Originally posted by Scribble
Well of course they haven't been labelled terrorists, they aren't organised and have no political ideology. You need both of those things to even begin to be labelled a terrorist organisation, mostly the ideology part (as you can get lone terrorists, such as the Nice truck driver).The media at large did portray the incidents as a riot, despite the violent incidents being few and far between: http://www.philly.com/philly/news/eagles-fans-super-bowl-celebrations-riots-mayhem-20180206.html
However, it's still very different from the riots you and the video are comparing it to: https://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/25/us/michael-brown-stepfather-video/index.html
Drunken revelry in a crowd of 100,000 people with some incidents of violence (which, sadly, is expected when that many people are out on the streets, look at the many peaceful protests that get ruined by violent individuals or groups destroying property) is quite inherently different to commands of "burn it all down".
Like I say, I get vaguely where the video is coming from, but it is very selective in how it chooses to put its message across, to the point of weakening its own argument when put under scrutiny.
I essentially have to say the same thing to Surtur: the incidents aren't necessarily indicative of the people in the street at large. Surt often uses antifa violence at otherwise peaceful protests to suggest that people on the left are just plain violent. I disagree when he uses that tactic and I'm disagreeing with it now. I consider integrity to be more important than the political point-scoring games that people play.
People do the same by using shit nazis do to suggest people on the right are violent or racist.
Labeling conservatives "alt right" is the new favorite tactic of moronic leftists with nothing better to say.
And the same people calling these people terrorists sure as hell don't use the word when blacks burn down their cities. If these people are terrorists, so are those people.
Originally posted by Bashar Tegas far as "burn it down", really a weak point to make since it was uttered by a mourning brother who felt that a member of his family was murdered with impunity. so to generalize that as marching orders to an entire movememt is just ludicrous and only plays into surt's intellectual dishonesty campaign.
thanks for proving my point tho 👆
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
thanks for proving my point tho 👆
Not talking about anyone yelling to burn stuff. I am talking about them literally burning down their city, looting, and attacking people.
I am talking about the sister of a thug who got rightfully shot telling the crowd to go riot in the suburbs, and then CNN going and portraying it like she was calling for peace.
No, f*ck anyone who burns down a city.
Originally posted by Bashar TegYeah, sorry, I didn't mean to imply that but I can see how you got that from what I said. My bad
right but your point on "burn it all down" implied that there would have been no riots if he had remained silent, which would again be ludicrous. black people were very angry over a situation which they took personally, not a political motive or marching orders from anyone.