independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Wed 13th Dec 2017 6:25pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > BLM shuts down ACLU free speech event
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 1 of 3 123>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 10/08/17 5:29am

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

BLM shuts down ACLU free speech event

Free speech is bigotry! BLM shuts down ACLU

You better Watch Out! I'm a WAR MACHINE!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 10/08/17 7:04am

djThunderfunk

avatar

Morons! Using freedom of speech and the constitution to protest freedom of speech and the constitution? lol lol lol

"Liberalism is white supremacy"? falloff The left is eating itself...



We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 10/08/17 7:31am

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

Protect Freedom of Speech for IDIOTS! Let them speak and they will say dumb things and you can counter with better ideas.

yeahthat

You better Watch Out! I'm a WAR MACHINE!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 10/08/17 7:44am

Dasein

djThunderfunk said:

(1) Morons! Using freedom of speech and the constitution to protest freedom of speech and the constitution? lol lol lol

(2) "Liberalism is white supremacy"? falloff The left is eating itself...





(1) It is hardly moronic to use white American truths to point out the hypocrisy of white American
truths being easily applied in a white American context but appear to fall apart when applied out-
side of that. The US Constitution works perfectly if Black Americans and all other minorities, inclu-
ding women, are subjugated completely to the whims of straight white American men who proclaim
to be Christian.

(2) I'm glad the left is beginning to eat itself because it is not above reproach. In some sense, liber-
alism is a kind of white supremacy. I used to live in Boston, a haven of US liberalism and the home
of the world's finest universities; it is a city utterly segregated.

That being said, I found it in poor taste that the BLM members here did not engage in any kind of dia-
lectic with the organizers and its participants who, from what I read, were actually eager to participate
in a discussion with them.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 10/08/17 7:45am

Dasein

SuperFurryAnimal said:

Protect Freedom of Speech for IDIOTS! Let them speak and they will say dumb things and you can counter with better ideas.

yeahthat


What's your problem with the video, Furry? And, what are "better ideas"?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 10/08/17 7:46am

djThunderfunk

avatar

Yup! Speech is NOT violence or assault. "Hate" speech is protected and legal.

Take a Jr. High School civics class if you need a refresher.

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 10/08/17 7:53am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

par for the course! BLM have used violence and threats and criminal acts to push their agenda...which is not even based on actual facts. They hide behind masks and use the threat of calling someone a racist to get their way. BLM like Antifa, they are not about freedom but about oppression.

"I was raped by the Arkansas AG who then becomes Governor & President..." Juanita Broaddrick
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 10/08/17 7:57am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

SuperFurryAnimal said:

Free speech is bigotry! BLM shuts down ACLU

they are so dumb they do not even know they are protesting against their own self-interest. "the revolution will not uphold the constitution." means they MUST not want any rights...so what do they want? Hummmm....

But I agree with the host "Liberalism is white supremacy" was funny and I agree! It is! Well the DNC is....

"I was raped by the Arkansas AG who then becomes Governor & President..." Juanita Broaddrick
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 10/08/17 8:02am

Dasein

The College of William & Mary (my first choice for school) released the following:


William & Mary has a powerful commitment to the free play of ideas. We have a campus where
respectful dialogue, especially in disagreement, is encouraged so that we can listen and learn from
views that differ from our own, so that we can freely express our own views, and so that debate can
occur. Unfortunately, that type of exchange was unable to take place Wednesday night when an
event to discuss a very important matter – the meaning of the First Amendment — could not be
held as planned.

The event, sponsored by William & Mary’s student-run programming organization Alma Mater
Productions (AMP), was entitled “Students and the First Amendment.” The anticipated conversation
never occurred when protestors refused to allow the invited speaker Claire Guthrie Gastañaga,
executive director of the ACLU of Virginia, to be heard. The protesters then drowned out students who
gathered around Ms. Gastañaga seeking to ask her questions, hear her responses and voice their own
concerns.


Silencing certain voices in order to advance the cause of others is not acceptable in our community.
This stifles debate and prevents those who've come to hear a speaker, our students in particular, from
asking questions, often hard questions, and from engaging in debate where the strength of ideas, not
the power of shouting, is the currency. William & Mary must be a campus that welcomes difficult
conversations, honest debate and civil dialogue.

I find this response to be fair and appropriate. Now, the other posts in this thread not mine, I cannot
say the same!

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 10/08/17 8:11am

djThunderfunk

avatar

Dasein said:

djThunderfunk said:

(1) Morons! Using freedom of speech and the constitution to protest freedom of speech and the constitution? lol lol lol

(2) "Liberalism is white supremacy"? falloff The left is eating itself...





(1) It is hardly moronic to use white American truths to point out the hypocrisy of white American
truths being easily applied in a white American context but appear to fall apart when applied out-
side of that. The US Constitution works perfectly if Black Americans and all other minorities, inclu-
ding women, are subjugated completely to the whims of straight white American men who proclaim
to be Christian.


Freedom of speech and the constitution do not exclusively benefit white men.

In 2017, who is excluding "Black Americans and all other minorities, including women" from having the same freedoms as "straight white American men who proclaim to be Christian"?

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 10/08/17 8:19am

2elijah

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

par for the course! BLM have used violence and threats and criminal acts to push their agenda...which is not even based on actual facts. They hide behind masks and use the threat of calling someone a racist to get their way. BLM like Antifa, they are not about freedom but about oppression.


I didn't watch the vid, but have a few questions in regards to your comments about BLM:

1)What violent, major acts of violence has BLM committed? Example: Have they committed some sort of domestic terrorist act? Mass shootings?

2)If BLM called out white supremacists or white nationalists as 'racists,' or if they call out racial profiling/racial injustices, is that hiding behind racism or using it as an excuse, to expose the reality of those existing 'truths?'
[Edited 10/8/17 8:21am]
'Trump voters got Hoodwinked by Trump' popcorn coke
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 10/08/17 8:21am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

what they did was not free speech it was trespassing. it is fine to protest outside but not okay to go in to disrupt. Also, the sick thing they an Antifa do is trying to prevent others from hearing speech they do not like. they are taking others freesom...but if anyone tried to stop them they would cry foul and run and hide behind the constitution.

"I was raped by the Arkansas AG who then becomes Governor & President..." Juanita Broaddrick
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 10/08/17 8:24am

Dasein

djThunderfunk said:

Dasein said:



(1) It is hardly moronic to use white American truths to point out the hypocrisy of white American
truths being easily applied in a white American context but appear to fall apart when applied out-
side of that. The US Constitution works perfectly if Black Americans and all other minorities, inclu-
ding women, are subjugated completely to the whims of straight white American men who proclaim
to be Christian.


Freedom of speech and the constitution do not exclusively benefit white men.

In 2017, who is excluding "Black Americans and all other minorities, including women" from having the same freedoms as "straight white American men who proclaim to be Christian"?


When the Bill of Rights were being composed and argued over, they did not intend to apply to
me as a Black man or to women. So, the spirit of the law of the Bill of Rights pertains exclusively
to land-owning white men or those white men who were businessmen during the time in which
the Bill of Rights was asserted and codified. And, when you survey the history of how civil rights
were afforded to minorities, including white women, it is not inconceivable to view the results of
that struggle to obtain the freedoms given to white men as being done so ever so begrudgingly
on the part of white men. If you doubt this, I'd suggest a junior high school civic class for re-
freshing!


wink

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 10/08/17 8:26am

2elijah

avatar

djThunderfunk said:



Dasein said:



djThunderfunk said:


(1) Morons! Using freedom of speech and the constitution to protest freedom of speech and the constitution? lol lol lol

(2) "Liberalism is white supremacy"? falloff The left is eating itself...







(1) It is hardly moronic to use white American truths to point out the hypocrisy of white American
truths being easily applied in a white American context but appear to fall apart when applied out-
side of that. The US Constitution works perfectly if Black Americans and all other minorities, inclu-
ding women, are subjugated completely to the whims of straight white American men who proclaim
to be Christian.




Freedom of speech and the constitution do not exclusively benefit white men.

In 2017, who is excluding "Black Americans and all other minorities, including women" from having the same freedoms as "straight white American men who proclaim to be Christian"?


Racial profiling and sexism, is an example. Both are still major problems against Black Americans and others labeled as such in this country.
[Edited 10/8/17 8:30am]
'Trump voters got Hoodwinked by Trump' popcorn coke
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 10/08/17 8:27am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

2elijah said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

par for the course! BLM have used violence and threats and criminal acts to push their agenda...which is not even based on actual facts. They hide behind masks and use the threat of calling someone a racist to get their way. BLM like Antifa, they are not about freedom but about oppression.

I didn't watch the vid, but have a few questions in regards to your comments about BLM:

lol so you can never gripe at me when I do the same

1)What violent, major acts of violence has BLM committed?

this, they have called for the murder of cops and white people they set fires, they assaulted Bernie Sanders... many cases of blocking freeways and protests to shut down free speech... THIS CASE...

Example: Have they committed some sort of domestic terrorist act? Mass shootings?

Dallas TX July 7 2016 and the Targeted assassination of several other police officers. So yes!

2)If BLM called out white supremacists or white nationalists as 'racists,' or if they call out racial profiling/racial injustices, is that hiding behind racism or using it as an excuse, to expose the reality of those 'truths?'


If it was limited to JUST that then that would be one thing...but they do not. they make it up such as they did in this case...
"I was raped by the Arkansas AG who then becomes Governor & President..." Juanita Broaddrick
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 10/08/17 8:34am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

2elijah said:

djThunderfunk said:


Freedom of speech and the constitution do not exclusively benefit white men.

In 2017, who is excluding "Black Americans and all other minorities, including women" from having the same freedoms as "straight white American men who proclaim to be Christian"?

Racial profiling is an example.

but it is used against all races.. it was used during the DC Sniper case.... and racial profiling has some use. I think it is overused... but here is the thing we are getting to the point were even using race as part of a description is seen as the same thing. It is not.

I think most of the problem some have with it is that it was moderately effective. But the "No Snitch" movement (which is totally the coward's way). What it seems to be is a way to delegitimize the reporting of crimes. "oh they said the robber was black...he is racist and any info used to find the robber is bad...and can not be used...."

"I was raped by the Arkansas AG who then becomes Governor & President..." Juanita Broaddrick
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 10/08/17 8:40am

poppys

Dasein said:


When the Bill of Rights were being composed and argued over, they did not intend to apply to
me as a Black man or to women. So, the spirit of the law of the Bill of Rights pertains exclusively
to land-owning white men or those white men who were businessmen during the time in which
the Bill of Rights was asserted and codified. And, when you survey the history of how civil rights
were afforded to minorities, including white women, it is not inconceivable to view the results of
that struggle to obtain the freedoms given to white men as being done so ever so begrudgingly
on the part of white men. If you doubt this, I'd suggest a junior high school civic class for re-
freshing!


wink

clapping

If your last December came, what would u do?
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 10/08/17 8:43am

2elijah

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:



2elijah said:


OnlyNDaUsa said:

par for the course! BLM have used violence and threats and criminal acts to push their agenda...which is not even based on actual facts. They hide behind masks and use the threat of calling someone a racist to get their way. BLM like Antifa, they are not about freedom but about oppression.



I didn't watch the vid, but have a few questions in regards to your comments about BLM:

lol so you can never gripe at me when I do the same

1)What violent, major acts of violence has BLM committed?

this, they have called for the murder of cops and white people they set fires, they assaulted Bernie Sanders... many cases of blocking freeways and protests to shut down free speech... THIS CASE...

Example: Have they committed some sort of domestic terrorist act? Mass shootings?

Dallas TX July 7 2016 and the Targeted assassination of several other police officers. So yes!

2)If BLM called out white supremacists or white nationalists as 'racists,' or if they call out racial profiling/racial injustices, is that hiding behind racism or using it as an excuse, to expose the reality of those 'truths?'


If it was limited to JUST that then that would be one thing...but they do not. they make it up such as they did in this case...


Were any of those threats carried out?
'Trump voters got Hoodwinked by Trump' popcorn coke
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 10/08/17 8:45am

djThunderfunk

avatar

Dasein said:

djThunderfunk said:


Freedom of speech and the constitution do not exclusively benefit white men.

In 2017, who is excluding "Black Americans and all other minorities, including women" from having the same freedoms as "straight white American men who proclaim to be Christian"?


When the Bill of Rights were being composed and argued over, they did not intend to apply to
me as a Black man or to women. So, the spirit of the law of the Bill of Rights pertains exclusively
to land-owning white men or those white men who were businessmen during the time in which
the Bill of Rights was asserted and codified. And, when you survey the history of how civil rights
were afforded to minorities, including white women, it is not inconceivable to view the results of
that struggle to obtain the freedoms given to white men as being done so ever so begrudgingly
on the part of white men. If you doubt this, I'd suggest a junior high school civic class for re-
freshing!


wink


Today, the Bill Of Rights does apply to black men and to women. Most white men, including myself, are happy about that. If you believe that most white men are still "begrudging" about our freedoms applying to all U.S. citizens, then I feel sorry for you.



[Edited 10/8/17 8:50am]

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 10/08/17 8:49am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

Dasein said:

djThunderfunk said:


Freedom of speech and the constitution do not exclusively benefit white men.

In 2017, who is excluding "Black Americans and all other minorities, including women" from having the same freedoms as "straight white American men who proclaim to be Christian"?


When the Bill of Rights were being composed and argued over, they did not intend to apply to
me as a Black man or to women. So, the spirit of the law of the Bill of Rights pertains exclusively
to land-owning white men or those white men who were businessmen during the time in which
the Bill of Rights was asserted and codified. And, when you survey the history of how civil rights
were afforded to minorities, including white women, it is not inconceivable to view the results of
that struggle to obtain the freedoms given to white men as being done so ever so begrudgingly
on the part of white men. If you doubt this, I'd suggest a junior high school civic class for re-
freshing!


wink



Ok and now it does...so do you NOT want to have those rights? Do you reject them? All of them? or do you want to use them to destroy them? I am confused as to what you want and what the protesters in this clip want?

But it is foolish to protest your own right to protest and even more so to argue that ONLY OUR freedoms should be protected.

"I was raped by the Arkansas AG who then becomes Governor & President..." Juanita Broaddrick
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 10/08/17 9:01am

2elijah

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:



2elijah said:


djThunderfunk said:



Freedom of speech and the constitution do not exclusively benefit white men.

In 2017, who is excluding "Black Americans and all other minorities, including women" from having the same freedoms as "straight white American men who proclaim to be Christian"?



Racial profiling is an example.



but it is used against all races.. it was used during the DC Sniper case.... and racial profiling has some use. I think it is overused... but here is the thing we are getting to the point were even using race as part of a description is seen as the same thing. It is not.

I think most of the problem some have with it is that it was moderately effective. But the "No Snitch" movement (which is totally the coward's way). What it seems to be is a way to delegitimize the reporting of crimes. "oh they said the robber was black...he is racist and any info used to find the robber is bad...and can not be used...."



Let's just be honest here. Racial profiling has been and continues, to be used more against Blacks than any other group in America. I think the problem many have with BLM is that many in America, have grown used to the MLK-type protesters that made/makes them feel 'safer', rather than today, where many young, Black protesters are not falling for the BS, and taking a more assertive approach in protesting, by confronting and questioning elected officials, regarding societal ills. There are many non-Black Americans that take issue with that, and see that as a threat, because they have the 'Blacks should stay in their place' mentality. Kind of like how some take issue with Black NFL players not standing for the anthem. It's like a 'How dare they do that' reaction.
[Edited 10/8/17 9:07am]
'Trump voters got Hoodwinked by Trump' popcorn coke
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 10/08/17 9:10am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

2elijah said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

but it is used against all races.. it was used during the DC Sniper case.... and racial profiling has some use. I think it is overused... but here is the thing we are getting to the point were even using race as part of a description is seen as the same thing. It is not.

I think most of the problem some have with it is that it was moderately effective. But the "No Snitch" movement (which is totally the coward's way). What it seems to be is a way to delegitimize the reporting of crimes. "oh they said the robber was black...he is racist and any info used to find the robber is bad...and can not be used...."

Let's just be honest here. Racial profiling has been and continues, to be used more against Blacks than any other group in America.

I do not think that is the case. That seems to be an illusory correlation... (that is the tendency to over state the occurrences of 2 events as if they were connected). What happens is we do not notice when it happens to white people as that is the norm. So whenever a white person is racially profiled the racial aspect is forgotten as if it did not exist. It is only a thing when it is done to non-whites.


I think the problem many have with BLM is that many in America, have grown used to the MLK-type protesters that made/makes them feel 'safer', rather than today, where many young, Black protesters are not falling for the BS, by taking a more assertive approach, in confronting or questioning elected officials, regarding societal ills.

no I think it is the burning and riots and block traffic and calling for and the actual murder of cops that is the issue.

And if a group wants to show that they are being wrongfully accused of engaging in crime then they really need to make sure they do not engage in crime.

"I was raped by the Arkansas AG who then becomes Governor & President..." Juanita Broaddrick
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #22 posted 10/08/17 9:43am

poppys

2elijah said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

but it is used against all races.. it was used during the DC Sniper case.... and racial profiling has some use. I think it is overused... but here is the thing we are getting to the point were even using race as part of a description is seen as the same thing. It is not.

I think most of the problem some have with it is that it was moderately effective. But the "No Snitch" movement (which is totally the coward's way). What it seems to be is a way to delegitimize the reporting of crimes. "oh they said the robber was black...he is racist and any info used to find the robber is bad...and can not be used...."

Let's just be honest here. Racial profiling has been and continues, to be used more against Blacks than any other group in America. I think the problem many have with BLM is that many in America, have grown used to the MLK-type protesters that made/makes them feel 'safer', rather than today, where many young, Black protesters are not falling for the BS, and taking a more assertive approach in protesting, by confronting and questioning elected officials, regarding societal ills. There are many non-Black Americans that take issue with that, and see that as a threat, because they have the 'Blacks should stay in their place' mentality. Kind of like how some take issue with Black NFL players not standing for the anthem. It's like a 'How dare they do that' reaction.

Thanks for posting, 2elijah.

If your last December came, what would u do?
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #23 posted 10/08/17 10:13am

2elijah

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:



2elijah said:


OnlyNDaUsa said:




but it is used against all races.. it was used during the DC Sniper case.... and racial profiling has some use. I think it is overused... but here is the thing we are getting to the point were even using race as part of a description is seen as the same thing. It is not.

I think most of the problem some have with it is that it was moderately effective. But the "No Snitch" movement (which is totally the coward's way). What it seems to be is a way to delegitimize the reporting of crimes. "oh they said the robber was black...he is racist and any info used to find the robber is bad...and can not be used...."



Let's just be honest here. Racial profiling has been and continues, to be used more against Blacks than any other group in America.

I do not think that is the case. That seems to be an illusory correlation... (that is the tendency to over state the occurrences of 2 events as if they were connected). What happens is we do not notice when it happens to white people as that is the norm. So whenever a white person is racially profiled the racial aspect is forgotten as if it did not exist. It is only a thing when it is done to non-whites.


I think the problem many have with BLM is that many in America, have grown used to the MLK-type protesters that made/makes them feel 'safer', rather than today, where many young, Black protesters are not falling for the BS, by taking a more assertive approach, in confronting or questioning elected officials, regarding societal ills.

no I think it is the burning and riots and block traffic and calling for and the actual murder of cops that is the issue.

And if a group wants to show that they are being wrongfully accused of engaging in crime then they really need to make sure they do not engage in crime.


Most of the racial profiling is done to Blacks. Shopping, walking, driving, in an elevator, etc., What you're doing is downplaying a reality where you are using reverse racism, to justify your agenda.

You create this fallacy of BLM to deny a long history of attacks on the Black community, by racists, over the years, who 'actually' murdered and terrorized Blacks, and created racist laws against Blacks to deny or limit opportunities among the general population.

BLM never created racist laws or denied Whites any opportunities, that would prevent or limit their progression, as a whole, in this country. You have your personal hatred towards BLM, because you see them as a threat, and 'out of their place', and that bothers you. So, you do what some of that bunch at FOX station did...they exaggerated about BLM to their audience, to cause fear, doubt, suspicion of BLM, and labeled them as anti-white, dangerous and falsely labeled them as domestic terrorists, whereas they have not committed any such acts.

What you really should concern yourself with, is folks like Paddock, who was an 'actual' threat and danger to America.
[Edited 10/8/17 10:15am]
'Trump voters got Hoodwinked by Trump' popcorn coke
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #24 posted 10/08/17 10:18am

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

BACK ON TOPIC PEOPLE! The ACLU protects Freedom of Speech. Now you may not like what some people have to say but that is how Freedom of Speech works. The ACLU doesn't endorse what everyone says for example because they protect Freedom of Speech. The far right has attacked the ACLU in the past and it is not a good strategy.

You better Watch Out! I'm a WAR MACHINE!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #25 posted 10/08/17 10:20am

Dasein

djThunderfunk said:

Dasein said:


When the Bill of Rights were being composed and argued over, they did not intend to apply to
me as a Black man or to women. So, the spirit of the law of the Bill of Rights pertains exclusively
to land-owning white men or those white men who were businessmen during the time in which
the Bill of Rights was asserted and codified. And, when you survey the history of how civil rights
were afforded to minorities, including white women, it is not inconceivable to view the results of
that struggle to obtain the freedoms given to white men as being done so ever so begrudgingly
on the part of white men. If you doubt this, I'd suggest a junior high school civic class for re-
freshing!


wink


Today, the Bill Of Rights does apply to black men and to women. Most white men, including myself, are happy about that. If you believe that most white men are still "begrudging" about our freedoms applying to all U.S. citizens, then I feel sorry for you.



[Edited 10/8/17 8:50am]


The spirit of the bill does not apply to minorities, including women. The Civil Rights Act was only
passed in the 60s, same with the Voting Rights Act. So, 177 years had passed between what was
given to white men in 1787 to Black American (men) freed in the 1860s. Isn't that odd? So, I
stand by what I said previously: the spirit of the Bill of Rights was written originally with only white
men in mind.

Yet, thank you for making me clarify: I believe white men in power begrudgingly granted all the
rights they enjoyed to minorities, including women. Not all white men are scumbag assholes who
are hypocritical racist and sexist douchebags - I apologize for not being clear about who I was con-
demning.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #26 posted 10/08/17 10:22am

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

2elijah said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Most of the racial profiling is done to Blacks. Shopping, walking, driving, in an elevator, etc., What you're doing is downplaying a reality where you are using reverse racism, to justify your agenda. You create this fallacy of BLM to deny a long history of attacks on the Black community, by racists, over the years, who 'actually' murdered and terrorized Blacks, and created racist laws against Blacks to deny or limit opportunities among the general population. BLM never created racist laws or denied Whites any opportunities, that would prevent or limit their progression, as a whole, in this country. You have your personal hatred towards BLM, because you see them as a threat, and 'out of their place', and that bothers you. So, you do what some of that bunch at FOX station did...they exaggerated about BLM to their audience, to cause fear, doubt, suspicion of BLM, and labeled them as anti-white, dangerous and falsely labeled them as domestic terrorists, whereas they have not committed any such acts. What you really should concern yourself with, is folks like Paddock, who was an 'actual' threat and danger to America. [Edited 10/8/17 10:15am]

Quit hijacking the thread. None of this has anything to do with BLM targeting the ACLU over Freedom of Speech. You said you didn't even watch the video I posted. neutral

You better Watch Out! I'm a WAR MACHINE!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #27 posted 10/08/17 10:27am

Dasein

SuperFurryAnimal said:

2elijah said:

OnlyNDaUsa said: Most of the racial profiling is done to Blacks. Shopping, walking, driving, in an elevator, etc., What you're doing is downplaying a reality where you are using reverse racism, to justify your agenda. You create this fallacy of BLM to deny a long history of attacks on the Black community, by racists, over the years, who 'actually' murdered and terrorized Blacks, and created racist laws against Blacks to deny or limit opportunities among the general population. BLM never created racist laws or denied Whites any opportunities, that would prevent or limit their progression, as a whole, in this country. You have your personal hatred towards BLM, because you see them as a threat, and 'out of their place', and that bothers you. So, you do what some of that bunch at FOX station did...they exaggerated about BLM to their audience, to cause fear, doubt, suspicion of BLM, and labeled them as anti-white, dangerous and falsely labeled them as domestic terrorists, whereas they have not committed any such acts. What you really should concern yourself with, is folks like Paddock, who was an 'actual' threat and danger to America. [Edited 10/8/17 10:15am]

Quit hijacking the thread. None of this has anything to do with BLM targeting the ACLU over Freedom of Speech. You said you didn't even watch the video I posted. neutral


She's not hijacking the thread; she's responding to posts made in the thread by others. Anyways,
I watched the video and I agree with the condescending host (Tucker Carlson?) but for different rea-
sons I've already explained. But, you mentioned something about "better ideas" and I was wonder-
ing if you would unpack that a bit . . .

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #28 posted 10/08/17 10:33am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

2elijah said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Most of the racial profiling is done to Blacks. Shopping, walking, driving, in an elevator, etc.,

I do not consider that as profiling I call that flat out bigotry. It seems we do not agree on what racial profiling means...

What you're doing is downplaying a reality where you are using reverse racism, to justify your agenda.

Nope. for one there is no such thing as reverse racism. and you are mistaken if you think I have an agenda here other than freedom for all people... and equality. I am opposed to making up for the past by punishing others.


You create this fallacy of BLM to deny a long history of attacks on the Black community, by racists, over the years, who 'actually' murdered and terrorized Blacks, and created racist laws against Blacks to deny or limit opportunities among the general population.

I did not.. are you saying that in part however slight based on what you assume about me in terms of my 'race'?


BLM never created racist laws or denied Whites any opportunities, that would prevent or limit their progression, as a whole, in this country. You have your personal hatred towards BLM,

did i say they had? why would you suggest I did?

because you see them as a threat, and 'out of their place', and that bothers you.

if anyone goes into any place to disrupt that is wrong and that is trespassing (being someplace uninvited or to cause a disruption) If the KKK when into a BLM speech would you have a problem with that?

So, you do what some of that bunch at FOX station did...they exaggerated about BLM to their audience, to cause fear, doubt, suspicion of BLM, and labeled them as anti-white, dangerous and falsely labeled them as domestic terrorists, whereas they have not committed any such acts.


you seemed to claim they had NEVER done anything bad or criminal and I pointed out examples I made NO claim as to the frequency or % of the BLM members that did... you challenged me to list some and I did, for you to accuse me of exaggerating them is dishonest.



What you really should concern yourself with, is folks like Paddock, who was an 'actual' threat and danger to America.


So I need to KEEP my place? say in my lane? but I agree left winers (and all accounts are that he was) do most of the mass shootings.

"I was raped by the Arkansas AG who then becomes Governor & President..." Juanita Broaddrick
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #29 posted 10/08/17 10:35am

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

2elijah said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

but it is used against all races.. it was used during the DC Sniper case.... and racial profiling has some use. I think it is overused... but here is the thing we are getting to the point were even using race as part of a description is seen as the same thing. It is not.

I think most of the problem some have with it is that it was moderately effective. But the "No Snitch" movement (which is totally the coward's way). What it seems to be is a way to delegitimize the reporting of crimes. "oh they said the robber was black...he is racist and any info used to find the robber is bad...and can not be used...."

Let's just be honest here. Racial profiling has been and continues, to be used more against Blacks than any other group in America. I think the problem many have with BLM is that many in America, have grown used to the MLK-type protesters that made/makes them feel 'safer', rather than today, where many young, Black protesters are not falling for the BS, and taking a more assertive approach in protesting, by confronting and questioning elected officials, regarding societal ills. There are many non-Black Americans that take issue with that, and see that as a threat, because they have the 'Blacks should stay in their place' mentality. Kind of like how some take issue with Black NFL players not standing for the anthem. It's like a 'How dare they do that' reaction. [Edited 10/8/17 9:07am]

The players have a right to kneel if the owners agree but also the fans have a right to view it the way they see it and many view it as disrespect to Flag, Military, USA etc. People have a right to boycott the NFL but they probably should have long ago because they just utilize slave labor to make billions. This is Freedom of Speech!

I don't believe the violent approaches work. I think it is a mistake for one side to stay silent and only come to blows with racists. It is easy, simple to win that war with knowledge, info and words.

You better Watch Out! I'm a WAR MACHINE!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 1 of 3 123>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > BLM shuts down ACLU free speech event