State of Emergency Declared in Ferguson - Curfew from 12 am to 5am - Now National Guard

a reply to: kosmicjack

It seems to be a common occurrence for the American empire to never admit a wrong, especially in the judicial system. If the White House themselves are initiating an investigation then it would seem to be next to wishful thinking to expect that they intend to find anything but a way to spin the story in order to "save face" and so that the execution would be accepted by the greater public. I am not aware of the facts surrounding the case, it has been mentioned that the young man was involved in a theft just prior to his demise, but that does not excuse his murder. A "good guy badge" is not a license to kill. The officer had other tools available to subdue the suspect and should have used a non lethal method. Even with a conventional sidearm he could have aimed below the waist. That should be elementary training to a morally healthy officer of the law. America should reconsider its militarization of police. The psychological "training" and "conditioning" of these officers, and their lack of outreach to and involvement with the "common rabble" is making an obvious show of the predatory nature of our governing body, our upper classes, and our species as a whole. The snake that eats its own tail. I so much want to be wrong about this but it's what i'm seeing. I can't help but get the feeling that humanity at large has been made into a science experiment.

originally posted by: WhiteAlice

originally posted by: OptimusCrime

originally posted by: WhiteAlice
a reply to: OptimusCrime

And when the molotov was thrown at Chop Suey restaurant, you could also see multiple protesters running to put it out. Vice's footage has that event recorded.

I didn't say all the protesters are bad, I've been over this already. Is this the only thing you people have against me is false accusations?

I said the ones that are bad are causing the rest to have issues. What's your point?

You pluralized the number of molotov cocktails and I was reminding that protesters also ran in to stamp it out. Perhaps if you're feeling like you're being misinterpreted by multiple people on this thread, then perhaps re-examine how you are explaining your point of view. You didn't, btw, say that in the post that I responded to. I also agree that gunshots being fired needs to be handled very much differently. The problem was that they were gassing the protesters before that single molotov was thrown or any shots were fired at all.

Now i'm pluralizing, lol. sorry. I'm not feeling like i'm being misinterpreted, I've made my points clear. They're just not getting through.The report I read said the gunshot went off, the smoke was then shot to clear the scene, when the cops got into see if anyone was harmed the guy had already been taken away.

a reply to: OptimusCrime

IDK why they decided to unjustly decided to make a curfew, I was not in the room either.
I could only assume they are tired of dealing with the protestors so they are going to make it as hard as they can for them to exercise their right. Cause as long as they are, it brings negative attention to their PD.

originally posted by: OptimusCrime

originally posted by: WhiteAlice
a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Well said. If I recall correctly, weren't there a handful of protesters on their knees and with their hands up before the police? I was watching Vice's feed primarily so couldn't quite make it out but that's what he said was occurring. If that was before the police, then did those people deserve being gassed would be another question I'd ask.

And agreed on the body armor and M-4's scarier--even if those M-4's are filled with rubber bullets, those aren't paintball guns or airsoft rifles. Yet, the nights I've been watching feeds, they were getting used enough to hit two different members of the press who were across the street from each other.

Isolating and removing the lawless is absolutely necessary but broad moves that do not distinguish between press, peaceful protester and the lawless? I don't find those things acceptable.

This is not something new. Like I said, they did the same thing in Philly.

Agreed. It isn't anything new and has been done before. I know that both Wrabbit and I have seen such treatments. However, I can only speak for myself on this and that is just because I have seen it before doesn't mean that I have to accept or like it. Free speech gets crushed in many subtle ways and one should haven't to fear being tear gassed, bombarded by LRAD, batoned, shot at with rubber bullets in order to exercise it. That's just my opinion though.

a reply to: OptimusCrime

he report I read said the gunshot went off, the smoke was then shot to clear the scene, when the cops got into see if anyone was harmed the guy had already been taken away.

And if you watched the events, you would know that is total hogwash.
So stop acting like you know everything when you are going off reports that are just the police covering their behinds.
NO gun shots happened before the tear gas, not smoke, went into the crowd

Looks like a much larger group over on the I am Micheal Brown feed. Is the curfew still in affect for tonight?

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: OptimusCrime

IDK why they decided to unjustly decided to make a curfew, I was not in the room either.
I could only assume they are tired of dealing with the protestors so they are going to make it as hard as they can for them to exercise their right. Cause as long as they are, it brings negative attention to their PD.

To be honest with you, if they didn't want attention, they'd just leave them alone to do whatever they felt like. You say "unjustly" that's your opinion not a fact. You're all about exercising rights until someone disagrees with you, though. Then you attack them as if they shouldn't talk. You sound just like a cop.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: OptimusCrime

he report I read said the gunshot went off, the smoke was then shot to clear the scene, when the cops got into see if anyone was harmed the guy had already been taken away.

And if you watched the events, you would know that is total hogwash.
So stop acting like you know everything when you are going off reports that are just the police covering their behinds.
NO gun shots happened before the tear gas, not smoke, went into the crowd

For one, you're the one who keeps asking me questions, buddy. I'm just responding, if you don't want my fing input dont fing ask for it. I don't know everything, but it sure sounds like you do. This is going to turn ugly with you so I'm going to let you spew your garbage and not respond any longer.

a reply to: OptimusCrime

You're all about exercising rights until someone disagrees with you, though. Then you attack them as if they shouldn't talk. You sound just like a cop.

Prove it, where am I all about exercising rights until someone disagrees with me? Is it cause of our exchange?
Have not attacked you in anyway, if i have, i would love for you to quote them

a reply to: OptimusCrime

Force will not be met with equal force against any cops in the world.

You know something? I have made that very same argument with passion, more than once and from the pro-police side.

Cops are not paid to fight. They are paid to win. Period. Every single time, without any exception. Why? Well, aside from the ones making the response, not caring for the result of losing? If a cop goes down...lethal weapons trusted to them go down with them. Those lethal weapons will likely be used to lethal effect. Hence....Cops cannot be permitted to lose. Society gives them the overwhelming force, with ability to summon more, to defeat anything but a professional fighting force on our soil. (and..I wouldn't say never on that, these days). They have the power of unlimited escalation, by radio call.

DUE to that awesome degree of power without limit, each of them is entrusted with? They have a BURDEN far beyond any normal citizen and there is NO equivalency to a protest group on THIS point.

Police, in my view, have the duty and obligation to DE-Escalate in every opportunity presented, to the extent it can reasonably be done, at *ALL* times. That doesn't mean saying "Well..hell with it.. this situation went down the crapper.. CHARGE! ! ! ". No. It means they can use the force necessary to contain and handle the threat...THREAT..of the moment. When it's no longer an active threat? Uh Oh...It's that pesky de-escalation time again, and few ever remember that re-try part, it seems.

Nothing I have seen, save for the State Patrol (and after last night..I question their sincerity here too at this point) has made serious effort to deescalate anything.

In fact, these unprofessional goobers are taking the worst attitude imaginable. "The crowd is doing xxxx...so we MUST do xxx". In short, they have handed control of the situation to the crowd, with the confidence that they will stand atop the ashes in the end..so who cares?

Well.. I care..and many others care. I care enough to say no more.

a reply to: jholt5638

Yes. The curfew was extended. Tonight is Part #2..and I expect a long and very unhappy night for all participating AND trying to cover this event. (yawn)....very long night.

originally posted by: OptimusCrime

originally posted by: WhiteAlice

originally posted by: OptimusCrime

originally posted by: WhiteAlice
a reply to: OptimusCrime

And when the molotov was thrown at Chop Suey restaurant, you could also see multiple protesters running to put it out. Vice's footage has that event recorded.

I didn't say all the protesters are bad, I've been over this already. Is this the only thing you people have against me is false accusations?

I said the ones that are bad are causing the rest to have issues. What's your point?

You pluralized the number of molotov cocktails and I was reminding that protesters also ran in to stamp it out. Perhaps if you're feeling like you're being misinterpreted by multiple people on this thread, then perhaps re-examine how you are explaining your point of view. You didn't, btw, say that in the post that I responded to. I also agree that gunshots being fired needs to be handled very much differently. The problem was that they were gassing the protesters before that single molotov was thrown or any shots were fired at all.

Now i'm pluralizing, lol. sorry. I'm not feeling like i'm being misinterpreted, I've made my points clear. They're just not getting through.The report I read said the gunshot went off, the smoke was then shot to clear the scene, when the cops got into see if anyone was harmed the guy had already been taken away.

I'm autistic. Nitpicking the details kind of goes with the turf, lol.

Have you watched any of the raw footage being streamed by journalists from last night? If you watch the Vice footage below, it might explain why there's some issues. About 2:05 is when the tear gas started. Around 2:06:26 is when the molotov got thrown. Gunshots could be heard at 2:10:47....All after the tear gas was being thrown.

a reply to: xuenchen

Found some interesting stuff an hour or so ago. Agreed. Still looking. Thanks.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Round two of the ATS play by play of the live feeds
Hopefully this is a much quieter response or a lack of one based on what happened last night

originally posted by: WhiteAlice

originally posted by: OptimusCrime

originally posted by: WhiteAlice

originally posted by: OptimusCrime

originally posted by: WhiteAlice
a reply to: OptimusCrime

And when the molotov was thrown at Chop Suey restaurant, you could also see multiple protesters running to put it out. Vice's footage has that event recorded.

I didn't say all the protesters are bad, I've been over this already. Is this the only thing you people have against me is false accusations?

I said the ones that are bad are causing the rest to have issues. What's your point?

You pluralized the number of molotov cocktails and I was reminding that protesters also ran in to stamp it out. Perhaps if you're feeling like you're being misinterpreted by multiple people on this thread, then perhaps re-examine how you are explaining your point of view. You didn't, btw, say that in the post that I responded to. I also agree that gunshots being fired needs to be handled very much differently. The problem was that they were gassing the protesters before that single molotov was thrown or any shots were fired at all.

Now i'm pluralizing, lol. sorry. I'm not feeling like i'm being misinterpreted, I've made my points clear. They're just not getting through.The report I read said the gunshot went off, the smoke was then shot to clear the scene, when the cops got into see if anyone was harmed the guy had already been taken away.

I'm autistic. Nitpicking the details kind of goes with the turf, lol.

Have you watched any of the raw footage being streamed by journalists from last night? If you watch the Vice footage below, it might explain why there's some issues. About 2:05 is when the tear gas started. Around 2:06:26 is when the molotov got thrown. Gunshots could be heard at 2:10:47....All after the tear gas was being thrown.

I just read another source, you're right. They even had the new black panthers there telling them to go home for the curfew. Don't understand the need for gunshots though.

Huge protests going on now

Iammikebrownlive

EzellFord LA and Ferguson
live stream

originally posted by: OptimusCrime

originally posted by: WhiteAlice

originally posted by: OptimusCrime

originally posted by: WhiteAlice

originally posted by: OptimusCrime

originally posted by: WhiteAlice
a reply to: OptimusCrime

And when the molotov was thrown at Chop Suey restaurant, you could also see multiple protesters running to put it out. Vice's footage has that event recorded.

I didn't say all the protesters are bad, I've been over this already. Is this the only thing you people have against me is false accusations?

I said the ones that are bad are causing the rest to have issues. What's your point?

You pluralized the number of molotov cocktails and I was reminding that protesters also ran in to stamp it out. Perhaps if you're feeling like you're being misinterpreted by multiple people on this thread, then perhaps re-examine how you are explaining your point of view. You didn't, btw, say that in the post that I responded to. I also agree that gunshots being fired needs to be handled very much differently. The problem was that they were gassing the protesters before that single molotov was thrown or any shots were fired at all.

Now i'm pluralizing, lol. sorry. I'm not feeling like i'm being misinterpreted, I've made my points clear. They're just not getting through.The report I read said the gunshot went off, the smoke was then shot to clear the scene, when the cops got into see if anyone was harmed the guy had already been taken away.

I'm autistic. Nitpicking the details kind of goes with the turf, lol.

Have you watched any of the raw footage being streamed by journalists from last night? If you watch the Vice footage below, it might explain why there's some issues. About 2:05 is when the tear gas started. Around 2:06:26 is when the molotov got thrown. Gunshots could be heard at 2:10:47....All after the tear gas was being thrown.

I just read another source, you're right. They even had the new black panthers there telling them to go home for the curfew. Don't understand the need for gunshots though.

Hopefully this clears up some of the confusion going on here. I don't think any of us posting here understand the need for those gunshots either. If I came to a protest with a knife in my hand, I'd probably not be viewed as peaceful. I sure hope they figure out what happened in that portion. Gunfire from either side is the last thing I'd ever want to hear at a protest.

originally posted by: kosmicjack

What is going on in Ferguson Missouri?

The general attempts

originally posted by: Thefarmer
They let them them loot so it discredits the whole lot of protesters takes the heat of them don't it

They got to be crafty now as so not to look like a paramilitary force

They did the same in LA during the riots in the 1990's. It was better to let the rioters run out of steam, than it was for police to start shooting everyone in sight. That would have guaranteed to escalate things as the rioters called for reinforcements. It's easier to wait for everyone to go home then lock down the city.

a reply to: OptimusCrime

And your contributions are those of an ignorant, bigoted person who wants to divide the nation rather than focusing on the wrong actions of law enforcement across the nation. I know your type because I saw them up close and personal back in the '60s during the civil rights movement. Back then it was the FBI and other alphabet agencies who sent in instigators to stir the pot and create strife so the news could report, "These people are destroying their own neighborhoods." leaving the impression without actually saying it, "These people are savages so why should we even consider that they need to be noticed or their rights observed."
I had hoped that we had moved beyond that attitude but I see it right here as often as I saw/heard it in the '60s when the Chicago gangs came to our area and attempted to disrupt peaceful protests.
I see this as the same thing, gangs from Chicago, probably directed by the mayor or his minions, for reasons of their own---not letting a crisis go to waste.
If you wish to go on sounding like a bigoted ignorant person, blaming an entire community for the bad actions of a few, that is certainly your right but don't go getting your drawers in a twist when it is pointed out to you that you are a part of the problem with the nation today, a divider and hate-monger who takes pleasure in seeing the authorities take rights from innocent people while ignoring the criminals.