what is the real point of looting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're opportunists is all. No real message to authorities is sent.

This.

Believe that at your peril.

They had a AA pundit on the radio this morning and he was saying that a lot of the old heads in the 1960's have always complained that this generation showed extreme apathy on Civil Rights issues. He said that if any good has come from Mike Brown's death it is that this generation of young educated AA's and young Liberals of other races is starting to become energized on these issues. These are the leaders of the protests in Ferguson and the ones in NY. So keep focusing on Sharpton and Jesse - who are only relevant in their age demographic. But those are not the AA leaders that will be front and center in the next few years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's just a cultural thing. They think they're sticking it to the man, when instead it's just a poor shopkeeper.

Cultural? Which culture?

Thugs, uneducated people without daddy's. Bums who had fathers that beat their wives. That type of culture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ still flawed system.

You are right. I was pointing out that for the person trying to liken this to the OJ case - OJ was charged, went to trial and was vigorously prosecuted.

Based on the DA's "speech" last night, can anyone truly say that he was a vigorous advocate for an indictment?[/quote]

I don't know the DA but I know he followed the law. It's not up to me to judge whether he is/isn't a vigorous advocate for an indictment.

Interesting, because there are legal experts and bar associates issuing statements today that his role in the GJ proceeding was puzzling at best and possibly unethical at worst.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have a look at the picture in 12:37. Really look at it. Peaceful protestors. Men, a woman, black, white, and possibly Asian? Point being that it is a mixed group, trying to do something positive.

Let's see some focus on that.

Great picture! This is what you DO NOT see presented on CNN, FOX, MSNBC, etc.

One picture is worth a thousand words. People like 12:40 should be summarily dismissed and ignored. They have nothing positive to offer and are no better than the looters/rioters.

And this is why I have no respect for our media (np, btw). They show one side of a conflict and live in inflame. They are partially responsible for abhorrent behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's just a cultural thing. They think they're sticking it to the man, when instead it's just a poor shopkeeper.

Cultural? Which culture?

Thugs, uneducated people without daddy's. Bums who had fathers that beat their wives. That type of culture.

Really? Was that your take on the Pumkin riots in New Hampshire? How about the riots in SF when the Giants won the World Series?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have a look at the picture in 12:37. Really look at it. Peaceful protestors. Men, a woman, black, white, and possibly Asian? Point being that it is a mixed group, trying to do something positive.

Let's see some focus on that.

Great picture! This is what you DO NOT see presented on CNN, FOX, MSNBC, etc.

One picture is worth a thousand words. People like 12:40 should be summarily dismissed and ignored. They have nothing positive to offer and are no better than the looters/rioters.

And this is why I have no respect for our media (np, btw). They show one side of a conflict and live in inflame. They are partially responsible for abhorrent behavior.

+1. Journalism today is all about reads and clicks. The key is to be the first out with something and do the fact checking, if any, later. They sell conflict and controversy. They have "editorialized" journalism. That is why I primarily rely on grassroots media

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're opportunists is all. No real message to authorities is sent.

This.

Believe that at your peril.

They had a AA pundit on the radio this morning and he was saying that a lot of the old heads in the 1960's have always complained that this generation showed extreme apathy on Civil Rights issues. He said that if any good has come from Mike Brown's death it is that this generation of young educated AA's and young Liberals of other races is starting to become energized on these issues. These are the leaders of the protests in Ferguson and the ones in NY. So keep focusing on Sharpton and Jesse - who are only relevant in their age demographic. But those are not the AA leaders that will be front and center in the next few years.

Hopefully, the AA leaders that will be front and center in the next few years will not condone this looting behavior. To be honest, this behavior simply reinforces stereotypes and does nothing at all to advance the discussion. It is shameful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're opportunists is all. No real message to authorities is sent.

This.

Believe that at your peril.

They had a AA pundit on the radio this morning and he was saying that a lot of the old heads in the 1960's have always complained that this generation showed extreme apathy on Civil Rights issues. He said that if any good has come from Mike Brown's death it is that this generation of young educated AA's and young Liberals of other races is starting to become energized on these issues. These are the leaders of the protests in Ferguson and the ones in NY. So keep focusing on Sharpton and Jesse - who are only relevant in their age demographic. But those are not the AA leaders that will be front and center in the next few years.

I hope so!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ still flawed system.

You are right. I was pointing out that for the person trying to liken this to the OJ case - OJ was charged, went to trial and was vigorously prosecuted.

Based on the DA's "speech" last night, can anyone truly say that he was a vigorous advocate for an indictment?[/quote]

I don't know the DA but I know he followed the law. It's not up to me to judge whether he is/isn't a vigorous advocate for an indictment.

Interesting, because there are legal experts and bar associates issuing statements today that his role in the GJ proceeding was puzzling at best and possibly unethical at worst.

experts/talking heads are dime a dozen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have a look at the picture in 12:37. Really look at it. Peaceful protestors. Men, a woman, black, white, and possibly Asian? Point being that it is a mixed group, trying to do something positive.

Let's see some focus on that.

Great picture! This is what you DO NOT see presented on CNN, FOX, MSNBC, etc.

One picture is worth a thousand words. People like 12:40 should be summarily dismissed and ignored. They have nothing positive to offer and are no better than the looters/rioters.

And this is why I have no respect for our media (np, btw). They show one side of a conflict and live in inflame. They are partially responsible for abhorrent behavior.

Lest we forget there are new victims now - the small business owners whose lives are ruined over these ignorant buffoons. Should they get no media coverage?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have a look at the picture in 12:37. Really look at it. Peaceful protestors. Men, a woman, black, white, and possibly Asian? Point being that it is a mixed group, trying to do something positive.

Let's see some focus on that.

Great picture! This is what you DO NOT see presented on CNN, FOX, MSNBC, etc.

One picture is worth a thousand words. People like 12:40 should be summarily dismissed and ignored. They have nothing positive to offer and are no better than the looters/rioters.

And this is why I have no respect for our media (np, btw). They show one side of a conflict and live in inflame. They are partially responsible for abhorrent behavior.

Lest we forget there are new victims now - the small business owners whose lives are ruined over these ignorant buffoons. Should they get no media coverage?

See my post 13:14. I think these are the people who should be getting ALL the media coverage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They're opportunists is all. No real message to authorities is sent.

This. It should also be a stark message of how close we live to anarchy.

You are surrounded by potential looters. In a widespread emergency (the ones we kept getting mail and email warnings about), don't count on the kindness of strangers as your plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're opportunists is all. No real message to authorities is sent.

This.

Believe that at your peril.

They had a AA pundit on the radio this morning and he was saying that a lot of the old heads in the 1960's have always complained that this generation showed extreme apathy on Civil Rights issues. He said that if any good has come from Mike Brown's death it is that this generation of young educated AA's and young Liberals of other races is starting to become energized on these issues. These are the leaders of the protests in Ferguson and the ones in NY. So keep focusing on Sharpton and Jesse - who are only relevant in their age demographic. But those are not the AA leaders that will be front and center in the next few years.

Hopefully, the AA leaders that will be front and center in the next few years will not condone this looting behavior. To be honest, this behavior simply reinforces stereotypes and does nothing at all to advance the discussion. It is shameful.

Well, if you were really plugged in, you would know that these same young leaders took to social media urging people to protect peacefully and not to loot.

See...here is the issue - the next generation of leaders will not give a hoot about "advancing the discussion." They will make demads and they want action. Do you know that the protestors have been in a month long discussion with FPD and others in Ferguson and surrounding jurisdictions about "rules of engagement" between the police and the community? Do you know they have shown up at Council meetings demanding to be heard and speaking? The people that follow them understand that this is bigger than looting. Anyone focusing on 3 days of looting in the midst of 100 day protest is missing the point. TBH, they are not concerned with "advancing the discussion" with people like that. I mean, geez, you should just see what is happening on social media right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're opportunists is all. No real message to authorities is sent.

This.

Believe that at your peril.

They had a AA pundit on the radio this morning and he was saying that a lot of the old heads in the 1960's have always complained that this generation showed extreme apathy on Civil Rights issues. He said that if any good has come from Mike Brown's death it is that this generation of young educated AA's and young Liberals of other races is starting to become energized on these issues. These are the leaders of the protests in Ferguson and the ones in NY. So keep focusing on Sharpton and Jesse - who are only relevant in their age demographic. But those are not the AA leaders that will be front and center in the next few years.

Hopefully, the AA leaders that will be front and center in the next few years will not condone this looting behavior. To be honest, this behavior simply reinforces stereotypes and does nothing at all to advance the discussion. It is shameful.

Who is condoning "this looting behavior"? In whom is it reinforcing stereotypes -- in the people who hold these stereotypes? And what do you think would "advance the discussion"? The rioting in Ferguson seems to me to have advanced the discussion a whole lot. If not for the rioting (and the appalling police response), none of us would ever have heard of Michael Brown. He would have been just another anonymous young black man shot dead by a police officer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ still flawed system.

You are right. I was pointing out that for the person trying to liken this to the OJ case - OJ was charged, went to trial and was vigorously prosecuted.

Based on the DA's "speech" last night, can anyone truly say that he was a vigorous advocate for an indictment?[/quote]

I don't know the DA but I know he followed the law. It's not up to me to judge whether he is/isn't a vigorous advocate for an indictment.

Interesting, because there are legal experts and bar associates issuing statements today that his role in the GJ proceeding was puzzling at best and possibly unethical at worst.

experts/talking heads are dime a dozen.

Sure they are, but I am sure they have has much knowledge as a PP who asserts that "I KNOW that he followed the law."