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

Cupatae

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Sorry chief. What questions are you asking me? Because the contexts change depending on the times we live in. MLK was speaking when there was no black president and life was very different.

Negative peace positive peace.... **** off.

If you are asking if I agree with black lives matter on their goal or their methods, it's a no from me.

My opinion is that people, of all races, should be judged on their actions and character and not the colour of their skin.

The usual suspects on here are litterally using this movement to virtue signal and personal gain it's really sick to see, they don't even care about the movement they just want to be seen,

They call anyone that exposed them a racist then

Foxtrol

Foxtrol wrote: »

Well at least you now know what MLK would have thought of your point of view.

No.

I don't.

I know what YOU think he would have thought.

Which is of no interest to me.

Overheal

Cupatae wrote: »

Only here can a child be set upon by 4 men and attacked , he then defends himself and but by some amazing mental gymnastics something close to a magic trick ! He is branded as criminal it's hilarious honestly..

The mental gymnastics here would be calling a 17 year old a child, and pretending he isn’t a criminal he has been charged with very serious homicide related offenses. You even posted earlier that we know for a fact he is guilty of gun possession and carry crimes. He will he tried as an adult. He was not holding mommy’s hand. He made a plan and executed it, drove himself and did the killings himself. He’s not a child.

Foxtrol

Deleted User wrote: »

No.

I don't.

I know what YOU think he would have thought.

Which is of no interest to me.

Whatever makes you sleep.

I literally quoted the man and you admitted you're saying the exact same things that the moderates he spoke about in his letter were.

You're on the wrong side of history now and it sounds like you would have been on the wrong side of history then. 'But things are better for black people now' is exactly what many said when he was protesting.

Tell me how

Cupatae wrote: »

The usual suspects on here are litterally using this movement to virtue signal and personal gain it's really sick to see, they don't even care about the movement they just want to be seen,

They call anyone that exposed them a racist then

Yeah, on an anonymous forum genuis. Real exposure there.

I find it curious how the term 'virtue signal' always seems to be used by people to confirm that their position on a topic is 'I really don't care about anyone, absolutely anyone, except myself'.

Why is it so triggering for you to think other people would like to see a just society for everyone in it and not just be selfish in only caring about themselves?

Foxtrol

Foxtrol wrote: »

Whatever makes you sleep.

I literally quoted the man and you admitted you're saying the exact same things that the moderates he spoke about in his letter were.

You're on the wrong side of history now and it sounds like you would have been on the wrong side of history then. 'But things are better for black people now' is exactly what many said when he was protesting.

By me LITERALLY saying that:

My opinion is that people, of all races, should be judged on their actions and character and not the colour of their skin.

puts me on the "wrong side of history"?

I'm genuinely done even trying to speak to you. You put a completely made up quote in quotation marks and tried to attribute it and alluded it to be something I said and ignored my actual quote.

Absolutely dishonest and incendiary for no reason.

Foxtrol

Deleted User wrote: »

Yesterday. At 5:23pm. Why?

I couldn't give a flying **** if you insult people on their looks or how they dress. I'm just saying you give the impression that if it was anything else, you would be calling such behaviour bullying.

At least be consistent though and remember that when you next ask people to #bekind

Again mate, knock yourself out.

If you didn't care then why did you respond to my original post that wasn't directed to you and continue to respond again and again, getting more and more offended?

I didn't mock how people look, I mocked how a group of idiots choose to attempt to wear military clothing and carry military weaponry when it is complete unwarranted at a public protest.

Tell me how

Deleted User wrote: »

By me LITERALLY saying that:

My opinion is that people, of all races, should be judged on their actions and character and not the colour of their skin.

puts me on the "wrong side of history"?

I'm genuinely done even trying to speak to you. You put a completely made up quote in quotation marks and tried to attribute it and alluded it to be something I said and ignored my actual quote.

Absolutely dishonest and incendiary for no reason.

That actually puts you on the side of those who support the BLM movement.

Overheal

[Deleted User] wrote: »

My opinion is that people, of all races, should be judged on their actions and character and not the colour of their skin.

Then why is the prevailing narrative in this thread, “black people are 13% of the population and commit 50% of the crimes?” Are we judging people? Because that sounds like judging a race of people to me.

Fat Lives Matter

Overheal wrote: »

Then why is the prevailing narrative in this thread, “black people are 13% of the population and commit 50% of the crimes?” Are we judging people? Because that sounds like judging a race of people to me.

It seems like people are judging people on actual statistics, C'mon man!

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

Then why is the prevailing narrative in this thread, “black people are 13% of the population and commit 50% of the crimes?” Are we judging people? Because that sounds like judging a race of people to me.

I do see where you are coming from with that but to me it isn't.

It's a fact.

If you were to say (and I'm grabbing these figures from my arse) 74% of domestic abuse is commited by men, would you consider me judging all men?

I think the prevailing narrative on the thread is that rioting and the agitation from BLM (such as the silly videos from restaurants) is counter productive. It has taken a very serious and sinister turn with the events of the last few days but I'm sure the truth will out in the next few days.

Foxtrol

Deleted User wrote: »

By me LITERALLY saying that:

My opinion is that people, of all races, should be judged on their actions and character and not the colour of their skin.

puts me on the "wrong side of history"?

I'm genuinely done even trying to speak to you. You put a completely made up quote in quotation marks and tried to attribute it and alluded it to be something I said and ignored my actual quote.

Absolutely dishonest and incendiary for no reason.

It is from a very famous piece of writing from MLK from 1963, Letter from a Birmingham Jail. (Yes, he was in jail for not following the orders of the police.)

If you take a read you might learn something about the man and what he believed in and fought against.

Here is a link to the original:
http://okra.stanford.edu/transcription/document_images/undecided/630416-019.pdf

Here is the link to it in text:
https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

That actually puts you on the side of those who support the BLM movement.

If that's what their manifesto said, I'd support the **** out of them. It doesn't and I find them divisive. My daughter is a "person of colour" so it came as a huge surprise to me to find out that I apparently discriminate against the person I love most in the whole world.

Foxtrol

Deleted User wrote: »

I do see where you are coming from with that but to me it isn't.

It's a fact.

If you were to say (and I'm grabbing these figures from my arse) 74% of domestic abuse is commited by men, would you consider me judging all men?

I think the prevailing narrative on the thread is that rioting and the agitation from BLM (such as the silly videos from restaurants) is counter productive. It has taken a very serious and sinister turn with the events of the last few days but I'm sure the truth will out in the next few days.

Another fact for you, the average white family in the US has 10 times the net worth of the average black family.

Is there something inherently wrong with black people to cause this or is there something wrong with the system that you believe is now 'equal'?

Foxtrol

Foxtrol wrote: »

It is from a very famous piece of writing from MLK from 1963, Letter from a Birmingham Jail. (Yes, he was in jail for not following the orders of the police.)

If you take a read you might learn something about the man and what he believed in and fought against.

Here is a link to the original:
http://okra.stanford.edu/transcription/document_images/undecided/630416-019.pdf

Here is the link to it in text:
https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html

I know all about the struggles he went through. I know about Anne Frank too. I don't still hold Germans in this day and age responsible for what happened to her and imagine that society hasn't changed.

If you don't think that there has been any improvement and parity with regards to rights since his death, then there is no hope of a decent conversation

Tell me how

Deleted User wrote: »

I know all about the struggles he went through. I know about Anne Frank too. I don't still hold Germans in this day and age responsible for what happened to her and imagine that society hasn't changed.

If you don't think that there has been any improvement and parity with regards to rights since his death, then there is no hope of a decent conversation

No, speaking for myself and not Foxtrol, the improvement as a consequence of the efforts of MLK and others and how it didn't happen immediately is reflected in the current movement.

In 50 years time, if people are talking about the Police reform of the 20's, they will mention that a step along the way was August 2016 when CK first knelt at an NFL game in 2016.

It's a similar journey and sequence of events and ultimately will result in some change, the only question is when and how significant that will be.

Foxtrol

Foxtrol wrote: »

Another fact for you, the average white family in the US has 10 times the net worth of the average black family.

Is there something inherently wrong with black people to cause this or is there something wrong with the system that you believe is now 'equal'?

Maybe the white people have better jobs? Perhaps more black people happen to be poor?

What's the breakdown with Asians? How are they doing on the income scale. Check into that and let me know.

Again, when black people come out as victims, it's ok to group them together, yet when you group them together for crime stats, it's racist. Bizarre

Here's another statistic while we are firing off ones that mean **** all....

From 2008 until 2016 a black man was the most powerful man in America. The majority of the country voted for him. ****ing racist bastards.

Tokyo

Mod: @DelaneyIn - don't post in the thread again.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

No, speaking for myself and not Foxtrol, the improvement as a consequence of the efforts of MLK and others and how it didn't happen immediately is reflected in the current movement.

In 50 years time, if people are talking about the Police reform of the 20's, they will mention that a step along the way was August 2016 when CK first knelt at an NFL game in 2016.

It's a similar journey and sequence of events and ultimately will result in some change, the only question is when and how significant that will be.

Look man, I don't think you are right but I don't think we are as opposed as we seem to be.

I want equality and I want peace. I just vehemently oppose the methods of BLM.

I appreciate that you actually answered questions I put to you and haven't been abusive or needlessly dismissive in your responses.

I do think you are wrong and I do feel that BLM are negatively affecting racial relations in America but I hope we both get to our shared end goals, which is fairness for everyone and equality across the board.

Foxtrol

Deleted User wrote: »

Maybe the white people have better jobs? Perhaps more black people happen to be poor?

What's the breakdown with Asians? How are they doing on the income scale. Check into that and let me know.

Again, when black people come out as victims, it's ok to group them together, yet when you group them together for crime stats, it's racist. Bizarre

Here's another statistic while we are firing off ones that mean **** all....

From 2008 until 2016 a black man was the most powerful man in America. The majority of the country voted for him. ****ing racist bastards.

So white people just coincidentally get 'better jobs' often enough to have 10 times the wealth... :rolleyes:

A 10 times difference in wealth is because they just 'happen to be poor...' :rolleyes:

I understood people not knowing the history of MLK but I'm sorry I simply can't take you in any way seriously after all those statements. You simply can't believe that rubbish

Foxtrol

Foxtrol wrote: »

So white people just coincidentally get 'better jobs' often enough to have 10 times the wealth... :rolleyes:

A 10 times difference in wealth is because they just 'happen to be poor...' :rolleyes:

I understood people not knowing the history of MLK but I'm sorry I simply can't take you in any way seriously after all those statements. You simply can't believe that rubbish

What's the deal with Asians or Indians? What's their income malarkey?

What is the disparity in Ireland or England?

What rules are in place that stop black people getting the big jobs or, more importantly, is there not actual laws and even quotas that need to be filled to give people who aren't white, jobs based on their skin colour and not on their ability

Do you agree that there is a gender pay gap?

Are you apologetic for your white privilege?

Tokyo

Mod: JKnoxer - threadbanned for personal insults and antagonistic posting.

weldoninhio

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If the young lad first thought is that I must shoot somebody throwing a plastic bag at them. He should not have access to a gun. I don't understand why there are so many white supremacists on boards. Embarrassing for Ireland really.

White supremecists for thinking that a white kid shooting a white man in self defence was justified?? Your post is embarrassing.

weldoninhio

Foxtrol wrote: »

Another fact for you, the average white family in the US has 10 times the net worth of the average black family.

Is there something inherently wrong with black people to cause this or is there something wrong with the system that you believe is now 'equal'?

Black families generally have at least 1 person less. The stats again show that Daddy rarely hangs around. Another unarguable fact.

Tipperary animal lover

https://twitter.com/i/status/1299210902206521346
Really doing BLM a service Here, the more and more I see these types of recordings the more I feel sorry for the normal American person

BattleCorp

Here's my take on things.

Many would consider Rittenhouse a hero for trying to defend other people's property and others vilify him for it. If it was in Ireland (leaving aside the gun element for a minute), and Rittenhouse was trying to stop someone from burning down a car garage he'd be commended. He wouldn't be called a vigilante etc. for trying to stop someone from damaging private property. But here's the rub. He foolishly inserted himself in that situation. He did it the wrong way. He did it in a way that he wasn't entitled to do because it was against the law for him to be armed there. He apparently broke several laws by having the gun there. So, let him face the full rigours of the law for that.

Now on to the shootings.

The first shooting - self defence in my mind due to my points below. Feel free to correct me if I've made any errors.

I've seen a video of Rittenhouse running with several people chasing him. I don't know what led up to that incident but someone chasing Rittenhouse threw something at him. Some on here are saying that it was a plastic bag. It certainly wasn't an empty plastic bag but I don't know exactly what was in it. That doesn't really matter though as throwing something at someone would be considered assault. As would chasing someone in those circumstances.

Rittenhouse was being chased by a mob and knew he was getting an ass kicking or worse if he was caught so he apparently turned around and shot someone in the head. If a mob chase you and attempt to assault you by throwing something at you, then why is it considered murder when you shoot someone attempting to kick your ass? That's self-defence in my book. And yes, Rittenhouse shouldn't have been in that position but that doesn't change the fact that it looks like self-defence.

The second and third shooting - Self-defence in my mind due to video evidence clearly showing him being chased and assaulted.

This part of the story is very clear. Lads swinging at him with skateboards, trying to jump and kick him when he was on the ground etc. That's self-defence right there.

Notice how I'm not bringing anyone's past convictions into this. That's immaterial. I'm just judging people on their actions. It does appear that they were assaulting/attempting to assault him.

I wouldn't prosecute Rittenhouse for the three people who were attacking him being shot.

But here's an extra charge that I would prosecute Rittenhouse for.

He recklessly discharged a few shots towards the crowd after he shot the guy in the arm. There was nobody near him at that point and that was completely unneccessary. And let him face the full rigours of the law for that.

weldoninhio

BattleCorp wrote: »

Here's my take on things.

Many would consider Rittenhouse a hero for trying to defend other people's property and others vilify him for it. If it was in Ireland (leaving aside the gun element for a minute), and Rittenhouse was trying to stop someone from burning down a car garage he'd be commended. He wouldn't be called a vigilante etc. for trying to stop someone from damaging private property. But here's the rub. He foolishly inserted himself in that situation. He did it the wrong way. He did it in a way that he wasn't entitled to do because it was against the law for him to be armed there. He apparently broke several laws by having the gun there. So, let him face the full rigours of the law for that.

Now on to the shootings.

The first shooting - self defence in my mind due to my points below. Feel free to correct me if I've made any errors.

I've seen a video of Rittenhouse running with several people chasing him. I don't know what led up to that incident but someone chasing Rittenhouse threw something at him. Some on here are saying that it was a plastic bag. It certainly wasn't an empty plastic bag but I don't know exactly what was in it. That doesn't really matter though as throwing something at someone would be considered assault. As would chasing someone in those circumstances.

Rittenhouse was being chased by a mob and knew he was getting an ass kicking or worse if he was caught so he apparently turned around and shot someone in the head. If a mob chase you and attempt to assault you by throwing something at you, then why is it considered murder when you shoot someone attempting to kick your ass? That's self-defence in my book. And yes, Rittenhouse shouldn't have been in that position but that doesn't change the fact that it looks like self-defence.

The second and third shooting - Self-defence in my mind due to video evidence clearly showing him being chased and assaulted.

This part of the story is very clear. Lads swinging at him with skateboards, trying to jump and kick him when he was on the ground etc. That's self-defence right there.

Notice how I'm not bringing anyone's past convictions into this. That's immaterial. I'm just judging people on their actions. It does appear that they were assaulting/attempting to assault him.

I wouldn't prosecute Rittenhouse for the three people who were attacking him being shot.

But here's an extra charge that I would prosecute Rittenhouse for.

He recklessly discharged a few shots towards the crowd after he shot the guy in the arm. There was nobody near him at that point and that was completely unneccessary. And let him face the full rigours of the law for that.

So a misdemeanor charge and wreckless endangerment. That seems fair enough.

BattleCorp

weldoninhio wrote: »

So a misdemeanor charge and wreckless endangerment. That seems fair enough.

He'd have a few charges in relation to having the gun (underage brandishing/open carry, crossing state lines with a firearm etc.) and I'd consider it quite serious though to be firing towards the crowd after the third shooting. He wasn't in any danger then. Would the charge in that instance be reckless endangerment? That doesn't sound strong enough but I'm not up to speed on American terminology.

weldoninhio

BattleCorp wrote: »

He'd have a few charges in relation to having the gun (underage brandishing/open carry, crossing state lines with a firearm etc.) and I'd consider it quite serious though to be firing towards the crowd after the third shooting. He wasn't in any danger then. Would the charge in that instance be reckless endangerment? That doesn't sound strong enough but I'm not up to speed on American terminology.

The gun charges are misdemeanors in that state. Reckless endangerment would cover shooting towards people but not hitting anyone.

dog_pig

BattleCorp wrote: »

He'd have a few charges in relation to having the gun (underage brandishing/open carry, crossing state lines with a firearm etc.) and I'd consider it quite serious though to be firing towards the crowd after the third shooting. He wasn't in any danger then. Would the charge in that instance be reckless endangerment? That doesn't sound strong enough but I'm not up to speed on American terminology.

Is there footage of him firing towards the crowd? From the videos I've seen it appears that those gunshots are coming from somewhere else.