It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

NLBS #26: Eric Garner's Death, and the Hypocrisy of the NYPD's Broken Windows Policing

page: 5
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 8 2014 @ 06:50 PM
The Communists in America are not letting a good crisis go to waste

#1 Communist protest banners have been prominently displayed at protests in Ferguson, in New York City and elsewhere around the nation.

#2 Flyers declaring that Darren Wilson is wanted “for racist murder” are being distributed by communist groups in Ferguson. In fact, the website address for the “Revolutionary Communist Progressive Labor Party” is right on the flyers.

#3 There were reports that violent communist activists from Chicago were brought into Ferguson by bus last August with the intention of stirring up as much trouble as possible…

#4 During the past week, communists from Chicago have once again descended on Ferguson in large numbers. In the video posted below, communists from Chicago proudly display a banner as they verbally provoke the police in Ferguson…

#6 Outside the courthouse in Ferguson on Friday, a crowd of protesters was overheard chanting this phrase over and over: “The only solution is a communist revolution“.

posted on Dec, 8 2014 @ 07:37 PM
Brilliant episode Joe.... can not believe you dont have more subscribers, All the best mate

posted on Dec, 8 2014 @ 10:06 PM

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

Yes. We and the Medical Examiner stand by the statement.

You're kidding me right? The medical examiner most certainly DID NOT say Garner was strangled to death.

Who is this elusive medical examiner by the way?

posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 10:35 AM

originally posted by: Bundy

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: theNLBS

I don't KNOW--that the officer's actions led to his death.

BUT, you seem to have a tendency in these recent cases to confuse opinion with facts. You call the act "murder," yet, it's only "murder" if a jury convicts someone when evidence has been shown in court to have satisfied all of the elements of the charge.

What more evidence do you need? You just watched one man strangle another to death. Do homicide victims need to start coming back from the dead to confirm to people they were murdered? "Yes, that was me, i am dead, and when i stopped moving right there that was the last time i ever moved."

Please get out of american legal fantasy land. Someone does not have to be convicted for a murder to take place. There are unsolved murders. Explain yourself lol.

You police defenders are just astounding. You will literally say anything no matter how stupid and nonsensical to make a cop look innocent. I literally facepalmed the # out of myself when i read the part i quoted from you. I may have a concussion.

First off, I'm not a "police defender," but my background in the legal field has taught me nothing if not one thing--wait to review all of the evidence before forming an opinion. Some people think that approach is crazy, but hey, if so, I don't trust their logic on the issue.

Furthermore, "murder" has an official and a judicial definition. If someone hasn't been convicted of it in a court of law, they are not a murderer. Here, let us examine the official definition of the word, shall we?


the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

kill (someone) unlawfully and with premeditation.

Please note that, in both definitions, the term "unlawful" is used. Now, how do we decide in America that a law has officially been broken? YES, that's correct--a judicial trial. Therefore, unless someone has been convicted of breaking the law in a court of law, it is not "murder," it is called a "killing." There's that whole official stance in America of "innocent until proven guilty." Discarding that philosophy discards the entire need of a justice system.

So, let me ask you, dear Bundy: What part of these phrases from my original comment do you not understand?

First off, let me say that I think this case should have received an indictment, and I feel--although, I don't KNOW--that the officer's actions led to his death.


Please understand me here: I think that if this case were to go to trial, he'd probably be convicted of something having to do with the death (probably not murder, as that necessitates an intent to cause the death, which I would hope most people could realize from the video that he was not intentionally trying to strangle Garner to death).

So, is it that you simply have a problem with me asserting the rationale that I want to (and everyone should) wait until I am privy to all of the evidence to prescribe guilt, or is there some other point that you're trying to make altogether that escapes me?

The main reason that I want to wait until I know more evidence (which, honestly, I'm not actively researching at the moment) is because the officer doesn't strangle him to death--the officer released his hold on him before Garner begins complaining about the inability to breath. Obviously, there was something else internally that happened, and I just don't know the answer to that yet.

Do you? If so, I'd sincerely like to know.

edit on 9-12-2014 by SlapMonkey because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 9 2014 @ 10:47 AM
a reply to: zazzafrazz

Interesting post.

I do not believe the Grand Jury System itself is broken, but it's participants.

LOCAL Prosecutors that are tasked with the unique chore of prosecuting a Police Officer, spend 99.9% of their other time working closely with those same police officers. When they need a search warrant executed, an arrest made, a phone tapped or a suspect watched ad infinium.

On the rare occasion that a police officer is brought before a Grand Jury, asking one of his close colleagues, who depends heavily on the same police force, who has possibly even relied on that same police office in past investigate or prosecute that just STUPID.

Can you imagine if the prosecutor had won? The next day he asks a cop from that same police force to swing by someones house, watch some suspect, arrest suspect X or for help with evidence and prosecution of some other case...a big EF you is what he gets. Career over.

We can keep the Grand Jury system..we need to assign independent prosecutors and investigators in these circumstances. Next city over or better yet, next state over.

Just my 2 cents.

edit on 9-12-2014 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 16 2014 @ 11:14 PM
I love watching your videos. That being said, if anyone cannot see the problem here, they need to be choked themselves. Progression leads to bad things. I feel for the man they killed. What crime isn't a death sentence anymore? They show us no respect by sweeping this under the rug. It's time we make them do their #ing jobs and hold police officers who do this kind of # accountable. It'll never stop until we make it stop. You are doing more than most to bring the correct viewpoint to the forefront. I wish you had more viewers.

new topics

top topics
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in