ShadowcatX wrote: yellowdingo wrote: national guard
executive order 14-09 can be downloaded here.
So much for constitutional accountability.
Deploying the police force with military grade equipment is one thing, but rolling out the actual military against our own people is a whole 'nother thing indeed. Bleh. From bad to worse. Maybe. Maybe not.
It can be bad. Thinking back to the 60s and Kent State and other uses of the Guard against peace protesters. OTOH, I also think back to seeing the Guard used to defend desegregation. Honestly at this point, them just not being cops might be enough.
Its going to depend on whether or not these guardsmen can tell the difference between protestors acting in accordance with the constitution they swore to defend and the enemy.
thejeff wrote: ShadowcatX wrote: yellowdingo wrote: national guard
executive order 14-09 can be downloaded here.
So much for constitutional accountability.
Deploying the police force with military grade equipment is one thing, but rolling out the actual military against our own people is a whole 'nother thing indeed. Bleh. From bad to worse. Maybe. Maybe not.
It can be bad. Thinking back to the 60s and Kent State and other uses of the Guard against peace protesters. OTOH, I also think back to seeing the Guard used to defend desegregation. Honestly at this point, them just not being cops might be enough. * Gives jeff a cookie.
Most people forget that the Governor of Arkansas called out the Guard to block integration and it took Ike sending in the 101st Airborne Division (an elite regular US Army unit for those around the world) and Federalizing the whole Arkansas National Guard.
The danger of using the National Guard these days is that they really aren't weekend reserve soldiers any more. Most of them are relatively battle hardened veterans of urban asymetrical warfare. This can cut both ways.
Krensky wrote:
The danger of using the National Guard these days is that they really aren't weekend reserve soldiers any more. Most of them are relatively battle hardened veterans of urban asymetrical warfare. This can cut both ways.
"Police officers responded to a domestic dispute, accompanied by marines. They had just gone up to the door when two shotgun birdshot rounds were fired through the door, hitting the officers. One yelled `cover me!' to the marines, who then laid down a heavy base of fire. . . . The police officer had not meant `shoot' when he yelled `cover me' to the marines. [He] meant . . . point your weapons and be prepared to respond if necessary. However, the marines responded instantly in the precise way they had been trained, where `cover me' means provide me with cover using firepower. . . . over two hundred bullets [were] fired into that house."[1]
From an essay on the 1992 riots in LA.
On the other hand, I've seen comments and tweets from military folks along the lines of "why are they pointing sniper rifles into the crowd?", which suggests that they might have better training for this.
thejeff wrote: ShadowcatX wrote: yellowdingo wrote: national guard
executive order 14-09 can be downloaded here.
So much for constitutional accountability.
Deploying the police force with military grade equipment is one thing, but rolling out the actual military against our own people is a whole 'nother thing indeed. Bleh. From bad to worse. Maybe. Maybe not.
It can be bad. Thinking back to the 60s and Kent State and other uses of the Guard against peace protesters. OTOH, I also think back to seeing the Guard used to defend desegregation. Honestly at this point, them just not being cops might be enough. So you think it is a bad idea to give military equipment to police to handle this situation, but acceptable to send in the actual military?
At "best" this works perfectly, they handle the looting amd everyone is happy and all across America the idea of deploying our own military to deal with our own civilians becomes a little more palatable. Lose, lose IMO.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Andrew R wrote: thejeff wrote: ShinHakkaider wrote: "animal" rioters? Yeah I've seen this narrative from people like you before Andrew. Of course "animals" is part of the police approach here. He's not pulling it out of the blue.
Quote: A White Ferguson police offer was captured on video aggressively taunting the Black protestors who decry the shooting death of unarmed black teen Michael Brown.
“Bring it, all you f–king animals! Bring it!” the officer said during the tense volleying of threats and insults.
No racial implications there at all.
The police chief apparently has a Confederate flag displayed in his living room, but I'm sure that's just about pride in his southern heritage, again with no racial implications. Not everyone who loves the south is a racist but it is certainly possable and not a good sign. Need a bit more proof than that theat he is indeed a racist. of course all of the race hate being thrown at the cops is just fine i see. I really couldn't care two bits about what kind of garbage they use to decorate their offices.
I prefer the facts such as today's revelation that the police doctored the store video tape to give the appearance that Brown stole three cigars from a white owned store when the store owner has come out and said that Brown purchased them legitimately. There is simply no amount of spin that's going to justify this shooting and the way it's been handled by the local authorities. At the very minimum, both the cop responsible and the chief of police need to be handing in their badges... without pension.
Lazar, I need a source for this as soon as you can get it. That is a VERY serious statement the store owner is making.
Lazar, on the videos I've seen it looks like he's getting into an altercation with the shopkeeper about something. Do you have a link to the shopkeepers statements?
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
I haven't seen anything where the store owner denied the theft, only that he denied that he or his employees called 911.
Here it is on Daily Kos.
For those worried about the fact that Daily Kos is biased, it does link back to the original local news story.
**edit** And here's a statement from Freeman Bosley, the shopkeeper's attorney, stating that the shopkeepers did say to police that Brown stole the cigarillos.
Usagi Yojimbo wrote:
"Police officers responded to a domestic dispute, accompanied by marines. They had just gone up to the door when two shotgun birdshot rounds were fired through the door, hitting the officers. One yelled `cover me!' to the marines, who then laid down a heavy base of fire. . . . The police officer had not meant `shoot' when he yelled `cover me' to the marines. [He] meant . . . point your weapons and be prepared to respond if necessary. However, the marines responded instantly in the precise way they had been trained, where `cover me' means provide me with cover using firepower. . . . over two hundred bullets [were] fired into that house."[1]
From an essay on the 1992 riots in LA.
On the other hand, I've seen comments and tweets from military folks along the lines of "why are they pointing sniper rifles into the crowd?", which suggests that they might have better training for this.
Like I said, it can cut both ways. The 7th Infantry and 1st Marines were trained combat veterans, but not trained the same way the current Missouri Guard is since they were trained (essentially) for classical warfare vs the Warsaw pact in Europe and fought a classical engagement in the Middle East. They were also, if memory serves, line infantry, not military police.
The incident you described is, to me, less a lesson in the inherent danger of the the military in police operations and much more a lesson in the danger of mixing forces with disparate training and tactics. That essay is mostly discussing the dangers and risks of operations that are not proper wars and uses that quote from a separate source as a illustration of the challenges an officer faces commanding a non war deployment.
It's a military science essay, not a political one. That quote also deals with a Marine unit, not a National Guard one who were much more circumspect in their use of force. See [url=http://www.militarymuseum.org/HistoryKingMilOps.html]The 1992 Los Angeles Riots
Military Operations in Los Angeles, 1992[/url[ from the same source.
As I said, this can go either way. I'm guessing that the primary units involved will be either the 175th or 205th Military Police Battalions and the 229th Medical Battalion.
Military police units are trained especially for this sort of thing, so in theory they're the proper tool compared to line infantry or armor.
Like I said, it can go both ways, so we'll see.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote: Lazar, on the videos I've seen it looks like he's getting into an altercation with the shopkeeper about something. Do you have a link to the shopkeepers statements? What isn' shown is considerably more important that what was.
On this page... http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/08/18/ferguson-pd-busted/
You'll see two videos. On one you'll see Brown purchasing three cigars. The other relates to the fact that the price of the cigars meant that Brown decided he couldn't afford more and left with the ones he bought. There is no evidence of theft or even threat.
As to the store statements.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/18/1322560/-Ferguson-Store-Owner-Says -NO-ONE-From-His-Store-Called-Cops-To-Report-Cigar-Theft?
Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
LazarX wrote: BigNorseWolf wrote: Lazar, on the videos I've seen it looks like he's getting into an altercation with the shopkeeper about something. Do you have a link to the shopkeepers statements? What isn' shown is considerably more important that what was.
On this page... http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/08/18/ferguson-pd-busted/
You'll see two videos. On one you'll see Brown purchasing three cigars. The other relates to the fact that the price of the cigars meant that Brown decided he couldn't afford more and left with the ones he bought. There is no evidence of theft or even threat.
As to the store statements.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/08/18/1322560/-Ferguson-Store-Owner-Says -NO-ONE-From-His-Store-Called-Cops-To-Report-Cigar-Theft? LazarX, I just posted this in my earlier comment. In it, the store owner's attorney clearly states that the store owner has stated that Brown stole the cigarillos.
We can't be seen as spreading false information on this.
Krensky wrote:
Like I said, it can cut both ways...
The incident you described is, to me, less a lesson in the inherent danger of the the military in police operations and much more a lesson in the danger of mixing forces with disparate training and tactics...
I wasn't clear, I didn't intend to disagree with you. Wanted an excuse to share that quote.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Flash bangs tear gas, and 200 police pointing machine guns at people to arrest 14 people remaining.
Freaking NUTS.
They're going balistic (literally) because of thrown water bottles. I've had to put up with that without reacting, with no helmet, just to move snakes out a crowded area. An APC, full on body armor, bullet proof vests and they're wetting themselves over Avion.
Here is a link to the article describing how the police edited video in the cases I was involved with:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/12/nyregion/12video.html
That video editing, and the article that came exposed it were the reason my charges were dropped.
Also, the original charge against me was Disorderly Conduct for... Blocking traffic!
The cops aren't very original with this stuff.
“With these additional resources in place,” said Mr. Nixon, a Democrat in his second term, “the Missouri State Highway Patrol and local law enforcement will continue to respond appropriately to incidents of lawlessness and violence, and protect the civil rights of all peaceful citizens to make their voices heard.”
Someone needs to slap this guy in the back of the head if he thinks these idiots are acting "appropriately".
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/12/michael-brown-protests_n_5672163.h tml
I can't watch that video without thinking, "Steroids it, all you steroids steroids! Steroids it!".
EDIT: Anyone have video of this scene?:
https://twitter.com/EliKMBC/status/501591669679329280/photo/1
A crime reporter from StLouis Post-Dispatch is saying that so far the witnesses are supporting the police version of events in this shooting... and I did see one video online of a witness saying he saw the teen charge at the officer before he was gunned down. I wish the police would release ALL the information they have it might even help quiet the mobs if they hear what witnesses have to say...
assuming this reporter is correct?
we may not get all the facts till the trial...
Aranna wrote: A crime reporter from StLouis Post-Dispatch is saying that so far the witnesses are supporting the police version of events in this shooting... and I did see one video online of a witness saying he saw the teen charge at the officer before he was gunned down. I wish the police would release ALL the information they have it might even help quiet the mobs if they hear what witnesses have to say...
assuming this reporter is correct?
we may not get all the facts till the trial...
Which is interesting because all the witnesses who've come forward publicly have not supported the police version. Except apparently this one video you saw.
What trial? Why do you think there's going to be a trial? There's been no charges filed. No arrest made. No warrant. If all the witnesses support the police, there shouldn't be a trial.
Doesn't there have to be a trial in any shooting? justified or not?
And I presume the family of the boy is pressing charges... aren't they? I mean if the family isn't pressing charges and the police don't... then maybe they would have to let him go. But I can't imagine charges haven't been filed.
Aranna wrote: Doesn't there have to be a trial in any shooting? justified or not? Of course not. Not even in civilian self-defense cases, much less in police shootings in the line of duty.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Krensky wrote: thejeff wrote: ShadowcatX wrote: yellowdingo wrote: national guard
executive order 14-09 can be downloaded here.
So much for constitutional accountability.
Deploying the police force with military grade equipment is one thing, but rolling out the actual military against our own people is a whole 'nother thing indeed. Bleh. From bad to worse. Maybe. Maybe not.
It can be bad. Thinking back to the 60s and Kent State and other uses of the Guard against peace protesters. OTOH, I also think back to seeing the Guard used to defend desegregation. Honestly at this point, them just not being cops might be enough. * Gives jeff a cookie.
Most people forget that the Governor of Arkansas called out the Guard to block integration and it took Ike sending in the 101st Airborne Division (an elite regular US Army unit for those around the world) and Federalizing the whole Arkansas National Guard.
The danger of using the National Guard these days is that they really aren't weekend reserve soldiers any more. Most of them are relatively battle hardened veterans of urban asymetrical warfare. This can cut both ways. Back in 1955, veteran American Trotskyist Richard S. Fraser made the point that Eisenhower only intervened and sent in federal troops after the local black community organized itself and started fighting back.
I can't see any parallels with today at all.
[Stomps on cookies]
The DA has said that a grand jury hearing as to see if there is enough evidence to go to trial might start as soon as tomorrow.
I do expect there to be a trial at this point, unless some blatant evidence clearing the officer comes to light. But that's as much because it's politically necessary as anything else.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Aranna wrote: Doesn't there have to be a trial in any shooting? justified or not?
Of course not. There is an (HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA)investigation done by the cops every time shots are fired, but it is usually if not always cops investigating themselves and quickly clearing themselves of any wrongdoing.
Freehold DM wrote: Aranna wrote: Doesn't there have to be a trial in any shooting? justified or not?
Of course not. There is an (HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA)investigation done by the cops every time shots are fired, but it is usually if not always cops investigating themselves and quickly clearing themselves of any wrongdoing. In fairness, this varies from state to state and police department to department. Some do go to more lengths to make those investigations impartial. Not surprisingly those departments tend to have less trouble with bad shootings.
BigNorseWolf wrote: Flash bangs tear gas, and 200 police pointing machine guns at people to arrest 14 people remaining.
Freaking NUTS.
They're going balistic (literally) because of thrown water bottles. I've had to put up with that without reacting, with no helmet, just to move snakes out a crowded area. An APC, full on body armor, bullet proof vests and they're wetting themselves over Avion.
I suspect the Molotov cocktails and gunfire had more to do with the stun grenades and tear gas than the water bottles, but nice attempt at making the cops seem worse than they are. Not that they really need your help to look bad.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
ShadowcatX wrote: BigNorseWolf wrote: Flash bangs tear gas, and 200 police pointing machine guns at people to arrest 14 people remaining.
Freaking NUTS.
They're going balistic (literally) because of thrown water bottles. I've had to put up with that without reacting, with no helmet, just to move snakes out a crowded area. An APC, full on body armor, bullet proof vests and they're wetting themselves over Avion.
I suspect the Molotov cocktails and gunfire had more to do with the stun grenades and tear gas than the water bottles, but nice attempt at making the cops seem worse than they are. And just how nice do you think things are? You must be wearing some serious blinders not to recognise this as merely the eruption of a long standing problem in this town, and countless others like it.
Fact of the matter is there should be a distinction between police operations and military. The purpose of the military is wholesale killing when it's needed. That's why you equip them in faceless body armor, they're not supposed to identify with the people they are engaging.
Police on the other hand ARE supposed to be part of the community they are protecting. That's why police uniforms include bared faces, and handguns worn holstered. Not long barrel assault weapons pointed forward wearing stormtrooper gear. The problem is that Fergueson and many other towns like this where the makeup of the force is not representative of the community it serves is that it fosters the "Us Vs. Them" mentality that's clearly seen here. The cops see the public as the enemy, and the public sees the cops as faceless soldiers looking for a reason to put them down.
This is a problem that's decades in the making, made worse by polticians like Reagan who actively worked to undo a lot of social progress. There's no quick walk out of the woods for this one. But that doesn't mean we give up on taking those first steps.
ShadowcatX wrote:
I suspect the Molotov cocktails and gunfire had more to do with the stun grenades and tear gas than the water bottles, but nice attempt at making the cops seem worse than they are. Not that they really need your help to look bad.
So where are all the burned and torched cops from these cocktails? I was watching this on cnn, didn't see a single fire go up on the police side before they let loose with the heavy artillery.
Well, cops lie. So I'm not taking anything at face value.
Quote: #Ferguson Capt Johnson just said to @JakeTapper 'we didnt use tear gas, just smokebombs'.Tapper: 'Yes you did,we got gassed'.Capt: ok we did Of course, he could be lying about that exchange too.
BigNorseWolf wrote: ShadowcatX wrote:
I suspect the Molotov cocktails and gunfire had more to do with the stun grenades and tear gas than the water bottles, but nice attempt at making the cops seem worse than they are. Not that they really need your help to look bad.
So where are all the burned and torched cops from these cocktails? I was watching this on cnn, didn't see a single fire go up on the police side before they let loose with the heavy artillery. CNN wrote: More violence. More tear gas. No answers.
Stun grenades and tear gas canisters arced through the night sky and into crowds of protesters overnight in Ferguson, Missouri, after police said they had been targeted with rocks, Molotov cocktails and gunfire amid continuing demonstrations over the death of Michael Brown.
You can believe the police or not believe the police, but the fact is they're there and have a better idea of what is happening than you do. 3 or so minutes of footage from a single angle by someone who may or may not have an agenda doesn't give a comprehensive vision of rather or not the police were attacked.
LazarX wrote: And just how nice do you think things are? You must be wearing some serious blinders not to recognise this as merely the eruption of a long standing problem in this town, and countless others like it. Um. . . What? I acknowledge that the situation is bad in previous posts, and in the edit to the post you quoted (which I guess I did after you quoted me). But let us at least be reasonable and factual about what is going on, it isn't protestors getting attacked because someone threw a plastic water bottle like BNW said, there has been gunfire and more coming at the police.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
ShadowcatX wrote: BigNorseWolf wrote: ShadowcatX wrote:
I suspect the Molotov cocktails and gunfire had more to do with the stun grenades and tear gas than the water bottles, but nice attempt at making the cops seem worse than they are. Not that they really need your help to look bad.
So where are all the burned and torched cops from these cocktails? I was watching this on cnn, didn't see a single fire go up on the police side before they let loose with the heavy artillery. CNN wrote: More violence. More tear gas. No answers.
Stun grenades and tear gas canisters arced through the night sky and into crowds of protesters overnight in Ferguson, Missouri, after police said they had been targeted with rocks, Molotov cocktails and gunfire amid continuing demonstrations over the death of Michael Brown.
You can believe the police or not believe the police, but the fact is they're there and have a better idea of what is happening than you do. 3 or so minutes of footage from a single angle by someone who may or may not have an agenda doesn't give a comprehensive vision of rather or not the police were attacked. Maybe if the police quit arresting journalists, we would have a clearer picture.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
I'd like to see the hard evidence of gunfire at police along with the hard evidence of two dozen police cars being burned/destroyed along with the hard evidence of molotov cocktails. No statements to press or pictures, I'm talking a live feed. The Ferguson pd has lost all credibility with me, they are relying too heavily on their word as police officers and not providing anything else. I trust them about as much as I trust a politician.
ShadowcatX wrote:
You can believe the police or not believe the police, but the fact is they're there and have a better idea of what is happening than you do.
And more reason to freak out about it and then lie about it later. One of the people that spooked them was armed security for the news crews.
I think the best was the Police Chief? Trying to tell CNN that it was smoke grenades not tear gas. CNN ermmed.. no. really. Tear gas. Still got the snot pouring out of my nose.
Quote: 3 or so minutes of footage from a single angle by someone who may or may not have an agenda Ok, get YOUR facts strait. It was watching the news for a good hour (I have no life) and you're now accusing a camera of having an anti police agenda.
Quote: doesn't give a comprehensive vision of rather or not the police were attacked. Right, so where is the other evidence of that attack? Video of the molotov cocktails going off? Pictures of burned cops? Giant balls of fire are not exactly subtle and they make GREAT footage. Its possible a different location had that happen and the police didn't care to differentiate between where they were and a few blocks over.
Even if people ARE doing that, its entirely possible to arrest them for it without arresting everyone exercising their right to assemble. They started arresting people when they had a couple hundred cops and 14 protestors.
Accusing the media of an agenda other than getting viewers is just nuts. There's no reason for it.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Back in 1955, veteran American Trotskyist Richard S. Fraser made the point that Eisenhower only intervened and sent in federal troops after the local black community organized itself and started fighting back.
I can't see any parallels with today at all.
[Stomps on cookies] That's adorable. It also has no relation to reality.
Eisenhower was yelling at Faubus in the beginning of September and was trying to not have to push things to the point where the Federal Government had to goblin slap the State government because it opened up a whole different can of worms, including him being accused of violating the terms of the United States' surrender to the Southern insurrectionists in 1878 (ie, the Posse Comitatus Act). He was also trying to let Faubus save face by backing down.
Also, it would be impossible for anyone to say anything about Ike and the integration of the Little Rock school in 1955. Well, other than The Doctor. Brown v Board was in 1954. The Little Rock School board complied and set out a plan in 1955 to integrate by 1957, which is when the Little Rock crisis happened when whites had violent protests which Governor Faubus used as excuse to send in the AK National Guard to 'restore order' by defying the law.
But of course Fraser would have been opposed to it or giving Eisenhower credit since it violated his ideological views that calling for the federal government to enforce the law would only encourage people to believe that the government could do good.
Oh, look, another member of the far left marching in lockstep with the far right.
Thank you for playing. You loose. No pickle.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Comrade Anklebiter wrote: I've never seen animals burn businesses or shoot cops, but I grant you, New Hampshire doesn't have as much wildlife as it used to. Moose are not to be trusted.......
|
5 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Oh this is awesome.
Quote: Egypt on Tuesday urged U.S. authorities to exercise restraint in dealing with racially charged demonstrations in Ferguson, Missouri - echoing language Washington used to caution Egypt as it cracked down on Islamist protesters last year.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote: Oh this is awesome.
Quote: Egypt on Tuesday urged U.S. authorities to exercise restraint in dealing with racially charged demonstrations in Ferguson, Missouri - echoing language Washington used to caution Egypt as it cracked down on Islamist protesters last year.
For surreal though, that's still not going to top the sight of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry trying to get Moscow to turn Ed Snowden to the U.S. with a promise not to torture.
thejeff wrote: Oh this is awesome.
Quote: Egypt on Tuesday urged U.S. authorities to exercise restraint in dealing with racially charged demonstrations in Ferguson, Missouri - echoing language Washington used to caution Egypt as it cracked down on Islamist protesters last year.
We are through the looking glass here, people.
Also I find myself wondering how anyone who wants to look good in this circumstance could think arrest of the media would help their cause in any way. Also also; not to contradict you BNW, but we can't forget the Murdoch Media Monolith - they're making money hand over fist by screaming about a supposed bias that is in direct opposition to the one they pander to and the demographic to which they pander.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
thejeff wrote: Oh this is awesome.
Quote: Egypt on Tuesday urged U.S. authorities to exercise restraint in dealing with racially charged demonstrations in Ferguson, Missouri - echoing language Washington used to caution Egypt as it cracked down on Islamist protesters last year.
That's hilarious. Also, sad.
When Egypt is like "bro, we're worried you might have some humans right violations. . . "
And people say that el-Sisi does't have a sense of humor.
TheAntiElite wrote: thejeff wrote: Oh this is awesome.
Quote: Egypt on Tuesday urged U.S. authorities to exercise restraint in dealing with racially charged demonstrations in Ferguson, Missouri - echoing language Washington used to caution Egypt as it cracked down on Islamist protesters last year.
We are through the looking glass here, people.
Also I find myself wondering how anyone who wants to look good in this circumstance could think arrest of the media would help their cause in any way. The simple answer to that is when the truth of what is happening is worse than what people imagine is happening based on the fact that they're preventing us from discovering what is happening.
More likely, however, thinking wasn't part of their job description.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
TheAntiElite wrote: Also also; not to contradict you BNW, but we can't forget the Murdoch Media Monolith - they're making money hand over fist by screaming about a supposed bias that is in direct opposition to the one they pander to and the demographic to which they pander. Thats not media.
I was confused by news that cops killed man in Ferguson + journalist beheaded...second half didnt happen in Ferguson.
Nope. So far they're only tear gassing and arresting the journalists in Ferguson.
Not sure what they're thinking there.
Isn't there some old-fashioned rule about never picking fights with someone who buys ink by the barrel?
They can't control the images that get out. Why go out of their way to piss off the press?
|
