Reply With Quote
So sensitive.
Thanks for admitting your total ignorance of these people and their agencies.
But it's SO IMPORTANT!
The question is why did the President of the United States of America decide to be represented at the funeral of a thug that tried to disarm and kill a Ferguson police officer.
Their iden ies and the agencies for which they worked are irrelevant to the question; at the funeral they WERE the President.
So sensitive.
Thanks for admitting your total ignorance of these people and their agencies.
But it's SO IMPORTANT!
The dumb s cannot articulate the reason for their outrage other than to say Obama was involved. Good minions but stupid ing people.
The quote in my sig about thinking for yourselves is for you, TSA, CC, and Yoni.
Back on the porch ankle biter. The adults are having a conversation.
Apparently, it was important enough for the President to want to be represented.
It wouldn't hurt the President to throw a few PR bones to white America, their media is doing a much better job of igniting racial indignation than he is of quelling it.
so this inane back and forth is your notion of an 'adult' conversation. You are asking him questions trying to get him to make your argument for you and cannot articulate why Obama reps being involved is bad. That is not adult. That is lazy, stupid thinking.
Apparently the 'adults' have been told something and believe but are not sure why that is. You guys are adorable looking for hypocrisy as if that absolves you for doing the same thing.
It sends a terrible message to the police and the communities they are sworn to protect when there is a White House presence at the funeral of a cop assaulting felon and no White House presence at the funerals of the men and women of the police force that have lost their lives in the line of duty.
If they are overly sensitive that is.
Have any of the cops' families invited white house officials to their private funerals? Or should they just crash them like a frat party?
Why does an interest in knowing why the President chose to be represented at the funeral of Michael Brown demonstrate any oversensitivity?
Did Michael Brown's family invite the President?
The blacks have already, over a long time, heard the indisputable msg that for the cops, BLACK LIVES DON'T MATTER
The heavily militarized, escalate-instantly-to-shoot-to-kill, taser-anybody-gratuitously cops are vastly more interested in saving their own lives, and serving as rent-a-cop to the wealthy and BigCorp, than in SERVING AND PROTECTING the lives of citizens.
Chump, I know you love to argue but you really picked a bad one this time. I know you are more intelligent than that. pretending to be Fuzzy Lumpkin dumb is not becoming on you.
Cops are human. They carry guns to protect themselves, not us. Anybody with half a brain know that. Don't with them they won't with you no matter what color you are.
Come off like a loud mouthed asshole no matter what color you are and you can expect to be treated like one.
Black Cops Fear Other Cops
Two dozen black NYPD cops tell Reuters that they've been treated similarly to Eric Garner.
http://www.alternet.org/black-nypd-cops-say-theyre-profiled-and-threatened-white-cops?akid=12608.187590.8bAOmB&rd=1&src=newsletter1 029174&t=2
disgusting
Remove all police presence from Chicago for a week and then you can claim police don't think black lives matter.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...0K11EV20141223
"It makes good headlines to say this is occurring, but I don’t think you can validate it until you look into the cir stances they were stopped in," said Bernard Parks, the former chief of the Los Angeles Police Department, who is African American.
"Now if you want to get into the essence of why certain groups are stopped more than others, then you only need to go to the crime reports and see which ethnic groups are listed more as suspects. That’s the crime data the officers are living with."
Considering the positions these no name officials have, it actually makes sense. Wouldn't really make sense for the same officials to go to a police funeral. I personally believe it was more for the community in toto rather than Brown himself.
stop-and-frisk profiling in pretty clearly abused, over-used. any proof that it reduces black crime?
I've read stories where NYPD will see a black and his girl on a sidewalk. frisk him, including their hands on his genitals and anus, in front of his girlfriend. emty his pockets, exposing a joint (legal if concealed) and arrest him for drugs. just builiding respect for NYPD.
just too many stories about too many cops in too many cities to give them the benefit of the doubt
A scary culture change: What new law enforcement rhetoric reveals about America
But if you listen to some of the rhetoric that’s recently come from police unions and their most loyal politicians, you’ll realize that the problem currently engulfing de Blasio doesn’t end at the Hudson. It extends all across the country, influencing communities large and small, black and (less often) white. The problem isn’t the unions themselves or “bad apples” among the rank and file.
The problem is that the culture of law enforcement in America has gone badly off-course; too many officers — and, for that matter, too many citizens — forget that law enforcement’s mandate is to preserve justice as well as maintaining the peace.
You’d think it would be impossible to offer a better illustration of the mentality than Rudy Giuliani’s remarkable 1994 speech on why freedom is about obeying authority.
Unfortunately, recent public statements from representatives of powerful police unions in two major American cities indicate that many officers’ privileging of order over justice has only gotten worse. The day after news of Liu and Romas’ murder first broke, the Fraternal Order of Police in Baltimore (where the killer shot an ex-girlfriend before heading to New York) released a statement that made Giuliani’s rhetoric from two decades ago sound positively libertarian.
“Once again, we need to be reminded that the men and women of law enforcement are absolutely the only en y standing between a civilized society and one of anarchy and chaos,” the statement said before laying blame for the shooting at the feet of President Obama, Attorney General Holder, Mayor de Blasio and Rev. Al Sharpton (all of whom are either black or have black people in their immediate family). “Sadly,” the union continued, “the bloodshed will most likely continue until those in positions of power realize that the unequivocal support of law enforcement is required to preserve our nation.”
At no point in the press release did the union acknowledge its members’ duty to protect Americans’ rights as well as their persons. There wasn’t even a perfunctory gesture to that effect. Instead, the union statement spoke of “the dangerous political climate in which all members of law enforcement, nationwide, now find themselves” (the rate of officers being killed is at a 50-year low) and how being a member of American law enforcement hadn’t been so bad since the civil rights movement (or, as the union puts it, “the political unrest of the 1960’s”).
At the end of the statement, the union reiterated why it believed support for cops must be “unequivocal,” saying that Baltimore citizens must help “to restore the order necessary for their own safety and for ours.”
In sum, the union was arguing that American citizens — including politicians — must do what they’re told, lest we fail to “preserve our nation.” The enemies of civilization, apparently, had already broken through the gates.
While the Baltimore union’s statement could hardly be described as subtle, it still paled in comparison to the comments of Jeffrey Follmer, the president of the Cleveland Police Patrolmen’s Association, whose unvarnished authoritarianism made headlines just last week.
Appearing on MSNBC in order to defend his claim that Cleveland Browns wide receiver Andrew Hawkins should be forced to apologize for political speech, Follmer told host Ari Melber that the shooting of 12-year-old Tamir Rice was “justified” because the child refused to “listen to police officers’ commands.” Never mind the fact that Rice was shot almost immediately, and that the cop who shot him had a history of rank incompetence; according to Follmer, if “the nation” would simply obey when officers “tell you to do something,” everything would be all right. And if the officers commands are uncons utional or in any way objectionable? Be quiet and let “the courts … figure it out.”
Not content to simply issue commands to those engaged with officers on-duty, Follmer also ordered Hawkins and other athletes like him to “stick to what they know best on the field” because their voicing opinions on police behavior was “pathetic.”
http://www.salon.com/2014/12/23/a_sc...about_america/
From what I've seen lately, he literally doesn't contribute anything to the conversation. Just randomly chimes with some short comment to derail whatever conversation was happening.
edit-
Just did a quick glance through a random page and found an example of what I'm talking about lol
Except you'd be completely wrong, they were kicked out of the Bundy protests.
http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/bu...tart-their-own
They were also OWS protestors
So the POTUS needs to go to all police funerals or it gives a terrible message. Gotcha. Now what is that message?
I already know that NYC, NYPD, and POTUS are involved. I said articulate reasoning as to the outrage not the subjects of the issue. You cannot do it. This is a common trend. It just seems like idiotic Obama fixation. #THANKSOBAMA
I would add that the non-violent protesters that have been blamed by cops are the community involved you speak of. The POTUS stepping into that fray just seems like he is picking sides. You can handwave at Obama all you like but prosecutorial conflicts of interest in LEO criminal litigation and extra rights for LEO is an issue worthy of protest.
Merry Xmas!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
