It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Freddie Gray had spinal surgery a week before the arrest ??

page: 10
54
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 10:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality
a reply to: Vasa Croe

better view of his legs, your view is another perspective


A better view or another perspective do not matter. What you stated in your earlier post were untrue and that is clearly shown in the video I posted....he is standing ON HIS OWN on the back of the van, he TURNS HIS HEAD and looks right at the camera, he then DUCKS his head down and bends over and steps into the van ON HIS OWN. There is no other perspective needed here.....

AANNND was driven around for THIRTY MINUTES, stopped once to be shackled and continued to the station. Now honestly, did that look like a person that needed to first go get booked, or first get medical attention?



Funny though, everyone is so quick to jump on the wagon that these officers killed him, when it is MORE likely they have dealt with him before and knew him.....odd there are no other cases coming up where he claimed any police brutality in his years of criminal activity in the same town.....
Making the speculation of a spinal injury that much worse for the cops, they would know about freddie's back problem, I mean since we are speculating.


Why would the cops know about his spinal injury? As far as I understand the law, hospitals are not allowed to divulge that and the story of it was leaked because of the nature of the injury to his back in relation to this case.

You've never lived the "bad life", cute. If the cops know him, they know EVERYTHING about him, trust me.


Ummm......no. They don't. They know nothing about medical records. Especially from one week prior.

Sure of that? You know first hand? cops knew my every move at 16-17 years old. And made no attempt to hide it.


They had access to your medical records? How?

think i said move, not medical records.




posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 10:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality
a reply to: Vasa Croe

better view of his legs, your view is another perspective


A better view or another perspective do not matter. What you stated in your earlier post were untrue and that is clearly shown in the video I posted....he is standing ON HIS OWN on the back of the van, he TURNS HIS HEAD and looks right at the camera, he then DUCKS his head down and bends over and steps into the van ON HIS OWN. There is no other perspective needed here.....

AANNND was driven around for THIRTY MINUTES, stopped once to be shackled and continued to the station. Now honestly, did that look like a person that needed to first go get booked, or first get medical attention?



Funny though, everyone is so quick to jump on the wagon that these officers killed him, when it is MORE likely they have dealt with him before and knew him.....odd there are no other cases coming up where he claimed any police brutality in his years of criminal activity in the same town.....
Making the speculation of a spinal injury that much worse for the cops, they would know about freddie's back problem, I mean since we are speculating.


Why would the cops know about his spinal injury? As far as I understand the law, hospitals are not allowed to divulge that and the story of it was leaked because of the nature of the injury to his back in relation to this case.

You've never lived the "bad life", cute. If the cops know him, they know EVERYTHING about him, trust me.


Ummm......no. They don't. They know nothing about medical records. Especially from one week prior.

Sure of that? You know first hand? cops knew my every move at 16-17 years old. And made no attempt to hide it.


Oh brother....this argument is getting ridiculous at this point. No, I do not know first hand as I have not spoken to the particular officers involved in this incident.

To that same point, can you prove that officers knew your every move at 16-17, specifically what medical ailments you had?


Well I was healthy without ailment then, and while I can't prove it, I can tell you marked cars would ALWAYS follow me in my neighborhood (few square miles) cops have a "beat" they get to know it and the troublemakers like I was almost 20 years ago. By name.


Yeah...it is called "doing their job". They get to know the area and the people. They DON'T get to know the medical history of the people.



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe




Hmm..well that is a far cry from your earlier post claiming:


My claim hasn't changed. From the videos that I saw, Feddie Gray was unable to walk. Again, you're not a doctor, and ultimately the man died due to police brutality, from a severed spinal cord. That's disgusting!

The more that people come out with absurd "blame the victims" bait and switch tactics to protect the police, who are obviously out of control from shore to shore, the more the looters and rioters look like angels. Somethings' gotta give!



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 10:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: [post=19290643]Vasa Croe

Kind of a far cry from dealing drugs, but hey...maybe someday this will happen. Likely I won't run from police when they find me though....the "crimes" you mentioned are not exactly felonies nor considered dangerous. So far the good ole USA is treating this law abiding citizen just fine....shocking right?

I guess you would label these "white people crimes" since you are so hellbent on "thug" and whatever else being racist?


Ohg, I am sure in your mind, that white people don't sell drugs.


Sure they do, but you only gave me those three options, which were all very white of you.

You call people racist for saying thug and multiple offence criminal, which Gray was both, then tell me that I am going to be arrested for things that I have never even gotten tickets for......way to project.

Typical argument with a lot of folks here.....try to bring a non-criminal to the level of a known criminal with ridiculous comparisons.



America is filling up with laws. Someday they're sure to pass one that even you will break.

You are an interesting semanticist, at least.


Oh....I meant to add, that maybe, someday, a person with a squeeky clean background will die in a nefarious manner by the police and actually have a cause to riot....

People love martyrs, especially when they really are squeeky clean. The trouble with MSM martyrs is that the MSM portrays them as the families say they were too quickly without having the whole picture and are often caught holding the bag when the real information comes out.


If the laws aren't applied to everyone equally, what's the difference if they are squeaky clean or a drug dealer? The system is flawed and immoral at that point, and it's open season on everyone.


They are applied equally...so, if I use one of your earlier examples and I am jaywalking.....I see a cop coming towards me....I am not doing anything I think is wrong so I don't run, yet I still get a ticket. Even if I KNEW jaywalking is wrong and see the officer coming towards me, I am not going to run. That just exacerbates the issue.

Gray ran, KNOWING he was doing something wrong (again), forcing officers to chase and take him down.


LAws applied equally:

www.wsj.com...


Too bad there are no links to the actual data used for the study. It just says blacks were sentenced to more time than whites for the same crimes. Nothing about prior convictions or anything to do with the circumstances of the arrest, such as they gave up peacefully or they ran.

These "studies" are typically done specifically for bias to be shown, usually for political reasons....very similar to the pro/anti gun arguments.

Find me the link to the study and I will happily point out where they were biased.


Yeah, well, I mean, you do seem to know a lot more than anyone else. Clearly, you have the answers. Oh, and megalomania, you have that too.


Oooo...name calling.....another favorite of a non-argument. And no, I don't have all the answers. I have common sense. Why don't we just sit back and let this one play out....If I am wrong then I will come back here and say I was wrong.


Well, come on, man. The Wall Street Journal is publishing nonsense articles about black men serving longer time in jail then white men for the same crime, according to you. You already know it's biased before you see the research they based the article on, and you say so. "Show me the research, I will show you the bias".

So, you are above it all, calling out data you haven't even examined yet as being biased. But you aren't biased. So, is it megalomania or something else that fuels your selective arguments?



You are the one using a journalists writings as "proof" with no links to any of the research, so yes, I do think there is bias in it. Articles that have no citations often DO have bias as they don't want the reader to be able to claim bias. It is ignorant not to question things when there is no indication that they are as they say they are....as in no citations or links.


I could find you fifty and you would still have a litany of reasons why they must be excluded.


Don't need fifty...just the research links to the ONE article you used.


I don't need to post ANY though, because you've already told me, see how that works? You already told me you know more. Nothing I could post would matter.


Sure it would...if the research showed that I was incorrect, I am happy to say it. Without it, the article shows bias since the reader can't check the research for themselves.....just because a journalist says so, does not mean it is true.



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality
a reply to: Vasa Croe

better view of his legs, your view is another perspective


A better view or another perspective do not matter. What you stated in your earlier post were untrue and that is clearly shown in the video I posted....he is standing ON HIS OWN on the back of the van, he TURNS HIS HEAD and looks right at the camera, he then DUCKS his head down and bends over and steps into the van ON HIS OWN. There is no other perspective needed here.....

AANNND was driven around for THIRTY MINUTES, stopped once to be shackled and continued to the station. Now honestly, did that look like a person that needed to first go get booked, or first get medical attention?



Funny though, everyone is so quick to jump on the wagon that these officers killed him, when it is MORE likely they have dealt with him before and knew him.....odd there are no other cases coming up where he claimed any police brutality in his years of criminal activity in the same town.....
Making the speculation of a spinal injury that much worse for the cops, they would know about freddie's back problem, I mean since we are speculating.


Why would the cops know about his spinal injury? As far as I understand the law, hospitals are not allowed to divulge that and the story of it was leaked because of the nature of the injury to his back in relation to this case.

You've never lived the "bad life", cute. If the cops know him, they know EVERYTHING about him, trust me.


Ummm......no. They don't. They know nothing about medical records. Especially from one week prior.

Sure of that? You know first hand? cops knew my every move at 16-17 years old. And made no attempt to hide it.


Oh brother....this argument is getting ridiculous at this point. No, I do not know first hand as I have not spoken to the particular officers involved in this incident.

To that same point, can you prove that officers knew your every move at 16-17, specifically what medical ailments you had?


Well I was healthy without ailment then, and while I can't prove it, I can tell you marked cars would ALWAYS follow me in my neighborhood (few square miles) cops have a "beat" they get to know it and the troublemakers like I was almost 20 years ago. By name.


Yeah...it is called "doing their job". They get to know the area and the people. They DON'T get to know the medical history of the people.

Specific medical details/sealed confidential medical records? No. Don't be stupid and don't think I am.
You hear about freddy though? his backs been messed up and was in the hospital gettin' surgery, that's how cops know...



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Vasa Croe




Hmm..well that is a far cry from your earlier post claiming:


My claim hasn't changed. From the videos that I saw, Feddie Gray was unable to walk. Again, you're not a doctor, and ultimately the man died due to police brutality, from a severed spinal cord. That's disgusting!

The more that people come out with absurd "blame the victims" bait and switch tactics to protect the police, who are obviously out of control from shore to shore, the more the looters and rioters look like angels. Somethings' gotta give!



So how, exactly, being paralyzed and all, is he able to stand up on the back of the van like he is in this picture, holding his own head up and turning it towards the officers/camera?



I mean I want to understand your argument and all, and I DID see him dragging his legs prior to this particular point in the video, but he is CLEARLY standing on his own in this screenshot. You are claiming he was paralyzed prior to getting into the van....I am showing you he was not.



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: [post=19290643]Vasa Croe

Kind of a far cry from dealing drugs, but hey...maybe someday this will happen. Likely I won't run from police when they find me though....the "crimes" you mentioned are not exactly felonies nor considered dangerous. So far the good ole USA is treating this law abiding citizen just fine....shocking right?

I guess you would label these "white people crimes" since you are so hellbent on "thug" and whatever else being racist?


Ohg, I am sure in your mind, that white people don't sell drugs.


Sure they do, but you only gave me those three options, which were all very white of you.

You call people racist for saying thug and multiple offence criminal, which Gray was both, then tell me that I am going to be arrested for things that I have never even gotten tickets for......way to project.

Typical argument with a lot of folks here.....try to bring a non-criminal to the level of a known criminal with ridiculous comparisons.



America is filling up with laws. Someday they're sure to pass one that even you will break.

You are an interesting semanticist, at least.


Oh....I meant to add, that maybe, someday, a person with a squeeky clean background will die in a nefarious manner by the police and actually have a cause to riot....

People love martyrs, especially when they really are squeeky clean. The trouble with MSM martyrs is that the MSM portrays them as the families say they were too quickly without having the whole picture and are often caught holding the bag when the real information comes out.


If the laws aren't applied to everyone equally, what's the difference if they are squeaky clean or a drug dealer? The system is flawed and immoral at that point, and it's open season on everyone.


They are applied equally...so, if I use one of your earlier examples and I am jaywalking.....I see a cop coming towards me....I am not doing anything I think is wrong so I don't run, yet I still get a ticket. Even if I KNEW jaywalking is wrong and see the officer coming towards me, I am not going to run. That just exacerbates the issue.

Gray ran, KNOWING he was doing something wrong (again), forcing officers to chase and take him down.


LAws applied equally:

www.wsj.com...


Too bad there are no links to the actual data used for the study. It just says blacks were sentenced to more time than whites for the same crimes. Nothing about prior convictions or anything to do with the circumstances of the arrest, such as they gave up peacefully or they ran.

These "studies" are typically done specifically for bias to be shown, usually for political reasons....very similar to the pro/anti gun arguments.

Find me the link to the study and I will happily point out where they were biased.


Yeah, well, I mean, you do seem to know a lot more than anyone else. Clearly, you have the answers. Oh, and megalomania, you have that too.


Oooo...name calling.....another favorite of a non-argument. And no, I don't have all the answers. I have common sense. Why don't we just sit back and let this one play out....If I am wrong then I will come back here and say I was wrong.


Well, come on, man. The Wall Street Journal is publishing nonsense articles about black men serving longer time in jail then white men for the same crime, according to you. You already know it's biased before you see the research they based the article on, and you say so. "Show me the research, I will show you the bias".

So, you are above it all, calling out data you haven't even examined yet as being biased. But you aren't biased. So, is it megalomania or something else that fuels your selective arguments?



You are the one using a journalists writings as "proof" with no links to any of the research, so yes, I do think there is bias in it. Articles that have no citations often DO have bias as they don't want the reader to be able to claim bias. It is ignorant not to question things when there is no indication that they are as they say they are....as in no citations or links.


I could find you fifty and you would still have a litany of reasons why they must be excluded.


Don't need fifty...just the research links to the ONE article you used.


I don't need to post ANY though, because you've already told me, see how that works? You already told me you know more. Nothing I could post would matter.


Sure it would...if the research showed that I was incorrect, I am happy to say it. Without it, the article shows bias since the reader can't check the research for themselves.....just because a journalist says so, does not mean it is true.


You and I both know that I chose one representative article, and you and I also both know I am not responsible nor accountable for articles posted in an MSM publication like the WSJ. So I'm not going to answer to your charge; it's not my job. Suffice to say I believe the WSJ before I believe an anonymous internet bully.

And really, you are gonna come on ATS and start talking about how because a journo writes something doesn't make it automatically true? Thanks, Sherlock.



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 10:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality
a reply to: Vasa Croe

better view of his legs, your view is another perspective


A better view or another perspective do not matter. What you stated in your earlier post were untrue and that is clearly shown in the video I posted....he is standing ON HIS OWN on the back of the van, he TURNS HIS HEAD and looks right at the camera, he then DUCKS his head down and bends over and steps into the van ON HIS OWN. There is no other perspective needed here.....

AANNND was driven around for THIRTY MINUTES, stopped once to be shackled and continued to the station. Now honestly, did that look like a person that needed to first go get booked, or first get medical attention?



Funny though, everyone is so quick to jump on the wagon that these officers killed him, when it is MORE likely they have dealt with him before and knew him.....odd there are no other cases coming up where he claimed any police brutality in his years of criminal activity in the same town.....
Making the speculation of a spinal injury that much worse for the cops, they would know about freddie's back problem, I mean since we are speculating.


Why would the cops know about his spinal injury? As far as I understand the law, hospitals are not allowed to divulge that and the story of it was leaked because of the nature of the injury to his back in relation to this case.

You've never lived the "bad life", cute. If the cops know him, they know EVERYTHING about him, trust me.


Ummm......no. They don't. They know nothing about medical records. Especially from one week prior.

Sure of that? You know first hand? cops knew my every move at 16-17 years old. And made no attempt to hide it.


Oh brother....this argument is getting ridiculous at this point. No, I do not know first hand as I have not spoken to the particular officers involved in this incident.

To that same point, can you prove that officers knew your every move at 16-17, specifically what medical ailments you had?


Well I was healthy without ailment then, and while I can't prove it, I can tell you marked cars would ALWAYS follow me in my neighborhood (few square miles) cops have a "beat" they get to know it and the troublemakers like I was almost 20 years ago. By name.


Yeah...it is called "doing their job". They get to know the area and the people. They DON'T get to know the medical history of the people.

Specific medical details/sealed confidential medical records? No. Don't be stupid and don't think I am.
You hear about freddy though? his backs been messed up and was in the hospital gettin' surgery, that's how cops know...


No....we heard about Freddie because someone obviously leaked the info after the crazy MSM coverage because it is VERY related to the story. Had the cops known about it, that would likely have been the very first thing they would have brought up to cover their butts.



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 11:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe




I mean I want to understand your argument and all, and I DID see him dragging his legs prior to this particular point in the video, but he is CLEARLY standing on his own in this screenshot. You are claiming he was paralyzed prior to getting into the van....I am showing you he was not.



The only way your argument can end, is with the police inflicting more violence on Freddie Gray, after he had been shackled and in their custody, and that the severed spine didn't occur because he ran and was harshly apprehended, for which he may be responsible for partial blame.

The more you argue the worse you make yourself, the police and this whole case look!


edit on 29-4-2015 by windword because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-4-2015 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 11:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: [post=19290643]Vasa Croe

Kind of a far cry from dealing drugs, but hey...maybe someday this will happen. Likely I won't run from police when they find me though....the "crimes" you mentioned are not exactly felonies nor considered dangerous. So far the good ole USA is treating this law abiding citizen just fine....shocking right?

I guess you would label these "white people crimes" since you are so hellbent on "thug" and whatever else being racist?


Ohg, I am sure in your mind, that white people don't sell drugs.


Sure they do, but you only gave me those three options, which were all very white of you.

You call people racist for saying thug and multiple offence criminal, which Gray was both, then tell me that I am going to be arrested for things that I have never even gotten tickets for......way to project.

Typical argument with a lot of folks here.....try to bring a non-criminal to the level of a known criminal with ridiculous comparisons.



America is filling up with laws. Someday they're sure to pass one that even you will break.

You are an interesting semanticist, at least.


Oh....I meant to add, that maybe, someday, a person with a squeeky clean background will die in a nefarious manner by the police and actually have a cause to riot....

People love martyrs, especially when they really are squeeky clean. The trouble with MSM martyrs is that the MSM portrays them as the families say they were too quickly without having the whole picture and are often caught holding the bag when the real information comes out.


If the laws aren't applied to everyone equally, what's the difference if they are squeaky clean or a drug dealer? The system is flawed and immoral at that point, and it's open season on everyone.


They are applied equally...so, if I use one of your earlier examples and I am jaywalking.....I see a cop coming towards me....I am not doing anything I think is wrong so I don't run, yet I still get a ticket. Even if I KNEW jaywalking is wrong and see the officer coming towards me, I am not going to run. That just exacerbates the issue.

Gray ran, KNOWING he was doing something wrong (again), forcing officers to chase and take him down.


LAws applied equally:

www.wsj.com...


Too bad there are no links to the actual data used for the study. It just says blacks were sentenced to more time than whites for the same crimes. Nothing about prior convictions or anything to do with the circumstances of the arrest, such as they gave up peacefully or they ran.

These "studies" are typically done specifically for bias to be shown, usually for political reasons....very similar to the pro/anti gun arguments.

Find me the link to the study and I will happily point out where they were biased.


Yeah, well, I mean, you do seem to know a lot more than anyone else. Clearly, you have the answers. Oh, and megalomania, you have that too.


Oooo...name calling.....another favorite of a non-argument. And no, I don't have all the answers. I have common sense. Why don't we just sit back and let this one play out....If I am wrong then I will come back here and say I was wrong.


Well, come on, man. The Wall Street Journal is publishing nonsense articles about black men serving longer time in jail then white men for the same crime, according to you. You already know it's biased before you see the research they based the article on, and you say so. "Show me the research, I will show you the bias".

So, you are above it all, calling out data you haven't even examined yet as being biased. But you aren't biased. So, is it megalomania or something else that fuels your selective arguments?



You are the one using a journalists writings as "proof" with no links to any of the research, so yes, I do think there is bias in it. Articles that have no citations often DO have bias as they don't want the reader to be able to claim bias. It is ignorant not to question things when there is no indication that they are as they say they are....as in no citations or links.


I could find you fifty and you would still have a litany of reasons why they must be excluded.


Don't need fifty...just the research links to the ONE article you used.


I don't need to post ANY though, because you've already told me, see how that works? You already told me you know more. Nothing I could post would matter.


Sure it would...if the research showed that I was incorrect, I am happy to say it. Without it, the article shows bias since the reader can't check the research for themselves.....just because a journalist says so, does not mean it is true.


You and I both know that I chose one representative article, and you and I also both know I am not responsible nor accountable for articles posted in an MSM publication like the WSJ. So I'm not going to answer to your charge; it's not my job. Suffice to say I believe the WSJ before I believe an anonymous internet bully.

And really, you are gonna come on ATS and start talking about how because a journo writes something doesn't make it automatically true? Thanks, Sherlock.


Wow...brilliant...name calling again.

And yes, it is on you for the accountability of an article that YOU brought to the table and are using for your argument of whatever. If you choose to post non-cited journalists as your evidence, then that only makes you look bad. Maybe choose your "evidence" or articles you choose to post with a bit more scrutiny next time.



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 11:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Vasa Croe




I mean I want to understand your argument and all, and I DID see him dragging his legs prior to this particular point in the video, but he is CLEARLY standing on his own in this screenshot. You are claiming he was paralyzed prior to getting into the van....I am showing you he was not.



The only way your argument can end, is with the police inflicting more violence on Freddie Gray, after he had been shackled and in their custody, and that the severed spine didn't occur because he ran and was harshly apprehended, for which he may be responsible for partial blame.

The more you argue the worse you make yourself, the police and this whole case look!



No, that is not the only way it can end. I posted possible reasons for his paralysis, as did other posters, due to the initial arrest and the fact he had a prior injury. The fact is, there is absolutely no factual evidence of police brutality in this case.....none at all. Only evidence of a criminal with a prior back injury that just had surgery, running from police, was taken down and arrested. Even the video you claim shows he is paralyzed shows no extraordinary force being used at all...not even really struggling. Yet it shows he is standing and turning his head at the end....
edit on 4/29/15 by Vasa Croe because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Very true, that is why I wonder and for what I gather is that is another American economy killer treaty been going on right now, that while is not in closed doors like others before, it will create more problems on the same issues of unemployment and outsourcing that has a lot to do with what is going on in our inner cities, feed mulitinternationals, give them the right to sue our nations and the tax payer pay for the results of their greed, while they outsource and insource without punishment and the poor remind unemployed feeding from the tax payer angry and deprived, filing our jails while the rich and powerful keep filing their pockets.

People are fighting for the wrong things but hey that is what keep them blind, stupid and bickering in anger.

The power behind the power love's it.


edit on 29-4-2015 by marg6043 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 11:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Neutrality
a reply to: Vasa Croe

better view of his legs, your view is another perspective


A better view or another perspective do not matter. What you stated in your earlier post were untrue and that is clearly shown in the video I posted....he is standing ON HIS OWN on the back of the van, he TURNS HIS HEAD and looks right at the camera, he then DUCKS his head down and bends over and steps into the van ON HIS OWN. There is no other perspective needed here.....

AANNND was driven around for THIRTY MINUTES, stopped once to be shackled and continued to the station. Now honestly, did that look like a person that needed to first go get booked, or first get medical attention?



Funny though, everyone is so quick to jump on the wagon that these officers killed him, when it is MORE likely they have dealt with him before and knew him.....odd there are no other cases coming up where he claimed any police brutality in his years of criminal activity in the same town.....
Making the speculation of a spinal injury that much worse for the cops, they would know about freddie's back problem, I mean since we are speculating.


Why would the cops know about his spinal injury? As far as I understand the law, hospitals are not allowed to divulge that and the story of it was leaked because of the nature of the injury to his back in relation to this case.

You've never lived the "bad life", cute. If the cops know him, they know EVERYTHING about him, trust me.


Ummm......no. They don't. They know nothing about medical records. Especially from one week prior.

Sure of that? You know first hand? cops knew my every move at 16-17 years old. And made no attempt to hide it.


They had access to your medical records? How?

think i said move, not medical records.


But Vasas comment was along the lines of "how could the cops know he had a spinal fusion." You replied with "the cops knew every move I made" which suggests, in context, they knew your medical history as well. I wondered how.



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 11:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

And yet, the facts are that he died from a severed spine that occurred while in police custody. Those are all the facts that we need. I don't care about is medical condition the day before the incident. I care about his medical condition the day after!

The police are clearly to blame for this. It's another example on a long, long list of unarmed black men dying in police custody for minor crimes.


edit on 29-4-2015 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 11:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: UnBreakable


If you're talking about reparations, I guess both blacks and whites will have to put something in the kitty since the first slave owner in America was black, and there were thousands of black slave owners.


Seems like you're well versed in the memes at least.

Anthony Johnson was never an American. He was freed from indenture sometime between 1635 and 1647. At that time, the percentage of free blacks was at the highest it would be until the Civil War. Chattel slavery really kicked off in Virginia in 1662 with the passage of a law that declared that children were born with the status of their mothers. This meant that children could be born into slavery.

As for the "thousands of black slave owners." According to the research of Carter G. Woodson (Free Negro Owners of Slaves in the United States in 1830, 1924), in 1830, 3,776 free blacks owned 12,907 slaves — out of a total of 2,009,043 slaves. 42% of these slave owners owned just 1 slave and 94% owned 1-9. Typically this involved free men buying relatives to protect them.

While I don't support paying reparations, I support mindlessly repeating deliberately misleading factoids even less. Perhaps you'd like to go on about how "Irish were treated worse" too? That's a popular myth with the slavery apologists.


Thanks for the education. By correcting my "meme" you reiterated my point that there were also black slave owners. Much obliged.

And by the way, I'm not a slavery apologist. Most people don't realize it was not exclusively white people who practiced slavery in America. Just pointing out the facts, ma'am.
edit on 29-4-2015 by UnBreakable because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-4-2015 by UnBreakable because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 11:14 AM
link   
Ya I don't believe for 1 minute that his spine was severed because he wasn't getting bed rest..might have more to do with the "ride"(admitted I believe) he was given while handcuffed and then denied medical attention. Was this guy an angel..nope. Does that preclude the police get to hurt you..nope.
I'm very familliar with spinal cord injuries and this is just bullsh^t..80% severed???



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 11:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Vasa Croe

And yet, the facts are that he died from a severed spine that occurred while in police custody. Those are all the facts that we need. I don't care about is medical condition the day before the incident. I care about his medical condition the day after!

The police are clearly to blame for this. It's another example on a long, long list of unarmed black men dying in police custody for minor crimes.



He wasn't unarmed.....police reports of an illegal switchblade knife on his person. So again...wrong.



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: [post=19290643]Vasa Croe

Kind of a far cry from dealing drugs, but hey...maybe someday this will happen. Likely I won't run from police when they find me though....the "crimes" you mentioned are not exactly felonies nor considered dangerous. So far the good ole USA is treating this law abiding citizen just fine....shocking right?

I guess you would label these "white people crimes" since you are so hellbent on "thug" and whatever else being racist?


Ohg, I am sure in your mind, that white people don't sell drugs.


Sure they do, but you only gave me those three options, which were all very white of you.

You call people racist for saying thug and multiple offence criminal, which Gray was both, then tell me that I am going to be arrested for things that I have never even gotten tickets for......way to project.

Typical argument with a lot of folks here.....try to bring a non-criminal to the level of a known criminal with ridiculous comparisons.



America is filling up with laws. Someday they're sure to pass one that even you will break.

You are an interesting semanticist, at least.


Oh....I meant to add, that maybe, someday, a person with a squeeky clean background will die in a nefarious manner by the police and actually have a cause to riot....

People love martyrs, especially when they really are squeeky clean. The trouble with MSM martyrs is that the MSM portrays them as the families say they were too quickly without having the whole picture and are often caught holding the bag when the real information comes out.


If the laws aren't applied to everyone equally, what's the difference if they are squeaky clean or a drug dealer? The system is flawed and immoral at that point, and it's open season on everyone.


They are applied equally...so, if I use one of your earlier examples and I am jaywalking.....I see a cop coming towards me....I am not doing anything I think is wrong so I don't run, yet I still get a ticket. Even if I KNEW jaywalking is wrong and see the officer coming towards me, I am not going to run. That just exacerbates the issue.

Gray ran, KNOWING he was doing something wrong (again), forcing officers to chase and take him down.


LAws applied equally:

www.wsj.com...


Too bad there are no links to the actual data used for the study. It just says blacks were sentenced to more time than whites for the same crimes. Nothing about prior convictions or anything to do with the circumstances of the arrest, such as they gave up peacefully or they ran.

These "studies" are typically done specifically for bias to be shown, usually for political reasons....very similar to the pro/anti gun arguments.

Find me the link to the study and I will happily point out where they were biased.


Yeah, well, I mean, you do seem to know a lot more than anyone else. Clearly, you have the answers. Oh, and megalomania, you have that too.


Oooo...name calling.....another favorite of a non-argument. And no, I don't have all the answers. I have common sense. Why don't we just sit back and let this one play out....If I am wrong then I will come back here and say I was wrong.


Well, come on, man. The Wall Street Journal is publishing nonsense articles about black men serving longer time in jail then white men for the same crime, according to you. You already know it's biased before you see the research they based the article on, and you say so. "Show me the research, I will show you the bias".

So, you are above it all, calling out data you haven't even examined yet as being biased. But you aren't biased. So, is it megalomania or something else that fuels your selective arguments?



You are the one using a journalists writings as "proof" with no links to any of the research, so yes, I do think there is bias in it. Articles that have no citations often DO have bias as they don't want the reader to be able to claim bias. It is ignorant not to question things when there is no indication that they are as they say they are....as in no citations or links.


I could find you fifty and you would still have a litany of reasons why they must be excluded.


Don't need fifty...just the research links to the ONE article you used.


I don't need to post ANY though, because you've already told me, see how that works? You already told me you know more. Nothing I could post would matter.


Sure it would...if the research showed that I was incorrect, I am happy to say it. Without it, the article shows bias since the reader can't check the research for themselves.....just because a journalist says so, does not mean it is true.


You and I both know that I chose one representative article, and you and I also both know I am not responsible nor accountable for articles posted in an MSM publication like the WSJ. So I'm not going to answer to your charge; it's not my job. Suffice to say I believe the WSJ before I believe an anonymous internet bully.

And really, you are gonna come on ATS and start talking about how because a journo writes something doesn't make it automatically true? Thanks, Sherlock.


Wow...brilliant...name calling again.

And yes, it is on you for the accountability of an article that YOU brought to the table and are using for your argument of whatever. If you choose to post non-cited journalists as your evidence, then that only makes you look bad. Maybe choose your "evidence" or articles you choose to post with a bit more scrutiny next time.


Really, for Sherlock? Sorry, I will not repeat that if you thought that was a slag. I will just have to take your insinuated insult with a smile, for your semanticistic skills far exceed mine.

OK, Fine, it's my job.

First, tell me about the bias in the Booker Report as found on the USG website:

www.ussc.gov...

Then, tell me about the bias in this sentencingproject.org report:

www.sentencingproject.org...

bias in the UK reporting system too!
www.gov.uk...



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Vasa Croe

And yet, the facts are that he died from a severed spine that occurred while in police custody. Those are all the facts that we need. I don't care about is medical condition the day before the incident. I care about his medical condition the day after!

The police are clearly to blame for this. It's another example on a long, long list of unarmed black men dying in police custody for minor crimes.



We can see you don't care. However, the facts are that it was quite possible, IF he had a recent surgery, that the spinal cord injury was not caused by police abuse or neglect. I say "possible" because we don't even know for sure if he had recent surgery nor do we know exactly when the spinal cord evulsion occurred.

His medical condition is indeed pertinent to the issue at hand, even if it does contradict previously established ideological belief systems. You might not care about having the facts before declaring judgement, but most reasonable people do.



posted on Apr, 29 2015 @ 11:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: pilgrimOmega

originally posted by: UnBreakable
a reply to: pilgrimOmega


Yep, blame everyone else but do not take any personal responsibility for one's own predicament. Then you have stories like this girl I saw on the news last night who didn't make excuses.

"It is one of those life moments that changes everything.
Home video shows Shamyra Woods-Elliot of Chester, Delaware County learning that she is the recipient of a Gates Millennium Scholarship, one of only 1,000 given out every year through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
"I'm a very focused and determined person and when I set a goal, I plan on achieving it," Shamyra said."
6abc.com...



I should have asked: Would you tell your son's black girlfriend "If black lives matter why are there line ups at the inner city abortion clinics?"

I should also ask, if it's about taking responsibility, when is America going to address stealing hundreds of thousands of Africans from their home and bringing them to a new land to live as slaves and property?



Ok, I will ask her perspective. I know she was appalled by what happened in Baltimore.

As far as the slaves, I guess it would be appropriate for America, as a whole, since I get a vibe you are turning this into a racial thing, to take responsibility for slavery. If you're talking about reparations, I guess both blacks and whites will have to put something in the kitty since the first slave owner in America was black, and there were thousands of black slave owners.

"First Slave owner in the US was black and more history they don't want you to know
There were thousands of black slave owners in the South."
www.liveleak.com...


Yeah, I'd really love to watch a video of you and your son's girlfriend when you tell her that the first slave owner was black. What's your implication, then? That blacks enslaved themselves willingly and white man just came along and did what they were already doing to each other, which made it ok?

Yes, please discuss this with black people and film the results, i'd love to see it.

This whole thing is racial. I'm not turning it racial.



I'm sure the results wouldn't be accepted well. Most time people can't handle the truth.



new topics

top topics



 
54
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join