I know refer those who haven't read page 4 of this thread to do so. (Page 4 on default settings, AFAIR, is post #121 to post #160.) This takes a comprehensive reading of the sequence of posts to understand the obfuscation that is being done:
Unabogie refers a few times to the undisputed claim that there was a volley of shots as Brown fled. (Undisputed here meaning that
both the police statements
and the witness statements agree that there was an initial volley as Brown fled, then Brown turned around, then X happened, then the final volley.)
That is the idea Unabogie refers to. Both times Unabogie, when referring to that idea uses the number of shots as 6. It is very clear that is a side point,
Unabogie is just using a number from the audio, and that the exact number is not the main issue being discussed. The main issue is that there was a volley from behind, not the number.
Very clearly and unapologetically attacking a claim by attacking the less relevant feature of the claim. This is a very old tactic that actually works quite well on the general public, you see it quite often in the dirtier side of US politics for instance.
And yet on two occasions this post attacks Unabogie (even to the point of referring to it as a lie!!)
merely because of the number used (6)!!
This was done in post #124 (I don't have to ask for people to please read this post in its entirety because I already asked people to please read the entire page in its entirety!) which I snipped because it is long:
Second, Brown was running AWAY from Wilson during those six shots. This is confirmed by four witnesses and the police themselves. I know people want to say that the six shots are from Brown facing towards Wilson, but witnesses all say the same thing, and police have confirmed that Wilson was shooting at Brown as he was turned away from him.
I hilited the lie.
You can see from that one that the claim is clearly about whether or not all the shots are from when Brown is facing Wilson, the number is a side issue.
And another, unsnipped:
Unless you accept the undisputed fact that the first six shots were from behind. Then the recording is obviously devastating to Darren Wilson.
That you keep posting this lie ....
And again, a full reading of the page will see that the discussion is about whether or not there was a from behind volley at all, the number Unabogie is using is clearly a side issue and just a best guess from the audio.
And yet that poster attacks that side issue, a common way of discrediting a main claim without doing so.
And, now finally, here is why that is all relevant:
One the very same page a poster named Fudbucker repeatedly makes the claim that "all bullets entered from the front".
The main claim there, no side issue at all, is not true. It has been pointed out to Fudbucker multiple times that Baden said it is possible that one bullet entered
while Browns back was to the shooter.
And the autopsy shows Brown was shot in the front.
Anyone who reads the previous thread knows that it was a mis-reading of 2 things related to the autopsy that Baden later very clearly corrected. One being that the drawing is anatomically 2D, not a representation of the position the body was actually in. The other was a statement Baden made. Both of these were very clearlly corrected by Baden himself.
Except that Brown wasn't shot from behind.
All the bullets entered from the front.
What do we know for sure:
2. Brown was not shot from behind.
And yet the previous poster does not once call Fudbucker a liar like they do to Unabogie. And yet they do it to Unabogie when the main claim Unabogie is discussing is clearly not a lie, and even the # part, the side issue is clearly not a lie because it is obviously an educated guess gotten from the audio!
The logical conclusion, very strongly supported by posts from last year, is that obfuscation is being used on posters that make posts that are favorable to one side one.
