home

Tuesday Open Thread

My new Spanish learning program, Fluenz, arrived yesterday. I'm going to try it out now, so I won't be blogging much today.

It is really cold here.

Forecasters say temperatures in Denver will top out at 4 degrees on Tuesday before dropping to as low as minus 9 at night with a wind chill of minus 15. A 70 percent chance of snow remains until this evening through which about an inch is expected to fall.

This is an open thread. All topics welcome.

(I also put up an open thread at the wordpress site. You can comment at either or both. Comments there will help me get the bugs out.)

< ISIS End of Year Wrap: Where Are They Now? | New Year's Eve Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Merry New Year! (5.00 / 4) (#1)
    by kdog on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 01:54:53 PM EST
    I signed up at Wordpress but don't see an open thread up yet...FYI.

    The New Year's celebrations begin tonight...a little Dark Star Orchestra action at The Paramount.  Depending on the stupendousity of the set, I might just double-dip and blow off a low key NYE shindig and go again tomorrow night.  

    Here they are performing "Eyes of The World" at Mountain Jam last year...one of the highs of my 2014 highs and lows.

     

    Have a blast, my man (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by Dadler on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 02:03:19 PM EST
    Great clip. Max grooves. Queen Dadler and I will be having dinner in The City tomorrow night to celebrate our anniversary. Probably hit the local Irish Pub down the hill for a beverage or two before retiring fairly early to the boudoir.

    Peace out.

    Parent

    Congratulations! (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by kdog on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 02:18:43 PM EST
    I know you always say you're the lucky one, but the Queen is pretty damn lucky too, as all of us at TL can testify.  I always feel better about the world knowing you be in it.

    I'll be smoking tonight to many more happy years together for the Dadlers, amongst other things;)  

    Hope your achy back is up to the task at hand my good man! ;)

    Parent

    Thanks, Dog (none / 0) (#88)
    by Dadler on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 10:12:15 AM EST
    You're a good man. Love knowing I always have you to find in NYC whenever I'm there.

    Parent
    kdog, go to the new premium site, (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by fishcamp on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 04:35:32 PM EST
    and check out all the fish we caught today.  You would have loved it.  Have fun up there and be careful my friend.  BTW, it was 80 degrees here today.  cheers...

    Parent
    Quite a haul... (none / 0) (#97)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 10:57:34 AM EST
    feel fry to throw a couple filets in a box with dry ice my brother!

    Parent
    just got it posted (none / 0) (#12)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 02:53:30 PM EST
    I forgot to hit publish before

    Parent
    Richard Pryor plays drums for Sly Stone (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Dadler on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 01:57:27 PM EST
    Well worth a look... (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by kdog on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 02:26:30 PM EST
    even without sound in the cubicle cell.

    Talk about a White Christmas...Sly looks high as f*ck, and Richard just hides it a little better.  I love 70's TV clips...everybody high or drunk or their fly is open.

    Parent

    Always look to the right on YouTube (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 02:34:54 PM EST
    With Jimmy Dynamite Walker AND Kenny Rogers (none / 0) (#90)
    by Dadler on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 10:15:03 AM EST
    Was that the great 70s lineup or what. And Walker saying he loves listening to Andres Segovia to relax. That's some real life change-up stuff righter there. Be-You-Tea-Full.  

    Parent
    That is hilarious! (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by sj on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 05:44:09 PM EST
    "Beautiful and strange and high and classic" says it all.

    Parent
    My jaw is still kind of hanging open (none / 0) (#91)
    by Dadler on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 10:15:51 AM EST
    Don't know how the hell I stumbled across it, but I did. And happy as hell about it. ;-)

    Parent
    John Cleese (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 02:17:35 PM EST
    NYC police throw a tantrum. Demand (5.00 / 7) (#6)
    by caseyOR on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 02:25:36 PM EST
    de Blasio debase himself before them. Begin a work stoppage.

    NY Magazine is reporting that NYC police are engaging in a work stoppage because their feelings have been so badly hurt by people who think the cops first response to seeing a person of color, which seems to be shoot them, is wrong.

    So, the cops are only arresting people when it is necessary. My question? How is this a bad thing? Shouldn't this be the regular policy? Only arrest people when it is necessary?

    Excellent questions.... (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by kdog on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 02:33:17 PM EST
    finally the NYPD does something right...make it a permanent "work stoppage" and do the citizenry a f*ckin' favor!

    The NYPD has become an all-out embarrassment to NYC.  Petulant children all because the Mayor had the balls to say what everybody with half a brain has known for decades. If you are the parent of any kid, but especially a black kid, and you're not teaching them of the possible dangers of dealing with police you are being remiss in your parental responsibilities.

    Parent

    How about teaching kids not to resist arrest? (2.00 / 1) (#10)
    by McBain on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 02:49:10 PM EST
    There wouldn't be many police shootings if people just did what the cops told them to.

    Parent
    That's what the mayor basically told his son... (5.00 / 8) (#13)
    by kdog on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 03:12:10 PM EST
    no sudden moves, follow lawful commands, say nothing, call Dad.  This is controversial?

    Now I think it's a shame we have to teach our children this...in a better world with better laws and better cops it need not be...but this is the world we live in.  My pops taught me the same and I'm white.  

    Parent

    Yes, it is a shame (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by Zorba on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 04:31:48 PM EST
    And it's also a shame that some cops think that they can over-ride your rights.  Not all of their commands, after all, are lawful.
    Just because a cop tells you to do something, doesn't mean that you are resisting "arrest" if you object to it.
    We are not supposed to be a police state, after all.
    See, for example, this.
    And this.
    BTW, kdog, there are some apps that you might find interesting, here.

    Parent
    Problem is (5.00 / 4) (#26)
    by nycstray on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 04:42:24 PM EST
    you can forget those lessons when instinct takes over. Somebody grabs your wrist, you might instinctively pull away . . . . the thinking brain is not always as quick as we would like it to be.

    Parent
    Indeed... (none / 0) (#98)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 11:11:27 AM EST
    and also easier said than done when your subject to police harassment on the regular, like the late Mr. Eric Garner was.  

    Only so much degradation a person can take.  It's a lot easier to swallow your pride and dignity, and bend over and take it, when you find yourself in the crosshairs once in a blue.

    For me it's a safety/survival/convenience thing.  Which I realize makes me part of the problem...enough people accept the unacceptable, and the unacceptable becomes s.o.p.  

    Parent

    How about we do something truly (5.00 / 4) (#18)
    by MO Blue on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 03:57:23 PM EST
    unique like demand that cops follow the rules just like everyone else. Case in point: chokeholds have been banned  since 1993.

    Parent
    Can't we do both? (none / 0) (#21)
    by McBain on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 04:23:46 PM EST
    Expect cops to follow the rules and for civilians to obey the cops?

    Parent
    "Obey" the cops? Under all (5.00 / 7) (#28)
    by Anne on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 04:48:52 PM EST
    circumstances?  

    Are we supposed to produce ID whenever we're commanded to?  Are we supposed to answer questions whenever we're asked them?  "Who are you, what are you doing here, show me some ID, where do you live, what's in that shopping bag, is this your car, what's in the trunk, who are your friends, where are you coming from?"  

    What if they knock on your door and want to come in?  Are you saying your best option is to let them?

    Your use of the word "obey" troubles me.  A lot.  It seems to be ignorant of the rights we, as citizens, have.  Do we really want to give that much power to police such that people are in fear for their safety if they don't "obey" on command?

    Your solution to police violence is a recipe for an authoritarian state: just do what you're told and you'll be fine.  Don't make the bully mad and he won't beat you up.

    Yeah, that sounds like a great idea.

    And no, I'm not saying we should all act like a$$holes, but I am saying that the balance of power already seems tilted against the interests of citizens - and your solution doesn't seem to me to help rectify that imbalance.


    Parent

    It helps to have common sense and knowlege of (none / 0) (#56)
    by McBain on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 08:45:01 PM EST
    the law but few people have both.  My advice is, if you haven't been arrested, do what the police request. If they place you under arrest, don't resist and keep your mouth shut until you have legal counsel.

    Parent
    If the cops stop me, (none / 0) (#62)
    by fishcamp on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 09:29:03 PM EST
    or come to my door and want in, I have three great criminal defense lawyers on speed dial.  Hopefully, I will have time, and one of them will answer.  Then, I plan to ask the cop to please speak to my lawyer.  Naturally that won't work in a riot situation, but we don't have riots down in the keys, but we do have cops that check everything from speeding to illegal lobsters.  Once your stopped the game begins

    Parent
    Yes but we don't do both (5.00 / 4) (#30)
    by MO Blue on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 04:49:56 PM EST
    As Zorba pointed out not all of cops demands are legal demands nor does complying with their demands mean that you will not be beaten or shot. We are not suspense to be a police state. Promoting the idea that it is fine and dandy for cops to kill anyone who doesn't instantly obey their every demand, is a real good way to sanction becoming one.

    Parent
    I hate autocorrect (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by MO Blue on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 04:53:14 PM EST
    Should read:

    We are not supposed to be a police state.

    Parent

    Both would be nice (5.00 / 5) (#34)
    by FlJoe on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 05:14:25 PM EST
    But.... in real life situations there are many instances where the civilians won't or can't obey.
    These range from medical/mental reasons all the way to anger/criminal with all flavors in between. The police are supposed to always be the professionals in these confrontations. Yet all to often some act of non-compliance quickly spins into a fatal encounter. This '"obey" or suffer the consequences' meme that you apologists are putting out is rather
    unAmerican.
    We must DEMAND that the police follow the rules and "expect" citizens to co-operate. Any other way lies tyranny.

    Parent
    Talk about LE following the LAW (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by Palli on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 02:44:47 PM EST
    Again the STLPD deliberately violate the federal restraining order against the enforcement of any rule, policy or practice that grants the law enforcement the authority or discretion to use "chemical agents" for the purpose of dispersing groups of individuals [American citizens] who are engaged in peaceful, non-criminal activity in the City of St Louis or the county of St Louis.
    Once again, the number of cops standing around watching their comrades strike, drag and gas citizens, mostly women Protestors, seems to indicate football is no longer the preferred spectator sport for the men in blue who still are not wearing visible name tags & badges.

    BTW, Here is a good read for the New Year
    Just Justice by Bryan Stevenson.  Recommended by Davis Menschel, Defense Atty. and documentary film producer


    Parent

    I have never been arrested (5.00 / 4) (#33)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 05:07:06 PM EST
    ...in my 69 years, but I have walked right up to the line so many times no one who has ever seen me defend myself against a police demand can believe that stat.

    Of course, I'm a white guy, but all my employees for fifteen years were Black.  Because I hang with them and in their neighborhood, I was given honorary "black"status, i.e. stopped and warrant checked for no reason.

    One time a deputy said he was going to frisk me after I had been cited for a SEATBELT violation.  He had already frisked my two black passengers.  I knew he wasn't entitled to do that, but you have three seconds to prevent it or put up with it.

    I assumed a commanding tone to get control of the situation.  "YOU ARE GOING TO KEEP YOUR !@#$% HANDS TO YOURSELF!"  I took my pocketknife out of my pocket and threw it down.  Took off my sweat shirt.  Pulled up my pants cuffs, and finally dropped jeans and shorts to the ground.

    First time I ever made an officer so mad he cried.  Of course he searched the vehicle then, and of course I told him I wasn't giving permission for that, and of course he told me that not wanting a search indicated guilty knowledge, and of course he didn't find anything.

    Later I beat the seatbelt ticket in court, and the judge admonished the CHP officer who wrote it for lying to him.

    Just one of my many adventures with police.  Another was a Rec List DKos diary called "Then He Asked Me for I.D."

    Parent

    Oh absolutely! (5.00 / 3) (#51)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 07:51:48 PM EST
    McBain: "How about teaching kids not to resist arrest? There wouldn't be many police shootings if people just did what the cops told them to."

    By all means, please comply with a police order to bend over and drop your drawers, so one of the officers can sodomize you with a broken broomstick.

    Do you have any clue as to how ridiculous you sound when you channel Rudy Giuliani?

    Parent

    Can you point to (none / 0) (#14)
    by Uncle Chip on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 03:13:14 PM EST
    anywhere in Officer Wilson's testimony or anything he said anywhere that he told anybody in this situation that they were being placed under arrest???

    Parent
    You are missing the point (none / 0) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 03:23:37 PM EST
    when you are told to "get the fvck on the sidewalk" you do it.

    You submit.  Or you die.

    Parent

    I guess that (none / 0) (#16)
    by Uncle Chip on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 03:32:26 PM EST
    must be code for: "you are under arrest".

    And he accidentally grabbed his gun as he was reaching for those handcuffs.

    Parent

    Well now let me see (none / 0) (#59)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 09:12:28 PM EST
    You have just had a very physical confrontation with a police officer. Two shots have been fired....

    Nope. No reason for you to think your being placed under arrest.

    The things I do learn.

    Parent

    Nope, no reason at all (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by nycstray on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 09:27:49 PM EST
    possibly reason to think the PO wants to kill you, so you flee . . .

    See how that works?

    Parent

    You got it backwards -- again (5.00 / 2) (#66)
    by Uncle Chip on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 10:04:24 PM EST
    The physical confrontation causing the officer's pinky cheeks came after Wilson grabbed his wrist and pulled his gun and pointed it at him.

    That's not arrest protocol.

    The first shot came as Wilson had a hold of Brown's wrist. Not once in all his interviews did he mention handcuffs or arrest.

    The second shot came after Brown broke free and started to run from the nutcase who then tried to shoot him again through the door.

    The only thug on the street that day was the one with the gun and the badge and a bagful of excuses.

    The things I do learn.

    Unfortunately you don't.

    Parent

    Really?? That's not what the GJ believed (2.00 / 1) (#70)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 10:58:01 PM EST
     
    I drew my gun, I turned. It is
    18 kind of hard to describe it, I turn and I go like
    19 this. He is standing here. I said, "get back or
    20 I'm going to shoot you."

    21 He immediately grabs my gun and says,
    22 "you are too much of a pussy to shoot me." The way
    23 he grabbed it, do you have a picture?

    snip

    It went off twice in the car. Pull,

    5 click, click, went off, click, went off. So twice

    6 in the car.

    7 Are you certain?

    8 A Yes.

    9 Okay.
    10 A When I look up after that, I see him start
    cloud of dust behind him. I then

    12 get out of my car. As I'm getting out of the car I

    13 tell dispatch, "shots fired, send me more cars."

    GJ

    Grabbing a policeman's gun will get you shot at everytime.

    Parent

    The DA said some of the witnesses lied (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 11:30:39 PM EST
    In their testimony, was this an example of such perjury?

    Parent
    It is a factual comment showing what (2.00 / 1) (#80)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 09:03:54 AM EST
    Wilson testified to under oath.

    The GJ,a group of 12 of his peers, believed him.

    That is our system of justice.

    You may want to replace the GJ with a panel of experts, or a judge, or some combination there of.

    Why do you think that system would not be easier to corrupt than what we have?

    Parent

    Therefore (none / 0) (#81)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 09:09:30 AM EST
    He should be preosecuted for perjury.

    Also, the double jeopardy exception doesn't apply in GJ findings, so a new one cou I'd be convened, and this time perhaps the witnesses can testify to the truth.

    Face it, when the DA says that some of the witnesses lied and takes no actions like filing charges of perjury, it diminishes this process unnecessarily and makes the outcome questionable, at best.

    Glad to clear that up for you.

    Parent

    Ah, so now (none / 0) (#92)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 10:18:41 AM EST
    you know better than the GJ... Wait. That's incorrect. You don't like the results so let's try again.

    How elitist of you.

    Yes some did lie. We know that Johnson lied about Wilson choking Brown. Should he be tried for perjury?

    And you present no evidence that Wilson lied.

    Be careful. Hate will corrode the soul and damage the body.

    Parent

    Nope, just saying that the proceeding (none / 0) (#94)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 10:22:46 AM EST
    Was tainted by the admission of the DA.  Nothing hateful about that, Jim.

    Thanks for an amazing demonstration of projection today.

    Lol!

    Parent

    LOL (5.00 / 2) (#73)
    by Uncle Chip on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 11:33:50 PM EST
    You quote Wilson himself for your evidence???? Wilson who even the Grand Jury itself admits to having committed perjury before it:

    In his original statement, Wilson said he fired once inside the car. He told the grand jury he fired twice. Physical evidence appears to back up his initial story.
    Care Main p49

    And still his story proves my point -- he pulled his gun and threatened to shoot him instead of pulling out his handcuffs and threatening to arrest him.

    Grabbing a policeman's gun will get you shot at everytime.

    Which of course never happened in this case.

    If he had grabbed it there would have been fingerprints on the barrel or some part of the gun but there were none except in your and Wilson's imagination.

    That was a good effort though -- thanks for trying.

    Oh BTW -- the detective in the GJ report said that  Wilson misidentified Brown's friend from a lineup of pictures. It's a good thing that Dorian Johnson  came forward, otherwise Wilson would have sent investigators on another wild goose chase.

    You sure do pick 'em.

    Parent

    Chip, bless your heart (2.00 / 1) (#84)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 09:15:53 AM EST
    you are smarter than the 12 people on the GJ who, after listening to some 70 hours of testimony and seeing all kinds of evidence refused to indict Wilson of anything.

    What a man. How do you do it??

    lol

    Parent

    Listening to false testimony (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 09:20:32 AM EST
    according to the DA, but, bless your heart, you don't seem to want to acknowledge that fact.

    Parent
    How??? (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by Uncle Chip on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 10:14:31 AM EST
    They listened to 3 months of testimony during which they were not allowed to talk to anybody about it.

    They were admonished by the prosecutor when they tried to get answers from outside sources.

    They were told that nutcase Witness 40's lying statements were valid evidence to be weighed just before deliberations.

    They were not told that Witness 10's location  was over 480 feet away behind trees and cars making his testimony perjury as well.

    They were not allowed to cross-examine Wilson's testimony that was in clear conflict with his police interview.

    They they were misled by McCulloch's office into acting like a trial jury not a Grand Jury, and thinking that their standard was "beyond a reasonable doubt" not mere "probable cause".

    And then there is also that inconceivable 205 foot run in record time that prosecutors sold to them that they apparently bought into.

    That's how -- and thanks for asking.
     

    Parent

    So let me see (2.00 / 1) (#93)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 10:22:41 AM EST
    Grand jury's should be allowed to discuss the case with all their friends and neighbors as well as give press interviews.

    Yeah, that'd work good.

    As for your specifics, they have been disproved.

    As I said to Mordiggian, be careful. Hate corrodes the soul and damages the body.

    Parent

    Jim (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by Uncle Chip on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 11:24:33 AM EST
    Hate corrodes the soul and damages the body.

    Would that Hate be akin to Murder who is akin to a Shooter finishing off his victim???

    And aren't they all akin to the prefabricators and liars and perjurors and commenters who justify it??

    Send your pontifications to the real hate group.

    Parent

    Chip, your hatred is for (none / 0) (#104)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 11:37:41 AM EST
    the system. I have no idea as to why you think there's a better way but you demonstrate that you do.

    And that's a position not only of the far Left but of many on the far Right. Politics does make strange bedfellows.

    Parent

    the system (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by Uncle Chip on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 02:45:56 PM EST
    your hatred is for the system.

    Nonsense --

    If anything it's for those who "game" the system while making everyone else abide by the rules.

    They can lie to the public, lie to investigators, lie to the Grand Jury, change their stories to fit the facts, withhold evidence, malign witnesses, manipulate evidence ... and do so under the color of law without consequences.

    Wow I just described what right wing talk show blabberers have been accusing the current administration of for 5 years -- excessive government, abuse of authority, the lawlessness of  public employees.

    I used to think that the right wing controlled the moral high ground until this case. They've now demonstrated that they swim in the same mire as anyone else.  

    The way the duplicitous right wing pundits accused all these neighborhood witnesses of lying -- all because they dared to step forward to describe an event that what went by them in the blink of an eye. How dare they try to do their civic duty.  

    Parent

    Probably (none / 0) (#157)
    by Palli on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:57:26 PM EST
    DW's pinky cheeks came well after well after the incident atthe car.  

    Parent
    Yep (none / 0) (#166)
    by Uncle Chip on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 06:14:42 PM EST
    I'm bettin those happened at the station -- self-inflicted pinky cheeks.

    Parent
    Yeah, getting shot is just (none / 0) (#60)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 09:19:18 PM EST
    A permanent arrest.

    Parent
    I found these comments by Kareem (5.00 / 9) (#11)
    by Anne on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 02:51:08 PM EST
    Abdul-Jabbar, in an op-ed he wrote for Time, to be some of the most pointed and insightful I've read in a while (my bold):

    In a Dec. 21, 2014 article about the shooting, the Los Angeles Times referred to the New York City protests as "anti-police marches," which is grossly inaccurate and illustrates the problem of perception the protestors are battling. The marches are meant to raise awareness of double standards, lack of adequate police candidate screening, and insufficient training that have resulted in unnecessary killings. Police are not under attack, institutionalized racism is. Trying to remove sexually abusive priests is not an attack on Catholicism, nor is removing ineffective teachers an attack on education. Bad apples, bad training, and bad officials who blindly protect them, are the enemy. And any institution worth saving should want to eliminate them, too.


    Parent
    Great article, thanks Anne. (none / 0) (#19)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 03:59:06 PM EST
    Here's another one that raises (5.00 / 4) (#65)
    by Anne on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 09:53:42 PM EST
    some good points, and makes some interesting observations, not least of which is a comparison to what took place in the aftermath of the Haymarket Massacre:

    Keep Marching On

    The Haymarket Massacre is still the paradigmatic case of the state using a violent act to justify repression. In 1886, at the height of the movement for an eight-hour workday, a bomb was set off at a worker rally in Chicago's Haymarket Square. The rally was called to both protest police killings of worker protesters and to support striking workers fighting for the eight-hour day. When police attacked the demonstration, a bomb was thrown. To this day no one knows who set off the explosive, including whether it was an agent provocateur or an activist.

    What is known, however, is that the government used the bombing as a pretext to discredit the protests and the workers movement, suggesting that the entire movement was comprised of supposedly violent anarchists. Charges were brought against key leaders of the movement and in a kangaroo trial, eight individuals were convicted for their alleged involvement in the bombing. Four were subsequently hanged.

    The reaction by police unions, the Right and much of the mainstream media today is eerily reminiscent of the aftermath of the Haymarket massacre. In this moment it is critical that progressives forcefully counter these arguments. They are cynical and disingenuous efforts to discredit and derail one of the most important movements of the recent past. Let us be clear about what has transpired.

    [...]

    While the killing of the police officers was deplorable, there is no basis for a cessation of protests against police violence. This national movement, in point of fact, is actually about much more than police violence. It is about highlighting the continued and growing discrepancies in the treatment of African Americans and Latinos compared with whites.

    Food for thought, and certainly preferable to the "just do what they tell you to do" mentality that appears to be rearing its ugly head.

    Parent

    Time to eliminate all (5.00 / 5) (#17)
    by MO Blue on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 03:35:51 PM EST
    overtime and inact a hiring freeze, and start laying off cops and department heads. Arrests are down proving that that there is no need for overtime and a reduction of the size of the department is warranted.


    Parent
    Retaliate against the union (none / 0) (#20)
    by toggle on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 04:14:33 PM EST
    Even though I find these acts of protest distasteful, I do find it amusing that if this were any other union we'd all be cheering them on.

    Parent
    Wrong (5.00 / 4) (#24)
    by nycstray on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 04:39:47 PM EST
    Any union acting like this would get the same treatment. They aren't just disrespecting the Mayor, they are disrespecting the people of NYC also. Their behavior is embarrassing and also sets a p!ss poor example. Don't know too many people that are in favor of that, and those that are, well . . .

    Parent
    Not necessarily (5.00 / 6) (#25)
    by MO Blue on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 04:40:55 PM EST
    Much would depend on what the union was trying to accomplish. Decent wages, good health and retirement benefits and safe working conditions - sure definitely cheer them. OTH, shielding their members from illegal activities or activities  that cause harm to others or downright childish demands - no cheering or support.

    Parent
    Yes, it depends on what (5.00 / 5) (#120)
    by KeysDan on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 12:46:30 PM EST
    the union was trying to accomplish.  Decent wages, good health and retirement and safety issues may not be supported by the same crowd that supports turning backs on the mayor.  Wonder what perspective Wisconsin's  anti-union Governor Scott Walker would have. Must be torn.   Would Walker's new best friend be NYC police union boss, Patrick Lynch?  

    Parent
    Hey! (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by sj on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 05:49:00 PM EST
    I am cheering them on! They are doing the absolute right thing for the absolute wrong reasons.

    Still, good behavior should be acknowledged.

    Parent

    One should remember this (5.00 / 2) (#155)
    by Palli on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:54:32 PM EST
    On Sept. 17, 1992, the NYPD was enraged at Mayor Dinkins when he attempted to establish an independent Civilian Review Board and disallowed semiautomatic weapons for the force. Ten thousand officers crashed through police barricades around City Hall to block entry and then marched over to block traffic on the Brooklyn Bridge. Most of the  police officers assigned to control the demonstration relinquished their duty and joined the protestors.


    Parent
    I was surprised to learn (none / 0) (#145)
    by Palli on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:33:23 PM EST
    The small town of Berkley in St Louis County has 43 police officers in the department. The population is about 8900.  The city of Oberlin Ohio is the same size although the college students raise it by 2500 during the academic year. Oberlin has 13 police. Think on that.

    Parent
    Too right (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by sj on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 06:12:47 PM EST
    How is this a bad thing? Shouldn't this be the regular policy? Only arrest people when it is necessary?


    Parent
    Dancing while black (5.00 / 3) (#77)
    by MO Blue on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 07:59:30 AM EST
    NYPD may be engaging in a work stoppage but they have stopped verbally and physically abusing citizens.

    Dancing while black is dangerous.

    Parent

    Should read (none / 0) (#156)
    by MO Blue on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:54:59 PM EST
    But they have not stopped verbally and physically abusing citizens.

    Parent
    Steve Anderson, Nashville Police Chief, (5.00 / 5) (#122)
    by KeysDan on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 12:59:27 PM EST
    provided, as a part of his Christmas greetings, his response to an angry citizen who very much disliked the Nashville police department's handling of police protests.  The fact that the police department handled the protests professionally, and, particularly that the police provided the protesters with coffee and hot chocolate, drew fire.  The irate citizen wrote that "rather than threatening to arrest them, they were served coffee and hot chocolate, I don't feel that is a good use of taxpayers dollars.  It sends a message that they can do whatever they want and it will be rewarded."  And, the writer continued, "I have a son who I raised to respect police, what do I do now?"

    Chief Anderson's response, while lengthy, is masterful and deserves a read.  

    Parent

    Wow! (5.00 / 3) (#126)
    by Zorba on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 01:30:19 PM EST
    Can we clone Chief Anderson?  We need way, way more police chiefs like this.

    Parent
    The response to the "person of color" (none / 0) (#27)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 04:45:46 PM EST
    bit is that the NYPD Sgt who supervised the arrest of Eric Garner was a black female.

    IJReview

    Sometimes playing the race card doesn't work.

    Parent

    The wording of your comment (none / 0) (#32)
    by MO Blue on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 05:05:59 PM EST
    Is a little awkward. According to the article, Pantaleo's supervisor was an African-American female NYPD sergeant. Even your conservative site  did not state that she supervised the arrest. They did mistate the cause of death which is to be expected from that site.

    Parent
    Though not completely difinitive: (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 05:24:13 PM EST
    I agree (none / 0) (#39)
    by MO Blue on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 05:58:52 PM EST
    The articles you referenced (better sources) seem to support that a black female sergeant was at the scene during the arrest.

    Parent
    One who apparently (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 06:02:57 PM EST
    needs a hearing test.   Among other things.

    Parent
    The original video of the incident ... (5.00 / 3) (#54)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 08:12:10 PM EST
    ... has glancing shots which show a black female police officer at the scene, although she clearly does not participate in the fatal take-down. If she was indeed the supervising sergeant on scene at the time of the takedown, then shame on her for not saying something to Officer Daniel Pantaleo when the illegal chokehold was first applied. The entire incident was all so totally unnecessary, and it still makes me angry to watch that clip.

    Parent
    female officer directly in front of the incident, maybe 10 - 20 feet away, clearly watching exactly what was happening.

    Parent
    Here's what was written (none / 0) (#48)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 06:39:41 PM EST
    Pantaleo who applied the lethal chokehold on Eric Garner was supervised by an African-American female NYPD sergeant.

    Having that black sergeant in charge of that crime scene takes race out of the equation. As awful as Pantaleo's actions appear on that video, at no time does that black sergeant order Pantaleo to stop choking Garner.

    Note the "was supervised by" and "in charge."

    That's definitive.

    Parent

    Red Tomahawk, the police officer who shot ... (none / 0) (#63)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 09:34:58 PM EST
    ... and killed Sitting Bull in December 1890 as the latter resisted arrest on the Standing Rock Reservation in Dakota Territory, was Lakota Sioux. At the time of the incident, he was acting on the direct orders of his superior, James McLaughlin, who had ordered tribal police to effect the chief's arrest.

    When racism becomes institutionalized, as is the case in so many police departments across the country, it's departmental policy and attendant subculture that are the core problems. The primary culpability for the perpetuation of that policy and subculture rests with the department's management, and not necessarily with the rank and file.

    Therefore, the fact that the supervising officer present at the subjugation and death of Eric Garner also happens to be an African-American female is meaningless.

    African-American police officers are perfectly capable of engaging in racially discriminatory practices against fellow African-Americans such as profiling, etc., just as Red Tomahawk was capable of arresting and shooting Sitting Bull back in 1890.

    In both instances, these officers are / were acting in strict accordance with departmental policies adopted and set by their superiors, who also happen to be white men.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    I think you're discounting the (4.75 / 4) (#67)
    by Anne on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 10:06:10 PM EST
    brotherhood of the police culture and its ability to circle the wagons to exert its power over us mere mortals - and protect themselves.

    Sure, there may be racism within the ranks of law enforcement, but when the uniform feels disrespected or threatened, it doesn't matter what the color is of the person wearing it: they're sticking together.

    Yes, maybe I have watched too many consecutive episodes of The Wire these last three days, but there's a reason for the term "closing ranks," and it's not about black v. white, it's about them v. us.

    Parent

    I think you missed my point, Anne. (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 04:12:09 AM EST
    I'm talking about the inherent and conditioned bigotry that's ingrained in departmental policies governing the interaction between law enforcement officers and the community it ostensibly serves, and not about racism that exists in individual officers.

    I'm fully aware of the code of "the thin blue line" that bonds fellow officers together. But while those bonds can exacerbate the problem of institutionalized racism within various police departments, I don't believe that they're the primary cause of it.

    Rather, as I said above, that rests with the department's management and those who provide departmental oversight, such as police commissions. As such, change must be imposed from the top down and not from the bottom up, much as it was in the U.S. military back in 1948.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    It's about power, Donald. (5.00 / 3) (#96)
    by Anne on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 10:54:14 AM EST
    It's about those in power failing to see the humanity of the people over whom they exert it.  It's putting power in the hands of people who, but for the uniform, might not be much better off than the people who are too often the objects of their brutality.

    I'm not saying race isn't a factor - it clearly is - but it's the power that's allowing instance after instance of police misconduct to be dismissed.

    Parent

    You're right about that. (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 12:36:35 PM EST
    Anne: "It's about power, Donald. It's about those in power failing to see the humanity of the people over whom they exert it.  It's putting power in the hands of people who, but for the uniform, might not be much better off than the people who are too often the objects of their brutality."

    But again, that's the sort of corrosive attitude which, like racism, sexism, etc., has been institutionalized within departments. Whatever arrogance individual officers project toward the general public is merely the symptom of a larger problem.

    Therefore, whatever changes are needed in not only how the police conduct themselves in interaction with the community, but also how departments solicit, screen and accept potential recruits, will have to be imposed upon those departments from the top down.

    I consider it folly to expect law enforcement agencies to reform themselves on their own initiative, so in that regard, the public anger that's presently being expressed toward officers themselves and their departments is actually misdirected, and as you hinted in your prior comment, may actually be counterproductive.

    Rather, serious public pressure must instead be brought decisively to bear upon those officials who have either direct jurisdictional oversight over law enforcement activities or control of the agency's or department's purse strings (or both, in some locales), such as mayors, county executives, city councils and municipal boards.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    The point is that it wasn't a racial (2.00 / 2) (#71)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 11:01:14 PM EST
    thing.

    But that's not the message.

    Parent

    I don't believe the racism is overt. (5.00 / 5) (#75)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:52:31 AM EST
    Very few people ever intend to be racist. But what clearly exists in our culture and society is a latent racism, by which we've been conditioned to make assumptions and judgments about people which are based upon nothing more than initial appearance.

    In 2011, my eldest daughter was pulled over twice in southern Texas by white officers while visiting her maternal grandparents, for what was obviously nothing more than driving while Mexican.

    It's been all too easy for middle class white people to say that we don't have a problem with racism in this country, when they're not the ones who are regularly singled out by law enforcement and subjected to repeated indignities, simply because of what they look like.

    Even in a place like Portland OR, which takes pride in its progressivism, African-Americans accounted for 14% of all traffic stops by local police in 2012, which is a grossly disproportionate rate given that they comprise a little less than 6% percent of the city's population. Further, when African-American, Hispanic and Native American drivers were pulled over by Portland police, they were twice more likely than whites to be subjected to searches.

    We clearly have a problem with institutionalized racism in our law enforcement agencies. Denying it exists, in the face of substantial and contrary data that documents police interactions with minority communities, does not make it go away.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Donald, the point I was trying to make (1.00 / 2) (#87)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 10:09:49 AM EST
    and which you are fuzzying up, is this.

    The message of the media, Sharpton, his honor, the protesters....is that it was racial. That it was white cops killing a black man.

    That's just just wrong. It was cops, with the supervisor on scene being black, trying to arrest a man who was physically resisting. And the cops were there because shop owners had called and complained.

    All Garner had to do was allow himself to be arrested. He didn't. The result was unfortunate but foreseeable. If the police, with multiple officers on scene, want to arrest you they will.

    And they must. We cannot live in a society in which people can just refuse to be arrested. Think of the consequences of that.

    Now, how would you have taken him into custody? Have you ever tried to subdue a man who is resisting? And before I go further let me share a bit of personal history. I have. And it isn't easy.

    Would you have used a Taser?? Well, that would have probably killed him since he was suffering from heart disease.

    Would you have threatened him with a gun? Well, that might have worked but I am sure it is out of guidelines.

    Would you have thrown a net over him?? Of course they didn't have a net and don't carry one. And even then his struggles against the net could have killed him.

    I ask again. How would you have done it??

    Based on the video I have seen it was a lawful attempt to arrest. And while use of a choke hold is out of guidelines "it" appears to have been applied for only a few seconds. And "it" may have not been a choke hold but an attempt to apply pressure to the carotid artery shutting off the blood supply thus rendering Garner unconscious.

    Garner died because of his physical condition while resisting arrest. Did he know of his condition? I don't know. Did the police? No.

    But what should we have the police do?

    "Sir, we are going to arrest you using physical means. But first please fill out this health questionnaire and then allow the medic to check your blood pressure, listen to your heart and test your lung function."

    Silly? Yes. And Garner died.

    Not because the police were racist. Not because the black female supervisor is "racist" against non-police blacks.

    He died because he resisted arrest.

    And the GJ didn't indict and they were 100% correct.

    Parent

    The question that's all but begged to be asked here is not why Eric Garner resisted arrest, but rather why NYPD officers even chose to arrest him in the first place -- never mind that they lethally subdued him -- over what was at best a minor civil violation of New York municipal ordinances.

    Those officers had the discretion to simply give Garner a citation or better still, warn him to stop his activity and move on. But for whatever their reasons they didn't exercise that option, but instead chose to confront him physically and thus escalate matters disproportionately to the actual violation at hand.

    While Garner was obviously wrong to be selling individual cigarettes at a reported fifty cents apiece, those officers deliberately instigated a wholly unnecessary fatal confrontation with the man. And personally, I consider that appalling lack of good judgment on their part to be a direct violation of their sworn oaths to protect and serve the public. How exactly was NYPD protecting and serving the public on this particular occasion?

    Not that I would expect you to admit it here, but I think you probably know as well as I do that such a disproportionate -- and in this instance, deadly -- use of force by officers upon a city resident over a minor violation would likely never be visited upon a white person in Queens or Manhattan's upper east side.

    And therein lies the odious and unacceptable double standard, regarding how members of the same law enforcement agency conduct their business when interacting with residents of different communities in the same city.

    It's that blatant double standard -- not Eric Garner's personal conduct -- which is really the core problem here. And that's why so many people are very upset and angry over this issue.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    The cops were called by local merchants (2.00 / 1) (#133)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 02:05:04 PM EST
    They, perhaps falsely, believe that the police is supposed to protect their legal businesses from the unlawful actions of others.

    That is how they were protecting and serving the public.

    Garner's actions were illegal. He also had a criminal record of 30 arrests including grand theft and assault.

    No one had any reason to believe that he would have stopped his illegal activities had they just issued a citation and left.

    Yes. There is a double standard. But that isn't the argument the protesters are making. They are claiming a Garner was killed because he was black.

    Nothing could be further from the truth.

    And by doing so they are harming their own position.

    Parent

    "They are claiming Garner was killed (2.00 / 1) (#170)
    by McBain on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 08:15:24 PM EST
    because he was black.... And by doing so they are harming their own position"

    This is why it's hard to take the protesters seriously.  They always pick the wrong cases and assume racism before knowing the facts. Then they use catchy but inappropriate slogans or symbols.

    "hands up, don't shoot"
    "black lives matter"
    A hooded sweatshirt


    Parent

    So, you're saying (5.00 / 2) (#178)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 06:35:34 AM EST
    They're wrong, and black lives don't matter?


    Parent
    Is this really confusing to you? (none / 0) (#195)
    by McBain on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 02:13:22 PM EST
    All lives matter.  As has been pointed out many times, there isn't any evidence that Brown, Garner or Rice were killed because of their race. The protesters don't seem to care about blacks killed by non whites.  They're a bunch of phonies.

    Parent
    Exactly (none / 0) (#180)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 09:15:09 AM EST
    A few weeks ago I noted that I supported his honor's call for more police training...along with a PR campaign educating people to not resist arrest.

    What I have got back is lectures on justice, rights, anecdotal "what I did" and various other bits.

    So I can't believe this is anything about justice. It is about power. People, some anarchists and some tinged by that deadly political stripe, want the police neutered. They are supported by a wider group who are just misled by the media. The so-called leaders, Sharpton et al, are using them to make money and stroke their egos. That this witches brew can spin out of control and cause some real problems doesn't seem to matter to them.

     

    Parent

    Cops (5.00 / 3) (#185)
    by lentinel on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 11:28:18 AM EST
    are supposed to be about protecting us. Protect and Serve. That was the motto.

    The last things on their list currently are protecting us - and the people they serve are not the proverbial person on the street - they serve the interests of a repressive State.

    They are given the task by the State to hand out summons. A waste of their time and training.

    They are given the task by the State to bust people smoking joints. A terrible tragedy since it makes them adversaries of just about everybody.

    They are given the task by the State of corralling and suppressing people who wish to peacefully gather and express an opinion that varies from that laid upon us by the State.
    Once again - they are on the wrong side.

    Therefore, instead of being a welcome sight, police officers are seen as allies of an enemy - set out to enforce laws that are unjust or antiquated or even un-American.

    This is a very unfortunate state of affairs.

    No one really wants police to be "neutered" as you put it.

    What I would like is for them to be relieved of enforcing a lot of garbage laws and instead for them to walk the streets with the sole goal of protecting people from other people out to harm them, and from other physical dangers. Generally - helping those in distress.

    That would be really really nice.

    Parent

    People and property (5.00 / 2) (#194)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 02:08:35 PM EST
    But people first.

    Parent
    Yeah, it's about power (none / 0) (#184)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 10:26:09 AM EST
    The power to go about ones' business without the cops killing you for not following orders in a non-life-and-death situation, like selling individual cigarettes, or being suspected of committing a robbery and walking in the street.

    Please do try to keep up.


    Parent

    "The GJ didn't indict and they were 100% (none / 0) (#115)
    by McBain on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 12:16:51 PM EST
    correct"
    Most people aren't interested in correct GJ decisions. They want at least one cop to pay for the past, perceived, sins of other cops.

    "Based on the video I have seen it was a lawful attempt to arrest."

    I agree but no one wants to hear that.  People don't seem to understand, or care, that once someone resists, bad things can happen.    And the more someone resits arrest, the more force the police will use.

    "Would you have used a Taser?? Well, that would have probably killed him since he was suffering from heart disease."

    There aren't any easy ways to subdue a large person who isn't cooperating. It often takes multiple cops and becomes dangerous for everyone.

    The best solution:  Don't resist arrest.


    Parent

    That's simply nonsense. (5.00 / 4) (#136)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 02:24:52 PM EST
    McBain: "Most people aren't interested in correct GJ decisions. They want at least one cop to pay for the past, perceived, sins of other cops."

    The public has a vested and compelling interest in the integrity and due process of the law, and most people want the law to work both fairly and impartially in serving the interests of justice.

    Rather, I'd offer that the problem rests with the ignorance that's constantly perpetuated by concern trolls such as yourself, who enjoy an entirely unfounded and arrogant belief in your own self-ascribed moral superiority.

    Thus, you repeatedly and mistakenly assume that your opinions and judgments are always going to be more than likely correct on most any occasion, and it naturally follows that everyone else correspondingly has to be wrong -- regardless of any evidence otherwise.

    You really need to stop constantly spinning the facts to support your often baseless contentions, because all you're doing here is making yourself dizzy and the rest of us nauseous.

    :-(

    Parent

    I found this quote by Robert F. Kennedy (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 02:32:44 PM EST
    today:

    "What is objectionable, what is dangerous about extremists, is not that they are extreme, but that they are intolerant. The evil is not what they say about their cause, but what they say about their opponents.



    Parent
    Kennedy should know (none / 0) (#141)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:21:52 PM EST
    He was shot by one.

    Parent
    Nice crack,Jim. So was Rasputin. (5.00 / 2) (#142)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:28:42 PM EST
    and so were the Archduke Ferdinand.

    Did you have a point, or are you merely my shadow with callous statements today?

    Parent

    Thanks for understanding (2.00 / 1) (#148)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:37:34 PM EST
    that your comment proves nothing.

    Of course I understand that you hate the police thinking somehow that without them the world would be peaches and cream.

    So did Obama. How's that worked out?

    Parent

    Where can you point to any statement (none / 0) (#151)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:42:07 PM EST
    By Obama or I saying police need to be abolished and everything will be great afterwards?

    What is needs to cease is unneccessary killings by the cops for offenses that aren't a matter of life or death.

    That you thinks this makes either the big O or I anti-police is a finer example of what RFK was talking about.

    Thanks for making his point better than I can, or he could since he was shot by an extremist.

    Parent

    But this is not the issue (none / 0) (#146)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:34:43 PM EST
    The public has a vested and compelling interest in the integrity and due process of the law, and most people want the law to work both fairly and impartially in serving the interests of justice.

    that is being hucked by the protesters and the so called spokes people for them.

    And one of the reasons that we have a problem is that the average person realizes the dishonesty of the hucksters and refuse to support reform.

    Of course no crisis should be wasted.

    Parent

    But this is not the issue (none / 0) (#147)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:35:19 PM EST
    The public has a vested and compelling interest in the integrity and due process of the law, and most people want the law to work both fairly and impartially in serving the interests of justice.

    that is being hucked by the protesters and the so called spokes people for them.

    And one of the reasons that we have a problem is that the average person realizes the dishonesty of the hucksters and refuse to support reform.

    Of course no crisis should be wasted.

    Parent

    Yeah, it's dishonest (none / 0) (#149)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:37:48 PM EST
    To want cops to stop killing unarmed people who aren't an immediate threat to life and limb.

    Think before you double-comment here.

    Or are your anger and rage starting to come to the surface?

    Lol!

    Parent

    It is dishonest to represent the (none / 0) (#167)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 07:16:38 PM EST
    Eric Garner death as caused by race.

    There is no proof that Wilson shot Brown because of race.

    If you are concerned about young black men being killed study Chicago and Memphis and Detroit.

    Oh, wait. In those locales we have young black males killing other young black males and that doesn't fit the narrative.

    You know, after watching the protests and reading what you, and some others have written, I have came to the conclusion that you are just anti-police and there is nothing that they can do that will satisfy you.

    Parent

    When and where have In (none / 0) (#168)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 07:23:54 PM EST
    I stated that his death was due to his race in my comments?

    It's doubly dishonest to represent my POV without any evidence to back it up, as you've just done.

    Keep it up, you're still making my case for me with your nonsense conclusions.

    Parent

    Good morning (none / 0) (#179)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 09:03:42 AM EST
    My comments have been directed at what Sharpton, his honor, the media and the protesters have been  claiming.

    In that you support them then you are saying what they say.


    Parent

    Let's get down to the bone Jim (5.00 / 4) (#193)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 02:06:14 PM EST
    Leave all your favorite strawmen aside, leave everything aside. Do you find it acceptable that unarmed citizens are being killed by police on a regular basis?
    If yes, why is this not a huge step toward tyranny?
    If no, why is protesting against it so distasteful and dangerous to you?

    Parent
    Oh, I see (none / 0) (#183)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 10:17:24 AM EST
    If I object to his death, then I'm on the same side as Sharpton, et al, attributing it to his race.

    Why must you tell these lies so early in the morning?

    Parent

    My comments point out what the problem (none / 0) (#187)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 12:19:45 PM EST
    is. So why should you respond if all you want to do is object to his death?

    And the answer is.... you shouldn't.

    Yet you do.

    Parent

    Thus spake the all-knowing jim... (5.00 / 6) (#188)
    by Anne on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 12:36:52 PM EST
    hate to break it to you, buddy, but you are not the Delphic Oracle, and your assessment of this - and so many other situations - is not definitive.

    You have your opinion; that's all it is.  An opinion.  That many don't share it, or aren't willing to bow to its awesomeness, won't deter you from doubling down on it, but that's nothing new.

    And thus begins the new year.  Looks kind of familiar.

    Parent

    As Bob Dylan put it (5.00 / 1) (#189)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 01:17:43 PM EST

    Pointed threats, they bluff with scorn
    Suicide remarks are torn
    From the fool's gold mouthpiece the hollow horn
    Plays wasted words, proves to warn
    That he not busy being born is busy dying



    Parent
    So, you're going with the inevitability (5.00 / 4) (#186)
    by Anne on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 12:17:52 PM EST
    of arrest instead of considering that other options were available to police that could have taken the whole interaction down a much better path, to a much better end.

    Isn't this one of the reasons people don't trust the police?  That instead of approaching situations with calm, and an interest in resolving any conflict peacefully, too many of them start at full speed and just go faster, even when there's no need to do so?

    As I understand it, police had been called to the scene not because a man was reportedly selling loose cigarettes, but because they had reports of a street fight in progress - a fight that ended before cops got there, and which the man who video'd the death of Eric Garner says Garner helped break up.

    Why did they have to move in to arrest Garner?  Because he was agitated at being accused of something he says he wasn't doing?  Did they first go into the store to see if a call had been made, or to talk with the store clerks/owner to get more information?  It doesn't appear so.  Don't you think that would have made some sense?

    But, no.  You think we're all just supposed to obey, to submit, to offer ourselves up, like lambs to the slaughter.  And I guess, hope and pray that we come out of it okay.

    I hope you remember your sage advice when they come for you.

    Parent

    Based on testimony (none / 0) (#116)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 12:21:53 PM EST
    That the DA admits was not true in the case of some of the witnesses.

    Parent
    Mordihhian for the Nth time (none / 0) (#130)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 01:50:06 PM EST
    The GJ heard ALL the testimony.

    The true. The Lies. The Perceived.

    That's the way it works.

    Sorry that you don't like the result but that's life!

    Parent

    Sorry, I confused this with the Browm (none / 0) (#132)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 01:58:12 PM EST
    GJ.

    And this GJ ignored the finding of homicide by the Coroner, Jim.

    And, to remind you for the Nth+1 time, GJ findings aren't final, and there are still Federal charges that could be applicable here as well.

    I know you're fine with the death of a man over a minor infraction.

    That's what worries me about you.

    Parent

    Mordiggian, for the second time (2.00 / 1) (#134)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 02:15:31 PM EST
    They didn't ignore the Coroner.

    Homicide is:

    The killing of one human being by another human being. Although the term homicide is sometimes used synonymously with murder, homicide is broader in scope than murder.

    Please try and remember the definition.

    Any death is a tragedy for any reason.

    But a death caused by the actions of the dead person is doubly so.

    And Garner's death was caused by his actions.


    Parent

    Obey the cop (5.00 / 2) (#135)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 02:19:24 PM EST
    Or die.

    That's what you're espousing, not for someone holding another person hostage or threatening to set off a bomb, but, for selling individual cigarettes, and not obeying the cop right away, disobedience merits death.

    That's your position, and I find it as uncivilized as it is repulsive.


    Parent

    Exactly. (none / 0) (#140)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:20:48 PM EST
    Obey the cop. And if you have a grievance, live to prosecute when the advantage is yours.

    What you are advocating, in some cases, is assisted suicide. That is what is truly uncivilized.

    Parent

    No. (none / 0) (#143)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:29:35 PM EST
    But thanks for making my point for me again.

    Parent
    Listen in any PD locker room and hear racism (none / 0) (#160)
    by Palli on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 04:19:29 PM EST
    Sadly, I cannot agree with Donald from Hawaii: I don't believe very few people ever intend to be racist. If that were true, America would be considerably different and unmeasurably better.

    http://tinyurl.com/lalwhv2  An ex-cop from the StLPD

    Parent

    Oh, that Pope . . . (5.00 / 4) (#29)
    by nycstray on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 04:49:42 PM EST
    I saw this (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 06:01:00 PM EST
    on the FB page I abandoned long age but still check just to know what the cave people are saying among themselves I saw an ugly screed by a good christian woman about him and this statement.  I would post it here just to make a point but it's very ugly.  Of course with no profanity or anything like that.   Just ugly.   A stupid.   She is the person John Cleese was talking about in the clip I linked in this thread.  Further down the timeline she was boasting that she just finished reading "from cover to cover" her Bible for Dummies.

    I like keeping that page.  It keeps me connected to reality.  As I wish it was not.

    Parent

    You are a braver person than I (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by nycstray on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 06:20:12 PM EST
    I have just quit reading anything by such narrow minded people. Life is too short and their message gets through anyway.

    I am liking this Pope though. Making RWNJ heads explode is so very giving of him ;)

    I'll have to check out your vid . . .

    Parent

    Their message gets through (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 06:37:29 PM EST
    because there are lots of them.  And they feed off and reinforce each other's ignorance and fear and hostility.  There was two posts in that time line with some smiling white people posing with NYC police officers with the headline "I LOVE THE NYPD.   SHARE IF YOU AGREE"

    Now you need to understand these are people who have never been to NYC.  Would in fact probably rather have a colonoscopy that go there.  But if the are keeping down black people and that lousy interracial Mayor, well count them in.

    I hate them probably more than you because I know them.  But ignoring them won't make them go away.  Any hard for me to ignore.

    Parent

    Look friendly (none / 0) (#49)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 07:03:50 PM EST
    and harmless enough
    Who wouldn't support these guys?

    Parent
    To answer your question (none / 0) (#161)
    by Palli on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 04:26:26 PM EST
    Take a look at the African American in the back- his eyes tell you all.

    Parent
    Not that anyone really cares.... (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by lentinel on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 06:10:07 PM EST
    US cybersecurity experts say they have solid evidence that a former employee helped hack Sony Pictures Entertainment's computer system -- and that it was not masterminded by North Korean cyberterrorists.
    One leading cybersecurity firm, Norse Corp., said Monday it has narrowed its list of suspects to a group of six people -- including at least one Sony veteran with the necessary technical background to carry out the attack, according to reports.
    The investigation of the Sony hacking by the private companies stands in stark contrast to the finding of the FBI, which said Dec. 19 its probe traced the hacking -- which ended up foiling the planned wide release of the Hollywood studio's "The Interview" -- to North Korea.
    Kurt Stammberger, senior vice president at Norse, said he used Sony's leaked human-resources documents and cross-referenced the data with communications on hacker chat rooms and its own network of Web sensors to determine it was not North Korea behind the hack.
    "When the FBI made this announcement, just a few days after the attack was made public, it raised eyebrows in the community because it's hard to do that kind of an attribution that quickly -- it's almost unheard of," Stammberger told Bloomberg News in a telephone interview from San Francisco.
    "All the leads that we did turn up that had a Korean connection turned out to be dead ends," he said.


    Was this the source of your quote (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 06:29:43 PM EST
    the NYPost?

    I have been reading a steady stream of this from much more credible sources.  And some not so much 21st Century Wire has been running a steady stream of hysterical posts about this.  From what I can tell they don't "prove" much.  Like this quote-

    It's Official: Sony Hack was a `False Flag'

    As 21WIRE predicted last week, Washington's official conspiracy theory that North Korea was the villain behind the infamous Sony Hack - has crumbled...

    Today, every major US media outlet was forced to admit what we told our reader over a week ago - that official conspiracy theory validated by Obama - that North Korea hacked Sony - was a fabricated lie. US media also confirmed that two leading cyber security firms, Norse Corporation and Cloud Flare, conducted independent investigations into the hack and the results are a stark opposition to the FBI's highly creative claim that Pyongyang carried out the historic hack. Experts confirmed that the alleged malware used in the cyber attack was in fact leaked years ago and any hacker could have utilized it since.

    Like I said.  I don't really care much.  But I would keep an open mind.

    Parent

    I nailed it n/t (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 06:34:31 PM EST
    hmmmm, who do I think has better Intel? (none / 0) (#68)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 10:17:57 PM EST
    I kind thinkin theses guys do.  Which , I guess, brings us back to the seeing what you look for thing.

    However, the FBI source said, the bureau continues to hold to its original assessment, based on information "from the FBI, the U.S. intelligence community, the Department of Homeland Security, foreign partners and the private sector."
    The FBI source said the agency didn't share any of its information with Norse due to "sensitivity of sources/techniques."

    That's from CNN but the story is everywhere.  I will say one thing.  As sure as the officials seem to be all any "security firm" needs to be to become famous, and rich, is to prove them wrong.

    Parent

    One other thought (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 10:48:28 PM EST
    if, notice I said if, IF the officials are right what the firms are doing is pretty risky.  It might be that they are counting in the FBI and others never being able to reveal how they know what they know so they get a few headlines.  They got them.  But if the decide to reveal how and why this is known they are going to look pretty silly.  Not so much what they want to do I would think.  It is getting very interesting.

    Parent
    I read this from several sources (none / 0) (#74)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 12:54:09 AM EST
    this morning on my new Iphone 6 while still in bed. Then further researched LulzSec and others (will do more on AnitSec soon). Political sources are not always right in this case(s).

    I almost always agree with every last little thing you write - Capt - but not on this. We, the public (and in this case everyone is "the public" - even the military, CIA, FBI, and CNN) simply do not know anything for certain at this point in time. "We" are on the cusp of a completely new kind of global power being expressed. And it is not just in hacks like this, J has been covering these new kinds of power expressions (see her IS posts) for a good while now.

    If this hack(s) was done by a 'ne0-LulzSec-Haha" 'group' then we simply can not know that, at this point in time. They are not stupid (whoever 'they' are) and they know we will be predictable in our "looking for what we are looking for" or our "follow the money" or whatever overused strategy 'we' have used, over and over again.

    Parent

    This might be of interest to you: (5.00 / 4) (#127)
    by Anne on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 01:31:00 PM EST
    From the Daily Beast (via emptywheel)

       In spite of mounting evidence that the North Korean regime may not have been wholly responsible for a brazen cyberassault against Sony--and possibly wasn't involved at all--the FBI is doubling down on its theory that the Hermit Kingdom solely bears the blame.

        "We think it's them," referring to the North Koreans, an FBI spokesperson told The Daily Beast when asked to respond to reports from private investigators that other culprits were responsible. The latest evidence, from the cyberanalysis firm the Norse Corp., suggests that a group of six individuals, including at least one disgruntled ex-Sony employee, is behind the assault, which has humiliated Sony executives, led to threats of terrorist attacks over the release of a satirical film, and prompted an official response from the White House.

        The FBI said in a separate statement to journalists on Monday that "there is no credible information to indicate that any other individual is responsible for this cyberincident." When asked whether that left open the possibility that other individuals may have assisted North Korea or were involved in the assault on Sony, but not ultimately responsible for the damage that was done, the FBI spokesperson replied, "We're not making the distinction that you're making about the responsible party and others being involved."

    See also, here.

    Researchers from the firm Norse told Security Ledger, an independent security news website, that they believe that a group of six individuals orchestrated the hack, including at least one former employee who was laid off in company-wide restructuring in May.

    The latest allegations add to growing skepticism over the FBI's assertion -- reiterated by President Barack Obama -- that linked North Korea to the attack, which the country has denied. A recent linguistic analysis cited in the New York Times found that the hackers' language in threats against Sony was written by a native Russian speaker and not a native Korean speaker.

    Marcy Wheeler:

    There's one more factor that deserves notice here: the role of cybersecurity firms in laundering government propaganda.

    One of the most pregnant observations in Zetter's Countdown to Zero Day comes after Symantec published the first details implicating the US and Israel in the StuxNet attack. The Symantec team expected a bunch of others to jump in and start validating their work. Instead, they were met with almost complete silence. While Zetter didn't say it explicitly, the implication was that the security industry is driven by its interest in retaining the good will of the US Government. Here, the first security firm to back the North Korea claim was Mandiant, the firm that served as a surrogate for claims against China.

    And while in this case there is no lack of experts willing to push back against US claims, I just wonder whether at least some of the initial credulity on the North Korea claims arose because of the dominance of USG contractors among the earliest reports on the hack? While there are some equivalents in the WMD vein, the cyberindustry, in particular, seems particularly prone to serving as a cut-out for both poorly analyzed intelligence and even propaganda.

    Wonder if christine will have any comment.

    Parent

    I await the sequel, (5.00 / 3) (#163)
    by KeysDan on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 05:07:03 PM EST
    "Interview, Cloaks and Daggers Behinds the Scenes."   While  less interesting to the teenage boy demographic, it will likely be more memorable Hollywood fare than the original.  Some material for a potential screenwriter can be found in the NYTimes article (Jan 31) describing some of the backdrop that is fit for print.

    The theory of violation by a disgruntled employee is bruited about with, apparently, several security experts being unpersuaded by the FBI conclusions (or beliefs).

    The Sony executive, Michael Lynton, is  ready to go with the Koreans--which does shift the onus from him to Kim. The FBI may well have the upper-hand in tracing the culprit(s), but the forensics, at this point, seem to be based on cyber-attack malware that was leaked years ago and any hacker could have used since.  This is no more convincing than a hard and fast conclusion that since a Kalashnikov rifle was used in a robbery, the perpetrators must be Russian.

    Parent

    If you can't tell the difference between (5.00 / 3) (#50)
    by nycstray on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 07:38:46 PM EST
    a wolf and a coyote, maybe you shouldn't be hunting. And maybe you should reconsider shooting anything with a radio collar . . .

    That depends on a lot of things (none / 0) (#55)
    by scribe on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 08:28:32 PM EST
    - a large coyote and a small wolf are pretty hard to distinguish one from the other, particularly at normal hunting distances.  And I know of coyotes being taken (in an area with no wolves) that come in in the 60-70 pound range.  That's wolf-size.

    Parent
    If you aren't sure (5.00 / 3) (#58)
    by nycstray on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 08:54:52 PM EST
    don't shoot (unless being attacked). The image with the article of the GC wolf is pretty clearly a wolf. I do think there is enough of a difference most of the time, and really, nothing should be shot unless a person is sure. Killing is kinda final . . . and again, radio collar . . .

    Parent
    Anyone who mistakes a coyote for a wolf (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 12:16:08 PM EST
    or vice versa, is not qualified to discharge a firearm.

    We have a lot of coyotes around the house.  Used top have a lot of turkeys, not any more.

    Walking the dog one morning, came on a coyote, 50 feet away.  The dog and the coyote studiously ignored each other.  I made a noise so the coyote would look at me, and got a great photo.

    Our dog was bigger than the coyote, but a little poodle would probably be lunch.

    Many years ago I traveled in the Canadian Northwest Territories.  My host was a biologist, and he told me the wimpiest wolf in the entire world was more than a match for the toughest dog.

    Parent

    In many states (none / 0) (#101)
    by scribe on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 11:29:12 AM EST
    there is no closed season on coyotes.

    In fact, in some states, you can hunt them day or night for most of the year.

    Parent

    Wolves are killed around here (none / 0) (#57)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 08:50:00 PM EST
    pretty regularly.  I think it may be illegal but it doesn't stop them.  No one around here is going to get in trouble for killing things they think will kill livestock.  Gos for cats too.  Sadly.

    Parent
    Eastern Coyotes are much larger than (none / 0) (#108)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 11:57:59 AM EST
    Western coyotes.  At first I thought it was just my lying eyes.  But we watched a documentary on Coywolves, a hybrid currently found in Northeast North America.  In the documentary predator researchers discuss the size difference between the coyotes from each coast.  

    Parent
    I learned while prepping (none / 0) (#109)
    by oculus on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 12:04:42 PM EST
    my "coyote" case, that there are also many coyotes in Alaska.

    Parent
    Correct (none / 0) (#113)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 12:12:15 PM EST
    Very hard to tell from any distance here.  And I'm not that Far East.   Farmers don't care they are all considered threats.  

    Parent
    With most animals, the farther North (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by fishcamp on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:39:36 PM EST
    you move the larger the animals become.  I'v done several animal shows for the old American Sportsman show, and desert bighorn sheep are considerably smaller than Rocky mountain bighorn sheep, while both are the same species.  The best example is bears.  The black bears that roam most of the US are smaller than the northern brown bears.  Then the grizzly bears are farther north and much larger.  The Polar bears are, of course, the largest.  This phenomena happens with raccoons and many other animals.  Birds are not an example of this, since we have big wading birds down here, and the Bald Eagles seem to be the same size as the northern raptors..

    Parent
    How's the weather down there (none / 0) (#153)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:46:26 PM EST
    just watching the weather channel and listening to Jimi Hendrix.   The U.S. Map is a giant blue and white blob with a tiny red thing hanging off it that is south FL.

    Parent
    We're just fine Howdy, thanks.. (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by fishcamp on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:57:36 PM EST
    It hit 80 degrees today, but the wind shifted and the fishing wasn't quite as good.  Yep, this old man went out again, that's four days in a row.  We caught about half what we caught yesterday, but still a load of fresh fish.  Absolutely no fishing for me tomorrow, unless I want to watch the Rose Bowl in bed.  GO DUCKS.

    Parent
    NYPD (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by Uncle Chip on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 08:02:49 AM EST
    NYPD Insubordination aka NYPD cops shoot themselves in both feet.

    This is a temper tantrum worthy of spoiled brats.

    But maybe the work stoppage will result in citizenry being on their best behaviour demonstrating the need for fewer spoiled brats policing the streets.

    Ohh wait -- we can't have that. Expect the NYPD to backdown shortly, claim victory, and return to work shaking down the public for their salaries and benefits.

    Happiest of New Years to all (5.00 / 4) (#79)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 08:49:11 AM EST
    Parties tonight, but this morning it's chocolate from Germany and coffee and trying Peeky Blinders on Netflix.

    Yes! (5.00 / 4) (#83)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 09:13:55 AM EST
    happy new year MT and everyone else.  Its very very cold here.  Glad I have not left the house on this night for many years.  

    Parent
    Peaky Blinders is pretty good so far (none / 0) (#106)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 11:38:38 AM EST
    Have you watched any of it?

    Parent
    Have not (none / 0) (#112)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 12:08:42 PM EST
    but just reading about it.  Sounds interesting. Thanks.

    Parent
    Here is the PBS chart of (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Uncle Chip on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 09:09:45 AM EST
    the Ferguson witnesses.

    For weeks we were told that 8 or 9 black witnesses backed Darren Wilson's story.

    Can anyone identify those witnesses on this chart or in the report???

    I've tried to find these Wilson witnesses in the GJ Report but can't seem to find them there or anywhere, other than long distance Witness 10, and nutcase Witness 40 who didn't even make the chart.

    You are right (none / 0) (#162)
    by Palli on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 04:33:06 PM EST
    the supporting cast to the GJ Announcement myth are not there. Fact. As is the fact that there are at least two very significant witnesses to the events of the day who were deliberately not called to testify.
    All the evidence, my eyes and ears.

    Parent
    Who are they? Do you have more info? (none / 0) (#164)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 05:47:29 PM EST
    there are at least two very significant witnesses to the events of the day who were deliberately not called to testify.
    I'd like to know more about this.

    Parent
    Here is something useful: (none / 0) (#169)
    by Uncle Chip on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 07:32:28 PM EST
    Map of the witness locations that the Grand Jury should have had.

    Witness 10 is so far away he doesn't make it on the map.

    Parent

    W10 was, and how that distance affected his observing the incident.

    From W10's testimony:

    Detective: Okay, approximately how far away were, a, were you at that a to where
    you saw that police car at?

    Witness 10: Okay, distance

    D: And, if you don?t ...ya know. . .  

    W10: guess maybe 100 yards I would say. Maybe less.

    So the GJ knows W10 estimates his distance at "100 yards. Maybe less" from Wilson's vehicle.

    D: Okay. And, a, do you see anybody in the driver?s seat of that car?

    W10: I-I couldn?t make it out. I couldn?t, all I seen was Mr. Brown?s body.

    D: Okay. And what was his body doin??

    W10: At that distance I-I-I couldn?t tell. It looked like a?a confrontation and all I
    could assume was some type of confrontation was going on in the car.

    Now the GJ knows that W10 couldn't see exactly what happened at Wilson's SUV because of the distance.

    D: Okay, so um, Michael Brown in running east heading towards that-that parking
    lot, right?

    W10: Yes.

    Brown ran east, it was already established for the GJ that east was AWAY from W10. iow, the GJ knew the distance now was the "100 yards. Maybe less" PLUS whatever distance Brown ran away from W10's location.
    D: Okay. And, do you hear anybody saying anything at any point in this?

    W10: No. I was not at a close enough distance to hear any words being exchanged.

    Again W10 tells the GJ about the distance.

    Parent

    Was it 50 or 75 or 100?? (none / 0) (#173)
    by Uncle Chip on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 09:23:58 PM EST
    Witness 10 told the Detective 100 yards.

    Witness 10 told the Grand Jury a month later 50 maybe 75 yards.

    So which was it???

    25 to 50 yards is a pretty big difference wouldn't you say??? How can you be that far off???

    So did he lie to the Detective in his first interview or did he lie to the Grand Jury a month later.

    Why didn't the prosecutor call him on it???

    I dare you to go to google maps and get the precise distance from Copper Creek Court entrance to where he claims to have been standing -- at his car near the corner of Canfield Dr and Clarion Dr.

    Parent

    Why didn't the prosecutor call him on it??? (none / 0) (#181)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 09:19:39 AM EST
    Because the GJ is supposed to hear all the evidence.

    And since Johnson lied about Brown being choked, why didn't the prosecutor call him on it??

    Parent

    All the Evidence??? (none / 0) (#182)
    by Uncle Chip on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 09:55:37 AM EST
    Because the GJ is supposed to hear all the evidence.

    You're confused.  That's a trial jury. A Grand Jury only needs enough for a probable cause indictment -- but you know that, don't you.

    If they are supposed to have heard ALL the evidence then why didn't they hear from Witness 10's employer to verify his location??? No one and nothing places him at the scene.

    And where was the evidence from the CSI who took pictures from where Witness 10 was supposedly standing to show that he could actually see a full charge from 480 feet away??? Don't tell me that he forgot to do that.

    or how about Witness 40's psychiatrist???

    And why was the white construction worker harrassed as a drug dealer by the police???

    Why wasn't any of the evidence to justify their treatment of him presented to the Grand Jury???

    And since Johnson lied about Brown being choked, why didn't the prosecutor call him on it??

    You're sounding like a broken record and someone who failed to read the GJ report:

    The prosecutor asked the military ME about that and the ME agreed that if the grab around the throat was momentary then it is likely to have left no marks. And DJ admitted that it was momentary.

    But good try anyway -- and Happy New Year!!!

    Parent

    Uh no. (none / 0) (#196)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 02:18:38 PM EST
    The Grand Jury is supposed to hear all the evidence the prosecutor wants to present. In this case the politics dictated that he present everything.

    Witness 10 was all over the place as to location.

    Witness 40 wasn't on trial.

    And here's the Q & A on the ME.

    Did you notice anything when you examined
    18 his body, was there any bruising of his neck?

    19 A No.

    20 Any abrasions on his neck?

    21 A No.

    22 Have you ever seen an injury, and injury
    23 to a person who has been choked?
    24 A Yes.

    And Johnson didn't say momentarily


    A No, ma'am, at this time when the door had
    9 closed back on him, he didn't say anything. His arm
    10 almost in an instant came out the window, his left
    ll arm, I remember it was his left arm, came out the

    12 window and touched Big Mike around his neck area and
    13 his throat. I watched his hands, you know, they
    14 really tightened up, so yeah, he had a good grip on

    15 it, that what's I saw first.

    Face it. Chip. You are a conspiracy nut. I bet you don't believe we landed on the moon.

    Parent

    depends upon what it is (5.00 / 1) (#199)
    by Uncle Chip on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 05:03:12 PM EST
    Is there some reason you missed this on pp 49-50:

    Johnson: his arm came out the window and that's the first initial contact they had ... The officer grabbed a hold of Big Mike's shirt around the neck area.

    Prosecutor: So did he grab his shirt or his neck around the neck area???

    Johnson: It was more of both because he had a real good grip on him.

    Even the prosecutor knew what he was talking about and moved on. You however are stuck on stupid.

    Parent

    away.

    Please stop your false claims.

    Parent

    I just heard (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 09:19:11 AM EST
    that gas is expected to stay at or around current prices through the new year.  I hope they are right.   That would be great news.

    Reverse sticker shock... (5.00 / 3) (#95)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 10:48:24 AM EST
    at my heating oil delivery yesterday too...just under 200 gallons for $ 470.00 plus tax.  Almost feels like stealing compared to to the approx. 7-8 hundo I was paying for the same delivery last year.

    And the electric bill went down a little
    It's like the twilight zone up in here and I like it!  Working class may not be benefitting from the economic recovery, but the energy market is putting some love in our pockets right now.  Keep pumpin' OPEC, f*ck Putin! lol

    Just waitin' on a drop in food prices which theoretically should be along shortly...bacon is still pricey, and what's up with eggs?  They went up all of a sudden a couple weeks ago.

    Parent

    Re eggs: blame the (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by oculus on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 11:25:27 AM EST
    Governator.

    LAT

    Factlet:  in Iowa, laying hens outnumber people 2:1.

    Parent

    Thanks for the edumacation Ma'am... (none / 0) (#103)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 11:35:56 AM EST
    if that's the reason, it's a good thing.  I don't mind paying more for the sake of the hens' quality of life...in Cali at least.  

    I'd imagine they're having none of it in Iowa though! ;)

    Parent

    IA eggs sold in CA must be laid by (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by oculus on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 11:53:25 AM EST
    hens whose living conditions comply w/CA law per the LAT.

    Parent
    Ever boil a "fresh" egg? (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 12:07:57 PM EST
    they don't boil well.   I have been eating almost entirely fresh eggs since I've lived here.  Like snatched out if the chickens butt fresh.  They are great but they stick to the shell like they are superglued when boiled.  Something about the freshness.  Google is your friend.    I recently learned how to deal with that.  Dump a significant amount of baking soda in the water when boiling and let them set for a bit in the water after.   That makes them peal easily.

    Parent
    Or just stick the eggs you (5.00 / 2) (#119)
    by Zorba on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 12:46:20 PM EST
    will want to boil in the refrigerator for a week, to "age" them.
    Really fresh eggs are the absolute best for fried eggs, though.  The yolk and the white are nice and high, and don't spread the way they do in "old" eggs.
    We get local "free-range" fresh eggs a lot.  The chickens run around outside during the day, and they are able to peck at and eat bugs and such.  They just taste better than store eggs.

    Parent
    Aging (none / 0) (#144)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:30:10 PM EST
    my sister said that so I tried it but it didn't seem to make that much difference.  Then I discovered the trick I mentioned above.   But even when I did that it didn't help until I increased the amount of BS and then let them set.  Whatever is making them stick must go double for my sisters chickens.  But I completely agree about them being better.  I become totally spoiled.  On the rare occaisions I have bought store eggs recently they hardly seem like the same thing.   Especially as you say fried or scrambled.   Happy bug feed chickens.  

    Parent
    I'll have to try the baking soda (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by nycstray on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:43:45 PM EST
    I do keep a basket in the fridge and put aging eggs in that for hard boiling. Ah, the things we do for fresh eggs ;)

    If I have sticky eggs now, I give the shell with the whites stuck to them to my bird. :)

    Parent

    I use three or four tblspns (none / 0) (#154)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:53:52 PM EST
    in enough water for 6 or 8 eggs.  I usually keep boiled eggs in the fridge for salads and stuff.  Sometimes I crush one up with a fork for a toasted bagle sandwich.

    Parent
    LOL! (5.00 / 2) (#159)
    by Zorba on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 03:57:39 PM EST
    It's very similar to the difference between wild-caught fish, and "farm-raised" fish.
    Years ago, when I first tasted a wild-caught trout, it was so completely different from the farm-raised ones, the only trout I had ever eaten previously.
    The flesh was quite startlingly dark pink, and the taste was orders of magnitude better.
    I think they must feed farm-raised fish something akin to dog food, because it sure makes a difference in the flavor.  To the detriment of the farm-raised fish.
    Plus, of course, any fish you buy in the store, whether wild caught or not, is just not going to be the same as fish you catch yourself and cook very soon after.
    Just ask fishcamp, whom I'm sure will agree.   ;-)


    Parent
    I put a little white vinegar... (5.00 / 2) (#176)
    by unitron on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 03:47:28 AM EST
    ...in the water to seep into any too small to see cracks/holes in the shell and "cook" whatever egg it touches to solidify it and keep it from leaking out under pressure from the heat.

    Then when it's time to take the eggs off of the heat, leave the pan on the burner with the heat turned way down, and put the eggs into an ice-water bath for about 15 minutes to stop the cooking process and cool them down.

    Then put the eggs back into the hot, but no longer anywhere near boiling, water, maybe 5 minutes, to heat up and expand the shells away from the cooked egg inside.

    Helps with the peeling.

    Parent

    "Pealing" eggs? (none / 0) (#118)
    by oculus on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 12:42:50 PM EST
    I did read that birds slur when intoxicated.

    Parent
    And it's better.... (none / 0) (#177)
    by unitron on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 03:49:35 AM EST
    ...to hard boil the oldest eggs, so buy enough in advance, or do like I do and get busy and forget to use them for anything while they're still fresh.

    : - )

    Parent

    Me too (none / 0) (#102)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 11:33:57 AM EST
    My natural gas bill has went from around $1.20 cf to just under .90... ain't frackin great!?

    Read where the SA's have kept pumping to undercut our domestic production which had put pressure on the world market. Lots of independents shutting down wells because of low prices...

    Maybe Obama can subsidize them the way he has Solyandra...;-)

    Parent

    Seeing Obama's name in (5.00 / 4) (#125)
    by sj on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 01:28:23 PM EST
    your comment made me sure that you were going to give him kudos for the lower prices. You know, the way you blame him when the prices rise.

    Or maybe not.

    Parent

    I didn't think of the US production angle... (none / 0) (#105)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 11:38:26 AM EST
    I was theorizing our good friends the tyrants of Saud were pumping high as a favor to us to stick it in Russia's arse.

    Parent
    kdog, I just read that the Bears, the (5.00 / 2) (#110)
    by caseyOR on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 12:04:58 PM EST
    hapless win-averse Bears, may be considering Rex Ryan as their new head coach. Help me!!

    I have to say, in a former life I must have been some kind of obnoxious sports fan to merit this life where I was born into a family of Cubs and Bears fans. I just want to say to the universe that I am a humble sports fan in this life. A humble humble sports fan.

    And thank the goddess, or Phil Knight, for the Oregon Ducks. GO, DUCKS!!!!!

    Parent

    Don't fret Cap'n... (none / 0) (#121)
    by kdog on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 12:49:31 PM EST
    I think Sexy Rexy is a damn good coach who was failed by his idiot owner and GM...no one could win with the roster he was given to work with the last couple years.

    I'm pretty confident our new coach won't be as good as our recently sh*tcanned coach, while our new GM can't be any worse.  A wash?

    Ya got me beat on the misery scale with the Cubs, no doubt, but the Bears have won a Super Bowl in my lifetime...more than I can say for the same old Jets.  It can always be worse.

    And though I love you dearly...Go 'Noles!

    Happy New Year!

    Parent

    is interviewing for Rex's old job.

    Parent
    Aren't things looking (none / 0) (#123)
    by oculus on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 01:00:24 PM EST
    up for the Cubs?  Joe Maddon and John Lester. What could go wrong?

    Parent
    Well done, Governor O'Malley (5.00 / 2) (#129)
    by sj on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 01:47:51 PM EST
    Now the death penalty is well and truly gone from the state of Maryland.

    Happy New Year, one and all. (5.00 / 5) (#131)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 01:51:47 PM EST
    We're flying out to Hilo and the Big Island this morning, so I'm signing off for now. Let's all please enjoy the holiday sanely and safely, so that 2015 can bring us good fortune.

    Aloha.

    You've yet to back up your claim (5.00 / 2) (#192)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 02:06:07 PM EST
    By anything I've written here, and I suspect the same is true of Anne as well, although unlike you I try to let adults explain themselves here instead of endlessly regurgitating my version of what they said back to them sans evidence.

    Now, if you want to say that supporting the police means that I think they should have the right to use their gun to enforce any request they make of a citizen, regardless of the reason for that request, then no, I don't believe that.

    Obviously, if someone won't drop the knife or other weapon, the cops have a right to shoot in defense of their own or others' lives, but that's not true of either of the current cases that are in the public eye

    If after all the training and weaponry and support we give them, this is  what we've come to, just subjects that must do or die, then we really don't have anything left to defend.  Better to become homeless and live off the grid then have ones' life at the whim of an armed representative of the state who can enforce his whims like a soldier of an occupying force

    Your view of power and rights and law enforcement in a democracy is twisted and repulsive. That's my final response.  

    Ask and you shall receive (1.67 / 3) (#197)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 02:28:21 PM EST
    You've yet to back up your claim By anything I've written here,

    You remind me of a child caught walking out of the kitchen with a full mouth claiming he has ate nothing.

    Based on testimony (none / 0) (#116)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 11:21:53 AM CST
    That the DA admits was not true in the case of some of the witnesses.

    Sorry, I confused this with the Browm(none / 0) (#132)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 12:58:12 PM CST
    GJ.
    And this GJ ignored the finding of homicide by the Coroner, Jim.

    So, you're saying (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 05:35:34 AM CST
    They're wrong, and black lives don't matter?

    I could go on but my point is made. By you.


    Parent

    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#200)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 05:18:53 PM EST
    The DA in the Brown case admitted to witnesses testifying untruthfully, and the coroner in the NYC case termed it a homicide.  I got confused briefly as to which was what, and then admitted my error and moved on.

    Now, I admitted I made a mistake, and my confusion doesn't obliterate the points I made........

    Except inside your head.

    Get over yourself, Jim. You'll be happier in the long run, instead of snarking at the many Blame America First Lefties who post here and don't recognize your unique experience and wisdom about everything from aardvarks to zoonoses.

    Parent

    One Of America's Most Conservative Courts (none / 0) (#38)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 05:52:43 PM EST
    Honestly (none / 0) (#52)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 07:53:03 PM EST
    everybody knows what is going to happen in these cases. It's going to go to the supreme court and nobody is going to hear it. Maybe if the lower courts overturn the state laws they will quit wasting tax payer money on this nonsense.

    Parent
    "It's really cold here" (none / 0) (#53)
    by desertswine on Tue Dec 30, 2014 at 07:57:39 PM EST
    It's really cold here, too. And windy, it's very windy.  This kind of cold can kill you.

    2 Year Old Kills Mom at Walmart (none / 0) (#165)
    by RickyJim on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 05:58:58 PM EST
    Link.  There must be statistics somewhere comparing the number of accidents caused by civilian firearms versus crimes prevented by civilians having them. Anybody?

    If this wasn't witness intimidation (none / 0) (#171)
    by Uncle Chip on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 08:21:40 PM EST
    then I don't know what is:

    Ferguson "White Construction Worker" Harassed As Drug Dealer

    He was basically held incommunicado for quite a long time, and then hounded as if he were a drug dealer.

    Police and other mysterious "Unknown Males," as described in the just-released transcript, treated these witnesses like criminals and drug dealers from the word go, in an extremely hostile fashion.  

    It's no surprise as to why: they were very credible, uninvolved, witnesses that were going to testify to the grand jury - and they were white, meaning the prosecutors feared they would be credible.

    [the commentary section is most interesting]


    Happy New Year everyone! (none / 0) (#174)
    by ZtoA on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 09:48:10 PM EST
    I'm staying in tonite. About 5-6 weeks ago my doctor insisted that I go on a blood pressure med - amLODIprine. Since then I have felt crazy (seriously), nauseated, can't walk, dizzy and serious pain in my legs and feet, can't sleep and much more. I had no idea why. But my daughter has been home for a week now and has been watching me. She also knew that I fell in my home about 2 weeks ago and could not get up and I had to call 911 and crawl (skootch)  to the front door to let them in. I'm still bruised all over from that, and other falls. Two nights ago I thought I was dying and she called the triage nurse before we were going to go to the emergency center. (I am still feeling very lucky and happy in my life - so I had that to rely on).

    For some lucky reason, we got a very nice triage nurse who led us thru some analysis. I'm very grateful my daughter was involved because I was (and still am) very mentally impaired besides being in acute pain. The nurse set up several doctor visits and I had one last night with a new doc. It seems like my body does not 'do' amLODIprine (Norvasc). I decided (since it is MY body) that I will not take that, or any chemical BP med) and it has been around 21 hours since my last dose. I'm starting to be in less pain. Somehow after googling "how long does it take to get relief from Norvasc?" long forums of people who have had the same long series of serious 'side-effects'. One guy thought (he was a younger guy too) that he had parkinsons and his doc concurred, put him on more meds for that and some on the forum have permanent damage from the BP med. Many describe it as feeling like a "Zombie".  I am, personally, looking forward to 2015.

    This is not totally disconnected to this thread. This morning, for hours, when I could not physically get out of bed or even stand without falling, I laid in bed reading about LulzSec - check them out on Wiki. They are not an official group anymore, but in 2011 they hacked (among others) Sony, ATT&T, CIA, China, a couple of large banks.

    The ONLY reason several of them were arrested was because other hacker groups exposed them. Arrests were made, all for males, ages 16, 19, 23 and 24.  Most of their hacks (the known ones) were not for $$, and they often just put up some message like "we have all your information, pls improve your cyber security". But at least the 16 and 19 year olds did not directly financially benefit from cyber security income. One of those young men was 'aspergers' and they were put under house arrest and not allowed internet or to go out without their moms. Some had to serve some jail time too.

    This is regarding the recent Sony hack(s). I read about Stuxnet in 2011 and for some reason it did not get much media attention. Wired magazine did a very nice, long article on it tho. IMO, cyber attacks (not going to use the word 'warfare' since much of this is just pranks and 16 year old boy's ideas of 'fun') is where much of the power of 'struggles' is already going.

    I do not think that 'regular' (non cyber expert) people would know anything about this except that some small linked group of genius hackers (may a few females too?) let some info out. They are letting us know that they are there/here. And they ARE! IMO, we need to try our hardest to listen and become aware of the power of the internet and the power of just a few linked individuals on the entire internet and planet.

    J has been posting for months and months about IS marketing and PR instruments.  In my mind PR and hacking are very linked. Demonstrations, physical and cyber are done for PR and info releases and the 'crowd sourced' change is let happen. For some reason the US media has ignored it and if one wants to read about it then one needs to 1) go to the source (like J does) or read on UK news (the Guardian) or Al-jazeera.

    BTW I am sorry for any 'crazy' comments I've made in the last 6 weeks. Other than that, I'm not sorry for what may appear nuts. :)  But, still, happy new year to everyone here! Y'all are brilliant and wonderful!

    You may be interested in this story: (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by Mr Natural on Wed Dec 31, 2014 at 10:48:18 PM EST
    Anonymous vs. the Lizard Squad, in the battle for the Hidden Internet (Tor anonymized)

    I hope you feel better soon, ZtoA.  Scary.  My cat is on amlodiprine.  I don't think she hurts but how would we know?

    Parent

    This thread is now closed (none / 0) (#201)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jan 01, 2015 at 07:36:16 PM EST
    we're at 200 comments.