All Lives Matter

[GMCGeneral]

Don't call me sweetie pie.

OK Cupcake. Tucker's got more journalistic integrity than the entire Lamestream Press tied together.

 

[OldLady]

Death-Ninja
I'd say if you don't know what a fascist is, or where/how to get factual coverage on stuff like race issues, you probably don't belong on a political message board.

Unless you're just trolling, sea lioning for fun.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Everything you just said.

Really? So why weren't people talking about "All lives matter" BEFORE black lives matter?

Are you suggesting people didn't oppose the civil rights movement in the 1960s?

Are you suggesting people aren't opposed to the BLM movement now?

It's pretty obvious they are.

Imagine if someone comes along and says "Black Lives Matter" and you're a white nationalist. You know you can't say "fuck black people" or "make them slaves again". The narrative change. You have to say something people won't be shocked at, something the mainstream can accept, something people will say "that's not racist".

An example from the BNP in the UK. Griffin, then leader, their most successful leader, went to the US and was chumming it up with David Duke.



"that means basically to use the same old words, as I say, freedom, security, identity, democracy, nobody can criticize them"

"So, instead of talking about racial purity, you talk about identity."

It's classic controlling the narrative. These people, the BNP, and white supremacists in the US, South Africa, racists in Europe, they're all connected. They've all learned together how to do this stuff.

So, saying "All Lives Matter", it's a simple way of trying to attack "Black Lives Matter".

There have been plenty of other attacks too. Trying to paint the WHOLE MOVEMENT with the Communist label, so that people will be afraid of saying "Black Lives Matter". Trying to stop the civil rights movement by claiming it's only a Communist plot.

But then, I guess some people will only accept 110% proof of somethings, while accepting 0% on other things.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Really? So why weren't people talking about "All lives matter" BEFORE black lives matter?

Are you suggesting people didn't oppose the civil rights movement in the 1960s?

Are you suggesting people aren't opposed to the BLM movement now?

It's pretty obvious they are.

Imagine if someone comes along and says "Black Lives Matter" and you're a white nationalist. You know you can't say "fuck black people" or "make them slaves again". The narrative change. You have to say something people won't be shocked at, something the mainstream can accept, something people will say "that's not racist".

An example from the BNP in the UK. Griffin, then leader, their most successful leader, went to the US and was chumming it up with David Duke.



"that means basically to use the same old words, as I say, freedom, security, identity, democracy, nobody can criticize them"

"So, instead of talking about racial purity, you talk about identity."

It's classic controlling the narrative. These people, the BNP, and white supremacists in the US, South Africa, racists in Europe, they're all connected. They've all learned together how to do this stuff.

So, saying "All Lives Matter", it's a simple way of trying to attack "Black Lives Matter".

There have been plenty of other attacks too. Trying to paint the WHOLE MOVEMENT with the Communist label, so that people will be afraid of saying "Black Lives Matter". Trying to stop the civil rights movement by claiming it's only a Communist plot.

But then, I guess some people will only accept 110% proof of somethings, while accepting 0% on other things.

Wait a second, so blacks killing blacks and they trying to say black lives matter is an oxymoron

 

[emilynghiem]

Why is it such an offensive thing to say that? It's not saying everybody else except black people's lives matter, it's saying that all lives matter including the blacks.

The best explanation I've heard for this is like comparing it to campaigning for breast cancer awareness instead of cancer in general. Or people who focus on stopping domestic abuse as opposed to all human rights abuses.

The obvious difference is BLM also blame RACE as the CAUSE, not just the groups affected. But they believe it is dismissing mistreatment of Blacks by deflecting. Like saying, there is no need to focus research on women's breast cancer, because all cancer should be researched. That is missing the point.

If you were to lobby against legal abuse of rape victims, and were protesting to raise awareness of women victims mistreated and censored as "liars and sluts"; but then someone attacks you as only caring about rape victims -- what about men falsely accused who become victims of legal abuse? Then they go protest that you are against men and saying all men are guilty and all women are telling the truth, this gets messy.

But both groups should be opposed to legal abuse.

Just like both ALM and BLM should be against crime, violence and brutality.

If they take sides, and argue one side tends to be criminals while the other tends to be victims, this doesn't address the abuse.

 

[emilynghiem]

Really? So why weren't people talking about "All lives matter" BEFORE black lives matter?

Are you suggesting people didn't oppose the civil rights movement in the 1960s?

Are you suggesting people aren't opposed to the BLM movement now?

It's pretty obvious they are.

Imagine if someone comes along and says "Black Lives Matter" and you're a white nationalist. You know you can't say "fuck black people" or "make them slaves again". The narrative change. You have to say something people won't be shocked at, something the mainstream can accept, something people will say "that's not racist".

An example from the BNP in the UK. Griffin, then leader, their most successful leader, went to the US and was chumming it up with David Duke.



"that means basically to use the same old words, as I say, freedom, security, identity, democracy, nobody can criticize them"

"So, instead of talking about racial purity, you talk about identity."

It's classic controlling the narrative. These people, the BNP, and white supremacists in the US, South Africa, racists in Europe, they're all connected. They've all learned together how to do this stuff.

So, saying "All Lives Matter", it's a simple way of trying to attack "Black Lives Matter".

There have been plenty of other attacks too. Trying to paint the WHOLE MOVEMENT with the Communist label, so that people will be afraid of saying "Black Lives Matter". Trying to stop the civil rights movement by claiming it's only a Communist plot.

But then, I guess some people will only accept 110% proof of somethings, while accepting 0% on other things.

Yes and No
frigidweirdo
Some people are against the politicization of race.
Being against blaming mistreatment of Blacks on WHITES instead of focusing on not mistreating Blacks because of RACE.

We can oppose Slavery of Blacks but not blame ALL WHITES as a group.
The same % of Blacks to Whites in Southern populations also refelected in the % of Blacks who owned Black slaves as the Whites who owned Black slaves.

So people are questioning why focus on the smaller % of Blacks injured or killed by police instead of focusing on the larger numbers of Blacks killed by neighborhood and drug related crimes that police are hired to stop?

People are arguing over their different focus in the media.

The common focus is to end crime and violence anywhere.

But each person or group has their own agenda.

Why not just address root causes of crime and violence regardless?
And let each group protest and focus on their individual interests and still address and solve all related problems at the same time?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yes and No
frigidweirdo
Some people are against the politicization of race.
Being against blaming mistreatment of Blacks on WHITES instead of focusing on not mistreating Blacks because of RACE.

We can oppose Slavery of Blacks but not blame ALL WHITES as a group.
The same % of Blacks to Whites in Southern populations also refelected in the % of Blacks who owned Black slaves as the Whites who owned Black slaves.

So people are questioning why focus on the smaller % of Blacks injured or killed by police instead of focusing on the larger numbers of Blacks killed by neighborhood and drug related crimes that police are hired to stop?

People are arguing over their different focus in the media.

The common focus is to end crime and violence anywhere.

But each person or group has their own agenda.

Why not just address root causes of crime and violence regardless?
And let each group protest and focus on their individual interests and still address and solve all related problems at the same time?

The problem is the people who are saying "All lives matter" are not the people coming out and saying that the country needs Proportional Representation, sensible politics, better education, better after school programs.

There's the ones say "fuck black people".

 

[emilynghiem]

The problem is the people who are saying "All lives matter" are not the people coming out and saying that the country needs Proportional Representation, sensible politics, better education, better after school programs.

There's the ones say "fuck black people".

SOME of them are frigidweirdo
SOME Blacks are criminals lying to police and hiding weapons and killing officers.
Does that mean treat all Blacks as thugs?


SOME of the BLM burn down Black businesses letting corporate interests take over the real estate

Are you going to dismiss all BLM as being self destructive just because SOME are?

SOME of the people against tearing down Confederate statues are Historian preservationists including African, Latino and Asian Americans.
SOME are pro Klan or White Supremacists.

Does this mean treat ALL protestors as Historians? Or ALL protestors as the Klan?

Where does collective blame end?
And due process begin?

 

[frigidweirdo]

SOME of them are frigidweirdo
SOME Blacks are criminals lying to police and hiding weapons and killing officers.
Does that mean treat all Blacks as thugs?


SOME of the BLM burn down Black businesses letting corporate interests take over the real estate

Are you going to dismiss all BLM as being self destructive just because SOME are?

SOME of the people against tearing down Confederate statues are Historian preservationists including African, Latino and Asian Americans.
SOME are pro Klan or White Supremacists.

Does this mean treat ALL protestors as Historians? Or ALL protestors as the Klan?

Where does collective blame end?
And due process begin?

So, if "SOME Blacks are criminals" we should stop the whole civil rights movement, ignore the constitution etc?

Because some BLM people, or people claiming to be BLM, are going around causing violence, we should ignore the whole thing?

Remember what happened when Kaepernick knelt before NFL games. You know what they said "This isn't the place for this". Any old excuse to get them to stop. So they realized these people weren't going to listen. NOW THEY LISTEN because they went and got people's attention.

You can't have it both ways.

 

[Hellbilly]

Well BLM doesn't matter to me at all. They're a bunch of terrorist Nazis.

I am not a terrorist nazi.
Shame on you.

 

[Death-Ninja]

Don't call me sweetie pie.

Sweetie-pie, you might lighten up your load a bit by passing that massive rock pile of constipation currently parked up your backside!

 

[Road Runner]

Really? So why weren't people talking about "All lives matter" BEFORE black lives matter?

Are you suggesting people didn't oppose the civil rights movement in the 1960s?

Are you suggesting people aren't opposed to the BLM movement now?

It's pretty obvious they are.

Imagine if someone comes along and says "Black Lives Matter" and you're a white nationalist. You know you can't say "fuck black people" or "make them slaves again". The narrative change. You have to say something people won't be shocked at, something the mainstream can accept, something people will say "that's not racist".

An example from the BNP in the UK. Griffin, then leader, their most successful leader, went to the US and was chumming it up with David Duke.



"that means basically to use the same old words, as I say, freedom, security, identity, democracy, nobody can criticize them"

"So, instead of talking about racial purity, you talk about identity."

It's classic controlling the narrative. These people, the BNP, and white supremacists in the US, South Africa, racists in Europe, they're all connected. They've all learned together how to do this stuff.

So, saying "All Lives Matter", it's a simple way of trying to attack "Black Lives Matter".

There have been plenty of other attacks too. Trying to paint the WHOLE MOVEMENT with the Communist label, so that people will be afraid of saying "Black Lives Matter". Trying to stop the civil rights movement by claiming it's only a Communist plot.

But then, I guess some people will only accept 110% proof of somethings, while accepting 0% on other things.

Well, I will give you one thing. Saying all lives matter might be criticizing BLM, but it isn't saying what you claim it is towards black people.

I am not a terrorist nazi.
Shame on you.

Shame on me? What have I ever done? This is what your heroic group has done.

 

[Hellbilly]

Shame on me? What have I ever done? This is what your heroic group has done.

You painted all BIPOC with the same wide brush. I agree with the goal of equality for all, but not the violence. I guess on your mind that makes me a terrorist nazi. Shame on you.

 

[Road Runner]

You painted all BIPOC with the same wide brush. I agree with the goal of equality for all, but not the violence. I guess on your mind that makes me a terrorist nazi. Shame on you.

You show me one good thing that they have done and I promise that I will take it all back.

 

[Hellbilly]

You show me one good thing that they have done and I promise that I will take it all back.

Do you believe that BIPOC folks are treated unfairly in this country?

 

[Road Runner]

Do you believe that BIPOC folks are treated unfairly in this country?

If you tell me what that is first then maybe I would agree.

 

[Hellbilly]

If you tell me what that is first then maybe I would agree.

Definition of BIPOC

Black, Indigenous, (and) People of Color… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[Road Runner]

Oh then yes I do. However, that doesn't give them the right to do whatever they want to and break laws as seen in the video that I just posted.

 

[Hellbilly]

Oh then yes I do. However, that doesn't give them the right to do whatever they want to and break laws as seen in the video that I just posted.

I have never done any harm to anyone yet you call me a nazi.
We have had several BLM rallies in my state. Not once has there been any violence. None. Are they nazis too?

 

[Road Runner]

I have never done any harm to anyone yet you call me a nazi.
We have had several BLM rallies in my state. Not once has there been any violence. None. Are they nazis too?

Do you mean that you're a part of BLM? Oh and if that's true I would like some proof please. Otherwise I just consider it hogwash and I'm sure that others in this thread would say the same.