Racist Police Response to Ferguson Protests

[DaveC]

I think I missed the part of the forum rules where it says that moderators are required to be perfectly neutral arbiters and aren't allowed to have or express their own views.

[AEON]

Police sources tell me more than a dozen witnesses have corroborated cop's version of events in shooting #Ferguson

Christine Byers is a crime reporter for the St. Louis Post Dispatch.

https://twitter.com/ChristineDByers/...56693382094848

If this thing goes to trial - it might get ugly.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by AEON

Christine Byers is a crime reporter for the St. Louis Post Dispatch.

https://twitter.com/ChristineDByers/...56693382094848

If this thing goes to trial - it might get ugly.

I found this response funny:

In breaking news, police say police are right.

Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[AEON]

Originally Posted by BVS

I found this response funny:

I actually laughed at that one too. And there's some truth to it.

But there is also some truth to the notion that if a Ferguson eyewitness DID have information that would benefit the officer's story, then they would be afraid to have their face plastered on CNN (especially with "Snitches Get Stitches" spray painted on the building next to them).

[gump]

Originally Posted by AEON

I'm still a confessed homophobe

That clarifies things re. your position on racial issues too. Good to know.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by gump

That clarifies things re. your position on racial issues too. Good to know.

What are my positions on racial issues?

[gump]

Originally Posted by AEON

What are my positions on racial issues?

The fact that you really believe your comments in this thread are not about race is a rather perfect summation of your position on racial issues.

[gump]

Oh, and clearly, listening to hip hop makes one a "thug", but disliking homossexuals somehow is ok? And yet, the problem with this forum is the lack of a right wing moderator?

[AEON]

Originally Posted by gump

Oh, and clearly, listening to hip hop makes one a "thug",

Please find the quote where I said that.

Originally Posted by gump

but disliking homossexuals somehow is ok?

My "homophobia" is limited to my inability to understand it. This lack of understanding does not mean that I "dislike" homosexuals - nor do I think they should be mistreated in any way.

Originally Posted by gump

And yet, the problem with this forum is the lack of a right wing moderator?

Yes - and a centrist.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by gump

The fact that you really believe your comments in this thread are not about race is a rather perfect summation of your position on racial issues.

Please clarify.

[nbelcik]

Originally Posted by AEON

You know - it may serve this forum better to have a more politically neutral mod. Unless the intention is for this forum to be a backslapping Liberal circle-jerk. If that IS the intention, you are succeeding quite well. That is also why it is dying a slow (but accelerating) death.

A few years back in FYM - debate across the political spectrum was encouraged (yet, it was never exactly equal - but this is a U2 website - so Left-leaning is expected). Now, it seems you've bullied/bored away any dissenting (i.e. - non-Liberal) opinions.

So being criticized for your opinions=bullying? Gotcha.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[AEON]

DELETED - The story I was going to post does not have enough valid sources...

[gump]

Originally Posted by AEON

Please find the quote where I said that.

You posted a link about Michael Brown's music listening habits as if it was relevant information. A discussion went on for a couple of pages. Don't be disingenious.

My "homophobia" is limited to my inability to understand it. This lack of understanding does not mean that I "dislike" homosexuals - nor do I think they should be mistreated in any way.

"phobia" ˈfəʊbɪə Oxford English Dictionary: An extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by gump

You posted a link about Michael Brown's music listening habits as if it was relevant information. A discussion went on for a couple of pages. Don't be disingenious.

You are incorrect. I linked to the songs Michael Brown created and shared. That's not the same as "music listening habits."

Originally Posted by gump

"phobia" ˈfəʊbɪə Oxford English Dictionary: An extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something.

The "phobia" was something attributed to me here and I now use it a bit sarcastically about myself. For the record - I do not consider myself homophobic. I simply do not understand it, and we've discussed that at great lengths in other threads.

[Diemen]

Originally Posted by AEON

It seems to you - and most here - that the people who do not agree with the liberals simply have not "seen the light" quite yet.

I don't personally think this way, but I can understand how the general vibe of the thread can come across this way.

Perhaps then it would be helpful if you acknowledged that more often when it occurs.

Again, unless I missed it - acknowledging that more often and in close proximity to the post would be very helpful. I am not looking for agreement, but a little acknowledgement for taking a perfect valid position would go a long way toward inviting opposing views.

This I will cop to and agree should happen more often.

That's fine. I thought the term "thug" was a more specific term (like "gangsta"). However, pointing out his own music page, tweets, fb posts, photos - is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. I am not a racist for doing so.

No you're not. But I think it's questionable to point to the kind of music a guy likes as indicative of his moral character. I enjoy a pretty wide variety of music, including a few bands/songs that have some pretty morally questionable lyrics. I don't think it would be fair for someone to say "oh, that song is pretty violent, so I bet you'd probably be more likely to get aggressive with a cop." I just don't see the correlation that directly. And there is a lot more to my character than the music I listen to or the photos I take with my friends.

No - we differ in that you seem to have a different requirement for "moving the debate" for liberals than for non-liberals and assert your own politics too often (my opinion). If you were a user, I'm all for it. But when you wear both hats interchangeably - I feel like I'm a playing an away baseball game against the opposing team AND the umpires. Does that make sense?

I understand where you're coming from. Like I said before, I agree that sometimes I may take too much of an active role in threads and will try to temper that. And while it does put you in a bit of an unfair, or at least, unequal position to be the sole representative of your argument, I feel like if you're the sole proponent of a stance, you should expect to have to explain yourself more thoroughly.

I would also like to see this notion that liberalism is automatically "right" attitude challenged by the mods/you more often. There is no way on this earth that one side of a controversial topic is ALWAYS right on every point.

Fair enough.

Take this shooting as an example - if it turns out the forensics and numerous eyewitnesses PROVE Darren Wilson's innocence (hypothetical at this point)- there would still be a prevailing attitude that Darren Wilson murdered an innocent black teen. And there will be no call from the mods for the facts to justify such a position.

I don't think that's true. Granted, I think some people probably wouldn't buy it, but I think if an independent investigation proved Wilson's innocence, most people would accept it, but would still be perfectly valid in questioning why the police didn't operate more transparently, and would continue to question why the police response to protests was/is so overwhelmingly disproportional and antagonistic.

Yet - I've conceded, that if the forensics prove that Darren Wilson overreacted/murdered Michael Johnson, he should be punished accordingly.

If the facts from an independent investigation show beyond a reasonable doubt that Brown was charging Wilson at the time that Wilson killed him, I will be the first to acknowledge that. If the facts point to Wilson unlawfully using lethal force, I think whether or not Wilson would be punished accordingly is a whole other can of worms, and one that comes with a history that unfortunately doesn't appear to err on the side of victims of police brutality.

Diemen, all that being said - I do appreciate you and the volunteer work you do here. Thank you. These are just some of my opinions - take them for what they are worth. I think I've proven myself to be a man that can change his mind - and if I am completely off-base here, I can probably be convinced as such.

I appreciate that, Aeon. Both your acknowledgement and your ability to change your mind.

[bono_212]

Originally Posted by Diemen

I don't personally think this way, but I can understand how the general vibe of the thread can come across this way.

This is probably my #1 pet peeve about the dismissive way people talk towards others with a different viewpoint in this forum, just fwiw.

[iron yuppie]

Originally Posted by bono_212

This is probably my #1 pet peeve about the dismissive way people talk towards others with a different viewpoint in this forum, just fwiw.

There are times though when it is justified (not necessarily in this thread). Some of the things Indy said about LGBT people, for example, amounted to hate speech, if I'm being candid. Bigotry deserves to be called out - again, not saying it is happening in this thread - and should not be excused simply because it falls under the veil of "conservatism" or any other political umbrella. And again I would see this as symptomatic of a larger problem the right is facing: the rhetoric in some cases - and I have seen a lot of this first-hand - is becoming so extreme that it's pushing into territory where that rhetoric is demonstrably wrong.

[bono_212]

Originally Posted by iron yuppie

There are times though when it is justified (not necessarily in this thread). Some of the things Indy said about LGBT people, for example, amounted to hate speech, if I'm being candid. Bigotry deserves to be called out - again, not saying it is happening in this thread - and should not be excused simply because it falls under the veil of "conservatism" or any other political umbrella. And again I would see this as symptomatic of a larger problem the right is facing: the rhetoric in some cases - and I have seen a lot of this first-hand - is becoming so extreme that it's pushing into territory where that rhetoric is demonstrably wrong.

I can agree that there are times when the language is suitable for the conversation, but it does appear to be used for every topic involving a conservative viewpoint. Even when I don't share those viewpoints (I really do try to stay in the middle of things, which is why I try to have a conversation on both sides of a topic when I can), it frequently rubs me the wrong way, just for the people it is aimed at.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by Diemen

I appreciate that, Aeon. Both your acknowledgement and your ability to change your mind.

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my grievances. You're a class act. Hopefully this leads to a little more tolerance from other members.

[cobl04]

Op-Ed: Killer Mike on the Problems Underlying the Chaos in Ferguson | Billboard