Black Lives Matter's "Guiding Principles"

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I can't help but notice you may have missed the point and are focusing on only one part of my reply.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Yes, bad behavior has consequences.

Is the group advocating for people to engage in that behavior, or is it a matter of personal responsibility?

They kind of are:

Black Lives Matter Radio Host Calls for Race War & Cop-Killing
www.truthrevolt.org...
An apparent Black Lives Matter activist reportedly delivered a shocking and violently racist rant during a live Internet broadcast on BlogTalkRadio Tuesday night, declaring it is “open season on killing whites and white police officers.”

Protesters Chant 'What Do We Want, Dead Cops'


Black Lives Matter Chant Called 'Disgusting' By Police - 'Pigs In A Blanket, Fry 'Em Like Bacon!'


Megyn Kelly CONFRONTS #BLACKLIVESMATTER Activist Over RACIST Video THREATENINGTo KILL "CRACKAS"

Or at least the official mouthpieces should be condemning that stuff. Do they? Have proof?

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I can't help but notice you may have missed the point and are focusing on only one part of my reply.

I started at the top, and now you're completely dodging it. Please do tackle all that for us the credibility of your stance depends on it.

I never said BLM is itself a terrorist group, like Al Qaeda, but do argue that their total SJW platform does cause hateful bigotry so binding all that with the sensitive surface issue is very dangerous and it shouldn't take a genius to see where it's going (which we have now: 2 separate cop killer incidents inspired by BLM before Dallas, Dallas, another one that night, possibly others between beginning and now).

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

They kind of are:

Kind of? Well, does BLM advocate for violence officially?

You are proving my point. These are acts of the individual.

Or at least the official mouthpieces should be condemning that stuff. Do they? Have proof?

Yes, they have and do.

The founder of St. Paul’s Black Lives Matter chapter denounced the violent protesters who blocked a major interstate and attacked police officers Saturday night in the Twin Cities, saying they did a disservice to the officers trying to maintain order and that their actions did nothing to further the group’s goals.

time.com...

a reply to: introvert

I wasn't talking about blocking the road, I was talking about that list of BLM supporters (groups of them even) calling for killing cops & crackas. Where's the official press release int he official BLM website????

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
And there it is, under the guise of being about 'stopping cops from shooting blacks' .

A guise of? That is not an accurate statement, as it is something that has happened too much and citizens are protesting this problem.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I started at the top, and now you're completely dodging it. Please do tackle all that for us the credibility of your stance depends on it.

Tackle what? That post appears to be a rant.

I never said BLM is itself a terrorist group, like Al Qaeda, but do argue that their total SJW platform does cause hateful bigotry so binding all that with the sensitive surface issue is very dangerous and it shouldn't take a genius to see where it's going (which we have now: 2 separate cop killer incidents inspired by BLM before Dallas, Dallas, another one that night, possibly others between beginning and now).

The bible has inspired people to shoot-up or bomb abortion clinics. Does that mean we should get pissed at organized religion?

Do you see the fallacy in your thinking yet?

It is not reasonable to blame BLM for the acts of individuals, unless they advocate for such acts.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I can't help but notice you may have missed the point and are focusing on only one part of my reply.

I started at the top, and now you're completely dodging it. Please do tackle all that for us the credibility of your stance depends on it.

I never said BLM is itself a terrorist group, like Al Qaeda, but do argue that their total SJW platform does cause hateful bigotry so binding all that with the sensitive surface issue is very dangerous and it shouldn't take a genius to see where it's going (which we have now: 2 separate cop killer incidents inspired by BLM before Dallas, Dallas, another one that night, possibly others between beginning and now).

SJWs are not Bigots. I can attest to that.


Your posts do actually sound biggoted, though.

a reply to: introvert

Okay, if you're going to brush off the hardest questions in the thread as unworthy for "appearing to be a rant", and yet hold steadfast as if you've got 3 legs to stand on, then there's no point in even noticing anything you write.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: introvert

I wasn't talking about blocking the road, I was talking about that list of BLM supporters (groups of them even) calling for killing cops & crackas. Where's the official press release int he official BLM website????

Moving the goalposts I see.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: introvert

Okay, if you're going to brush off the hardest questions in the thread as unworthy for "appearing to be a rant", and yet hold steadfast as if you've got 3 legs to stand on, then there's no point in even noticing anything you write.

I brushed them off because it's not a very articulate line of questioning. It was a rant that was all over the place.

Jeez, why do you guys care so much. I hate the #alllivesmatter argument so much, ALTHOUGH I do agree with it 100% but why would you take that away from them. Sure statistically more white people have died right? why haven't you guys protested or said anything it does not matter who has died more but blacks are actually doing something about it. if it bothers you so much make your #whitelivesmatter movement but don't belittle them, because at the end of the day does it really matter that more white people have died? no they just have a community who sees the trend and is fed up with it. Regardless it's bound to happen white cop kills black guy it just looks bad, what if you had 5-10 videos showing black cops killing white citizens for no apparent reason, who have a license to carry, who get pulled over for a bad break light anyone would scream racism or, at least you would notice a trend. No offense to anyone

a reply to: reldra

Of course they're not, because they "cant be bigots" ("only" straight white males can be).

If you two are unwilling to break this down for me, for the sake of the credibility of what your "goals" are, then I'll just be ignoring the 2 of you from now. This isn't a rant, but it is a mofo an an impossible 'Question Stack' for you, no:

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: [post=20974786]introvert:
Of course it would appear that they are pushing a social just platform, because their goal is social justice.

And what does that even mean? What is the GOAL? What are you trying to achieve???

Everyone has equal rights now. BUT that's not good enough:

So then, besides trying to reduce cops shooting blacks, what purpose other than driving divides does any of this represent???

When you go and create this situation where only straight white males "can be" racist/bigoted/etc, while everyone has equal rights, and you pit everyone against SWM, the only real outcome that can be expected is radicalizing basically everyone and creating total social chaos. And that's exactly what we're already seeing in this is only what year 3, year 4??

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

again with the 'progressive stack'. LOL I never said anyone 'can't' be bigots'.

I have zero to explain or prove. It's not my thread.

I agree with them about fostering extended family relations. The prevailing "nuclear family", or rather the untethered individual with few strong cultural and localized bonds, is a party to divide-and-conquer tactics. What we've got in the West now is decadent hyper-individualism. People are far easier to control when they're aimlessly individualistic without any solid attachment to a what I call a culture block. Local culture blocks are anathema to the elite, they're much harder to control. This is why mass-culture is so intimately tied in to globalist exploitation. The average American "individualist" is just a sheep for the slaughter, and his whole life is basically one big masturbatory rat race.

A lot of the globalist wars are about eradicating "problematic" culture blocks.

It's pure propaganda that modern individualism is something to be praised. It's just another tool of control.

a reply to: reldra

Okay, so you have no argument to answer my questions about what are your goals (besides causing social divides and chaos).

Good to know. We've already gotten introverts answer.

So that's 2 for 2.

Are there any other SJW's that could actually explain this for me? I'd really like to understand it. But without some insightful explanation of what the premise the ACTUAL goals of SJW is about (given everyone has equal rights now), it basically leaves one conclusion (chaos).

a reply to: introvert

Neither. The group is protesting the natural consequences of bad behavior.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: introvert

Neither. The group is protesting the natural consequences of bad behavior.

To a certain extent, I can agree with that.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Good to know. We've already gotten introverts answer.

Yes, I believe it is a potential strawman argument that you have created.

Of course they're not, because they "cant be bigots" ("only" straight white males can be).

There it is.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Of course it would appear that they are pushing a social just platform, because their goal is social justice.

THE IRONY! One of the tenants of the SJWs which we have heard time after time is the ideology that "actions have consequences" in regards to free speech which they may find offensive. Yet here is an entire herd of SJWs, formed to remove the natural consequences of bad behavior by their own. The percentage of people (of any color) killed by police in this country who weren't acting like thugs or jackasses is extraordinarily small. Bad behavior has consequences...

Bad behaviour should be handled through the courts and criminal justice system, not through summary execution.
The right to a fair trial is enshrined in your constitution if you bother to read past the 2nd amendment .

Deadly force should ONLY be used if there is a clear and direct threat to the public or officer involving a deadly weapon.

Shooting people at traffice stops or chocking suspects to death other cigarettes is NOT a excuse for lethal force.

Lethal force should only be used as a very last resort.


This isnt to excuse the criminal behaviour of BLM either. I just see both sides are to blame and there needs to be a descalation both sides.