An Army in Ferguson tonight! Sporadic Twitter/Facebook censoring of #Ferguson hashtag

nevermind, delete

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: spirited75


Mr. Brown may have rushed the officer and reached for his gun. If this is the case, the shooting was justified and a bunch of rabble rousers seized the opportunity to incite riots. However for there to be enough civil unrest to cause a riot, there already had to be strong emotions against the police in that community.

yes it is strong emotions in the community against the police.

the strong emotions were being acted out by a bunch of lawless, inconsiderate, looting, rioting, arsonists who are more criminal than civil.

just a good cross section of the caliber of people close to Mr. Brown. Friends/associates/fellow gangbangers.

the kinds of men you would want to have dating YOUR teenage daughter. LOL.

originally posted by: Greven
a reply to: spirited75
The autopsy and report paints a very, very bad picture for the shooter.

He was shot twice in the head from 'above' (relative to sketch).
He was shot once in the chest from an unknown angle.
He was shot thrice in the inner arms, which suggest they struck him from behind or that he had his palms towards the officer (above head or arms down from front).

twice in the head were the last two bullets as the kid was falling towards the ground.

once in chest from the front.

all shots entered from the front

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: spirited75

if it were my son that were shot, I would demand answers. Immediate answers. Failure to provide immediate answers is a sign of being guilty. Then, over reacting violently (by rolling out the militarized police response) is a further sign of guilt.


If you think the response to Browns death has been disproportionate, pray you never have to see me respond to something similar.

ETA: I don't even know anyone in that town, but reading the NYC ME's report has angered me to a degree that is unusual for me. And his quote pretty much sums it up, "He shot too many times".

lets be real here----it would not be your son who was shot dead during the crime of resisting arrest while charging an injured and armed law enforcement officer.

you can infer guilt from the reasonable response to the rioters who were breaking and entering, destroying property, looting stealing shooting guns at news helicopters and at police, throwing fire bombs if you need to.

the kid charged the police and the officer continued shooting until the immediate clear and present threat and danger was stopped.


you would have shot the kid fifteen times if he had been in your home and charging you while ignoring orders and commands to stop.

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I just heard the report of a witness (on CNN) from Ferguson who reported that a young lady had been hit in the face with smoke bombs (plural) and tear gas. Wow!

FYI: This was actually said. I just find it a bit humorous, hence the posting.

she should have been inside her house
and she would not have been injured.

as soon as the protest turned violent all of the peaceful protesters began aiding and abetting the violent ones----guilt by association.

www.theblaze.com... wilson-told-theblazes-dana-loesch-on-air/

officers story true

www.redflagnews.com... -rushed-wilson

witnesses support officer.

a reply to: spirited75

The first link is nonsensical hearsay

The second doesnt work

So ya

a reply to: Another_Nut

www.thegatewaypundit.com... own/

Edit: You used the word nonsensical completely wrong, perhaps you didn't mean to?

non·sen·si·cal
nänˈsensikəl/Submit
noun
1.
having no meaning; making no sense.

That article made perfect sense. I agree though, hearsay, especially from a friend of the officer.

a reply to: Greven

I am not sure where you got your data, it looks like from the attorney for the family.

The examiner, who is an expert and was brought in, said he was not shot in the back at all, and that the wound on his arm could have been from the front if he was running OR if he had his arms up. So basically one would could have been received while he had his arms up, however it could have also been received while rushing the officer.

We now know the officer has a visual and medical record of a shattered eye socket that he may have received when he struggled with Brown in the police vehicle.

We know that several witnesses indicate that the officers gun first went off while Brown literally had half his body in the police vehicle.

Also, the bullets that entered the head were the final bullets to enter the body, and one of them was the kill shot. One was received while the head was lowered. I don't know if you've ever charged someone but you lower your head when you do that. The second was the top of the skull (the kills shot) and probably received while brown was falling to the ground.

Officers are trained to shoot to kill, to aim for the chest and head, if they are in imminent danger. If after a few shots Brown was still charging, the officer may have continued to shoot until Brown was on the ground.

If brown had indeed assaulted an officer and tried to steel his gun, he may have thought "I am not going to Jail" and figured he could bum rush the officer and get out of the situation with brute force.

Also, if Brown did put his hands up, who is to say he didn't then start to approach the officer (who may have already had a shattered eye socket) in a threatening manner? There are PLENTY of examples of violent offenders doing exactly that and ending up dead because of it. When an officer says "Freeze" it usually indicates you need to freeze or shots are about to be fired.

a reply to: raymundoko

Excellent addition, and there are far more possibilities for the gunshot wounds and the points of entry along with the position of his body at the time of the weapon's discharge. What we are seeing be televised and perpetuated in social media and on websites like this is a circus of black elites and Brown family sympathizers, coupled with the anti-government, anti-authority mind-set, that is completely biased against the police force before any facts or evidence comes out. Even when some of that evidence does come out, individuals such as the family's attorney, Congressional Senators, even the governor of Mo., are claiming that it was a murder and that if there is "no prosecution" then there will be "no peace".

The American Justice system doesn't work by being subject to threats, and in this case it's a matter of evidence, evidence that NONE of us outsiders currently have to be able to form any type of extremist opinion that we see being thrown around.

Again, excellent post ray, star for you! Keep up the good work.

True intellects don't allow emotional reactionary impulses to drive their decision making and their positions, they are objective, they wait for facts and evidence, and they are careful when forming their opinions and examining that evidence, usually decorating them with an openly admitted agnosticism.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Greven

I am not sure where you got your data, it looks like from the attorney for the family.

The examiner, who is an expert and was brought in, said he was not shot in the back at all, and that the wound on his arm could have been from the front if he was running OR if he had his arms up. So basically one would could have been received while he had his arms up, however it could have also been received while rushing the officer.

We now know the officer has a visual and medical record of a shattered eye socket that he may have received when he struggled with Brown in the police vehicle.

We know that several witnesses indicate that the officers gun first went off while Brown literally had half his body in the police vehicle.

Also, the bullets that entered the head were the final bullets to enter the body, and one of them was the kill shot. One was received while the head was lowered. I don't know if you've ever charged someone but you lower your head when you do that. The second was the top of the skull (the kills shot) and probably received while brown was falling to the ground.

Officers are trained to shoot to kill, to aim for the chest and head, if they are in imminent danger. If after a few shots Brown was still charging, the officer may have continued to shoot until Brown was on the ground.

If brown had indeed assaulted an officer and tried to steel his gun, he may have thought "I am not going to Jail" and figured he could bum rush the officer and get out of the situation with brute force.

Also, if Brown did put his hands up, who is to say he didn't then start to approach the officer (who may have already had a shattered eye socket) in a threatening manner? There are PLENTY of examples of violent offenders doing exactly that and ending up dead because of it. When an officer says "Freeze" it usually indicates you need to freeze or shots are about to be fired.

Read the autopsy and report better.

“This one here looks like his head was bent downward,” he said, indicating the wound at the very top of Mr. Brown’s head. “It can be because he’s giving up, or because he’s charging forward at the officer.”

Dr. Baden is talking about a single head wound when he says he could have been rushing or giving up. None of the rest are mentioned in that statement. Do not infer from that that he means the rest.

Look at the sketch. The wounds to his arms are along the underside of his arms. Try to reenact how you get those while charging at someone.

Several witnesses says he was throwing his body inside the closed door of an SUV, huh? Is that what you are going with? That he got shot at - maybe hit - and then ran off only to turn around and charge the guy who was shooting at him to begin with? Several witnesses say he was shot at from behind and turned around, then was shot multiple more times.


We do not now know that the officer has a "visual and medical record" because the only 'report' that is claiming such a combination of things is using a CT scan from a medical website with no attribution or context as if it were Wilson's. Unless you have some other thing I have not seen and can show us otherwise.

If you are literally charging at someone like a bull, someone who has a gun that you ran away from for shooting at you in the first place, then you are insane. You and the others are buying this story floating around that he did this from a distance. Wilson has not presented a statement so far as I have seen. We have only heard second and third hand accounts (or further removed) from the police version of events.

Brown was 6'4". In order to charge at someone with his head down like you are suggesting, he would be unlikely to be able to even see Wilson from that angle and distance.

a reply to: raymundoko

No im right its nonsensical

Close enough to be pushed into his car and punched.but far enough away to be rushed

The story doesnt make sense and its hearsay so its inadmissible anyways

Let me hear it from his own mouth

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

I am from the old school that taught any censorship of information was propaganda.

a reply to: Another_Nut

No, you are confused, I don't think that you read the story correctly...

He was punched in his car BEFORE anything else. After punching Wilson, and apparently reaching for his gun causing it to discharge, Brown ran. Wilson exited his vehicle and ordered Brown to freeze, Brown turned, and according to the article, rushed Wilson.

I am not sure how you aren't able to understand that from the article.

a reply to: raymundoko
According to who did these events take place?
Got any links to these utter specifics?

a reply to: Greven

The bullet into the top of the head was probably just because of rapid firing. The bullet that probably caused him to start to fall was the shot to the face...Just because the shot to the top of the head was the one that ultimately killed him does not mean that was how he was positioned the entire time.

Hold your arm in a running position and look in the mirror. All parts of the arm that were shot are visible. The other factor are the two graze wounds and the top of the arm injury. They are located in such a way that if his hand's were raised there is no way they would have grazed that part of his arm unless he was being shot at in multiple directions or turning while being shot.

You and I are taking completely different things from the link you posted. You are saying "SHOT WITH HIS HANDS UP AND THEN EXECUTED TO THE TOP OF HIS HEAD" I am saying "Could have been shot either way, and the shot to the head was just because he was still being shot while falling.". That is what an officer is trained to do if lethal force is determined necessary. Why do you think cops unload entire clips into violent offenders. They are trained to kill, not injure.

a reply to: Greven

That was from the story. I didn't say that's what happened, but the guy said he couldn't understand the story from the article when it is clearly written and makes sense. Scroll up, the link is in another posters comment.

a reply to: raymundoko

That story makes no sense

The officer drove up close enough to be jumped in his car

The suspect began to flee but turned around to rush the officer

Why didnt he just beat the officer when he had the chance? Why charge a shooting officer ?

So much nonsense

Think about the actions that were supposedly taken by bith parties

It makes no sense

a reply to: raymundoko
There were two bullets that struck from roughly the 'top' remember:

One of the bullets shattered Mr. Brown’s right eye, traveled through his face, exited his jaw and re-entered his collarbone.

One upper right chest wound, two head wounds from 'above' his head, and 3 wounds to his right arm.

Look at the report. Look at the sketch. You are missing an important detail:
His palm is facing the same direction as the entry wounds.

If I am running, my arms are in front of me with my palms facing somewhat towards my body, just as the entry wounds would be. The back of my hands and my forearms are facing away from my body to the front. Maybe I run wrong? Hell if I know, but I don't see what you do.

Try to mimic the pose in the autopsy sketch with your right arm - thumb pointed away from your body, palm facing the front. That's why I say the wounds are to the inner arm. Take a marker or use fingers on your left hand to touch where a wound is. Start running, or charging, or whatever. Do you see what I mean yet?

And no, I am not saying that strawman that you just constructed so don't you dare continue accusing me of such a thing.

I hope you will withdraw your statement about the "visual and medical record" as I handily showed you why you were wrong, but you seem to have not addressed that here.

a reply to: raymundoko
That story is not from a witness. It is from an alleged friend of Wilson - or his wife or something.:

The alleged friend of Wilson continued: “So he goes in reverse back to them, tries to get out of his car. They slam his door shut violently. I think he said Michael did. And, then he opened the car again, you know, he tried to get out. He stands up. And then Michael just bum-rushes him and shoves him back into his car, punches him in the face and then, of course, Darren grabs for his gun. Michael grabbed for the gun. At one point, he got the gun entirely turned against his hip. And he shoves it away, and the gun goes off.”

So, Brown charged him once...

The caller went on to claim that Brown then ran from the officer, making it about 35 feet away before Wilson got up and ordered the suspect to “freeze.”

Then ran away, 35 feet off...

“Michael and his friend turn around. And Michael taunts him… And then all the sudden he just started bumrushing him. He just started coming at him full speed. And, so he just started shooting. And, he just kept coming. And, so he really thinks he was on something,” she concluded. “The final shot was in the forehead, and then he fell about two or three feet in front of the officer.”

And then charged at him a second time. Note what the last claim there is - a forehead shot. There is no forehead wound in the autopsy sketch.