(11-25-2014, 06:57 PM)Blindgreed1 Wrote:

(11-25-2014, 06:53 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote:

(11-25-2014, 06:46 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:

(11-25-2014, 06:30 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: @ HotD, Did I really say all that? ^^

Yes, you did. Some of it more than once.

I believe that I commended you for your butt-hurt honesty at the time, and assured you that I would do my best to recover from the wounds you'd inflicted upon me. I remember that I blew you a kiss.

Now, if you'd hurled all that honesty my way and you happened to be black, it would have been especially impressive and worthy of extra commendation -- I probably would have offered you to oil up and massage my breasts while I stroked your cock for an hour or two (or something like that).

So, there would've been a happy ending (for me)?

If that wouldn't do it for ya MS, I think you'd better check yourself for a heartbeat.

I'm sure HotD is kicking herself for putting that in print.

She knows I've waited three years to read those words from her keyboard.

She was probably trying to get me to keel over and die right here!

(11-25-2014, 06:06 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: Let me ask you a question, and please answer it honestly (so I can commend you for your integrity later).

Do you believe that the black Fergunson eyewitnesses were identified? In other words, do you think those people were known throughout the black community?

Yes, I believe that those witnesses (black and white ones) who were identified in the media early on were known to all.

However, those witnesses (black and white ones) who testified in the secret grand jury proceedings and had not done media interviews would not have been known to the public.

(11-25-2014, 06:06 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: If so, with the violence, rioting, race-incitement that's come with this case, don't you think those witnesses were tampered with by the inciters, to get them to change, alter or modify their testimony?

The FBI and DOJ were all over Ferguson conducting separate but related investigations at the time. IMO, their presence would have made if difficult for local police to try to get witnesses to mold their testimony in LE's favor. Likewise, I think it would have been difficult for witnesses to nefariously modify their accounts in Brown's favor; the witnesses were likely being interviewed by skilled interrogators from different agencies.

(11-25-2014, 06:06 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: If you don't believe that, then I can understand you being upset that I'd dare compliment those witnesses for being truthful.

I'm not upset with you, MS. I'm fucking around you with for posting what I considered a presumptuous, condescending, dufus remark.

(11-25-2014, 06:06 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: If you DO believe there could've been tampering, then you should be able to undersand what I was saying.

I understand what you're saying, I just think it's a very narrow perspective. Don't you think non-black witnesses might face the same types of pressure? Don't you think the local cops could apply pressure in the opposite direction, if coercion was going down in Ferguson? Why should blacks get special commendation for telling the truth under those circumstances unless you feel that blacks are more pliable or less honest? I don't think you hear what I'm saying, but that's just the way it is.

No, I do hear what you're saying.

I just never gave much credence to the idea that they're could've been white witnesses. The way the city had been portrayed was that it was essentially all-black with an almost exclusively white police force.

I should've recognized that THAT was the main gist of your contention, that i didn't include any white witnesses that could've been tampered with as well, and therefore were equal to any special commendations I was awarding for extra-meritorious service.

Now, let's get back to the special award I was going to qualify for, before I blew it....

ABC secured the exclusive interview with Officer Darren Wilson and showed a preview during daytime programming.



For those interested in watching it:
-George Stephanopoulos conducted the interview which will be shown on ABC News tonight.
-The network confirmed in a press release that the rest of the interview will air Tuesday, Nov. 25, on “World News with David Muir” and “Nightline” and Wednesday, Nov. 26, on “Good Morning America."

(11-25-2014, 07:34 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: I just never gave much credence to the idea that they're could've been white witnesses. The way the city had been portrayed was that it was essentially all-black with an almost exclusively white police force.

Bullshit. Today at 10:45 a.m.....

Midwest Spy said: "I'd like to say kudos to the eyewitnesses (particularly the black ones) who had the courage to testify honestly to what they saw. Not an easy thing to do and they should somehow be commended."

So, why add "(particularly the black ones)" if you didn't realize there could also be non-black witnesses?

(11-25-2014, 07:34 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: Now, let's get back to the special award I was going to qualify for, before I blew it....

The minute you stop bullshitting and become a black man, we can get back to that special award...

I just read that all the buildings on the same street as the police station were burned and/or looted. The same street as the police station! I think LE could have done more to stem some of this bs. I still can't get over the way they waited until 9:00 PM to release the information. I want to know why but that probably won't be forthcoming. Surely daylight hours would have been better.

I think the looting might have been staved off for a few hours if the announcement had been made during the day.

Perhaps it could have been prevented entirely if the National Guard had been in place by nightfall (regardless of what time the announcement was made).

It's my understanding that the timing of the public announcement had to do with schools and traffic. Given the massive anticipation and frustration surrounding this decision, that would have made sense to me if the guards were in place at the time of the announcement. I don't understand why they weren't in place, unless authorities overestimated the depth of the calm achieved over the last couple of months and wanted to display trust in the citizens of Ferguson?

(11-25-2014, 05:40 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: In this thread, Maggot has said some incendiary things, but no one says boo.
that's BECAUSE I'm RIGHT
Guess its just his opinion? Kinda like I have an opinion.
I like your opinion its yours and that does count for something.
Butt-hurt is not at all what I feel. I guess I'm an ignoramus because I still believe what I said 100%.
Stick to it, if you know you're right and that's how you feel, stick with it. The world is full of fools that let public opinion and political correctness change their initial thoughts, gut feelings that let you look in the mirror are worth more than money can buy.

I do not think the peaceful protesters are at fault. when they read the indictment those people walked away to live to fight another day. The trouble makers were not there because the cameras of the world were there to record it.
The cowards that looted only hurt their own people that had businesses in that area. Do you really think they looted and pillaged because they were upset at the ruling? No they waited until later and struck at places that the cops were not set up.
If you really think about it, it was a bit of a concerted unraveling. If the government was on their toes and I do believe they had time, the NSA could have recorded all cell phone messages in that area and pinpointed the organizers of this thing. You know they have the capabilities but will more than likely say nothing as that would fire up the civil liberties machine. Politically incorrect again. Reality is thrown in the dustbin and a chess game begins.
Al Sharpton is part of the media machine now and he will get a bandwagon together. Instead of creating peace he is firing up the blacks for some ungodly reason and opening the racial divide. He sucks.

Him and his irk are just a shadow of the great MLK who was striving for true equality through peaceful change and it was going well until gangsta rap hit the streets. These young people have those songs plugged into there heads ²⁴⁄₇ what the fuck do you think these impressionable minds will think of the world? And..........and they have awards ceremonies for the writers of it. Un fucking believable.

And another thing...........HOTD, User Duchess with the golden hair can have their opinions sometimes I disagree but at least they take the stand and say their peace, just like anyone here.
I openly can take a thrashing here and welcome any and all rebuttals to anything I type. I respect peoples opinions and sometimes..........they can change my perception. Its all good. I call myself maggot so step on me anytime I get close to the Hamburg bitches.

Well... The no fly zone over St. Louis jacked up my test result delivery. Now I have to work tomorrow. I just want to give a special thanks to all those who caused destruction and created havok *raises both middle fingers*

(11-25-2014, 08:51 PM)Duchess Wrote: I still can't get over the way they waited until 9:00 PM to release the information. I want to know why but that probably won't be forthcoming. Surely daylight hours would have been better.

You've gotten me really curious as to the rationale behind announcing the grand jury decision at night. I heard local news commentators speculating that it was possibly to avoid disruption to traffic and school transport, but that doesn't make much sense since there was such insufficient security in place for a planned night time announcement.

McCulloch needs to answer that question directly, IMO. Here's some speculation by a law school professor (Armour) that's in line with possibilities that crossed my mind when you posed the criticism and questions about the timing upthread.

Snip:
St. Louis County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch’s late-night unveiling of the grand jury decision in the Michael Brown fatal shooting has drawn criticism from legal experts who said the timing was to blame for the chaos that immediately erupted in Ferguson, Missouri, including the torching of two police cars and looting. McCulloch, whose controversial handling of the Darren Wilson case has been heavily scrutinized in recent months, held an 8 p.m. news conference Monday to announce Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson was not being indicted.

McCulloch only had to look to previous rowdy protests in the days shortly after Brown was shot and killed in August to know that a daytime grand jury announcement was a better option, according to Jody David Armour, a professor at the University of Southern California Law School in Los Angeles. During the day, protests in and around Ferguson were peaceful, with more unruly activity happening at night.

Only McCulloch knows why the go-ahead was given for the 8 p.m. grand jury announcement -- authorities have yet to explain the rationale behind it. But Armour speculated that the St. Louis County prosecutor in part had his own self interests in mind.

“This was more about stagecraft, building drama, building suspense so that he can grandstand. He can bask in kind of the public eye and the media attention and be the focal point in a way that you can’t perhaps at other times in the day,” Armour said. “It was abundantly foreseeable that there would be, could be more trouble at night and those additional risks were deemed worth it for whatever other interests he was serving in having a late announcement.”

Another reason may have been that government officials intentionally wanted to make protesters appear less sympathetic by using the cover of darkness, critics said. “They’ll look more menacing at night,” Armour said. “There’s more fear naturally that everyone feels when it’s dark and you’re groping around in the dark. It seems that if you wanted to construct a scenario to cast the protesters in the worst possible light, you would do what Bob McCulloch did in this case.”

Full story: http://www.ibtimes.com/ferguson-grand-ju...ht-1729192

(11-26-2014, 01:37 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: “This was more about stagecraft, building drama, building suspense so that he can grandstand. He can bask in kind of the public eye and the media attention and be the focal point in a way that you can’t perhaps at other times in the day,” Armour said. “It was abundantly foreseeable that there would be, could be more trouble at night and those additional risks were deemed worth it for whatever other interests he was serving in having a late announcement.”

Another reason may have been that government officials intentionally wanted to make protesters appear less sympathetic by using the cover of darkness, critics said. “They’ll look more menacing at night,” Armour said. “There’s more fear naturally that everyone feels when it’s dark and you’re groping around in the dark. It seems that if you wanted to construct a scenario to cast the protesters in the worst possible light, you would do what Bob McCulloch did in this case.”[/i]

Jesus Christ.

I find that believable. I hope that other towns who may one day find themselves in this same predicament take note on how not to conduct themselves. In my opinion, this entire situation has been poorly managed from the get go.

Our state has quite a few militias some known some unknown. It would not be farfetched to say it would be tough doing that crap around here.
Call Ferguson what it is..... Domestic Terrorism.

(11-26-2014, 01:46 PM)Maggot Wrote: Call Ferguson what it is..... Domestic Terrorism.

I think we need to be really careful about diluting the meaning of "terrorism".

I feel that way about "hate crime", "bullying", "victim" and a lot of other words too.

How is the protesting of perceived racial discrimination and the opportunistic looting and vandalism of property = "terrorism"?

I think that point is reached when the "Peaceful Protesters" start looting and burning other peoples shit

(11-26-2014, 09:53 PM)SIXFOOTERsez Wrote: I think that point is reached when the "Peaceful Protesters" start looting and burning other peoples shit

I don't see how looting and burning other people's shit = "terrorism", rather than "burglary and arson".

If someone blew up a building and it was destroyed like a Tim McVeigh type thing. What difference is burning a building to the ground? Destroying someone else's business and saying it is because of a persons hatred towards authority or that some person was killed because of a conflict of interest that was perceived real or unreal, what is the line especially when so much more was damaged.
Lets review the definition of Domestic terrorism:

"Domestic terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics:
◾Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
◾Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping; and
◾Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.

F.B.I. official link

So the question remains........Do the innocent not deserve the full protection of the United States Government? The law abiding citizens that pay taxes and abide by the oh, so strict letter of the law. And the restrictions placed on them in regards to code regulations that today are "out of this world"

Thanks, Maggot. I know the definition.

My question is do you really think looting and burning in this context qualifies as "domestic terrorism", or do you think the looters are bad apples who are just looking to prosper from the current climate and environment (as you essentially stated upthread)?

(11-26-2014, 10:30 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: Thanks, Maggot. I know the definition.

My question is do you really think looting and burning in this context qualifies as "domestic terrorism", or do you think the looters are bad apples who are just looking to prosper from the current climate and environment (as you essentially stated upthread)?

Yes , I actually think that it was a concerted effort by either a group or several groups of people that through different social media, cell phones and gatherings told others were to go. They destroyed the places where there was much less police presence and cameras. They used bandanas to hide their identities and were gone when the police did arrive. I think 77 were arrested but most got away.

They may be looked on as idiots by me but they are street smart and know the ways of the police. That makes them not so stupid in your eyes I guess. And gives me new cataracts.
Just being a "bad apple" does not produce this much damage.
I rescind my previous statement and replace it with the above one.

Ok. I understand your current view now.