I take it you know the sound from personal experience.
But of course. I've heard you squeal any number of times.
0 Replies
bobsal u1553115
1
Reply
Fri 9 Jan, 2015 01:11 am
@coldjoint,
Quote:
I am not ashamed of anything. And you saying so is another in your long string of lies about members of this forum.
Of course you're not ashamed of anything, you wouldn't be the idiot you are if you felt shame. Just because you feel no shame doesn't mean you should feel no shame.
0 Replies
bobsal u1553115
1
Reply
Fri 9 Jan, 2015 01:13 am
0 Replies
bobsal u1553115
1
Reply
Fri 9 Jan, 2015 01:14 am
0 Replies
tony5732
1
Reply
Fri 9 Jan, 2015 05:43 am
@bobsal u1553115,
No.... Killing unarmed people is not ok. I don't know which rw blog your talking about I posted a surveillance video of brown robbing a store. I said a million times already that cops do bad things I simply stated it is wrong to group EVERYONE who wears a uniform in the same category, because most cops are not doing stupid ****. Now in browns case the cop said he went for the gun, in which case, I don't think that constitutes brown as unarmed. And brown had a fake gun, which could be awfully confusing to an officer who needs to decide when to defend himself. The cops story adds up. The other stories don't. There is no video, there is no evidence, there is no motive for the cop to WANT to put himself in the situation. You only say he is a cold blooded killer because he is a cop. you are not using reason you are using a stereotype. I think thats wrong.
The problem with your surveillance film showing Brown robbing the store isn't over Brown robbing the store. Its a film of someone doing something in the store:
Ferguson Store Owner Says He Doesn’t Believe That’s Mike Brown On Surveillance Video
August 18, 2014 1:28 am·
The convenience store surveillance tapes that the Ferguson police released supposedly shows Michael Brown “robbing” a the local market shortly before being shot and killed by Officer Darren Wilson. The Ferguson police have characterized this as a “robbery” in spite of the fact that it was carried out without any brandishing of a weapon. This was really more a case of petty theft shoplifting than anything else. But in an interesting turn of events, this Friday the owners of the store announced that they never said that they believed Michael Brown was even the individual who stole the item from their store.
While the owners of the market are speaking out through an attorney about the surveillance video, the mainstream media have decided to virtually ignore everything they said. Instead, the corporate media outlets have remained content to pretend that this video definitively identifies Michael Brown as the strong arm shoplifter.
The owners claim that this is a claim the police have come up with on their own. On the other hand though, Dorian Johnson, a witness to the shooting of Michael Brown, has reportedly confessed to being with Brown in the convenient store. But this has yet to be corroborated by the store owner, employees or eye witnesses. A number of questions remain as we are not hearing this from Johnson himself, and we already see just how deceptively the Ferguson police are willing to twist facts to suit their narrative.
The store owner, speaking through their attorney, even dispute the claim that they or an employee called 911. They explain that a customer inside the store made the call, and that is how police even got word of a crime, or a perpetrator who “fit the description” of Brown. The fact of the matter is that if there were an actual “robbery,” we can be certain that the store owner would have called the police.
In addition to clarifying that the store owners never said they believed, nor identified the suspect as being Michael Brown, they further claimed that the St. Louis County issued the warrants to confiscate the hard drive of surveillance video Friday. The warrants were issued based on the police claim that Brown “fit the description” of the person in the video. Remember, this was the person who the owners and employees of the store did not even see fit to call the police on due to the pettiness of the crime. The owner clarifies that neither the management of the shop, nor any employee has ever identified Mike Brown as the suspect recorded in the surveillance video.
The claim that the video recorded Brown “robbing” the convenience store is an assertion made by the police alone. The real question is why the mainstream, corporate media has been uncritically taking the word of the police on this matter, even over the eye witness testimonies of the store employees and owners?
Let alone, no robbery was ever reported.
I've never EVER said,"ALLcops are bad." EVER.
What is happening is you think ALL cops are good, ALWAYS. My evidence of murdering cops on forces all over the US has taken you and your assumptions by surprise. When I started looking into police brutality I went into it skeptically about the scope of it. And I had my skepticism lifted.
Its bigger than both of us thought. The difference is I actually researched it and you are still governed by your preconceived notions of homogenized good policing all over the US.
There was no reason for Wilson to want to kill Brown. There was no reason for Wilson to kill Michael Brown.
You claim that cops don't do "stupid ****", that it "had to be Brown doing" something to get himself shot dead. Cops do purposely do stupidly murderous things to unarmed people. The videos I post from news stations with reports of indicted, fired cops certainly testify to it.
Funny how you trust an indistinct video to base your assumptions about Wilson and Brown on, yet you ignore clear video (sometimes the prowler car video, yet!) I post from news sources including Fox.
And second of all no I have not been doing any name calling or "discourse". I have been trying to actually talk about the issue and ask questions requesting an intelligent or educated response, which I have not received. The main question being what evidence is there against the officer who shot Brown, other than a bunch of cop haters who can't even tell the same story without contradicting each others details.
You mean besides the dead body of an unarmed young man and the number of shots fired by Wilson???
So this video refutes your above article. The article states that there was never any report of a robbery at the store where Brown stole the cigars. The video states just the opposite, that there was a report of a robbery and it went out over the radio, and Wilson responded asking if he was needed for assistance.
This pretty much discredits most of the posts you have made on this subject.
0 Replies
tony5732
1
Reply
Fri 9 Jan, 2015 04:00 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Well ok, so that video proves that the owners did not want to get involved in the case. I can understand why after seeing what happens to stores in that town. That person is not even wearing a mask, he looks like mike brown, and he still has the same outfit on as mike brown laying on the street in other videos, but we are still saying that's not mike brown. Ok, no big deal, mike brown didn't rob the store his identical twin brother and his buddy's doppelganger did it. That would still leave a fake gun, drugs, and a complete lack of any video showing the shooting, as well as conflicting stories. With all that saying the town is full of **** and the cop is actually telling the truth, what says otherwise?
0 Replies
tony5732
0
Reply
Fri 9 Jan, 2015 04:02 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank what's up! Missed you friend.
0 Replies
giujohn
0
Reply
Fri 9 Jan, 2015 04:03 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
i have a lot of porn files on my computer and i need to move them to make space.
Translation..."I need to get rid of the kiddie porn before ICE raids my house.
0 Replies
tony5732
0
Reply
Fri 9 Jan, 2015 04:04 pm
@Frank Apisa,
And yes, of course dead body and shots, question is how they got there.
0 Replies
giujohn
0
Reply
Fri 9 Jan, 2015 04:14 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
You mean besides the dead body of an unarmed young man and the number of shots fired by Wilson???
Please enlighten us how the number of shots are evidence and please do so in accordance with established rules of evidence...not Franks law