Printable View
Don't you realize that stronger discrimination laws, more progressive taxation, living wage, etc = more government = more police brutality?Quote:
Originally Posted by charrob
What specifically do you think should be done about the problem?
Edit:
If it was just about police brutality I wouldn't be irritated but it's not. Here is a quote from Kaepernick, "I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color."
So will you always choose to "stand with people" no matter who it is if you have common ground? Trump? The KKK? The police?Quote:
Originally Posted by acptulsa
Would you stand with the KKK to protest discrimination laws?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madison320
I think you are taking the cart before the horse. Those issues you state are issues that will take years to wind through congress; during this time if we stand with those who kneel against police brutality we can discuss solutions with them. Choosing to stand with the bootlickers and state worshipers (the way some here have said they would) immediately gives cops the extra incentive to be even more violent. If white people choose to stand with those who kneel and carry signs against police brutality that gives a strong signal to cops to step back and reconsider their violence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madison320
Exactly what I've believed since the start of the Black Lives Matter protests. And that would be that white people stand with them against police brutality and carry signs that are against police brutality. And through aligning with them we can show them the statistics that cops are battering white people as much as black people. That it is not a racial problem but instead a problem with out of control cops. A lot of them only see what's going on in their own neighborhoods and are unaware of what the true statistics are.
I'm sorry again, I edited my last post after you replied, please don't hurt me. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by charrob
"If it was just about police brutality I wouldn't be irritated but it's not. Here is a quote from Kaepernick, "I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color."
As far as standing with the protestors against police brutality, that might help a tiny bit in the short run, but it won't do anything in the long run. We need more freedom/capitalism and less socialism/tyranny.
Absolutely not. Black Lives Matter is a domestic terrorist group that promotes Communist ideals. It is disgusting that police don't face the same penalties for raiding the wrong houses, unleashing dogs on innocent people and general abuses. But Black Lives Matter someone how manages to make the police look less terrible. Blocking traffic is never okay. Looting is never okay. I am not for murdering protesters but a driver should not have to stop their vehicle for more than a couple of seconds for these people. And anyone who breaks into a store and steals something should back that up with their life. A store owner should not have to tolerate being robbed and have their merchandise destroyed.Quote:
Originally Posted by charrob
No freedom loving person should support Black Lives Matter.
You have specifically chosen to ignore Kaepernick's entire statement; instead you sliced off the part of his statement which proves his main concern is about police violence and police brutality not social justice concerns. Here is Kaepernick's entire statement that you alluded to including the part which you sliced off:Quote:
Originally Posted by Madison320
Quote:
Colin Kaepernick: "I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color," Kaepernick told NFL Media in an exclusive interview after the game. "To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder."
I disagree. It has already put body cameras on cops in this country. Just imagine how much more could be changed if white people would stand with those who kneel to protest police brutality and cops would see that they are truly on notice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Madison320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madison320
Kaepernick went Ghana on the 4th of July to seek freedom and independence. You want to know what country I don't want America to be like? GHANA. Living on $4 a day like an animal without sewers and clean water is not freedom. Jesus. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_...ation_in_Ghana
I'm out of rep for you, too. When this whole BLM thing started, the liberty people should have been involved. Hell, I probably said as much years ago on here. That would have been much more worthwhile than getting behind Rand watering down the message to the point where we don't even have libertarians here anymore, just skinheads and Trumpcucks. Who cares what their economic views are? They aren't protesting for a living wage or socialism. We don't have to agree with them on that. They are protesting cops murdering black people. They murder white people and brown people and every other type of person too, so why not get behind them on that?Quote:
Originally Posted by charrob
Not to mention, they aren't the only ones who want a living wage and socialism, so that stuff is going to happen anyway. Attacking these people isn't going to stop it, but it does do an excellent job of racializing an issue that should unite everyone. It gives the media everything they need to focus on race and not on the murderous pigs.
Good point. Instead of backing the most libertarian Senator in US history, because he wasn't radical enough (LOL), "libertarians" should be out marching with a group that explicitly advocates a Communist platform. BLM explicitly advocates communal ownership of natural resources on top of reparations, free college, free health care, higher minimum wages and all their other insanity. Libertarians really should support a group that has advocated looting as an effective means of protest. And libertarians should really associate with a group that has resulted in innocent officers being assassinated.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Gold Standard
Yes, you did good. Look at Rand now. And your president. I know you're proud of your guy Trump. Get the fuck out here with this shit. You weren't a Ron Paul guy, so I can't even remind you of how Ron looked at coalitions with guys across the aisle that disagreed with him on everything except one issue. Thank you for your contribution to the discussion. You can get back to your pledge of allegiance and whichever of Bill O'Reilly's books you were reading.Quote:
Originally Posted by Krugminator2
Not all those in the Black Lives Matter movement, especially the leaders, believe in violence. In fact I would argue those perpetrating violence are the minority not the majority of this movement. Of course the MSM centers completely on those that are violent and plays their violence over and over and over again so that white people will not respect them. There are many individuals in that movement that oppose the violence; I listened to many videos where people who have peacefully protested stated that those caught doing violence were actually from out of state and not from their local communities. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.Quote:
Originally Posted by Krugminator2
Again: I find the silence of boot-licking whites to be more of a threat than any social justice claims those taking the knee allude to. Everyone knows this movement started and continues mainly because of police brutality. People are still currently protesting in St. Louis Missouri not "for social justice" but because yet another cop got off the hook for murdering a black man that was no threat to him.
Your concerns:
- Blocking traffic is never okay. A driver should not have to stop their vehicle for more than a couple of seconds for these people.
- Looting is never okay. Anyone who breaks into a store and steals something should back that up with their life. A store owner should not have to tolerate being robbed and have their merchandise destroyed.
Fair enough. But all in this movement are not doing this; the MSM highlights those that do in order to divide and conquer. Furthermore, blocking traffic and looting (while wrong) is not even in the same category as murdering and maiming people for the rest of their lives which occurs in this country on a daily basis. Broken windows can be replaced; over 1000 lives per year lost to police violence cannot.
No freedom loving person should stand on the side of the bootlickers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Gold Standard
I didn't vote for Trump. I was strongly against Trump being President. I made hundreds of posts against him and made exactly zero posts supporting him. Feel free to look at the hundreds of posts I made against Trump starting in July of 2015 and you won't see any posts supporting him. None. I did vote for Ron. Twice. That said, I didn't hold him up as some sort of god or ideal though. I saw him as what he was, a protest vote, who was pretty good on the issues. I like Ron in the same way I like Raul Labrador, Rand, Mark Sanford. He's good. I never agreed with him on his support of Kucinich and Sanders. And I despise people like Glenn Greenwald and leftists who he was comfortable with.. Those types of people are infinitely less allies than the worst Republicans.
He didn't support Kucinich and Sanders. Working with them on one issue is not an endorsement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Krugminator2
'Black Lives' leader defends looting in Yale lecture http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/10/08...l?intcmp=hpbt3Quote:
Originally Posted by charrob
My mom was just in St. Louis the weekend of the verdict. She said people were behaving like degenerates blocking the streets.
Once you take "black" out of your sentence you'll gain my support.Quote:
Originally Posted by charrob
Kops murdering anyone is wrong but the moment one succumbs to the idea that being "black" is relevant they loose me and many like me.
I will never protest a "black" man being shot/assaulted/molested/etc.............But I'll certainly jump on the bandwagon if it's just a non-hyphenated man or woman.
Blacks, Indians, Mexicans, women and all the other sub-sections of society can kiss my ass!
Exactly. There is one objective, self evident and redundant fact: the US flag is the official flag of the US. Everything after that is subjective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Madison320
One could get up on their high horse and claim that the US flag represents the wholesale slaughter of the free-roaming and peaceful American Bison, and they could take a knee during the national anthem. But for them to claim that it is the one and only possible meaning behind the flag is beyond ludicrous.
Yeah, those damn "liberty" people never cared about unjustified Police killing of people. Or any other abuses by law enforcement and infringement of basic (and Constitutional) rights. Good thing that Kaepernick brought this to the attention of the "liberty" people. They would have continued completely oblivious to this outrage forever.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Gold Standard
Uh, the liberty people were the only ones who cared until BLM came along. And instead of trying to joining up to form a larger group of people to magnify the message, deciding that distancing Rand's followers from them was the prudent political play, the alt-right crowd took over, backed the police, and started pushing separation from the coloreds to preserve their heritage or some bullshit. That's working out swimmingly too, I might add.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty
What makes you think liberty people would be welcome? Again, you have not been paying attention.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Gold Standard
Just scratching the surface, it is not that hard to find.
BLM Co-Founder "Allah Give me strength not to cuss/kill these men and white folks out there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYkvZodBRuY
BLM No Whites Allowed
https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...es+not+allowed
BLM Whites in Back
https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...es+in+the+back
BLM attacks whites
https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...attacks+whites
Yes, that represents all of them, correct? Then fight back if they attack. You're a Donald Trump alpha male, right? Surely, you aren't afraid of a little street fight. Let the media cover a group of black police protestors fighting a group of libertarian, white (and whoever else came along) police protestors. Then they at least have to show that there are two large groups protesting police murders.Quote:
Originally Posted by kahless
I have to disagree with some very good people in this thread, and this is exactly why. The .minute anyone tried to encompass humanity instead of only blacks they would be run off.Quote:
Originally Posted by kahless
Who would be run off by whom? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Origanalist
I'm a tad befuddled......
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krugminator2
And there's the problem in a nutshell. Ron Paul separates himself from traditional Republicans on issues of war and civil liberties. He aligns himself on those issues with people he agrees with... Kucinich and Glenn Greenwald respectively because traditional Republicans believe the exact opposite of what he believes on those issues.
While economic issues can be fought out over years in congress, the more immediate concern imho is war and police violence because lives are being lost in this country and elsewhere everyday.
You actually seem to equate the violence of looting with the violence of murdering a human life. Broken windows can be replaced; over 1000 lives being violently taken per year by out of control cops cannot be replaced. While both are wrong, one is far worse than the other. That you equate the two as if they are somehow equal just makes my head spin.
I'll ask you the same question I asked someone previously. Would you march with the KKK in support of ending discrimination laws?Quote:
Originally Posted by charrob
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty
Brian even Ron Paul and Daniel McAdams stated in today's Liberty Report that the meaning of this forced patriotism during sports games is completely related to militarism. That was the whole point to today's Liberty Report. Here are excerpts from today's Report:
Quote:
Ron Paul: Minute 5:40
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eF9j-U4aBM&t=5m40s
Ron Paul: The attitude has changed several years back. […] There is something about military being always at the football game. And a flag as big as the football field. I understand that it hasn’t been forever that they played the national anthem at football games. It sort of came along when they have to build up this super strong support for military to justify the wars they are doing. That’s what they are subtlety doing. If you can praise the military and thank you for their service, they never ask you ‘what was your service’? Oh I went over and killed a bunch of people. I bombed somebody over there even though they didn’t do us any harm. They never raise that question. I didn’t like what the NFL was doing with their allegiance to the patriotism.
Quote:
Daniel McAdams: Minute: 7:46
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eF9j-U4aBM&t=7m46s
Daniel McAdams: Prior to 2009 it was very uncommon for players to be out on the field during the national anthem. They were in their locker rooms. But the military saw this as an opportunity to bring these guys out on the field and really have a display. […] The military branches spent $53 million dollars on pro-sports marketing just between 2012 and 2015. On NASCAR they spent upwards of $100 million dollars including $88 million dollars just on Dell Earnhardt Junior’s car. $88 million dollars to propagandize, to militarize, professional sports. Ron Paul: And that comes much closer to crony capitalism and fascism when you see that connection, but it’s also propaganda. I think it’s war propaganda.
Quote:
Ron Paul: Minute 15:00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eF9j-U4aBM&t=15m0s
Ron Paul: I think the point has been made that there was a time when the ball players didn’t attend the national anthem. They stayed in the locker room. They didn’t come out until afterwards. Daniel McAdams: It’s relatively new. This whole issue, and it’s because of the DOD money.
And so, if i have to pick a side, I side with those taking a knee. I don't agree with everything they believe in, however, I am grateful that at least someone in this country has the guts to stand up to police violence and forced patriotism at these sports games. Colin Kaepernick has received death threats because of this; if that is not forced patriotism, then what is?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madison320
I would stand with the ACLU in their support of the KKK and their right to freedom of speech. Would I actually march with them? If I did my sign would say: "I don't agree with the KKK on race, but freedom of speech should never be suppressed and on those grounds, and only those grounds, I stand with them."
So when the shoe is on the other foot you change the parameters. It would've been nice if you had given us that consideration.Quote:
Originally Posted by charrob
OK, I'd march with BLM but my sign would say "I stand with BLM against police brutality but I don't agree with their belief in communism and racism".
What's wrong with protesting discrimination laws by that way? Why'd you change that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madison320
I never changed any parameters. I would support people on the issues I agree with them on. Here was my post:
Quote:
I would stand with the ACLU in their support of the KKK and their right to freedom of speech. Would I actually march with them? If I did my sign would say: "I don't agree with the KKK on race, but freedom of speech should never be suppressed and on those grounds, and only those grounds, I stand with them."Quote:
Originally Posted by Madison320
I think that would be a perfectly valid statement on a sign. Another possibility: "Libertarians against Police Brutality". By virtue of being Libertarian, others know we don't believe in communism and aren't racist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Madison320