go again. The Trayvon Martin effect all over again. The community trots out a story, that everyone beleives. And which the racial merchants use to foment outrage. Then details start to emerge that make the story line more complicated.
Crack wrote:
crack: "He followed Brown and Johnson just like George Zimmerman did - because that's what white men with guns do."
but something that black men with guns never do. I like how Zimmerman is suddenly the white guy.
And, the truth of the matter is Trayvon went back to fight Zimmerman. Zimmerman wasn't following him at that point. How do we know this? Because TM called his girlfriend from behind his dads girlfriends house. And the fight took place by Zimmermans car. If Zimmerman followed him then the fight would have taken place behind his dads girl friends house.
'Hmmmm....it looks like the cop was black as well.
How are they going to fix the narrative?
If true I’m sure the media will start referring to him as “white black.”"
Inauthentic black. You know someone is itching to say it.
"The community trots out a story, that everyone beleives. And which the racial merchants use to foment outrage. Then details start to emerge that make the story line [strike]more complicated.[strike] a lie.
Fixed that for you.
crack: "He followed Brown and Johnson just like George Zimmerman did - because that's what white men with guns do"
Sí, el Crack, todas esas armas se disparó en el Sur de Los Ángeles y Chicago y Inglewood está disparando desde las armas de los hombres blancos que ruedan a través el barrio ...
Alex said...hen they see young black men on the street at night they assume they are up to no good.
Point of order, Alex, the shooting is supposed to have occurred in the afternoon and not at night. Although the young men in question were apparently walking down the MIDDLE of the street, so there was, you know, some reason they stood out.
"I KNOW why he stopped Brown and Johnson - just as I know why Brown is dead."
Because he was walking down the middle of the street.
Only racism keeps you from seeing the truth.
I mean geez, we even have signs posted:
"Hey if you walk down the middle of the street and don't get out of our way, we shoot you" - Love, Whitey
See, thats what I don't get - if there is a history of police targeting your race, WHY would you poke them with a stick?
I would be all "yes sir, no problem sir, that was stupid of me and I won't do it again sir"
"We might have to outlaw white men - alone - from having guns in the future,…"
You might even be able to do this given that Obama got elected twice. What you can't do is make us live where you run things.
Detroit is the model of Crack's perfect city.
"We might have to outlaw white men - alone - from having guns in the future,…"
You might even be able to do this given that Obama got elected twice. What you can't do is make us live where you run things.
Detroit is the model of Crack's perfect city.
Although the young men in question were apparently walking down the MIDDLE of the street, so there was, you know, some reason they stood out.
In Maryland the local thugs play this ego game where they walk out into the street as if to deliberately inconvenience you, taking their sweet time and daring you to honk or speed around them. I wonder if thats what these two were doing.
The parallel to Trayvon Martin is silly. In that case, the facts were publicly available. In this case -- as in most police shootings -- the "facts" won't be known until everyone on the force has time to get their story straight.
I was sort of boggled by Obama's speech on the subject, though. If you're going to sound *that* bored, maybe skip giving a speech entirely and just issue a statement.
Fen - it may be an ego thing, but walking down the middle of the street is illegal.
Oh I agree, I'm just saying their behavior reminds me more of a ClockWork Orange crew sauntering down the middle of the road as an intimidation tactic on the more sheepish locals. I bet they did this alot. It seems to be a thing now.
Geez, as this thing is shaking out it seems almost like an inverse of the Trayvon Martin situation in several ways.
In Trayvon's case there was surveillance footage of him in a store shortly before his death which showed him doing nothing wrong and acting normally. This was used by Trayvon supporters to claim that he must have been attacked without provocation later. Thus the repeated mentions of "skittles and iced tea." Zimmerman supporters (for lack of a better term) pointed out that the events shortly before the shooting were what actually mattered and not what happened in the store. Since what was alleged to have happened just before the shooting involved Martin mounting and beating Zimmerman a jury did not find Zimmerman guilty.
In this situation there is surveillance footage of Brown threatening and assaulting a shopkeeper in the course of an alleged robbery shortly before Brown is shot. The Brown supporters (for lack of a better term) are now arguing that what happened before the shooting does not matter at all and should not influence how we view (or judge the veracity of) the conflicting statements regarding what happened just before the shooting.
Similarly in the Martin case Zimmerman supporters argued that the media's use of an old picture of Martin prejudiced viewers by portraying a younger and more innocent-looking guy. Brown supporters are now objecting to the showing of the store footage now as it may prejudice viewers into seeing Brown as more aggressive and threatening than his family and friends want to portray him.
from the 'ya can't make this stuff up' file: the brown family's lawyer has condemned the release of the convenience store surveillance video of brown roughing-up a store clerk while stealing his merchandise as "an attempt to besmirch his client's character".
I really don't think that Martin looked that innocent on the 7/11 video - he seemed to me to have been pretty out of it, more like he was stoned, or maybe even more on "lean". And the timing was such that it is pretty clear that he hadn't gone straight home after buying 2 of 3 "Lean" ingredients from the 7/11 (he was still missing the prescription caugh syrup). But I can see why you might view it differently.
How can releasing a tape showing Brown robbing a store only fifteen minutes prior and tossing the owner around and then threatening him when he complained smearing? If there were a tape floating around showing the officer calling black people the N word, you'd know those calling for his head would demand it was released and saying it shows his racist intent.
The cigars may be another parallel.Trayvon Martin bought cigars and marijuana from the peddlers at the drugstore that night, presumably to hollow out the cigars and fill them with pot before smoking. I saw a post that said that while marijuana and that concoction he bought the ingredients for in the store, separately do not do much, the combination will make some people more belligerent than they normally are.
And Michael Brown was 6'-4 and 250-300 lbs.?
I've heard conflicting reports. One that the cop initially pulled brown over for walking down the middle of the street. But then realized he might be the suspect of the robbery as he was pulling away and backed up. And THAT'S when the event was triggered.
Rioters continue to riot last night. Including looting the store that Michael robbed from earlier.
Hello, I'm a local, STL has been my home for 22+ years.
Ferguson MO is a nice area with a few problems. Good Chop Suey on West Florrisant. Local news plays up the many sub-plots in the inner workings of the Dem party structure. Municipal/State/Federal public office holders and allies are all moving around each other. Its all politics.
***St Senator dropped the F bomb on Twitter about the Governor.
***Alderman from the city getting TONS of hits on twitter after arrest-very activist young man. he will go far in politics, already people talk about him for mayor. Comes from a political family.
***State Troopers hate the St Louis Count cops- but strangely they love the St Louis City cops.
***City cops like their county fraternal po-po. But...
***City government is at war with county municipalities. (we have 91 independent cities of which Ferguson is just one.
***Our member of Congress visited the district. He looks good- I think he's gotten thinner since the last time we saw our congressman. Nice fellow too,legacy. his dad held the seat before.
***Lawyer for one of the involved people is our former mayor- He comes from a political family too. He was our first black mayor some years a go.
If I could give you out-of-towners who are peeking in from the internet,I will say this to you:"The people who are talking the most, know the least. And the ones who know the most are not talking at all." I heard that expression somewhere and it fits here.
I don't think that the robbery/assault right before the interaction that led to the death can be ignored, at least yet. While the officer may not have known of the robbery/assault, the decedent surely did, and thus had reason not to want to go down to the local cop shop as a result. He would not be in a good position if fully handcuffed in the back of the cop car, or in the jail, when someone in the department put 2+2 together. And, maybe that was what triggered what the cops are claiming was an attempt at the cops gun.
Initially, I was siding with the family here, against the cops, but as things go on, and more evidence comes out, I am moving towards the center. Right now, don't know what is just spin on each side.
We need to have a conversation about young black men who think it's perfectly OK to steal from a convenience store.
Then we need to have a conversation about the failure of an education system than leads them to believe that after commission of a crime the next logical step is to draw attention to yourself by petty illegal actions.
Has anyone interviewed the guy who was robbed by Brown? And who's store was subsequently looted?
The guys a double victim. First, a PUNK robs him then throws him out of the way. Then when he goes to grab him threatens him. Then later on his store gets looted by a band of THUGS who may or may not be doing it to teach him a lesson. I'd love to know what he said to the store owner when he came back in menacingly.
Bruce Hayden wrote:
I don't think that the robbery/assault right before the interaction that led to the death can be ignored, at least yet. While the officer may not have known of the robbery/assault, the decedent surely did, and thus had reason not to want to go down to the local cop shop as a result.
According to the police chief the officer DID know about the robbery. AN APB went out to be on the lookout for someone who matched Brown's description.
However, he didn't initially put two and tow together when he told Brown and his accomplice to get off the street. But then he saw they were carrying cigars and realized they might be the suspects.
My guess is this is why Brown attacked him in the squad car. Because it wasn't about him getting off the street it was about him being potentially arrested for a robbery.
Note, all the people pushing the story about the racist cop angle keep saying that the Police chief said the officer didn't know about the robbery during the initial incident. But ignore when he follows up by saying the officer put two and two together almost immediately. They ignore the word "INITIAL" contact.
Also, according to friends of the cop, he's giving a different account of the incident. According to him Brown initially ran. But then turned and charged the cop directly after the cop told him to freeze. after first taunting him.
Now, the idea of the cop just shooting him for no reason sounds implausible. But so does the idea that Brown would charge him head on. Then again, I do believe he pushed the cop back into the squad car and fought with him over his gun, so he might have been that stupid/brazen.
In any case, forensics will hopefully tell us something about how he died. Was he shot while on the ground or while running. Was he shot in the back? etc.
The whole "Hands up, don't shoot" may in fact be a complete fabrication. And so, people are rioting over a meme and not an actual occurrence.
Bruce Hayden wrote:
Initially, I was siding with the family here, against the cops, but as things go on, and more evidence comes out, I am moving towards the center. Right now, don't know what is just spin on each side.
It's the same way with the Trayvon Martin case. I said, IF events played out exactly as they were suggested in the official Trayvon Martin story (young kid carrying skittles miding own business gets stalked by white racist and then shot for being black) then George Zimmerman was guilty. But, I wasn't sure if that description was in fact accurate. It wasn't.
My guess is, neither will this one be. We already have evidence that he's a violent thug who only moments ago stole from a store then manhandled the store owner.
The pushers of the story have already mischaracterized what the cops are saying the cop knew and when, ignoring that the Police Chief said in fact that the officer realized that Brown may have been the suspect on the APB right after telling him to get off the street.
How much of the story is actually true? Maybe none of it.
If the cop did shoot him when his hands were up, it would be difficult to say that it was justified. By I don't even know that that's accurate.
For example, who is the one who started the story that he was shot in cold blood? Dorian Johnson, an "eyewitness" according to the story.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/eyewitness-michael-brown-fatal-shooting-missouri
Dorian is on the tape with Brown as he robs the store. He's not just a witness, he's an accomplice. Who already admitted to stealing cigars. How trustworthy is he as a witness consider he has everything to gain by saying the cop just shot his friend for no reason. The story doesn't mention anything about his involvement in the incident at all.
And there are already clear lies in the account.
"About 20 minutes before the shooting, Johnson said he saw Brown walking down the street and decided to catch up with him. The two walked and talked. That’s when Johnson says they saw the police car rolling up to them."
Oh, they were just walking and talking. Not robbing a store.
"The officer demanded that the two “get the f—k on the sidewalk,” Johnson says. “His exact words were get the f—k on the sidewalk.”
After telling the officer that they were almost at their destination, Johnson’s house, the two continued walking. But as they did, Johnson says the officer slammed his brakes and threw his truck in reverse, nearly hitting them."
So, they ignored the cop who slammed on the breaks and drove his car in reverse (this is probably around the time he realized they were robbery suspects.
"Now, in line with the officer’s driver’s side door, they could see the officer’s face. They heard him say something to the effect of, “what’d you say?” At the same time, Johnson says the officer attempted to thrust his door open but the door slammed into Brown and bounced closed. Johnson says the officer, with his left hand, grabbed Brown by the neck."
This sounds extremely dubious. Michael Brown was known as big Mike. He was at least 6'4". it would be extremely difficult for a cop, sitting in a car to grab him around his neck. either the cop would have to be hanging out of the window nearly standing, or Brown would need to be leaning into the car, for the cop to get a grip on his neck.
Well, the "demilitarization" fools have won and the police have backed off in Fergusen.
Now the looting and rioting has begun again and those who work and create wealth in our society, the shop and store owners are asking, "Where are the police?"
Complete fools.
Blogger jr565 said..
"This sounds extremely dubious. Michael Brown was known as big Mike. He was at least 6'4". it would be extremely difficult for a cop, sitting in a car to grab him around his neck. either the cop would have to be hanging out of the window nearly standing, or Brown would need to be leaning into the car, for the cop to get a grip on his neck."
The cop was not in a 1997 Crown Vic(!)
It was one of these supped up super-macho-ultimate-radical-monster-things. So yes it does seem to me that an officer in a seated position could be involved in a confrontation with a 6'4"(?)
person.
Part of what bothers me here is the implied assumption that we should have two different standards of behavior, one for young black males, and one for everyone else. Martin apparently played the knockdown game with Zimmerman, and died because he picked a legally armed victim. And yet, somehow he was at fault for defending his own life because Martin was apparently misunderstood and his behavioral issues a result of institutional racism. Something like that. It is the idea that young black males are violent, but that violence is excused because of their background (ignoring that it is probably primarily a result of failed Dem policies starting with LBJ's War on Poverty).
The other part of this is that the Dems, and esp. Blacks, seem willing to say that we should ignore the underlying actions of the dead perps for the larger narrative of racial stereotyping. Except, of course, that the stereotyping is accurate in this case. Young Black males are significantly more liable to engage in violence than almost any other demographic in our country, and according to FBI statistics are less likely to be arrested for their violence than they should, with a greater discrepancy between their commission and conviction of violent crimes than average.
I do find it troubling that many in the Black community consider rioting, robbery, theft, and arson to be a legitimate response to what may end up being a legitimate police stop and ultimate shooting. Instead of shoot first and ask questions later, somehow this riot first and then don't ask questions later seems now to be the norm in this sort of situation.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा