http://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/lawmakers-ferguson-hands-up-113254.html

Jacka$$es!
Idiots know exactly that the Facts of the Case are different from what they are implying!

Remind me of this Jackleg!

Liberal Democrats... In Congress... Using Fabricated Narrative... For Political Gain...

Thank the gods that I had that 10 seconds to look this up because I would have never known it to be so..

[Oh, hell...since it's NOT gonna be an intelligent discussion, why not just join 'em, and have some *fun*, too?!?]



OMG!!!

Here are well-known non-black Conservative icons shown lending their full support to the "Hands-Up-Don't-Shoot" movement, too! DamnedLibtardCommieBastards!!!



George W. Bush:


Moses, himself:


Bill O'Reilly:

Oh hell..

Since someone bothered to cater to my idiotic demands for proof..

I guess I will now go pout in the corner because I have NOTHING..

Awwww...don't go away mad, invictus...you can still play and have fun in this thread, too.


No one made "demands of proof" of any "idiotic" statement YOU'D made.


The request for a citation to a legitimate source was made of another poster, on a completely different tangent of something he'd stated as factual but has yet to find the proof to substantiate it.


There's a good reason he hasn't been able to...

I appreciate your concern.. Haha

Yes, that does look like "opportunists from the liberal wing of the government and Democratic party" have indeed made use of the "fake news about the poor child who was "murdered" while his hands were in the air or shot in the back."

Yes. Those white thugs don't care about Ferguson, they have been breaking and burning things in the east bay for many, many years.

It is awful that there is such a strong image in some people's minds about black people in general, and absolutely terrible that this image influences the way some people behave towards individual black people.

Why should law abiding black people be blamed for the actions of criminals? It makes no sense, its terribly unfair, and in this area I support 'anti racism'. But too many anti-racists want to deny the facts, and censor people who wish to work with the facts.




I'm sure that may be, in some cases. But as far as Mike is concerned, I don't care about his race. If one of those white radicals was shot shortly after going for a cop's gun, I'd be even less sympathetic.

I saw the video of Mike shoving around the store owner just minutes before he attacked the police. I don't have much sympathy for him, and its not because of his race, and its not because of the actions of other black people. Its because of the quality of mind that he demonstrated in that store video.




Well, that's the narrative being spun by some people. As if white america doesn't care when a black man is killed.

Most of white america DOES care when a black man is killed, about as much as it cares about a white man. But they care a lot less when that man brings about his own death through violent actions.

its not white americans , its americans across racial and cultural lines who are SUBLMINALLY programmed to view blacks in a manner that they have inferior character and are scarier and more dangerous

so when they are gone,, they aren't missed, because of their 'character'

I wouldn't want a bully to be shot full of bullets, nor a thief, nor an embezzler, nor a weed smoker, nor a teen who is in a fight,,or any other terrible 'criminal' behavior ,, I would want a consequence that was FITTING,,,

but too often, those taken from their families have their pasts instantly COMBED THrough for any and every past discretion, they are immediately painted as the thug who just got what they 'deserved',,,


and it seems to happen MOST often with minorities,,,

certainly did

he grabbed someone (who never called in a crime and walked away unscathed)

he stole some cigarettes

he got in a struggle with an officer

,,EXCEPT for that last event, nothing warrants death,,,and the last event had ENDED , struggle discontinued,,, by the time he was killed

IF he had been killed DURING a struggle, there would be less to dispute

being killed after traveling over a hundred feet from the vehicle/altercation by foot, without a weapon,, again causes me to not agree that a death penalty is warranted,,,

Michael Brown's "past discretion" took place just before he encountered the cop who killed him, and that "discretion" was clearly a crime.

Mr. Brown was shot twice during the struggle in which he attempted to get the officer's gun from him.

The forensic evidence proves that.

He was shot dead after being shot during the struggle and staggering away and then doubling back in the direction of the officer with the gun which had shot him and making another lunging motion towards the armed officer. The forensic evidence - and eyewitness account which didn't change each time it was told - proves and attests to that.


Mr. Brown is no longer alive to provide honest testimony as to what his intent was when grabbing the officer's gun. Perhaps he was simply going to take the weapon out of the officer's hand, remove the bullets, set the gun on the ground and then handcuff himself and go away peacefully.

Mr. Brown definitely appeared to be someone who WANTED to be a peaceful, law-abiding citizen; it was evident by the way he stood down the store clerk, who was a full foot shorter than him, while stealing the box of cigarellos, which WAS caught on a video cam.


It's the same type of equipment everyone's screaming that the cops wear, so *The Truth* will be evident...


...and ignored while you continue to spin your preferred version of *The Truth*.

there is no 'version' I wasn't there , neither was anyone posting
I saw him grab and push a man on a video, I saw him leave with cigarettes I didn't See anything else after that

I believe there was an altercation at the car
I believe the gun was discharged at the car

I do NOT believe that after Brown had run , he 'doubled back' and lunged at the officer

what I or anyone else believes about what happens is their prerogative and wont change the finding or the TRUTH,,, which I doubt we will ever get the complete story on,,,though when I hear stories where one part is just a 'victim' and the other JUST an aggressor, I tend to find it less believable than a version where BOTH hold some accountability

I also don't tend to believe people scared enough to put extra effort into GETTING away from a situation suddenly decide to return to it either,,,,,

whatever happened, its enough of unarmed people being shot down,, by police or anyone else,,,,,,but especially by those PAID to protect,,,and serve

but, wasn't there, no one here was,,,,,evidence proves the car altercation

evidence proves a retreat from the car

evidence is not clear on any point beyond that,,,,,


except after he was being shot his body movement was forward instead of backward,,, whether that proves a 'lunge' or a 'charge' or just someone disoriented is not clearly proven or disproven by evidence,,,

So, it seems there is a mountain of evidence provided which collaborates the officers story. There is also a history given of the suspect which collaborates the officer's story to some extent.

On the flip side, there is no evidence against the officer's story.

People want to persecute the officer without evidence. What happened to the "innocent until proven guilty" motto? Should the burden of evidence be placed on the accuser? In my honest opinion, Brown's actions got him killed, one way or another. The responsibility remains with him in this case. And the burden of evidence remains with those wanting to imprison the officer.

Unfortunately for your version of *The Truth*, there IS a version, but you are correct when you say neither you or (presumably) no one else posting is privy to it.


The 12 men and women of the Grand Jury (selected in May 2014...this incident occurred in August 2014) WERE privy to it, as they were provided ALL the evidence. Every single person in the world is also now third-party privy to most of it, as the transcript of the testimonies of the expert witnesses and of ALL the eyewitnesses, including those who repeatedly changed their versions of what they saw and those who admitted under oath they hadn't seen a thing, but were merely repeating what others had told them happened

has been published and is freely available on the internet.


But, that's OK...you keep believing your version of *The Truth*, which flies in the face of the facts, the testimony, and the forensic evidence, including the blood droplets which clearly showed Mr. Brown moved away from the vehicle (and the original spot of the original shots) for several yards, and then doubled-back towards the site of the gun and the officer holding it.

It DOES make for a *better* story...at the very least, it's a better story to better support your agenda.

Some people do NOT believe that President Obama was born in Hawaii, either.

So, something can be true even if there are people who don't believe it.

Whatever people believe or not the false narrative of 'he was shot in the back or with his hands up' that really got all of this nonsense started continues on.. that is really the most telling aspect of this story. When lies are told enough times they become the truth.

Ah, so much, so much just where to begin. How about here:

Gunshots, tear gas in Missouri town where police shot teen

It's all there, just needs comprehension to understand. But "factually-speaking" the lack thereof will lead to a total denial.