'Stop snitching': Flyers posted on shooting estate warn residents not to help police with murder i

reply to post by Kandinsky

'Ethnics?'

I don't know what to make of that comment but you whois search comment was embarrassing.

Please think twice before making questionable claims.

Originally posted by Ilovecatbinlady
I don't know what to make of that comment but you whois search comment was embarrassing.

Please think twice before making questionable claims.

I'd ask that you state that to the members here who make wild claims without any sort of research or citations to back up their claims.

Kandinsky may appear to have got carried away on that particular area of the topic but it can now truly be understood due to that research and any doubt removed from the equation about its origins.

In many other topics that type of research is the clincher when it comes to understanding the motivation behind an organisation and I'm certain the thanks for it is lacking by the spoon fed masses of cry babies that call themselves conspiracy theorists whilst just accepting the hard work done by others.

So, could you please think twice before attacking someone who put effort into a topic that wasn't their own and had no wares to peddle?

-m0r

Still have not had a reply to my previous post of:

Were the police correct not to snitch on the police officer that killed the G20 protester?

The answer should be easy.

Originally posted by colin42
Still have not had a reply to my previous post of:

Were the police correct not to snitch on the police officer that killed the G20 protester?

The answer should be easy.

Absolutely fantastic point!!!! You have made a profoundly good point and gets at the heart of the argument.

I wonder if any police officer will step forward as whistleblower on the killer Raoul Moat? I wonder what provocations drove this police informer into howling maniac?

reply to post by m0r1arty

So, could you please think twice before attacking someone who put effort into a topic that wasn't their own and had no wares to peddle?

Are you suggesting that I am peddling something? Can you please give me an indication of what you might think it could be so that I can defend myself?

Thanks

reply to post by Ilovecatbinlady


Nah, I'm trying to say that Kandinsky was being helpful and focusing on the origins of the poster rather than stipulating ideas without foundation.

By this I'm not saying anything of, or about, you. I just want it made known that Kandinsky was being useful.

It was they who invited me to this thread to help clear up the matter. That in itself shows you how they wished to help. Try to be pleasant to them eh?

-m0r

Originally posted by Ilovecatbinlady
reply to post by Kandinsky

 

Please think twice before making questionable claims.

...

Originally posted by Ilovecatbinlady

 

It is equally likely that the leaflets might be some kind of dirty tricks campaign against internet freedom.

Equally likely?!

Originally posted by m0r1arty
reply to post by Ilovecatbinlady

 

Nah, I'm trying to say that Kandinsky was being helpful and focusing on the origins of the poster rather than stipulating ideas without foundation.

By this I'm not saying anything of, or about, you. I just want it made known that Kandinsky was being useful.

It was they who invited me to this thread to help clear up the matter. That in itself shows you how they wished to help. Try to be pleasant to them eh?

-m0r

No worries mate.

I will do; I get carried away sometimes and thanks for the heads up.

reply to post by Ilovecatbinlady


We all get carried away at times

As long as we remember that we're fighting to the same ends we're allowed the odd bit of flamboyance.

Anyway - nice thread and something worthy of study so thanks!

-m0r

reply to post by Soshh

Equally likely?!

Do you think its funny because I am speculating, or that I am using a mathematics phrase in a conversation or are you merely mocking me?

I love it when a thread comes back to handshakes and hugs.
It is so correct that we are all on the same side, and very often find ourselves at odds, but at the end of the day, realize that we are all on the same page (and I dont mean ATS)

Kudos to all involved.

Originally posted by KEMIK

Originally posted by Equinox99
Although I am not an advocate of no snitching I think both sides of the law are practicing that rule. Police are hypocrites to tell people to snitch while they are practicing the don't snitch on a fellow officer. Never practice a do as I say and not as I do because it hurts your credibility.

Let me ask you guys this, when was the last time that an officer came right out and ratted out another officer? Don't give me cases where the information was leaked before an officer got suspended with pay. The fact is that many officers are practicing that same rule they are speaking against and it isn't fair to everyone.

If you want people to snitch than officers have to start snitching as well. Otherwise don't tell people to snitch while telling your subordinates to hush.

So crime victims shouldn't come forward because there are corrupt cops? So witnesses of crimes should mind their own business when they could possibly help someone? Wow, our society is getting worse and worse.

I just think it's wrong to compare.

edit on 16-1-2011 by KEMIK because: (no reason given)

I never said that. I said this information should be mutual. If a person fights the person will go to jail until the trial or gets bail. If a cop gets in a fight there is a verbal warning and is protected by the union.

I think cops should be there to set an example and they should be held to a higher standard of care than a citizen. A cop gets training to enforce the law even if it means against their own people. But we have unions now which protects cops from getting fired for something citizens would go to jail for.

I never said don't snitch you simply assumed because I said cops should snitch on their fellow workers as well. But this is a two way street and people need to feel protected. Do you honestly think that people will keep snitching if they see police protecting their own without consequences?

And it isn't simple as seeing a drug dealer and snitching. If you do that chances are the dealer will find you and deal with you himself, no pun intended. There is corruption to the highest level whether you like to think or not.

reply to post by youdidntseeme


Hehehe!

I too am ready to issue some hugs. Who wants one?

No just joking, we are British here you know

Originally posted by Ilovecatbinlady

Originally posted by colin42
Still have not had a reply to my previous post of:

Were the police correct not to snitch on the police officer that killed the G20 protester?

The answer should be easy.

Absolutely fantastic point!!!! You have made a profoundly good point and gets at the heart of the argument.

I wonder if any police officer will step forward as whistleblower on the killer Raoul Moat? I wonder what provocations drove this police informer into howling maniac?

Thankyou I thought so too.

So now answer the question instead of throwing another anicdote in.

Raoul Moat. It seems one of your heroes was a cowardly murderer of innocent people, who by your reasoning should have been let free to kill whenever he liked except himself as it seems he did not have the courage to do that.

The officer of the G20 killing went to court because others snitched.

Stop offering nonsense and discuss the topic

Originally posted by colin42

Originally posted by Ilovecatbinlady

Originally posted by colin42
Still have not had a reply to my previous post of:

Were the police correct not to snitch on the police officer that killed the G20 protester?

The answer should be easy.

Absolutely fantastic point!!!! You have made a profoundly good point and gets at the heart of the argument.

I wonder if any police officer will step forward as whistleblower on the killer Raoul Moat? I wonder what provocations drove this police informer into howling maniac?

Thankyou I thought so too.

So now answer the question instead of throwing another anicdote in.

Raoul Moat. It seems one of your heroes was a cowardly murderer of innocent people, who by your reasoning should have been let free to kill whenever he liked except himself as it seems he did not have the courage to do that.

The officer of the G20 killing went to court because others snitched.

Stop offering nonsense and discuss the topic

Actually I would say that Raoul Moat is of your own ilk. He is an informer like you only he seemed to have had a domestic with the police.

The freaky thing was, your informer mate Moat, had a criminal record, was an old lag and had a GUN LICENSE!,

You have to have the agreement of the local police commander to have a weapons license in the UK, so what the heck is going on here!

You take this informer business personally so I think you may be one.

The officer of the G20 killing went to court because others snitched.

Originally posted by colin42
Thankyou I thought so too.

So now answer the question instead of throwing another anicdote in.

Raoul Moat. It seems one of your heroes was a cowardly murderer of innocent people, who by your reasoning should have been let free to kill whenever he liked except himself as it seems he did not have the courage to do that.

The officer of the G20 killing went to court because others snitched.

Stop offering nonsense and discuss the topic

Since most of us are unfamiliar with the topic you are trying to discuss, why not begin your own thread on the topic. That would probably be helpful to your cause and might enable more members to see your question and get some replies. Just a thought, works for everyone else.

reply to post by youdidntseeme


this kind of thing isn't my personal circumstance, #, I live in hollywood..look, not everyone has the means or the courage to stand up to a gangbanger. it's all well and good to flex on the internet, but, once someone puts some steel in your face, you might think twice. easy to act like a tough guy until it happens to you, just sayin'..

reply to post by Ilovecatbinlady


First, most of your post made no sense. I dont use moat as a pargon you do.

Yes, if I see a crime I would be an informer. I make no bones about it.

Youdidntseeme:

I have no need to start a new topic. My question is correct for this one.

For those saying 'dont snitch' is the correct course to take when witness to a crime then is the same action correct if the police see a crime being commited by another officer?

Expand that a bit more and If someone see's a policeman committing a crime should we not snitch then?

I used Moat and the G20 killing because others here keep using it to defend their keep quiet stance.

Edit
BTW dont liken me to Moat again 'binlady

reply to post by colin42


I'm with you on this topic

To 'Ilovecatbinlady' - we have spoken before, you do need to look at this again and re-evaluate what you are saying !! Your position and thinking on this subject are suspect, IMO..
Regards

PDUK

reply to post by colin42


correct? no. but a snitch is a pariah to other cops, right or wrong. so it becomes a career decision, not just a moral one.