BLM, or WLM? [MOD WARNING: FIRST POST]

brentanrodgers

Tell me how wrote: »

They should all be prosecuted?

Where did you get that BLM condones and encourages this?

There's literally video of a BLM Chicago leader calling looting 'reparations' and encouraging said looting. Are you really going to try and spin that.

Tell me how

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Again, why are you acting like you haven't seen this video?

brentanrodgers wrote: »

There's literally video of a BLM Chicago leader calling looting 'reparations' and encouraging said looting. Are you really going to try and spin that.

As already pointed out. That is a single person within the BLM movement.

If you want to take that as emblematic of the entire movement, you must be ok with this guys views being that of all police forces.

https://twitter.com/870South/status/1299887061013540864

brentanrodgers

Tell me how wrote: »

That is a single person within the BLM movement.

Sure wasn't Hitler just a single person in the Nazi party. You are laughable pal.

AbusesToilets

Tell me how wrote: »

As already pointed out. That is a single person within the BLM movement.

If you want to take that as emblematic of the entire movement, you must be ok with this guys views being that of all police forces.

https://twitter.com/870South/status/1299887061013540864

That's not just a single person, that's a founder and leader of the movement. You like to (rightly) hold Trump accountable for his support of racism and violence, yet don't want to do the same for BLM. Why?

Tell me how

brentanrodgers wrote: »

Sure wasn't Hitler just a single person in the Nazi party. You are laughable pal.

So all police have the same views as Sheriff Todd Wright....

Something definitely needs to change then.

Tipperary animal lover

AbusesToilets wrote: »

That's not just a single person, that's a founder and leader of the movement. You like to (rightly) hold Trump accountable for his support of racism and violence, yet don't want to do the same for BLM. Why?

A.T. you're wasting your time, every time you counter he's points he shifts the goal posts, will never agree with you even if you blow him out of the water with facts, on on on it goes, we agree that the police need changing that things need to change for a fairer country for all, but the lads can't get into their heads that the blm movement is all wrong the way its going atm, your just banging your head against the walk to have a decent argument with them, they just won't see your point of view.

brentanrodgers

Tell me how wrote: »

So all police have the same views as Sheriff Todd Wright....

Something definitely needs to change then.

It's these endless wide reaching excuses and whataboutery you're continuously coming up with that baffles me - they don't make any sense or prove any point.

Generally what happens when ideologues try to defend the indefensible.

Tell me how

Tipperary animal lover wrote: »

A.T. you're wasting your time, every time you counter he's points he shifts the goal posts, will never agree with you even if you blow him out of the water with facts, on on on it goes, we agree that the police need changing that things need to change for a fairer country for all, but the lads can't get into their heads that the blm movement is all wrong the way its going atm, your just banging your head against the walk to have a decent argument with them, they just won't see your point of view.

:pac::pac::pac:

lol.

Glad to see you agree that the police needs changing. Guess you'll now be lending your voice to calls for that.

Tell me how

brentanrodgers wrote: »

It's these endless wide reaching excuses and whataboutery you're continuously coming up with that baffles me - they don't make any sense or prove any point.

Generally what happens when ideologues try to defend the indefensible.

Where is the whataboutery in suggesting that if someone thinks the views of a single person from one organisation reflects the position of that organisation, they must accept that the views of another person reflect the views of their organisation?


It is a literal like for like comparison which to use another posters term, 'blows the argument out of the water'.

brentanrodgers

Tell me how wrote: »

Where is the whataboutery in suggesting that if someone thinks the views of a single person from one organisation reflects the position of that organisation, they must accept that the views of another person reflect the views of their organisation?

1. She is not just "a single person". She is a leader in Chicago, which is a stronghold for BLM, so you can stop banging that drum right now.



2. How does someone like that come into a position of organisational power with such views. The answer is simple - those said views are accepted by her peers - which is evident from videos of her because there are large crowds listening and cheering with no pushback, and she's still in the same position as before.

You're "argument" is disingenuous and nonsensical. If some right wing group had a leader which something along the lines that "We must loot local businesses run by foreigners" to hundreds of people would you hold that person to the same standard? Fúck would ya - you sir are an ideologue.

Tell me how

brentanrodgers wrote: »

1. She is not just "a single person". She is a leader in Chicago, which is a stronghold for BLM, so you can stop banging that drum right now.

2. How does someone like that come into a position of organisational power with such views. The answer is simple - those said views are accepted by her peers - which is evident from videos of her because there are large crowds listening and cheering with no pushback, and she's still in the same position as before.

You're "argument" is disingenuous and nonsensical. If some ring wing group had a leader which something along the lines that "We must loot local businesses run by foreigners" to hundreds of people would you hold that person to the same standard? Fúck would ya - you sir an ideologue.

BLM has no national leadership organisation. Anyone can set up a chapter in any location they wish should they want to do so.

How would like that come in to power? Who knows, they could just say that they are a leader and who is going to refute that. She wasn't appointed from a Board of management or elected to the position or anything like that.

A few posts ago I was accused (by you no less) of using whataboutery (which I wasn't) and your last paragraph her is literally a text book definition of that. You sir, are a hypocrite.

You know who was elected to a position? Sheriff Todd Wright. And that should be a massive indicator of how racial views are still commonly accepted in many areas of the US in 2020.

Now, ho

brentanrodgers

Tell me how wrote: »

A few posts ago I was accused (by you no less) of using whataboutery (which I wasn't) and your last paragraph her is literally a text book definition of that. You sir, are a hypocrite.

Your entire argument is essentially saying that because one person says something it's not indicative of that organisation or platform as a whole and we shouldn't hold others associated to that platform to the same standard.

It falls apart because Ariel Atkins is a leader for BLM platform in Chicago where it's most prominent. It's not some random person off the street like you're trying to portray - leaders and managers of ANY platform or organisation set the tone and guidelines for those below them.

You can spin your shíte all your want - the video evidence is there for all to see and that person is still a leader of BLM.

Foxtrol

AbusesToilets wrote: »

You've literally had video of one of the BLM founders condoning looting as reparations. Why be so dishonest ?

Did you even read my post?

Once again, how is that worse than Trump saying that his supporters that went to Portland armed with paintball guns and mace and fired them indiscriminately into a crowd were 'peaceful'?

I'm not claiming no one involved in BLM (a group made up of thousands of organisers) has ever said stupid things that go against their ethos, however claiming they are doing something terrible that is different than Trump/GOP/Right Wing media is where people are 'dishonest'.

I know you tried to strawman here rather than deal with my actual point but here is my post again.

Foxtrol wrote: »

Despite it being repeated ad nauseam here as a fact, I've yet to see any evidence of BLM movement organisers supporting 'violence' any more than Trump/GOP/Right Wing media do. For the most part the BLM organisers are far quicker to condemn the violent actions of protesters than the other side are.

Tipperary animal lover

Tell me how wrote: »

:pac::pac::pac:

lol.

Glad to see you agree that the police needs changing. Guess you'll now be lending your voice to calls for that.

Why laugh? Your just showing yourself up for the person we all taught you where again, see no counter argument just a sneer this is what your dealing with, again you'll see many on here agree with you change needs to happen in your country on all levels .... but oh no you can't agree that BLM has been taken over by the wrong crowd, you'll just put your fingers in your ears and scream "your all racists" .... champion them away lad you've been called out many a time on here but quick change the goal post smh, that bubble your in seems to be getting smaller as more people see what blm really stand for .... hugs and kisses tell me how stay safe

AbusesToilets

Foxtrol wrote: »

Did you even read my post?

Once again, how is that worse than Trump saying that his supporters that went to Portland armed with paintball guns and mace and fired them indiscriminately into a crowd were 'peaceful'?

I'm not claiming no one involved in BLM (a group made up of thousands of organisers) has ever said stupid things that go against their ethos, however claiming they are doing something terrible that is different than Trump/GOP/Right Wing media is where people are 'dishonest'.

I know you tried to strawman here rather than deal with my actual point but here is my post again.

Foxtrol wrote: »

Despite it being repeated ad nauseam here as a fact, I've yet to see any evidence of BLM movement organisers supporting 'violence' any more than Trump/GOP/Right Wing media do. For the most part the BLM organisers are far quicker to condemn the violent actions of protesters than the other side are.

Hmmm

Tell me how

brentanrodgers wrote: »

Your entire argument is essentially saying that because one person says something it's not indicative of that organisation or platform as a whole and we shouldn't hold others associated to that platform to the same standard.

It falls apart because Ariel Atkins is a leader for BLM platform in Chicago where it's most prominent. It's not some random person off the street like you're trying to portray - leaders and managers of ANY platform or organisation set the tone and guidelines for those below them.

You can spin your shíte all your want - the video evidence is there for all to see and that person is still a leader of BLM.

All you're doing here is repeating the message which I understand, but disagree with.

And you are adamant in showing that you refuse to hole the police system by the same measures which you think should be applied to the BLM.

You can't have your cake and eat it.

AbusesToilets

Tell me how wrote: »

All you're doing here is repeating the message which I understand, but disagree with.

And you are adamant in showing that you refuse to hole the police system by the same measures which you think should be applied to the BLM.

You can't have your cake and eat it.

Eat your cake and have it too

Tell me how

Tipperary animal lover wrote: »

Why laugh? Your just showing yourself up for the person we all taught you where again, see no counter argument just a sneer this is what your dealing with, again you'll see many on here agree with you change needs to happen in your country on all levels .... but oh no you can't agree that BLM has been taken over by the wrong crowd, you'll just put your fingers in your ears and scream "your all racists" .... champion them away lad you've been called out many a time on here but quick change the goal post smh, that bubble your in seems to be getting smaller as more people see what blm really stand for .... hugs and kisses tell me how stay safe

Where have I changed the goal posts?

How much more of a counter argument do you want than 'You want to judge this person and their organisation in this way, will you therefore judge this person and their organisation in the same way'?

It couldn't be more relevant and more obvious as to how you all want the narrative to go on this.

Foxtrol

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Hmmm

So you've read it now and are stuck for words?

I can find plenty more evidence of BLM leaders condemning actions of protesters than I can of Trump or GOP (Team 'Good people on both sides') condemning the actions of theirs

AbusesToilets

Foxtrol wrote: »

So you've read it now and are stuck for words?

I can find plenty more evidence of BLM leaders condemning actions of protesters than I can of Trump or GOP (Team 'Good people on both sides') condemning the actions of theirs

Pray tell where the condemnation of the violence and looting was in her speech?

Foxtrol

Tipperary animal lover wrote: »

A.T. you're wasting your time, every time you counter he's points he shifts the goal posts, will never agree with you even if you blow him out of the water with facts, on on on it goes, we agree that the police need changing that things need to change for a fairer country for all, but the lads can't get into their heads that the blm movement is all wrong the way its going atm, your just banging your head against the walk to have a decent argument with them, they just won't see your point of view.

I see you subscribe to the Ben Shapiro 'claim victory no matter how stupid you look' newsletter.

Foxtrol

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Pray tell where the condemnation of the violence and looting was in her speech?

Pray tell where the condemnation of violence was in Trump's response to the question about his supporters 'rallying' through Portland shooting weapons into the crowd?

Tell me how

Foxtrol wrote: »

Pray tell where the condemnation of violence was in Trump's response to the question about his supporters 'rallying' through Portland shooting weapons into the crowd?

Trump tweeted that he hoped the victim shot in Portland would rest in peace.
He spoke at a press conference how he felt Kyle Riffenhouse was defending himself.

He has frequently called on states to liberate themselves and for individuals to be wary of losing their second amendment rights.

Trump will be judged by history as being an instigator throughout this whole period.

Harry lyme

Foxtrol wrote: »

Pray tell where the condemnation of violence was in Trump's response to the question about his supporters 'rallying' through Portland shooting weapons into the crowd?

And why does that matter.2 wrongs don't make a right.


Nobody expects much from Trump because he's always been awful however for a while BLM and their supporters had some claim on moral superiority , unfortunately for the movements sake that is now gone when they could easily have claimed the moral high ground and held onto it and potentially made real progress by getting people who may have initially been suspicious of their motives to change their minds about them. BLM have let down the black community, Trump hasn't let down anybody because in truth nobody really expects anything from him.

Political change is about convincing people you disagree with to see your side and change their views and BLM are not helping in this regarding with the violence associated with their protests and their nonsense about reparations.

AbusesToilets

Foxtrol wrote: »

Pray tell where the condemnation of violence was in Trump's response to the question about his supporters 'rallying' through Portland shooting weapons into the crowd?

You stated you could find no evidence of BLM condoning the attacks, I didn't go into spurious whataboutery. No one is denying Trump's actions. You can deflect all you want, but the evidence is clear.

Tell me how

Harry lyme wrote: »

And why does that matter.2 wrongs don't make a right.


Nobody expects much from Trump because he's always been awful however for a while BLM and their supporters had some claim on moral superiority , unfortunately for the movements sake that is now gone when they could easily have claimed the moral high ground and held onto it and potentially made real progress by getting people who may have initially been suspicious of their motives to change their minds about them. BLM have let down the black community, Trump hasn't let down anybody because in truth nobody really expects anything from him.

Political change is about convincing people you disagree with to see your side and change their views and BLM are not helping in this regarding with the violence associated with their protests and their nonsense about reparations.

Has there ever been an organisation that existed over an extended period across a large geographical area in which some members weren't found to have been less than ideal?

There were american soldiers who committed human rights violations during WW2. Should the efforts of the US army as a whole be negated as a consequence of this?

I think that anyone who reckons that isolated examples of inappropriate behaviour has entirely undermined the BLM movement did not really think the movement had merit in the first place.

BattleCorp

Three simple questions for BLM supporters. They are yes or no question by the way.

Have any BLM leaders condoned or encouraged looting or rioting or burning down buildings? Yes or No?

Have any BLM supporters done any of the above mentioned looting or rioting or burning down buildings? Yes or No?

Do you condone looting or rioting or burning down buildings? Yes or No?

Tell me how

BattleCorp wrote: »

Three simple questions for BLM supporters. They are yes or no question by the way.

Have any BLM leaders condoned or encouraged looting or rioting or burning down buildings? Yes or No?

Have any BLM supporters done any of the above mentioned looting or rioting or burning down buildings? Yes or No?

Do you condone looting or rioting or burning down buildings? Yes or No?

Have any BLM leaders condoned or encouraged looting or rioting or burning down buildings? Yes

Have any BLM supporters done any of the above mentioned looting or rioting or burning down buildings? Yes

Do you condone looting or rioting or burning down buildings? No


Now, for you, or anyone else against the BLM movement.

Do you think Black people have been killed due to inappropriate actions by police? Yes or no?

Do you think some Police are racist? Yes or No?

Do you think that the police should treat all members of society equally? Yes or no?

BattleCorp

Tell me how wrote: »

Now, for you, or anyone else against the BLM movement.

Do you think Black people have been killed due to inappropriate actions by police? Yes or no?

Do you think some Police are racist? Yes or No?

Do you think that the police should treat all members of society equally? Yes or no?

Firstly, I'm not against the aims of the BLM movement. I'm just against how they are going about achieving their aims.

I'm going Yes 100% on all three of your questions.

I don't deny that some police don't give them fair play. I am also obliged to point out that many black people don't do themselves any favours whatsoever the way they carry on during their interactions with the police.

I also don't think that every single shooting of an unarmed black man is unwarranted, something that many of the BLM crowd seem to think. I also don't think that every single shooting of an unarmed white man is unwarranted either.

Harry lyme

Tell me how wrote: »

Has there ever been an organisation that existed over an extended period across a large geographical area in which some members weren't found to have been less than ideal?

There were american soldiers who committed human rights violations during WW2. Should the efforts of the US army as a whole be negated as a consequence of this?

I think that anyone who reckons that isolated examples of inappropriate behaviour has entirely undermined the BLM movement did not really think the movement had merit in the first place.

More deflection from you.

The head of BLM in Chicago (3rd biggest city in USA) is spouting the reparations line, it is not some minor member of the organisation who's doing it.

A lot of people didn't think the organisation had merit due to it's Marxist leanings and they've really haven't helped convince those people that they were wrong to think that. Part of political change is convincing people who don't agree with you initially to change their minds.