Re: US strike options on TSP

sooraj · Post by **sooraj** » 13 Nov 2014 20:31

The Colbert Report - Obama International Embarrassment

[youtube]/watch?v=cyebt3Xhf-M[/youtube]

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 16 Nov 2014 11:45

In progressive news, scientists have defined a harem to hold at least a dozen inhabitants.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 17 Nov 2014 00:24

Whites often don’t realize that slavery didn’t truly end until long after the Civil War. Douglas Blackmon won a Pulitzer Prize for his devastating history, “Slavery by Another Name,” that recounted how U.S. Steel and other American corporations used black slave labor well into the 20th century, through “convict leasing.” Blacks would be arrested for made-up offenses such as “vagrancy” and then would be leased to companies as slave laborers.

(NYT OpEd: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/16/opini ... art-4.html )

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 17 Nov 2014 03:48

Preet Bharara vindicated

Shocked that the Court didn't award Overtime since they had to work way past 5pm, like Nannies are forced to do. In this case the workers did just have to CHANGE diapers, they had to work IN diapers.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 17 Nov 2014 10:11

^^vindication with a vengeance one might say

The dancers' attorney - Anna Prakash

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 18 Nov 2014 01:17

The Birth of a New Century

What the British historian Eric Hobsbawm called “the long 19th century” ended 100 years ago, in 1914, in Sarajevo, with the two pistol shots that sparked World War I. Another historian, Fritz Stern, described that war as “the first calamity of the 20th century … the calamity from which all other calamities sprang.” These disasters included the Great War itself, which claimed some 20 million lives, including victims of the new century’s first genocide, in Turkey; the October Revolution in St. Petersburg, which gave birth to an ideological empire that would kill tens of millions of people and imprison hundreds of millions more; the rise of Nazism out of Germany’s defeat; World War II, with another 60 million deaths, including genocide on an unprecedented scale; the upheavals and wars beyond the borders of Europe that followed the end of colonialism; and the division of the postwar world into two nuclear-armed camps, which fought each other through proxies in post-colonial lands.
It’s hard to say when the 20th century ended. The years that followed were characterized by rapid globalization in communications, technology, capital, and human migration. The world’s markets, institutions, and wars were presided over by the one superpower, the United States. This was the period of the new world order. In some ways, it was a continuation of the post-World War II decades, in which American power was preeminent if not undisputed. But it was also a transitional phase—and from the vantage point of the present, it’s pretty clear that the transition is over.
When did the 21st century begin? We’ve seen sectarian slaughter, Russian revanchism, and the ravages of a deadly epidemic before. What’s more, there has been no Sarajevo in 2014, no triggering event of transformation, no thunderbolt out of a blue sky.Nonetheless, it has been a year of shocks. They originated in unhappy places well outside the charmed circle of safety, comfort, and freedom, but their impact was deeply felt in the West, where the structures of power and principle that used to contain such disruptions no longer seem to exist. For Westerners, that collapse is the greatest shock of all.Russian President Vladimir Putin’s annexation of Crimea and subversion of Ukraine shocked Europe—above all the Germans, who believed that they were living on a continent that had learned well the lessons their country once inflicted on it, a continent of peace, unity, and inviolable borders. Putin is an autocrat of an old, familiar type: a strutting nationalist surrounded by rich cronies and ideological adventurers, snowing his people with ethnic-based propaganda and inflaming their sense of historical victimhood, while daring the world to stand up to him. (No wonder they love him in Belgrade.) To see such a figure stoking wars as the head of a resurgent power, in 2014, suddenly cast a strange light upon the map of Europe.
The Islamic State was a second shock—a very ugly one—with its takeover of at least one third of Iraq, its consolidation of land and resources in Syria, its obliteration of borders drawn by European imperialists during and after World War I, and its drive to exterminate or expel ancient minority populations from territory under its control. Much about the Islamic State isn’t new, beginning with its barbarism. Videotaped beheadings of civilians by jihadists date back to the murder of Daniel Pearl, in Pakistan in 2002, and Nick Berg, in Iraq in 2004. Yet it somehow took the Islamic State’s series of foretold and dramatized ritual decapitations (which seem doomed to continue) on a bleak stretch of desert to bring home to Westerners the reality of the violence that Syrians and Iraqis had already experienced firsthand. The group’s ideology, slogans, and ambitions are also familiar from its former sponsor, al Qaeda (Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the Islamic State’s “caliph,” was once a lieutenant of the original leader of al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi). What’s new and terrifying about the Islamic State is its success in imposing a semipermanent reality on the ground: the astonishingly rapid appearance of a self-anointed caliphate occupying a land mass more than twice the size of Jordan with millions of people, as well as oil fields, dams, and a large, well-equipped army, under its control.The Islamic State is the malignant spawn of two major events in the Middle East, one from the outside, one from the inside: the American invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the popular rebellions of the Arab Spring in 2011. Both of these events began with a promise of replacing dictatorship with democracy, but both have produced chaos and tragedy on a terrible scale. Much of the responsibility falls on the United States, which has meddled in the region for decades, supporting corrupt oil regimes, arming tyrants, and then launching an ill-advised war and botching the consequences beyond repair. But it’s a mistake to allow American solipsism—the notion that the United States is the source of all the world’s troubles, or the solution to them—to reinforce Middle Eastern victimism. Shiite-Sunni conflict is an indigenous phenomenon; so are jihadi terrorism and the dream of a restored caliphate; so is a social system that marginalizes women, stigmatizes minorities, and binds religion to force in everyday life. To think otherwise is to deny people in the region their own agency. “It’s the Iraqis who destroyed their country,” a man from Baghdad once told me, “with the help of the Americans, under the American eye.”
The United Nations, with its vanishing secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon, is barely an afterthought. The Security Council is as blocked and broken as the U.S. Congress, with Russia and China playing the spoiler role of the Republican caucus. NATO seems increasingly like a relic of Harry Truman’s era, without the vision or will to play a role in keeping order along its own edges. The Baltic states, full-fledged members of the alliance, unlike Ukraine, seem less than fully convinced that their European allies will come to their defense under Article 5 in case Russian subversion spreads to Estonia—and there are early warning signs that this might occur. It’s possible to imagine Putin testing the integrity of NATO, hoping to find that it exists on paper only.
The collapse of global structures has opened the way for bad behavior on the part of elected and unelected regimes around the world. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has moved Turkey into the ranks of regional powers that are rising with the eclipse of Western influence. His rule is increasingly authoritarian, illiberal, and paranoid, using anti-American rhetoric to silence domestic critics and distract from allegations of corruption, while justifying support for some of Syria’s most brutal rebel groups. When the Syrian Kurdish city of Kobani, on the Syria-Turkey border, seemed poised to fall to the Islamic State and the specter of massacres loomed large, the U.N.’s special envoy for Syria, Staffan de Mistura, appealed to the world for help, and especially to Turkey, which had sealed its border against resupply of the besieged Kurds. “You remember Srebrenica?” de Mistura asked at a news conference, referencing the genocide of more than 8,000 Muslim men and boys in Bosnia in 1995. “We never forgot, and probably we never forgave ourselves for that.”But Turkey didn’t want to remember Srebrenica. Even as it pursued a bid for a nonpermanent seat on the Security Council, Turkey ignored the U.N. envoy’s plea—it preferred to see the Islamic State crush a Syrian Kurdish group, the People’s Protection Units, that it considers an ally of its own separatist Kurdish party. Turkey’s actions have made this NATO member a de facto supporter of the Islamic State, which has declared its murderous intent toward citizens of every other member of the NATO alliance. Erdogan is following Putin’s lead—what Putin is to Greater Russia, Erdogan hopes to be to the Muslim Brotherhood. It’s a strange, and likely self-destructive, turn for a non-Arab, historically secular country that was created after World War I out of the ruins of the caliphate that the Islamic State claims to be restoring. But for now, the initiative is with Turkey, as it is with Russia and China.
The European Union is another debilitated institution—a collection of mostly stagnant economies joined together by an ailing currency and political dysfunction. Elections in May to the European Parliament in Brussels favored parties on the left and right that want to see the European Union weakened to the point of irrelevance.Above all, the year’s disruptions have revealed the waning of America’s ability to control events—not just its willingness and ability to project force, but the attractive power of liberal democracy as a counterweight to authoritarianism and extremism. President Barack Obama, along with the heads of most governments in Europe, is mired in domestic unpopularity and international confusion, while Putin, Erdogan, China’s Xi Jinping, India’s Narendra Modi, and other anti-Western nationalists have an increasingly free hand.
Obama’s foreign policy in his second term has been hesitant, self-contradictory, at times even feckless—and American hawks blame the year’s violence squarely on him for tempting the world’s Putins and Baghdadis with displays of weakness. ” . the postwar international order was underpinned by American democracy in a period of functioning institutions, shared prosperity, and public optimism. The global disorder of this new century is both accompanied and enabled by a sharp deterioration within the United States itself. The U.S. economy, in recession or recovery, is more and more built on a profoundly unfair distribution of rewards; the political system, strangled by organized money and partisan extremism, has no answers to the country’s deepest problems; large numbers of Americans have lost faith in their children’s future. The United States is no longer in a condition to impose its will by asserting or demonstrating its values. Those days, always problematic, are now gone. But the liberal ideas that brought freedom, security, and hope to millions of people around the world in the last century remain essential in this one. America can promote them best if it restores its own democracy to health.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 18 Nov 2014 13:22

In case you were wondering why there is a state of emergency in missouri, some of the precedents:
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Los_Angeles_Riots
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_Detroit_Riot

and some fun informashun:
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulsa_race ... ack_by_air
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 20 Nov 2014 17:06

Theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss is like Hitler
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/11/crea ... errifying/

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 25 Nov 2014 07:13

As expected, No charges and No indictment against White Police officer Darren Wilson for shooting Unarmed Black teen Michael brown ! Justice American style

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 25 Nov 2014 07:41

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 25 Nov 2014 07:52

Check this one out:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/2 ... 05492.html

Black men cannot walk down the stairs in the US... LOL onlee

If you are black you cannot:
drive while black,
hang out in groups of more than 4,
play music
buy candy and drinks from nearby vending machine
ask cops for help for help after accident
ask any resident for help after accident

In many situations similar to the list above, quite a lot of black people have been butchered with guns.

If this was an Indians fate in the US, they would be better off in going back to India, and that is the ultimate tragedy of the situation: Where the phaack are black people supposed to run to? They have no other home.

Sorry to draw this == here. But it needs to be emphasized:

In India, you can change your name, move and you could hide your caste. No one will second guess if you tell them you are from this cashtu or that cashtu. There is no distinguishing characteristic here.

But in the US, can a black man ever say : "I am white, onleee!" ? Everyone will see through it. There is no way you can hide your identity, and thus racism is and will be a permanent fixture in the US. It may go away for brown people once the Hispanics become majority, but blacks will never reach majority and in such a case the and their future generations are setup for being discriminated and violated.

In such a hopeless situation it will take a lot for anyone to maintain sanity, and most of them, even the sane ones have severe PTSD due to racist encounters dehumanizing them from childhood.

Here is another read: Being rich does not help you from racist abuse:
https://abagond.wordpress.com/2014/11/1 ... om-racism/

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 25 Nov 2014 08:02

I don't know what to make of it all. The prosecutor says the Gland July are the ones who have seen ALL the evidence. OK, what evidence is there that has not been shown to anyone else? Why?

OTOH, I am not saying at all that the policeman should have been indicted - I don't know what happened that ~~night~~ (DAY! I didn't know all that was in the middle of the day!) But it seems that shooting several times was not necessary to subdue Mr. Brown, even if he was being aggressive and coming at the policeman. Why then was there no indictment?

saip · Post by **saip** » 25 Nov 2014 08:23

Grand Juries do not decide cases. It is the prosecutor who decides what evidence he will present.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 25 Nov 2014 08:47

Ferguson's Tiananmen moment. Black protester with hands up blocking militarized armed police vehicles

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 25 Nov 2014 22:30

MLK wrote:"It is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard."

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/1 ... ing-after/

Shalav · Post by **Shalav** » 26 Nov 2014 04:39

Michael Brown was not an innocent victim randomly shot on the streets of Ferguson, MO. He was a suspect in a strong arm robbery case (There is video evidence of him bullying and stealing from some desi store owner) not 5 minutes before he was stopped by Wilson.

LiveLeak Video

He was 6'4" tall and weighed about 130 kgs. That is a tall powerful individual.

He then reached into a police car when stopped by the officer and tried to snatch the officers gun. When he was shot he tried to escape. The officer followed him to arrest him, he charged back at the officer when he found he could not get away and was subsequently shot dead.

The post-mortem report shows all shots hit him from the front, there were no shots fired on his back, as stated by some witnesses.

The suspicion of robbery, the assault on a law officer doing his duty, and then charging back at an armed police offer had the most likely outcome, and this was the fatality of Michael Brown.

No doubt there are cases of "shot while black" America, but it doesn't look like it was so in the Ferguson case. Any dispassionate observation of the circumstances and available evidence, would have the same conclusion.

While a youth being shot is bad, outrage and sympathy should be reserved for someone other than an alleged bully and thief!

BTW the store allegedly robbed by Michael Brown, was looted after the GJ decision was announced

http://thepunditpress.com/wp-content/up ... rguson.png

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 26 Nov 2014 04:53

I understand where you are getting at. However any *rational* country would not institute death penalty and dispense it on the spot for thievery and bullying. Saudi Barbaria may do it, but I am talking about the non-barbarian countries.

I am not saying the kid is innocent. But of this I am sure, He would have been very well aware that messing with cops == death sentence. Most black people have "a talk" with their kids when they are reaching teen-age and they explain reality to them. I find it hard to believe that the kid tried to do a "bully" move on the cop. But then cops are known to try to get you to instigate violence towards them and then promptly shoot you to death. Given the amount of shootings with black people getting murdered, I find it quite hard to believe that ALL of them are justified.

There is no justification for creating a situation where the only option you got is to put 12 bullet into the head of the kid you just started a confrontation with. Such situations can and need to be avoided. There are much better ways to handle it.

If the LEOs in the so called "land of the brave", cannot tackle an unarmed (but BIG) teenager without shooting him dead. Then there is something wrong with that organization.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Nov 2014 04:57

What about due process for the 'criminal'? Was he not entitled to court of law? And emptying 12 bullets into the 'criminal' is it not excessive force?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Nov 2014 05:06

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/officer-darr ... first-time

Interview with the shooter.

Shalav · Post by **Shalav** » 26 Nov 2014 05:10

He did not get what you call "the death penalty" for thieving and bullying, he got what you call "the death penalty" for being stupid and assaulting a police officer.

You are correct it there is no justification for creating a situation where the only option is to be shot multiple times. It was stupid of the man (18 years old is a man - not a kid) to create it.

The so called unarmed teenager had 30+ kgs and 3" advantage on the officer. He had already shown he wanted to get the officers gun, he ran, and then turned to rushed back at the officer, what exactly was wrong there?

We know some of the witnesses lied when they said the officer shot him in the back. The post-mortem report shows ALL shots hit him in the front.

We know the kill shot was the head-shot which entered from the top of his forehead. We know that kill shot was made because the previous shots failed to stop him. We know the kill shot entered through the top of the forehead, exited through his cheek, and then reentered his shoulder. We know he was not on the ground when the kill shot was made. That kill shot angle is possible when someone is rushing the opponent with his head down. We know this was a kill shot because all witnesses stated he fell to the ground AFTER being shot through the head.

Please go ahead and read it all here.

The libtard ADM like the DDM is not above crusading on their favourite causes.

PS: Just found a Vine of looted store

https://vine.co/v/O1XlODJtUrh

Shalav · Post by **Shalav** » 26 Nov 2014 05:17

ramana wrote:What about due process for the 'criminal'? Was he not entitled to court of law? And emptying 12 bullets into the 'criminal' is it not excessive force?

There were 7 bullets, not 12.

Here is a link to the Private Autopsy report conducted after the official one. There is no significant mis-match between the two.

http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... eport.html

From the report

1. Palm of right hand, tangential. Close discharge.
2. Back of right forearm through ulna bone, exits in front.
3. Right upper arm, near to elbow, tangential, through skin and soft tissues. Direction indeterminate.
4. Front of right upper arm, near to chest, exits back of arm.
5. Top of head, right of midline, proceeds downward and to the right, through brain, bullet recovered from soft tissues right side of face.
6. Forehead, right of midline, proceeds downward and to the right, through the and facial bones and exits right lower jaw; it re-enters the right upper chest through the clavicle and is recovered from near the third posterior rib.
7. Right side of chest, proceeds downward and to the right through soft tissues and fractures the eighth rib from where it was recovered.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 26 Nov 2014 05:18

http://news.yahoo.com/9-essential-facts ... 02799.html

Okay. Maybe this witness lied too:

Brown's friend Dorian Johnson, who was with him when the shooting occurred, gave this account to MSNBC: Johnson said that he and Brown had been walking in the middle of the street when a police officer approached and told them to use the sidewalk. They complied, and the officer began to drive away, but then threw his car into reverse and came back alongside the teens, nearly hitting them. Johnson heard Wilson say something like "What'd you say?", before trying to open his car door, slamming it into Brown. Then the officer reached out and grabbed Brown by the neck with his left hand. The two men struggled briefly, and then Wilson, still in his car, shot Brown once.

Johnson said that he and Brown both attempted to flee, but Brown was shot a second time. After the second shot, Brown turned around and surrendered, putting his hands in the air and saying, "I don't have a gun. Stop shooting!" Johnson said that Wilson then approached Brown and fired several more shots, killing him.

Which version would you believe? The cop had a motive to lie. So did Dorian. But the cop had a larger motive to lie about the facts, because his a$$ was in the line.

In the cops testimony, he describes Brown as a demon. He has already dehumanized him. He could have easily put himself in a situation in which he HAD to use the number of bullets he used to kill the "subject".

As much as you find it hard to believe many eye-witnesses for whatever reason, I find it hard to believe that a cop who calls a teenager a demon would give a straight answer to the question: Were you justified in shooting the teenager to death?

Shalav · Post by **Shalav** » 26 Nov 2014 05:25

A fleeing suspect once he has assaulted anyone is shot in the US - it happens to every race. Suspects are not allowed to flee after committing an offense in front of the police. The police officer was right to follow and try to arrest him.

The angle of the shots show a different story from what his (MB's) friend testified. I would rather believe the physical evidence, than a friend testifying for another friend.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 26 Nov 2014 05:30

^^^
Shalav:

There were 12 cartridges discharged, 1 remained in the chambers.

Regardless of *this case*, the accepted narrative now is that should any circumstances arise where a law enforcement officer enters a dialog where they *feel* threatened (like the stand your ground law in FL) they are entirely justified in employing lethal force and no public scrutiny of their actions (not just grand jury convention) would take place.

The protectors of the people are now primarily concerned about *their* safety and their safety *alone*. If you do not see anything wrong with this, there is no possible dialog.

Neither you nor anyone else here should be arguing the facts or opinions. That is why there are jury trials. And if they go away, then its wild-wild west all over again.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 26 Nov 2014 05:34

Shalav wrote:A fleeing suspect once he has assaulted anyone is shot in the US - it happens to every race.

That is rather harsh. I would want the suspect to be brought to justice, not killed. Even if I was the victim of that assault.

Perhaps you dont know how racist cops operate. I would suggest you read this book, its rather funny but very very relevant.

http://www.amazon.com/Arrest-Proof-Your ... 1613748043

Here is the relevant part:
Ethnic insults and verbal jabs

Please dont forget to read up the section on "The Baton and Flashlight pole". That book was written by an ex-cop and an ex-FBI agent, who is white.

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 26 Nov 2014 05:35

LOL...

mike brown was not a suspect of anything when the cop started this. the police chief said as much at the very beginning itself.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 26 Nov 2014 05:38

Let me post from a libtard site:
http://countercurrentnews.com/2014/08/f ... nce-video/#

The store owner, speaking through their attorney, even dispute the claim that they or an employee called 911. They explain that a customer inside the store made the call, and that is how police even got word of a crime, or a perpetrator who “fit the description” of Brown. The fact of the matter is that if there were an actual “robbery,” we can be certain that the store owner would have called the police.

In addition to clarifying that the store owners never said they believed, nor identified the suspect as being Michael Brown, they further claimed that the St. Louis County issued the warrants to confiscate the hard drive of surveillance video Friday. The warrants were issued based on the police claim that Brown “fit the description” of the person in the video. Remember, this was the person who the owners and employees of the store did not even see fit to call the police on due to the pettiness of the crime. The owner clarifies that neither the management of the shop, nor any employee has ever identified Mike Brown as the suspect recorded in the surveillance video.

The claim that the video recorded Brown “robbing” the convenience store is an assertion made by the police alone. The real question is why the mainstream, corporate media has been uncritically taking the word of the police on this matter, even over the eye witness testimonies of the store employees and owners?

Note that I am in no way a liberal. I am very conservative in so many things.

Shalav · Post by **Shalav** » 26 Nov 2014 05:46

He was shot 7 times, both the govt. and private autopsies don't disagree there. 12 cartridges is a news story, not how many time he was shot.

I am trying to show a different perspective - that MB was not a helpless victim randomly shot on the street in broad daylight. He was allegedly a bully and a thief who was rightly stopped for suspicion of a crime, and got shot while trying to avoid arrest.

The angry young man dies in real life!

They have already had a grand jury decide there should be no prosecution, now we are arguing about if a bunch of people who spoke to everyone involved are right or not. Then whats the difference between news media lynching there and what was done to NM by undieTV and their ilk?

Gus,

You should actually read the GJ report, if not news reports - his description was circulated, as 6'6" and 330 lbs. Not many people fit that description. While we may state alleged thief the alleged thief was also described as wearing socks and sandals, white t-shirt and a cardinals hat - very coincidentally this was exactly what MB was wearing! How shocking! He became a suspect when his description and attire VERY CLOSELY fit the 911 report.

Shalav · Post by **Shalav** » 26 Nov 2014 05:48

LokeshC wrote:
Shalav wrote:A fleeing suspect once he has assaulted anyone is shot in the US - it happens to every race.
That is rather harsh. I would want the suspect to be brought to justice, not killed. Even if I was the victim of that assault.

So would I - however in this case I feel its a waste to spend my sympathy and outrage on an alleged thief and bully who made stupid moves in front of an armed policeman.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 26 Nov 2014 05:50

Shalav wrote: We know he was not on the ground when the kill shot was made. That kill shot angle is possible when someone is rushing the opponent with his head down. We know this was a kill shot because all witnesses stated he fell to the ground AFTER being shot through the head.

I saw that autopsy report and for me it is perfectly possible to say that the injuries are consistent with a man who has his right arm up and head down trying to protect his head from being hit by something. All shots, if they were fired in quick succession, the bloke may not have had time to fall or even be "dead" in terms of heart not beating any more.

Did not read the report in detail but it is possible that one or two of the arm/hand shots could have entered his head after passing through the hand/forearm.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 26 Nov 2014 05:52

LOL!
Right! Showing anger and frustration while getting arrested is == instant death and completely justified.

I just hope that none of our kids turn out to be hot headed, coz you know Angry Young Men end up getting shot by cops.

And ofcourse the Jury is final, justice has been served. Case is closed. Another day in paradise.

Shalav · Post by **Shalav** » 26 Nov 2014 05:58

shiv wrote:I saw that autopsy report and for me it is perfectly possible to say that the injuries are consistent with a man who has his right arm up and head down trying to protect his head from being hit by something. All shots, if they were fired in quick succession, the bloke may not have had time to fall or even be "dead" in terms of heart not beating any more.

Did not read the report in detail but it is possible that one or two of the arm/hand shots could have entered his head after passing through the hand/forearm.

Quite possible, but none of the witnesses described him ever being this position! We had being shot in the back and other items, but no one said "he had his right arm up and head down trying to protect himself". All witnesses describe him as either running away from the police officer or facing the police officer or walking towards the police officer, or bull rushing the police officer.

His height was such that he had to have been kneeling for what you said to be possible, and he was never in the kneeling position. Even the private post-mortem doc had mentioned it, I seem to remember from a previous CNN interview.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 26 Nov 2014 05:59

shalav,

One day you will realise that "stupid moves in front of an armed officer" is a talking point that could fit any action. The 12 shots fired fact is in the evidence, not a news story, and is not contested. The officer had 1 cartridge left. This is also, however, immaterial.

Laws apply in all circumstances and to all people, not just the wehite, or the smart, or the well dressed, or the rich or just under normal circumstances,or just when cops are/are not present.

A jury trial *is not* a finding of guilt. A trial, like an inquest, is a necessary procedure. Dont advocate doing away with it.

If you actually were a party to a jury trial , you will find that the bar is set too low even at a trial.

In indian terms, you are advocating the equivalent of that a FIR may not be registered because one party is an officer.

I leave this dialog now, hoping this was helpful. Good luck to you.

Shalav · Post by **Shalav** » 26 Nov 2014 05:59

LokeshC wrote:LOL!
Right! Showing anger and frustration while getting arrested is == instant death and completely justified.

I just hope that none of our kids turn out to be hot headed, coz you know Angry Young Men end up getting shot by cops.

And ofcourse the Jury is final, justice has been served. Case is closed. Another day in paradise.

In America such is the case, they are born there, they see the shows, even we in India know about it. Why the surprise and outrage?

If you have done nothing wrong, there is no need to attack a police officer.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 26 Nov 2014 06:01

shiv wrote:
Shalav wrote: We know he was not on the ground when the kill shot was made. That kill shot angle is possible when someone is rushing the opponent with his head down. We know this was a kill shot because all witnesses stated he fell to the ground AFTER being shot through the head.
I saw that autopsy report and for me it is perfectly possible to say that the injuries are consistent with a man who has his right arm up and head down trying to protect his head from being hit by something. All shots, if they were fired in quick succession, the bloke may not have had time to fall or even be "dead" in terms of heart not beating any more.

Did not read the report in detail but it is possible that one or two of the arm/hand shots could have entered his head after passing through the hand/forearm.

It took all of 90 seconds for all of *it*. Count to One-one thousand,... 90,one thousand. A person is dead. There will be no public scrutiny.

The rest matters only if facts were contested at a trial, and not leaked selectively.

Shalav · Post by **Shalav** » 26 Nov 2014 06:07

Shreeman

Me - I don't have a dog in this show, just this feeling that MB is not the innocent victim as some want to make him out to be. He made stupid moves after allegedly committing a robbery, he died for it.

I probably be leaving soon too. Other things to do, but I did want to point out that our sympathy and outrage should be spent on someone more deserving.

This unusually strong outrage over MB is like hearing people being outraged by PB as a victim of racial discrimination. Its like hearing outraged members say - so what if PB was unfair to Devyani, he did not get nominated for the AG so the American system is biased!

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 26 Nov 2014 06:08

Shalav wrote: So would I - however in this case I feel its a waste to spend my sympathy and outrage on an alleged thief and bully who made stupid moves in front of an armed policeman.

What scares me is that you are speaking like someone from StormFront. An alleged robbery is somehow linked to a cop stopping him (for Jaywalking of all things) and then used as a justification of him getting killed. When there is no causal chain from point A to point B, why create one? If we isolate the encounter from the robbery, as see the encounter for what it was : A teenage kid stopped for Jaywalking. How can one justify emptying a clip on him?

There must be better ways of handling this.

I have had two incidents in my life where a cop has pulled a gun on me. Both are in small town America

In one case he was an inch away from dispatching me because I could not respond to his command fast enough. (I was dehydrated and disoriented that day). The other one was during a trip down south (for me) to the Hoover Dam area, my SUV window got jammed and would not open. There was a DUI/drug check point and the cop ordered me to roll window down, and I kept signalling that its jammed. He started getting irritated and he and the cop behind him pulled their guns out. I never had that experience before and I froze (thankfully). Finally they opened the door and I said the window was jammed. The rest of the story is not very crazy.

Once you have been on the receiving side, you will see a different America. I just hope you do not come across this.

The ladder of escalation from normality to shooting someone dead is just one or two rungs.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 26 Nov 2014 06:10

Teenagers do a lot of stupid things. That is why they are teenagers. Shooting them dead for it is a rather harsh way to deal with things.

Shalav · Post by **Shalav** » 26 Nov 2014 06:24

I think the teenagers who allegedly steal and bully people smaller than themselves get too cocky for their own good. They also die for doing stupid things. Happens all over the world under all sorts of circumstances all the time.

The 'tragedy' of MB's death is not unforeseen given his alleged behaviour as described by witness during the incident, and as witnessed in the camera before the incident.

Its not something we should be outraged over and expend 3 pages of discussions on, there are more outrageous things happening in America, indeed the world, all the time.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 26 Nov 2014 06:27

Shalav wrote:Shreeman

Me - I don't have a dog in this fight, just this feeling that MB is not the innocent victim as some want to make him out to be. He made stupid moves after allegedly committing a robbery, he died for it.

I probably be leaving soon too. Other things to do, but I did want to point out that our sympathy and outrage should be spent on someone more deserving.

This unusually strong outrage over MB is like hearing people being outraged by PB as a victim of racial discrimination. Its like hearing outraged members say - so what if PB was unfair to Devyani, he did not get nominated for the AG so the American system is biased!

There is a time honored tradition to reserve public sympathy for the warrior, and the brave, and the needy, and the deserving and so on. But this is not how a land of laws is governed. This,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hustler_Ma ... v._Falwell

is an example where a p0rn0grapher served the greater good. Questioning the individual, is along the lines of justifying honor killing.

Many a woman die in India because they are deemed to be unworthy in some way. As do many men. Precedents impact everyone. You may think you dont have a dog, but you do. And even when one does have a motive, it is illogical to deny the truth or the rational (there is no god vs there is no evolution).