An inconvenient truth

[tali89]

Wow dude, you've outdone yourself! Taking some pages out of The Marquis's book, I see?

What on earth does 'The Marquis' have to do with this? You're becoming hysterical, Bells. Calm down and stick to the topic at hand, thanks.

Your indignation about me quoting posts Tiassa and you have made in the past is a bit puzzling. When you post material in a public forum, it is usually accepted that your material is made, well, public. That means that it can be seen and cited by others. If you don't want your hateful views to be quoted back to you, then there is a simple answer: Don't post them in the first place.

Your attempts to mitigate your hateful claims are as transparent as they can get. Gremmie made it very clear to Tiassa that not once had he ever behaved unethically as a traffic officer, yet Tiassa essentially called him a liar because... well.. he's a cop, and all cops are bad, dontcha know? When Gremmie asked how you would feel if a poster on the forum considered you scum simply because of your profession, and would wish wholescale slaughter of your profession if they 'weren't a pacist' you... referenced external hate sites? Um, OK, there are sites on the internet dedicated to hating lawyers. There are also sites dedicated to hating blacks, women, men, whites, government works, doctors, you name it. You glossed over the fact that Gremmie was asking how you would feel if you were called scum by another poster on *this forum*.

Instead of providing an understanding and empathetic answer, such as "Yeah, I wouldn't like it. You shouldn't be judged as an individual just because some cops are bad.", you engaged in misdirection that is typical of you liberals. You're just as hateful as Tiassa when you attempt to mitigate his bad behaviour. Let's face it, you both hate cops in general, and you aren't willing to give them a fair and impartial hearing.

 

[Photizo]

At what point did we stop adhering to the truth, and start fabricating absolute bullshit...

Genesis Chapter 3.

 

[iceaura]

McCulloch was in a bind. As became clear in his remarks last night, he genuinely did not believe that Wilson had committed a crime.

And that was completely obvious from his rigging of the grand jury hearing. That is also why thousands of people who knew his record and biases petitioned to have him removed or recuse himself.

You argue that because this grand jury was not biased towards indictment as grand juries typically are, then it amounts to a travesty of justice

Why yes.

And you are arguing that rigging a grand jury hearing to protect a favored accused from risk of jury trial is "fair" and "just".

We then have left-wingers complaining that Wilson was questioned for four hours.

You are mistaken, again, about the complaint - people who are objecting to the rigged grand jury hearings are complaining about Wilson being allowed to sway the grand jury with coached and unexamined testimony for even ten minutes.

When I pointed out that his waving of his 5th amendments rights put him at risk of incriminating himself,

You were wrong, again. He avoided cross examination, was challenged on none of the inconsistencies and contradictions in his testimony, and could have chosen to say nothing at any time - it's called having the fix in.

Indeed, one would think that if one is lying about events, being questioned for *four hours* would put one at great risk of contradicting, and therefore incriminating, oneself.

You would be wrong, if you thought that. Not in a friendly grand jury hearing. You are thinking of the kind of stuff that happens at trials. His contradictions, inconsistencies, and carefully coached deceptions and falsehoods, did not incriminate him, and he knew they would not incriminate him, because he was not sitting in the witness stand at a trial.

He was avoiding the risk of self-incrimination, not taking it.

'Gently' is a subjective term, and we should be asking ourselves, 'Gentle in comparison to what?'

In comparison to the normal examination witnesses expect at trials.

Has there been any study performed to compare the intensity of questioning of the suspect at other grand juries?

Suspects are not normally questioned at grand jury hearings. If they are, they are supposed to be questioned by a prosecutor attempting to obtain an indictment against them - an unfriendly attorney who does not coach and lead the suspect to put themselves in the best light for the grand jury.

It's possible that almost all grand jury hearings run like this are rigged events featuring similarly gentle treatment of the suspect, so this rig job was typical of rigged grand jury hearings. I wouldn't know. So what if it was?

 

[Bells]

What on earth does 'The Marquis' have to do with this? You're becoming hysterical, Bells. Calm down and stick to the topic at hand, thanks.

Did you read what was posted in this thread? At all?

Or in that thread from months ago which you have taken completely out of context and you have accused me of doing something I never even did.

Your indignation about me quoting posts Tiassa and you have made in the past is a bit puzzling. When you post material in a public forum, it is usually accepted that your material is made, well, public. That means that it can be seen and cited by others. If you don't want your hateful views to be quoted back to you, then there is a simple answer: Don't post them in the first place.

Your attempts to mitigate your hateful claims are as transparent as they can get. Gremmie made it very clear to Tiassa that not once had he ever behaved unethically as a traffic officer, yet Tiassa essentially called him a liar because... well.. he's a cop, and all cops are bad, dontcha know? When Gremmie asked how you would feel if a poster on the forum considered you scum simply because of your profession, and would wish wholescale slaughter of your profession if they 'weren't a pacist' you... referenced external hate sites? Um, OK, there are sites on the internet dedicated to hating lawyers. There are also sites dedicated to hating blacks, women, men, whites, government works, doctors, you name it. You glossed over the fact that Gremmie was asking how you would feel if you were called scum by another poster on *this forum*.

Once again, you have outdone yourself with your lies, misrepresentations and innuendo. As I had pointed out in that thread, that I did not agree with Tiassa's argument or his words. What I did say, which Gremmie was not that far off from saying himself, was that the system itself is corrupt (which is pretty much what everyone was saying). Gremmie's anger was that anyone would criticise police and not give them the respect he feels the uniform deserves. As everyone noted in that thread, even Gremmie when he commented that one way to change the system was to get rid of the "good old boys" network that exists, corruption, the blue wall has to be dealt with. And it isn't being dealt with.

And as I noted to Gremmie, when he asked how would I feel if I was called scum by another poster on this forum, I'm a lawyer. I get called scum all the time. We even have tshirts, mugs and posters about ways to kill us. And really, Gremmie, after his performance in his club, along with his little buddies on this "forum", on the previous website, where they called me every single name under the sun in said club, commented on my marriage, how I performed sexually with my husband, my cancer, how they assumed I looked, etc, was really not one to talk, nor was he really in a position to whine that someone said corrupt police officers were scum. Or do you believe that corrupt police officers and the blue wall which protects them are not scum? Because it is those officers who are ruining it for the rest of the good officers who try to do their job with dignity and treat others with respect.

Instead of providing an understanding and empathetic answer, such as "Yeah, I wouldn't like it. You shouldn't be judged as an individual just because some cops are bad.", you engaged in misdirection that is typical of you liberals. You're just as hateful as Tiassa when you attempt to mitigate his bad behaviour. Let's face it, you both hate cops in general, and you aren't willing to give them a fair and impartial hearing.

No tali89. I said it comes with the job. If you can't deal with it, don't do the job any more. Should I have held his hand, given him some milk and cookies and told him to not listen to the mean people anymore? And really, reacting that badly because someone criticised the corrupt factions within his profession - and it wasn't even aimed at him, but at corrupt police officers and 'the blue wall'... His indignation was because someone said something bad about 'the police'. What? Are they above reproach? Should I be all up and riled up and getting angry because some articles said that the prosecutor in Brown's case was corrupt, bad at his job? "Oh no, they are saying bad things about a lawyer and lawyers so they must mean me!!"... Please, preach to another choir dude.

Now, since you are so adept at going back months and months prior to your joining this site, dude, show me where I said I hate cops.

Look tali89, I get that you're trying to change the narrative of this thread by spreading lies and innuendo, but it's not going to work for you. Just makes you look mean and petty and with an axe to grind, which really isn't attractive at all.

 

[tali89]

He avoided cross examination,

Cross-examination? I don't think you know what a grand jury hearing actually is. Protip: It's not a criminal trial, which is adversarial in nature.

His contradictions, inconsistencies, and carefully coached deceptions and falsehoods, did not incriminate him,

If he made contradictions and inconsistencies without any cross-examination, how was he at no risk of incriminating himself before an impartial grand jury?

He was avoiding the risk of self-incrimination, not taking it.

He was avoiding the risk of self-incrimination by choosing to waive his 5th amendment right to not testify before a grand jury. The mental gymnastics liberals perform to justify their distorted worldview is nothing short of mind-boggling.

 

[tali89]

Once again, you have outdone yourself with your lies, misrepresentations and innuendo. As I had pointed out in that thread, that I did not agree with Tiassa's argument or his words.

Oh, you 'didn't agree'. How very proper. Instead of condemning Tiassa for stating that 'if he wasn't a pacifistic', he would endorse the wholescale slaughter of the police force (?!), you went on to criticise the culture of policing in America. Gremmie acknowledged this, but rightfully pointed out that a poster on this forum shouldn't be subjected to that sort of vitriol and stereotyping. And then you made the topic all about *you*. Ok Bells, I get it, you're a professional victim. You've supposedly been treated horribly in real life, and your profession is the subject of ridicule and hatred on other forums. It's all very tragic. I'll say a prayer for you. That doesn't change the fact that you not only refused to condemn hatred occurring your own backyard, but attempted to mitigate it. That's the sort of bias we are dealing with in this thread. How can we trust anything Tiassa and you have to say on this subject, considering your underlying resentment of police officers?

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

Genesis Chapter 3.

Referring to a fantasy book. Hilarious. The lying started long before any part of that book was written. In that fantasy book tho, the 1st fabricating absolute bullshit was Genesis 1:1.

 

[Photizo]

The mental gymnastics liberals perform to justify their distorted worldview is nothing short of mind-boggling.

Bravo. You are a doing a stand up job of rubbing their noses in their own excrement...Well done. The time is fast approaching when a separation of the two mindsets/groups must take place...the thought of it is as unpleasant as it is inevitable. Even so, their pernicious and putrid mindset will worm its way in among a new generation.

 

[Photizo]

Referring to a fantasy book. Hilarious. The lying started long before any part of that book was written. In that fantasy book tho, the 1st fabricating absolute bullshit was Genesis 1:1.

The fantasy is your own, and waking up from it will be a horrifying experience for you. You would do well to come to grips with yourself now rather than later because presently terms are being offered--that is, while you draw breath...when your breathing stops, no quarter will be offered or given. Interestingly, in one sense, what is being revealed through your (plural) attitudes, viewpoints, mindsets etc presented here throughout this thread serves as a metaphorical illustration of your (plural) attitude towards the Ultimate Authority over all mankind. Its really quite telling...a sight to behold. What you would never admit otherwise you have freely presented as a testimony against yourselves. As it is written, "He taketh the wise in their own craftiness."

 

[Bells]

Oh, you 'didn't agree'. How very proper. Instead of condemning Tiassa for stating that 'if he wasn't a pacifistic', he would endorse the wholescale slaughter of the police force (?!), you went on to criticise the culture of policing in America. Gremmie acknowledged this, but rightfully pointed out that a poster on this forum shouldn't be subjected to that sort of vitriol and stereotyping. And then you made the topic all about *you*. Ok Bells, I get it, you're a professional victim. You've supposedly been treated horribly in real life, and your profession is the subject of ridicule and hatred on other forums. It's all very tragic. I'll say a prayer for you. That doesn't change the fact that you not only refused to condemn hatred occurring your own backyard, but attempted to mitigate it. That's the sort of bias we are dealing with in this thread. How can we trust anything Tiassa and you have to say on this subject, considering your underlying resentment of police officers?

What did you want me to do? I told him I didn't agree with his position? Did you want me to fly to the States and set his house on fire or something? Carry on like you are carrying on now? I get it, you have this compulsion to lie, misrepresent and distort facts, even to the point of literally trolling through a thread from months before you ever came to this site and the hilarious result of that is that you completely got it wrong. You attributed things to me that I have never said and you are still stereotyping me, "liberals", the left and once again lying and saying that I resent police officers when I have never made such a claim. All without any sort of proof whatsoever.

Tell me, are we meant to take you seriously after the little game you just tried to play and lost? Go on, link where I said I hate the police, or resent them.

The thing with you, tali89, is that you come out with all of these amazing claims, without any proof. You lied and misrepresented what I had said, linked to it and now you backpedal to personal attacks to try to cover up your lies and offensive stereotyping. I mean, you even tried to make spurious comments and bigoted and offensive stereotypes about my parents of all people in another thread. This is the level of your desperation. I actually feel sorry for you, because something in your life must be fucked up if you feel the need to stoop so low. Is it a self esteem issue? Does it make you feel better about yourself to come out with such fantastic lies about other people? Because someone cannot keep doing what you are doing, repeatedly, and not have some sort of issue. If it makes you feel better about yourself, then knock yourself out, dude. Keep it up. It's sad if you feel the need to do this to feel good about yourself, but that's okay. I'm not fussed. Give it all you've got if it makes you feel good about yourself afterwards. Because you clearly seem to need it.

 

[Bells]

Genesis Chapter 3.

Please keep your religious woo confined to the religious sub-forum. Because after the white supremacist and racist crap you just spouted in this thread, your referring to the bible as justification of your offensive beliefs just makes you look like a bigger fool than you looked like before.

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

The fantasy is your own, and waking up from it will be a horrifying experience for you. You would do well to come to grips with yourself now rather than later because presently terms are being offered--that is, while you draw breath...when your breathing stops, no quarter will be offered or given. Interestingly, in one sense, what is being revealed through your (plural) attitudes, viewpoints, mindsets etc presented here throughout this thread serves as a metaphorical illustration of your (plural) attitude towards the Ultimate Authority over all mankind. Its really quite telling...a sight to behold. What you would never admit otherwise you have freely presented as a testimony against yourselves. As it is written, "He taketh the wise in their own craftiness."

Stop lying to me about me. No experience will ever be horrifying for me. I fear nothing. Get that thru your thick skull. You would do well to snap out of your delirious deluded dreamworld before trying to advise others. No frigging terms are being offered to me. I cannot have any attitude toward any supposed ultimate authority until it gets the courage to show itself. Neither can you. Your fearful fanatic fantasy does not give you any right to lie time & time again.

 

[Photizo]

...after the white supremacist and racist crap you just spouted in this thread, your referring to the bible as justification of your offensive beliefs just makes you look like a bigger fool than you looked like before.

I don't agree with your definition of racism as implied by your posts, so leveling that accusation at me holds no weight whatsoever. As far as white supremacy, that's laughable given my beliefs. Assuming the two co exist in the heart and mind of a believer in Christ is a feat that could only be imagined/accomplished by someone comfortable practicing all manner of mental contortions to compensate for their lack of logical and factual consistency. That I look like a fool to you is not surprising...recognizing the absurdity as hypocritical and an example of "offensive beliefs" testifies to the fact that, at your core, you possess the requisite qualifications and abilities to think otherwise than you do about many things except you deliberately choose not to do so; therefore--barring repentance on your part--you will be declared guilty of willingly believing a lie.

Indeed the justice so many pine for shall certainly be meted out. In the meantime, rather than being so zealous for justice, cry out for mercy.

For the record, both Brown and Garner received justice.

 

[Bells]

I don't agree with your definition of racism as implied by your posts, so leveling that accusation at me holds no weight whatsoever. As far as white supremacy, that's laughable given my beliefs. Assuming the two co exist in the heart and mind of a believer in Christ is a feat that could only be accomplished by someone habitually practicing all manner of mental contortions so as to compensate for their lack of logical and factual consistency. That I look like a fool to you is not surprising...you recognize the absurdity as hypocritical and "offensive beliefs" testifying to the fact that, at your core, you possess the requisite qualifications and abilities to think otherwise than you do about many things except you deliberately choose not to do so; therefore, you will be declared guilty of willingly believing a lie.

Well, delusion people rarely agree when their delusions are pointed out to them.

Here is what you have been saying in this thread:

"...on behalf of white supremacism."

... http://www.unz.com/freed/black-power/ ...
​

Not content with merely quoting white supremacist rubbish, you later went on to defend it. But not before you decided to spout some white supremacist rubbish of your own:

The problem is not with whites. The problem is centered in an unruly, undisciplined, violent, and irresponsible black society. You pit that society against normal white standards of behavior/expectations concerning law enforcement (with accompanying expectations of respect and compliance) personnel and you are asking for trouble the kind of which we see on a continual basis. Much of what we see at this point is borne of frustration with having to serve and protect people who's behaviors are predominantly criminal. The message needs to go out not to police, but to black society to show respect and obedience to the police rather than rebellion and hostility. It is their behaviors that provoke the responses from LAW ENFORCEMENT. Resisting them is NOT the way to deal with them, they are charged with the task of enforcement. In the presence of an officer, you are to be respectful and polite, not antagonistic. If they were to change these violent and irresponsible ways, there is no question things will eventually calm down. The solution is not to hamstring the police in the face of an already unruly mob, but to teach the mob proper ways of living and behaving in a civilized society not the least of which includes respect and compliance when confronted by a police officer.​

Did a bad spirit possess you and make you write such moronic white supremacist crap? Or are they all your very own?

When others pointed out the idiocy of what you were spouting and quoting and using as a point of reference here, you decided to defend said white supremacist rubbish:

You people have a problem. You do not observe things as they are, you 'observe' things through the lens of a cultural marxist narrative (which in this case as in so many others, a situation is being used not as it is, but as it desired to be) that demands a particular universal perspective regardless of the facts. Events, situations, etc. will be twisted and contorted at any cost to 'align' it with that same narrative.

No one's 'eyesight' is perfect, but there are some who see better than others do. This notion is unacceptable under the narrative you purport to live by, yet--ironically-- deep down you shamelessly embrace observable differences as the episdemological foundation of all you hold, it's just that they are disposable means (I believe the term is useful idiots) to a self centered end (~it's all about feeling 'good' about me and the rewards I deserve in whatever way I can selfishly grab/attain~) . It is why you adhere to the politics of division while hypocritically pontificating on how reality be damned, to you there are to be no distinctions/discriminations based on the natural distinctions OBSERVABLE in everyday life. You go with what you want reality to be rather than what it is and to you this is a virtue!! As such, by definition and by default you are entraped and entwined in self deception. Consequently, all that 'flows' out from that poisoned pit is lies.​

And then you went on to try to quote scripture, as though your abhorrent beliefs are supported in said scripture. You aren't even a Christian. Because no real Christian, no one who believed in Christ, would spout what you spouted in this thread. You're so bad that you are gleefully pondering what is going to happen to people once they die. Not only are you full of woo, but you are so full of hate that you think quoting scripture is going to save you.

Delusional people often think it's everyone else and not them. So of course you think everyone is wrong.

The reality is that it isn't everyone else. It's you.

Bravo. You are a doing a stand up job of rubbing their noses in their own excrement...Well done. The time is fast approaching when a separation of the two mindsets/groups must take place...the thought of it is as unpleasant as it is inevitable. Even so, their pernicious and putrid mindset will worm its way in among a new generation.

Pining for days of old?

 

[Photizo]

I stand by every word I wrote (and you quoted); neither of the quotes/comments has anything to do with white supremacism.

The reason for quoting "on behalf of white supremacism" and following it up with the link was to point out that white supremacism as a controlling influence is a myth. Do isolated pockets of such people exist? Of course, but by and large they do not represent the viewpoint of the majority of whites. Furthermore, and to the point, the influence of those isolated groups among their fellow whites pales in comparison to the disproportionate influence blacks wield with respect to social mores / behaviors among whites despite the fact they are--like white supremacists--a small minority of the population. That was the point.

No one is gleefully pondering what is going to happen to people when they die, such an accusation, again, could only arise from your own ignorance; it is completely inconsistent with my beliefs (based on the Bible) to feel that way about other people. The same goes for your comment accusing me of thinking "it's everyone else and not them. So of course you think everyone is wrong." That's absurd. Your closing admonition regarding reality is laughable given your continual misunderstanding / misrepresentation of my intentions and the missing of my points. Take a chill pill.

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

That's absurd. ... ...Take a chill pill.

LOL From someone overheating from compulsive fantasy & obsessed with telling strangers they will be frightened by your imaginary boogieman & other crap you cannot possibly know.
You spew absurdities yet think you can tell what's absurd.

 

[Landau Roof]

I stand by every word I wrote (and you quoted); neither of the quotes/comments has anything to do with white supremacism.

The reason for quoting "on behalf of white supremacism" and following it up with the link was to point out that white supremacism as a controlling influence is a myth. Do isolated pockets of such people exist? Of course, but by and large they do not represent the viewpoint of the majority of whites. Furthermore, and to the point, the influence of those isolated groups among their fellow whites pales in comparison to the disproportionate influence blacks wield with respect to social mores / behaviors among whites despite the fact they are--like white supremacists--a small minority of the population. That was the point.

No one is gleefully pondering what is going to happen to people when they die, such an accusation, again, could only arise from your own ignorance; it is completely inconsistent with my beliefs (based on the Bible) to feel that way about other people. The same goes for your comment accusing me of thinking "it's everyone else and not them. So of course you think everyone is wrong." That's absurd. Your closing admonition regarding reality is laughable given your continual misunderstanding / misrepresentation of my intentions and the missing of my points. Take a chill pill.

 

[Bells]

I stand by every word I wrote (and you quoted); neither of the quotes/comments has anything to do with white supremacism.

You quoted and defended a white supremacist article saying that all blacks are stupid and then you went on a spiel about what you saw as the problem being black people and you don't think that has anything to do with white supremacism?

The delusion is strong in you...

The reason for quoting "on behalf of white supremacism" and following it up with the link was to point out that white supremacism as a controlling influence is a myth. Do isolated pockets of such people exist? Of course, but by and large they do not represent the viewpoint of the majority of whites. Furthermore, and to the point, the influence of those isolated groups among their fellow whites pales in comparison to the disproportionate influence blacks wield with respect to social mores / behaviors among whites despite the fact they are--like white supremacists--a small minority of the population. That was the point.

In a thread about police officers getting away with killing unarmed black people and a legal system that protects them, with black people denied their fundamental rights and a push to deny them even the right to vote in some areas, you are going to try and make that claim?

No one is gleefully pondering what is going to happen to people when they die, such an accusation, again, could only arise from your own ignorance; it is completely inconsistent with my beliefs (based on the Bible) to feel that way about other people. The same goes for your comment accusing me of thinking "it's everyone else and not them. So of course you think everyone is wrong." That's absurd. Your closing admonition regarding reality is laughable given your continual misunderstanding / misrepresentation of my intentions and the missing of my points. Take a chill pill.

Really?

The fantasy is your own, and waking up from it will be a horrifying experience for you. You would do well to come to grips with yourself now rather than later because presently terms are being offered--that is, while you draw breath...when your breathing stops, no quarter will be offered or given.

You can not believe you are racist all you like. Your strong support and defense of a racist white supremacist and your own arguments clearly indicate that you are racist and a bigot. Not to mention your twisted fantasies and thoughts about what will happen to others when they die based on your religious woo.

 

[Capracus]

What, that's it? An article that contradicts your prior argument? And no address of any questions? You know, like the really simple one about who else gets this particular process?

Which article contradicted what prior argument? As for when this grand jury approach is used, I addressed that question in my last post.

“Normally they hear from a detective or a main witness or two. That’s it,” Magee said. “This gives us an opportunity to present all of the evidence to jurors who represent St. Louis County. They will make the decision.”

Susan W. McGraugh, a criminal-defense lawyer and a professor at the Saint Louis University School of Law, said that the approach is allowed under the law and that prosecutors sometimes use it in high-profile cases.

“The prosecutor may want cover, which they can get by sharing the responsibility with the grand jury,” McGraugh said. “So when the public reacts to what does or does not happen, they can go back to the fact that the grand jury played a large role in the decision. They can say, ‘We let these jurors, who are your peers, hear what witnesses had to say. This was their decision.’ ”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ec6ffe-339b-11e4-8f02-03c644b2d7d0_story.html

I haven’t looked up specific cases, but apparently neither have you.

Your disrespect for the U.S. Constitution is why you're wrong.

My disrespect for the Constitution? Ha! You’re the one advocating that prosecutors rig the grand jury process to favor an indictment in spite of the law and weight of opposing evidence.

Your disrespect for other people is why they shouldn't waste a second on anything you have to say.

Like all other living human beings there are people I do not respect, but I don’t recall mentioning anyone specifically in this thread. Who did you have in mind?

As has been noted repeatedly, the grand jury itself wasn't the problem; the prosecutors presenting it were. You're still just a walking, whining fallacy.

You mean the same prosecutors that manage the typically styled grand jury processes that also fail to indict police officers in deadly force cases? Could it be it has more to do with the atypical rights of police officers than the atypical nature of the grand jury process? Grand juries don’t generally indict cops for the same reason prosecutors are reluctant to file complaints against them. Because the law doesn’t equate their action to that of an average citizen, they get more leeway in the use of deadly force, which requires a much higher burden of proof to effectively indict and prosecute. So don’t whine about the prosecutors, whine about the law.

 

[wellwisher]

If you look at the choking death in New York, in a larger context, the encounter, itself, was due to a man selling single cigarettes and not paying taxes. That was the crime that needed a small army. These two connected things are democratic and liberal pet peeves. The tax and spend democrats love to extort taxes, and they hate cigarettes, to where even death is now justified when democratic mafia doesn't get its way.

Prohibitions always create black markets, with the excessive taxes on cigarettes in NY ($13/pack) creating a positive black market who can undersell the retailers in poor neighborhoods and still make money. This good business and social sense cuts into extortion tax and allows cigarettes to flow, so the Nazi democrats had to set an example. They brought in a small army to take him out.

What I also noticed is all the cities being accused of police racism against blacks, where marches appear, are Democratic controlled. This is logical since the democratic party is the historical party of slavery, segregation and KKK. Liberals can't see the big picture, but get easily bogged down into the smaller context of the march. At this level nothing will ever change, other than feeling good for a few days. If nothing changes at the top of the democratic leadership, changes at the bottom ,will not change anything, other than lead to the division that perpetuates the planation.

As an experiment, look at republican controlled cites and compare crime, employment, and need for force for republican blacks who have escaped the planation. The Republican have always been the party of anti-slavery and NAACP. Think in terms of data and larger context and not bottom level context and sentiment.