• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ferguson police used flight restrictions to muzzle media, with feds' help

There's a fair bit of cognitive dissonance going on with the conservatives regarding this Ferguson situation.

You don't trust government, but you appear to blindly belief anything that comes out from the Ferguson PD. Even confronted with straight up proof, you make every effort to deny, deflect or completely ignore evidence that gives credence to the idea that there's something fishy going on in Ferguson.

It's kind of pathetic.

Please don't reference cognitive dissonance without understanding what cognitive dissonance is. Your introductory psychology teacher/professor would be ashamed of your usage.
 
See the thing is it would be stupid if I was completely making this up, howerever there are direct quotes and a audio recording to back up the claims.
No there isn't.
You are misinterpreting them speaking about keeping press aircraft out of harms way for safety reason and nothing more.
That is not muzzling the press.

And we know that the safety reason still exist to keep them out.
Click on the image and read the crap the idiot spews.

 
See the thing is it would be stupid if I was completely making this up, howerever there are direct quotes and a audio recording to back up the claims.

One more time:

The audio recording is of the person making the claim - not of the police. You already know this, I've explained it to you before and provided quotes from your citation to prove it.

Your claim is knowingly dishonest. Stop pushing RT/PressTV propaganda.
 
Please don't reference cognitive dissonance without understanding what cognitive dissonance is. Your introductory psychology teacher/professor would be ashamed of your usage.

By all means, please show me how my usage of the term is incorrect.
 
You think pointing lasers at aircraft is a laughable offense?
Maybe folks should be crying for you.

I would really like to see where I said that lasering an aircraft is a laughable offense, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

No sir, being a pilot and owning a few lasers, I do NOT think it is laughable. It is a form of assault IMO.

Is your position here so weak that you must resort to such absurd statements?
 
I would really like to see where I said that lasering an aircraft is a laughable offense, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

No sir, being a pilot and owning a few lasers, I do NOT think it is laughable. It is a form of assault IMO.

Is your position here so weak that you must resort to such absurd statements?
Stop deflecting.
You were the one saying they didn't know whether to laugh or cry at the information specifically showing that they intend to use lasers. Which is exactly as previously reported being used.

And you are already on record in this thread with the pathetically weak argument falsely claiming deception by the Gov when there was none.

Yeah, stop deflecting.

You saying you didn't know whether to laugh or cry at the provided info clearly says laughing was a possibility, and is why you were called on that bs as well.
 
Stop deflecting.
You were the one saying they didn't know whether to laugh or cry at the information specifically showing that they intend to use lasers. Which is exactly as previously reported being used.

And you are already on record in this thread with the pathetically weak argument falsely claiming deception by the Gov when there was none.

Yeah, stop deflecting.

You saying you didn't know whether to laugh or cry at the provided info clearly says laughing was a possibility, and is why you were called on that bs as well.

Deflecting?

You do realize that lasers do not stop at 2000' of altitude don't you? Some artificial human construct like "airspace" or "temporary flight restriction" does not effect the distance travelled by laser light? Or don't you?

TFR was requested for political reasons, and even the FAA acknowledged that.
 
Deflecting?

You do realize that lasers do not stop at 2000' of altitude don't you? Some artificial human construct like "airspace" or "temporary flight restriction" does not effect the distance travelled by laser light? Or don't you?
Yes you are now deflecting again.

Everything you have been saying has already been addressed by the information provided by everyone else.
You now retorting with 2000 feet is just more deflection.
It was the reported gun shots they were protecting the press from. The lasers were what was reported later and is even more reason to keep the press aircraft out of the area now.


Just as they will be when the GJ decision is reached.
None of which is concocted as you falsely claim.
Or do you really not understand that?

So you have no point. Your claims were absurd

What is more funny is that you were saying the TFR's were silly, but now are pointing out the dangerous of lasers.
You can't even get your **** straight. :doh



TFR was requested for political reasons, and even the FAA acknowledged that.
:doh
Not once did they say any such thing. The TFR was over the threats in the area.
That is why they didn't want the press aircraft in the area. Either you understand that or you don't.

Your claims are nothing more than the product of convoluted thoughts.
 
Yes you are now deflecting again.

Everything you have been saying has already been addressed by the information provided by everyone else.
You now retorting with 2000 feet is just more deflection.
It was the reported gun shots they were protecting the press from. The lasers were what was reported later and is even more reason to keep the press aircraft out of the area now.


Just as they will be when the GJ decision is reached.
None of which is concocted as you falsely claim.
Or do you really not understand that?

So you have no point. Your claims were absurd

What is more funny is that you were saying the TFR's were silly, but now are pointing out the dangerous of lasers.
You can't even get your **** straight. :doh



:doh
Not once did they say any such thing. The TFR was over the threats in the area.
That is why they didn't want the press aircraft in the area. Either you understand that or you don't.

Your claims are nothing more than the product of convoluted thoughts.

You and I do not share the same illusions. :peace
 
You and I do not share the same illusions. :peace
Of course not.
Illusions/delusions/convoluted thoughts?
No matter how it is put, you are the only one between us that has them in regards to this topic, and they are all your own.
 
Here is another one of those delusions that were shooting at aircraft. :doh

He was caught because someone had the intestinal fortitude to stand up agaisnt his threats.
I hope they remain unharmed.


Ferguson man charged with shooting at police helicopter

ST. LOUIS - A local man is facing charges after officers say he shot at a police helicopter with a handgun.

Terrell Doss, 28 of Ferguson, has been charged with two counts of assault on law enforcement in the second degree, one count of assault in the first degree, and three counts of armed criminal action.

Police say Doss fired at a St. Louis County Police helicopter on Sunday, August 10 during the civil unrest in Ferguson. There were two officers inside the helicopter at the time, but the aircraft was not hit and the officers were not injured.

A witness says after the shots were fired, Doss walked by them as said "snitches get stitches." The following day, the witness says they were threatened again by Doss. The witness positively identified Doss as the suspect on November 17.​


Ferguson man charged with shooting at police helicopter
 
Back
Top Bottom