Jump to content

Photo

Iraq Or U.s.a.?


33 replies to this topic

#21 Miss Daisy

Miss Daisy

    Super Contributor

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,254 posts
448
Excellent
  • LocationUSA

Posted 15 August 2014 - 11:12 PM

another Trayvon Martin incident in the making



#22 John81

John81

    Running to Win

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,225 posts
5,264
Excellent

Posted 16 August 2014 - 06:46 AM

It's very similar, but thankfully the news media were busy with other stories so they didn't jump on this one as quick and didn't get a big false story widely spread.

 

However, the patter is the same. In the case of Martin, the media kept showing a picture of a 13 year old Martin without making it clear that's what they were doing. When pictures of the much older teen surfaced with him doing gangster poses and looking like a street punk, we got a much more clear and accurate picture of who he was when shot.

 

In this case, they showed an innocuous picture of the one shot while following the same story they did with Martin: they were both claimed to be innocent kids, good kids, wonderful kids who never did anything wrong.

 

Both cases also have the same outcome from actually looking into the lives of these "kids" (I really dislike when they call these 16, 17, 18 year old street thugs kids): both were criminals, both had disciplinary problems, both thought they were some sort of "gangsta", both decided to look for trouble, both escalated a situation they could have avoided, both ended up shot dead.

 

Not surprisingly, most of the media and, of course, the race baiting "civil rights" hucksters, blamed everyone but the street thugs for what happened.



#23 John81

John81

    Running to Win

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,225 posts
5,264
Excellent

Posted 16 August 2014 - 07:22 PM

The Missouri governor had placed 12:00 midnight curfew on Ferguson after more looting last night.

 

As reported, store owners called for police help, some citizens called for help and tried to keep back some of the looters, but the police refused to come to their assistance. After yet another mishandling of the situation, reporters today asked the governor how he expects to enforce the curfew when he's already said there will be no police violence and the police refused to respond to last nights looting. The governor said if arrests have to be made then people will be arrested. Not really answering the question, especially if the governor is standing by his "no violence by the police" position.

 

What a mess.



#24 ThePilgrim

ThePilgrim

    Super Contributor

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,138 posts
615
Excellent
  • LocationHillsboro, Oregon

Posted 17 August 2014 - 12:11 PM

More newhttp://www.ijreview....guson-shooting/ stuff: 



#25 John81

John81

    Running to Win

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,225 posts
5,264
Excellent

Posted 17 August 2014 - 12:28 PM

I watched that video the other day and wondered about that. Throughout the video you hear different ones talking about "the police shot him for no reason" but then when someone asks them if they saw it, all of them saying that said "no". Then some start saying, "well, they say he didn't do anything, the police just shot him for no reason" but nobody ever says who "they " are. On and on different people keep saying the police shot him for no reason but admit they didn't see it happen and didn't get there until after the incident was over.

 

Then, there is that conversation in the background which I was straining to make out when I watched that video before and it seemed more like a first person account that didn't agree with what all those who didn't see it were trying to say happened.

 

That reminded me of back in the 90s during a bunch of drive-by shootings and there was a shoot out on a corner in Chicago and one of the "gangstas" grabbed a toddler and held in front of him as a shield and the child was shot and killed. Almost instantly there were all kinds of stories and excuses poured forth to make it seem as if what happened didn't really happen. Some were even trying to paint the "gangsta" as a hero who was trying to save the child. Then video came out of what happened and it was clear as day that big bad "gangsta" picked that small child up and held him in front of him to protect himself from being shot; willingly sacrificing that child's life in order to save his own. After that the story quickly died away.



#26 John81

John81

    Running to Win

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,225 posts
5,264
Excellent

Posted 18 August 2014 - 08:24 AM

It seems the Missouri State Police are unable to contain the situation in Ferguson so the governor is now sending in the National Guard. It's also been reported the violence spread to another nearby suburb.



#27 ThePilgrim

ThePilgrim

    Super Contributor

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,138 posts
615
Excellent
  • LocationHillsboro, Oregon

Posted 18 August 2014 - 09:03 AM

Seems like things are going the way TPTB wish.  Martial Law anyone?



#28 John81

John81

    Running to Win

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,225 posts
5,264
Excellent

Posted 18 August 2014 - 10:34 AM

It's interesting that the local police, after totally dropping the ball on the first night, initiated virtual martial law while denying they were infringing on citizens constitutional rights; and the Missouri governor denounced that and said he was taking over. Then the governor sends in the State police with orders to put on kids gloves. When that didn't work, and he/State police dropped the ball and allowed more rioting/looting, they started adopting more of the tactics the locals had finally used but with nice words sprinkled about. That didn't work. Now the governor has called in the National Guard but as of yet I've not heard their rules of engagement.

 

Meanwhile, the citizens and business owners are taking big hits.

 

If what they (the police and media) reported earlier was true, that a few small groups broke from the main protest group and they were the ones who rioted/looted, why weren't forces deployed to surround and arrest these small groups? Why on the first night the State police were in charge did the police refuse to respond to calls for help from citizens and business owners when shops were being ransacked and looted? Why weren't they at least prepared to deal with the same thing after that?



#29 ThePilgrim

ThePilgrim

    Super Contributor

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,138 posts
615
Excellent
  • LocationHillsboro, Oregon

Posted 18 August 2014 - 12:16 PM

It's interesting that the local police, after totally dropping the ball on the first night, initiated virtual martial law while denying they were infringing on citizens constitutional rights; and the Missouri governor denounced that and said he was taking over. Then the governor sends in the State police with orders to put on kids gloves. When that didn't work, and he/State police dropped the ball and allowed more rioting/looting, they started adopting more of the tactics the locals had finally used but with nice words sprinkled about. That didn't work. Now the governor has called in the National Guard but as of yet I've not heard their rules of engagement.

 

Meanwhile, the citizens and business owners are taking big hits.

 

If what they (the police and media) reported earlier was true, that a few small groups broke from the main protest group and they were the ones who rioted/looted, why weren't forces deployed to surround and arrest these small groups? Why on the first night the State police were in charge did the police refuse to respond to calls for help from citizens and business owners when shops were being ransacked and looted? Why weren't they at least prepared to deal with the same thing after that?

All good questions, John.  I don't know if they are rhetorical or not and I don't know if my answers are correct or not. (probably not)  I believe those in power desire things to get out of hand.  How else can they justify the Police State.  How else to justify their armed personnel carriers with mounted 50 cal. machine guns?  How else to justify military tactics against the populous?  We are not all rioters, we are not all criminals.  Only a tiny minority of even the black population is causing trouble . . . . but we need the National Guard?  Somebody thinks we need controlling and by any means necesary.

 

When they are out to get you, it is not paranoia that causes you to feel threatened, it is good sense.   :th_wellduh:



#30 John81

John81

    Running to Win

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,225 posts
5,264
Excellent

Posted 18 August 2014 - 05:34 PM

I heard Obama today trying to talk out of both sides again, as in one breathe he said violence doesn't help but then started making excuses for blacks to be upset and violent, mostly because of "history".

 

So apparently a black born in 1995 is so weighed down by whatever was going on in 1795 that they must get upset and violent???

 

Is Obama really saying that every race of people on the planet has been and is capable of moving beyond the terrible things in their peoples past, except for black folk? That's the logical conclusion to this continual argument that what happened in the 18th and 19th centuries holds blacks down in the 21st century.

 

Oh, by the way, don't look around or someone might see the millions of blacks in America that have decided to do what's needed to make a good life in America. If someone does notice them, especially those who dare to speak up, just call them Uncle Tom's, white wannabes, house negroes, and be sure to act all indignant and curse a lot so they'll get the message.



#31 Miss Daisy

Miss Daisy

    Super Contributor

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,254 posts
448
Excellent
  • LocationUSA

Posted 19 August 2014 - 12:18 AM

Missouri have concealed weapon laws? I'm all for martial law when needed.



#32 John81

John81

    Running to Win

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,225 posts
5,264
Excellent

Posted 19 August 2014 - 07:46 AM

The main problem is the rioters/looters are black. If they were white the police would have gone in the first night with a heavy hand arresting as many as they could and shooting who they thought they needed to shoot. That probably would have been the end of it.

 

However, because the rioters/looters were black, they feared charges of "racism", they feared what the media would say, they feared the response of their own State government, they feared the reaction of the federal government. So, rather than try decisive action the first night to take control of the situation they chose to sit it out, let the rioters/looters have a free run and hope they would be satisfied with one night of lawlessness.

 

In todays world of mass media coverage, instant social media, such a plan was destined to fail. Not only were more locals emboldened to join the mess the next night, but with each passing day more and more outsiders had time to travel there and join in. In short order there was a media circus in town. The race agitators started pouring in; Sharpton, the New Black Panthers. The federal government quickly stuck their nose into the situation.

 

So we have one criminal teen who was shot dead by a policeman and we don't yet know the details, but we have the focus of the country right there from the president on down to web bloggers. Meanwhile, something like six blacks were killed in Chicago over the weekend with something like over two dozen wounded, but no media outcry over that. It's hard to cry "racism" when it's blacks killing blacks so they ignore it.

 

Hypocrisy, hidden agendas and fear are driving so much in this country today and it's all taking us toward a very bad place.



#33 "I am chief"

"I am chief"

    1 Tim. 1:15

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,411 posts
895
Excellent

Posted 19 August 2014 - 08:16 AM

I watched that video the other day and wondered about that. Throughout the video you hear different ones talking about "the police shot him for no reason" but then when someone asks them if they saw it, all of them saying that said "no". Then some start saying, "well, they say he didn't do anything, the police just shot him for no reason" but nobody ever says who "they " are. On and on different people keep saying the police shot him for no reason but admit they didn't see it happen and didn't get there until after the incident was over.

Irritating isn't it.



#34 Jim_Alaska

Jim_Alaska

    Advanced Member

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPip
  • 83 posts
68
Excellent
  • LocationNorthern California

Posted 23 August 2014 - 02:20 PM

I got this in email this morning. Much of the information regarding what is actually going on may give us a different perspective on the situation. I tried to post the actual article but the "tables" wouldn't let me. Just click on the link to go to it.

 

Edited for spelling.

______________________________________________________

 

 http://oathkeepers.o...oath-keepers-2/


Edited by Jim_Alaska, 23 August 2014 - 09:21 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

The Fundamental Top 500IFB1000 The Fundamental Top 500