Ferguson is being used as a public scene to familiarize the public with militarized police, secretive court proceedings.

53  2014-11-25 by [deleted]

They don't want the first time we see a US city covered in tear gas, flash bangs, and military-grade weaponry to be a serious incident(riots over war, lack of food, power, political uprising) when they cannot risk the additional anger(here they can, as it is a relatively simple situation).

They also are making it precedent to make court cases that have high public attention to have secret jurors. This is so that if any case is brought to court that may cause public outcry, any subpoenas, testimony, evidence, will remain secret(same reason they tried the 9/11 planner in secret military tribunal, not in NYC).

I am not saying anybody planned Ferguson. I am saying they are using this as practice, and one can learn what they will really do if shit hits the fan(the "police" in Ferguson have automatic weaponry for a reason). Also, this "secret jury" i expect to become more commonplace(especially if there are trials of "terrorists" who may implicate the CIA or Saudi Arabia, or if it is a government official/corrupt businessman who could potentially leak damaging info for a shorter sentence.) It's a shitty precedent to set. It's been set. And accepted. And most people don't even realize it I feel.

14 comments

11  NormalOwl 2014-11-25

White people feel all safe and secure now. Soon enough, they'll see too. You're also not part of the overlords. But by then it'll be too late. Shit, already is.

5  devils32391 2014-11-25

This is the sad, brutal truth.

10  rockytimber 2014-11-25

Yeah, but they also do this kind of acclimatization stuff all the time starting in elementary school.

Humans have been acclimitized intentionally through religions, monarchies, etc. for thousands of years.

One thing they don't want us to learn is how to ask intelligent questions. So when we do start getting mad, without fully understanding why, we often act badly. They use that against us too. "Mentally disturbed", "maladjusted". So we have to get smarter, and take care of ourselves. Get more and more rational, and stay calm. And don't fall for the crazy tin foil hat stuff.

Its not easy to be in the minority and state even the obvious. There is a huge mental investment on the part of people who tout the party line. Planting that first seed of doubt is very tricky. It only works if you can stay polite. And you can't give them ammo to doubt that you are rational.

1  OnSpeakerCrab 2014-11-25

but they also do this kind of acclimatization stuff all the time starting in elementary school.

The most obvious of which being the pledge of allegiance which people seem to not even realize is brain washing. You are forced to do it. You refuse, you not only get made fun of, but you get in trouble with the school, your parents- you become an example for others. Don't do this or you end up like him.

5  Sabremesh 2014-11-25

They did the same after the "Boston Bombings" - armoured vehicles and stormtroopers in the streets. And when they indicted Dzokhar Tsarnaev, no cameras were allowed in or outside the court. To my knowledge there isn't a single image in existence of Tsarnaev (or any other reliable evidence he is even alive) since he was taken into custody.

1  dusty_rowboats 2014-11-25

It's 2014 and we are only allowed to see hand drawn courtroom sketches?

http://darkroom.baltimoresun.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/REU-USA-EXPLOSIONS_BOSTON-3.jpg

http://d3819ii77zvwic.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/courtroom.jpg

1  Sabremesh 2014-11-25

Yup, sketchy in every sense. Was the man in court even Dzokhar Tsarnaev?

-1  dusty_rowboats 2014-11-25

Well we would certainly know one way or the other if we had some kind of court photo, but we don't.

The sketches don't look much like him. I guess we are expected to attribute that to the artist being shitty at doing faces.

The funny thing is that for what they paid the artist they could have bought three or four digital cameras.

2  120z8t 2014-11-25

militarized police has been used fora long time now for crowd control. The first really big event I can remember of the top of my head was the Pittsburgh G20 submit in 2009 also the RNC in 2006 and we seen some of it during the Seattle riots in 1999 as well.

Here are some videos of the G20:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etv8YEqaWgA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSMyY3_dmrM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-cxHC_JU8o

2  devils32391 2014-11-25

Yes, but these were events that were suppressed by the media. American eyes haven't seen anything like this blasted on the news since Rodney King.

2  120z8t 2014-11-25

The G20 stuff was all over the news at the time same for Seattle riots.

3  devils32391 2014-11-25

I don't recall it being like this. Ferguson is the only thing on 10 stations at any given time. Occupy Wall street, Gay protests, G20 protests get/got sparing coverage compared to Ferguson/OJ/Rodney. Certain narratives are beneficial,and are pushed, while others are detrimental, and covered only enough as needed(IN USA at least).

1  120z8t 2014-11-25

I think the difference with Ferguson is that it was anticipated for days

1  pupupow 2014-11-25

Yup Yup Yup

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWQCVQUveZA

1  120z8t 2014-11-25

I think the difference with Ferguson is that it was anticipated for days