At Least Three Police Officers Dead in Shooting in Baton Rouge

by eddie Sun Jul 17, 2016 6:06 pm

At least three police officers are dead and and three others are injured after a shooting in the Old Hammond area of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, officials said.

One suspect is also dead, but police believe two others may be at large, according to the East Baton Rouge Sheriffs Office.

Louisiana Gov. Jon Bel Edwards implied that multiple shooters were involved in the attack, in a statement released via social media.

"This is an unspeakable and unjustified attack on all of us at a time when we need unity and healing," the governor said. "Rest assured, every resource available to the state of Louisiana will be used to ensure the perpetrators are brought swiftly to justice."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/police-officers-dead-shooting-baton-rouge/story?id=40646533

by Guest Sun Jul 17, 2016 7:10 pm

Every time I hear or read about such events I'd love to have Wayne La Pierre some where close by where the mass of Americans could plant their collective feet up his back side; for pushing his lies and utter BS about the 'Liberals'...going to come remove your guns from your homes and other NRA pushed propaganda!
Now we've got so many CCW - Open Carry permitted Wing Nuts out there just looking for an excuse to got ballistic and a target to practice on!
Soooo frustrating!

At Least Three Police Officers Dead in Shooting in Baton Rouge Strang10

At Least Three Police Officers Dead in Shooting in Baton Rouge Strang10

by Victorismyhero Sun Jul 17, 2016 8:00 pm

and so the spiral down into chaos and anarchy begins......

by eddie Sun Jul 17, 2016 8:25 pm

According to plan

by Raggamuffin Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:04 am

eddie wrote:According to plan

What plan is that eddie?

by Major Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:31 am

A gun is a tool.

by eddie Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:43 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
eddie wrote:According to plan

What plan is that eddie?

I think Obama wants his gun law passed
Lots of gun crime lately - big happenings

Just one of my thoughts about what I think is happening
But then, I'm a loony bin geek

by Raggamuffin Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:53 am

eddie wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

What plan is that eddie?

I think Obama wants his gun law passed
Lots of gun crime lately - big happenings

Just one of my thoughts about what I think is happening
But then, I'm a loony bin

Are you suggesting that Micah Johnson and Gavin Long were tools of the Government?

by eddie Mon Jul 18, 2016 9:03 am

Who knows rags. Maybe.
One thing is for sure, you'll only find out in years to come (as with most things) and by then, no one will care much.

Look at Blair and the Chilcot report; too late. No one in the public cares much now as they're all warning something else.

I treat the mainstream news like a film.

Of course I'm only surmising. It might be that these happenings are just growing in number (who knows why?) and have no relevance to the fact that "somebodies" want the American public, unarmed.

I just watch with a little bit of distance and skeptism.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jul 18, 2016 9:09 am

eddie wrote:Who knows rags. Maybe.
One thing is for sure, you'll only find out in years to come (as with most things) and by then, no one will care much.

Look at Blair and the Chilcot report; too late. No one in the public cares much now as they're all warning something else.

I treat the mainstream news like a film.

Of course I'm only surmising. It might be that these happenings are just growing in number (who knows why?) and have no relevance to the fact that "somebodies" want the American public, unarmed.

I just watch with a little bit of distance and skeptism.

Think about it though. Such a move would mean sacrificing the lives of police officers. Do you really think that the Government would do such a thing?

Then there's the possibility of a backlash. There might be even more calls for people to be armed, and for the police to crack down even harder on anyone who even twitches when they're challenged or arrested.

It might cause even more problems with race relations. If black men go around shooting white officers, will that not cause even more of a problem than there already is? So far, these shootings have been confined to black men shooting police officers, but it seems to be white officers that they're going for - thank about that.

by eddie Mon Jul 18, 2016 9:20 am

Civil unrest creates lots of opportunities for people in power. Think about that.

All I'm saying is: watch that space and see what occurs.
By the time the powers that be change shit around we've already forgotten how played we were.

We are just being played constantly. The public are the children being tricked by the parents into doing exactly what the parent wants. It's so easy to do.
You only have to make it feel like the the child is making all the decisions on their own.

Just remain open; watch the news with one eye and listen with your intelligence.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jul 18, 2016 9:43 am

eddie wrote:Civil unrest creates lots of opportunities for people in power. Think about that.

All I'm saying is: watch that space and see what occurs.
By the time the powers that be change shit around we've already forgotten how played we were.

We are just being played constantly. The public are the children being tricked by the parents into doing exactly what the parent wants. It's so easy to do.
You only have to make it feel like the the child is making all the decisions on their own.

Just remain open; watch the news with one eye and listen with your intelligence.

I just pointed out to you some of pitfalls of attempting to introduce gun control by asking black men to go around shooting white police officers. If you were in power and wanted to ban guns, is that really how you would do it? To me, that would be a pretty stupid way to do it for the reasons I gave. Introducing yet another element of racial divisions isn't going to do much for such a cause is it? Attacking the police isn't going to work isn't it?

by 'Wolfie Mon Jul 18, 2016 10:56 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
eddie wrote:

I think Obama wants his gun law passed
Lots of gun crime lately - big happenings

Just one of my thoughts about what I think is happening
But then, I'm a loony bin

Are you suggesting that Micah Johnson and Gavin Long were tools of the Government?

SOME would suggest that they were just tools...

INSANE tools to be sure, but plain old tools, all the same. What a Face

by Raggamuffin Mon Jul 18, 2016 11:11 am

I'd like to hear more from eddie.

Eddie, so far your posts have been quite vague. Can you answer my points at all? Cheers.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jul 18, 2016 11:19 am

One of the officers who was killed - a black officer - wrote on Facebook how difficult he found it to be a black police officer.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/18/baton-rouge-shooting-dead-policeman-wrote-emotional-facebook-post-about-trying-times

Is it significant that he was black, or did the murderer not care what colour he was? There's actually very little information about the incident generally.

by eddie Mon Jul 18, 2016 11:27 am

Raggamuffin wrote:I'd like to hear more from eddie.

Eddie, so far your posts have been quite vague. Can you answer my points at all? Cheers.

Rags I'll be happy to discuss it via pm otherwise it will just descend into certain people attacking me and I can't be arsed with it today.
I don't have any answers for you anyway. Just thoughts and theories.

If a filmmaker can think it, anyone can think it, so it can happen. That's all.

It's possible.

Don't know what wolf meant, perhaps he has a theory.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jul 18, 2016 11:31 am

eddie wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:I'd like to hear more from eddie.

Eddie, so far your posts have been quite vague. Can you answer my points at all? Cheers.

Rags I'll be happy to discuss it via pm otherwise it will just descend into certain people attacking me and I can't be arsed with it today.
I don't have any answers for you anyway. Just thoughts and theories.

If a filmmaker can think it, anyone can think it, so it can happen. That's all.

It's possible.

Don't know what wolf meant, perhaps he has a theory.

If people attack you, tell them to eff off.

I do like to be more specific re these conspiracy theories, and I don't think it's enough to just assume there are some shenanigans going on.

Your call though.

by eddie Mon Jul 18, 2016 11:32 am

I'm off out in a bit. I'll chat when I come back

I'd like to know wolfie's theory though.

by Raggamuffin Mon Jul 18, 2016 11:34 am

eddie wrote:I'm off out in a bit. I'll chat when I come back

I'd like to know wolfie's theory though.

I don't think he had one - he was just calling them "tools" - ie, idiots?

by Ben Reilly Mon Jul 18, 2016 4:12 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
eddie wrote:I'm off out in a bit. I'll chat when I come back

I'd like to know wolfie's theory though.

I don't think he had one - he was just calling them "tools" - ie, idiots?

I thought he meant tools in the literal sense -- the things you use to complete a project.

Besides the good points you've brought up, the conspiracy to ban guns would also include ordering police to kill black men, and probably even ordering other "tools" to go shoot up elementary school kids, movie theaters, Congressional rallies, black churches and gay nightclubs. We're getting into a Game-of-Thrones level of bloodshed to accomplish disarming the U.S. public ...

... Which, as I've pointed out before, would be clear-cut illegal in the U.S. The Supreme Court has determined that the constitution gives citizens the right to keep and bear arms, and interpreted that as meaning firearms. (Supreme Court rulings are final.) Any disarmament law would immediately face thousands of lawsuits and would be overturned due to Supreme Court precedent. It wouldn't work in literally any scenario that doesn't include overthrowing the U.S. government and abolishing the constitution.

But let's look at what Obama has proposed and what has happened. In broad strokes, for the past three years, Obama has asked Congress to ban assault-style firearms, to require universal background checks and other measures designed to keep guns from criminals, the mentally ill and suspected terrorists, and to limit the amount of ammunition a gun can hold at once (the extended-clip ban).

These are measures that were actually supported by the majority of Americans, even in predominantly Republican states, yet Congressional Republicans had not even allowed a vote in Congress until a short while ago -- and that one failed by a long shot.

So the notion that Obama is going to continue to force people to take innocent lives in pursuit of disarmament is pretty far-fetched when you consider that even his less ambitious proposals have utterly failed. And, of course, when you consider that Obama is probably not the kind of monster that could do such a thing in the first place.

I think it's also worth noting that according to conspiracy theorists, Obama actually inherited this agenda. They claim that these shootings going all the way back to at least 1999 and the Columbine school shooting were "false flags." So we're now to believe that all these shootings are part of an at least 17-year-old effort to ban guns, and that (apparently) nobody in America has ever actually just flipped out and started shooting people.

Frankly, I think it insults the survivors of shooting victims.

by eddie Mon Jul 18, 2016 4:42 pm

I said Obama wanted his gun law passed.
I never once said or implied that Obama ordered people to be killed.

Frankly I'm suprised you even imagine that Obama is in charge of Obama!
Even more frankly, how is discussing a topic an "insult to the victims"?

Do leave off. Doesn't leave many topics to discuss if we have to avoid "victims" Rolling Eyes

That is such a lame thing to say.

by Ben Reilly Mon Jul 18, 2016 4:59 pm

eddie wrote:I said Obama wanted his gun law passed.
I never once said or implied that Obama ordered people to be killed.

Frankly I'm suprised you even imagine that Obama is in charge of Obama!
Even more frankly, how is discussing a topic an "insult to the victims"?

Do leave off. Doesn't leave many topics to discuss if we have to avoid "victims"
That is such a lame thing to say.

Are you saying the victims are all smoke and mirrors, nobody actually died?

by eddie Mon Jul 18, 2016 5:03 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
eddie wrote:I said Obama wanted his gun law passed.
I never once said or implied that Obama ordered people to be killed.

Frankly I'm suprised you even imagine that Obama is in charge of Obama!
Even more frankly, how is discussing a topic an "insult to the victims"?

Do leave off. Doesn't leave many topics to discuss if we have to avoid "victims"
That is such a lame thing to say.

Are you saying the victims are all smoke and mirrors, nobody actually died?

Haven't you asked me that before?
Yes of course people died.

Im not actually saying anything in particular, I'm just saying that I remain on the fence about what's going on.

by Ben Reilly Mon Jul 18, 2016 5:07 pm

So if Obama didn't order people to be shot, and those people really did die, what's there to be on the fence about, really? Is it some secret society that's behind all this, perhaps one that tells Obama what to do?

Not trying to be mean, bear in mind that my experience with these theories pins the blame on the government.

by eddie Mon Jul 18, 2016 5:16 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:So if Obama didn't order people to be shot, and those people really did die, what's there to be on the fence about, really? Is it some secret society that's behind all this, perhaps one that tells Obama what to do?

Not trying to be mean, bear in mind that my experience with these theories pins the blame on the government.

You don't need to think I think you're mean and I know I'm irritating you too lol!

Yes I do think there is a higher power than the government - don't you? You don't think the rich aka the powerful, "rule" the world?
I don't think they're sitting in a big chair with a big stick but....the Rockerfellas? The Walmart guys? These people are powerful Ben.

by eddie Mon Jul 18, 2016 5:18 pm

Im setting myself up for s hounding here Rolling Eyes

by Guest Mon Jul 18, 2016 5:31 pm

eddie wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:So if Obama didn't order people to be shot, and those people really did die, what's there to be on the fence about, really? Is it some secret society that's behind all this, perhaps one that tells Obama what to do?

Not trying to be mean, bear in mind that my experience with these theories pins the blame on the government.

You don't need to think I think you're mean and I know I'm irritating you too

Yes I do think there is a higher power than the government - don't you? You don't think the rich aka the powerful, "rule" the world?
I don't think they're sitting in a big chair with a big stick but....the Rockerfellas? The Walmart guys? These people are powerful Ben.

While I'll agree with the direction you're taking your idea's Eddie; I won't/don't agree that our POTUS has any part in these heinous events nor that the good heart - rightful minded people behind those many attempts to push back on getting the military grade weapons ban PUT BACK IN PLACE.
But your not far off the mark for your thoughts and POV regarding 'MEGA WEALTHY' - private clubs and how they manipulate global power!
I'd posted this on another thread some time back but it's very germane to this flow of conversation now as well.

Inside the Koch Brothers’ Secret Summit of Billionaires
June 18, 2014
by Lauren Windsor
Charles and David Koch wrapped up their annual summer seminar on June 16 in Dana Point, California, at the St. Regis Monarch Bay resort — a fitting location for two men whose combined net worth is more than $100 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. The highly secretive mega-donor conference, called “American Courage: Our Commitment to a Free Society,” featured a who’s who of Republican political elites. According to conference documents obtained through a source who was in attendance, Representatives Tom Cotton (R-AR), Cory Gardner (R-CO) and Jim Jordan (R-OH) were present, as were Senators Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Marco Rubio (R-FL). Cotton, Gardner and McConnell are all running for the Senate this year; Jordan for re-election in the House. Rubio is widely considered a major contender for a 2016 presidential run. According to the documents, the conference attendees discussed strategy on campaign finance, climate change, healthcare, higher education and opportunities for taking control of the Senate. (The draft agenda is available for viewing here.)
According to another source who also attended the conference, 300 individuals — worth at least a billion each — were present. This source said that the explicit goal was to raise $500 million to take the Senate in the 2014 midterms and another $500 million “to make sure Hillary Clinton is never president.” Three hundred billionaires in attendance is likely an exaggeration; to put that figure in perspective, there are 492 total billionaires in the United States by Forbes’s count. The Koch network raised an estimated $407 million in the 2012 presidential election, according to an analysis by The Washington Post and the Center for Responsive Politics.
http://billmoyers.com/2014/06/18/inside-the-koch-brothers%E2%80%99-secret-summit-of-billionaires/

Which as I'd posted ...is a huge burning ember up 'Chump-Trumps' back side as those very same 'Secret Mega Billionaires' that he wasn't invited to be part of; have not loosened those huge purse strings to aid his 2016 campaign push because the Koch Brothers DO NOT WANT THIS BUFFOON SEATED AT THE POTUS OVAL OFFICE!

How scary is that? And how much does that leave 'Cheeto-Jesus' looking over his shoulder wondering whom in his inner circle of 'movers & shakers' really can't abide the dumb-ass and want him OUT?

2016 Election Cycle
The Koch brothers have set a spending goal of $889 million for the 2016 election cycle.David Axelrod, a former senior adviser to President Obama told the New York Times, “That’s exponentially more money than any party organization will spend. In many ways, they have superseded the party.”
Koch-Funded Group Attacks Kasich in New Hampshire
"Who is He?"
The Koch-tied American Future Fund took out TV ads in New Hampshire against 2016 Republican Presidential Nominee John Kasich prior to the primary held on February 9, 2015. In the ad, the group attacks Kasich's record for not being conservative enough, "John Kasich — not a conservative. Not even a moderate. An Obama Republican.^" Nick Ryan, the current president of American Future Fund told The New York Times in an email that the group was running the ads because Kasich was "misleading New Hampshire voters" and that the “The real John Kasich record looks like something you might expect from a liberal politician like Barack Obama."
Kasich finished second in the New Hampshire primary to Donald Trump.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Koch_Brothers

And as odd as that 'back stabbing ad campaign' against Kasich was; it was the $80,000 dollars to his own election campaign from the Koch Brothers coffers that made it possible for this 'T-Bagger' conservative to beat his opponent and win his elected seat! Suspect

So, 'Cheeto-Jesus' knows, that it's well within the 'KOCH BROTHERS' methods and history to do whatever they deem necessary to unseat someone that "THEY" have issues with.

Which will beg the question; just how much sucking up to their POV and political think tank has 'Cheeto-Jesus' done - is that why he chose Pence over Gov. Chris Christie and who is pulling his puppet strings now?

by Victorismyhero Mon Jul 18, 2016 5:39 pm

when it comes to guns...its the tool beghind the tool thats the problem

or as we say here the nut behind the butt

by eddie Mon Jul 18, 2016 5:48 pm

4ever I don't think ALL members of governments are knowledge about happenings, but there are a few higher -ups who've spoken out about huge events when they've left office or the FBI or the military.
There has to be a reason why they do?

by Raggamuffin Mon Jul 18, 2016 5:48 pm

eddie wrote:I said Obama wanted his gun law passed.
I never once said or implied that Obama ordered people to be killed.

Frankly I'm suprised you even imagine that Obama is in charge of Obama!
Even more frankly, how is discussing a topic an "insult to the victims"?

Do leave off. Doesn't leave many topics to discuss if we have to avoid "victims"
That is such a lame thing to say.

Hmmm, your posts have been so vague that it's difficult to know what you actually meant, but I think you certainly implied that the shootings were something to do with Obama and the "plan".

by eddie Mon Jul 18, 2016 5:52 pm

Obama has a plan (and a good one I might add) and I think someone tells him what to do.
You don't think he gets pressured to do things? Of course he does!

I see government like a huge corporation; and the government are merely the supervisors, or the area management - probably a better analogy, and we, the public never see the "owners"

Best and most basic way I can describe it.

Look I don't have the answers and if I'm vague it's becasue I don't know why or what to think.

by eddie Mon Jul 18, 2016 5:54 pm

Bet Ben is off doing some research on his points.
Don't come back with a photo Ben, I don't think I can bear another photoshopgate!

by Raggamuffin Mon Jul 18, 2016 5:58 pm

eddie wrote:Obama has a plan (and a good one I might add) and I think someone tells him what to do.
You don't think he gets pressured to do things? Of course he does!

I see government like a huge corporation; and the government are merely the supervisors, or the area management - probably a better analogy, and we, the public never see the "owners"

Best and most basic way I can describe it.

Look I don't have the answers and if I'm vague it's becasue I don't know why or what to think.

So what has he been told to do in your opinion?

Do you not think that getting black men to shoot mainly white police officers in order to get guns banned is a little far-fetched? For a start, it's unlikely to actually work is it? If you think it would work, can you explain your reasoning?

by HoratioTarr Mon Jul 18, 2016 6:03 pm

eddie wrote:Bet Ben is off doing some research on his points.
Don't come back with a photo Ben, I don't think I can bear another photoshopgate!

Keep me out of it! lol!

by Ben Reilly Mon Jul 18, 2016 6:15 pm

eddie wrote:Bet Ben is off doing some research on his points.
Don't come back with a photo Ben, I don't think I can bear another photoshopgate!

Ah, got lots of work to do today, but luckily it's off to a banner start. I don't have time to do research.

I will say that while powerful people have too much influence on government, they didn't get to be powerful by taking the size of risk that could ruin their reputation. And, the powerful in the U.S. tend to want fewer gun restrictions, not more. https://www.thenation.com/article/how-alec-took-floridas-license-kill-law-national/

by eddie Mon Jul 18, 2016 6:38 pm

Perhaps it's not just about guns but creating civil unrest.

by Ben Reilly Mon Jul 18, 2016 6:52 pm

eddie wrote:Perhaps it's not just about guns but creating civil unrest.

That's an interesting thought -- that's actually where my sadly failed spy novel was going.

by eddie Mon Jul 18, 2016 6:54 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:
eddie wrote:Perhaps it's not just about guns but creating civil unrest.

That's an interesting thought -- that's actually where my sadly failed spy novel was going.

Hahahaha Paco is waiting too. Wink

There are lots of articles, and I don't mean "Ted from Texas Blogfest", that talk about causing civil unrest. It was done back in the sixties with the black movement.

Do you know Ted, btw?

by Ben Reilly Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:18 pm

eddie wrote:
Ben Reilly wrote:
eddie wrote:Perhaps it's not just about guns but creating civil unrest.

That's an interesting thought -- that's actually where my sadly failed spy novel was going.

Hahahaha Paco is waiting too.
There are lots of articles, and I don't mean "Ted from Texas Blogfest", that talk about causing civil unrest. It was done back in the sixties with the black movement.

Do you know Ted, btw?

Yes, everyone in Texas knows each other Rolling Eyes