Because except for Fox News, none of the other MSM news outlets said a WORD about the killer's race!
If the SOB was WHITE you'd a damn sure knew.
Can you say "HATE CRIME"??
WW, not sure if you know but black folks can't be racist or guilty of hate crimes cause theys is oppressed minoritys....
Mike in CT's Link
I don't think you can understate how damaging his actions and words were following the GJ verdict in the Staten Island case.
Yep. I thought it was disgraceful and unprofessional.
The mayor had no more to do with the tragic death of these officers than he did with the murderer's shooting of his girlfriend the day before.
Al Sharpton was also outraged at the murders
"We have stressed at every rally and march that anyone engaged in any violence is an enemy to the pursuit of justice for Eric Garner and Michael Brown. We have been criticized at National Action Network for not allowing rhetoric or chanting of violence and would abruptly denounce it at all of our gatherings." A. S.
To my knowledge not one public figure has attempted to justify or explain the officer's murders with the case of Eric Garner.
I think every decent person, regardless of how they feel about the death of Eric Garner, mourns the death of these officers.
Mike in CT's Link
Given the Mayor's poorly thought-out statement I'd argue it was very apropos.
The mayor had no more to do with the tragic death of these officers than he did with the murderer's shooting of his girlfriend the day before.
Please-the two incidents are only related to the extent of being perpetrated by the same criminal. The mayor's statements fed into the cult of victimhood in a way that did the Jesse Jackson's and Al Sharpton's proud. To deny this is to be beyond naive.
Al Sharpton was also outraged at the murders
I'm with tru on this one; saddened at the likely thought that you typed that with a straight face and worse, believe it.
typical lib-extremism
typical 'zig when they zag'
typical hor$hit
typical all from the same group- the killer, the mayor, the rev and the interweb apologist
The quote was direct from Sharpton.
The Mayor merely expressed the bewilderment so many of us felt at the GJ decision not to indict.
The murders of the officers was the act of a deranged man who then shot himself.
Have you no decency at all? Is there nothing for you all beside partisan warfare?
You make me sick. All of you.
Feeling is mutual. Only a fool would make excuses for a black thug who commits capital murder. The killer knew what he did was wrong otherwise he wouldn't have killed himself.
A baseless ad hominem; deal with the specific issues and if they are easily rebutted you might want to rethink the ground you've staked out.
The quote was direct from Sharpton.
Tawana Brawley. Let me know if you still want to cite the Reverend Al as your personal paragon of virtue.
The Mayor merely expressed the bewilderment so many of us felt at the GJ decision not to indict.
Hogwash; the mayor played to the notion that there must be inherent racism in any case that involves a white police office and a black man. He pandered to that segment of the populace and evidently from your continued railings, to the white population enamored with perpetuating white guilt.
Have you no decency at all? Is there nothing for you all beside partisan warfare?
Oh please, can the theatrics already. Hop in your car, take a drive down to Harlem and apologize for the 99.99999% of the white population who don't share your predilection for liberal handwringing over every perceived injustice. Maybe you can ring up Al on the drive and he'll join you for a kumbaya hand-holding session.
You make me sick. All of you.
Nothing partisan there, just run-of-the-mill drivel. Feel free to peddle your nonsense at DU, DK or any of the other sites where your skewed worldview will fit in quite nicely with the rest of the out-of-touch-with reality crowd.
I'll sleep quite soundly absent your presense, never fear.
Mint's Link
“Dead cops!” comes the reply.
Done.
Thus does rhetoric have consequences. There may have been just a single shooter in Bedford-Stuyvesant on Saturday afternoon. But New York’s failure to denounce without nuance the bloodlust that’s been boiling out of the corners of the Eric Garner-Michael Brown demonstrations for weeks now boils down to this:
There is blood on many hands this morning.
Yes, First Amendment. Yes, redress of grievances. Yes, peaceful protests — even as clogged bridges and mobbed boulevards created, however temporarily, very real peril for tens of thousands of New Yorkers every night for a week.
The free-speech trope is so obviously true that it’s a deflection even to raise it. Here’s the real issue: It was, and it remains, the responsibility of protest organizers — such as they may be in the face of ubiquitous social media — to directly address murderous incantations, to unequivocally condemn those who call down harm on the city’s protectors.
And they didn’t do that.
Moreover, when two of the six people who “allegedly” attacked two cops on the Brooklyn Bridge a week ago Saturday night turn out to be, respectively, a CUNY professor and an organizer for a union that placed five one-time senior union leaders in top de Blasio administration posts, it’s clear that New York isn’t dealing with bearded Bolsheviks living in caves. Violence against cops has gone mainstream — that is, violent threats to society itself can manifest virtually without a soul among the city’s elected leaders saying so much as boo.
Pitiful.
The cops understand all this, of course. They get the threat. They are steeped in the department’s institutional memories of other cops, executed from ambush in similar circumstances. They know its tradition of reflexive heroism under deadly threat — and they are proud it its record: Not perfect, of course, but better than anyone else’s.
And now this.
Who would have thought that PBA President Pat Lynch’s don’t-come-to-my-funeral petition would have become so relevant, so prescient, so tragically right to the point.
So quickly.
There will be time to count the political consequences of Saturday’s cowardly murders.
They will be substantial.
The city’s cut-the-baby-in-half approach to the Garner-Brown protests — genuflect to the PBA, confer with the most rhetorically irresponsible of the protesting groups, rinse, repeat — lent an air of moral equivalence to the events leading up to Saturday’s savagery.
Nobody knows what was in the shooter’s mind, of course; happily, he relieved society of the responsibility of trying to find out with a well-placed bullet to his own head.
But anybody who thinks he wasn’t emboldened by City Hall’s placidity in the face of nihilistic, bloodthirsty incantations is delusional.
And anyone who believes that the city’s decision not to draw a high-profile line — even if only symbolically — after the “alleged” Brooklyn Bridge attacks was not empowering to the shooter is equally wrong.
Was the shooter crazy? Define crazy. The city is full of crazies. And none of them needs to be encouraged in their psychoses — certainly not by the suggestion that official New York thinks they somehow may have a point. It’s wrong to blame the protests wholly for the actions of one person — up to a point.
That is, right up to the point when the protesters began to demand dead cops — and nobody put a stop to it.
Right up to the point where protesters began to drop full garbage cans 10 feet down on unsuspecting cops, and nobody took it for what it was: An escalation that culminated in yesterday’s Bed-Stuy executions.
And now for the funerals — for the heartbreaking skirl of the pipes and the agony of the families; for the grim-faced officers from across America, lined to the horizon in silent tribute to ambushed brothers; for the folded flags and the endless motorcades to the cemetery.
You wanted dead cops, protesters? You got ’em. Now live with it. If you can.
It appears you have come unarmed to a battle of wits.
That would make anyone sick.
So full of partisan hate and at CHRISTmas time. Fra I will pray for you.
With all due respect there is a very important point that both you and Fra have missed; the point of the mayor's commentary and what, if any fallout resulted from it.
To the point of what the mayor expressed in his remarks after the GJ result; unlike you, I, Fra or any other citizen Bill DiBlasio does not have the luxury of being able to publicly opine as a private citizen. You see, Bill DiBlasio isn't just an ordinary citizen he is the titular head of the government of NYC. As such he has to be cognizant that there will be some elements that lack the perspective (probably the intellectual maturity as well) to separate the remarks of a citizen from the remarks of the face of NYC government.
When the Mayor makes remark that can easily be interpreted to express disagreement with the GJ result that result will no longer be seen as the execution of our judicial process in proper context but rather as another example of the system failing minorities. Sadly there are too many Al Sharpton's etc. out there ready to prey on that sentiment to their personal advantage.
Leadership carries responsibilities; not always fair, but there nonetheless. Bill DiBlasio ignored those responsibilities to express what he felt as a human being. His office and accompanying responsibilities to all the citizens of NYC (including and especially to those who "protect and serve") do not allow him that luxury.
If Mayor DiBlasio wanted to properly and to great benefit exercise the bully pulpit of his office he could have and should have immediately condemned those "fringe jackasses" you refer to rather than give them a pass to peddle their hate via his deafening silence.
Would this nut job have perpetrated this crime absent any protests? We'll never know and at best can only speculate. Would he have been as bold had the Mayor's intitial response been to lead rather than to pander? Again, we'll never know but I know that the best tool to prevent fires is not more gasoline.
Bill DiBlasio failed the citizens of NYC and he failed two police officers whose only "crime" was that they wore the uniform that he, whether innocently and inadvertly or not cast as the villain.
Regarding who should take responsibility; certainly the thug who pulled the trigger, no question. Where you and I and Fra part company however is I'm not willing to give a pass for those who functioned as his enablers.
You mean the ones that called for dead cops? Michael Goodwin lays it out perfectly why the Mayor and progressives share the blame.
De Blasio’s arrogance puts cops in cross hairs
By Michael Goodwin
December 22, 2014 | 12:59am
After I once criticized President Obama for appearing to abandon Israel by being rude to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, my mailbag quickly overflowed with anti-Semitic attacks. The writers proudly signed their names to the kind of vile slurs on Jews usually whispered in private.
The president bore some responsibility for that tide of sludge. Not that Obama was guilty of personal anti-Semitism, but his behavior was a whistle the anti-Semitic dogs heard loud and clear. Unintentionally, he gave them license to come out of hiding.
So it is with Mayor Bill de Blasio and the cop-haters. There is no way he wanted to see NYPD officers murdered, and his distress is surely genuine. But he is accountable nonetheless.
“Once a bullet leaves a gun, it has no friends,” the late Sen. Pat Moynihan once said. That is the nature of power, too. Those who have it must take extra care to be precise in their words and actions, lest they unleash the dogs of hell.
The mayor failed that test miserably. He can run from the consequences, but he can’t hide. His mayoralty is sunk unless he comes to grips with the fact that he lit the fuse that led to Saturday’s explosion.
For two years, starting with his 2013 campaign, he painted a target on the NYPD. Many of us warned repeatedly that he was playing with fire, but he saw his election as a blank check.
With Al Sharpton protecting his radical flank, the once-amiable back-bencher from Brooklyn has grown pompous with power. He fancies himself the leader of a national movement, and is comfortable lecturing the public and even the Democratic Party about its shortcomings. He has a habit of silencing critics by declaring, “I am right.”
Again and again, he depicted the great and gallant NYPD as an occupying army of racist brutes and foolishly boasted that he had warned his biracial son that the police were a danger to him. Just Friday, he met with demonstrators despite the fact that five cops had been assaulted in the so-called peaceful protests, and despite a video in which hundreds if not thousands of protesters are seen demanding “dead cops.”
As John Lindsay and David Dinkins learned, you cannot govern New York if you are hostile to the police. But even those mayors never experienced the shunning dished out to de Blasio Saturday night at the hospital.
The instant when scores of officers turned their backs on him was spontaneous, but reflected the hostility he spent two years creating. He earned their wrath.
As it stands, the bonds between City Hall and the Thin Blue Line are not merely strained. They are severed.
That is a threat to the entire fabric of the city. If it is open season on cops, nobody in New York is safe. Gun-toting maniacs like the one who assassinated Officers Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu will not be stopped by reason or appeasement.
They are evil, and they feel emboldened by the demonizing of cops. Give them an inch, they will take a mile. They won’t stop until they are stopped.
That is the lesson of the last 20 years. The crime wave that swept the nation was stopped in New York under the leadership of Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg.
They didn’t do it with midnight basketball or compassionate-sounding social programs. Nor are New Yorkers inherently less violent and more honest than the people of Chicago or Detroit or Baltimore.
Gotham became the safest big city in American only through smart, aggressive policing that was demanded by two mayors who knew the difference between good and evil. Their relentless approach to arresting criminals and preventing crime was not without risks or mistakes. But their approach worked beyond imagination and amounted to a man-made miracle.
The lesson they left was that, as mayor, you are either with the police, or you are against them. No matter what you say about respecting them or how many tears you shed when you try to comfort grieving families, the choice is binary.
That fact is nowhere to be found in the progressive playbook, which sees everything through race and class. But it is how the real world works.
Yes or no? De Blasio said no to the police, and now he reaps the whirlwind.
But what about organized violence? Look at ISIS. They are indoctrinating people with internet videos and hate speech, creating killers. That's not the same as a random lunatic going batsh1t murder crazy (like the Sandy Hook shooter). The difference being if it is organized motivational push for more/retaliatory violence than I believe it is linked and holds some responsibility. Like in Ferguson when the Dad said to burn the place down, and then that is what happened.
The argument trying to say this killer shot his girlfriend too and that wasn't a part of the violent NY chant is weak. You could also say that this killer was a d-bag for years and yet didn't shoot cops until Al Sharpton finished speaking!
(I predict an explanation forthcoming that will attempt to interperate how either the crowd was NOT saying what they did, or they didn't mean it, or they were not refering to the police specifically. Either way, it should be entertaining.)
Emerald Garner, whose father Eric died after police used a choke hold on him during an arrest, came to the New York City Police Memorial today to express her condolences following the deaths of two NYPD officers who were gunned down over the weekend.
"I just had to come out and let their family know that we stand with them, and I’m going to send my prayers and condolences to all the families who are suffering through this tragedy," she told ABC News. "I was never anti-police. Like I said before, I have family that’s in the NYPD that I’ve grown up around, family reunions and everything so my family you know, we’re not anti-police."
Did you take tap dancing lessons, or does it come naturally?
I still go with my "ignore" comment though. YOU didn't hear them, so it didn't happen......got it Brad.
I cringed the first time I read this. Why? Well for starters investigative reporters (e.g. Breitbart and the like) very quickly exposed this fraud for what it was; liberal activists deliberately showing up at Tea Party events either in full KKK regalia or playing to the lowest common denominator via some other vehicle/stereotype and hoping the caricature stuck.
I doubt you could find a more stark contrast of comportment than the aftermath of a Tea Party event contrasted to the aftermath of the "Occupy crowd." (More than a handful of defecated in or on police cars can testify to the distinction.)
Once exposed for the fraud it was the "tea party racist" meme quickly disappeared from the daily discourse and post mortem has only been seen in occasional revivals posted by liberal internet trolls trying to be disruptive on largely conservative sites.
I'd be a bit more careful in the future when trying to draw analogies or comparitive examples to make a point to vet such examples before posting them.
