Black Lives Threaten

[Sam]

Because there is evidence, and apparently growing, that the problem is endemic to the BLM movement where there was none in the Tea Party. Worse, there is some evidence that it is representative of the BLM movement. The cases differ considerably.

I haven't any evidence that this problem is endemic to the BLM movement. Can you define "endemic" in such a way that involves more than a few instances? Do official BLM rallies routinely call for violence?

This is what I'm talking about: when it's BLM, each and every instance (see OP!) becomes an image of the movement. If and when the shoe is on the other foot (see Cliven Bundy supporters aiming guns at federal officers and promising to respond with violence should they be "attacked"), then we see some nuance.

[Sam]

If the Tea Party - or apparent elements of it - were calling for the deaths of liberals (or anybody) - I would absolutely denounce them in a heartbeat. No question about it.



Ummmmm...... no comparison, Sam. Those of us in the 2nd amendment rights movement quickly and loudly denounce the nutters.

Can you give me a compilation, please, of 2nd amendment supporters (or incidents) who are calling for the deaths of... anybody?

[klaus54]

Wanting people murdered is always bad!

Really?

I learn something new every day.

[Cow Poke]

A compilation. I've seen many, many Internet comments from right-wing nutjobs to the effect that Obama/Clinton/Subject of the Story needs to be killed.

Wow! You need to widen your circle of acquaintances!

ok............

The point is to consistently apply the logic being levied when Rogue acknowledges that these are not official statements from BLM or even statements made by higher-ranking BLM advocates but by offshoots and fringe groups.

Look at BLM's website, Sam - last I looked, it wasn't even up! The movement is being hijacked by the loonies.

If you are willing to allow some guy Tweeting threats to define the BLM movement, you have no justification for not applying that consistently to causes that you yourself support. To do otherwise would be hypocritical.

Sam, you're trying to compare apples and oranges. This is like comparing the Tea Party to the Occupy movement.

[Sam]

Wow! You need to widen your circle of acquaintances!

ok............

Look at BLM's website, Sam - last I looked, it wasn't even up! The movement is being hijacked by the loonies.

Sam, you're trying to compare apples and oranges. This is like comparing the Tea Party to the Occupy movement.

[Cow Poke]

Sam.... dear brother Sam......

Have you seen IN GENERAL the venue that is left behind by a Tea Party group as opposed to the venue that is left behind by an Occupy group?

Your buddy,

CP

[Darth Executor]

As far as I know neither OWS nor the Tea Party were founded with the explicit intent to protect violent assailants from retaliation.

[Cow Poke]

As far as I know neither OWS nor the Tea Party were founded with the explicit intent to protect violent assailants from retaliation justice.

[One Bad Pig]

Interesting. I have never seen any comment from the right that left-wingers need to be killed. Then again, I don't tend to frequent other discussion boards or comment sections. There are violent idiots, to be sure, on both extremes of the spectrum.

[rogue06]

The converse, of course, is to say that were a group a Tea Party rally were

As I noted "Now to be fair this group seems to have had split off from the larger protest" so I was pointing out that this might not reflect the view of the majority. However, in the Minnesota rally where we heard the "Pigs in a blanket, fry 'em like bacon" chant in response to the news about shooting death of deputy Darren Goforth, it was those leading the protest who were also leading the call so it can hardly be excused as having come from a fringe. And when asked about it, the organizer of the protest, Trahern Crews, tried to slough it off as merely being "playful" rather than something that came from a minority of participants who didn't represent the views of the movement.

As for your comparison to "pro-gun" advocates this is more equivalent to a director of the NRA calling for the murder of someone than some angry drunken idiot off in a back corner muttering how we need to kill someone.

One other thing worth mentioning. AFAICT, when there is someone at a pro-gun rally or at a Tea Party rally playing the fool and using violent rhetoric they are almost always quickly and summarily denounced (although I can think of an exception or two). In contrast when you look at the riots caused by the Occupy movement such violent rhetoric often came from those up on a platform addressing the crowd. And far from denouncing such speech the left too often excuses it as an example of free speech (look at the reaction to comments about killing Bush for just one example) or, as seen at the BLM march, just being "playful."

[Cow Poke]

One other thing worth mentioning. AFAICT, when there is someone at a pro-gun rally or at a Tea Party rally playing the fool and using violent rhetoric they are almost always quickly and summarily denounced (although I can think of an exception or two). In contrast when you look at the riots caused by the Occupy movement such violent rhetoric often came from those up on a platform addressing the crowd. And far from denouncing such speech the left too often excuses it as an example of free speech (look at the reaction to comments about killing Bush for just one example) or, as seen at the BLM march, just being "playful."

And we get "understanding" from the highest offices in the land that this violence happens.... it would help if there were some strong influence toward PEACEFUL protests....

[Sam]

As I noted "Now to be fair this group seems to have had split off from the larger protest" so I was pointing out that this might not reflect the view of the majority. However, in the Minnesota rally where we heard the "Pigs in a blanket, fry 'em like bacon" chant in response to the news about shooting death of deputy Darren Goforth, it was those leading the protest who were also leading the call so it can hardly be excused as having come from a fringe. And when asked about it, the organizer of the protest, Trahern Crews, tried to slough it off as merely being "playful" rather than something that came from a minority of participants who didn't represent the views of the movement.

As for your comparison to "pro-gun" advocates this is more equivalent to a director of the NRA calling for the murder of someone than some angry drunken idiot off in a back corner muttering how we need to kill someone.

One other thing worth mentioning. AFAICT, when there is someone at a pro-gun rally or at a Tea Party rally playing the fool and using violent rhetoric they are almost always quickly and summarily denounced (although I can think of an exception or two). In contrast when you look at the riots caused by the Occupy movement such violent rhetoric often came from those up on a platform addressing the crowd. And far from denouncing such speech the left too often excuses it as an example of free speech (look at the reaction to comments about killing Bush for just one example) or, as seen at the BLM march, just being "playful."

Right ....



And who can forget Wayne LaPierre's response to the Sandy Hook School shootings?

I'm sure we can both go around picking choice quotes from low-to-mid level organizers and pols excusing or downplaying the violent rhetoric that leads to violence, albeit rarely. But what you're trying to do here, paint left-wing organizations as being more tolerant of violent rhetoric than right-wing organizations, is not supported and is not appropriate. It's an exercise in cherry-picking; violent rhetoric is denounced by the vast majority of people on both sides. This is like pigeon-holing all Muslims as violent extremists.

[klaus54]

I think Sam should live in da Hood for a few months.

[Cow Poke]

I think Sam should live in da Hood for a few months.

Yeah, if we all had to live in the worlds we try to create.....

[Teallaura]

I think Sam should live in da Hood for a few months.

What did 'da hood' do to you?