NYC Mayor de Blasio, Sharpton and the hundreds of protesters chanting for dead cops have the dead officer's blood on their heads. Those named above did not pull the trigger but share in the responsibility of supporting a hostile mindset against the new centurions. They acted or did not act in a manner that would have discouraged this murderer from making cops his target; not much difference in impact than the ISIS leadership folks calling for deliberate individual acts of murder against innocent victims. A terrorist by any other name...is still a terrorist. http://nypost.com/2014/12/21/there-is-blood-on-hands-of-those-who-demanded-dead-cops/ http://www.capitalnewyork.com/artic...-declares-war-de-blasio-after-murder-officers
So we don't know why he did what he did, but you will still say that they caused it. Seems to me, that this is just a symptom of the real problem. Without skipping a beat, we're so willing to blame the other side for anything and everything. We need this to stop. If we want to get better as a society, we need to stop this fighting between us.
Well, of course we know why he did what he did - everything points toward him misinterpreting Qu'ran. And separately, these who chanted kill the cops got their wish indeed...
And it was also the shortest night of the year tonight. Night is black. Black Americans feel abused by cops. Therefore, we must offer sacrifices to the Equinox in order to make sure this never happens again. Or perhaps we should talk about bulls eyes on U.S. representatives and Loughner?
The man who pulled the trigger is the man to blame here. But if you are seeking someone else to blame, the single person most responsible, other than the shooter, is the cop who strangled Eric Garner to death.
Even in the Community Activist Corps, not unlike the Mafia, there are levels of insulation. These events (attacks on law enforcement) are examples of just what the activist leadership (from the street squads to the Oval Office) has been and is still working towards and if they claim "not willfully so" then the end of these officer's lives is a logical if not expected conclusion of their, the Community Activist Corps, collective personal and professional political philosophy and goals. If the Prez does invite these families (and they will simply be props) I hope they respectfully decline as their President is the current spearhead of the problem, has blood on his hands and should not dupe the bereaved into thinking he is the righteous solution. When the President has made a passionate "big deal" about police officers in the past it is in a condemning way and then there are the other times his political/personal interjection/presence is noticeably lacking.
Accuracy is important. According to the murderer's posting he appears to have murdered the police officers to avenge the passing of Mr. Brown and Mr. Garner...who can't see the logic in that? I mean look at all the retired NFL football players murdered after and because of the OJ murder verdict! Was Mr. Garner choked to death? Were Mr. Brown and Mr. Garner suspected of committing criminal offenses? Were either gentlemen resisting arrest during their interaction with police officer(s)? What would you suggest police do when people suspected of criminal activity resist arrest...walk away? How about domestic violence...guy is gonna beat his wife...he refuses to cease and desist...officers should walk away and go back on patrol? The idea of changing our justice system processes because of these grand jury decisions is simply ludicrous...the tail wagging the dog. You don't make a change simply because those decisions are not the decisions the uneducated (evidence ignorant) want. We will never have a perfect system or results but it has served Americans for centuries and what, we recently found it imperfect so we turn a blind eye to those who de facto encourage riot and murder for political objectives? Think this strategy might even fit a part of the terrorism definition.
Yeah, like I said, the shooting obviously begins with these incidents. It does not begin with the protests that these incidents sparked. So just looking back to Mayor de Blasio, Sharpton, and the protesters does not follow the chain of causation to its root; it only follows it back far enough to not blame any cops. False dilemma. The options are not A)walk away, or B)choke a man to death. Garner was unarmed and surrounded by a mob of cops who had far more means of arrest at their disposal than an illegal choke hold. I think Godwin's Law might need to be expanded to include "terrorism", as that has become another go-to smear. Now, you talk about the evidence ignorant, and in the case of Darren Wilson I think that is valid. None of us really know what happened there, and I am inclined to believe that Wilson acted justifiably. But in the Garner case, we all saw what happened. There is no "evidence ignorance" to give the cops the benefit of the doubt, because there is no doubt. The most ironic thing about this whole thing is the generally non-violent protests in the Garner case (where he wasn't hurting anyone and the cops were caught red handed) contrasted with the generally violent "protests" in Fergusen over a violent robber with much doubt as to the police action.
Who are the cops that you personally blame? Me, after watching the cell phone video, I am unsure a choke-hold (by definition/intent) was applied. Take down and control moves were definitely used. I would like to know why both suspects resisted where superior numbers or challenging deadly force had to be overcome. Personally I do not like many against one but in cases of arrest a superior number usually conveys a message of futility in resistance and concludes peacefully in court. What are the tactics/options you would have pursued in the Garner case arrest? Terrorism, to me, is the use of violence/intimidation for political goals. Though nothing really new under the sun it seems much is political these days and too many office and street level politicos de facto support and/or participate in violence. Interesting that one who chose to identify with the Fifth of November would claim a disdain for the use of the word terrorism. A rose by any other name, eh Guy . Why did Mr. Garner not comply with the arrest instructions as most likely, though I have no way of knowing, he did a score or more times before? What made this situation different for him from his previous arrests...were all the priors just citations? All I know is no one should forfeit their life at the altar of untaxed cigarettes.
The ones who killed Garner. The cell phone video is not the only evidence we have. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/04/n...land-chokehold-death-of-eric-garner.html?_r=0 This fact alone warrants an indictment. Think the cops were justified in spite of the medical examiner's findings? Let a jury make that determination. That is real "due process". Brown resisted, I believe, because he thought he was going down for robbery. Garner "resisted" (meaning, going "hey wait just a minute, this is bull(*)(*)(*)(*)") because it was bull(*)(*)(*)(*). Nonlethal ones, for a non-violent offense. Hell, a fine would have sufficed. If you lose, you're a terrorist. If you win, you're a freedom fighter. I won't speculate on that, but the punishment for nonviolent resistance is not and should not be summary execution. Amen. Or sacrifice another at that alter.
I'll bet the people of NYC think twice before they elect another socialist, DeBlasio's hands are dripping with the slain officers blood.
