Friday, August 15, 2014

The Officer In Ferguson, Missouri, Should Be Afraid....

Whether the shooting was justified or not, whether he is guilty of a crime or he fulfilled his duty as a sworn police officer, the officer who shot Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, should be afraid right now.

The Ferguson police department isn't releasing his name at the moment (and rightly so) because of death threats that have been made public. The demands for the release of his name are nothing but attempts to gain access to him - at the least to harass him; at the most to do him bodily harm or kill him in revenge. Al Sharpton and the New Black Panther Party know this yet are demanding the release of his name. They are advocating violence intentionally. They are also calling for his prosecution - before the investigation is complete.

As much as the officer needs to fear for his safety in the community - he needs to fear the Justice Department as well. Remember the George Zimmerman case? Who doesn't? When George Zimmerman was acquitted of murder (a verdict I still agree with), Attorney General Eric Holder sent investigators to Florida with the intent to find any information they could use to prosecute Zimmerman on federal civil rights charges. They found nothing. So what did Holder do? He opened a snitch hotline and advertised for anyone who had any negative information about George Zimmerman that could be used to prosecute him to call that hotline and give them the information. How many Attorney Generals have done that for average citizens? Certainly, if you're talking about an organized crime figure or major criminal but the Attorney General of the United States opened a snitch line on an average citizen who happened to shoot a black kid. And guess what - the Attorney General's pathetic effort at convicting Zimmerman "for something/anything" failed.

Eric Holder has already sent the FBI and probably some of his own investigators to Ferguson to "see what really happened." This time he sent them before the local investigation has even concluded. And why is that? Because a black man was shot by what is presumed to be a non-black police officer. (We still don't know the identity, race or ethnicity of the shooter. I suppose Holder does by now.)

The thing is - other than the race of the victim (and the Attorney General's apparent racial bias) there is no reason the Justice Department should be involved in the investigation. The case has already been turned over to county officials by city officials - simply to remove any suspicions of bias. So why is the FBI there already?

I have no idea if the officer in question was justified in shooting Michael Brown or not. Given my law enforcement background I would like to believe so but mistakes do happen. The bottom line is I believe Eric Holder would prosecute a white person for shooting a black person no matter how justified the shooting was. Eric Holder seems to be driven by race in many cases.

If Holder really was doing his job to the best of his abilities he would have prosecuted the New Black Panther Party for voter intimidation. And there have been others. His treatment of George Zimmerman and his assignment of investigators to this local case are good examples. Holder said recently he was proud to be called an "activist Attorney General." That statement alone says he is not impartial and non-biased - requirements for the position he holds.

It's interesting that Holder and President Obama involve themselves in cases where a black person gets arrested or shot but I've never once heard them involving themselves in similar cases involving another ethnic group. President Obama's statement concerning the Trayvon Martin case prejudiced a lot of people against George Zimmerman.

Now he is speaking out about police "bullying" people and using "excessive force against peaceful protests." Uh... Mr. President - what peaceful protests are you watching? In Ferguson they are throwing molotov cocktails at the police, vandalizing businesses, looting, and shooting people. That's your definition of "peaceful"? OK - you're from Chicago so I suppose that's what you're accustomed to.

I read this morning that the President and First Lady "reached out to the Brown family." They did the same thing in the Trayvon Martin case, even inviting his parents to the White House. When is the last time the President reached out to the family of a white person killed by police, or a white person killed by a black person? It happens all the time but I don't see the President involving himself in those cases. And people wonder why racial division is growing in the United States.

Another article this morning says a police officer is killed every 58 hours in this country. When's the last time the President "reached out to the family" of a police officer who gave his life in service to his community? The President's selective outrage at certain events in this country is very telling of who he is.

I'm going to irritate a few people with this next portion but I'm going to say it anyway. On July 28, 2009, conservative talk show host Glenn Beck said on air that he believes President Obama is a racist. He was attacked and chastised from all sides, including his employer at the time, Fox News. The statement eventually led to Beck not renewing his contract with Fox. But was he wrong?

Based on the continued actions and statements from the President it would appear maybe Beck was correct. Take a good look at the events (killings, arrests, etc.) in this country that cause the President to speak out. How many of them involve victims who are not black?

No comments:

Post a Comment