Michael Brown Shooting and Aftermath

[Derec]

Has anyone here known Derec from the early 1980's?

I barely know myself from the early 80s.

I'm just curious what his opinion was of John Walsh.

It's a common enough name so you'll have to be more specific.

Did it mirror the vile crap he spews about the parents of Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin and every other young black male killed?

Certainly not "every other black male killed". That's a baseless accusation.

 

[Derec]

I will urge other participants to not run with that derailing question by fueling it with replies. You, Derec, can start your own thread with an Op leading a discussion towards which nations commit human rights abuse and what the percentage of those abuses are per nation. Clear enough?

We have to clarify this before I can engage with anything else you write. When we discuss UN's response to a certain thing (Michael Brown shooting and the riots/protests in the aftermath) the credibility (or lack thereof) of UN bodies is highly relevant. Thus mentioning them always gunning for Israel and US is neither derailing nor a "hobbyhorse".

 

[Sabine Grant]

I will urge other participants to not run with that derailing question by fueling it with replies. You, Derec, can start your own thread with an Op leading a discussion towards which nations commit human rights abuse and what the percentage of those abuses are per nation. Clear enough?

We have to clarify this before I can engage with anything else you write. When we discuss UN's response to a certain thing (Michael Brown shooting and the riots/protests in the aftermath) the credibility (or lack thereof) of UN bodies is highly relevant. Thus mentioning them always gunning for Israel and US is neither derailing nor a "hobbyhorse".

You asked a question which I clearly quoted where you are expecting respondents to provide their opinion on whether Israel commit half of the human rights abuse in the world. For the last time, I am asking you to start your own thread rather than you engaging in arguing that you are not derailing this thread. In your own thread, you would be able to discuss the credibility and lack of of UN resolutions at your heart content to include discussing which nations commit human rights abuse and what percentage of abuse per nation.

 

[Derec]

You asked a question which I clearly quoted where you are expecting respondents to provide their opinion on whether Israel commit half of the human rights abuse in the world. For the last time, I am asking you to start your own thread rather than you engaging in arguing that you are not derailing this thread. In your own thread, you would be able to discuss the credibility and lack of of UN resolutions at your heart content to include discussing which nations commit human rights abuse and what percentage of abuse per nation.

That question was not asked in a vacuum but specifically to address the biases and lack of credibility of the UN human rights bodies.
Neither did I intend to start a long, detailed discussion about Israel and human rights. That Israel is not responsible for anything within an order of magnitude to almost half of worldwide human rights abuses should be clear to even the most staunch pro-Palestinian on here. Yet, UN so-called human rights council passed almost half of its resolutions against Israel which shows clear, unambiguous and gross bias. So why should we trust them to deal in any way fairly with the issue of Ferguson?

Your complaints about this are becoming a much bigger derail that if you'd just address my question directly.

 

[Sabine Grant]

TFT Moderation Team.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

You asked a question which I clearly quoted where you are expecting respondents to provide their opinion on whether Israel commit half of the human rights abuse in the world. For the last time, I am asking you to start your own thread rather than you engaging in arguing that you are not derailing this thread. In your own thread, you would be able to discuss the credibility and lack of of UN resolutions at your heart content to include discussing which nations commit human rights abuse and what percentage of abuse per nation.

That question was not asked in a vacuum but specifically to address the biases and lack of credibility of the UN human rights bodies.

Let's keep it on topic. So if the UN is so ineffective what will it do in Ferguson? Agenda 21 the cops?

So why should we trust them to deal in any way fairly with the issue of Ferguson?

What exactly can they do and why do you think that they can do anything? And why aren't you bringing up other examples if you are serious about discussion of the Ferguson situation?

Let's stay on topic here and talk about how effective a UN conference in Switzerland will be in the unfolding events in Ferguson (and NOT bring up the Middle East).

In my opinion it will not have any effect at all beyond rustling the feathers of the most extreme wingnuts, intellectually dishonest, and the plain stupid.

 

[laughing dog]

I will urge other participants to not run with that derailing question by fueling it with replies. You, Derec, can start your own thread with an Op leading a discussion towards which nations commit human rights abuse and what the percentage of those abuses are per nation. Clear enough?

We have to clarify this before I can engage with anything else you write. When we discuss UN's response to a certain thing (Michael Brown shooting and the riots/protests in the aftermath) the credibility (or lack thereof) of UN bodies is highly relevant. Thus mentioning them always gunning for Israel and US is neither derailing nor a "hobbyhorse".

Since the topic of discussion is Michael Brown's parents attendance at an UN conference, the UN response is not relevant. And certainly not the UN response to alleged incidents in other countries. There are many steps of logic missing between the parents' attendance and your claim.

 

[Sabine Grant]

That question was not asked in a vacuum but specifically to address the biases and lack of credibility of the UN human rights bodies.

Let's keep it on topic. So if the UN is so ineffective what will it do in Ferguson? Agenda 21 the cops?

So why should we trust them to deal in any way fairly with the issue of Ferguson?

What exactly can they do and why do you think that they can do anything? And why aren't you bringing up other examples if you are serious about discussion of the Ferguson situation?

Let's stay on topic here and talk about how effective a UN conference in Switzerland will be in the unfolding events in Ferguson (and NOT bring up the Middle East).

In my opinion it will not have any effect at all beyond rustling the feathers of the most extreme wingnuts, intellectually dishonest, and the plain stupid.

It might place some pressure on the US Department of Justice to automatically step in and conduct an investigation on any suspected case of police brutality across the nation. Note I said "might". So many of those cases are left to being investigated by the local law enforcement body itself whose members/personnel are suspected to have abused the public or a member of the public in the course of their functions or assignments. Because the law enforcement milieu (like the military) is known to protect their own, it is necessary to have an exterior body (so to speak) dedicated to insure that internal investigations on suspected police brutality cases in the US be conducted objectively and fairly.

 

[Trausti]

It might place some pressure on the US Department of Justice to automatically step in and conduct an investigation on any suspected case of police brutality across the nation. Note I said "might". So many of those cases are left to being investigated by the local law enforcement body itself whose members/personnel are suspected to have abused the public or a member of the public in the course of their functions or assignments. Because the law enforcement milieu (like the military) is known to protect their own, it is necessary to have an exterior body (so to speak) dedicated to insure that internal investigations on suspected police brutality cases in the US be conducted objectively and fairly.

We already have that; they're called plaintiff's attorneys.

 

[blastula]

Update: Michael Brown's mother accused in armed robbery of Ferguson vendors selling t-shirts commemorating her son's death

The article says the incident is being investigated as an "armed robbery". Like mother, like son, I guess, or rather the other way around in this case. It also gives mother's age as 34, which according to Adam Ries, means that she was only 16 when she had Michael. Kind of explains a lot, doesn't it?

No, it doesn't explain much of relevance.

Do you think this does about Wilson?

His mother, Tonya Harris, died when he was 16. Records show that she had a long history with law enforcement, pleading guilty to numerous counts of forgery and stealing. In 2001, she was sentenced to five years in prison, although she appears to have served most, if not all, of it on probation.
Records indicate that Wilson’s stepfather, Tyler Harris, took guardianship of him in 2003.

The Washington Post

 

[RavenSky]

I barely know myself from the early 80s.

I'm just curious what his opinion was of John Walsh.

It's a common enough name so you'll have to be more specific.

Did it mirror the vile crap he spews about the parents of Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin and every other young black male killed?

Certainly not "every other black male killed". That's a baseless accusation.

The fact that you don't know who I am talking about means that you didn't/don't slander the shit out of him for *cashing in* on his son's horrific murder...

Just as I figured.

 

[Derec]

The fact that you don't know who I am talking about means that you didn't/don't slander the shit out of him for *cashing in* on his son's horrific murder...

Early 80s were a bit before my time.
That said, I think you mean the "To Catch a Predator" guy on TV. Never watched his show and had no idea his son was murdered and that this sparked his obsession with sex offenders. Although his son's case was a clear-cut case of murder (a particularly grizzly one, as like in that Ledbelly/Nirvana song, they found his head but his body was never found).
Reading his wiki page though he seems to be a grade A asshole with an unhealthy obsession.

 

[Derec]

Still waiting for the decision of the grand jury. In the meantime, pro-indictment group "Justice for Mike Brown" has released a list of targets in the case things don't go their way. Most, like Anheuser-Busch, St. Louis Art Museum, Peabody Opera House or the Missouri Botanical Garden have no connection to the case whatsoever.
Things could get very ugly real soon ...

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Gateway Pundit? Really?

Sounds like the right-wing noise machines are out in force.

Here is a map of possible protest spaces. Remember, we actively advocate and profess the importance of peaceful protest. We do not support, condone, or encourage violence.

 

[Derec]

Gateway Pundit? Really?

Sounds like the right-wing noise machines are out in force.

Here is a map of possible protest spaces. Remember, we actively advocate and profess the importance of peaceful protest. We do not support, condone, or encourage violence.

Yeah. Peaceful protest. Like when they looted and torched that QuickTrip.
But even if it remains peaceful, why protest at all those places that have nothing to do with the case? Seems counterproductive to me - you will just annoy people that want to visit the museum or that work at Anheuser-Busch.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Oh Derec, they are choosing places of high visibility with easy access. Once again these are proposed protest sites. They have the Constitutional right to annoy.

 

[marc]

Things could get very ugly real soon ...

So any opinion on how ugly things could get considering the KKK's threat of lethal force for 'self defense'?

 

[Derec]

Oh Derec, they are choosing places of high visibility with easy access. Once again these are proposed protest sites. They have the Constitutional right to annoy.

It's still a bad idea to annoy people who have nothing to do with the case just because their location is "high visibility" with "easy access". It's only going to drive people into opposition to the protesters' cause, especially if there is violence, as is likely, and to which the protesters certainly have no constitutional right to.

- - - Updated - - -

So any opinion on how ugly things could get considering the KKK's threat of lethal force for 'self defense'?

Yes, especially if they run into New Black Panthers.

 

[Rhea]

Gateway Pundit? Really?

Sounds like the right-wing noise machines are out in force.

Yeah. Peaceful protest. Like when they looted and torched that QuickTrip.
But even if it remains peaceful, why protest at all those places that have nothing to do with the case? Seems counterproductive to me - you will just annoy people that want to visit the museum or that work at Anheuser-Busch.

who is "they" and how are "they" related to the protesters, and how do you know that?

 

[AthenaAwakened]

I see the "scary black people" are still haunting the minds of the willfully fearful and easily hatefilled.