I guess this is better posted here, apparently BLM was going after the parents of the gorilla kid for shitty parenting when they thought the kid was white. Then it turns out the kid was black and they went silent lol.
By "Gorilla Kid" I mean the kid who recently fell into a gorilla's habitat and the gorilla grabbed him and they had to shoot and kill the gorilla.
Originally posted by Scribble
Do you have a source that shows BLM going after the parents? Found nothing that implies that online. Just some random people on Twitter, being stupid people on Twitter.
It was apparently BLM's on Twitter, and all around just blacks in general. It's strange how it apparently stopped after it was shown the kid wasn't white.
Originally posted by SurturWell, "blacks in general" isn't a thing. Even if 100 black people on Twitter said that, it wouldn't reflect any kind of a majority. Plus, it was a black guy who called them out on their bullshit. I've found literally zero evidence that BLM posted that, so personally I don't believe it, I don't see the point in believing literal hearsay just because it supports my view. That's bad practice, imo.
It was apparently BLM's on Twitter, and all around just blacks in general. It's strange how it apparently stopped after it was shown the kid wasn't white.
Originally posted by Scribble
Well, "blacks in general" isn't a thing. Even if 100 black people on Twitter said that, it wouldn't reflect any kind of a majority. Plus, it was a black guy who called them out on their bullshit. I've found literally zero evidence that BLM posted that, so personally I don't believe it, I don't see the point in believing literal hearsay just because it supports my view. That's bad practice, imo.
By "blacks in general" I meant people who were black but not a part of BLM. Yes, a black guy called them on it, okay? Some blacks actually see BLM for what they are.
I also don't need to believe in hearsay to support any views, I have facts. For this story I said "apparently this happened". I don't need this one specific story to support anything.
It's fine if you personally don't believe it. I was watching a video with a guy discussing comments he saw people making and I believe him. Given the way the group has acted lately this type of behavior doesn't surprise me. But you won't see me saying it 100% happened.
It just seems like a non-issue is all. I don't see what a couple of random people on Twitter saying dumb shit has to do with anything. So some black people said some shit about white people, big deal. Most people are stupid, especially when given unlimited access to social media platforms such as Twitter. It says nothing about the Black communities of America.
Personally, I like to believe empirical evidence, rather than stuff that people that I've never met say, especially when it's contained in what is probably a video with some kind of an agenda or stance. People can tell me they think ghosts exist all they want, but if I haven't seen one, why should I believe them, right?
Originally posted by Scribble
It just seems like a non-issue is all. I don't see what a couple of random people on Twitter saying dumb shit has to do with anything. So some black people said some shit about white people, big deal. Most people are stupid, especially when given unlimited access to social media platforms such as Twitter. It says nothing about the Black communities of America.Personally, I like to believe empirical evidence, rather than stuff that people that I've never met say, especially when it's contained in what is probably a video with some kind of an agenda or stance. People can tell me they think ghosts exist all they want, but if I haven't seen one, why should I believe them, right?
If it's true that is an issue, because it would mean they aren't willing to criticize their own race. Empirical evidence is fine and dandy, but this is an internet forum not a newspaper, so I wouldn't necessarily place hearsay as something out of place. As long as you don't dress it up as indisputable fact.
Originally posted by SurturWhy deal in hearsay at all? It works purely as pathos and serves no logical function.
If it's true that is an issue, because it would mean they aren't willing to criticize their own race. Empirical evidence is fine and dandy, but this is an internet forum not a newspaper, so I wouldn't necessarily place hearsay as something out of place. As long as you don't dress it up as indisputable fact.
Originally posted by SurturWell, that's not really an argument of any degree, so I guess I have nothing left to say. My general point was just, "As a human being, why deal in hearsay when you can deal in facts and evidence?"
Most of the things people do on the internet serve no logical function.
Originally posted by It's xyz!Is this relevant to anything, xyz? Seems like a general blanket strawman that can be applied to literally anyone saying anything.
Also.
Originally posted by Scribble
Well, that's not really an argument of any degree, so I guess I have nothing left to say. My general point was just, "As a human being, why deal in hearsay when you can deal in facts and evidence?"
You can prefer to deal in one while occasionally still dealing in the other IMO.
Originally posted by Surtur
BLM leader charged with sex trafficking lol.http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/19/charles-wade-black-lives-matter-leader-charged-wit/
BLM exposed, notice how the left trying to ignore and move on.
Originally posted by Scribble
He doesn't, though. He's a proud racist.The sad thing is that he's a self-admitted and shameless paedophile/hebephile, but the right wingers let him stick around because he agrees with what they say.
Actually had a laugh at that myself today, he made a creepy underage girl comment and they just ignore it because they believe he agrees with them politically. So odd.