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

NYPD Caught Editing Wikipedia Articles on Police Brutality

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 15 2015 @ 11:49 AM
After reading the article in full: The only thing I noticed, was how whoever did this simply changed the wording around to suit their agenda, much like whoever they originally edited wrote the article in a way that suits their own agenda, you Liberals try to be good at that.

This example.

It is true that after Garner was put in the chokehold, the four EMT's were suspended.

But it is also true that the four paramedics that responded to his respiratory distress were also suspended. Because Garner had respiratory distress, this is a fact, the man was asthmatic.

You are trying to take the moral high ground by claiming the NYPD has a bias but are completely and conveniently ignoring your own anti-police bias.

A neutral edit of that phrase would more go along with:

"The four EMT's who responded to the scene were later suspended without pay."

So until you can write that, you have not a leg to stand on when trying to claim some sort of neutral moral high ground.

In this article. The liberal point of view states he 'raised his arms in the air and was then put in a chokehold. They are trying to paint a picture just like when they claimed Michael Brown was on his knees and raised his hands above his head and was shot in the face. No, sorry, watch the video. While I do believe the cops in Staten Island Garner case should have been doing more important things than busting a guy selling loose cigarettes, he was doing a whole hell of a lot more that 'raising his hands' there were several times after Police approached to detain him that he forcefully pulled his hands away. Although I would say 'flailing' is a bit much.

As for the second edit:

The choke-hold maneuver is not illegal for use, Police Department policy bans it's use. There is a huge stretch from something police doing being ILLEGAL, such as bringing someone into an interrogation room, not allowing them to leave and also denying them counsel (this is Illegal via the constitution) and a Police Department telling Police Officers "hey, don't use a choke-hold in the arresting of suspects because of reasons xyz.

By claiming the use of the chokehold is illegal in this case, you are also saying that you taking and hour and a minute at work for lunch is also illegal because company policy allows you only 60 minutes. What you did is not illegal, it is against company policy. The department ban on using the chokehold is technically no different. So the Liberal point of view here is technically lying.

Liberals love trying to burden everyone else by semantics but hate abiding by semantics themselves.
edit on 15-3-2015 by chuck258 because: typo

posted on Mar, 15 2015 @ 11:50 AM

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: chuck258
Angry much?..take your own advice.

He offered no reasons as to why he believed his point of view, only his assurances, like they are the word of god.

posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 06:06 AM
a reply to: Shamrock6

I think it's more the fact that it was done while on the clock. Not in the police spare time or home computer.

posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 06:30 AM
On-topic musical interlude:

Yow'm welcome.

posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 10:43 AM
a reply to: kosmicjack

Definitely the most interesting part about this is the NYPD damage control, however, anybody can edit wikipedia. Anyone who has taken college, let alone ENG101, would know that Wikipedia isn't an accepted as a credible source anywhere.
edit on 16-3-2015 by 31Bravo because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 16 2015 @ 12:32 PM
a reply to: ObjectZero

I think it's probably more to do with the falsity of some of the posts than it being done on the clock.

NYPD has an entire unit who's purpose is to liaise with the community and press. I think using a computer is probably part of that.

If it turns out to be some rook editing wiki pages instead of being on the street where they belong, different story.
edit on 16-3-2015 by Shamrock6 because: Apparently autocorrect can't handle "tjey"

new topics

top topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in