America braced for backlash after explosive Ferguson report findings

America was braced for a backlash last night as the explosive findings of a government report found conclusive evidence that the Ferguson, Missouri police department routinely engaged in racially biased practises.

The findings will compound tensions across a country that has been in a deep-rooted state of unrest since the shooting of black teenager Michael Brown last August – an incident that set off violent protests across the country.
Analysis of over 35,000 pages of police records  have found that black Americans make up 93 percent of arrests in Ferguson while accounting for only 67 percent of the city's population.
It is also expected to charge that police disproportionately use excessive force against blacks and that black drivers are stopped and searched far more often than white motorists.
The Justice Department report, which is expected to be released Wednesday found that blacks were 68 percent less likely than others to have their cases dismissed by a municipal court judge, and that from April to September of last year, 95 percent of people kept at the city jail for more than two days were black.

Racist emails sent by Ferguson officials – including one doubting Barack Obama’s ability to serve a full term because “what black man holds a steady job for four years” – were also unearthed, it was reported last night, and are expected to be released to the public.
According to one report, another message written by a Ferguson official in May 2011 stated: “An African American woman in New Orleans was admitted into the hospital for a pregnancy termination. Two weeks later she received a check for $5,000. She phoned the hospital to ask who it was from. The hospital said, ‘Crimestoppers.’” The authors of the emails were not identified.
The findings are likely to be used by the government to investigate Ferguson officials and enter a negotiation or even  sue the city. It is likely to mark something of a denouement in what has been a tense year for the White House in wake of a number of incidents that have asked deep questions of US policing.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/america-braced-for-backlash-after-explosive-ferguson-report-findings-10083669.html

They really need to do something this whole 'just us' system is fucked up.

To me they need to get to the root cause problem of racism in America, which to me again has much to do with countless years of religious racism going back to ther times of religious endorsement of slavery. This is what I mean between the US and Britain in regards to how different they are over racism. Britain challenged perceptions and these perceptions were voted to bring about an end to slavery. In the US they were fought over by a civil war where the losers never got over their defeat and continued a religious belief centred around white people being chosen by (their) God as special. I think if given more time and civl war did not happen and slavery ended via concensus, would there be the trouble we see with racism in the US today?

Burn the motherfucker down; it's been a travesty of justice and this is one time we can actually make it right.

Bras -- I was in teacher training years ago and even then (this was 2010) saw a 4th-grade teacher (kids were around 10) trying to teach that slavery would have gone away on its own thanks to farming technology.

I wasn't in position to ask him whether he thought any farming technology would have been invented in the first place had there been no slaves ... but I sure wish I could have

Ben_Reilly wrote:Burn the motherfucker down; it's been a travesty of justice and this is one time we can actually make it right.

Bras -- I was in teacher training years ago and even then (this was 2010) saw a 4th-grade teacher (kids were around 10) trying to teach that slavery would have gone away on its own thanks to farming technology.

I wasn't in position to ask him whether he thought any farming technology would have been invented in the first place had there been no slaves ... but I sure wish I could have

Interesting Ben.
The point to me is there was little resentment where a well sounded debate which did take many attempts mind, brought about change in Britain. Again in the US they went to war, which left one sided  with resentment even to this day and again this southern states are in the main very religious more so than the North. This factors together with again with a view of a claim to "God being on the side of the righteous". Yes sheer nonsense but this is the kind of nonsense where bad ideas come from based around religious belief. To me what would have happened if this had been better argued over a few more years which did not result in a war where then the losers took to then resenting further black people and making their lives intilerable for further years to come?

There were probably ways to have averted the war, one of the big ones would have been industrialization in the South, and if the U.S. Congress had been a bit more flexible. But I do think the whole racial superiority idea made the South incalcitrant and less likely to give any ground.

Mind you, it happened only a little over a generation after the American Revolution (which itself was a secession in any real sense) so the Southern secessionists can be somewhat forgiven for being baffled that their secession would lead to war.

It should also be noted that while there was a religious justification being promoted for slavery, there was also a religious justification being offered for abolition, particularly from Quakers in the north.

I just hate it when I hear people in the South argue that the war wasn't over slavery, but "states' rights." For one, the only "right" the South was fighting for was to enslave people (they weren't fighting for the right to chew grass stems or wear overalls for fuck's sake), and for another, the Confederate constitution they set up specifically forbade its states from banning slavery.

It is a difficult subject Ben, one which has continued to see resentment again for years which to me has been the cause again of losing a war. How many times have we seen this in history where those who have been defeated are unable to accept this, to the point further hate like in this case is taught against Black people as the cause of this loss. Which is the sour grapes of such losing this coflect by the Southern States, where they use such poor disgusting terminoloogy to discriminate against Blacks in the US. I think this will still takes years to resolve.

The American Revolution is an interesting aspect here, as what would have happened if the War of Independence had been won by Britain and then later decades before the US Civil War Britain had then banned slavery in the US as happened in the UK in 1833? Wold this have created a second war of independence started from the Southern states but Britain supported by the Nothern States?

well the report was damning in the extreme. some of the emails were disgusting.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2015/03/04/390713944/ferguson-report-justice-dept-says-wilson-won-t-face-civil-rights-charge

watching a statement from the mayor

Brasidas wrote:It is a difficult subject Ben, one which has continued to see resentment again for years which to me has been the cause again of losing a war. How many times have we seen this in history where those who have been defeated are unable to accept this, to the point further hate like in this case is taught against Black people as the cause of this loss. Which is the sour grapes of such losing this coflect by the Southern States, where they use such poor disgusting terminoloogy to discriminate against Blacks in the US. I think this will still takes years to resolve.

The American Revolution is an interesting aspect here, as what would have happened if the War of Independence had been won by Britain and then later decades before the US Civil War Britain had then banned slavery in the US as happened in the UK in 1833? Wold this have created a second war of independence started from the Southern states but Britain supported by the Nothern States?

Interesting to wonder whether Britain would have conceded on the issue of slavery to ward off any secessionist leanings in the South. A lot of politics were played with slavery back then; even Lincoln wasn't intending to do anything about it when first elected.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Brasidas wrote:It is a difficult subject Ben, one which has continued to see resentment again for years which to me has been the cause again of losing a war. How many times have we seen this in history where those who have been defeated are unable to accept this, to the point further hate like in this case is taught against Black people as the cause of this loss. Which is the sour grapes of such losing this coflect by the Southern States, where they use such poor disgusting terminoloogy to discriminate against Blacks in the US. I think this will still takes years to resolve.

The American Revolution is an interesting aspect here, as what would have happened if the War of Independence had been won by Britain and then later decades before the US Civil War Britain had then banned slavery in the US as happened in the UK in 1833? Wold this have created a second war of independence started from the Southern states but Britain supported by the Nothern States?

Interesting to wonder whether Britain would have conceded on the issue of slavery to ward off any secessionist leanings in the South. A lot of politics were played with slavery back then; even Lincoln wasn't intending to do anything about it when first elected.

Lots to hypothesize here Ben and where it would lead to later and that today you would have our Queen as your queen. America entering both world wars from the word go, I mean would there even be a senate? Your flag would be this today:

Maybe, maybe not. Maybe the U.S. would become one of those devolved Commonwealth states and end up like Canada and Australia. Maybe it would have rebelled at a later date, perhaps out of fatigue of fighting for the crown in one of the World Wars.

Or maybe the wealth of America would have perpetuated the British Empire for centuries further. In that case, the U.S. population would probably be quite a bit different than it is today, as fewer people would be expected to immigrate to a dependency than to the "beacon of hope" and the myth of a new start in a new land. I can say one thing, the U.S. would probably not be the coast-to-coast nation that it is -- unless you can picture the Royals buying land from Napoleon