Nearly 20 arrested in Missouri protest over shootings

“My faith compels me to be here,” said Bishop Wayne Smith of the Episcopal Diocese of Missouri. “I want to show solidarity, and call attention to the structural racism of St. Louis.”

Exactly, Bishop Smith. The structural racism of St. Louis is a vestige of Jim Crow.

“My heart feels that this has been going on too long,” Ferguson officer Ray Nabzdyk told the clergy. “We all stand in fault because we didn’t address this.”

Exactly, Officer Nabzdyk. Justice delayed is justice denied. Killing an unarmed, 18-year-old, shoe-less jaywalker 100 feet from a police vehicle should warrant an indictment. Structural racism lies behind the shooting as well as its aftermath.

Killing an unarmed, 18-year-old, shoe-less jaywalker 100 feet from a police vehicle should warrant an indictment. Structural racism lies behind the shooting as well as its aftermath.

Jumping to conclusions here. An investigation is ongoing. When the determination is made these comments may or may not be valid. Otherwise stirring the pot which helps nobody.

Police spokesman Shawn McGuire says about 13 people were arrested at police headquarters on charges of peace disturbance. Six others were later arrested for failing to disperse after blocking a street. -This also is irresponsible helping only to sway mildly racist whites to sway away even further.

This also is irresponsible helping only to sway mildly racist whites to sway away even further.

It's nice to see someone who'll speak for "mildly racist whites." It confirms many a suspicion.

Jumping to conclusions here.

Brown was not armed. No jumping to conclusions there. Brown was 18-years old. Nope, no leap there. Brown wasn't wearing shoes. Brown was stopped for jaywalking. He was shot at least six times and his dead body was 100 feet from Wilson's vehicle. The entire community knows these to be the facts.

Perhaps it takes more time to let them sink in for mildly racist whites.

Armed or not one can still pose a threat to the safety of the officer or others. Shot w/o a gun does happen, and acceptable when justified. Brown was a monster of a man, he could certainly been a threat. We don't know the facts yet. As I said an "ongoing" investigation, they'll determine the facts.

The entire community with numerous disproved facts already! It's impossible for an entire community to know the same facts. A percentage of humanity embellish most every rumor.

We are all racist to a degree. And it's not only skin color. All races have racists. When will this all stop? We are all different. Skin color is the obvious and most pointed out.

The entire community with numerous disproved facts already!

The eyewitness accounts are all extremely consistent. The entire community knows Brown was unarmed, wasn't wearing shoes, was 18 years old, and was 100 feet from the police vehicle. For anyone in the mildly racist white community who doesn't know that, it's just all too typical.

Armed or not one can still pose a threat to the safety of the officer or others.

And unarmed person, 100 feet away from a police vehicle, is not a threat to the officer in that vehicle. No witness to the event has Officer Wilson making any command to Brown that he could have complied with in order to prevent getting shot. Wilson obviously wanted to keep firing at Brown, even though all the eyewitnesses say Brown's hands were raised in the standard sign of surrender.

Brown was a monster of a man,

Maybe to a runt. Still, the "monster" gets smaller when he's 100 feet away and on the run. The fact is that Brown was a human being who was known and cared about by members of his community. To racist whites, he might have seemed a "monster" because of his size, but that does not justify executing him while he's shoe-less and running away from the confrontation.

When will this all stop?

It will begin to stop when racist whites stop trying to justify all manner of abuse, including murder, by police.

Exactly, Bishop Smith. The structural racism of St. Louis is a vestige of Jim Crow.

How so? By asking many of the Black kids to follow the law?

Exactly, Officer Nabzdyk. Justice delayed is justice denied. Killing an unarmed, 18-year-old, shoe-less jaywalker 100 feet from a police vehicle should warrant an indictment. Structural racism lies behind the shooting as well as its aftermath.

Sounds like something Malik Shabazz or Sharpton would say, inciting a riot or at least if not condemning, at the very least instigating one.

It's nice to see someone who'll speak for "mildly racist whites." It confirms many a suspicion.

Believe it or not, racism goes both ways. Blacks wanting and demanding Justice without all the facts and condemning the officer without due process is completely racist and the majority of that racism is coming from the Black community.

Brown was not armed. No jumping to conclusions there.

Yes, he was, he girth! And that's definitely NIT jumping to conclusions!

Brown was 18-years old. Nope, no leap there. Brown wasn't wearing shoes. Brown was stopped for jaywalking. He was shot at least six times and his dead body was 100 feet from Wilson's vehicle. The entire community knows these to be the facts.

Af if age has anything to do with a persons guilt or innocence! How old were the kids in Columbine? Remember, Brown was thugging his way through the liqueur store, snagging cigars as well. You keep forgetting to add that.

Perhaps it takes more time to let them sink in for mildly racist whites.

I think the people here that deny that Brown was really a delinquent are probably denying the facts, their was definitely a behavriol issue with him as the video shows.

The eyewitness accounts are all extremely consistent. The entire community knows Brown was unarmed, wasn't wearing shoes, was 18 years old, and was 100 feet from the police vehicle.

But he had his girth and that was more than enough to pummel someone.

For anyone in the mildly racist white community who doesn't know that, it's just all too typical.

I think many Blacks are trying to make this a race issue when it clearly isn't, now Shabazz and Sharpton want you to believe it is. Both are known racists and people know it or do you need proof?

And unarmed person, 100 feet away from a police vehicle, is not a threat to the officer in that vehicle. No witness to the event has Officer Wilson making any command to Brown that he could have complied with in order to prevent getting shot. Wilson obviously wanted to keep firing at Brown, even though all the eyewitnesses say Brown's hands were raised in the standard sign of surrender.

Looks like the facts will come out soon enough, doesn't help to speculate. If Wilson is NOT indicted, will you put this all away and let it go, so that we can have calm and peace or at least a peaceful protest without the race baiters and dividers.

Maybe to a runt. Still, the "monster" gets smaller when he's 100 feet away and on the run. The fact is that Brown was a human being who was known and cared about by members of his community.

How do you know that? You don't know that and I don't know that for a fact! You are just going on speculation from what other people said, but how do we know if they are telling the truth or seeing him in a different perspective from other people. Come on now!

To racist whites, he might have seemed a "monster" because of his size, but that does not justify executing him while he's shoe-less and running away from the confrontation.

No, it doesn't, but if the officer had no choice and none of us were there or in his shoes, he may have had enough justifacation to put him down. We just don't know yet.

It will begin to stop when racist whites stop trying to justify all manner of abuse, including murder, by police.

Or when Blacks stop carrying a chip on their shoulder and think that Whites are out to ethnically cleanse them from society.

the people here that deny that Brown was really a delinquent are probably denying the facts

The facts are that juvenile delinquency (whether Brown was a delinquent or not) does not warrant summary execution.

But he had his girth and that was more than enough to pummel someone.

How do you pummel someone from 100ft away? Did he have telescoping fists, or something?

Or are you saying that any young man of greater than average body mass should be considered 'armed with his girth' and 'put down'? Like a mad dog?

if the officer had no choice and none of us were there or in his shoes, he may have had enough justifacation to put him down. We just don't know yet

Please, describe one situation in which a police officer would have 'no choice' but to shoot dead an unarmed teenager (even one with 'girth') running away from a jaywalking 'crime' scene? What possible justification could there be?

a. Brown absolutely had his shoes on. Photos of his body after the altercation prove that. No idea where that's coming from.

b. Witness testimony that portrayed Brown as innocent has totally fallen apart. Inconsistent, differing accounts, autopsy doesn't line up, and a video where shortly after the incident witnesses basically give the exact account that the police did before changing their story.

c. Brown was massive, and just because he was unarmed doesn't mean the shooting couldn't have been justified. There are numerous accounts of people dying from barehanded blows to the head. Moreover, there were claims that Brown struggled for Darren Wilson's gun.

Darren Wilson won't be indicted by the Grand Jury. There's zero evidence of any wrong doing. They're holding off on this decision though for two reasons:

Colder weather prevents violence. To not upset Democrats election chances this November. Pictures of blacks rioting, ala the LA riots = more Republican votes.

No charges yet on the officer suggest some degree of "possible" justification. The FBI is investigating, no longer a local incident. What does it take for disbelievers? Street rumors hold more credibility? US mass media's irresponsibility is a major factor also.

btw...Brown the Adult was not executed. Obviously so when no charges have been made yet. Keep an open mind. Wait for the whole story. Not just one sided as reported.

The facts are that juvenile delinquency (whether Brown was a delinquent or not) does not warrant summary execution.

Wilson is not indicted on murder charges as of yet, so to say he was executed is there is no way to know if the shooting was justifiable or not.

How do you pummel someone from 100ft away? Did he have telescoping fists, or something?

The same back to you, you weren't there as well. You don't know, none of us do and IF and I mean, IF the Grand jury comes up with the same stats, that would mean, either there wasn't substantial evidence to back up that theory or his witnesses flat out lied.

Or are you saying that any young man of greater than average body mass should be considered 'armed with his girth' and 'put down'? Like a mad dog?

If I'm a cop and I tell you to stand down and your charging me and I have good enough reason that you could very well inflict bodily injury, I will shoot to "neutralize" that threat.

Please, describe one situation in which a police officer would have 'no choice' but to shoot dead an unarmed teenager (even one with 'girth') running away from a jaywalking 'crime' scene? What possible justification could there be?

Actually, it all depends on the situation and circumstances of the attack, I cannot say or speak for any officers, but for the majority of officers that had to shoot to kill was for a justifiable reason.

@zichi

How is that related to the shooting and killing of Brown since officer Wilson knew nothing about the events at the store when he shot and killed Brown? The size of Brown was irrelevant to the killing which happened 100 feet from the police patrol car and officer Wilson was in no danger from an unarmed teenager trying to flee the scene.

The size of Brown doesn't matter, but now all of a sudden, playing the race card does???

Myers’ parents say he was unarmed, and many speakers at a weekend rally echoed those doubts and raised concerns about racial profiling.

I always immediately discount the comments made by parents. They are usually the last to know what their child is REALLY like once the child reaches his/her teens. Add to this the tendency for parents to reject anything that might reflect poorly on their parenting, and you have ample grounds for discounting much of what they have to say.

As far as I can tell, none of those speakers at the rallies were actual eyewitnesses, so what they do or do not believe happened is irrelevant.

Actually, it all depends on the situation and circumstances of the attack

--which is why I asked you to describe a situation in which you think it would be justifiable. I'll note that you were not able to give any examples, yet you still insist that Brown deserved to die and that Wilson was justified in shooting him.

How do you pummel someone from 100ft away? Did he have telescoping fists, or something?

The same back to you, you weren't there as well. You don't know, none of us do

What?? None of us know what, how you pummel someone from 100 ft away? (Hint: you don't). Whether he had telescoping fists?? Are you serious?

If I'm a cop and I tell you to stand down and your charging me and I have good enough reason that you could very well inflict bodily injury....

You still haven't explained how an unarmed person can inflict bodily injury from 100ft away.

But since the killing of Brown you have stated hundreds of times that Brown is guilty of all accounts and officer Wilson is 100% innocent.

I never said, Wilson was innocent, I am saying we should give him the benifit of doubt and let the justice system run it's course, but it's funny how you guys always claim that Brown was innocent. In either cases we don't know about each of these people. We are only going on hunches, eyewitnesses and speculation, that's it. None of us can definitively say, that Wilson is totally guilty or that Brown was totally innocent. That's all I'm saying.

Brown absolutely had his shoes on. Photos of his body after the altercation prove that. No idea where that's coming from.

It comes from the basic fact that Brown was not wearing shoes but "backless" flip-flops. Ever tried to sprint or make any sudden motions (like turning and charging) in flip-flops? It is extremely difficult to tell from the video whether or not both flip-flops are still on his feet, and there is one video of the scene where what looks very much like a single sandal can be spotted about 25 feet from Wilson's vehicle.

I am saying we should give him the benifit of doubt and let the justice system run it's course

But grand juries are, in and of themselves, special procedures designed to circumvent the normal course of the justice system. Everyone accused of a crime is given the benefit of a doubt, but the grand jury procedure guarantees that no one from the victim's side -- in this case those representing Michael Brown -- will be heard. That is not justice, because both sides need to be heard.

None of us can definitively say, that Wilson is totally guilty or that Brown was totally innocent.

According to the significant number of at-the-scene eyewitnesses, nothing Brown did justifies his being summarily executed in the street. NOTHING. That alone should be enough to accuse and indict Wilson of a crime and let him have his day in court. The grand jury is designed to circumvent that -- giving cops special treatment under the law.

Moreover, there were claims that Brown struggled for Darren Wilson's gun.

Claims by whom? The same liars who said that they released the videos under public pressure? The same liars who claimed Brown's body was 35 feet from the vehicle when it was nearly three times that distance?

If I'm a cop and I tell you to stand down and your charging me

The eyewitnesses could hear Brown yelling: "Ok OK OK...." as he turned to surrender with his empty hands raised -- nearly 100 feet from Wilson's vehicle. But NO eyewitness has Wilson making any commands to the person he was in the act of executing. NONE. The only reported words of the cop came from inside the car when Wilson first drew his weapon and fired at Brown: "I'm going to shoot you!" (Wilson's mind was already made up, and his actions to pursue and fire 10 more rounds back that up.) Other members of the community have come forward to describe Wilson as a thug of a cop who would resort to violent and abusive behavior with little or no provocation.

That certainly describes what these eyewitnesses observed under a bright Saturday sky. Perhaps the cowardly Wilson was afraid of a big black kid's "girth." But from 100 feet away with Brown trying to flee? An execution is what it was. Wilson had lost control over his actions -- and that four second pause before he fired the fatal shots indicates premeditated and deliberate malice.

It comes from the basic fact that Brown was not wearing shoes but "backless" flip-flops. Ever tried to sprint or make any sudden motions (like turning and charging) in flip-flops? It is extremely difficult to tell from the video whether or not both flip-flops are still on his feet, and there is one video of the scene where what looks very much like a single sandal can be spotted about 25 feet from Wilson's vehicle.

You don't know that for a fact. You are just making an assumption or do you have photos that can back up what you're saying, if not, it's just pure speculation.

But grand juries are, in and of themselves, special procedures designed to circumvent the normal course of the justice system. Everyone accused of a crime is given the benefit of a doubt, but the grand jury procedure guarantees that no one from the victim's side -- in this case those representing Michael Brown -- will be heard. That is not justice, because both sides need to be heard.

But if Wilson regardless of the truth or not, as long as he's convicted, the justice system in your eyes would work just fine and it's a just system. But because there is a possibility that he might not indicted, it's an unfair system now all of a sudden.

According to the significant number of at-the-scene eyewitnesses, nothing Brown did justifies his being summarily executed in the street. NOTHING. That alone should be enough to accuse and indict Wilson of a crime and let him have his day in court. The grand jury is designed to circumvent that -- giving cops special treatment under the law.

We'll have to see what the facts say whether Wilson is guilty or Brown is innocent or vice versa. Remember, Brown was mostly responsible for his own death, had he'd not been thuggin' and snagging cigars, that much is true.

Claims by whom? The same liars who said that they released the videos under public pressure? The same liars who claimed Brown's body was 35 feet from the vehicle when it was nearly three times that distance?

We still don't know who is really lying, but the facts should come out soon.

The eyewitnesses could hear Brown yelling: "Ok OK OK...." as he turned to surrender with his empty hands raised -- nearly 100 feet from Wilson's vehicle. But NO eyewitness has Wilson making any commands to the person he was in the act of executing. NONE. The only reported words of the cop came from inside the car when Wilson first drew his weapon and fired at Brown: "I'm going to shoot you!" (Wilson's mind was already made up, and his actions to pursue and fire 10 more rounds back that up.) Other members of the community have come forward to describe Wilson as a thug of a cop who would resort to violent and abusive behavior with little or no provocation.

Some of the eyewitnesses were excused and found that some of their testimonies were not credible and so what are we to believe. Now the Feds have to weed out the stories that over exaggerated about Brown and decipher fact from fiction.

->That certainly describes what these eyewitnesses observed under a bright Saturday sky. Perhaps the cowardly Wilson was afraid of a big black kid's "girth."

When Brown charged him, he had every right to be afraid of being pummeled and beaten down, Wilson had every right to live and not allow a thug beat him down after he told Brown to comply and the thug got physical thinking he could do whatever he wanted. Brown set the wheels in motion for his own demise because of his pompous attitude.

But from 100 feet away with Brown trying to flee? An execution is what it was. Wilson had lost control over his actions -- and that four second pause before he fired the fatal shots indicates premeditated and deliberate malice.

More like self defense and from the looks of it, "possibly" justifiable.

You don't know that for a fact. You are just making an assumption or do you have photos that can back up what you're saying, if not, it's just pure speculation.

It's well known what Brown was wearing at the time of his death, down to the color of his socks (yellow). The fact that he was wearing flip-flops can be clearly seen in the convenience store video. Thus, there is no speculation about it whatsoever.

But because there is a possibility that he might not indicted, it's an unfair system now all of a sudden.

The system is designed to favor police -- so it's inherently unfair to any of their scores of victims. Only video evidence is providing the opportunity to bring some of these brutal thugs to justice.

We still don't know who is really lying, but the facts should come out soon.

You may not know, but it's clear to anyone who is paying attention. The police clearly lied when they claimed they released the convenience store video because of pressure from the public. Documents released under the Freedom of Information Act proved it to be a lie -- there wasn't any pressure. They also clearly lied when they stated that the distance between Brown's body and Wilson's vehicle was 35 feet. It was nearly three times that distance. Video evidence makes verifying the actual distance extremely simple -- since it shows exactly where Wilson's vehicle was, as well as where Brown's body was.

A person who chases after an unarmed, shoeless kid -- firing indiscriminately in a residential neighborhood -- and finally executing him after he's got his hands raised in a sign of surrender, doesn't deserve much of a benefit of any doubt. Not according to the eyewitnesses who are forced to live with the real-life image of what they saw: a public execution by a goon wearing a uniform -- and about as terrifying as what ISIS does.

Some of the eyewitnesses were excused and found that some of their testimonies were not credible and so what are we to believe.

You are making things up again. Other than the fact that Wilson was called in and testified over four hours, there has been nothing released by the grand jury as to witness testimony. Nothing.

It's well known what Brown was wearing at the time of his death, down to the color of his socks (yellow). The fact that he was wearing flip-flops can be clearly seen in the convenience store video. Thus, there is no speculation about it whatsoever.

So now you are saying when a person wears flip-fops they can't run? Whether they were on his feet or came off, he can still run and charge a person.

The system is designed to favor police -- so it's inherently unfair to any of their scores of victims. Only video evidence is providing the opportunity to bring some of these brutal thugs to justice.

Again, where is your documented proof that what you are saying holds merit? Please show proof that the system is designed to favor police. Personal opinions don't count.

You may not know, but it's clear to anyone who is paying attention. The police clearly lied when they claimed they released the convenience store video because of pressure from the public. Documents released under the Freedom of Information Act proved it to be a lie -- there wasn't any pressure.

Documents, please.

They also clearly lied when they stated that the distance between Brown's body and Wilson's vehicle was 35 feet. It was nearly three times that distance. Video evidence makes verifying the actual distance extremely simple -- since it shows exactly where Wilson's vehicle was, as well as where Brown's body was.

Where is the video showing that Brown and the distance of the patrol vehicle was allegedly standing 35 feet apart?

A person who chases after an unarmed, shoeless kid -- firing indiscriminately in a residential neighborhood --

Or the thug was charging the officer high out of his mind wanting to show the officer, F*** you, I'm gonna show you thinking to pummel him and left the officer with NO choice, but to put him down.

and finally executing him after he's got his hands raised in a sign of surrender, doesn't deserve much of a benefit of any doubt.

Or the shooting was a possible justification.

Not according to the eyewitnesses who are forced to live with the real-life image of what they saw: a public execution by a goon wearing a uniform -- and about as terrifying as what ISIS does.

Many of the eyewitnesses were excused as being NOT credible, which is another reason why the Feds are looking deeper into this. The problem also is that many Blacks in the community think that they can talk to police and act in any manner without repercussions.

You are making things up again. Other than the fact that Wilson was called in and testified over four hours, there has been nothing released by the grand jury as to witness testimony. Nothing.

I am not. There is so much conjecture going around about who said what and who saw what and a lot of that was dismissed. Sorry, if you don't like the truth, but that's what is going on now.

The courts will determine weather or not it was justifiable. No so called witnesses, not the media, certainly not Sharpton, and not the protestors.

Only the court will determine facts from fiction. I do have faith more than suspicion in them. DOJ has motivation for a fair investigation. Arguing here on alleged facts if futile. This is proof of media manipulation and the followers they control.

The medical attention Wilson sought after the incident is missed by those accusing him of a child execution. He was a man, and something more than an execution took place. What exactly is the publics guess at the moment.

The courts will determine weather or not it was justifiable.

This comment reveals more really serious ignorance. The grand jury is not a court. Unlike courts, where two sides are presented and the evidence and testimony is part of the public record, a grand jury meets in secret and there is no one who represents the victim. Victim's rights are completely denied in a grand jury scenario.

The grand jury only has one question to answer: Should Darren Wilson face a trial in a court of law?

Please show proof that the system is designed to favor police.

The proof is self-evident for anyone with at least average intelligence: When the ordinary citizen takes the life of another citizen under suspicious circumstances, there is not a special panel of people working in secret that will determine whether or not the killer is charged with a crime. The hurdle to overcome in order to indict a cop of a violent crime is a very high one -- in other words, a "system that is designed to hugely favor police."

The problem also is that many Blacks in the community think that they can talk to police and act in any manner without repercussions.

It would appear that the more serious problem comes from white racists who believe that summary execution is acceptable as a repercussion for a member of the Black community to acts disrespectfully to a police officer who abuses his authority.

Where is the video showing that Brown and the distance of the patrol vehicle was allegedly standing 35 feet apart?

It is documented that the police gave the distance between Brown and Wilson's car as "35 feet." Curiously enough, this is considered the maximum distance where an unarmed person could be considered a threat to an officer, and that goes a long way to explain their motivation for lying through their teeth. The following link contains the summation of the video evidence exactly placing Wilson's vehicle and Brown's body. 35 feet is under three car lengths -- with the average length being around 13.5 feet. In the video-based evidence, one can fit at least seven full car-lengths between Wilson's vehicle and Brown's body -- or around 100 feet.

https://i.imgur.com/6zrMdAv.jpg

This was clearly an attack on Brown by Wilson, and not the other way around. And a clear, bald-faced lie by the Ferguson Police in order to sway public opinion.

We will wait and see Yabits! Nobody can convict w/o all the facts. We the public don't have them.

Missouri grand jury process Q&A apropos the Wilson case: http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/20/justice/missouri-shooting-grand-jury/

@markG

The medical attention Wilson sought after the incident is missed by those accusing him of a child execution. He was a man, and something more than an execution took place. What exactly is the publics guess at the moment.

Exactly, I totally agree. There is more than meets the eye. I don't want to speculate on anything. I just think it goes both ways, if he's guilty of shooting Brown in cold blood, then he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of course, abuse of color of authority, if Brown was the agressor, then the shooting was completely justified and Wilson should be reinstated and allowed back to work, if not in Ferguson, then somewhere else.

This comment reveals more really serious ignorance. The grand jury is not a court. Unlike courts, where two sides are presented and the evidence and testimony is part of the public record, a grand jury meets in secret and there is no one who represents the victim. Victim's rights are completely denied in a grand jury scenario.

I think the ignorance comes into play when people discredit one side of argument and twist it to suit their narrative, until their argument falls apart and then they are left with excuses. I see this day in and day out. This story is NO different.

The grand jury only has one question to answer: Should Darren Wilson face a trial in a court of law?

Based on the evidence.

->The proof is self-evident for anyone with at least average intelligence: When the ordinary citizen takes the life of another citizen under suspicious circumstances,

Yet, we don't know what happen, so no need to speculate.

there is not a special panel of people working in secret that will determine whether or not the killer is charged with a crime. The hurdle to overcome in order to indict a cop of a violent crime is a very high one -- in other words, a "system that is designed to hugely favor police."

Again, if Wilson is found guilty, you will be on here praising the system as being just and you will hear Sharpton and that other racist Shabazz doing the same, if it goes the other way, it favors the cops. Hmmmmm.....

It would appear that the more serious problem comes from white racists who believe that summary execution is acceptable as a repercussion for a member of the Black community to acts disrespectfully to a police officer who abuses his authority.

I think it's racist when Blacks think that EVERY White person is out to get them or if every police officer is supposed to be bad and doesn't want or wish nothing more than do terrorize Blacks. But if the police officer is Black and would have shot Brown, what kind of shooting would it have been? Blacks are equally subjected to the pitfalls of racism as are Whites.

It is documented that the police gave the distance between Brown and Wilson's car as "35 feet." Curiously enough, this is considered the maximum distance where an unarmed person could be considered a threat to an officer, and that goes a long way to explain their motivation for lying through their teeth. The following link contains the summation of the video evidence exactly placing Wilson's vehicle and Brown's body. 35 feet is under three car lengths -- with the average length being around 13.5 feet. In the video-based evidence, one can fit at least seven full car-lengths between Wilson's vehicle and Brown's body -- or around 100 feet.

More then enough room to charge the officer. Good point.

This was clearly an attack on Brown by Wilson, and not the other way around. And a clear, bald-faced lie by the Ferguson Police in order to sway public opinion.

An attack that was prompted by Brown thuggin' his way through a liqueur store snagging a box of cigars, let's not forget that.

if he's guilty of shooting Brown in cold blood, then he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of course

I thought the whole point of a trial was to determine whether the defendant was guilty or not. You think only guilty people should go to trial? Whether Wilson shot Brown in murderous cold blood or in justifiable self-defence, he deserves his day in court.

abuse of color of authority

I have no idea what that means. Do you ever proof-read? Or even think about what you write before you write it?

I think the ignorance comes into play when people discredit one side of argument and twist it to suit their narrative

You mean like you have done all the way with this case? It's really quite funny to watch you so passionately accusing others of what you do yourself.

An attack that was prompted by Brown thuggin' his way through a liqueur store snagging a box of cigars, let's not forget that. (Yet, we don't know what happen, so no need to speculate.)

Jaywalking. He was stopped for jaywalking by a uniformed man in a car with a gun. Public servants are not supposed to eff and blind at members of the public even if they are jaywalking, and common sense would say certainly not in a society where you never know who might be a dangerous cigar-thievin' criminal with an arsenal concealed about his person and just lookin' fer a fight.

More then enough room to charge the officer. Good point.

Brown could have given himself more room to charge from 300 feet away. Or maybe a mile.

Nevertheless, the main point is that the Ferguson police lied through their teeth when they told the public the distance was 35 feet. They can't be trusted with anything other than covering their own rear ends.

I have no idea what that means. Do you ever proof-read? Or even think about what you write before you write it?

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/civilrights/color_of_law

Yeah, I do. Try reading it right, please.

You mean like you have done all the way with this case? It's really quite funny to watch you so passionately accusing others of what you do yourself.

Actually, I'm not. I'm playing Devil's advocate. There are ALWAYS two sides to every story

Jaywalking. He was stopped for jaywalking by a uniformed man in a car with a gun. Public servants are not supposed to eff and blind at members of the public even if they are jaywalking, and common sense would say certainly not in a society where you never know who might be a dangerous cigar-thievin' criminal with an arsenal concealed about his person and just lookin' fer a fight.

Thugs are not supposed to break the law as well or attack a peace officer regardless the reason.

Try reading it right, please.

I'm trying to understand how you're reading it. So abuse of his position as a police officer is a more dire offence than shooting an unarmed person down in cold blood in the street?

There are ALWAYS two sides to every story

No one would think so from reading your posts. All we get is 'Brown was a thug, Brown stole some cigars, Brown attacked the officer'. No attempt from you to turn the same critical eye on the distance Wilson was from his car, the distance Brown was from Wilson or the number of shots fired, in two separate bursts.

I'm trying to understand how you're reading it. So abuse of his position as a police officer is a more dire offence than shooting an unarmed person down in cold blood in the street?

Or shooting a person in order to defend yourself from a raging brute that wants to beat the crap out of you and then being accused of overstepping that authority based on faulty and unreliable witnesses. That is another scenario.

No one would think so from reading your posts.

That's how many of us feel when we read many of you guys posts as well. Believe me, I DO understand the feeling.

All we get is 'Brown was a thug, Brown stole some cigars, Brown attacked the officer'. No attempt from you to turn the same critical eye on the distance Wilson was from his car, the distance Brown was from Wilson or the number of shots fired, in two separate bursts.

Back at you, Wilson IS guilty, Wilson SHOT Brown in cold Blood, the Grand Jury needs to be called in...oops, they might NOT indict Wilson??? The Jury system is rigged. Please, with all due respect, when you talk about fair, understand what you are saying. I NEVER said, Wilson was NOT guilty, but for the record, I'm tired of hearing one-sided opinionated stories about Brown. he wasn't innocent, that is one established fact. A few of you make it seem that he was just minding his own business, if so, he'd still be alive. I don't know much about Brown other than, he stole some cigars and he coped an attitude with a cop. These are indisputable facts. What happened after that is pure conjecture and everything is speculative. All I'm doing is presenting the argument that if you want to see Wilson in one way, you have to see Brown in another light as well. Reverse their fates and see the other alternative scenarios. I don't care about Brown or Wilson for that matter, he's dead, gone and book closed, but Wilson is alive and I want the man to be heard in court and go through the justice system, NOT by the opinion of the public, who cares what the public thinks, they have nothing to do, nor do they or should they have any influence on the case.

@zichi

you have mentioned the store event like a million times, even though at the time of the shooting Wilson knew nothing of what happened at the store, so how is it linked to Wilson emptying his weapon into Brown and shooting him dead, just for jay walking in a very quiet street? Even though the two white construction workers said Brown had his arms up and was shouting, OK! OK! OK! The contractors were only 50 feet away.

You guys do the opposite about Wilson. That's ok? That's acceptable? When he's convicted and is in hand cuffs, go ahead, by all means! Until then that's one side, and there are others, obviously a lot of these witnesses were dismissed and some of the testimonies didn't seem credible. All I'm saying is nothing is in stone, but there is a lot of convoluted misinformation going around.

There are quite a few Blacks that support Wilson as well.

Back at you, Wilson IS guilty, Wilson SHOT Brown in cold Blood, the Grand Jury needs to be called in..oops, they might NOT indict Wilson??? The Jury system is rigged.

I've never said Wilson is guilty; I've said he deserves his day in court, i.e. his chance to tell the judge and jury what happened, why he shot Brown (this fact is not in dispute). I've also never said anything about any Grand Jury. I've never said anything about the jury system being rigged.

I NEVER said, Wilson was NOT guilty

You have said several times that 'Brown brought his death on himself'. If that's true, aren't you basically saying that Wilson is innocent? That it was all Brown's fault?

I'm tired of hearing one-sided opinionated stories about Brown

The only story is that an unarmed Brown was shot down in the street by a police officer. This is not a one-sided opinionated story, it is the one basic fact that is not in dispute.

@cleo How do you address the fact that numerous autopsies contradict eye-witness testimony?

I've never said Wilson is guilty; I've said he deserves his day in court, i.e. his chance to tell the judge and jury what happened, why he shot Brown (this fact is not in dispute). I've also never said anything about any Grand Jury. I've never said anything about the jury system being rigged.

Then we are both in agreement. I want the same thing as well.

You have said several times that 'Brown brought his death on himself'. If that's true, aren't you basically saying that Wilson is innocent? That it was all Brown's fault?

Sorry, NO. Wilson being guilty or innocent doesn't have one to do with the other as far as HE is concerned. As far as Brown, his actions in IMHO cost him his life from the looks of it so far. That's all I'm implying.

The only story is that an unarmed Brown was shot down in the street by a police officer. This is not a one-sided opinionated story, it is the one basic fact that is not in dispute.

Well, if you call the kid that was a towering figure a NON-menace, fine. But you and I weren't there and we weren't in Wilson's shoes, so we don't know what he had to deal with or what his experiences were that led up to that infamous night.

numerous autopsies contradict eye-witness testimony?

In what way?

if you call the kid that was a towering figure a NON-menace, fine

How do you 'tower' from 100 ft away?

we weren't in Wilson's shoes

We weren't in Brown's flip-flops either, but I don't see you busting a gut trying to put yourself there. But you're totally unbiased, right?

In what way?

Where some say, Brown was the agitator and aggressor.

How do you 'tower' from 100 ft away?

If that is indeed what happened?

->We weren't in Brown's flip-flops either, but I don't see you busting a gut trying to put yourself there. But you're totally unbiased, right?

Yes, Cleo, that's right. I'll let the other usual crowd on JT use that scenario, they have that part covered already, NO need to whip a dead horse now.

Where some say, Brown was the agitator and aggressor.

Two white construction workers, Michael Brady, Tiffany Mitchell, Piaget Crenshaw and several others were at the scene and describe Wilson as the aggressor. "Some say" is the conservatives' way to lie. The question is: Who, specifically, says Brown was the aggressor? Who? (You can't provide a name because no such person exists.)

We've seen how the police intentionally lied to the public on several key points. The distance between Brown's body and the police vehicle is easily proven as a complete lie. The first police on the scene would have known it was far greater than 35 feet.

How do you address the fact that numerous autopsies contradict eye-witness testimony?

Numerous autopsies? There has been only one that has been made public information, so how do you know the other autopsies -- which haven't been released -- contradict anything? As for the one released to the public, there was nothing that contradicts eyewitness testimony. Why don't you provide an example?

There are ALWAYS two sides to every story

But only one truth. The police have been proven to have willfully provided false information several times. They didn't do their jobs in filing an incident report -- which is standard duty in any event like this one. Just how deep does the corruption go in St. Louis County?

Two white construction workers, Michael Brady, Tiffany Mitchell, Piaget Crenshaw and several others were at the scene and describe Wilson as the aggressor. "Some say" is the conservatives' way to lie. The question is: Who, specifically, says Brown was the aggressor? Who? (You can't provide a name because no such person exists.)

Some also say! that many of the liberals are lying as well to make a political statement using race as the underlying issue. Also as for who the agressor is, I don't know, that's not my concern, I'll let the people that are investigating this case determine that, neither you, nor anyone else can decide the outcome or who is a credible witness or not.

We've seen how the police intentionally lied to the public on several key points. The distance between Brown's body and the police vehicle is easily proven as a complete lie. The first police on the scene would have known it was far greater than 35 feet.

Brown's friends could have lied just as easily. We don't know, but in time we will.

But only one truth.

The only truth is, the kid is dead, everything else is pure speculation at this point.

The police have been proven to have willfully provided false information several times. They didn't do their jobs in filing an incident report -- which is standard duty in any event like this one. Just how deep does the corruption go in St. Louis County?

The police never said, they purposely lied to obstruct justice. As for courrption, we have to wait and see if there is REAL corruption going on in St. Louis or not.

Some also say! that many of the liberals are lying as well to make a political statement using race as the underlying issue.

Those "some" are also clearly lying or clearly delusional. They remain unnamed because naming them would destroy their credibility. And so, bass4funk, they've gotten you to carry their water for them.

Also as for who the agressor is, I don't know, that's not my concern

Yes, when 8 or more independent eyewitness accounts all have it that Wilson was the aggressor, it's time for the white supremacists and others who think it's perfectly OK to execute an unarmed kid in flip-flops for jaywalking and rudeness to head for the exits.

Brown's friends could have lied just as easily.

The independent eyewitnesses, except for Dorian Johnson, were not even acquainted with Brown. But it's amazing how you'll let police lies off so easily. I thought the police were to be held to a higher standard.

The only truth is, the kid is dead, everything else is pure speculation at this point.

Concrete facts: 1) Wilson shot Brown; 2) Brown was unarmed; 3) Brown ran away and was 100 feet from Wilson's vehicle when the final shots brought him down; 4) From a distance of 100 feet, no person -- especially an armed police officer -- would be in fear for his life from an unarmed person.

Fear is not the operative word here -- it is rage. Wilson was completely out of control, firing his weapon out of rage. Eyewitnesses report that, while Brown was saying "Ok Ok Ok..." in the act of giving up, the office never yelled out any command whatsoever. Wilson wanted Brown "eliminated" and acted accordingly.

The police never said, they purposely lied to obstruct justice.

Yet another in a series of statements by you that is utterly comical in its sheer nonsense. Nevertheless, what reason could the police have to lying as egregiously as they have in this case? Deliberately misinforming the public -- who they are supposed to be serving. They're a corrupt bunch alright. Glad there's at least a few who aren't, like this Officer Nabzdyk, who openly admits the fault of the police.

Those "some" are also clearly lying or clearly delusional.

Prove it! Tell us something that you know more or have more evidence then the Feds.

They remain unnamed because naming them would destroy their credibility. And so, bass4funk, they've gotten you to carry their water for them.

No, I just don't think or claim, I know more than the Feds and the Justice Dept.

Yes, when 8 or more independent eyewitness accounts all have it that Wilson was the aggressor, it's time for the white supremacists and others who think it's perfectly OK to execute an unarmed kid in flip-flops for jaywalking and rudeness to head for the exits.

Hmmm, from those 8 do you know which of those individuals, the Feds used their testimonies or which they dismissed? No, you can't. I think more like many of the Blacks that demand something be done about Wilson or else. Malik Shabazz was clearly instigating that their will be trouble if Wilson is not brought up on charges. Now who is the real racist? Hmmmm, sounds like a threat to me.

The independent eyewitnesses, except for Dorian Johnson, were not even acquainted with Brown. But it's amazing how you'll let police lies off so easily. I thought the police were to be held to a higher standard.

You hear and see what you want, I never said NO such thing! Anyone can lie. I that goes for both sides, that's why we should allow the justice system to sort this all out.

Concrete facts: 1) Wilson shot Brown (maybe it was justified) 2) Brown was unarmed (Not if you take into account his massive girth and strength) 3) Brown ran away and was 100 feet from Wilson's vehicle when the final shots brought him down ( Or he was charging the police officer) 4) From a distance of 100 feet, no person -- especially an armed police officer -- would be in fear for his life from an unarmed person. (You cannot say that, you are NOT him and you have never been in that kind of a situation, you don't know what his eyes saw)

Fear is not the operative word here -- it is rage.

Brown could have been driven by drugs that fueled his rage.

Wilson was completely out of control, firing his weapon out of rage. Eyewitnesses report that, while Brown was saying "Ok Ok Ok..." in the act of giving up, the office never yelled out any command whatsoever. Wilson wanted Brown "eliminated" and acted accordingly.

So now you are a certified physic analyst? So you are saying without a shadow of a doubt, Wilson intended to murder Brown all along because he was Black or Big? You are digging again, Yabits. Or Brown thought that, he could easily overpower this puny White cop, who the hell does he think he is getting in my face telling me what to do, I'm gonna show him. Another likely scenario.

Yet another in a series of statements by you that is utterly comical in its sheer nonsense. Nevertheless, what reason could the police have to lying as egregiously as they have in this case?

Show me the proof that the cops purposely and maliciously lied in order to CYA to make this problem go away.

Deliberately misinforming the public -- who they are supposed to be serving.

So now you are painting EVERY cop with a broad brush. Hmmm...Sharpton and Shabazz were doing the exact same thing. Oh, I keep forgetting, these men are racists, that's why. Silly me.

They're a corrupt bunch alright. Glad there's at least a few who aren't, like this Officer Nabzdyk, who openly admits the fault of the police.

That is one officers opinion over 3000 cops?? I think the corrupt person was the one that lost his life by setting the Wheels in motion for his demise. You play with the bull, you get the horns.

Tell us something that you know more or have more evidence then the Feds.

Sorry, but you don't appear very able to follow one of your own lines of thought [sic] for more than a post or two. Where did the Feds come into this all of a sudden? Earlier, you made the statement that "many of the liberals are lying as well to make a political statement using race as the underlying issue." The "Feds" are making no such claims, so pressing anyone to come up with evidence against them is sheer nonsense.

Malik Shabazz was clearly instigating that their will be trouble if Wilson is not brought up on charges. Now who is the real racist?

I only have the faintest notion of who this Shabazz character is. I venture to say he does not have very much influence, except among the loony right for whom he seems to have supernatural powers and abilities. How many unarmed people has Shabazz executed in the street?

So you are saying without a shadow of a doubt, Wilson intended to murder Brown

Without the shadow of a doubt, Wilson knew that Brown did not have a weapon. Without the shadow of a doubt, Wilson drew his weapon out of his holster intending to use it. Without the shadow of a doubt, Brown broke free of Wilson's grip on him and quickly distanced himself to nearly 100 feet from the officer's vehicle. Without the shadow of a doubt, Wilson left the safety of his vehicle -- failing to radio dispatch -- in order to continue firing at Brown. Without the shadow of a doubt, Wilson intended to deliver lethal firepower to an unarmed, shoe-less, 18-year-old in the middle of street on an altercation over jaywalking. That's murder, pure and simple.

Sorry, but you don't appear very able to follow one of your own lines of thought [sic] for more than a post or two. Where did the Feds come into this all of a sudden? Earlier, you made the statement that "many of the liberals are lying as well to make a political statement using race as the underlying issue." The "Feds" are making no such claims, so pressing anyone to come up with evidence against them is sheer nonsense.

Yabits, calm down, no need to hurl insults, it degrades the debate. First you were implying that there is overwhelming corruption going on in the justice system, but a month ago, you had extreme total faith in it, but because there is a possible chance that Wilson might not be indicted or to be blunt, that the ruling might not go your way or many people in Ferguson, the system is bias. Second, as for playing the race card, YES. For the last 6 years that Obama and the Dems have controlled the WH. The constant talk of race mind-numbing and garrulous. You guys cannot talk about anything if it doesn't have the words: Race, Racism, Republican and Woman...oh and Bush, that's about all you have and there is nothing else you guys can debate about. If you oppose anything, you are a racist, you hate Blacks and on and on or you hate the president. But you guys never look at the other coin of an issue, which completely befuddles me, it all comes down to you oppose=racist, you hate Obama=racist, when will you guys stop with these petty Kindergarden thought process?

I only have the faintest notion of who this Shabazz character is. I venture to say he does not have very much influence, except among the loony right for whom he seems to have supernatural powers and abilities. How many unarmed people has Shabazz executed in the street?

Actually, Shabazz has influence not as much as the racist Sharpton, but he is making a name for himself and collecting a following of other Black Nationalists and racists and like Sharpton, his power is in the words that he speaks as a divider and instigator.

Without the shadow of a doubt, Wilson knew that Brown did not have a weapon. Without the shadow of a doubt, Wilson drew his weapon out of his holster intending to use it. Without the shadow of a doubt, Brown broke free of Wilson's grip on him and quickly distanced himself to nearly 100 feet from the officer's vehicle. Without the shadow of a doubt, Wilson left the safety of his vehicle -- failing to radio dispatch -- in order to continue firing at Brown. Without the shadow of a doubt, Wilson intended to deliver lethal firepower to an unarmed, shoe-less, 18-year-old in the middle of street on an altercation over jaywalking. That's murder, pure and simple.

ROFL, Thank you for sharing your honest skewed, myopic viewpoint, Yabits

First you were implying that there is overwhelming corruption going on in the justice system,

Yes, specifically the Ferguson police force has proven themselves to be corrupt, as well as elements of the force leadership in St. Louis County. I also stated that the grand jury system is designed to (heavily) favor police officers who claim to be acting in the line of duty.

but a month ago, you had extreme total faith in it

Ludicrous. I don't have "extreme, total faith" in anything made and governed by people. I have no idea how your mind allows you to form such statements.

Second, as for playing the race card, YES. For the last 6 years that Obama and the Dems have controlled the WH. The constant talk of race mind-numbing and garrulous.

I don't know where or why you are talking about playing the "race card." Race is definitely a factor in this event. One key way is as follows: the city of Ferguson is predominantly African-American. I believe the vast majority of African-Americans in Ferguson do not approve of how their police force handled this from beginning to end -- and they have been extremely up-front with their disapproval. Although I am a white, I completely understand and agree with them: Nobody should be verbally and physically accosted by a police officer for jaywalking and then shot six times 100 feet or more away from the officer's vehicle -- black or white.

The Ferguson residents are entitled to standard police procedures which include issuing a standard incident report within 24 hours of any police action -- especially one as serious as this event. The Ferguson police demonstrate their corruption in their willingness to flaunt their duty to provide an incident report.

yabits Oct. 17, 2014 - 05:01AM JST I believe the vast majority of African-Americans in Ferguson do not approve of how their police force handled this from beginning to end -- and they have been extremely up-front with their disapproval.

If Ferguson police truly want to improve their image and reputation among black citizens, they must first acknowledge that the black community’s mistrust of police is rational and justified. Police must also admit racial bias exists not only in the attitudes and behaviors of some individual police officers but also in the institutional culture of police departments where the unwritten rule of the “blue code of silence” protects officers who harbor racist attitudes and engage in racially discriminatory behavior. Ferguson Police officers must understand that community trust is earned not given. Unless police are willing and able to truly empathize with community anger and pain, relations with black communities in Ferguson will never improve.

What does "shoe-less" have to do with any of this?

sfjp330: Beautiful post, beautifully well-stated.

One of the conservatives' most diabolical achievements was coming up with "political correctness."

When overt racism -- like Amos and Andy for example -- was portrayed, a means had to be provided to combat the revelation of overt racism. Not only combat/defend, but to attack the person pointing out the overt racism. The invention of "political correctness" was the means by which this was accomplished. Anyone pointing out racism, miscegenation, homophobia, etc., was to be attacked under this new banner of "political correctness."

sfjp330 : If Ferguson police truly want to improve their image and reputation among ...

May as well replace "police" with "government at large". Not enough checks and balances. Started off with the checks and balances idea, but grew over the years into a big lovefest of "shepherds".

Police should not be conducting investigations of their own departments or personnel. Better to have them done by next county over or a random county a few counties away.

@yabits : IIRC "politically correct" was a leftist idea, rightwing just picked up on it.

turbotsatOct. 17, 2014 - 06:55AM JST May as well replace "police" with "government at large".

Ferguson police are part of local governments and play an integral role in the dispersion of power. Imagine if the federal government, not local municipalities, controlled all police forces throughout the country. What if all we had was a national police force? Who would stand against the totalitarian state, who would defend the cities and the individual against a consolidated, arbitrary power?

Who would stand against the totalitarian state, who would defend the cities and the individual against a consolidated, arbitrary power?

I think that is what the framers had in mind when they included the 2nd Amendment in the US Constitution.

sfjp330 : Ferguson police are part of local governments and play an integral role in the dispersion of power. Imagine if the federal government, not local municipalities, controlled all police forces throughout the country. ...

I didn't mean replace local police with a national police force.

I meant replace one term in your statement with another broader statement. And that collusion among police is symptomatic of the system at large, and the system needs to actively combat it. It won't, though, because the system is self-perpetuating. It has its interests at heart, not yours. Balance just kind of happens randomly and minimally, through sporadic media exposure, sporadic election turnover, internal tension, etc.

IIRC "politically correct" was a leftist idea, rightwing just picked up on it.

Care to provide some light on that statement? I've studied history and can't understand where you got that notion.

Care to provide ...

It's from memory of the times, and if you read the wikipedia article on it, the wiki tends to support that idea.

Although the wiki tries not to (appears to have been hijacked by leftist/apologist cultural studies professors, and by the time you've been through that kind of wordplay you'll believe anything, if you were focusing too hard).

Don't you remember the same? That "politically correct" was a liberal meme before it became a conservative one?

Don't you remember the same? That "politically correct" was a liberal meme before it became a conservative one?

Absolutely not. According to the wiki, the first usage of PC in its modern understanding -- the one we ALL know -- came from conservative writer, William Safire.

I don't put it past the mendacious conservatives to deny their ownership of the term in its modern sense.

Yes, specifically the Ferguson police force has proven themselves to be corrupt, as well as elements of the force leadership in St. Louis County. I also stated that the grand jury system is designed to (heavily) favor police officers who claim to be acting in the line of duty.

I love how you generalize the entire police force.

Or Maybe it's not courrption on their part, more like the Black community in Ferguson is out of control and many Blacks may have brought the heat on to themselves.

Ludicrous. I don't have "extreme, total faith" in anything made and governed by people. I have no idea how your mind allows you to form such statements.

From your past comments and just by judging them alone, it sounds like you do.....or at least did until about a few days ago, now that you have abandoned that notion that the possibility of Wilson not being indicted changed your entire perception.

I don't know where or why you are talking about playing the "race card." Race is definitely a factor in this event.

Because the Blacks and the media make it so and CNN most notably was the biggest instigator of inflaming racial tensions.

One key way is as follows: the city of Ferguson is predominantly African-American. I believe the vast majority of African-Americans in Ferguson do not approve of how their police force handled this from beginning to end -- and they have been extremely up-front with their disapproval. Although I am a white, I completely understand and agree with them: Nobody should be verbally and physically accosted by a police officer for jaywalking and then shot six times 100 feet or more away from the officer's vehicle -- black or white.

Correct, but if you didn't follow the law, if you did something you were not supposed to do or take an attitude with a cop, then the cop has every right to take back and regain order. If people don't want problems with the police, don't cause any. Quite simple. I never had a problem with the police, NEVER. I just mind my own business, don't talk smack, follow their orders and that's that. You want to be combative, then you shouldn't be surprised by the consequences.

The Ferguson residents are entitled to standard police procedures which include issuing a standard incident report within 24 hours of any police action -- especially one as serious as this event. The Ferguson police demonstrate their corruption in their willingness to flaunt their duty to provide an incident report.

I'll give you a pass on that one single point, as far as the corruption is concerned, that remains to be seen if there was widespread corruption.

When overt racism -- like Amos and Andy for example -- was portrayed, a means had to be provided to combat the revelation of overt racism. Not only combat/defend, but to attack the person pointing out the overt racism. The invention of "political correctness" was the means by which this was accomplished. Anyone pointing out racism, miscegenation, homophobia, etc., was to be attacked under this new banner of "political correctness."

The real problem is that many people use race to conflate the real underlying issue and that is to make the gross exaggeration that Whites or the White power structure is a bad thing as if to say, being White is something to be ashamed about and because of our brutal past history, Whites need to atone for their past sins and allow Blacks to say and do as they wish without verbally or physically confronting them on ANY issue, which also translates to undermine any law enforcement official or authority and challenge them on any or every occasion. Liberals for the past 60 years have been force feeding and indoctrinating that Whites are virtually all inherently evil, add to that, we have in the White House THE most radical president in the White House that has to make EVERY issue about race or gender. He was supposed to bring together and he has not done that, hanging out with Sharpton, Jackson and other race baiters most notably the Dems are constantly politicizing the issue of race. Now the race relations between Blacks and Whites is at it's worst since the 60's. Example, if Wilson is not indicted, you can expect that there will be riots. I know all too well how these things can get out of control very quickly, because for many Blacks, no matter what, they want retribution and if they don't get it, they will do something namely incite riots to voice their disapproval as well as their discontent by opposing all law officials and that won't bring anything to have civil unrest, never has and never will. Liberals never learn.

yabits: Absolutely not. According to the wiki, the first usage of PC in its modern understanding -- the one we ALL know -- came from conservative writer, William Safire.

So you barely read it, right? This is all it has to say about William Safire. He wrote a dictionary entry about Toni Cade's use of it. Clicking through to Toni Cade indicates she definitely was not conservative.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness#History_of_the_term

The first recorded use of the term in the typical modern sense is stated in William Safire's Safire's Political Dictionary to be by Toni Cade in the 1970 anthology The Black Woman, where she wrote "A man cannot be politically correct and a chauvinist too".

OK, so Toni Cade Bambara used it, but did she use it in the same sense that as did conservatives who later made it so popular?

The answer is, obviously, No.

yabits

They WERE using it in the same sense.

The liberals were using it seriously, as a label for a virtue.

The conservatives were using the same label to mock the liberals' perception of it as a virtue. Why should they make a different name for it?

I'm thinking of groupthink here, for the virtue, but the Newspeak description on wikipedia is more elegant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak

Newspeak is the fictional language in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, written by George Orwell. It is a controlled language created by the totalitarian state as a tool to limit freedom of thought, and concepts that pose a threat to the regime such as freedom, self-expression, individuality, and peace. Any form of thought alternative to the party’s construct is classified as "thoughtcrime". ...

Generically, Newspeak has come to mean any attempt to restrict disapproved language by a government or other powerful entity.

Don't you remember the same? That "politically correct" was a liberal meme before it became a conservative one?

No. It was never a "liberal meme." And it certainly became a conservative one. While a smattering of obscure leftist writers may have used the term, that is far from making it a "liberal meme." (Do you know what a meme is?) As the wiki makes clear, the conservatives picked it up directly from the neocons in their ranks who were ex-Reds. Folks like the Podhoretz family, David Horowitz, etc.

Another conservative meme appears to be: one Big Lie deserves another.

Only a "smattering of obscure leftist writers may have used the term" based on what? Their appearance in a wikipedia article?

Read first paragraphy here (which I can't paste because JT is rejecting the submit).

http://tinyurl.com/pptoppy

Only a "smattering of obscure leftist writers may have used the term" based on what? Their appearance in a wikipedia article?

As a well-read liberal of over 50 years, if "PC" had risen to the level of a "liberal meme," it's appearance in print journalism and popular culture of the time in question would be easy to demonstrate. (A search of the archives of The Nation, The Atlantic, or the New Republic, for example -- which comes up blank until the mid-to-late 90s. How could such a "meme" have escaped their hundreds of contributors? Precisely because it was never a liberal meme.)

We shouldn't have to depend on an anecdotal memory of Mr. Bleifuss, whose circles may have been far more leftist than liberal. We used some slang terms in the Detroit area where I was raised -- and those may provide a parallel to what Bleifuss recalls growing up in Missouri. But that hardly makes those terms memes.

I remember it, Bleifuss remembers it, you appear to have forgotten it or to have filtered it out.

I remember it, Bleifuss remembers it, you appear to have forgotten it or to have filtered it out.

Thank you, turboshat, for verifying that no liberal print journal of record has the term being used by hundreds if not thousands of writers and contributors during the period in question. If you had found something, you would have posted it, rather than resting your case on the foibles of human memory. You may have already forgotten that the argument was not about whether the term may have been used in some quarters, but whether it rose to the level of being a "liberal meme." (If it was a meme, it wouldn't depend on Bleifuss' memory of his pals in Missouri...LOL... millions of us lived through the time.)

In late-breaking news, some source tied to the investigation has leaked word of Wilson's testimony, and that blood evidence from Michael Brown was found on the officer's car, uniform and weapon. This lends further credence to Dorian Johnson's story that Brown was shot and bleeding at the vehicle -- before he started to flee for his life. This finding, if accurate, will no doubt be spun to support Wilson's publicly executing the unarmed jaywalker 100 feet from his vehicle after firing over 10 shots at him.