|
|
|
Ferguson Missouri
- Thread starter Jayv
- Start date
yeah it's all the Zionist controlled medias fault..better? Look up watts riots. Detroit riots hell what about the g20 riots in toronto??.. They happened day and night. It's not a timing of an announcement issue. Stop blaming the wrong people
Roomie
Banned
Sonny things have changed since you were here last. If you could leave your common sense at the door.... most don't understand that around here anymore.
Yes let's riot from 9 pm to 2am. Tomorrow night we'll schedule it from 10 to 6.
This isn't a job. They do stupid **** around the clock. **** tha po-lease. That kid died. Let's burn the uninvolved neighbors business to the ground. That'll show we dun mean bidness. Stupid as **** down there right now.
Yes let's riot from 9 pm to 2am. Tomorrow night we'll schedule it from 10 to 6.
This isn't a job. They do stupid **** around the clock. **** tha po-lease. That kid died. Let's burn the uninvolved neighbors business to the ground. That'll show we dun mean bidness. Stupid as **** down there right now.
Sonny, you got it wrong. The people responsible are the ones doing the looting, 100%. No way to condone that.
I was suggesting however, that that was the outcome (the riots) that authorities wanted. So that there is now a "wrong" done by the community to take the focus away from the possible wrong (I said possible) done by the process. In other words, a deflection.
cynic or conspiracy theorist? Maybe.
I'll be interested in hearing the opinions of those who will be reading over the evidence released.
I was suggesting however, that that was the outcome (the riots) that authorities wanted. So that there is now a "wrong" done by the community to take the focus away from the possible wrong (I said possible) done by the process. In other words, a deflection.
cynic or conspiracy theorist? Maybe.
I'll be interested in hearing the opinions of those who will be reading over the evidence released.
Last edited:
It's safe to assume the announcement will induce a riot. That's common sense. Why kick it off under cover of night, I think is the question. You've got two choices. Day is one. Night is the other one. Why choose night? It's gotta be the worse choice. Ok, I'll think of other ways to say the same thing later. Try to digest this for now.
Fewer innocent bystanders out and about, to get caught up in it.
But the ones that are caught up in it suffer a worse fate under cover of dark? I don't believe for a minute that's a reason for announcing at night. Was that reason given from official sources?
If you really want to play devil's advocate, the media makes a fortune on live coverage (cheap to produce, lots of viewers, lots of ads) if the broadcast happens in the evening. If it happens in the morning, at least half the potential viewers are at work and unable to watch.
I'm not quite that cynical yet but if proven true I wouldn't be shocked. I understand smart people are paid good money manipulate everything.
You are wrong. Most break ins happen during the day when people are at work or out running errands. Not when they are home at night. Keep thinking
I didn't say "most". I said "better". Obviously you have to scope the target to make sure it's vacated, so all else being equal, cover of night is the better.
Stores are broken into at night ,houses generally during the day. Why? No one there. Cover of darkness doesn't mean anything and in fact walking around at night in a neighbourhood, retail or industrial area will attract more attention at night than during the day .
Squirrel!
Let's get back to the best time to riot. Night time is prime time, under the cover of darkness.
So let's make an inflammatory announcement during prime time (both for riots and TV.)
Why? To facilitate the foreseeable angry reaction.
Why? To give them something other than the non-incitement to talk about.
Let's get back to the best time to riot. Night time is prime time, under the cover of darkness.
So let's make an inflammatory announcement during prime time (both for riots and TV.)
Why? To facilitate the foreseeable angry reaction.
Why? To give them something other than the non-incitement to talk about.
Last edited:
Boots
Well-known member
So ive been following this for quite a bit and for the most part i was on the side of Brown, but after the forensic evidence was released and after the video of him manhandling that guy in the store was released, im led to believe that yes Michael Brown was a thug and I wouldnt be surprised if everything that was said in the interview with Wilson was true.
Almost every argument used by Brown supporters are completely invalid and the way in which they go about portraying Brown is so childish.
Showing his grad picture or pictures of him as a kid is beyond irrelevant its unreal. Only thing I see is a grown man who robbed a store and most likely assaulted a police officer to the point where he was in fear for his life.
And Brown supporters saying things like "Brown isnt hear to tell his story" like what the **** does it matter at this point, the case has been so racially and politically charged that they wouldn't believe the cops testimony regardless if he was here or not.
Tldr; Brown supporters (99 percent of which were not at the scene) already established that Wilson was guilty before the trial went underway. Talk about using your ability to reason and being open for interpretation huh. Sounds reasonable to me. Thank god these people arent in the legal system.
Almost every argument used by Brown supporters are completely invalid and the way in which they go about portraying Brown is so childish.
Showing his grad picture or pictures of him as a kid is beyond irrelevant its unreal. Only thing I see is a grown man who robbed a store and most likely assaulted a police officer to the point where he was in fear for his life.
And Brown supporters saying things like "Brown isnt hear to tell his story" like what the **** does it matter at this point, the case has been so racially and politically charged that they wouldn't believe the cops testimony regardless if he was here or not.
Tldr; Brown supporters (99 percent of which were not at the scene) already established that Wilson was guilty before the trial went underway. Talk about using your ability to reason and being open for interpretation huh. Sounds reasonable to me. Thank god these people arent in the legal system.
Last edited:
That's the thing: racial tension isn't likely to go away soon, especially in the south.
|
|
|
|
|