- Joined
- Jan 29, 2015
- Messages
- 62,760
- Reaction score
- 30
LOLDid that robot say 'Have a nice day' before it went off?
Please tell me it did.![]()
LOLDid that robot say 'Have a nice day' before it went off?
Please tell me it did.![]()
Here we go blaming the 50s again, pass the buck
That's funny, because MLK would definitely make that comparison himself.
Or did you think the whitewashed view of the Civil Rights Movement as kumbaya and walking around quietly was correct?
They had reached the "nobody else dies but the perp" stage of negotiationThe robot killing thing was a bit rough but we don't know what the shooter was saying, maybe he was treating to explode everyone. He did say he had bombs.
It's basically a "we're reeeeeeally fucking mad so we're just gonna kill this dude right here" thing.
Civilians murdering random cops isn't even worth talking about because no one thinks it's a good idea. But the police overlooking due process and moving straight to execution is very worrying.
Anyone have that Snoop tweet? I see he's getting praise on TMZ facebook for coming out with a video saying violence is not the answer
"We can't get into the head of a person that would do something like this. We negotiated with this person that seemed lucid during the negotiation. He wanted to kill officers, and he expressed killing white people, he expressed killing white officers, he expressed anger for Black Lives Matter. None of that makes sense," Brown said. "None of that is a reason, a legitimate reason, to do harm to anyone. So the rest of it would just be speculating on what his motivations were. We just know what he said."
Their message, he would.I highly doubt MLK would approve of Black Lives Matter.
There are over 750,000 police officers in the US and less than 600 times a year they kill someone. Even if all of those are unjustified I don't see that as a huge problem.
May I ask what's objectionable about the idea that violence isn't the answer?I've always hated Snoop Dogg with a passion and now I hate him even more.
I highly doubt MLK would approve of Black Lives Matter.
You may well ask: "Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?" You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation.
It's wrong to silence legitimate criticism of police violence on the theory that it could *cause* more hatred of police. "Contributing to an environment" is a bullshit criticism, like saying that criticism of immigration is itself wrong because of the *fact* that it contributes to an environment of racial hostility. You can't let speech get hijacked by the fact that making such speech *causally* supports extremists, even if that's perfectly true, or we couldn't talk about anything. The question is whether the speech itself is acceptable.
His tweet last night was quite the opposite it's saved somewhere in this thread though. I want to post it on the TMZ facebookMay I ask what's objectionable about the idea that violence isn't the answer?
May I ask what's objectionable about the idea that violence isn't the answer?
This combined with the stats I posted from WaPo (below) indicates that blacks are not disproportionally killed by police when compared to whites and Hispanics. Nothing to see here folks, it's all a ruse.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings/
In 2015...
50% of the 990 people shot dead by police were white, 26% were black, 17% were Hispanic, and 7% were other.
84% were armed with a deadly weapon (including using a vehicle), 3% had a toy weapon, 9% were unarmed, and 3% unknown.
In 74% of cases, there was an "attack in progress".
Their message, he would.
But he'd lead the group and a large amount of the country in a peaceful movement that would receive the positive attention that would change more minds by far than tramping onto highways and shouting at people who have no problem with their cause.
The U.S. has 2.6 million Muslims.
A new survey reveals the dramatically changing face of religion in America, with the number of Muslims in the U.S. soaring 67% in the decade since the 9/11 attacks.
Data released Tuesday from the 2010 U.S. Religion Census shows Islam was the fastest growing religion in America in the last 10 years, with 2.6 million living in the U.S. today, up from 1 million in 2000.