SUV plows down Wisconsin Christmas parade as children watch in horror

It looks like this guy may have had political motivations based on his songs

 

mad at blacky gets you canceled and fired
mad at whitey gets you an on air job at MSNBC, a university professorship, or elected to congress

 

no we are just applying the same thought process you liberals uses every time some one white commits a crime against someone black
racism is always the default motive

 

This was a terrorist incident incited by the MSM. It isn't the first and it won't be the last. No MSM outlet will tell the truth. Only alternative media will..... and they are being murdered in the crib by the MSM and the Democrat Party.

This is the truth:

 

Sydney Watson?
A Discredited Extreme RW Conspiracy Theirist (and Enabler of Alex Jones' Propaganda)?
You really want to hang your hat on that?

I disagree with her take, completely.
She is a RW Troll who posts the most outrageous Extreme RW BS possible (to give anybody displeased with the "Big Bad Left" Confirmation Bias).
And, on top of that she is shillihg merch.
You cant make this stuff up.

And, It WASN'T a "terrorist incident incited by the MSM"...
Not Even Close...
Give me a break..

 

God, I want this subhuman to hang! It's so unfortunate that Wisconsin doesn't have the death penalty.

This slug will live the rest of its life with three hots and a cot while its victims will live with the injuries and suffering for the rest of their lives.

 

The last lynching in Wisconsin was in 1891.

 

I think were getting a little off track (which is difficult to manage on a long thread) but if I may refocus. My concern was with comments (think it was you, if not I apologize) that the incident was probably political/racially motivated. My original response was that (to date) the evidence doesn't show that to be the case. I included in that response a statement the effect that 'wanting something to be true doesn't make it true'. I then repeated that statement with regard to the asinine statements to the press about 'the revolution beginning' or whatever made by that self appointed BLM 'spokesperson' i.e. what he might want and what actually happened may well be two entirely different things!

I think I also commented at one point that if the evidence supported a claim that the incident was a terrorist/hate crime I'd readily acknowledge the fact. My entire point is I go with the evidence. And the evidence to date seems to indicate it was not terrorist related.

 

1. The perp made multiple anti-white posts on his social media. The posts advocated violence against white people.
2. Multiple witnesses (including police) have stated that he swerved back and forth to hit more people instead of driving straight through.
3. He has been charged with INTENTIONAL HOMICIDE. He meant to kill as many people as possible.

Now if you have a motivation (other than racial animus) for why he drove so far out of his way into a community of primarily white Republicans and specifically targeted a parade of primarily white Republicans, please provide it.

Lets state the obvious. If the heroic cop who shot at this animal when he initially broke into the parade had actually hit him, people on the left would be crying white supremacy and the cop would be on trial for murder. The MSM would be pitching the "driving while black" meme. You know this. I know this. The whole damn world knows this. It is the primary explanation why crime rates have gone off the chain and why we will eventually reach the highest violent crime rates in American history. After enough decent citizens have been maimed, raped, robbed and murdered.... the pendulum will swing back. Until that point, there will be suffering.

Meanwhile the FBI is hot on the trail of white supremacist terror. Good luck with that. Clown world.

 

All said and done this guy really shouldn't have been out on the streets

 

Same answer as before, not the highest concentration of victims. Why else would the car swerve left when it encountered the band? Why didn't he stop, and flee on foot?

Let's pretend that you are right. Let's see if that works. Brooks has just left his ex-girlfriend's house after some kind of domestic disturbance. We know that he left before the police arrived. The officers that were supposed to respond to the house were redirected to the parade. There is even a report that there was a Knife fight at a boat dock that Brooks might have been involved in. The officers responding to that report said the fight had broken up, and they reported a red Explorer leaving the scene. What we are missing here are timeframes. What time and address did the domestic event take place? What time was the boat dock fight reported? Was Brooks actually at the boat docks, was he just passing by, or was it a different SUV all together? Was the boat dock located on a direct route from his ex's house? It could be that Brooks thought he could hang out at the boat docks. Maybe he thought he could lay low there. But when he saw the police, he took off. I have searched for boat docks in Waukesha, and the closest thing that could be a dock is about two miles away, but I doubt that it would actually be considered a boat dock. It is called High Rollers Fun Rentals. They rent canoes and paddle boats. The closest actual boat rental is more the 7 miles away. In either case, it is far enough away for Brooks to not notice that someone was not chasing him. So, he had no reason to be panicking. Now, let's look at the parade route:

Do you see the red star that is marked "Start"? Now, look to the right of that star. You see Martin St. that turns to the south? Further to the right, you see another intersection. That is N. East St. to the south and Berkley St. to the north. At both those intersections, it was clearly marked, road close parade ahead. Even where Brooks crashed through the barricades, he could have turned north or south on N. Barstow St. Yet, he did not choose to take any of those options. Instead, he plowed straight ahead. Remember, no one was chasing him. He drives down Main St. on the right side of the road until he gets to a point where the road is blocked by a marching band that spans the entire road. Instead of stopping, he plows into them, and still does not stop. He is knocking bodies left and right. They are flying off his hood. At this point the police was pounding on his hood to stop. One officer fires three shots at the vehicle, but Brooks plows straight ahead. He is swerving side to side. Officers and bystanders have said it looks like Brooks was intentionally trying to hit people.

After driving the entire parade route (I do not know if that included the turn onto Wisconsin Ave or not), he drove some distance away. He abandoned his car, coat and even his shoes. He went onto the porch of someone he did not know, and claimed that he needed to use their phone to find out when an Uber was coming. If I had been the man at that house, I would not have let him in. The man said that he was homeless, but waiting on an Uber? He said that it had already been called, but he needed to use the guy's phone to call to see when it would get there? How would a homeless person get to his house without shoes or a coat? No, there was too many holes in that story. I commend the guy for giving him a coat and making him a sandwich, but I still think he is a lucky fool.

Brooks had the presence of mind to abandon his car. I have no idea how he thought abandoning his coat and shoes would help to throw off the cops, but that is what he did. There is too much here that does not make any sense along the lines of your reasoning. A panicked person does not go out of their way to run over people. A person afraid of getting caught after a domestic dispute issue does not decide to add multiple vehicular homicide into the mix.

This is what I believe. Brooks is a racist idiot. He posts on social media about how he wanted to kill white people. (Strangely enough, he idolized Hitler.) His posts equated all white people to being Trump Supporters. He rapped about violence and hating cops. He was already looking at numerous felony convictions. He had a felony warrant in Nevada and legal problems in Georgia. When his Ex called 911, he was afraid that would be the last straw for him. They would not let him bond out a third time. So, he wanted to go out in a blaze of glory. He wanted to make a point about the Rittenhouse verdict (he had posted and rapped about it.) and he wanted the cops to be the ones to take him out. He wanted his name to be up there with Floyd and Blake. The parade made the perfect event. Kill a bunch of white people, and the cops would take him out. Then the media would blast the cops for killing him. This was a suicide by cops triggered by the Rittenhouse verdict. It is the only thing that makes any sense.

 

All said and done this racist genocidal maniac should not have been on the streets.


Apparently he was a fan of Hitler as well. Do you now have enough evidence to call him a racist? Do you have enough evidence to call him a terrorist? I will be honest, I don't believe there is enough evidence on earth to convince you of either. Cognitive dissonance will prevent that for most leftists.



I don't believe this man would have committed this terrorist attack absent the horrific propaganda coming from MSM and Democrat politicians. This is not a one off. There have been multiple black nationalist murders against whites/cops in the past few years. Just last week a white man was set on fire in New York and burned to death by a black racist. The same thing happened in Chicago last summer and Texas last year (white woman cashier). This incident is an escalation in the anti-white violence. This is not a one-off and it is a precursor to more anti-white violence to come.

Propaganda MATTERS. It changes how people think about other people. The tyrants of the 20th century understood this. The MSM understands this. If you demonize white people day after day, year after year, eventually non-white people will be motivated to attack the enemy that the MSM has created for them. This incident is ample evidence of that.

 

It does if you follow all the facts, and apply an ounce of common sense. Read my post to Flyboy56. I see this as Brooks attempting to commit suicide by cop, and chose the parade because of the political/racial statement it would make. Black man killing a bunch of whites taken out by police. How could that not be a political/racial statement. It just didn't work out for Brooks. The cops didn't kill him. Now, he is going to have to face the music he was trying to avoid. Albeit much worse. Now, he is looking at 6 Intentional Homicide charges and more 60 attempted Intentional Homicides. There are two questions that no one on this board has even given a reasonable speculation on the answers. The first is why Brooks did not stop when he saw the road blocked ahead of him. The second is why did he keep going after he started hitting people. You do not hit nearly 70 people by mistake or while panicking. Brooks saw himself joining the ranks of his heroes. Martin, Brown, Floyd and even Hitler (if you can believe that.)

 

Yes propaganda does matter - and while not excluding that you might be right he was fleeing a crime.

I would suggest a hate-crime element rather than terrorism. i.e. possibly a particular distain for white people's lives that he didn't mind a bit of collateral.

In truth we will probably never know.

 

Well one of the issues with the concept of a "hate crime" is determining if that was in fact the motivation. I think if white guy with anti black posts plows through a parade of mostly black people, no one in the media would be seriously doubting that racism was the motivation. Even with no prior evidence of such, like the Pulse nightclub attack, almost all media and lots of ordinary people think it was a hate crime simply because the victims were in a favored class (Hispanic and gay, a twofer), even though the perp explicitly gave the motivation as Islamic terrorism.

In short, we live in a who/whom world, and who the victims are seems to be more important than the perp's motivations. In this case, the victims were mostly white people, probably straight, who are not worthy of any special notice.

 

The cops arrested and interviewed the perp. After that interview, they charged him with INTENTIONAL HOMICIDE. That means the police believe the white people were not collateral damage, they believe that the white people were his primary target. What evidence do you have that suggests the police are wrong and you are right?

I would like people to pay close attention to your answer. Given your worldview, it is impossible for you to acknowledge a reality that contradicts it. This is a product of the human condition (I have the same problem). I am interested in how creative you are in denying that this was a racist hate attack INTENTIONALLY aimed at white people. Any denial is a direct refutation of the reality supplied by the Waukesha DA via the intentional homicide charges.

 

Unfortunately most of the above is just supposition. Your assigning a motive to the crime that may or may not be correct.

What we know for certain at this point is that he resided (or was present) at a location close quite to where the parade was being held, there was a domestic violence or related incident of some kind and that he fled the scene shorty before police arrived. We know he had an extensive criminal history and was on bail for serious charges. We also know (or at least the Police are stating) that there was no pursuit by officers and that some few short minutes afterwards he plowed into the crowd killing 6 people and injuring many others. Finally as of this time no evidence has come to light of significant involvement in radical political causes.

What we don't know are his motives, assuming that is he had any motive other than to avoid arrest. If there were any deep seated political motives they may come to light during his trial (albeit in some rare cases the killers motive is never revealed). In this case I don't see the latter point as being very likely. If it was politically motivated in all likelihood he will make a point of claiming so either during Police interviews or at trial. If it wasn't his lawyer will probability emphasize that point during negotiations over sentencing in the hope of (slightly) reducing his sentence. (A pretty forlorn hope I grant you but hey, what else have they got to work work with? His sterling character? )

The point is, as I keep saying that right now you have no evidence as to his motives and speculating about them on forums like this has the potential to inflame things more than they already are in the US.

Sighing off now its late. BTW I've found the news article I read confirming there was no pursuit (Reuters) but I'm having trouble finding the one that said he left at speed albeit the distance from his home? to the parade is short and given the circumstances he was hardly likely to be moving at a crawl. But I'll keep looking.

 

Very briefly (It 's late) claims like this often come to light (thanks global terrorism) whenever a car plows into a crowd. You see it on the news with reporters speculating about motive and then a little later its revealed to be an elderly driver or a medical emergency, drugs/alcohol or just plain bad driving or even mechanical failure. In other words NOT terrorism. We all tend to rush to judgement and assume the worst.

 

OK, but I think it's safe to assume elderly driver

 

Then why not murder and terrorism?

Have they said that?

I already said it looked like a hate attack. I don't think it was premeditated, but if the DA says it was terrorism I'll accept that.

 

I guess you have some sources that I have not found. You have a source that says where his ex-girlfriend lives? How far from the beginning of the parade route that address is? Do you have a source that says how long it was from the time that his Ex called 911, and he rammed the barricades? Do you have a source that discredits Brooks being the individual driving away from the scene at the boat docks? Or the location of the boat docks in relation of the Ex's house and the start of the parade.

[QUOTE="Monash, post: 1073092042, member: 80061"What we don't know are his motives, assuming that is he had any motive other than to avoid arrest. If there were any deep seated political motives they may come to light during his trial (albeit in some rare cases the killers motive is never revealed). In this case I don't see the latter point as being very likely. If it was politically motivated in all likelihood he will make a point of claiming so either during Police interviews or at trial. If it wasn't his lawyer will probability emphasize that point during negotiations over sentencing in the hope of (slightly) reducing his sentence. (A pretty forlorn hope I grant you but hey, what else have they got to work work with? His sterling character? )

The point is, as I keep saying that right now you have no evidence as to his motives and speculating about them on forums like this has the potential to inflame things more than they already are in the US.

Sighing off now its late. BTW I've found the news article I read confirming there was no pursuit (Reuters) but I'm having trouble finding the one that said he left at speed albeit the distance from his home? to the parade is short and given the circumstances he was hardly likely to be moving at a crawl. But I'll keep looking.[/QUOTE]

Here is a factor that needs to be calculated into the equation. Brooks lives with his mother that bailed him out twice this year. They live in Milwaukee. Which is to the east of Waukesha. When Brooks hit the barricades at the corner of White Rock and E. Main St., then traveled more than a half a mile down E. Main St, he was traveling west. That was going away from his home. So, where was he going? Where was he supposedly running to? It is human nature to run home when panicked. Not the opposite direction. Sorry, but the "panicked" supposition does not hold water.

So, either provide sources as to the location of the Ex's house, the time of the 911 call and proof that Brooks was not involved in the incident at the boat docks. Or admit to your own suppositions in this matter. BTW, I have said directly that everything that we know of motive is pure speculations. The main difference is that mine is based on evidence and my own research. As far as us hearing from Brooks on a motive from now on, is highly doubtful. If this was a political/racial statement, then the police would want to keep it quiet. They would not want copy-cats or someone doing as the BLM leader is trying to do and rally others to commit their own acts of violence. A defense attorney would want to keep Brooks quiet. Without this being identified as a politically/racially act, they can keep his social media posts and song lyrics out of the trail. If Brooks makes a public statement as to that type of motive, then all that comes in. Further, it could hamper his case if they were to plead insanity. A judge would want to keep such statement out to guard against jury nullification. Therefore, it is no one's best interest for Brooks to reveal his motive.

 

Either I said "most people assume it", or I called him a white supremacist. I never called him white supremacist, and for whatever reason that bothers you. Stop lying little mike.

These people can't get race out of their minds.

 

Not creative, feigned ignorance.

From Wisconsin statute: he is being charged with the crime of running down people with the intent of killing them. There is no charge more serious than that in Wisconsin. They are charging him with a crime that carries a mandatory life sentence.




The Waukesha DA has indicated with these charges they think his intent was to murder those people.

Are you still going to dispute this? Of course you are, it conflicts with your worldview. Please explain to us why the Waukesha DA is wrong in accusing this defendant of INTENTIONALLY running down 60+ white people in order to kill them. I'll get the popcorn.

 

Ok, if that's the case I stand completely corrected then. It does appear to be a terrorist attack, in that it is a deliberate massacre.

Note again, though, that the supposition that he intended to only kill white people is yours, not the DAs.

Let's see if he spills the beans during interview about his motivations.

 

This is mass ****ing murder. Federal hate crime mass murder. This piece of **** should be executed.