Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Look at what these liberal racists did to Condi Rice at Missouri University"A small group of angry white liberals is trying to force the administration at the University of Minnesota to revoke a speaking invitation extended to Condoleezza Rice because she played a role in the U.S. invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.
And here at Rutgers.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/04/us/condoleeza-rice-rutgers-protests/
They also whined over Bill Maher and called him a "bigot and racist". Which is very strange to me. I haven't seen everything Bill Maher has ever said, but from what I have seen I have never seen racism. He sure as hell hates religion, but racism? Not really. I've seen him take shots at others for their racist BS. I'd be curious about what Maher has said that was racist.
EDIT: Though this was apparently back in 2014. Though still if Bill Maher is so racist..why did he give 1 million dollars to Obama? He gave 1 million out of his own personal money to Obama's campaign in either 2008 or 2012. He sure as f*ck hides his racism quite well. I'm guessing he gave the money to Obama just to throw people off the scent of his racism.
Bill Maher is considered racist because he's against religion and there's a segment of people that equate the disparaging remarks regarding religious customs in some areas of the world, and particularly the Muslim part of the world, racist. Some people can't separate people from ideologies and customs.
Originally posted by MF DELPH
Bill Maher is considered racist because he's against religion and there's a segment of people that equate the disparaging remarks regarding religious customs in some areas of the world, and particularly the Muslim part of the world, racist. Some people can't separate people from ideologies and customs.
Well said
Originally posted by MF DELPH
Bill Maher is considered racist because he's against religion and there's a segment of people that equate the disparaging remarks regarding religious customs in some areas of the world, and particularly the Muslim part of the world, racist. Some people can't separate people from ideologies and customs.
The only religious customs I've seen him make disparaging remarks about are the legitimately crazy ones. I am not talking about the harmless kind of crazy.
It seems like some people can't separate racism from disliking religion.
Yeah, but a certain segment of people try to equate not condoning said barbarism with saying that all people of a certain ethnicity are barbaric. It's an equivocation, and it's bullshit. You can disagree with someone's customs based on the custom themselves. Ethnicity doesn't have to be a factor at all. For example, being against genital mutilation doesn't make you anti-Semitic or Anti-African because they practice circumcision and clitoris severing, but some people equate the custom with the ethnicity and make it an all or nothing proposition (accept all customs or you're a bigot).
It still amazes me how many think BLM- who successfully holds large numbers of peaceful protests and has gotten reasonably organized- is a 'terrorist' group, a violent group, or what have you. Even though their actual message is explicitly one against violence. Because occasionally, there's violent incidents involving people who use their slogans- but by people who don't even show up to their protests (and the fact of the matter is, when people are being killed, most groups have some violent individuals, but that remains not at all what BLM is about despite that).
And yet you had stuff like the other thread the other day, when people here were, literally, tossing around "Black Lives Matter people are going around threatening to rape people!" because a youtube commentor said so. And multiple people just taking it as gospel, despite no reports of it coming out.
That's prejudice for you- believing any bad thing said about a group, no matter how little sense it makes, because you don't like them.
We get actual groups who actively threaten and encourage violence, but it's BLM you're afraid of... for some reason. It's messed up.
Get the phuck out of here. Their leaders are telling people how to wear riot gear and encouraging stopping democratic process just because they don't like republicans. But you are the type of guy to call trump supporters racists because of a few bad apples or political plants.
I used to have respect for you. Ask time. I complimented you because it seemed that you at least did research. Now all you do is spout liberal garbage at face value
You don't get to sing that same song and dance after the co founder goes on tv spouting shit about how they will do whatever it takes to shut down republican conventions.
This is not some person merely using their slogans, are you insane? The time of saying "this isn't truly BLM" is over.
I'm also not sure why you think that just because someone thinks BLM shouldn't be able to do shit like what their co founder threatened to do....it means they are afraid of them.
Originally posted by Raisen
Get the phuck out of here. Their leaders are telling people how to wear riot gear and encouraging stopping democratic process just because they don't like republicans. But you are the type of guy to call trump supporters racists because of a few bad apples or political plants.
I used to have respect for you. Ask time. I complimented you because it seemed that you at least did research. Now all you do is spout liberal garbage at face value
Oh wow, the people who want to wear protective gear and blockade non-violently vs the people who have encouraged and excused violence against not just protesters but *reporters* (Brietbart reporter no less, a Conservative organization), and who have said if they don't win the Republican convention 'there will be violence'.
I wonder where the violence is coming from...
Surtur
You don't get to sing that same song and dance after the co founder goes on tv spouting shit about how they will do whatever it takes to shut down republican conventions.This is not some person merely using their slogans, are you insane? The time of saying "this isn't truly BLM" is over.
I'm also not sure why you think that just because someone thinks BLM shouldn't be able to do shit like what their co founder threatened to do....it means they are afraid of them.
That *is* actually BLM... but it's also not what you and others love to imply about them.
Keep in mind, the only one to threaten violence at the Republican convention... is Trump.
Note also BLM has been around for a long time by this point and have shown they can do non-violent protests with regularity, including shutdowns. You may view shutting things down as too far, fair enough, but you can absolutely be sure that they are not aiming for violence, and 'human blockade' is what you're looking at. Because that is what they've done before.
This sort of thing is why BLM exists- when black people are involved, they don't get the benefit of the doubt, they do not get a fair shake. You, Surtur, are quick to leap to the worst conclusions. In some ways you're more reasonable than some of the others here, but you still lept to believe the "BLM people were going around threatening rape" thing the other day- because a youtube commentator said it.
You are not unbiased in this. You, reflexively, have gone to the worst conclusions on BLM doesn't make sense. You have sided against them on things that even a little bit of research would tell you are made-up and false, because you are not credulous about smears thrown against them, even very non-plausible ones.
Yes, BLM does aim to shut stuff down in protest. They've done that to different locations before, like the Mall of America. They also have burst in on both Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, something the Secret Service will tell you is a big no-no. And yet, they also have a solid trackrecord of not initiating violence at any of these locations.
And the reason I say people are afraid? Well, when Black Lives Matters says they'll do something non-violent, people- including you- keep leaping to, "Oh no, they'll do something violent! They're a horrible group, how can you not be against them?". Sounds to me like you're afraid of them being treated neutrally.
The fact that you keep jumping the gun on them, and assuming they'll do stuff out of character with their history, is why I call this out. You're quick to demonize them, and the history of the movement clearly does not line up with your rush to condemn.
But you see it's not just about not being violent. It's about thinking you have the right to show up and shut down these conventions. That is not peaceful even when you don't throw a single punch. You seem to think anything non-violent equates to peaceful, it doesn't. You can terrorize people without ever throwing a punch.
As for the rape thing, it wasn't about what a single commenter said. It wasn't even about the entire group. It was said people showed up in Chicago attacking people and threatening that. I even said people would say it wasn't truly BLM. When I say "it was said" I mean it was in a video about the attack.
In another thread I also acknowledged that even if you could argue that these instances weren't BLM, what the co founder said definitely is.
So you see just because they don't attack people doesn't mean they are peaceful.