ADVERTISEMENT

Another leftist media narrative bites the dust

G

GMM

All-American
Oct 29, 2001
7,850
0
36
They tried to portray Michael Brown as an angelic, innocent teen who was executed by a white, racist cop. Then the video came out of Brown robbing a convenience store and shoving around the clerk who was half his size. In his last moments on earth Michael Brown was a thug.

Whoops.

It ought to be obvious that most of the news media has a political agenda and they promote it all the time. This latest instance was yet another opportunity for them to denounce AmeriKKKa and therefore justify their worldview. Just like with Tawana Brawley, Trayvon Martin, Matthew Shephard, the Duke Lacrosse Hoax, and many others, when the facts come out their narrative is destroyed. Doesn't matter. In the time between the narrative is hyped and the facts come out enough people have been convinced that they're right to hate America, the police, whites, etc. Oh, and to vote Democrat.

So, we get the riots and the phony outrage. Don't think this is the last time this will happen. Its pretty much worked up until now so count on more incidents like this in the future.

Hatefacts
 
Burglarizing some cigars and pushing around a clerk don't deserve a death sentence. He'd better have done something far more egregious than that to deserve being shot to death.
 
Burglarizing some cigars and pushing around a clerk don't deserve a death sentence.

Correct. But we were repeatedly told by the MSM that he was a "gentle giant" and was a completely innocent teen who was gunned down for no good reason. Based on the video footage the story that the cop told (that Brown attacked him) seems very plausible. Just like with all those other stories that didn't quite live up to the (leftist) narrative, this one is falling apart.

But that won't stop them the next time from indicting the police, America, whites, etc. as being horribly racist and responsible for whatever ails black people. They've got their political agenda and they push it all the time.
 
Quite frankly, you're ramping up the politicization with your own comments, so you're doing exactly what you're complaining about "the left" doing.

This situation is obviously a horrible one. Yes, are there people on the left taking the position you speak of? Sure. But when I'm reading respected writers, outlets, etc., they're talking about legitimate issues.

I've live in St. Louis before for a brief stint and I've lived in metropolitan cities throughout my life. I can tell you right now that a police force's #1 priority should always be having citizen's trust. Some cities do it much better than others. The reaction of this shooting is not based on 1 thing happening, it's a pent up, longstanding issue that exploded. And in Ferguson's case, it goes beyond that. The NY Times had a couple pieces about incidents in previous years, along with the overall landscape of Ferguson. You're talking about a place where 2/3 of the population is black, 3 of 53 police officers are black, the school board is all white, and the area has a deep history of racial insensitivity (in this same year St. Louis PD hired UCLA to study their racial insensitity after a lieutenant ordered officers to target black people at malls). A petition by residents in Ferguson for cops to pay more attention to neighborhood crime vs. traffic stops was ignored.

Going back to schools, a school district lost accreditation that served part of Ferguson and residents petitioned for their children to be able to attend neighboring (more white) schools and were rejected for vague reasons. When the governor held a news conference on Friday, the residents were peppering him with questions about fixing schools!

This whole situation is a built up anger from the residents and this was the straw that broke the camels back. I've lived in cities that dealt with this sort of thing well, and St. Louis is an example that has had a problem with it for quite some time. There is an extreme distrust by citizens of their police. You see them showing up to pretty calm protests with full on riot gear, shields, batons, police dogs, etc. - and then later in the night there's looting going on in stores and they stand by and do nothing. Shouldn't that be the opposite?

I live in DC, which has gone from some very serious racial situations through the 70s - where Marion Berry called the police force invading aliens or something along those lines because they were never to be seen. Today, the police force is over 50% black, focuses on neighborhood engagement, and for a place that has gone from being the murder capital of the country to what it is today, there's been very significant progress made (and no, it's not perfect now either). This is obviously not quite the same example, but during the Occupy Wall Street protests, in NYC they got a bit tense at time, but in DC, the police made an effort to speak with people camping out and such and had a relationship with them - and when they finally wrapped things up, there wasn't outrage and distrust towards the cops.

Until cities embrace building relationships as a critical component to effective policing, it's never going to be successful.
 
He might well have been gunned down for no good reason. That he was a "thug" as you put it shouldn't enter into it.
Posted from wireless.rivals.com[/URL]
 
You just had to bring up Occupy, didn't you? Those folks weren't even sure what they were protesting.
Posted from wireless.rivals.com[/URL]
 
Originally posted by GMM:
Burglarizing some cigars and pushing around a clerk don't deserve a death sentence.

Correct. But we were repeatedly told by the MSM that he was a "gentle giant" and was a completely innocent teen who was gunned down for no good reason. Based on the video footage the story that the cop told (that Brown attacked him) seems very plausible. Just like with all those other stories that didn't quite live up to the (leftist) narrative, this one is falling apart.

But that won't stop them the next time from indicting the police, America, whites, etc. as being horribly racist and responsible for whatever ails black people. They've got their political agenda and they push it all the time.
Click to expand...
As far as the officer involved knew, Brown was completely innocent prior to the shooting. The police chief has made it clear that the officer had no idea that Brown was a robbery suspect.

Speaking of false narratives, you keep pushing the narrative that Brown was a "thug" who got what was coming to him. That is just as false as the narrative that portrays him as completely innocent. The truth is somewhere in the middle, as it usually is. And nothing has come out so far that would justify emptying an entire clip in the kid.
 
I haven't said whether or not he "got what was coming to him" because all the facts aren't out yet. That's a false narrative on your part.

However, the MSM did push a false narrative. Mainly, that Brown was innocent and the cop had no justification for shooting him. They keep mentioning that he was an "unarmed teenager" to make the cop, and the police, and America, and whites, look bad. Did the cop know he was a teenager or was unarmed? I seriously doubt it. Yet that didn't stop the media, an their allies on the left, from justifying the demonization of their enemies. Based on Brown's behavior that day the cops story of being attacked is very plausible. Which is not what the MSM, the left, or Attorney General Eric Holder want us to believe. Black outrage at "the system", and all the stupid, destructive behavior that accompanies it, must always be defended.
 
So the left can politicize this and nobody can respond or else they're just as bad? Nice strategy for keeping your opponents quiet. I'm not going to apologize for defending this country on this issue.

The reaction of this shooting is not based on 1 thing happening, it's a pent up, longstanding issue that exploded.

Yes, the wrong tribe killed Michael Brown. Of the last 1,000 homicides of blacks in St. Louis, how many resulted in riots? I'm not aware of any. Mainly, because about 90% of those killings were done by other blacks.

I could also speculate that its frustration that ~50 years after the civil rights movement, and 6 years into The First Black President's time in office, things just haven't turned out like what people had hoped for.

You're talking about a place where 2/3 of the population is black, 3 of
53 police officers are black, the school board is all white.....

So?

Oh, that's right, you find the tribalism of black people justifiable. If there was a town that was majority white yet the police was majority black and the whites complained we all know how you (and many, many others) would denounce that. BTW, 25 years ago (that was for you, db) the town was over 2/3 white. So the rapid demographic change can explain in part why whites are a majority in those two areas. Also, you're assuming that a racially proportionate percentage of candidates ran for the school board or were qualified to be cops.

......and the area has a deep history of racial insensitivity (in this same
year St. Louis PD hired UCLA to study their racial insensitity after a
lieutenant ordered officers to target black people at malls).

As if there was no legitimate reason to target black people at malls? Looks like Equality is still infecting your mind. BTW, were the black people targeted at malls disproportionately young men? Most likely. Gee, why is that?

A petition by residents in Ferguson for cops to pay more attention to neighborhood crime vs. traffic stops was ignored.

The minute they do so it'll get denounced as "racist". Tell us, is there a lot of neighborhood crime in Ferguson? If so, why?

I live in DC, which has gone from some very serious racial situations
through the 70s - where Marion Berry called the police force invading
aliens or something along those lines because they were never to be
seen. Today, the police force is over 50% black, focuses on neighborhood
engagement, and for a place that has gone from being the murder capital
of the country to what it is today, there's been very significant
progress made (and no, it's not perfect now either).

Yes, crime rates in D.C. soared in the 70's and have dropped recently. Do you think it has anything to do with demographic change? Or is it instead all about government policies?

Until cities embrace building relationships as a critical component to effective policing, it's never going to be successful.

Yes, the burden is on everybody else but the people commiting crimes, looting, and rioting.
 
*nm

.
This post was edited on 8/17 4:19 PM by db
 
So. When asked if you are OK with the shooting, you simply change the subject to the looting and rioting.

That means you are OK with the shooting.

Got it.
 
Who was that guy?

I can't remember exactly which guy it was but there was somebody on this board who insisted to everybody who argued with him that if you defended George Zimmerman in any way it meant you thought that Trayvon Martin deserved to die.

You remind me of that guy.
 
Re: Who was that guy?

This is different. You haven't defended the police officer, even though the thought-provoking article to which I linked raises some important questions about police conduct and cover-ups.

You are only attacking the victim. You are saying, in effect, that Michael Brown deserved to die, because you believe he was of questionable character and because there is evidence of exactly that. You've speculated that his character might have influenced the actual events, but those facts have not come out yet.

You've had plenty of chances to say otherwise. I'm done asking. I know the score.
 
You're pissed off people are coming to conclusions without knowing the facts - but you're doing the same thing, or at least insinuating things.

My suggestion is if you're going to question people on things, you should at least know what you're talking about. I am not going to write a 20 page explanation of every detail because you're too lazy to look it up yourself. You say it's ok for the police to tell officers to target black people and you even take it a step further by saying young black men. According to the FBI, 70% of shoplifting arrests are white. But hey - black teenage guys sound a lot more scary and believable!

I'm not wasting my time on you.
 
Originally posted by lbodel:
Quite frankly, you're ramping up the politicization with your own comments, so you're doing exactly what you're complaining about "the left" doing.

This situation is obviously a horrible one. Yes, are there people on the left taking the position you speak of? Sure. But when I'm reading respected writers, outlets, etc., they're talking about legitimate issues.

I've live in St. Louis before for a brief stint and I've lived in metropolitan cities throughout my life. I can tell you right now that a police force's #1 priority should always be having citizen's trust. Some cities do it much better than others. The reaction of this shooting is not based on 1 thing happening, it's a pent up, longstanding issue that exploded. And in Ferguson's case, it goes beyond that. The NY Times had a couple pieces about incidents in previous years, along with the overall landscape of Ferguson. You're talking about a place where 2/3 of the population is black, 3 of 53 police officers are black, the school board is all white, and the area has a deep history of racial insensitivity (in this same year St. Louis PD hired UCLA to study their racial insensitity after a lieutenant ordered officers to target black people at malls). A petition by residents in Ferguson for cops to pay more attention to neighborhood crime vs. traffic stops was ignored.

Going back to schools, a school district lost accreditation that served part of Ferguson and residents petitioned for their children to be able to attend neighboring (more white) schools and were rejected for vague reasons. When the governor held a news conference on Friday, the residents were peppering him with questions about fixing schools!

This whole situation is a built up anger from the residents and this was the straw that broke the camels back. I've lived in cities that dealt with this sort of thing well, and St. Louis is an example that has had a problem with it for quite some time. There is an extreme distrust by citizens of their police. You see them showing up to pretty calm protests with full on riot gear, shields, batons, police dogs, etc. - and then later in the night there's looting going on in stores and they stand by and do nothing. Shouldn't that be the opposite?

I live in DC, which has gone from some very serious racial situations through the 70s - where Marion Berry called the police force invading aliens or something along those lines because they were never to be seen. Today, the police force is over 50% black, focuses on neighborhood engagement, and for a place that has gone from being the murder capital of the country to what it is today, there's been very significant progress made (and no, it's not perfect now either). This is obviously not quite the same example, but during the Occupy Wall Street protests, in NYC they got a bit tense at time, but in DC, the police made an effort to speak with people camping out and such and had a relationship with them - and when they finally wrapped things up, there wasn't outrage and distrust towards the cops.

Until cities embrace building relationships as a critical component to effective policing, it's never going to be successful.
Click to expand...
Why do you have to spew so much sense? Don't you know that to some AA are just looking for excuse to riot and loot under the guise of some made-up issues.
 
Originally posted by GMM:
I haven't said whether or not he "got what was coming to him" because all the facts aren't out yet. That's a false narrative on your part.

However, the MSM did push a false narrative. Mainly, that Brown was innocent and the cop had no justification for shooting him. They keep mentioning that he was an "unarmed teenager" to make the cop, and the police, and America, and whites, look bad. Did the cop know he was a teenager or was unarmed? I seriously doubt it. Yet that didn't stop the media, an their allies on the left, from justifying the demonization of their enemies. Based on Brown's behavior that day the cops story of being attacked is very plausible. Which is not what the MSM, the left, or Attorney General Eric Holder want us to believe. Black outrage at "the system", and all the stupid, destructive behavior that accompanies it, must always be defended.
Click to expand...
You missed (or willfully ignored) the entire point of my post. As far as the officer with the gun knew, Michael Brown was innocent!!!!! That narrative is not false, it is factual and has been acknowledged as such by the police themselves. In other words, the information that came out after the fact (that Brown had stolen some cigars and shoved a convenience store clerk) had no bearing whatsoever on the shooting. It couldn't have, because the one doing the shooting did not have that information.

That said, I'm not leaping to conclusions about the situation, either. My best guess is that neither party is innocent of all wrongdoing - but if it turns out to be true that the officer kept shooting after Brown had surrendered, the officer needs to be facing criminal charges.
 
Originally posted by hunkgolden:
Originally posted by atmafola:


...some AA are just looking for excuse to riot and loot under the guise of some made-up issues.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
That is precisely what several AA guests on MSNBC and CNN stated this weekend.
Click to expand...
Excuse me, I know my wording wasn't very clear, I should have added a comma after "to some". I am also hoping "some african americans are just looking for excuse to loot" is not what you meant. And I am sure no MSNBC analyst would say that. And that definitely wasn't what I said.

Listen, there are miscreants everywhere, it's not unique to AA. There are always people that will take advantage of apparent anarchy (or break down in law and order) to personally enrich themselves. Heck those who ran down Enron and other ponzi schemers are doing the exact same thing - taking advantage of lax enforcement of rules to personally enrich themselves. Arrest those miscreants and charge them accordingly and let's get back to facing real issues.
 
Originally posted by atmafola:


Originally posted by lbodel:
Quite frankly, you're ramping up the politicization with your own comments, so you're doing exactly what you're complaining about "the left" doing.

This situation is obviously a horrible one. Yes, are there people on the left taking the position you speak of? Sure. But when I'm reading respected writers, outlets, etc., they're talking about legitimate issues.

I've live in St. Louis before for a brief stint and I've lived in metropolitan cities throughout my life. I can tell you right now that a police force's #1 priority should always be having citizen's trust. Some cities do it much better than others. The reaction of this shooting is not based on 1 thing happening, it's a pent up, longstanding issue that exploded. And in Ferguson's case, it goes beyond that. The NY Times had a couple pieces about incidents in previous years, along with the overall landscape of Ferguson. You're talking about a place where 2/3 of the population is black, 3 of 53 police officers are black, the school board is all white, and the area has a deep history of racial insensitivity (in this same year St. Louis PD hired UCLA to study their racial insensitity after a lieutenant ordered officers to target black people at malls). A petition by residents in Ferguson for cops to pay more attention to neighborhood crime vs. traffic stops was ignored.

Going back to schools, a school district lost accreditation that served part of Ferguson and residents petitioned for their children to be able to attend neighboring (more white) schools and were rejected for vague reasons. When the governor held a news conference on Friday, the residents were peppering him with questions about fixing schools!

This whole situation is a built up anger from the residents and this was the straw that broke the camels back. I've lived in cities that dealt with this sort of thing well, and St. Louis is an example that has had a problem with it for quite some time. There is an extreme distrust by citizens of their police. You see them showing up to pretty calm protests with full on riot gear, shields, batons, police dogs, etc. - and then later in the night there's looting going on in stores and they stand by and do nothing. Shouldn't that be the opposite?

I live in DC, which has gone from some very serious racial situations through the 70s - where Marion Berry called the police force invading aliens or something along those lines because they were never to be seen. Today, the police force is over 50% black, focuses on neighborhood engagement, and for a place that has gone from being the murder capital of the country to what it is today, there's been very significant progress made (and no, it's not perfect now either). This is obviously not quite the same example, but during the Occupy Wall Street protests, in NYC they got a bit tense at time, but in DC, the police made an effort to speak with people camping out and such and had a relationship with them - and when they finally wrapped things up, there wasn't outrage and distrust towards the cops.

Until cities embrace building relationships as a critical component to effective policing, it's never going to be successful.
Click to expand...
Why do you have to spew so much sense? Don't you know that to some AA are just looking for excuse to riot and loot under the guise of some made-up issues.
Click to expand...
On twitter last night - "These people are not protestors. This is something different and it has little to do with JusticeForMikeBrown."
 
The NY Times had a couple pieces about incidents in previous years, along with the overall landscape of Ferguson. You're talking about a place where 2/3 of the population is black, 3 of 53 police officers are black, the school board is all white,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Three things I find quite disturbing.
Brown was shot 6 times. Was he bull rushing the officer and gave him no choice? Defense of the officer the first 4 shots were in the arm.
The police commander put in charge by the state of Mo., held a speech at a church and promoted more racism. He said 'black mommas and pappas will be better off as a result of Browns death', he riled up the crowd-not one mention to stop the rioting and hold peaceful demonstrations.
Jesse Jackson had a speech where he asked the people in the crowd to stand up if they had been arrested or have had a family member arrested and 2/3 of the people sttod up. He than went on to preach that felons should be allowed to vote. And that would be the only way to elect black representatives to office. FWIW only 12% of the Ferguson eligible voters voted. What makes him think current non eligible voters would vote?
There are still a lot of problems in this contry when race is involved. Whose fault is it? Food for thought a white majority voted a black man as President.
 
School board members are voted in, right?

Do you really think this policeman shot a guy six times who was kneeling down with his hands up in the air? In broad daylight? In the middle of a street surrounded by apartments? With cars and witnesses surrounding him? Think about what you're implying this guy did for a second. A policeman who has never shot any other suspect and never been in any trouble of any kind just one day decides he's going to unload his gun on a defenseless person with cars and witnesses all over the place. Does that sound plausible to you? Or does the version given by a witness at the scene as well as the story given by the police officer sound more likely? Yet our left leaning media promoted the first story and incited what we're seeing now in Ferguson. We've seen this story before haven't we? When will people learn to ignore CNN, MSNBC, and the national networks in situations like this until the facts come out. I'm guessing never.
 
Re: Who was that guy?

That was me, and it was more about the intense amount of blame you were putting on Martin and claiming that his actions lead to his own death and it was not the actions of Zimmerman. You were defending Zimmerman by BLAMING Martin for his own death because of his own actions.

It was a simple question that obviously effected you greatly because you couldn't come up with some sort of media-blaming narrative about it.

Since you brought it up, if it is ultimately shown that Brown was running away from the cops without a weapon on him did he deserve to be shot 6 times and therefore did he deserve to die?
 
Re: Who was that guy?

He did plenty of attacking of Trayvon Martin too.

It's pretty obvious that he blames Martin and Brown for their own deaths here. Somehow though, it's unthinkable to think that means he thinks they deserved to die.
 
Aha

I see you still can't tell the difference between blaming someone for doing something stupid/irresponsible and saying they deserved to die.

It was a simple question that obviously effected you greatly because you couldn't come up with some sort of media-blaming narrative about it.

Oh I sure as hell did blame the media for distorting, exploiting, lying, and pushing their leftist agenda. They're doing the same thing right now.

Since you brought it up, if it is ultimately shown that Brown was running away from the cops without a weapon on him did he deserve to be shot 6 times and therefore did he deserve to die?

I'm tempted to say "Hell Yeah!!!" just to drive you crazy.

If it is ultimately shown that Brown was attacking the cop (aka something stupid and irresponsible) would you blame Brown for doing something stupid/irresponsible yet at the same time not think "he deserved to die"?
 
Re: Aha

If Brown was attacking the cop then he deserved to die. I don't know why it has to be so difficult. If the actions of Brown made the actions of the cop unavoidable then he deserved to die. I'd have no problem saying that if I believed it. In this case, I actually think it is possible that Brown did cause the problem in the first place and then cause the use of lethal force. We'll have to see what the final investigation says.

That is the difference here. In both discussions, you refused to say either he didn't or did deserve to die. Even now, you have conveniently found a way to not answer the question I asked.
 
Re: Aha

No, I answered it at the time and its the same here.

If Brown attacked the cop then the cop deserved to defend himself. Whether or not Brown dies depends on the outcome of that chaotic situation. Does it rise to the level of Brown/Martin deserving to die? Depends on whether or not they intended to kill the cop/Zimmerman. We'll probably never know either. Therefore, I can't say that either deserved to die.

But since you've argued yourself into a corner you have to maintain the judgement that attacking a cop = deserve to die. Then, you have to try to argue others into that same corner. Ain't gonna work.
 
Re: Aha

It isn't about intentions. It is about actions. Did the actions of Brown/Martin reach such a critical level that they deserved to die?

Also, since you seemingly feel victimized by this line of questioning be sure you remember you brought this up. I'm more than happy answering the question in a simple yes or no manner instead of relying on intentions. My stance is consistent. I don't have to use phrases like "I can't say" and "we'll probably never know". Once we have the facts, we can look at them and come up with a simple yes or no answer to if the victim/criminal deserved to die. Well, at least I can.

If Brown was attacking a cop with his gun drawn then of course he deserved to die. You just don't do that. The cop has no way of knowing his intentions aren't actually to take the gun and kill him.
 
yep

because:

a. he was scared (or angry)

b. his adrenaline was sky high

c. he wasn't thinking

WHETHER he was justified or not justified he was not thinking about being in broad daylight, or his location, or witnesses.

The autopsy came back, guess what, no gunshot residue on the deceased's body. How can this be if they were struggling for the gun in the car and it went off?

Here's a real easy one, check the car for gunshot residue or damage from a bullet going off inside. If it didn't hit the car, then it hit one of the buildings on that street. Should be easy enough to show that as well. But here it is a week gone by and neither has come up yet.
 
Re: yep

From the evidence I know about, which is Brown was found lying 35 feet from the police car in the street. Brown apparently was facing the police officer when shot. The police officer stopped Brown and his friend because they were walking down the center of the street.

I don't doubt that Brown got in a struggle with the police officer and created a combustible situation but when no felony that the police officer knows is in progress (he didn't know about the robbery that had occurred earlier), why in the world would you shoot someone unless you are just pissed off.

I imagine the police office got roughed up, had a gun and in the heat of the moment shot Brown. Brown should have stopped when the police office told him to but then again he shouldn't have been shot when he is 35 feet away and posing no current danger to anyone and not suspected of any real crime other than maybe jaywalking. Brown was no angel but he shouldn't be dead either. I would definitely be upset if this was my kid.
 
unclear

the independent medical examiner said shots to arms/hand was consistent either with him facing away from the officer or surrendering.

Like I said, if there was a scuffle in the car with a gunshot, that should be REALLY easy to prove.
 
Re: unclear

I'd say Brown had his hands up but kept advancing on the officer. I would say the kid was shot 4 times in the arms , kept coming and the officer shot to kill. If you are shot 4 times and continue to advance you're either super pissed, dumb or on drugs. Either way you want to inflict damage to the officer.
If the above scenario is not true and the office just cut loose on the kid than the officer should see life behind bars.
Maybe just maybe, he wanted to give the officer the cigars he just stole and apologize to the store owner.
 
No one said he 'deserved' to be shot to death.

However, to ignore the fact that he confronted and also attacked an officer of the law in the officer's vehicle, and attempted to take said officer's fire arm, says that one could reasonably assume he wanted to kill the police officer and that said officer feared for his life. Beyond that, who knows, but one thing is clear, be it a justified killing or not-

When you attack someone that has a gun, know that you are bringing the possibility of your own death into play along with that of the person bearing the fire arm, be they law enforcement or not.
 
except

after he was shot in the arms 4 times, the last shot was to the top of the head, which is more consistent with him falling, not "kept coming." As well, it's highly unlikely he switched from running away from the officer, who was firing at him, to turning towards the guy he was running away from for firing at him.

No, I don't think he was trying to give the cigars back. I think he was shocked he was being fired at, he thought he could run and nothing would happen, the cop started firing, the kid was shocked because stuff just got real, turned around, and got shot.
 
yeah no

thus far one witness supports it, and they aren't ACTUALLY a witness but a friend of Wilson's reporting his side of the story.

but hey, if he punched the officer in the face, and tried to grab his gun then this should be real easy, show the bruising from the punch (or bruising on the hand) and the DNA from Brown on the gun. The latter should be real easy.
 
Re: More than a dozen witnesses support Officer Wilson's story

And today we learn that Officer Wilson suffered an orbital fracture of his eye at the hands of the "gentle giant".

Remind me again where we first got the notion that Mr. Brown was doing nothing but walking in the street; minding his own business; was a kind gentle giant; was running from the policeman when he was shot; got on his hands and knees with his arms raised in a surrender position; and was ultimately shot in the back and killed?

Exactly where did all of the above fiction come from?

Yeah - cause none of what we were told in the beginning about Mr. Brown and the events of that day have turned out to be true.

Thanks MSNBC and CNN! Can the town of Ferguson send you the cleanup bill?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Y

Mainstream media finally admits that Hunter Biden is a crook

Replies
145
Views
5K
Free Board: General Discussion Forum
PurdueFan1
P
CalBoiler

Tale of the Tape - ND...

Replies
22
Views
2K
The Depot
PurdueKrish
P
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back