@no1marauder saidAgain, your wording tends to distort what I said. I *never* said that BLM was "committed" to violence.
You keep claiming that BLM is committed to violence, why is it a "strange request" for you to provide some actual evidence of such from an official and/or leader of BLM?
Because you can't?
But BLM is supposedly committed to looting and killing AND the majority of them are "white liberals" according to you. Surely that means that millions of them are out looting and killing!
Where do you come up with this stuff??
BLM has committed a lot violence. Members have looted, destroyed cars, lit buildings afire, and shot and killed people.
Now, I never said the organization was committed to these types of violent actions,
I simply said that they have taken those actions. And they have. Does that make them violent...? YOU BETCHA!!
@earl-of-trumps saidWhat’s the problem?
Never mind your sniveling liberal excuses.
If they are violent, say they are violent, but with reason. Don't say they are not violent like a liberal liar.
Also, don't hide behind the old "from the ghetto" bullcrap. I'll bet more than half of the BLM-ers are liberal WHITE.
Do you think you can mistreat a group of people indefinately? Or do think it’s only natural, that at one point they’re gonna shout enough is enough and tear your house down?
What you’re seeing is a re-adjustment in society. You can either embrace it or smother it. If you choose the first option, things will gradually fade and some things will change a little and harmony will ensue.
If you choose the second option, you’ll create a quicker, but enforced, harmony which will only lead to more friction and ultimately revolution.
Think and choose wisely.
@earl-of-trumps saidA recent finding from VOX (left leaning).
Again, your wording tends to distort what I said. I *never* said that BLM was "committed" to violence.
Where do you come up with this stuff??
BLM has committed a lot violence. Members have looted, destroyed cars, lit buildings afire, and shot and killed people.
Now, I never said the organization was committed to these types of violent actions,
I simply said that they have taken those actions. And they have. Does that make them violent...? YOU BETCHA!!
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/04/21/report-blm-protests-correlate-with-10-percent-inrease-in-murders/
@shavixmir saidhow exactly has blm been mistreated by the people they harm?
What’s the problem?
Do you think you can mistreat a group of people indefinately? Or do think it’s only natural, that at one point they’re gonna shout enough is enough and tear your house down?
What you’re seeing is a re-adjustment in society. You can either embrace it or smother it. If you choose the first option, things will gradually fade and some things will chang ...[text shortened]... harmony which will only lead to more friction and ultimately revolution.
Think and choose wisely.
@mott-the-hoople saidAnd now that all the immediate news is completed, why don’t they just go back to work and leave everyone the hell alone? Like the diners in New York who were accosted by these horrible people. Marauder would say that the dining by the nice New Yorkers is not anybody’s business. I guess that includes BLM?
how exactly has blm been mistreated by the people they harm?
@earl-of-trumps saidYou have no idea who is part of BLM and who isn't. You seem to lump ANYONE who protests police brutality with BLM.
EoT: Duly noted, Viv. So your vision is that all the trouble makers, looters, and killers were not BLM.
People have protested police brutality long before BLM. Are you saying the Rodney King riots were also BLM?
What you're doing is spreading propaganda. You have no evidence who is part of BLM and who isn't; so you pin any extreme protests on the BLM in order to attack the movement. That's propaganda.
Protests against police brutality against blacks existed long before BLM. If BLM disappeared tomorrow, protests would still continue. Don't blame Black Lives Matter for violence they've explicitly condemned,
@shavixmir -
What’s the problem?
Do you think you can mistreat a group of people indefinately? Or do think it’s only natural, that at one point they’re gonna shout enough is enough and tear your house down?
------------------------------
EoT: And what "group" is that, Oh ignorant one? If you think "African American", think again.
Think PUNK white liberal. And if you think *they* can keep abusing people with their killings (many)
and destruction of innocent people's property, oh ignorant one, then you get prepared for the "enough is enough" from us.
-----
@shavixmir -
What you’re seeing is a re-adjustment in society. You can either embrace it or smother it. If you choose the first option, things will gradually fade and some things will change a little and harmony will ensue.
If you choose the second option, you’ll create a quicker, but enforced, harmony which will only lead to more friction and ultimately revolution.
Think and choose wisely.
---------------
EoT: What I am seeing are zombies and the liberal democrats taking control of America with the media cheering wildly.
2 edits
@vivify saidYa ya ya, Viv.
You have no idea who is part of BLM and who isn't. You seem to lump ANYONE who protests police brutality with BLM.
People have protested police brutality long before BLM. Are you saying the Rodney King riots were also BLM?
What you're doing is spreading propaganda. You have no evidence who is part of BLM and who isn't; so you pin any extreme protests on the BLM in ...[text shortened]... sts would still continue. Don't blame Black Lives Matter for violence they've explicitly condemned,
An equally compelling argument can be constructed with the bombing of Pearl Harbor.
"There is no proof that Japanese pilots did the bombing, killing 2,000"
Hey, no pilots were ever caught, the US never knew where they even came from.
So play all the semantical, courtroom tricks you want. No1Marauder would be proud.
As far as me lumping all protesters together... yes, I do.
All I know is, the only difference between protesters that belong to BLM and other protesters is the paperwork.
They are all akin. all likeminded. you know what I mean. And please don't ask me ever to believe that BLM did NOTHING.
One last item, Viv....
Many a protest and march have been cancelled because authorities anticipated violence. That dos not mean that the
protesters were guilty but that their presence was enough to stoke flames and cause violence.
Did anyone ever cancel out BLM protests??? Never.
Yet 36 murders and $$Billions in property damage are associated with BLM protests. Go figure.
@Mott-The-Hoople - blm was founded by two queers and a trans...
you know the difference? good for you, man. you're educated compared to me.
Oh, and PLEASE don't try to explain the differences to me, I'd rather remain ignorant on this one.
@mchill saidI don't have access to the raw data, but since you seemingly know more maybe you can help me out.
The fact is the vast majority of BLM protestors are peaceful.
Would a protest be considered "peaceful" if no one was attacked, but there was significant vandalism and property damage?
Is it true that there was no violence nor property damage at the vast majority of BLM protests? Or are we just saying the vast majority had no attacks on people, but may have had significant property damage?
I'm not trying to argue one way or another, but was curious if you can direct me to some data on this.
@techsouth said96.3% of protests no property damage; 97.7% no injuries. https://www.radcliffe.harvard.edu/news-and-ideas/black-lives-matter-protesters-were-overwhelmingly-peaceful-our-research-finds
I don't have access to the raw data, but since you seemingly know more maybe you can help me out.
Would a protest be considered "peaceful" if no one was attacked, but there was significant vandalism and property damage?
Is it true that there was no violence nor property damage at the vast majority of BLM protests? Or are we just saying the vast majority had no atta ...[text shortened]... m not trying to argue one way or another, but was curious if you can direct me to some data on this.
@no1marauder saidwow a leftist college statement.
96.3% of protests no property damage; 97.7% no injuries. https://www.radcliffe.harvard.edu/news-and-ideas/black-lives-matter-protesters-were-overwhelmingly-peaceful-our-research-finds
the question is, how much is too much?
People have had their lives ruined by this, black lives too. how much is too much?
@no1marauder saidHarvard... LOL 😆 😆
96.3% of protests no property damage; 97.7% no injuries. https://www.radcliffe.harvard.edu/news-and-ideas/black-lives-matter-protesters-were-overwhelmingly-peaceful-our-research-finds
talk about "How to lie with statistics"
And the average murderer is peaceful 99.9% of their waking moments.
@earl-of-trumps saidThat's dumb. Any Japanese pilot who flew all the way across the Pacific in planes strapped with bombs was obviously part of the Japanese army.
An equally compelling argument can be constructed with the bombing of Pearl Harbor.
"There is no proof that Japanese pilots did the bombing, killing 2,000"
Hey, no pilots were ever caught, the US never knew where they even came from.
No so with BLM. We don't know who is part of BLM and who is simply upset at the police brutality that was caught on video
As far as me lumping all protesters together... yes, I do.
Then I should lump all hate crimes committed by whites with Republicans, right? How about all white mass shooters?
BLM explicitly condemns violent protests. It's not their fault what random people moved to anger at horrific police brutality do.