BLM Activist on Waukesha: 'It Sounds Like the Revolution Has Started'

Never fight a war on the enemy's terms.

The history of successful revolutions (with the exception of the American revolution) is a history of peaceful protests and political pressure that bring meaningful and permanent change.

Violent Revolution is almost always a failure. If the revolutionaries win, they usually impose a government that's worse than the one they replaced.

This is why the right-wing would like a violent civil war, and why intelligent liberals refuse to accommodate them.



I hate to break it to you, moron, but it is YOUR violent lefties who are driving the car.
 
Liberals don't riot, anarchists do. Anarchists have nothing to do with liberalism.

Here's the result of your armed but 'peaceful' protests:





Provably bullshit. There are no real anarchists. Anarchists don't do anything except stay in their dugouts wishing everyone would leave them alone. The rioters are burn loot murder (self proclaimed marxists), antifart (allied with blac bloc, a SOCIALIST terror group), and a whole host of idiot socialist wannabe's.

Are you lying to cover for them, or are you truly this stupid?
 
You live in a world of Qunatic fantasy.



You live in moron land. So what does that tell you. BTW, even your propagandists only admit to 81 million supposedly voting for xiden.
 
The French Revolution, the Bolshevik revolution, Cuba, and Vietnam, just a few that come to mind, say your generalization is totally wrong.

None of those revolutions were successful because the governments they implemented were as bad or much worse than the governments they replaced.

The American Revolution is the only really successful revolution (that I can think of ) where the new government was better than the old government.

Just winning the violent conflict doesn't make the war successful. You have to justify your revolution by implementing a government that's better than the old one.

Is that so hard to comprehend?
 
Targeting children for murder, how Leftist.

Who said BLM were Commie terrorists?

Thompson(Chief of Waukesha PD)is a naked BLM supporter, who had his cops kneel(literally)to them as a sign of respect, and what you all need to understand right now, is this, the entire bureaucracy in Milwaukee, and Waukesha is democrat, this includes the mayors, DA's, everything. I have seen Brooks social media, and I watched appalled as Thompson stated matter of factly that no nexus to terror existed, that the racist, mass murdering Brooks, was in fact just fleeing another "ahh" disturbance.

I have seen all of the available video, its crystal clear that he was intending to run down and over human beings, just as the BLM animal had attempted to do to a cop a few months prior, and his girlfriend a a pair of weeks earlier in the same exact SUV, and that was all on top of his social media, where he described in detail, just how to use your motor vehicle as an instrument of mass murder! Here's the take on this, they have already politicized this in the exact reversal of how they politicized the Rittenhouse case & verdict, which BTW Brooks was obviously retaliating against!

They are intentionally smothering the mans true motivations, and they are doing this because they all know exactly where the chickens return to roost on all of this, specifically upon the shoulders of the democratic party hate machine, led by Biden/Harris, the democratic controlled congress(both houses)and most especially their media apparatus, the latter of whom has been inciting blacks, and other minority's, and radicalized intellectually weak whites to racial based violence for six years now!

They are lying their lips off about this animals motivations, because they know it ends them all! ;)
 
Last edited:
None of those revolutions were successful because the governments they implemented were as bad or much worse than the governments they replaced.

The American Revolution is the only really successful revolution (that I can think of ) where the new government was better than the old government.

Just winning the violent conflict doesn't make the war successful. You have to justify your revolution by implementing a government that's better than the old one.

Is that so hard to comprehend?




Your memory is poor., The Rumanian revolution was likewise a positive for the people.
 
None of those revolutions were successful because the governments they implemented were as bad or much worse than the governments they replaced.

The American Revolution is the only really successful revolution (that I can think of ) where the new government was better than the old government.

Just winning the violent conflict doesn't make the war successful. You have to justify your revolution by implementing a government that's better than the old one.

Is that so hard to comprehend?
Your subjective opinion about what is "successful" and "better" is immaterial. Vietnam's seems to have become a successful country, the French still exist. Your short-sightedness also doesn't take into account places like Bangladesh, Zaire, S. Africa--more examples of violent revolt with more stable governments as a result.
 
Never fight a war on the enemy's terms.

The history of successful revolutions (with the exception of the American revolution) is a history of peaceful protests and political pressure that bring meaningful and permanent change.

Violent Revolution is almost always a failure. If the revolutionaries win, they usually impose a government that's worse than the one they replaced.

This is why the right-wing would like a violent civil war, and why intelligent liberals refuse to accommodate them.
there is no such thing as an intelligent liberal .
 
Still, Vaun Mayes took to Facebook Live on Monday to suggest that Sunday's tragedy was the "start of a revolution."

Speaking from the scene of the attack, Mayes said: "I don’t know. Now we’ll have to wait and see because they do have somebody in custody. We may have to wait and see what they say about why this happened.




This is from your article. Before the perp was arrested. In the beginning, we were all wondering if this attack wasn't related to the Rittenhouse verdict.

He was wrong. It was just some guy running from police.
Some guy”?
You sound like Omars Attacks discussing 9-11 terrorists.
 
None of those revolutions were successful because the governments they implemented were as bad or much worse than the governments they replaced.

The American Revolution is the only really successful revolution (that I can think of ) where the new government was better than the old government.

Just winning the violent conflict doesn't make the war successful. You have to justify your revolution by implementing a government that's better than the old one.

Is that so hard to comprehend?
OK, Lather. You keep snorting the best licks in town.
 
If anything, more likely the Chauvin murders, the Rittenhouse murders, and the 5 parade murders combined.
But I think there's still one coming very soon that will set it off.

A good time for both sides to stop agitating each other to make it happen sooner!
California will explode first....and it won't be a white black thing either.....more like Latino scouring out the black population. This is coming.....
 
I think it's always better to err on the side of less violence. I think I've called it correctly, but I still have no idea what it's going to take for the left and the blacks to get out the guns. I suspect it's going to be a police murder of a black man or black men. Something that can be loosely justified but is questionable. Just my opinion weather.

And I'll use this opportunity to tell the braying asses to go quack themselves.
Tell that to you Leftards murdering hundreds every day.

And calling citizens murderers for defending themselves is why you are a pathological retard.
 

Forum List

Back
Top