Al Sharpton to meet with Obama over Ferguson

[Jim in CT]

The difference between what actually happened, and how it's being spun by the media, is astounding. In the Staten Island case, the original complaint was made by a black store owner, who didn't like that his guy was illegally taking business away from him. The cops are obligated to the store owner to address the situation. It was a black female officer at the scene who ordered the arrest. And it was the dead guy who is 100% responsible for causing the situation to escalate into a physical confrontation, which was not a good idea due to his health issues. There was no choke hold applied that I know of (proven by the fact that the guy was speaking while in the headlock, which you cannot do while in a choke hold).

There are bad cops out there who need to be dealt with. But just because there is a dead blac person and a white cop, THAT ALONE isn't evidence of anything. The dishonesty is unbelievable, as is the refusal of the left to even begin to have th econversation that's necessary to make improvements to blacks in poverty.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

But just because there is a dead blac person and a white cop, THAT ALONE isn't evidence of anything.

Well . . . yeah, its the evidence of something . . . even guilt.

Let's expand the picture and summarize:

A black president, and then a black senator, helped to significantly achieve a high enough tax/price on the cost of cigarettes in NY so that it was very profitable to make them a black market commodity. Which made it, at least economically, a priority to stop the illegal sales. So then, a black officer ordered the crackdown, and a black criminal was selling the illegal stuff, so black business owners called for his arrest, a black officer ordered the arrest, and a black officer supervised the arrest itself. So far, so good.

But an anomaly occurred. Instead of finishing the chain of events in a consistent way, a white officer did the final takedown. He, apparently, did it according to the book. But, if the process had been consistent from top to bottom, a black officer would have done the take-down. Presumably, all would have been good. There would have been no need for "protests," or a grand jury decision to indict, or the federal DOJ to be involved.

but there was an anomaly. A white officer intruded on black events. The white officer broke the orderly process. Being as there is a racially based constituency in our country which is on the lookout for such an anomaly, this became the immediate, a priori, cause for investigations and the assumption of guilt. And mainly, a priori, guilt by policing while white. So, you see, there was evidence of something, even of guilt--guilty of being white.