re: Sharpton, Obama and Holder have blood on their hands

If someone is born and raised in an environment of violence, and they subsequently become violent, who is to blame?

God created them so I'm going with god too.

quote:

---

Again, saying you support protestors disagreements with police tactics =\= support for killing cops. I don't remember seeing one organized protest that was rallied around killing cops. There were rogue social media people calling for it, but not like you are claiming.

---

There was a protest march with the "what do we want = dead cops" chant. They marched down the streets of NYC with NYC police protection. And they were protesting a Grand Jury decision. Grand Juries are the backbone of our entire criminal justice system and has been honored for over 200 years. In that decision there was PLENTY of reasons for reaching the verdict that they reached. The problem was that so many of the race hustler industry wanted a show trial where some civil rights lawyer could get come cred.

Now = I will agree that there is a legitimate issue to be discussed if someone disagrees with a grand jury decision in the Eric Garner case. I think they reached the correct decision, but many reasonable people disagree with me. I just think that protests in the streets are the wrong way to try to fix this kind of thing - unless there is an ongoing, evident, and overbearing pattern of such decisions.

I am not saying that all grand jury verdicts are absolutely correct - but they are the best system yet devised my mankind to ensure against injustice in the court system.

The Michael Brown case is completely absurd. There is NOTHING about that grand jury verdict that is in the slightest way incorrect. In fact it should not have even been submitted to a grand jury. There was no case there to prosecute. The DA succumbed to overbearing pressure from the Governor, Atty Gen of the USA, and the President of the USA by even sending it to the grand jury.

ALL the crap that ensued after the MB verdict was totally misguided. It was PURPOSEFULLY misrepresented and lies were told and retold to rile up the ignorant and the activists who are pining for something to protest against.

If not for the MB case perhaps the ignorant and the activists would not have been so eager to take up the EG case.

At any time, the POTUS could have done a great service to America by proclaiming the pre-eminence of the grand jury system, by declaring that all the hoopla being ginned up by the race-baiters was based on falsehoods and by publicly shaming those who were actively inciting riots.

There was nothing there to protest, period.

But none of the wise things happened - instead, BHO and EH poured flame on the fires by sympathizing with the race-baiters, even inviting the number one POS Al Sharpton to the WH.

Then in the EG case, mayor DeBlasio completely gutted the morale of the NYPD with his scorn towards them and he love-fest with the protesters.

You can legitimately protest police actions when you have a proper example of such. I will not support a bad cop. But I will not persecute a good cop just because someone thinks that bad cops exist and by gawd they want to riot.

I am in no way trying to absolve the POS thug who shot these policemen. I am however blaming the mayor for inciting him to do it.

quote:

---

unless there is an ongoing, evident, and overbearing pattern of such decisions.

---

There is.

(no message)

one can rationalize and try to justify till the cows come home, but when anarchy breaks out in a free society, the anarchists should not be defended in the name of freedom, rather freedom should be defended and anarchy stopped

but leave it to liberals to try and convolute and contort logic in every way possible to attempt to justify in the name of their political suasions

It is the beginning of anarchy when respect for law enforcement diminishes just like it did in the 60's and 70's. We are seeing a recurrence of that era in some respects right now.

quote:

---

one can rationalize and try to justify till the cows come home, but when anarchy breaks out in a free society, the anarchists should not be defended in the name of freedom, rather freedom should be defended and anarchy stopped but leave it to liberals to try and convolute and contort logic in every way possible to attempt to justify in the name of their political suasions

---

So the opposite of anarchy is freedom?

quote:

---

but anarchy infringes on freedom, don't you think?

---

It infringes on life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But I'm not sure the cops GAF about those. Or our freedom. Real talk.

The race baiters, Sharpton De Blasio and others bear some responsibility for this having fanned the hate flames to further a political agenda.

Had someone shot some protesters claiming support for the police the same people would have been all over the media screaming bloody murder and making the usual accusations.

And to those saying whites are far ahead on the scoreboard, like it is some kind of game, that price got paid big time in blood back in the 1860's. Paid in full.