• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

TMSAIL

Black mob beats white ex-marine into coma. Will Obama comment?

282 posts in this topic

 

"Thank you for your prair and support."

Wow. Mocking comes so easy to some of you. I found these words from his brother important rather than his spelling. Mock away

 

Most of you know that my borther in law Ralph was attacked In an altercation that took place in West Point Mississippi. He is a Iraq War Vet of the Marine Corp. I am setting up this fund to Raise Money for Medical Bill. 100% of the Money Raised will go to Ralphs Medical Care no Exeptions. Please Donate what you can lets see How much we can get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

"Thank you for your prair and support."

Wow. Mocking comes so easy to some of you. I found these words from his brother important rather than his spelling. Mock away

 

Most of you know that my borther in law Ralph was attacked In an altercation that took place in West Point Mississippi. He is a Iraq War Vet of the Marine Corp. I am setting up this fund to Raise Money for Medical Bill. 100% of the Money Raised will go to Ralphs Medical Care no Exeptions. Please Donate what you can lets see How much we can get.

Outrageous. If anyone feels compelled to donate now that they know about it, they can do so,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you seriously claiming that you posted that hoping to solicit donations. Sorry not buying it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you seriously claiming that you posted that hoping to solicit donations. Sorry not buying it.

So don't buy it. One way to get back at me would be to donate to his cause. As his father notes, while he is "certainly no angel", nobody deserves to go through that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Are you seriously claiming that you posted that hoping to solicit donations. Sorry not buying it.

So don't buy it. One way to get back at me would be to donate to his cause. As his father notes, while he is "certainly no angel", nobody deserves to go through that.

Loud mouth asshole looks for a fight and gets his ass kicked?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Are you seriously claiming that you posted that hoping to solicit donations. Sorry not buying it.

So don't buy it. One way to get back at me would be to donate to his cause. As his father notes, while he is "certainly no angel", nobody deserves to go through that.

Loud mouth asshole looks for a fight and gets his ass kicked?

I can't force you to donate to the gofundme page in his honor, but if you feel so compelled, the page is there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

"Thank you for your prair and support."

Wow. Mocking comes so easy to some of you. I found these words from his brother important rather than his spelling. Mock away

 

When you've got nothing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sadly my name got thrown around for years, I said nothing.

 

Sorry you're a hormonal little girl.

 

Must be rough ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it shocking that anyone would refer to a gofundme page, set up to help an Iraq War Veteran and former Marine overcome this act of racial cowardice, as nothing. Such hatred of our troops is outrageous. This is our chance to honor his sacrifice and service by helping him in his time of need. It is not nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it shocking that anyone would refer to a gofundme page, set up to help an Iraq War Veteran and former Marine overcome this act of racial cowardice, as nothing. Such hatred of our troops is outrageous. This is our chance to honor his sacrifice and service by helping him in his time of need. It is not nothing.

 

You can do better than that, truly.

 

Off your game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sadly my name got thrown around for years, I said nothing.

 

Sorry you're a hormonal little girl.

 

Must be rough ...

What was your previous screen name?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

sadly my name got thrown around for years, I said nothing.

 

Sorry you're a hormonal little girl.

 

Must be rough ...

What was your previous screen name?

 

Look it up - you know how.

 

Btw - sorry your life is rough. It must be tough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BJ Porter must really get steamed about people using his real name.

 

Yup - should have used his full first name. My guess is he manned up and got used to it.

 

Some, well, they might not have that much to "up" with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

sadly my name got thrown around for years, I said nothing.

 

Sorry you're a hormonal little girl.

 

Must be rough ...

 

What was your previous screen name?

Look it up - you know how.

 

Btw - sorry your life is rough. It must be tough.

As I recall, it was your first initial and your last name.

 

My life is great, no melt down here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

sadly my name got thrown around for years, I said nothing.

 

Sorry you're a hormonal little girl.

 

Must be rough ...

What was your previous screen name?

Look it up - you know how.

 

Btw - sorry your life is rough. It must be tough.

As I recall, it was your first initial and your last name.

 

My life is great, no melt down here.

 

Glad to hear you're doing well.

 

I know it's rough being who you are.

 

Glad you have the support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

sadly my name got thrown around for years, I said nothing.

 

Sorry you're a hormonal little girl.

 

Must be rough ...

 

What was your previous screen name?

Look it up - you know how.

 

Btw - sorry your life is rough. It must be tough.

As I recall, it was your first initial and your last name.

My life is great, no melt down here.

Glad to hear you're doing well.

 

I know it's rough being who you are.

 

Glad you have the support.

You can do better than that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be careful I think goading for a response will be the next item people will start whining to the mods about

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I find it shocking that anyone would refer to a gofundme page, set up to help an Iraq War Veteran and former Marine overcome this act of racial cowardice, as nothing. Such hatred of our troops is outrageous. This is our chance to honor his sacrifice and service by helping him in his time of need. It is not nothing.

. I thought you were waiting for the video?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I find it shocking that anyone would refer to a gofundme page, set up to help an Iraq War Veteran and former Marine overcome this act of racial cowardice, as nothing. Such hatred of our troops is outrageous. This is our chance to honor his sacrifice and service by helping him in his time of need. It is not nothing.

. I thought you were waiting for the video?

Before judging what happened that night, sure, I'm content to wait for the facts, but an Iraq War Veteran and former Marine has been injured and is in the hospital in fair condition with a life threatening head injury. There's a page to raise money to pay his expenses. That isn't "nothing".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

BJ Porter must really get steamed about people using his real name.

 

Yup - should have used his full first name. My guess is he manned up and got used to it.

 

Some, well, they might not have that much to "up" with.

You can call me Ed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who really expected obama or holder to get involved? After all the victim was white and the attackers black.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it was important to know what happened to the ex marine. Sorry, I forgot that the election is over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By using an article 6 weeks old? Yep that's a good update. Begs the question why did you wait to post it till after the election?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By using an article 6 weeks old? Yep that's a good update. Begs the question why did you wait to post it till after the election?

 

Sol just thinks he's cute.

 

I wonder why the restaurateurs who were feeding the Occupy FL beggars aren't helping the homeless there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

The police chief seems to think it amounts to little to nothing.

 

>"This does not appear to be a hate crime," he said in the press release. "We are investigating this as an aggravated assault. It's very early in this investigation but thus far the evidence and statements suggest that a verbal altercation turned physical and somebody got hurt." http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2014/08/mississippi_man_beaten_after_h.html

 

Don't set the hook until it is swallowed. Lower the drag, give plenty of line.

 

I think the Police chief is probably right to disregard this as a hate crime..... Seems he knows all the facts of the case and must be trustworthy to make that call. I can see why......

 

brinkley.png

Police Chief of West Point, MS

 

I don't get it. Why? Is it the grin?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sarcy snide snarky Ben....let me help you "get it"

 

YJyWGaF.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting, Grumpy. Thank you.

 

Now... Back to Jeff... I would like to know specifically why you question this particular Police Chief's investigation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you still don't "get it"?

 

I think you do but you still want to be an arsehole and rag on Jeff.

 

Do you want to call Jeff a racist? Stop being piss weak and just say so if that's the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not ragging on Jeff. I'm not calling him a racist. Unlike you, I am not going to recklessly run my mouth.

 

He is suggesting that the Police Chief of West Point MS cannot be trusted to make the call on this particular case. I know nothing about the qualifications of the Chief or anything regarding his professional history. I just want to know the basis of Jeff's relatively serious accusation.

 

I think it's a fair question. Moreover, it's not a question for you. That being said, I recommend you practice your usual MO and recall something in the past that I have expressed a passionate opinion about, chide it, and see if you can get a rise out of me. The Iraqi woman bit didn't work out very well, but don't let that discourage you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not ragging on Jeff. I'm not calling him a racist. Unlike you, I am not going to recklessly run my mouth.

 

He is suggesting that the Police Chief of West Point MS cannot be trusted to make the call on this particular case. I know nothing about the qualifications of the Chief or anything regarding his professional history. I just want to know the basis of Jeff's relatively serious accusation.

 

I think it's a fair question. Moreover, it's not a question for you. That being said, I recommend you practice your usual MO and recall something in the past that I have expressed a passionate opinion about, chide it, and see if you can get a rise out of me. The Iraqi woman bit didn't work out very well, but don't let that discourage you.

 

Its a fair question. The answer is I don't know if he's qualified to make the call or not. I presume that he is given he's the CoP and I would give him the bene of the doubt until proven otherwise. But even you been would recognize that my post was a rhetorical statement that calls into question why the white cops in Ferguson are uniquely UN-qualified to make a judgement call regarding a police matter. I see a stark double-standard in play. Don't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm not ragging on Jeff. I'm not calling him a racist. Unlike you, I am not going to recklessly run my mouth.

 

He is suggesting that the Police Chief of West Point MS cannot be trusted to make the call on this particular case. I know nothing about the qualifications of the Chief or anything regarding his professional history. I just want to know the basis of Jeff's relatively serious accusation.

 

I think it's a fair question. Moreover, it's not a question for you. That being said, I recommend you practice your usual MO and recall something in the past that I have expressed a passionate opinion about, chide it, and see if you can get a rise out of me. The Iraqi woman bit didn't work out very well, but don't let that discourage you.

 

Its a fair question. The answer is I don't know if he's qualified to make the call or not. I presume that he is given he's the CoP and I would give him the bene of the doubt until proven otherwise. But even you been would recognize that my post was a rhetorical statement that calls into question why the white cops in Ferguson are uniquely UN-qualified to make a judgement call regarding a police matter. I see a stark double-standard in play. Don't you?

 

No, I don't. The Ferguson incident was a Ferguson cop shooting somebody, with conflicting witness accounts. They were basically investigating themselves. It is a completely different case.

 

Sailboats get hit by motorboats and people are killed. There was a particular incident of that sort publicized on this forum a few years back that involved an off duty cop driving the motorboat, and conflicting witness statements. That particular one got a lot of attention here. Like the Ferguson case, the cops had to investigate one of their own. Yet there was no mention of double standard in play, nor any mention of race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I'm not ragging on Jeff. I'm not calling him a racist. Unlike you, I am not going to recklessly run my mouth.

 

He is suggesting that the Police Chief of West Point MS cannot be trusted to make the call on this particular case. I know nothing about the qualifications of the Chief or anything regarding his professional history. I just want to know the basis of Jeff's relatively serious accusation.

 

I think it's a fair question. Moreover, it's not a question for you. That being said, I recommend you practice your usual MO and recall something in the past that I have expressed a passionate opinion about, chide it, and see if you can get a rise out of me. The Iraqi woman bit didn't work out very well, but don't let that discourage you.

 

Its a fair question. The answer is I don't know if he's qualified to make the call or not. I presume that he is given he's the CoP and I would give him the bene of the doubt until proven otherwise. But even you been would recognize that my post was a rhetorical statement that calls into question why the white cops in Ferguson are uniquely UN-qualified to make a judgement call regarding a police matter. I see a stark double-standard in play. Don't you?

 

No, I don't. The Ferguson incident was a Ferguson cop shooting somebody, with conflicting witness accounts. They were basically investigating themselves. It is a completely different case.

 

It sounds like there were conflicting witness accounts of the black mob beating a whitey in front of a waffle house that indicated it might be racially motivated - yet the yet the black CoP declares its not racially motivated. Case closed (on the racial aspect). Yet Ferguson is a HUGE racial case with black folk burning down the town and accusing the CoP and DA of racial bias because they didn't immediately arrest and charge the cop, despite some pretty compelling physical evidence that the cop was defending his life from a black aggressor.

 

That, I'm sorry, is THE very definition of a double standard. I do however feel bad for the citizens of West Point, MS for the white looters and rioters that destroyed the town in the aftermath of the beatdown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Ben any double standard in the AG's response to the questions?

 

http://youtu.be/vdEl-pGeGxw

 

As compared to his response to what else? We need at least two comparable cases, and his response to them, to assess a double standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I'm not ragging on Jeff. I'm not calling him a racist. Unlike you, I am not going to recklessly run my mouth.

 

He is suggesting that the Police Chief of West Point MS cannot be trusted to make the call on this particular case. I know nothing about the qualifications of the Chief or anything regarding his professional history. I just want to know the basis of Jeff's relatively serious accusation.

 

I think it's a fair question. Moreover, it's not a question for you. That being said, I recommend you practice your usual MO and recall something in the past that I have expressed a passionate opinion about, chide it, and see if you can get a rise out of me. The Iraqi woman bit didn't work out very well, but don't let that discourage you.

 

Its a fair question. The answer is I don't know if he's qualified to make the call or not. I presume that he is given he's the CoP and I would give him the bene of the doubt until proven otherwise. But even you been would recognize that my post was a rhetorical statement that calls into question why the white cops in Ferguson are uniquely UN-qualified to make a judgement call regarding a police matter. I see a stark double-standard in play. Don't you?

 

No, I don't. The Ferguson incident was a Ferguson cop shooting somebody, with conflicting witness accounts. They were basically investigating themselves. It is a completely different case.

 

It sounds like there were conflicting witness accounts of the black mob beating a whitey in front of a waffle house that indicated it might be racially motivated - yet the yet the black CoP declares its not racially motivated. Case closed (on the racial aspect). Yet Ferguson is a HUGE racial case with black folk burning down the town and accusing the CoP and DA of racial bias because they didn't immediately arrest and charge the cop, despite some pretty compelling physical evidence that the cop was defending his life from a black aggressor.

 

That, I'm sorry, is THE very definition of a double standard. I do however feel bad for the citizens of West Point, MS for the white looters and rioters that destroyed the town in the aftermath of the beatdown.

 

So an agent of Government shooting and killing someone is directly comparable to a group of civilians beating somebody up.

 

That's a ridiculous comparison. I'm sorry, but I don't find them close in the remotest way. You can make every incident reflective of a racial double standard.

 

I suppose if a white guy driving down Figueroa in Los Angeles with no brake lights, a gun on the dashboard, and a joint in his mouth gets pulled over, and a 70 year old black couple in a minivan doesn't, it's a clear case of a double standard based entirely on race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I'm not ragging on Jeff. I'm not calling him a racist. Unlike you, I am not going to recklessly run my mouth.

 

He is suggesting that the Police Chief of West Point MS cannot be trusted to make the call on this particular case. I know nothing about the qualifications of the Chief or anything regarding his professional history. I just want to know the basis of Jeff's relatively serious accusation.

 

I think it's a fair question. Moreover, it's not a question for you. That being said, I recommend you practice your usual MO and recall something in the past that I have expressed a passionate opinion about, chide it, and see if you can get a rise out of me. The Iraqi woman bit didn't work out very well, but don't let that discourage you.

 

Its a fair question. The answer is I don't know if he's qualified to make the call or not. I presume that he is given he's the CoP and I would give him the bene of the doubt until proven otherwise. But even you been would recognize that my post was a rhetorical statement that calls into question why the white cops in Ferguson are uniquely UN-qualified to make a judgement call regarding a police matter. I see a stark double-standard in play. Don't you?

 

No, I don't. The Ferguson incident was a Ferguson cop shooting somebody, with conflicting witness accounts. They were basically investigating themselves. It is a completely different case.

 

It sounds like there were conflicting witness accounts of the black mob beating a whitey in front of a waffle house that indicated it might be racially motivated - yet the yet the black CoP declares its not racially motivated. Case closed (on the racial aspect). Yet Ferguson is a HUGE racial case with black folk burning down the town and accusing the CoP and DA of racial bias because they didn't immediately arrest and charge the cop, despite some pretty compelling physical evidence that the cop was defending his life from a black aggressor.

 

That, I'm sorry, is THE very definition of a double standard. I do however feel bad for the citizens of West Point, MS for the white looters and rioters that destroyed the town in the aftermath of the beatdown.

 

What you are forgetting is that blacks, particularly young black males, are the victims of a systemic race based targeting by police and the broader population. The demonstrations in Ferguson and the beat down in West Point are the inevitable response to that reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

I'm not ragging on Jeff. I'm not calling him a racist. Unlike you, I am not going to recklessly run my mouth.

 

He is suggesting that the Police Chief of West Point MS cannot be trusted to make the call on this particular case. I know nothing about the qualifications of the Chief or anything regarding his professional history. I just want to know the basis of Jeff's relatively serious accusation.

 

I think it's a fair question. Moreover, it's not a question for you. That being said, I recommend you practice your usual MO and recall something in the past that I have expressed a passionate opinion about, chide it, and see if you can get a rise out of me. The Iraqi woman bit didn't work out very well, but don't let that discourage you.

 

Its a fair question. The answer is I don't know if he's qualified to make the call or not. I presume that he is given he's the CoP and I would give him the bene of the doubt until proven otherwise. But even you been would recognize that my post was a rhetorical statement that calls into question why the white cops in Ferguson are uniquely UN-qualified to make a judgement call regarding a police matter. I see a stark double-standard in play. Don't you?

 

No, I don't. The Ferguson incident was a Ferguson cop shooting somebody, with conflicting witness accounts. They were basically investigating themselves. It is a completely different case.

 

It sounds like there were conflicting witness accounts of the black mob beating a whitey in front of a waffle house that indicated it might be racially motivated - yet the yet the black CoP declares its not racially motivated. Case closed (on the racial aspect). Yet Ferguson is a HUGE racial case with black folk burning down the town and accusing the CoP and DA of racial bias because they didn't immediately arrest and charge the cop, despite some pretty compelling physical evidence that the cop was defending his life from a black aggressor.

 

That, I'm sorry, is THE very definition of a double standard. I do however feel bad for the citizens of West Point, MS for the white looters and rioters that destroyed the town in the aftermath of the beatdown.

 

So an agent of Government shooting and killing someone is directly comparable to a group of civilians beating somebody up.

 

That's a ridiculous comparison. I'm sorry, but I don't find them close in the remotest way. You can make every incident reflective of a racial double standard.

 

I suppose if a white guy driving down Figueroa in Los Angeles with no brake lights, a gun on the dashboard, and a joint in his mouth gets pulled over, and a 70 year old black couple in a minivan doesn't, it's a clear case of a double standard based entirely on race.

How about a volunteer community watch guy in FL shooting and killing someone - I seem to recall everyone from Obama on down putting their two cents in. Didn't the DOJ get involved then - WHY?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hey Ben any double standard in the AG's response to the questions?

 

http://youtu.be/vdEl-pGeGxw

 

As compared to his response to what else? We need at least two comparable cases, and his response to them, to assess a double standard.

Right there in his first response to paraphrase - " I can not comment about an on going investigation .... But then he proceeds to tell us _ " it is clear that whole scale changes need to be made to the Fergusen Police force." Then he gets all prissy about the leakers while he just fucking leaked that the investigation showed that the police force needs major changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

I'm not ragging on Jeff. I'm not calling him a racist. Unlike you, I am not going to recklessly run my mouth.

 

He is suggesting that the Police Chief of West Point MS cannot be trusted to make the call on this particular case. I know nothing about the qualifications of the Chief or anything regarding his professional history. I just want to know the basis of Jeff's relatively serious accusation.

 

I think it's a fair question. Moreover, it's not a question for you. That being said, I recommend you practice your usual MO and recall something in the past that I have expressed a passionate opinion about, chide it, and see if you can get a rise out of me. The Iraqi woman bit didn't work out very well, but don't let that discourage you.

 

Its a fair question. The answer is I don't know if he's qualified to make the call or not. I presume that he is given he's the CoP and I would give him the bene of the doubt until proven otherwise. But even you been would recognize that my post was a rhetorical statement that calls into question why the white cops in Ferguson are uniquely UN-qualified to make a judgement call regarding a police matter. I see a stark double-standard in play. Don't you?

 

No, I don't. The Ferguson incident was a Ferguson cop shooting somebody, with conflicting witness accounts. They were basically investigating themselves. It is a completely different case.

 

It sounds like there were conflicting witness accounts of the black mob beating a whitey in front of a waffle house that indicated it might be racially motivated - yet the yet the black CoP declares its not racially motivated. Case closed (on the racial aspect). Yet Ferguson is a HUGE racial case with black folk burning down the town and accusing the CoP and DA of racial bias because they didn't immediately arrest and charge the cop, despite some pretty compelling physical evidence that the cop was defending his life from a black aggressor.

 

That, I'm sorry, is THE very definition of a double standard. I do however feel bad for the citizens of West Point, MS for the white looters and rioters that destroyed the town in the aftermath of the beatdown.

 

So an agent of Government shooting and killing someone is directly comparable to a group of civilians beating somebody up.

 

That's a ridiculous comparison. I'm sorry, but I don't find them close in the remotest way. You can make every incident reflective of a racial double standard.

 

I suppose if a white guy driving down Figueroa in Los Angeles with no brake lights, a gun on the dashboard, and a joint in his mouth gets pulled over, and a 70 year old black couple in a minivan doesn't, it's a clear case of a double standard based entirely on race.

 

tumblr_mgfidrhy521qk4e3go1_400.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Hey Ben any double standard in the AG's response to the questions?

 

http://youtu.be/vdEl-pGeGxw

 

As compared to his response to what else? We need at least two comparable cases, and his response to them, to assess a double standard.

Right there in his first response to paraphrase - " I can not comment about an on going investigation .... But then he proceeds to tell us _ " it is clear that whole scale changes need to be made to the Fergusen Police force." Then he gets all prissy about the leakers while he just fucking leaked that the investigation showed that the police force needs major changes.

 

That's not a double standard. That's being an idiot. I'm not sure you know what a double standard is.

 

It's like when Obama said this (bolding is mine):

 

"Now, I’ve — I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that. But I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home..."

 

I said at the time that this was one of the most idiotic statements I had heard made by an American President, and it still remains so. I'm puzzled as to why you think that someone saying they are not going to comment, then making a comment implies a "double standard". Look the term up. I don't think you understand it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A double standard is the application of different sets of principles for similar situations.[1] A double standard may take the form of an instance in which certain concepts (often, for example, a word, phrase, social norm, or rule) are perceived as acceptable to be applied by one group of people, but are considered unacceptable—taboo—when applied by another group.

 

I think the above definition applies. Leakers need to shut up (taboo) But I Eric Holder can leak.if I want too ( acceptable)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A double standard is the application of different sets of principles for similar situations.[1] A double standard may take the form of an instance in which certain concepts (often, for example, a word, phrase, social norm, or rule) are perceived as acceptable to be applied by one group of people, but are considered unacceptable—taboo—when applied by another group.

 

I think the above definition applies. Leakers need to shut up (taboo) But I Eric Holder can leak.if I want too ( acceptable)

 

Now I get it. Thanks, and sorry for misinterpreting you. I was looking for the same double standard that Jeff is discussing. Which I think is race, but not sure as he is now posting cartoons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tumblr_mgfidrhy521qk4e3go1_400.jpg

 

The only double standard I see here is that we should hold police officers to a higher standard than that of street thugs. And I think that is entirely appropriate.

 

As for your comment on the rioting, perhaps the rioters in Ferguson need a more appropriate reason to riot. Like when their home sports team wins a championship. And while there at that, less pigment in their skin wouldn't hurt either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People go to *waffle houses* after the bars close??!!

 

What? They don't have speakeasies and dance clubs down there?

 

Must sure be some damn fine waffles...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I ate at a Waffle House about a month ago. Only place to get breakfast at 5am in Dayton. Young lovely behind the counter puts my eggs and toast down and says in a sweet voice " let me go grab your meat."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

tumblr_mgfidrhy521qk4e3go1_400.jpg

 

The only double standard I see here is that we should hold police officers to a higher standard than that of street thugs. And I think that is entirely appropriate.

 

As for your comment on the rioting, perhaps the rioters in Ferguson need a more appropriate reason to riot. Like when their home sports team wins a championship. And while there at that, less pigment in their skin wouldn't hurt either.

 

Ben - you do understand that the double standard Jeff's describing is that "it's OK" for a black COP to decide that violence perpetrated against a white victim wasn't racially motivated, and that a white COP deciding that violence perpetrated against a black victim wasn't started riots?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I think the Police chief is probably right to disregard this as a hate crime..... Seems he knows all the facts of the case and must be trustworthy to make that call. I can see why......

 

brinkley.png

Police Chief of West Point, MS

 

I don't get it. Why? Is it the grin?

I can see into his soul and the darkness surrounding his heart. A man like that could never bring justice. Just look at him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

tumblr_mgfidrhy521qk4e3go1_400.jpg

 

The only double standard I see here is that we should hold police officers to a higher standard than that of street thugs. And I think that is entirely appropriate.

 

As for your comment on the rioting, perhaps the rioters in Ferguson need a more appropriate reason to riot. Like when their home sports team wins a championship. And while there at that, less pigment in their skin wouldn't hurt either.

 

Ben - you do understand that the double standard Jeff's describing is that "it's OK" for a black COP to decide that violence perpetrated against a white victim wasn't racially motivated, and that a white COP deciding that violence perpetrated against a black victim wasn't started riots?

 

No. I didn't. Did "a guy.." get this right, Jeff? Are you saying that the riots were in response solely due to a cop's assessment that violence perpetrated against a black victim wasn't racially motivated?

 

It's a ridiculous assertion, but will respond to if it is indeed what you meant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

tumblr_mgfidrhy521qk4e3go1_400.jpg

The only double standard I see here is that we should hold police officers to a higher standard than that of street thugs. And I think that is entirely appropriate.

 

As for your comment on the rioting, perhaps the rioters in Ferguson need a more appropriate reason to riot. Like when their home sports team wins a championship. And while there at that, less pigment in their skin wouldn't hurt either.

Ben - you do understand that the double standard Jeff's describing is that "it's OK" for a black COP to decide that violence perpetrated against a white victim wasn't racially motivated, and that a white COP deciding that violence perpetrated against a black victim wasn't started riots?

No. I didn't. Did "a guy.." get this right, Jeff? Are you saying that the riots were in response solely due to a cop's assessment that violence perpetrated against a black victim wasn't racially motivated?

 

It's a ridiculous assertion, but will respond to if it is indeed what you meant.

Remove your word "solely" and you have it about right

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

tumblr_mgfidrhy521qk4e3go1_400.jpg

The only double standard I see here is that we should hold police officers to a higher standard than that of street thugs. And I think that is entirely appropriate.

 

As for your comment on the rioting, perhaps the rioters in Ferguson need a more appropriate reason to riot. Like when their home sports team wins a championship. And while there at that, less pigment in their skin wouldn't hurt either.

Ben - you do understand that the double standard Jeff's describing is that "it's OK" for a black COP to decide that violence perpetrated against a white victim wasn't racially motivated, and that a white COP deciding that violence perpetrated against a black victim wasn't started riots?

No. I didn't. Did "a guy.." get this right, Jeff? Are you saying that the riots were in response solely due to a cop's assessment that violence perpetrated against a black victim wasn't racially motivated?

 

It's a ridiculous assertion, but will respond to if it is indeed what you meant.

Remove your word "solely" and you have it about right

 

You realize that is one hell of a caveat. If the black guys who followed and beat up the marine were on duty cops, would that change the dynamic? At all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<SNIP>

 

You realize that is one hell of a caveat. If the black guys who followed and beat up the marine were on duty cops, would that change the dynamic? At all?

 

I actually don't see that Ben - perhaps you could help me understand how the occupation of the perpetrator is relevant to accepting the decisions of the top cop w/r/t how/if to prosecute worked out in each case?

 

In Ferguson - we have a white cop deciding how to charge the case, and people were upset by the decision. In MS, we have a black cop deciding how to charge the case, and some people were upset (but no riots, and no outcry about racial motivation in the charging decision).

 

Not pickin' at ya, I think I'm missing something you're trying to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Fergunson had not been a police officer involved. Do you beleive there would have still been riots?

 

There were overt threats of violence and riots in Sanford and elsewhere if Zimmerman had not been charged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

<SNIP>

 

You realize that is one hell of a caveat. If the black guys who followed and beat up the marine were on duty cops, would that change the dynamic? At all?

 

I actually don't see that Ben - perhaps you could help me understand how the occupation of the perpetrator is relevant to accepting the decisions of the top cop w/r/t how/if to prosecute worked out in each case?

 

In Ferguson - we have a white cop deciding how to charge the case, and people were upset by the decision. In MS, we have a black cop deciding how to charge the case, and some people were upset (but no riots, and no outcry about racial motivation in the charging decision).

 

Not pickin' at ya, I think I'm missing something you're trying to say.

 

Thank you.... that is exactly the point I've been trying to make. My focus was on the top cop's decision on how to proceed based on available evidence - not about the perpetrator's occupation.

 

In the Ferguson case, there appeared to be ample evidence that Brown was the aggressor, not the cop. In the MS case, it appeared to be prima facia racially motivated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jeff. Part of the problem was the evidence that Brown was the aggressor wasn't put out there until after things went pear shaped. No one ever got in front of the story here in St. Louis. There was another police involved shooting a couple of days afterwards in St. Louis City. The city department got the information out immediately about what happened. No riots. I'm not condoning any of the actions, but I do feel like a lot could have been avoided with better/ more timely PR work. I have a close friend who was on the front lines in Ferguson as a County Officer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except that the story was out there from the get go that mike had his hands up and was shot execution style by the cop. I remember hearing that report within a few hours of the incident. I would contend that nothing would have convinced those pushing that scenario that brown was NOT executed in cold blood.

Personally after hearing the early reports I thought the cop fucked up and that there would be riots regardless.

 

As to the Zimmerman situation that blew up precisely because the initial report was that zimmerman was white and again that Trayvon was an innocent little kid executed in cold blood.

 

One member of Congress went so far as to publicly state that " Trayvon was shot down like a dog in the street".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except that the story was out there from the get go that mike had his hands up and was shot execution style by the cop. I remember hearing that report within a few hours of the incident. I would contend that nothing would have convinced those pushing that scenario that brown was NOT executed in cold blood.

Personally after hearing the early reports I thought the cop fucked up and that there would be riots regardless.

As to the Zimmerman situation that blew up precisely because the initial report was that zimmerman was white and again that Trayvon was an innocent little kid executed in cold blood.

One member of Congress went so far as to publicly state that " Trayvon was shot down like a dog in the street".

The Zimmerman situation didn't blow up right away. It blew up after it appeared the police and DA didn't really investigate a white neighborhood watch wanna be cop shooting a black teenager.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Except that the story was out there from the get go that mike had his hands up and was shot execution style by the cop. I remember hearing that report within a few hours of the incident. I would contend that nothing would have convinced those pushing that scenario that brown was NOT executed in cold blood.

Personally after hearing the early reports I thought the cop fucked up and that there would be riots regardless.

As to the Zimmerman situation that blew up precisely because the initial report was that zimmerman was white and again that Trayvon was an innocent little kid executed in cold blood.

One member of Congress went so far as to publicly state that " Trayvon was shot down like a dog in the street".

The Zimmerman situation didn't blow up right away. It blew up after it appeared the police and DA didn't really investigate a white neighborhood watch wanna be cop shooting a black teenager.
Yes and no. Yes because no one has heard of it outside the local coverage. It blew up the minute the race baiters like Sharpten got involved and the MSM started pushing the story. Including the infamous NBC edit to make him look racist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the Zimmerman police chief have a heart surrounded by darkness like the one Jeff showed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

<SNIP>

 

You realize that is one hell of a caveat. If the black guys who followed and beat up the marine were on duty cops, would that change the dynamic? At all?

 

I actually don't see that Ben - perhaps you could help me understand how the occupation of the perpetrator is relevant to accepting the decisions of the top cop w/r/t how/if to prosecute worked out in each case?

 

In Ferguson - we have a white cop deciding how to charge the case, and people were upset by the decision. In MS, we have a black cop deciding how to charge the case, and some people were upset (but no riots, and no outcry about racial motivation in the charging decision).

 

Not pickin' at ya, I think I'm missing something you're trying to say.

 

I don't mean to pick on you either, but I have to say I find it astounding that you don't find that the supposed perpetrator being a police officer is relevant. I can hold an on duty cop to a higher standard than an angry mob. Moreover, it isn't HOW a cop decides how to charge the case. It's whether or not he charges the case AT ALL.

 

A civilian mob beats the shit out of a guy and the police agree a crime has been committed are looking for the perps.

 

A cop kills a guy and he walks.

 

I think race was an issue in the beating case. Whether or not that is officially proclaimed by the chief, there is no denial that there was an injustice and they are looking for the guys. If the perps would have been on duty cops, with no acknowledgement of wrong doing, would you find that outcome acceptable? Just an issue of "occupation"?

 

In regard to the Ferguson case. If the Chief were to proclaim a racial issue, then put the guy right back on the job, would the protests cease?

 

I think my parallels are one hell of a stretch, but if you guys want to see these cases remotely similar, then let's rock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben, I was halfway through a lengthy reply to you when my iPad battery died. So fuck it, whatever. You still don't get the point but I'm tired of explaining it to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben, I was halfway through a lengthy reply to you when my iPad battery died. So fuck it, whatever. You still don't get the point but I'm tired of explaining it to you.

 

That's disappointing, as you are one of the few people here who I think expresses candid and balanced opinions on many topics. Sorry for frustrating you. I simply find a comparison between the two cases as incredible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Ben, I was halfway through a lengthy reply to you when my iPad battery died. So fuck it, whatever. You still don't get the point but I'm tired of explaining it to you.

That's disappointing, as you are one of the few people here who I think expresses candid and balanced opinions on many topics. Sorry for frustrating you. I simply find a comparison between the two cases as incredible.

I'll try to get to it later if I get time. I'm racing tomorrow, so I'm prepping the boat later today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben, I had a truly masterfully crafted reply. But I fear its lost forever now. So let me summarize

 

Fergeson white CoP and DA choose NOT to declare it racial and chooses instead to let the facts of the investigation come out before charging the suspect.

 

Black MS CoP chooses to ignore the obvious racial component and declares it definitively NOT racial before the investigation gets under way.

 

In the first case citizens riot before an investigation even begins because the authorities don't arrest the cop for a racially motivated shooting. In the second, the citizens don't riot despite a pretty obvious racial attack and the authorities seeking indifference to it.

 

Seems a little double-standardy to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben - I think Jeff's summary is pretty close to what I was trying to convey - the points of discussion aren't the actions of the people inflicting violence (cop in Ferguson, group of black males in MS), but, the public behavior w/r/t the way the respective chiefs of police decided to handle the charges.

I'm right there with ya that *anyone* wielding a weapon in the service of others must be held to a higher standard of accountability, but, with that accountability also comes an initial benefit of the doubt.

 

In the Ferguson case - there's plenty of doubt, and the investigation's still ongoing. Nobody has "walked" yet. Thedecision about levying charges is waiting until the investigation has completed, so it's not accurate to say that the cop that shot Mike Brown "got away".

 

In the MS case - consider if the races of the victims/perpetrators were reversed, and the Chief made the same declaration of no racial motivation. Whether this declaration was supported by unreported facts or not, do you think that the locals would behave as calmly as they have so far, or do you think that the right Reverend Sharpton would be down there fanning the flames?

 

That's where I see the double standard - not on the parts of the cops, but, in the public reaction to what the top cop has done in each case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DING!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What double standard then? Top cops in each district have said the crime was not racially motivated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben, I had a truly masterfully crafted reply. But I fear its lost forever now. So let me summarize

 

Fergeson white CoP and DA choose NOT to declare it racial and chooses instead to let the facts of the investigation come out before charging the suspect.

 

Black MS CoP chooses to ignore the obvious racial component and declares it definitively NOT racial before the investigation gets under way.

 

In the first case citizens riot before an investigation even begins because the authorities don't arrest the cop for a racially motivated shooting. In the second, the citizens don't riot despite a pretty obvious racial attack and the authorities seeking indifference to it.

 

Seems a little double-standardy to me.

 

Rioting is practically always the wrong response to anything. What I find particularly ironic in your post is the condemnation for people to react before an investigation even begins, and yet you are reacting to the second case, declaring as having an obvious racial component, before an investigation even begins.

 

Otherwise, I again cannot conceive of these cases being compared to each other. A agent of the state, shooting and killing an unarmed civilian vs. a civilian on civilian beating. It's not apples and oranges. It's apples and moon rocks.

 

And as an aside, considering how Ferguson unfolded, if I were a police chief and an incident like this happened in my city, I think the first word's out of my mouth would be that it had no racial incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben - I think Jeff's summary is pretty close to what I was trying to convey - the points of discussion aren't the actions of the people inflicting violence (cop in Ferguson, group of black males in MS), but, the public behavior w/r/t the way the respective chiefs of police decided to handle the charges.

I'm right there with ya that *anyone* wielding a weapon in the service of others must be held to a higher standard of accountability, but, with that accountability also comes an initial benefit of the doubt.

 

In the Ferguson case - there's plenty of doubt, and the investigation's still ongoing. Nobody has "walked" yet. Thedecision about levying charges is waiting until the investigation has completed, so it's not accurate to say that the cop that shot Mike Brown "got away".

 

In the MS case - consider if the races of the victims/perpetrators were reversed, and the Chief made the same declaration of no racial motivation. Whether this declaration was supported by unreported facts or not, do you think that the locals would behave as calmly as they have so far, or do you think that the right Reverend Sharpton would be down there fanning the flames?

 

That's where I see the double standard - not on the parts of the cops, but, in the public reaction to what the top cop has done in each case.

 

Putting this in chronological context, there was no indication at all that officer Darren Wilson was on the hook for anything. His name was not released until 5 days later. Incident reports were released by the city and county cops ten days after the event, with no narratives of what happened, were described by one journalist as "practically blank". A "use of force" report, required by the department does not exist.

 

When the first suspect in the marine beating case was encountered, he was arrested and charged with aggravated assault.

 

These a different cases, and as such will result in entirely different reactions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites