Once again it seems America has come completely unhinged,
with the help of the mainstream “un-biased” media there to fan the flames of
our own cultural destruction. Sadly,
racism has always been a problem in our nation, and around the world, for that
matter. Even more sadly, it will always be present in our society to at least a hopefully minor extent. It is an inexcusable evil that, when
left unchecked, has resulted in the dehumanization of others so that they could
be exploited, enslaved, and even murdered.
Even more sadly, the number of people enslaved today throughout the
world in 2017 exceeds the numbers that were enslaved in 19th century
America. Many of these slaves today are
perniciously sold and used as sex slaves.
Yet despite such horrific numbers, America was doing far
better with its racism problem in recent times, until the last decade or so. We even had a majority of Americans vote for
our first black president. While I agreed
with very little of President Obama’s policies and had seen many disturbing
signs that had cracked his polished veneer while he was still running for the
White House, I too was buoyed by the fact that America in its decency could
indeed elect a person of color to the presidency. Indeed, I would venture that the timing in
our history was such that Barack Obama’s color was absolutely an asset to his
election. (Never mind the foolishness of
voting for someone simply because of their color, instead of their
qualifications.)
I was greatly disheartened, however, to see that rather than
further unite our nation as Americans, President Obama squandered the good will
bestowed on him by a significant majority and decided to insert himself into
more localized incidents; indeed he was often prompted to do so by the
complicit mainstream media once again. The
net result was that instead of us all simply being “Americans”, he further
divided us into hyphenated Americans, most especially black-Americans and
white-Americans.
Recently in Charlottesville, Virginia, there was a
relatively small gathering of assorted white supremacists, neo-Nazis, and various nut-job racists that gathered with a permit to exercise their first amendment rights to
spew their vile speech. It should have
been a minor story of only local interest, but sadly some Nazi-wannabe thought
it would be a great idea to become a domestic terrorist and kill people by
driving his car into a group of counter-protesters. Luckily only one lady was killed instead of the
dozens that could have been. This terrorist,
whom I will not name to give him further notoriety, will hopefully be punished
to the fullest extent of the law for his act of murder accordingly.
It seems that the inflamed result of this event for some of
our brothers and sisters on the far left is to insist on tearing down any
vestige of our national history if it is even tangentially connected to the
confederacy or even much of western civilization. Indeed, eight statues and monuments have been
destroyed, defaced, or pulled down by these radicals on the left since the
Charlottesville murder.
One of the monuments defaced was of St. Junipero Serra, who
was a priest and tireless advocate for Native Americans.
Another monument was a bust of Abraham Lincoln, which leads to the question;
do these idiots have any idea of what they are even protesting? They certainly don’t have any historical
knowledge evidently.
Recently, Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz implored his
fellow liberals,
"Do not glorify the violent people who are now tearing down the statues. Many of these people, not all of them, many of these people are trying to tear down America. Antifa is a radical, anti-America, anti-free market, communist, socialist, hard-left sensorial organization... They use violence. Just because they are opposed to fascism and to some of these monuments, should not make them heroes of the liberals. ... Doing what Stalin did, just erasing history and rewriting it to serve current purposes does pose a danger. And it poses a danger of education malpractice. I'm a liberal, and I think it’s the obligation of liberals to speak out against the hard-left radicals, just like it’s the obligation of conservatives to speak out against the extremism of the hard right.''
Professor Dershowitz makes a good point. Since the far-left hate groups of Black Lives
Matter and antifa want to tear down confederate statues, what is to stop them
from wanting to tear down monuments to Washington, Jefferson, and Madison? After all, these founding fathers were slave
owners too. What is the difference
between Thomas Jefferson and Robert E. Lee to these ignoramuses?
It has been posited to me that Washington and Jefferson were
great founders of this country so their slave owning is somehow overlooked or
excused. I frankly don’t buy it, as
those guilty of tearing down statues to somehow hide our history don’t seem to
love the idea of America in the first place, so why would they leave its
founders alone?
Now personally I obviously don’t think any vestige of our founders
should be disturbed, much less destroyed, but for the sake of consistency on
the far left, how do they reconcile this disparity in their targeted
anger? Further, do these fools think
that by removing statues or defacing monuments, we will somehow purge our
history? We fought one of our bloodiest
wars over the sin of slavery. That sin
was paid for in blood. We need to
acknowledge that and try to make this nation one for all Americans again.
Today’s far right hate groups are grotesquely wrong in their
racism and hate. The far left hate
groups are likewise wrong in their counter-racism and hate. The calling out of the extremes on both the
left and right fringes should be the cause of every decent American.
That said, “both-siderism” is something that has taken a lot
of flak lately from some quarters, particularly from the far left. I suppose I am guilty of this from a
political perspective. But I really
don’t consider myself as pointing out what’s wrong on the left as a means of deflection
from the wrongdoing on the right. On the
contrary, I could care less what political persuasion one is. I am pointing out what is right and what is
wrong - period.
It is because of this
that I can unequivocally point out all violence, racism, and hate regardless of
the group that is fomenting it, whether it is from the KKK or the BLM; the
neo-Nazis or the antifa crowd. All are
despicable and all are deserving of decent Americans’ condemnation accordingly.
(And yes, some are indeed worse than others are, but that doesn’t give any of
them a free pass because their transgressions’ results of hate are less in body
count.)
At the end of the day, we need to come together once again,
regardless of color, faith, or political persuasion to call out against the
wrongs and evil in our society.
In the meantime, if folks want to help fight against white
supremacy, perhaps they should call out the evil of Planned Parenthood, which aborts
approximately 266 black babies every day.
Just a thought…
30 comments:
Mr. Paine,
Hope you are ready for the firestorm coming your way.
It is sad to think there should even be a firestorm when I simply said that ALL of us should soundly condemn ALL racism, hatred, and violence. Why is that even a point of controversy?
Is some hate, racism, and violence better than others? Shouldn't it all be disavowed?
What a strange world we live in, my friend!
Report on another violent far left group.
An armed Antifa group is launching a new cell in Philadelphia, with support from the “alt-left” alternative media.
The group currently hosts anti-police workshops called “Our Enemies
in Blue.” The group draws inspiration from convicted murderers and calls
for violence against the police, theft of goods, and armed
insurrection.
Antifa websites like It’s Going Down, Sub.Media and Insurrection News have been promoting the group, which calls itself the Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement, calling on their readers to donate to a Fundrazr account for the creation of the new cell.
The press release the group published in far-left media is filled with hyperbolic claims about how “mosques are being ruthlessly bombed” and how “LGBTQ are being battered.”
“The destruction of black life continues unabated as millions
languish in the plantations of the modern day slave system,” the group
states.
Taking pride in the “legacy” of “Philadelphia’s rich revolutionary
tradition,” RAM cites Mumia Abu Jamal, the Black Panther activist who
shot and killed Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner in 1981.
It also cites Russell Shoats, who shot a police officer in the back
five times in 1970. Similar to Antifa, the actions of the Black Panthers
have been described as having a “very undefined purpose of assaulting police officers.”
Like other Antifa groups, RAM claims to oppose the usual -isms and
white supremacy, but a quick look at the organization’s “Political
Foundation” page, as highlighted by Far Left Watch,
notes the inclusion of several alarming points, including the
“Abolition of Gender,” and the “Expropriation and the Cooperative
Economy.”
The latter calls on members to “expropriate” or “take away” goods,
lands, and tools to “begin the revolutionary process.” Expropriation is
another way of saying “seize” or “steal.”
The organization models itself after the so-called Rojava Revolution,
a leftist guerilla movement currently active in northern Syria. RAM
states that the communists offer a “foundation in communal and council
based political organization and militant defense.”
The organizations within the Rojava Revolution are currently involved in combat against ISIS.
Far Left Watch notes that RAM has been hosting a variety of
anti-police workshops including a “Legal Training” workshop, a class on
the “Introduction to Anarchism,” and one called “Our Enemies in Blue,”
which deals with anti-police action–or how to handle police officers
during violent clashes.
Despite active calls for violence against law enforcement and
revolution against the government, the liberal media has been
surprisingly lenient in its coverage of Antifa, depicting them as
righteous crusaders against the rise of white supremacy.
Ian Miles Cheong
The Daily Caller
I am not offended by Confederate statutes as it is a static display of history. I read one black women said the only way those statutes can be dangerous if one of them fell on you.
One thing that does offend me is when I see a pickup truck flying a large confederate flag, that is insulting to all black people that see it. To me the truck driver is aggressively showing his racism and proud of it.
Somehow I misplaced my flame thrower, Mr Paine did you see where I left it?
JTF,
That was a fabulously content free article you cut and pasted. I can not independently verify any information claimed in it. As far as I can tell 'Our Enemies in Blue' is a book from 13 years ago. Not a workshop.
Where's the press release for this Antifa group the Daily Caller writer references? Maybe that'll help me understand better.
Woodenman, I too am not offended by confederate statues, and I saw plenty of them during the years I lived in Virginia and North Carolina. That said, I understand how confederate statues could indeed be offensive to people of color. After all, these are powerful symbols of a failed nation that ultimately fought to keep them enslaved. Now that doesn't give them the authority to unilaterally decide to remove these statues of their own accord via vandalism or other means. I think they should vote or run for office with that being a part of their platform, if they feel it is warranted. Perhaps it is indeed time to move these statues to museums or cemeteries of confederate dead so that part of history can rest in peace. Vandalism is certainly not the answer.
As for the rednecks flying confederate flags from their trucks or what-have-you, well again, we may not like that and indeed may even find that offensive; however, that is the first amendment right of the person flying it. There is certainly not a constitutional right for us not to be offended. As I said before, at least you know where this person stands, instead of them hiding their bigotry in the shadows, my friend.
Oh, and I haven't seen your flame thrower anywhere. I even looked by my rocket launcher.
"Antifa websites like It’s Going Down, Sub.Media and Insurrection News have been promoting the group, which calls itself the Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement, calling on their readers to donate to a Fundrazr account for the creation of the new cell."
"I can not independently verify any information claimed in it."
I doubt you really read the article or searched as you claim if you would have found these:
http://noisyroom.net/blog/2017/08/25/communist-antifa-group-calls-for-armed-insurrection-seizing-property-and-violence-against-police-video/
https://itsgoingdown.org/
https://insurrectionnewsworldwide.com/
Why would you doubt I would read the article? Cause it's from some fly-by-night right-wing blog called Noisyroom.net?
This is what I'm taking issue with and what I mean by independently verify:
"I don’t remember a time that we just tolerated domestic terror groups like this in the US. The media is actually helping and promoting them."
I CAN'T FIND WHERE THE MEDIA IS ACTUALLY HELPING.
I look up the group you refer to, who they refer to, and the only places I find any mentions of them are on Daily Caller and other right-wing blogs. How, pray tell, is the media helping these people when I can't locate anything written by the media about them?
I google and research this Revolutional Abolitionist Movement and all I find is a youtube channel with 21 followers and 4 total moderately well produced videos over a 3 year period of time AND mentions of them on right-wing blogs.
The Media's doing a terrible job stoking the flames if I can't actually find any mentions outside of Daily Caller and Noisy Room.
Let's travel over to Insurrection Worldwide, shall we? Oh. Hmm, I could go to either their Russian or their English Facebook page.
MM/JTF, Where's that Philly Antifa Press release? I'm still having trouble finding it... which is incredibly odd since you'd think, since the Media's helping these people oppose Fascists, that it would be a whole lot easier to find it.
Oh, and T.Paine, I apologize. JTF/MM sidetracked me from commenting on your article.
I agree with you on the broader point that all of the violence is bad. You mention the both-siderism and how you suppose you are guilty of it. I don't know how to express to you so that you understand; Just after an incident where one side does something truly terrible to another, following that up by reminding people that the side that had something terrible happen to it has, itself, done terrible things is what people take issue with. It's minimizing what JUST happened. You're NOT wrong, it's just NOT the time. Just like with BLM. I'm not going to go into BLM, you called it a hate group, so you clearly have something against it. Just, Charlottesville happened and the national conversation became inundated with ANTIFA does it too. You followed the tragedy up, yourself, with three consecuitve posts on this blog parroting the whataboutism. Deflection doesn't need to be intentional or malicious. I'm with you. Violence is awful. Pointing out violence against a statue of President Lincoln is sidetracking us from the conversation we (The general population) were trying to have about Charlottesville.
"I CAN'T FIND WHERE THE MEDIA IS ACTUALLY HELPING." (leftist domestic terror groups) ~ TB3
Well, I understand where there is some basis for this complaint in the following aspect; the mainstream media has long soft-pedaled the vandalism and violence perpetrated by far left fringe groups, whether it is from the Occupy Wall Street crowd to the violence inciting of some of the Black Lives Matter groups. Often times the media comes across as condoning of some of these fringe left groups, or are even actually sympathetic to their causes. I could understand an objective reporting of the facts without bias, but they certainly do not do that.
TB3, I appreciate your comment about both-siderism. I understand your point about timing too. You make good sense with this suggestion. That said, I simply said that we all need to condemn violence and hatred wherever the specter of it arises.
Indeed, I first came out and stated without prompting on another left-wing blog that the racist idiot that ran down Heather Heyer was a domestic terrorist and should be prosecuted as such. Evidently this was not enough for some folks, as I was attacked for being a conservative and thus a supporter of Trump and thus a racist by default. Never mind I routinely and emphatically criticize President Trump on numerous issues and have been very open about the fact that I did not vote for him.
Now I truly don't care what some political opponents on the internet think of me, as I and those dear to me know who I truly am. That said, I allowed myself to be drug into the nastiness of the debate and did indeed resort to pointing out the hypocrisy of some when "their side" has been guilty in the past. Like I said, I don't care so much about the right and left of it when it comes to violence; I am more concerned with the right and wrong of it.
I appreciate your thoughtful comment, sir.
TB3 the videos embedded in the links should tell the story enough, even for you.
https://insurrectionnewsworldwide.com/ is this right wing?
Confederate statues? Nothing but participation trophies for losers. ;-) I applaud Mr. Paine’s common sense to reject vandalism and suggest that they belong in museums.
Once again Mr. Paine chooses to focus more time blaming Obama for racism than for actual racists. Here’s a clue. “Both sides” are not equally to blame. Obama is not Trump. BLM is not the Klan. Antifa are not Nazis. Follow the trail of dead bodies if you can’t figure out the difference.
It is an inexcusable evil that, when left unchecked, has resulted in the dehumanization of others so that they could be exploited, enslaved, and even murdered.
Exactly. So why allow that hate speech to go unchecked?
As Mr. Paine noted elsewhere:
When it becomes a problem, as Thomas Jefferson so stated, is when their actions, "pick my pocket or break my leg".
How many broken legs and deaths in Charlottesville does it take to awaken Mr. Paine?
Mr. Paine understands it is a crime to threaten the president. It is a crime to slander and libel. Hate speech directed towards others based on color of someone's skin, their ethnicity, gender, their country or continent of origin, or their sexual preferences should be in that group of exceptions. No harm to the republic or to the free speech of Americans could ensue from this distinction.
Hate speech is not free speech. It threatens others. Mr. Paine marginalizes the harm of hate rhetoric that leads to death. Klan and Nazi “free speech” has resulted in terrorizing and killing of many Americans. Why should that hate speech be a protected right when “fire” shouted in a theater is not? Both have deadly consequence and have NOTHING to do with the intended purpose of our First Amendment.
Our First Amendment rights are intended to allow us freedom of religion, a free press, and to peacefully gather and speak truth to power, NOT to facilitate racism, bigotry and violence toward minorities.
Is this notion too radical? Too “Alinsky”?
Looks like Dave is ok with limiting free speech, unless it's liberal speech.
Great example of how wrong Dave is, and he knows it. Has he ever denounced Antifa by name?
https://www.weaselzippers.us/354831-mob-of-antifa-in-berkeley-chasing-and-beating-people-after-protesting-rally/
Ah yes. From that distinguished bastion of journalism, Weaselzippers.us.
TB3,
check out it out, its a link to a tweet.
Funny how you demand sources and after provided, you slink away with your tail between your legs.
Will you denounce Antifa?
Dave, I am going to write this for you ONE MORE TIME. I am not equating the past murders of the KKK with the BLM crowd today. That said, BLM is absolutely a racist group responsible for assault, battery, hate speech, vandalism, and even inciting violence against police and others. They are a hate group too.
The difference is that every decent person understands and rejects the KKK as being a hate group. They don't all realize that BLM is too, and Obama was complicit with this by inviting some of their leadership to a White House forum. He would NEVER give a platform like that to the KKK or neo-Nazis, nor should he. So why is he doing so with racist anarchists like the BLM?
AGAIN, ALL groups that spew hate, racism, and inciting of violence should be condemned by all Americans. Why don't you join me in doing so instead of excusing one side for their actions just because their body count of murders isn't as great as the other side's.... yet?
"Mr. Paine understands it is a crime to threaten the president. It is a crime to slander and libel. Hate speech directed towards others based on color of someone's skin, their ethnicity, gender, their country or continent of origin, or their sexual preferences should be in that group of exceptions. No harm to the republic or to the free speech of Americans could ensue from this distinction." ~ Dave Dubya
You are right and I agree that it is a crime and should be so to threaten the president (even though this seems to be less of an issue now that Trump has been threatened by numerous Hollywood celebrities, and even some leftist politicians.) I further agree that slander and libel should remain illegal.
Where we part ways is when you start becoming the "thought police" and telling people that they don't have the right to be bigots and racists in their speech (Notwithstanding if they are inciting violence in their words or actions). THAT is the difference. No, it is not legal to falsely shout "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Nor is it legal to incite others to violence or destruction. One is entitled to their thoughts and opinions, even if it offends you, Dave. Even if it offends me.
If we make it illegal to espouse a contrary point of view or opinion that we find repugnant, then at what point does it stop that the powers that be ascertain that defending conservative (or liberal) dogma is offensive and therefore also illegal? Sure... no harm can come to our republic.
If David Duke or Al Sharpton wish to stand at a podium in front of a handful of like-minded bigots and spew their race-based hate, then they should be allowed. Indeed, those speeches should be made an example of the kind of intolerance and hatred that ALL OF US should be condemning. As long as they are not telling or even encouraging others towards violence or illegal acts, THAT speech is protected by the first amendment, Dave.
I am sure that you think my juxtaposing Duke and Sharpton together is an unfair comparison. THAT is exactly my point though. YOU may think that, even though Sharpton has been guilty of hateful speech that has been libelous and slanderous.
If you think that speech you find offensive should be made illegal, then you are indeed too "Alinsky" for our free republic.
"Looks like Dave is ok with limiting free speech, unless it's liberal speech." ~ Majormajor
Indeed, it sometimes seem like that is that case, doesn't it. I know Dave doesn't condone violence perpetrated by any group, but he sure has a hard time denouncing the hate from the left.
TB3, regardless of whether weazlezippers is "bastion of journalism" or not, the video that MM provided sure seems to back up our point that antifa is not a simple group of peaceful protesters. Of course, anyone that cared to look already knew this, sir.
What did that poor Nazi do to get smacked down? Note the BLACK journalist intervening. Or ignore it. He is the enemy too, right?
Yes, Obama is race agitator for meeting with BLM, but the racist birther that lied about his legitimacy is in the White House. Outrage noted.
Same thing, amirte?
Obama is just as much a race agitator as Trump. Got it. Mr. Paine does tend to blame Obama quite regularly for race problems, leaving Trump out of the discussion entirely. Let’s go with “Obama is more to blame for racism than Trump”, just to settle the position to Mr. Paine’s satisfaction. I will stand by for the clarification that they are equally to blame for inflaming racism.
Duke and Sharpton are “equally racist” now? BLM is just as racist as the Klan? Got it. Select a belief and stick to it. Trump would be proud.
Mr. Paine has accused BLM of “assault, battery, hate speech, vandalism, and even inciting violence against police and others”. NO EVIDENCE cited. As usual, the belief will suffice. And still being equated with the evil BLOODY murderous history of the Klan!
That takes some flexible values, a touch of bigotry, disregard of facts, and a bit of cold blooded indifference to the dead victims. After all, they are just as much to blame.
Here’s another difference between the Klan and BLM. One groups directs hate at minorities. As covered under the First Amendment, the other group protests government policy and legal tolerance of police unaccountability for killing Blacks. And yes, it happens.
Unfortunately Mr. Paine sees BLM only as a raging horde of Black Thugs coming to take his freedom.
Nice to see this time MM decided Nazi/Klan speech is not “liberal speech” after all. (You like it both ways, don’t you?)
It amazes me, well, not anymore, how one will jump to one’s conclusion of choice. The subject is hate speech, not policy differences. Nowhere did I suggest limiting free speech on valid public issues. Nowhere did I suggest limiting free conservative speech on taxes, war, the military, law enforcement (A BLM issue) or opinions on government matters.
Yet you quickly jump to accusing me of being ok with limiting your non-liberal speech. This is your conditioned reaction, I suppose. Amygdala. Look it up.
(Cont.)
(Cont.)
Just a point. Klan hate speech is not liberal. Nazi hate speech is not liberal. Conservative speech is not liberal. If I reacted like you, I’d whine about being equated with Nazis and the Klan.
But I made a distinction, didn’t I? There was an important qualifier, wasn’t there? Another futile discernment I make is noting the differences between conservative, and the far Right con-servative cult. The Pope is a conservative man. Eisenhower was a conservative man. Trump, Limbaugh, Palin, Alex Jones, Ted Nugent, ad nauseum, are con-servatives.
Hate is the difference. Con-servatives spew hate, blame and false accusations for liberals, not unlike Nazis and the Klan do for ethnic racial minorities. Con-servative demonization of liberals is their version of political hate speech. The killer of the Unitarians in Tennessee was one of many who were directly influenced and motivated to violence by con-servative hate.
Con-servatives have been emulating the worst of extremists, establishing an industry of propaganda, blame, accusations and hate through media, demonizing those who disagree with their ideology. How many times have liberals been branded as America hating commies? If I only had a dime for each time. They refuse to see it, but they are treading far closer to a tool of fascism than a few vandalizing anarchists.
If you can’t see the difference between First Amendment protected political speech and a Nazi/Klan rally, I’m wasting my time trying to employ reason and perspective here.
Here’s the deal. Let the racists freely talk among their kind, in their places. Let them stand at THEIR podiums. That is their right. However, it should NOT be abetted with public permits. They incite hate. In case you can’t make the logical connection, inciting hate encourages violence. The case cited above is only one of many I can cite.
But we live in Trump times, so hate will always be encouraged. And equated with its far more peaceful opposition.
Only white Conservative's can be racist, huh Dave?
Look up what the co-founder of the Toronto chapter of BLM, Yusra Khogali said.
Look up what the Nation of Islam has said about whites.
Must be the cult you live in Dave.
"Dave is ok with limiting free speech, unless it's liberal speech...Only white Conservative's can be racist"
Well well, putting words in my mouth again? IOKIYAR.
Never said those things.
Deflection failed. My points stand.
Liberal Huffington post rightfully called for the resignation of Yusra Khogali.
But racism for Trump...IOKIYAR. We know the rules.
"TB3,
check out it out, its a link to a tweet.
Funny how you demand sources and after provided, you slink away with your tail between your legs.
Will you denounce Antifa?"
Then give me a direct link to Blake Montgomery's tweets, MM. Give me the primary source, not a filter for it. Weaselzippers? Come on. They didn't even provide any context, it's not trying to convey information just stoke existing biases.
I demand sources and after provided I read them. Why waste my time asking for something that I will not read? And slink away? That's an incedibly juvenile declaration.
Typical.
Generic Pointless Response.
Mr. Paine and Co. are wondering when I disavowed violence. I feel I have been ignored.
So, for those with failing memories or short attention spans: I, Dave Dubya, hereby disavow all unprovoked violence upon innocent humans, whether perpetrated by those on the left, or the right, or anywhere in between.
Is this where I say, "All lives matter"?
I’m going to agree with Mr. Paine’s concerns and problems with a “Black Lives Matter Movement”. Some people do bad things in the name of this “movement”.
Mr. Paine may not understand that I am referring to the Black Lives Matter organization, not the “movement”.
What we have here regarding Black Lives Matter is the absence of a mutually agreed definition of terms.
Mr. Paine and his fellow white conservatives see BLM as a movement. They see mobs of angry threatening blacks. And no doubt some are. As with any march, any person, or criminal, can join. And a few chanted “pigs in a blanket”, all of 30 seconds!! These people are not members of the Black Lives Matter organization.
Let’s look at that fact again. These people are not members of the Black Lives Matter organization.
Any black criminal can say “pigs in a blanket” and be tagged a “Black Lives Matter member”.
Never mind the thug would have no clue about the people of the BLM organization. Any marcher can be tagged a ‘Black Lives Matter supporter” as well. And maybe he was, but he wasn’t a member, and certainly not following their principles. This is important to understand.
A man filled with resentment and hate killed policemen. This is a fact. He had no association with BLM. Did you see that fact? Here it is again. He had no association with BLM. Saying he was “angry on behalf of Black Lives Matter” is meaningless . Like Ted Bundy claiming porn made him kill.
No matter. Black Lives Matter is targeted and declared “racist” by angry white conservatives. They don’t know, or care, about the organization, the founders, or their principles.
Black Lives Matter was founded by three women in reaction to the racism behind the stalking and slaying of Trayvon Martin, and the failure of the justice system to punish the killer. It was like his life didn’t matter...Really. It was like Trayvon’s life didn’t matter. And racists cheered for the killer.
I would suggest Mr. Paine go to the BLM website and look for the hate, the “pigs in a blanket”, or whatever demons of racism that lurk in his imagination.
I dare him to learn about the women, and tell us why Obama’s meeting with them means he agrees with their “anti-cop” racist agenda. This must be what he believes by all the “race-agitating” accusations.
The Black Lives Matter founders are Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors and Opal Tometi. They are nothing like Klansmen or Nazis.
They expanded their social media project into a national network of over 30 local chapters between 2014 and 2016. They are advocates of Women and LGBTQ equal rights.
Nothing like the Klan. Nothing like Nazis.
The overall Black Lives Matter movement, however, is decentralized and has no formal hierarchy.
Again. Nothing like the Klan. Nothing like Nazis.
And still the Black Lives Matter organization is called racist by conservative white men. And they don’t even know what it is.
A criminal Black Lives Matter supporter is different from a criminal Trump supporter..how? The black guy’s group are the racists, of course.
This is Trumpworld, after all.
"I, Dave Dubya, hereby disavow all unprovoked violence upon innocent humans, whether perpetrated by those on the left, or the right, or anywhere in between."
Very good Mr. Dubya. As you might have noted previously, I did credit you with not condoning violence though. That said, according to your statement if the violence is "provoked", is that acceptable? After all some folks within the BLM and especially with antifa do indeed claim provocation for their otherwise "peaceful actions".
Next, how do you KNOW that those folks chanting "pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon" weren't members of the BLM organization? What is your proof? And would it matter if the chant went on for five minutes instead? What is your threshold for threatening police officers with such language? 31 seconds?
"Saying he was “angry on behalf of Black Lives Matter” is meaningless." ~ DD
Really? But the racist idiot that killed those people in Charleston at church was obviously a member of the KKK or some other officially recognized white supremacist group? Or Sara Palin is responsible for the idiot shooting Gabby Giffords? It seems like your criteria for culpability is a lot greater when the far left fringe groups are the perpetrators.
I suspect that the three women had nothing but noble intentions when they created the BLM organization; however, it is fairly obvious that their movement has been co-opted by far more radical and violent folks.
And QUIT with the Trump comparisons. A racist is a racist, whether he is a Trump supporter or a BLM supporter. Damn, why is that SO hard for you to get? As the title of my post said, I "denounce ALL hate and racism", and that is regardless of the source. Why can you not simply do the same instead of making allowances when it comes from the far left?
however, it is fairly obvious that their movement has been co-opted by far more radical and violent folks.
No. The organization is not the "movement". I tried to explain the difference. No wonder those women get so much hate. Conservative white men have a hard time with nuance and distinctions within the black community.
The phrase "Black Lives Matter" has been co-opted by the so called "movement".
You've missed my point entirely about the women's organization being smeared as racist. Not so much as a, "Gee, BLM is unfairly called racist because of a few thugs".
Why not just leave "Black Lives Matter" to the organization and just call criminals for what they are?
You abet their theft of the title by including thugs.
They have nothing to do with the target of your demonization of the organization.
The BLM organization is not racist. If you still refuse to see this, then that "racism" is your projection.
Understanding. It's not for everyone.
I think you missed my satiric point about the Trump supporting criminal and the BLM supporting criminal.
You presume the black guy is racist by supporting BLM, but not the Trumpist for supporting racist Birther-in-Chief Trump.
Satire. It's not for everyone.
I hope I'm being clear.
Another vile lie for your con-serative beliefs.
Hate/Fake news from https://conservativepost.com
CRIME
‘Black Lives Matter’ Thugs Block Texas Rescue Efforts to Protest Trump… IMMEDIATELY REGRET IT
President Donald Trump and his wife Melania arrived in Austin, Texas on Tuesday to provide aide and support to victims of Hurricane Harvey. Instead of...
The photo is a doozy. With snow!
Once again it is angry white conservatives who are the real hate group. And are very stupid in their evil.
MR. Paine and Major can now have a new “alternative fact” to promote their hate for BLM.
Post a Comment