The Washington Post's List of Supposed Shootings of Unarmed Black Men Includes a Man Who Was Not Unarmed and Also Wasn't Black

Democracy dies in remorseless lies by thoroughly corrupt institutions which need to be razed to the ground.

The press continues insisting that for the Four Hour Insurrectionists, holding a helmet counts as being "armed," while for the Protected Races of the Democrat Party and Corrupt Corporate state, lunging at someone with a knife does not count as "armed."

Nor does taking a cop's own taser and electrocuting him with it:

The point of all of this is that the Post's database as it stands now appears to be misleading in at least three important ways. First, a full investigation concluded the shooting was justified, something not reflected in the stories linked by the Post. I'm not suggesting that was done intentionally. It may simply be that the Post hasn’t updated this since it was first added. But at this point, intentionally or not, it is misleading.

Um, it's intentional. How much longer do we have to maintain this pretense that the propaganda, race-war-inflaming press is acting in good faith?

How many further proofs of their bad faith do we need? Does not their constant refusal to correct their errors -- let alone account for those errors, let alone apologize for them -- prove conclusively that they are bad faith actors?

Secondly, the man who was shot in this incident, Channara Tom Pheap was not unarmed. Evidence showed he took the officer's taser and fired it, hitting the officer. So while he may have been unarmed initially, he later armed himself and that's what led to the shooting. In short, the Post has him in the wrong category.

Thirdly, and this is the oddest of all, Pheap is not black. Several stories about the shooting note that he was "of Cambodian descent." There's a photo of him which shows he looks Cambodian and had medium brown skin. He could possibly be mistake for Hispanic but I don’t think anyone would assume he was black if they got a good look at him.

...

And given that we're talking about just 12 shootings in this category nationwide over an entire year, the fact that this shooting doesn't belong in this category for two separate reasons is significant. It also makes you wonder how many other entries in the Post's widely referenced database have errors like this.

The Post's "unjustified shooting of an unarmed black man" is actually about the justified shooting of an armed man who is not black, but Asian.

But otherwise: Another typical exercise in excellence from the enemy of the people media, doing their very best to propagandize for and justify violent terrorist groups.

Note that this list of "unarmed black men unjustifiably shot by police" only includes twelve such persons -- what a national epidemic!

And the fact that they had to add in a clearly false entry to pad the list up to twelve should further indicate their bad faith.

posted by Ace at 06:38 PM

| Access Comments