Cop gets on a power trip, has no idea he was being filmed

white privilege, eh ?
http://occupywallstreet.net/story/explaining-white-privilege-broke-white-person

Just grabbed the first link that googlesearch supplied.

corplhicks wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

corplhicks wrote:

I think Vexer missed my post of that video earlier...

No I didn't, I didn't bother mentioning it because I know it's BS.

Wait wait wait wait wait wait...

"I know."

"I know?"

You're a horrible detective (your reply could be "I'm no a horrible detective").

You go off of one single biased article with a misleading headline and sheer speculation which in fact does not claim with any certainty that the video is BS and you suddenly "know?"

Dude, I love you, but we all can universally agree here that you are the worst debater on the board. You simply cannot handle an argument. Your formula is nothing more than "F*ck you, dipshit, my opinion is right and I don't need to offer evidence other than fringe media articles" with all the violent language of a 15 year old. You show zero tolerance for other peoples' opinions with a closed minded approach to perspective. You simply KNOW because you read an article, and yes you do parrot. You complain about tea party megaphones yet you talk just like one if not worse, and this I know because I used to be one. In fact, you claim leftist politics yet you talk just as sardonic as the party I left many years ago.

pfft! Tea Party megaphones my foot. Vexer uses the tried and true leftist argumentative stance:

1. Use spun facts. These can be found on Huffington Post, Daily KOs, MSNBC, and many other liberal sources. What they do is take facts, polls or arguments and add a liberal spin in a weak attempt to make bad news for liberals look good. These are easily debunked and exposed as lies by going to the original source and posting the hard, cold facts with NO spin.

2. The next step for the liberal will be to attempt to discredit your source. If it is Fox or any perceived “right wing” source, they will refuse to believe it. If it is a non-partisan source, they will claim it is right wing, if it is a left of center source, they will find another lefty source to “prove” you are wrong. They will not discuss the facts themselves, as they know they have lost.

3. The Limbaugh Defense: This is one that comes out early and often. Although you know they never listen to Rush Limbaugh and have no idea what he says, they will drag him out and claim you are a Ditto head. This is another diversionary tactic. It has no relevance and is an attempt to change the subject.

4. The Personal Attack: Another common thread. Also designed to divert the lost argument.

5. Name Calling: Still another diversion. Tactics here include claiming race baiting, gender-baiting, class warfare or wanting to destroy one of: environment, women, children, voting rights, economic power, etc. Invariably leads to calls of White Supremacy or debater belonging to the KKK or similar hate group.

I'm neither liberal nor conservative, i'm independent, so no my argument is not "leftist". I don't need to attempt to discredit a BS source like Faux news when they have zero credibility to begin with, many of their "facts" are flat out wrong, I'm not "spinning" facts either(yeah cause FOX NEVER does that right?)and a child can very easily debunk any of the nonsense that's shat out by Faux on a daily basis, the cold hard facts are that the Ferguson police flat out lied about what really happened(photos taken shortly after the shooting prove that Brown was nowhere near as close to Wilson as he said)

There's no "diversion" here, just you being ignorant and naive as usual.

I know all too well what Limbaugh says, and i've heard enough to know that he is a truly racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, rotten irredeemable POS.

All you're doing is proving me right about most conservatives begin ignorant, I believe many of them do not even know the definition of what a "fact" is(Certainly not Glenn Beck or Bill O Reilly that's for damn sure), but I sure as hell do.

So no it's not a "leftist" stance, it's a common sense stance, you should try it sometime LOL.

Calling people racist and POS, is no way to win an argument or get someone to even consider one's point of view.

I am pretty liberal in my politics, no secret there. But already a narrative was established before the facts were, and in the court of public opinion, the officer was found guilty and Michael Browning was painted as a saint, which he clearly was not.

Was the cop in fear of his life? I have no idea. In retrospect, could the officer handled this situation differently or diffused what was clearly spinning out of control, maybe.

If the people of Ferguson felt the police were targeting them because of race, then that is legitimate issue but burning buildings, destroying your own neighborhoods, yelling racism is not going to change anything. These people want change, real change, then go vote. Without that, once the cameras have moved away from the next tragic event, nobody will care and nothing will have changed

manny wrote:

Calling people racist and POS, is no way to win an argument or get someone to even consider one's point of view.

I am pretty liberal in my politics, no secret there. But already a narrative was established before the facts were, and in the court of public opinion, the officer was found guilty and Michael Browning was painted as a saint, which he clearly was not.

Was the cop in fear of his life? I have no idea. In retrospect, could the officer handled this situation differently or diffused what was clearly spinning out of control, maybe.

If the people of Ferguson felt the police were targeting them because of race, then that is legitimate issue but burning buildings, destroying your own neighborhoods, yelling racism is not going to change anything. These people want change, real change, then go vote. Without that, once the cameras have moved away from the next tragic event, nobody will care and nothing will have changed

Yes, those destroying buildings should be condemned, but what many people fail to realize is that the vast majority of the protests are PEACEFUL, and the actions of those few violent individuals DO NOT represent the black community of Ferguson as a whole despite what the police department wants you to believe, and to claim that they do is disingenuous.

Voting is far easier said then done since the Supreme Court recently gutted the voting rights act, and now many states including Missouri have Voter ID laws which are aimed directly at preventing minorities from voting in elections(all that nonsense about "voter fraud" is total BS).

A lot of people do care and this is not going to go away quietly until REAL progress is made(like the Justice Department doing a real investigation on Darren Wilson).

Also the city arguably deliberately incited said riots by delaying the announcement of the verdict in the case despite having reached it hours earlier, by doing so the hoped the riots would become the story and people would forget how corrupt the Ferguson police dept really is, but most people aren't naive enough to fall for that.

Vexer6 wrote:

Voting is far easier said then done since the Supreme Court recently gutted the voting rights act, and now many states including Missouri have Voter ID laws which are aimed directly at preventing minorities from voting in elections(all that nonsense about "voter fraud" is total BS).

http://dailysignal.com/2014/10/25/if-a-republican-justice-department-did-this-theyd-be-attacked-as-borderline-racist/

Why are such measures supposedly discriminatory? According to the “experts” hired by the Justice Department and the NAACP to testify in the North Carolina lawsuit, they’re discriminatory because African Americans are “less sophisticated voters” and can’t figure out how to register and vote. No, really, that’s what they said.

exact33 wrote:

You still have not answered the question - where are the Ferguson protesters now that a white person was bludgeoned to death by a gang of black and mexican people?

I'm not quite sure why a man of your obvious intelligence would even ask this question? I don't think that anyone is denying that gang members of all races are involved in criminal activity and sometimes kill people. No-one is trying to defend that and they will rightly go to jail for a long time, but it's a completely separate issue to police brutality and racial profiling. We allow police power over us but also hold them to a very high standard, the police have a duty to uphold the law, not break it based on prejudices. Rightly or wrongly the community involved does not feel that this is what is happening.

I'm English so really don't know enough about your social problems or legal system to have strong opinions on this so I'll go back to reading this with mild amusement.

Btw, I have not seen a lot of your news but from what I have seen, you do not have a left leaning media, you have a right leaning media and a waaaaay right leaning media!

Vexer6 wrote:

There was ZERO evidence of Rodney King being on PCP, that's total BS, the autopsy showed he only had marijuana and Alcohol in his system.  .

The police video situation happened in 1991 and he died in 2012.  So what autopsy are you referring too ?   Talk about B/S

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/11/us/ferguson-grand-jury-docs/
I am going to read all of these transcripts in the next week.
Now that I am learning more from the comments in various news articles, and videos, such as -
that he was shot in the front, NOT the back,
and 8 black eyewitnesses corroborate the police officer's story, then I think Vexer6 then maybe has been duped or is purposely lying in his posts in this thread.
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/11/us/ferguson-grand-jury-docs/

mlotek wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

Voting is far easier said then done since the Supreme Court recently gutted the voting rights act, and now many states including Missouri have Voter ID laws which are aimed directly at preventing minorities from voting in elections(all that nonsense about "voter fraud" is total BS).

http://dailysignal.com/2014/10/25/if-a-republican-justice-department-did-this-theyd-be-attacked-as-borderline-racist/

Why are such measures supposedly discriminatory? According to the “experts” hired by the Justice Department and the NAACP to testify in the North Carolina lawsuit, they’re discriminatory because African Americans are “less sophisticated voters” and can’t figure out how to register and vote. No, really, that’s what they said.

These Voter ID laws are no different then the infamous Literacy tests African-Americans were forced to take before the Voting Rights Act was ratified.

mlotek wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/11/us/ferguson-grand-jury-docs/
I am going to read all of these transcripts in the next week.
Now that I am learning more from the comments in various news articles, and videos, such as -
that he was shot in the front, NOT the back,
and 8 black eyewitnesses corroborate the police officer's story, then I think Vexer6 then maybe has been duped or is purposely lying in his posts in this thread.
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/11/us/ferguson-grand-jury-docs/

No I most certainly have not been "duped" in the least, I think that's you.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/11/26/1347499/-Why-exactly-did-the-police-lie-for-108-days-about-how-far-Mike-Brown-ran-from-Darren-Wilson

mlotek wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/11/us/ferguson-grand-jury-docs/
I am going to read all of these transcripts in the next week.
Now that I am learning more from the comments in various news articles, and videos, such as -
that he was shot in the front, NOT the back,
and 8 black eyewitnesses corroborate the police officer's story, then I think Vexer6 then maybe has been duped or is purposely lying in his posts in this thread.
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/11/us/ferguson-grand-jury-docs/

Yes he was shot in the front(once in the eye), after he turned around to face Wilson with his hands up and begged him not to shoot (that's what the "Hands up don't shoot" protests that you sometimes see people doing are about)

James B. wrote:

Vexer6 wrote:

There was ZERO evidence of Rodney King being on PCP, that's total BS, the autopsy showed he only had marijuana and Alcohol in his system.  .

The police video situation happened in 1991 and he died in 2012.  So what autopsy are you referring too ?   Talk about B/S

Um, a technological expert during his trial confirmed that he was NOT on PCP, so your post is what's really BS.

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/01/22/us/rodney-king-testifies-about-night-of-beating.html

Boris2008 wrote:

exact33 wrote:

You still have not answered the question - where are the Ferguson protesters now that a white person was bludgeoned to death by a gang of black and mexican people?

I'm not quite sure why a man of your obvious intelligence would even ask this question? I don't think that anyone is denying that gang members of all races are involved in criminal activity and sometimes kill people. No-one is trying to defend that and they will rightly go to jail for a long time, but it's a completely separate issue to police brutality and racial profiling. We allow police power over us but also hold them to a very high standard, the police have a duty to uphold the law, not break it based on prejudices. Rightly or wrongly the community involved does not feel that this is what is happening.

I'm English so really don't know enough about your social problems or legal system to have strong opinions on this so I'll go back to reading this with mild amusement.

Btw, I have not seen a lot of your news but from what I have seen, you do not have a left leaning media, you have a right leaning media and a waaaaay right leaning media!

Yeah it must look right to a lot of countries, but MSNBC is mostly left aside from a few token right-wingers(though they used to be much more right-wing during the time of the Iraq war, Phil Donahue actually got his show cancelled by NBC for daring to speak out against the war, mainly due to NBC's parent company GE manufacturing much of the equipment being used during the war)

Vexer6 wrote:

mlotek wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/11/us/ferguson-grand-jury-docs/
I am going to read all of these transcripts in the next week.
Now that I am learning more from the comments in various news articles, and videos, such as -
that he was shot in the front, NOT the back,
and 8 black eyewitnesses corroborate the police officer's story, then I think Vexer6 then maybe has been duped or is purposely lying in his posts in this thread.
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/11/us/ferguson-grand-jury-docs/

Yes he was shot in the front(once in the eye), after he turned around to face Wilson with his hands up and begged him not to shoot (that's what the "Hands up don't shoot" protests that you sometimes see people doing are about)

one witness states the first shot was when Brown was wrestling through the window, into the police car and then he ran away
(page 4 of 17) https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1370930-interview-witness-10.html

That explains the black soot gun powder/residue on Brown from a very close shot, and his skin residue on the car.
(page 2 of 6)
http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1370608-michael-brown-private-autopsy-report.html

Ok gentlemen, we all said our piece, nothing we say will change anyone's mind here and I feel at times this thread has gotten absurd.

I am closing this thread out, thank you all participated.