National Protest and 'disband the cops' discussion (please review page 1)

[Blizzard]

"This is not the narrative we were fed". Think about that statement for a second. "This is not the narrative we were fed". Let me repeat that ~~~~> ?

""""Police scanner audio in Kenosha indicates a woman called 911 to report Jacob Blake was at her home & wasn’t supposed to be, & had stolen her keys. Responding police were made aware of Blake’s arrest warrant for domestic abuse & a felony sex crime. #KenoshaRiots #BlackLivesMatter""""

False Narratives? I suppose that depends on which false narrative you choose to believe and not do due diligence.

Which MSM is lying? Seriously?

Police Scanner Audio is ALWAYS FOIA ( Freedom of Information Act) and WILL be made public soon.

Correct What? We WILL find out who's lying. It just takes time and Patience.

Blake's arrest warrant for domestic abuse & a felony sex crime are by now common knowledge and do come in to play when he was told to stop and obey commands from the Law Enforcement Officers. He chose not to Comply. He was Tased to no effect. Was he reaching for the knife in the front seat? We don't know. Time and patience for the investigation to come to completion is all we can do at this point.

This could be an eyeopening moment for you B, but I'm sure I'll get smoked for posting this. The media Lies to you every single day. You have to change the channel and research. Don't just watch one channel or use one media source for your news. Maybe you don't anyway, but MSM are treacherous leeches and they lurk everywhere.

I hear you and agree. Although it may not have come across this way, my question was really kind of rhetorical.

The fact is we live in a society that is irrational and quickly jumps to conclusions. Sometimes, facts may not matter either, especially when actions fit a viewpoint we want them to support. We've seen this repeatedly over the past several months. Technology provides us with a lot of data but not necessarily the skills or time to process it. As a result, we have all kinds of knee jerk reactions to events (as much as I try to step back, I include myself in this at times). Unfortunately, we often don't take the time to correct that rush to judgment or it's too late to correct it.

As a general statement, the media has really fallen into this trap and it's troubling to me.

 

[Marauder06]

I hear you and agree. Although it may not have come across this way, my question was really kind of rhetorical.

The fact is we live in a society that is irrational and quickly jumps to conclusions. Sometimes, facts may not matter either, especially when actions fit a viewpoint we want them to support. We've seen this repeatedly over the past several months. Technology provides us with a lot of data but not necessarily the skills or time to process it. As a result, we have all kinds of knee jerk reactions to events (as much as I try to step back, I include myself in this at times). Unfortunately, we often don't take the time to correct that rush to judgment or it's too late to correct it.

As a general statement, the media has really fallen into this trap and it's troubling to me.

The only part I disagree with is the last bit (bolded). The media hasn't "fallen into this trap," the media "is" the trap. What's happening in America right now is what they want to see. They benefit from it, they approve of it, and they want it to continue. Objectivity went out the window a looooong time ago and now it's all about "winning." Winning, and hating.

The most recent example that springs to mind is CNN's "Fiery but mostly peaceful protests" chyron that they ran when their man on the ground was literally standing in front of a burning storefront.

 

[ThunderHorse]

"Had a knife, but otherwise unarmed".

This is a quote attributed to Mark Twain and reprised here by Denzel Washington:

"If you don't read the newspapers, you're uninformed; if you read the newspapers, you're misinformed."

 

[Blizzard]

1. It will almost always take more time for official police/dispatch 'narratives' to be disseminated to the media due to both reporting and official announcement regulations held by the LE department in question. Agreed. Not a question.
2. The media reporting and citing the claims of eyewitnesses does not constitute 'lying'.
If you're a journalist and not verifying facts before you report them, you need to state this and update your story once you do verify them. Not being forthright with info is disingenuous.
3. No seems to have made any claims as to what got Blake there in the first place. Multiple eyewitnesses reported what they saw occurring prior to the arrival of police. You've added your own unsupported premise (why he showed up) to the 'narrative'and then taken exception to it based on the assumption you inserted.
Untrue. From the first article link on the topic here:
George Floyd/National Protests
"More than 60 people were gathered following the shooting at the scene with several saying that the Black man was trying to break up a verbal altercation between two women shortly after 5 p.m."
The content of this quote is consistent with virtually every report from every media outlet I've seen up to this point.
4. What Blake did to prompt his girlfriend's 911 call and what people said they saw him doing prior to police arrival are neither necessarily the same thing nor mutually exclusive, absent more information showing otherwise. OK, not sure what point your trying to convey here.

I don't have the time to post lengthy responses to your post but added some brief responses in bold.

 

[Blizzard]

The only part I disagree with is the last bit (bolded). The media hasn't "fallen into this trap," the media "is" the trap. What's happening in America right now is what they want to see. They benefit from it, they approve of it, and they want it to continue. Objectivity went out the window a looooong time ago and now it's all about "winning." Winning, and hating.

The most recent example that springs to mind is CNN's "Fiery but mostly peaceful protests" chyron that they ran when their man on the ground was literally standing in front of a burning storefront.

View attachment 35491

Fair callout and I agree.

 

[Devildoc]

The media and law enforcement community (specifically DAs) seem to feed one another. DAs rush to seemingly overcharge before investigations are barely initiated, and the media are complicit in assigning guilt based on this fervor.

 

[Locksteady]

I don't have the time to post lengthy responses to your post but added some brief responses in bold.

No worries. I appreciate the response.

1. It will almost always take more time for official police/dispatch 'narratives' to be disseminated to the media due to both reporting and official announcement regulations held by the LE department in question. Agreed. Not a question.
2. The media reporting and citing the claims of eyewitnesses does not constitute 'lying'.
If you're a journalist and not verifying facts before you report them, you need to state this and update your story once you do verify them. Not being forthright with info is lying. They didn't ever claim it was a fact. The reported what other people said and cited them. It is no one but the reader's fault for confusing a claim that the media outlet makes a point of citing to the source with media itself claiming it as a fact.
3. No seems to have made any claims as to what got Blake there in the first place. Multiple eyewitnesses reported what they saw occurring prior to the arrival of police. You've added your own unsupported premise (why he showed up) to the 'narrative'and then taken exception to it based on the assumption you inserted.
Untrue. From the first article link on the topic here:
George Floyd/National Protests
"More than 60 people were gathered following the shooting at the scene with several saying that the Black man was trying to break up a verbal altercation between two women shortly after 5 p.m. Nothing about this is negating my point. You claimed that the media was 'lying' about what brought him to the scene when the girlfriend's dispatch call was publicized. It doesn't demonstrate that he wasn't breaking up an altercation before the police arrived.
4. What Blake did to prompt his girlfriend's 911 call and what people said they saw him doing prior to police arrival are neither necessarily the same thing nor mutually exclusive, absent more information showing otherwise. OK, not sure what point your trying to convey here. The point is the fact she called doesn't establish that he wasn't breaking up an altercation when the cops came, particularly when it wasn't asserted that that is what brought him to his girlfriend's spot in the first place.

 

[Hungry_Dog]

Not too weird. Kenosha sits right on the border of IL. The kid's town of Antioch just happens to be on the IL side of the border a few miles away. To me the fleeing charge is silly; it's a short and reasonable drive. He simply went home.

I'm sure they'll try to make an example out of him. I don't know how the law reads in WI but a murder one charge seems overreacting based on what little I've seen so far.

Thanks for the explanation.

 

[Rabid Badger]

@Marauder06 you stole my thunder and this entire page is diarrhea cover response. ~~~~>

 

[Marauder06]

@Marauder06 you stole my thunder and this entire page is diarrhea cover response. ~~~~>

It's a gift, brother.

 

[R.Caerbannog]

The media and law enforcement community (specifically DAs) seem to feed one another. DAs rush to seemingly overcharge before investigations are barely initiated, and the media are complicit in assigning guilt based on this fervor.

Yup! It's alarming when the bureaucrats tasked with upholding our laws are subversive ideologues or in the pockets of our enemies. Might also explain why those affiliated with the far left are given so much leeway.

Spoiler: Picture

Minnesota's Attorney General and ANTIFA leader Luis Enrique Marquez.

 

[Jaknight]

It’s scary how once again the Media has presented a false narrative with regarding the Kyle Rittenhouse shooting. Already he is being presented as some white supremacist who was running around shooting people at pleasure smh. This also from CNN more charges brought up Kenosha shooting suspect faces more homicide charges

 

[Cookie_]

It’s scary how once again the Media has presented a false narrative with regarding the Kyle Rittenhouse shooting. Already he is being presented as some white supremacist who was running around shooting people at pleasure smh. This also from CNN more charges brought up Kenosha shooting suspect faces more homicide charges

It's about as accurate a narrative as the "the guys he shot were violent pedophile felons" narrative going around.

I don't give a damn about anything someone did prior to this incident, unless it was literally "I cant wait to shoot those subhuman commies" or "I can wait to light a fascist fuck on fire".

All that matters is what happened to lead to the shooting, and the shooting itself.

 

[Jaknight]

It's about as accurate a narrative as the "the guys he shot were violent pedophile felons" narrative going around.

I don't give a damn about anything someone did prior to this incident, unless it was literally "I cant wait to shoot those subhuman commies" or "I can wait to light a fascist fuck on fire".

All that matters is what happened to lead to the shooting, and the shooting itself.

Based on what I saw on the video it looks line it was self defense but I’m no lawyer. I also don’t know what led to him being chased by the first Rioter. However it seems only the ones who appear in the videos were shot or killed so the narrative of he already shot someone before the video footage doesn’t seem to hold water

 

[BlackSmokeRisinG]

3. No seems to have made any claims as to what got Blake there in the first place. Multiple eyewitnesses reported what they saw occurring prior to the arrival of police. You've added your own unsupported premise (why he showed up) to the 'narrative'and then taken exception to it based on the assumption you inserted.
4. What Blake did to prompt his girlfriend's 911 call and what people said they saw him doing prior to police arrival are neither necessarily the same thing nor mutually exclusive, absent more information showing otherwise.

Not true. That's the exact same narrative I was told a few days ago, before I even knew about the incident. "Guy was breaking up a fight between two women and cops ended up shooting him." I was also told that the cops were there to break up that female fight Based on what? Based on lies.

There you go again, telling people that they're adding their own spin on a story. Blizzard is not the only one who heard that BS if people were telling that to me the day after the incident.

Obviously some news outlets don't mind reporting whatever before the facts are in. Sounds just like "hands up don't shoot".

 

[Locksteady]

Not true. That's the exact same narrative I was told a few days ago, before I even knew about the incident. "Guy was breaking up a fight between two women and cops ended up shooting him."

Please carefully reread the post, as it seems you're missing the central difference in the description you just gave (which matches the eyewitness claims that the media mentioned and cited) and what Blizzard stated the media 'lied' about.

There you go again, telling people that they're adding their own spin on a story.

If you're still bothered about the previous discussion, I'd say this is neither the time nor place to bring it back up yet again. It would probably be more appropriate for you to message me directly if that is still fueling any residual animus in our board interactions, rather than risk derailing the thread again.

Ball is in your court for that, but as before I will again willfully refrain from resurrecting that discussion with you here and I encourage you to please join me in that.

Blizzard is not the only one who heard that BS if people were telling that to me the day after the incident.

There is a small but important difference between the story you're defending having heard and what Blizzard used as his premise for accusing the media of lying.

Blizzard's claim that the media lied was set on his own projected premise that 'breaking up an argument between two women' was why 'he showed up' in the first place, when no one ever claimed to know why he was in the area in the first place. Breaking up a fight was just what people claim to have witnessed before the cops showed up, which says nothing about why he was originally there.

So, what Blizzard is claiming about the media lying is flawed on two front:

1. He took what eyewitnesses reported seeing and then, yes, added his own unsupported claim that that was why Blake 'showed up' in the first place - which is the only thing that would be at odds with the police report that indicated a different reason for why Blake was at his girlfriends prior to whatever the neighbors reported seeing.

2. Even if an eyewitness had in fact claimed that breaking up an argument between two women was why Blake was even over at his girlfriend's in the first place, that would make the eyewitness the liar, not the media that reported (and cited back to them) what eyewitnesses claimed to have seen and known about why he showed up.

The only grievance left to make at this point is about the fact that the media often tends to report the first available hearsay. I agree this can be a problem depending on what people -do- with that information, but the outlet cannot be faulted if they make a point of distinguishing that what they are reporting is hearsay from people claiming to be witnesses.

They met that measure.

 

[BlackSmokeRisinG]

I will just say that especially with the media, as with everyone else, before you "report" anything (ie. state it as truth), you should get more than one side of the story.

 

[Devildoc]

 

[Devildoc]

It's about as accurate a narrative as the "the guys he shot were violent pedophile felons" narrative going around.

I don't give a damn about anything someone did prior to this incident, unless it was literally "I cant wait to shoot those subhuman commies" or "I can wait to light a fascist fuck on fire".

All that matters is what happened to lead to the shooting, and the shooting itself.

They did in fact have a history of violence and offenses against minors. That is not a false narrative; what is false is using it as justification because, as he could not have known that, it is not germane to the argument. That said, it ended up a public service killing. I hope of all the things he loses sleep over, that is not one of them. He's in enough hot water regardless of the fact that the dearly departed were booger-eaters.

The italicized and bolded is indeed 'the bottom line.'

 

[757]