FBI Opens Investigation into Shooting of Michael Brown

[Easy Mac]

From what I understand, Trump's people rarely allow him to tweet or post himself anymore. Started about 2 weeks ago I believe.

[thesloppy]

I was 14 in '85 and that article is the first I've heard of MOVE or the Philly bombing. Crazy stuff.

[Toddzilla]

S-H-R-U-G, not shurg

[Edward64]

Don't know all the details yet and postmortem to be done but doesn't seem that they exhausted all options first (e.g. tear gas, flash bang?).

Not that he deserved to live but may make recreating chain of events and accomplices easier.

[Suicane75]

I was very young and not too much into caring about shit that like at the time, but I remember seeing it live and since my mom watched the 6 O'clock news every night it was hard to avoid. It's kind of been washed away over time though as it's hardly brought up, even around here, anymore.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Toddzilla

S-H-R-U-G, not shurg

*shurg*

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Oh! I remember that! Was a big deal for current events for quiz bowl stuff in high school.

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

Well I live just outside Philly, and I was shocked when I first learned about it just a few months ago. I would have thought that it at least would have been brought up by some talking head during the news cycles for things like Waco, Oregon standoff, etc.

Originally Posted by thesloppy

I was 14 in '85 and that article is the first I've heard of MOVE or the Philly bombing. Crazy stuff.

Puzzle: Musical Password - Front Office Football Central

[cuervo72]

Also, Cam mention: NRA podcast breaks silence on police shooting of Philando Castile in Minnesota | Daily Mail Online

[Neuqua]

'What we know does not look good. Our right to keep and bear arms is not based on the color of our skin.'



..... That's it?

[jeff061]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Don't know all the details yet and postmortem to be done but doesn't seem that they exhausted all options first (e.g. tear gas, flash bang?).

Not that he deserved to live but may make recreating chain of events and accomplices easier.

They supposed to incapacitate him and then storm the bomb? If he wanted to sit there and hug a bomb, I'm not sure another way out. They needed to disable the bomb before engaging him.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by jeff061

They supposed to incapacitate him and then storm the bomb? If he wanted to sit there and hug a bomb, I'm not sure another way out. They needed to disable the bomb before engaging him.

He had a bomb on him?

[Ben E Lou]

The Newt Gingrich quote is getting a fair bit of press. Some are bashing him for the use of "normal," but in context if you watch the entire discussion and note the general informality of it, it's completely understandable and fairly clear that he just meant "the average white guy."

Newt Gingrich: white in U.S. ‘don’t understand being black in America’ | Political Insider blog

Here's the discussion in its entirety: https://www.facebook.com/newtgingric...4285798134197/

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Oh, absolutely not. But I expected him to have tweeted something either mind-numbingly idiotic or incredibly offensive (or both!) well before now. He hasn't exactly shown a penchant to wait for his people to suggest reasonable responses to thing...

Yeah, I don't even recognize this guy.


ABC Breaking News | Latest News Videos

[jeff061]

Originally Posted by Edward64

He had a bomb on him?

Completely misread earlier posts, apologies. Yeah, odd decision, but I'm having trouble caring all that much.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by Toddzilla

S-H-R-U-G, not shurg

*shurg*

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Toddzilla

S-H-R-U-G, not shurg

n00b

[QuikSand]

fun stuff

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Edward64

He had a bomb on him?

He (allegedly) claimed to have bombs in the parking garage and "all over the city", which I think even the chief was implying they didn't believe, but I'm not going to blame then for not taking a chance.

Btw, has anything else officially been released on the other people? I know that one guy in the crowd with camo & a rifle has been cleared, but I can't tell if they've officially narrowed it down to that one guy or still thought there were others shooting from elevated positions - I could certainly understand in that environment with all those buildings and echoes erroneously thinking there was more than one shooter. (And unfortunately either way it'll lead to conspiracy theories just like that last notable shooting in Dallas.)

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by Neuqua

'What we know does not look good. Our right to keep and bear arms is not based on the color of our skin.'



..... That's it?

My thoughts too, pretty weak.

[MrBug708]

So why did he have a problem with the BLM movement? Not militant?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Don't know all the details yet and postmortem to be done but doesn't seem that they exhausted all options first (e.g. tear gas, flash bang?).

Not that he deserved to live but may make recreating chain of events and accomplices easier.

He was being uncooperative and firing on them any time they made a move. Sounds like he was barricaded somewhere and had body armor on. Plus he had told the cops he had bombs. If they couldn't get a sniper shot on him, this seems like the next best option.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I find one shooter considerably difficult to believe. All the shots don't even sound like they match up to the weapons identified as being on him (that first loud crack).

And if one guy did take down 10 cops by himself, even with ambush advantage, something is amiss or he was significantly more adept than his military record would suggest as likely.

[RainMaker]

From what I gather he had body armor on. You could see in one of the videos a cop hit him with a bullet and it had no impact on him at all.

I think it benefited him that it was done with a crowd nearby. Probably just chaos with cops not knowing where the shots were coming from. Also wouldn't be surprised if we ended up finding out there was a friendly fire or two during the chaos.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

From what I gather he had body armor on.

Still, that shit don't turn you into Iron Man. Nor even a Fallout-universe tank character.

I'm generally anti-conspiracy theory, most simple answers turn out to be the right ones. But if they stick to the lone gunman thing, there's a lot of questions to be answered before I'm going to be able to remove my doubts.

[RainMaker]

Also I wouldn't be surprised if they find out people helped him. Looks like his sister would be a good place to start.

Dallas Sniper's Sister Called Cops, White People Murderers In Facebook Post Night Before Kin's Killing Spree | The Smoking Gun

Then again the feds have been giving a pass to accomplices of terrorists of late.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Still, that shit don't turn you into Iron Man. Nor even a Fallout-universe tank character.

I'm generally anti-conspiracy theory, most simple answers turn out to be the right ones. But if they stick to the lone gunman thing, there's a lot of questions to be answered before I'm going to be able to remove my doubts.

Yeah I don't know much about the stuff that's available. I do remember the North Hollywood shootout where bullets were just bouncing off the guys. They were walking in the middle of the street without a fear in the world.

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I find one shooter considerably difficult to believe. All the shots don't even sound like they match up to the weapons identified as being on him (that first loud crack).

I don't know shit about firearms, but those 2-3 loud shots stuck out to me too, amidst all the consistent sound of semi-auto chatter. Maybe Police shotgun fire? There was a lot of cruisers around for cover, and a cruiser's riot shotgun might've been the highest power weapon available at the time?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

I don't know shit about firearms, but those 2-3 loud shots stuck out to me too, amidst all the consistent sound of semi-auto chatter. Maybe Police shotgun fire? There was a lot of cruisers around for cover, and a cruiser's riot shotgun might've been the highest power weapon available at the time?

What's wrong with that return-fire notion, at least to my ears (which are certainly nowhere near "trained") is the location. In comparison to the others, it sounds closer and from elevation, the way the sound echoes I guess.

A friend who is far more familiar reassured me that I'm certainly not screwball nuts, they heard the same thing & had the same questions. While obviously not definitive, that was certainly reassuring to me. They went on to raise some other issues with what we've seen & heard on the various amateur video clips versus the weapons that have been accounted for officially thus far.

I'm not suggesting some sort of nefarious multi-agency government cover up here (not with what we have to this point), I'm just not confident that this is all as nailed down as it sounds like we're being told.

[CU Tiger]

Jon I'm with you. It's a video that isn't best quality but gun to my head, I'm guessing there were multiplenty guns

[BishopMVP]

If he was firing from multiple levels of a parking garage as I think DPD was saying (especially if it was from different sides at times), then I could understand getting that many while everyone's confused. (And like I said, I assume having all the tall buildings there made it really hard to identify exactly where the shots were initially coming from). But you clearly have him moving at ground level, then he later gets cornered in the parking garage, so the timelines not making much sense to me either.

I also suspect (rightfully so) that the DPD etc will try to keep details of what body armor was used and the exact tactics under wraps, but I'm guessing that information is going to get out soon enough.

[AENeuman]

saw Louie CK last night, was a wonderful, cathartic break from the madness of the week. He was awesome and did a great 15 minute riff on the week to start show.

Then, walking out of the show on to the civic center the city hall is lit in red white and blue, the flag is at half mask, there's a demonstration on the steps, and a huge line of people coming up hugging and comforting the police officers. So surreal...

[Dutch]

As far as I'm concerned the media, albeit not their true aim, is spiraling this out of control. In their zeal to make money and ratings, it's crippling the discussion.

I think the new Jon Stewart (don't know his name, sorry I don't watch CC, it popped up on You-Tube) said it best. "Can we be for black people and for cops? Best does it have to be one or the other?"

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Dutch

"Can we be for black people and for cops? Best does it have to be one or the other?"

Law-abiding ones, that follow lawful instructions from law enforcement?
Sure thing, I'm down with it.

Ones that defend every two-bit thug no matter what the situation, as long as "da man" is the opposition?
Those worthless fucks can roast in hell afaic.

Hey, whaddya know ... my statement is entirely color-blind, the exact same criteria applies to everyone regardless of race.

By & large, it's not a black/white thing, it's a lowlifes vs decency thing. That the public "faces" of that conflict happen to have a visible racial skew, could all be entirely coincidental. Regardless, it's definitely irrelevant to my take.

My contempt for BLM "protestors" is equal regardless of whether they're black, white, or purple.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Dutch

As far as I'm concerned the media, albeit not their true aim, is spiraling this out of control. In their zeal to make money and ratings, it's crippling the discussion.

I think the new Jon Stewart (don't know his name, sorry I don't watch CC, it popped up on You-Tube) said it best. "Can we be for black people and for cops? Best does it have to be one or the other?"

Part of the problem I have with that angle though is that without the media, we're not having this discussion at all. I think a point the BLM types try to make is that this behavior isn't new, it's just that we're finally seeing it now thanks to phone cameras, the internet, etc. Media largely follows the trends here - if something is blowing up online, then they report on it. (I had this complaint about ABC, where they basically have a segment reporting on the viral video of the day.) I learned about both of these shootings first online (Now, if you want to blame FB for making this more visible, go ahead; or for online media which often is more slanted throwing opinions around. I don't think it's as simple as blaming a monolithic "media" though).

I don't want to see anyone shot. I'm not happy seeing citizens shot, nor law enforcement. Part of why I personally get up in arms though is because some people obviously don't care about both sides. Jon at least freely admits it (from an authoritarian rather than a race standpoint), others hem around it (but he did this, but he should have done that) or only make this an issue post-Dallas. There was no budding race war before that; I have a guy who is in the State Legislature back home in my feed. Didn't say a PEEP about the LA/MN shootings. But he was quick to blame race baiters, "certain politicians," etc. after Dallas happened (as he is any time something happens to a current/retired officer, firefighter, etc....dude does know his constituency, I guess). Blaming them comes off to me as akin to saying "hey, black folk - don't say anything, cops might get hurt."

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

I learned about both of these shootings first online

In fairness though, how much of that is because of media versus how much because of your own media usage habits?

It's a minor sidebar either way of course, I'm just asking cause it happened to catch my eye. The 24/7 immediacy of the online platforms is rendering a lot of the traditional formats increasingly irrelevant, even local coverage (Dallas Morning News) of the shootings was posting to Twitter before their own website. (Then again, Twitter was working while the influx of traffic crashed their website)

[JonInMiddleGA]

Meanwhile in Dallas today ... DPD HQ is locked down with SWAT deployed after threats made by "a group from Houston". Worth noting IMO is that while the building is said to be locked down, those paying their respects at the memorial site outside the building haven't even been asked to clear the area. That suggest to me, despite the headline, the perceived threat level is pretty low.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/crime...adquarters.ece

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Law-abiding ones, that follow lawful instructions from law enforcement?
Sure thing, I'm down with it.

Ones that defend every two-bit thug no matter what the situation, as long as "da man" is the opposition?
Those worthless fucks can roast in hell afaic.

Hey, whaddya know ... my statement is entirely color-blind, the exact same criteria applies to everyone regardless of race.

By & large, it's not a black/white thing, it's a lowlifes vs decency thing. That the public "faces" of that conflict happen to have a visible racial skew, could all be entirely coincidental. Regardless, it's definitely irrelevant to my take.

My contempt for BLM "protestors" is equal regardless of whether they're black, white, or purple.

I can't/won't deny that the dividing line between criminals and "decent folk" is probably better defined by class than race, but to ignore that race has a systemic influence on class is more tone-deaf than color-blind.

[cuervo72]

I guess it's a chicken or the egg question. It's true that I would have learned about these by watching the evening news even if I hadn't been online. But I'm not sure if they would have reported the Sterling/Castile shootings if the stories hadn't already blown up. Certainly not without video. There have been 500+ killed by police so far this year and I've only heard about a few (granted, most "common" ones aren't going to rise above local reporting). I'd say most if not all fallen officers make the evening news. Certainly Dallas would have.

But yeah - overall, evening TV news is headed down the road of evening newspapers...

(edit: though I guess with us older folk TV news can still act to legitimize a story)

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

I can't/won't deny that the dividing line between criminals and "decent folk" is probably better defined by class than race, but to ignore that race has a systemic influence on class is more tone-deaf than color-blind.

I tolerate few, if any, excuses for behaviors.

Apparently I lack the necessary prejudice to dismiss actions merely on the basis of race or socio-economic status. Maybe it's just experiential though, I've known plenty of people from every background that proved themselves perfectly capable of not being a lowlife. {shrug}

[cuervo72]

Is there a criteria for people absolving themselves? Like CU Tiger. He's alluded to a pretty checkered past. Is he clear of lowlife status now? If so, why, and at what point down the road was he in the clear?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Is there a criteria for people absolving themselves? Like CU Tiger. He's alluded to a pretty checkered past. Is he clear of lowlife status now? If so, why, and at what point down the road was he in the clear?

The most critical factor is typically going to be "have you ceased said behavior".
I mean, that would seem like a rather obvious starting point.

You can't really be caught in the act of screwing a goat & have a bonafide claim of being a "rehabilitated goat screwer"

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

screwing a goat & have a bonafide claim of being a "rehabilitated goat screwer"

Tell it all, brutha. Tell it all!!!

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Tell it all, brutha. Tell it all!!!

Don' believe I'da tol' that.

(And I'm probably laughing almost as hard now imagining the deprived folks who have no clue what either of us are talking about as I did at the joke )

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Don' believe I'da tol' that.

(And I'm probably laughing almost as hard now imagining the deprived folks who have no clue what either of us are talking about as I did at the joke )

Beat me to it!

BTW I have a checkered past, but NO GOATS!

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by Dutch

I think the new Jon Stewart (don't know his name, sorry I don't watch CC, it popped up on You-Tube) said it best. "Can we be for black people and for cops? Best does it have to be one or the other?"

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Law-abiding ones, that follow lawful instructions from law enforcement?
Sure thing, I'm down with it.

Ones that defend every two-bit thug no matter what the situation, as long as "da man" is the opposition?
Those worthless fucks can roast in hell afaic.

Hey, whaddya know ... my statement is entirely color-blind, the exact same criteria applies to everyone regardless of race.

One of the problems with todays society is the natural reaction is "who is to blame?". Which directly leads to good vs. bad. Which polarizes. Which leads to divison, fear, and scaremongering.

Very little in real life is black and white, but today's society puts people in boxes, and there's no overlap. Where's the Venn diagram when you need one?

You can be a cop and a good person. You can be a Muslim and a good US citizen. You can be a gun owner and a rational human being.

In today's quick fix media, all about the scoop, all about the ratings, you've got to be pigeon-holed, got to be one or the other.

Just like other aspects of life, there is no putting this persective, this rationale, back in the box, and i do fear for modern society's capacity to rise above social and racial stereotypes, which only propagates fear, division and hatred.

[cuervo72]

Harkening back to my FIL and the "not belonging here" sentiment, how do we get beyond stuff like this?

Pokémon GoÂ*Could Be A Death Sentence For A Black Man

When I saw this post I nearly fell out from laughter lol. More ironic since not only was I thinking this when I first download the app, but I have experienced it first hand. I live in a predominantly white neighborhood (City as well) and I’m in a interracial marriage of 16 years with 4 kids. I’m never a threat to anyone. I do not venture outside much as I really have no reason except to walk my dogs or take the kids out to play. I work 6a-6p 5 days a week so when I do go out its usually late. I intentionally leave my work clothes (dress shirt and tie)on and I’m overly friendly and nice even when no one is around cause I don’t want to risk anything. I spent about 20 mins walking and searching for my Pokemon around the neighborhood before a guy walks up and asks what I’m doing. I laugh it off and kindly explain I’m playing a mobile game Pokemon Go and even make a joke about it being a kids game that has me wandering around looking for virtual pets. He laughed and said he was just checking on it since a neighbor was concerned about me walking around. I pointed to my home and stated that I’d lived here for over 5 years. And there it was, a patrol car pulls up. Either he called before stopping me or someone else. Luckily nothing came of it and my wife walked down to see what the hell was taking so long. We talked with the cop and the guy for a while about kids and the schools just bantering, but all of that for Pokemon Go. My wife was pretty upset, but I wasn’t. It is just how it goes 99% of the time being a black guy in areas that aren’t 100% black. I’ll still play, but only when walking with my wife and kids so I guess I’m not so threatening. Sadly unless you experience it daily it’s very hard to grasp.

I know Tiger and others like to be prepared for any situation. Does anyone (white) prepare for having to deal with this?

[RainMaker]

A white person walking around Englewood probably has a unique situation too.

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I tolerate few, if any, excuses for behaviors.

Apparently I lack the necessary prejudice to dismiss actions merely on the basis of race or socio-economic status. Maybe it's just experiential though, I've known plenty of people from every background that proved themselves perfectly capable of not being a lowlife. {shrug}

Yeah..I think part of the issue is that make perfect sense for judging individuals, but get messy when judging groups or making generalizations. I don't know if you can apply the same standards, and if you're actually able to confine your judgment of people to each individual case than you're pretty rare.

That said, I feel like pointing out that I'm kind of engaging in a bit of the current liberal double-speak which seems comfortable profiling & labeling black people (and men particularly) as criminals...but only as long as it's in terms of society's victim. I'm certainly not arguing in favor of police profiling, or trying to justify police violence, but I just know sometimes it makes me feel uncomfortable to realize that it's pretty much the exact same justification/judgement, and it seems dishonest to not acknowledge or question it in some way.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

A white person walking around Englewood probably has a unique situation too.

Would a middle-class black person be comfortable walking around Englewood?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Beat me to it!

BTW I have a checkered past, but NO GOATS!

What's that song?

"I ain't afraid'a no goats"