HorrorMovieFans.com

No matter how many books and articles are written to justify it, one would hope it feels wrong to everyone to see law enforcement making any such gestures.

Also, we would have to try pretty hard to not see the bias in selecting books to read which confirm your own ideas and then recommending them. There are many books written on how such movements harm society and blacks in particular. Why not choose one of those?

When a KKK or Neo Nazi fuck kills someone by plowing into a crowd, no reasonable person has a problem condemning both the person, the reason, and the group. Trump condemned all violence, and then condemned the movement.

When the Dallas sniper killed 5 cops as part of the Black Lives Matter movement, Obama talked about "Racial disparity in the justice system" being a problem and gun control. He condemned the act, but he also sent out a loud dog whistle that fighting a race war is ok.

We should not be selective in our outrage. Black Lives Matter cannot claim there is not blood on their hands any more than modern Neo Nazis can.

Foo wrote:When a KKK or Neo Nazi fuck kills someone by plowing into a crowd, no reasonable person has a problem condemning both the person, the reason, and the group. Trump condemned all violence, and then condemned the movement.

When the Dallas sniper killed 5 cops as part of the Black Lives Matter movement, Obama talked about "Racial disparity in the justice system" being a problem and gun control. He condemned the act, but he also sent out a loud dog whistle that fighting a race war is ok.

We should not be selective in our outrage. Black Lives Matter cannot claim there is not blood on their hands any more than modern Neo Nazis can.

This is how I know you're full of shit with the holier-than-thou "I read everything" boasting. I've pointed out at least ten times that BLM was not associated with the Dallas snipers, that's a fact, and you ignore it because it doesn't suit your agenda. You're not open-minded. Not even close.

Foo wrote:No matter how many books and articles are written to justify it, one would hope it feels wrong to everyone to see law enforcement making any such gestures.

Also, we would have to try pretty hard to not see the bias in selecting books to read which confirm your own ideas and then recommending them. There are many books written on how such movements harm society and blacks in particular. Why not choose one of those?

Again, pretending to read and not soaking in any information. Go back to the last page for an explanation of what the "Black Power" gesture actually means and it will be obvious there's nothing "wrong" about it. You have to be open-minded though.

Why don't you recommend some yourself if you're so concerned? Inquiring minds want to know what you read.

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:When a KKK or Neo Nazi fuck kills someone by plowing into a crowd, no reasonable person has a problem condemning both the person, the reason, and the group. Trump condemned all violence, and then condemned the movement.

When the Dallas sniper killed 5 cops as part of the Black Lives Matter movement, Obama talked about "Racial disparity in the justice system" being a problem and gun control. He condemned the act, but he also sent out a loud dog whistle that fighting a race war is ok.

We should not be selective in our outrage. Black Lives Matter cannot claim there is not blood on their hands any more than modern Neo Nazis can.

This is how I know you're full of shit with the holier-than-thou "I read everything" boasting. I've pointed out at least ten times that BLM was not associated with the Dallas snipers, that's a fact, and you ignore it because it doesn't suit your agenda. You're not open-minded. Not even close.

What is "associated"? Every domestic group distances themselves after they whoop up a follower and it results in violence. Big deal.

"You're fake history!" says the man who actually admits to buying into Lost Cause propaganda. Oh brother.

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:When a KKK or Neo Nazi fuck kills someone by plowing into a crowd, no reasonable person has a problem condemning both the person, the reason, and the group. Trump condemned all violence, and then condemned the movement.

When the Dallas sniper killed 5 cops as part of the Black Lives Matter movement, Obama talked about "Racial disparity in the justice system" being a problem and gun control. He condemned the act, but he also sent out a loud dog whistle that fighting a race war is ok.

We should not be selective in our outrage. Black Lives Matter cannot claim there is not blood on their hands any more than modern Neo Nazis can.

This is how I know you're full of shit with the holier-than-thou "I read everything" boasting. I've pointed out at least ten times that BLM was not associated with the Dallas snipers, that's a fact, and you ignore it because it doesn't suit your agenda. You're not open-minded. Not even close.

What is "associated"? Every domestic group distances themselves after they whoop up a follower and it results in violence. Big deal.

Prove to me that Micah Johnson was part of the Black Lives Matter movement.

I believe both white power and black power messages are equally destructive.

You have to jump through a lot of intellectual hoops to think it is a good idea for police to be signaling allegiance to any race based group. Justice is supposed to be blind.

Foo wrote:I believe both white power and black power messages are equally destructive.

You have to jump through a lot of intellectual hoops to think it is a good idea for police to be signaling allegiance to any race based group. Justice is supposed to be blind.

White power = oppress everyone who isn't white
Black power = securing equal opportunity for blacks

What intellectual hoops are we talking about here? It's entirely appropriate to signal allegiance to a civil rights group, that's called being a good human. It's really only divisive for people who understand what it represents because there are a lot of racists in this country. Are you really going to cry for them?

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:When a KKK or Neo Nazi fuck kills someone by plowing into a crowd, no reasonable person has a problem condemning both the person, the reason, and the group. Trump condemned all violence, and then condemned the movement.

When the Dallas sniper killed 5 cops as part of the Black Lives Matter movement, Obama talked about "Racial disparity in the justice system" being a problem and gun control. He condemned the act, but he also sent out a loud dog whistle that fighting a race war is ok.

We should not be selective in our outrage. Black Lives Matter cannot claim there is not blood on their hands any more than modern Neo Nazis can.

This is how I know you're full of shit with the holier-than-thou "I read everything" boasting. I've pointed out at least ten times that BLM was not associated with the Dallas snipers, that's a fact, and you ignore it because it doesn't suit your agenda. You're not open-minded. Not even close.

What is "associated"? Every domestic group distances themselves after they whoop up a follower and it results in violence. Big deal.

Prove to me that Micah Johnson was part of the Black Lives Matter movement.

The police chief (who is also black) said the suspect specifically referenced BLM.

LOL! Meanwhile Trump is promoting a rally to pardon that old dipshit Sheriff Joe in Arizona and they're offering 10 dollars an hour for minorities to show up showing support.

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:When a KKK or Neo Nazi fuck kills someone by plowing into a crowd, no reasonable person has a problem condemning both the person, the reason, and the group. Trump condemned all violence, and then condemned the movement.

When the Dallas sniper killed 5 cops as part of the Black Lives Matter movement, Obama talked about "Racial disparity in the justice system" being a problem and gun control. He condemned the act, but he also sent out a loud dog whistle that fighting a race war is ok.

We should not be selective in our outrage. Black Lives Matter cannot claim there is not blood on their hands any more than modern Neo Nazis can.

This is how I know you're full of shit with the holier-than-thou "I read everything" boasting. I've pointed out at least ten times that BLM was not associated with the Dallas snipers, that's a fact, and you ignore it because it doesn't suit your agenda. You're not open-minded. Not even close.

What is "associated"? Every domestic group distances themselves after they whoop up a follower and it results in violence. Big deal.

Prove to me that Micah Johnson was part of the Black Lives Matter movement.

The police chief (who is also black) said the suspect specifically referenced BLM.

So we've established that Micah Johnson was alive in 2016 and aware of the existence of Black Lives Matter. And?

Sounds like the problem there was not Black Lives Matter. Sounds like the problem was that people tend to get upset when police are constantly killing unarmed black citizens, because police should not be killing unarmed black citizens (or anyone else unarmed and posing no danger). Crazy thought.

Not that that implies any "they MADE me do it" arguments makes sense, which is the point. Micah Johnson and his hatred and racism is responsible for what he did. James Fields believed in neo-Nazi and white supremacist ideals and he acted on those. Their ideas are only hate and racial superiority. Johnson didn't act on behalf of BLM's platform, so you can't equate the two. There are a lot of problems with BLM but they are not the militant terrorist group they're portrayed as here...

Here's one legitimate criticism I have of BLM that doesn't deal in fear-mongering:

They are absurdly hyperfocused on filling those liberal identity quotas. Forcing female leaders, transgender presence etc. They are now stuck in the big blue machine and I don't think their leaders really have any autonomy at this point because they definitely get sidetracked by nonsense. Deray McKesson is also a fraud and liar.

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:When a KKK or Neo Nazi fuck kills someone by plowing into a crowd, no reasonable person has a problem condemning both the person, the reason, and the group. Trump condemned all violence, and then condemned the movement.

When the Dallas sniper killed 5 cops as part of the Black Lives Matter movement, Obama talked about "Racial disparity in the justice system" being a problem and gun control. He condemned the act, but he also sent out a loud dog whistle that fighting a race war is ok.

We should not be selective in our outrage. Black Lives Matter cannot claim there is not blood on their hands any more than modern Neo Nazis can.

This is how I know you're full of shit with the holier-than-thou "I read everything" boasting. I've pointed out at least ten times that BLM was not associated with the Dallas snipers, that's a fact, and you ignore it because it doesn't suit your agenda. You're not open-minded. Not even close.

What is "associated"? Every domestic group distances themselves after they whoop up a follower and it results in violence. Big deal.

Prove to me that Micah Johnson was part of the Black Lives Matter movement.

The police chief (who is also black) said the suspect specifically referenced BLM.

So we've established that Micah Johnson was alive in 2016 and aware of the existence of Black Lives Matter. And?

Uh, ok. There is s pretty clear double standard at play here. Follower of a movement kills those who the movement views as enemies and there is no connection. I guess for something to be connected to White Supremacy they have to have an authenticated letter from Hitler stating they are a member?

I look at white Supremacists and Black Lives Matter groups and have seen violence from each. You just have to be willing to accept the truth.

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:When a KKK or Neo Nazi fuck kills someone by plowing into a crowd, no reasonable person has a problem condemning both the person, the reason, and the group. Trump condemned all violence, and then condemned the movement.

When the Dallas sniper killed 5 cops as part of the Black Lives Matter movement, Obama talked about "Racial disparity in the justice system" being a problem and gun control. He condemned the act, but he also sent out a loud dog whistle that fighting a race war is ok.

We should not be selective in our outrage. Black Lives Matter cannot claim there is not blood on their hands any more than modern Neo Nazis can.

This is how I know you're full of shit with the holier-than-thou "I read everything" boasting. I've pointed out at least ten times that BLM was not associated with the Dallas snipers, that's a fact, and you ignore it because it doesn't suit your agenda. You're not open-minded. Not even close.

What is "associated"? Every domestic group distances themselves after they whoop up a follower and it results in violence. Big deal.

Prove to me that Micah Johnson was part of the Black Lives Matter movement.

The police chief (who is also black) said the suspect specifically referenced BLM.

So we've established that Micah Johnson was alive in 2016 and aware of the existence of Black Lives Matter. And?

Uh, ok. There is s pretty clear double standard at play here. Follower of a movement kills those who the movement views as enemies and there is no connection. I guess for something to be connected to White Supremacy they have to have an authenticated letter from Hitler stating they are a member?

I look at white Supremacists and Black Lives Matter groups and have seen violence from each. You just have to be willing to accept the truth.

No double standard, Black Lives Matter does not advocate for killing, racial superiority or any of that nonsense. White supremacy inherently calls for all of that. Your fundamental failure here isn't even equating hate from above and hate from below, it's the way you constantly misrepresent BLM. You don't give an honest portrayal at all. Again, that doesn't mean black radical nationalism doesn't exist and those groups are out there. In the next few years, I'd hope there's a spotlight on them as well as white terror groups.

Yet the Black Lives Matter hate speech has put them in the center of cop killings...

Oh well.

I think cops killing was the ideological basis for killing cops in Micah Johnson's case, but maybe I'm crazy. BLM and other groups surely have fringe elements, but the "White Power" crowd is just one large fringe element. Unlike what Trump said, there are no "fine people" on that side. So again, no comparison.

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:I believe both white power and black power messages are equally destructive.

You have to jump through a lot of intellectual hoops to think it is a good idea for police to be signaling allegiance to any race based group. Justice is supposed to be blind.

White power = oppress everyone who isn't white
Black power = securing equal opportunity for blacks

Where in the fuck is that written in stone that is what each believe?

Reign in Blood wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Foo wrote:I believe both white power and black power messages are equally destructive.

You have to jump through a lot of intellectual hoops to think it is a good idea for police to be signaling allegiance to any race based group. Justice is supposed to be blind.

White power = oppress everyone who isn't white
Black power = securing equal opportunity for blacks

Where in the fuck is that written in stone that is what each believe?

I gave some background on the ideological inspiration for Black Power earlier. I don't think I need to do the same for White Power.