It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
Why is it when the FBI does something, it's suspicious and must be indicative of some nefarious plot? But if they DON'T do something, it is also suspicious and indicative of a nefarious plot?
originally posted by: Shamrock6
Why is it when the FBI does something, it's suspicious and must be indicative of some nefarious plot? But if they DON'T do something, it is also suspicious and indicative of a nefarious plot? Is it just a matter of wanting to have the bases covered so no matter what, somebody is right? It seems that whatever action taken is wrong. And where there's inaction, it's also wrong. That continues to amaze me.
What's so mysterious about the cop that offed these two yahoos? I can't watch the video, so if it's something from there then you'll have to enlighten me. Is it just because he hasn't been named yet? If so, so what? Why does he need to be? If it's something else, what is it?
This is true even when said officer guns down an American citizen?
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Bilk22
Is it? Turns out in Texas, a police department can't release an officer's picture unless they've been charged with a crime, named in a civil suit, or the officer consents to it. They also can't release personnel files or information without the state AG office signing off on it.
Brah. Lulz.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
Why is it when the FBI does something, it's suspicious and must be indicative of some nefarious plot? But if they DON'T do something, it is also suspicious and indicative of a nefarious plot? Is it just a matter of wanting to have the bases covered so no matter what, somebody is right? It seems that whatever action taken is wrong. And where there's inaction, it's also wrong. That continues to amaze me.
What's so mysterious about the cop that offed these two yahoos? I can't watch the video, so if it's something from there then you'll have to enlighten me. Is it just because he hasn't been named yet? If so, so what? Why does he need to be? If it's something else, what is it?
originally posted by: Bilk22
This is true even when said officer guns down an American citizen?
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Bilk22
Is it? Turns out in Texas, a police department can't release an officer's picture unless they've been charged with a crime, named in a civil suit, or the officer consents to it. They also can't release personnel files or information without the state AG office signing off on it.
Brah. Lulz.
That's all fine and good, but the cop is a public servant and his identity should be known. If indeed the law allows for his name to be withheld, then we know why this idiotic event was STAGED in Texas.
originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
originally posted by: Bilk22
This is true even when said officer guns down an American citizen?
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Bilk22
Is it? Turns out in Texas, a police department can't release an officer's picture unless they've been charged with a crime, named in a civil suit, or the officer consents to it. They also can't release personnel files or information without the state AG office signing off on it.
Brah. Lulz.
I guess the citizen shouldnt have drawn down on the officer........thats a pretty quick way to get shot here in Texas, and not just by officers
originally posted by: Bilk22
That's all fine and good, but the cop is a public servant and his identity should be known. If indeed the law allows for his name to be withheld, then we know why this idiotic event was STAGED in Texas.
originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
originally posted by: Bilk22
This is true even when said officer guns down an American citizen?
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Bilk22
Is it? Turns out in Texas, a police department can't release an officer's picture unless they've been charged with a crime, named in a civil suit, or the officer consents to it. They also can't release personnel files or information without the state AG office signing off on it.
Brah. Lulz.
I guess the citizen shouldnt have drawn down on the officer........thats a pretty quick way to get shot here in Texas, and not just by officers
originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Willtell
I thought it highly unlikely that a croup of artists would suddenly decide to show allegiance with Charlie Hebdo and risk this. The room it took place in looked staged and so plain.