The Lesson We Need to Learn

[Zoii]

What is clear is that the USA wanted a election that conformed to electoral laws, and when conservatives lost, they wanted insurrection. It's quite clear in law it's both an immoral and illegal act.... which is why they are being rounded up and prosecuted. It's quite simple really.

 

[Pommer]

What is clear is that the USA wanted a election that confirmed with electoral laws, and when conservatives lost, they wanted insurrection.

See, here’s the thing:
Conservatives will never want a change in the way things are done, (following the Constitution), it is not conservatives who are trying to make this a communist country! Conservatives are defending their country!
They’ve convinced themselves that “the wrong” people are going to be “in control” and they aren’t going to stand for that, because they’re the Real Patriots®!

That they’ve shifted so far to the Right that revolution seems inevitable to them, (the very antithesis of “conservatism”!), but they still see themselves as the downtrodden “good guys”.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Noone was supporting rioters and looters.

Sure....they were just supporting the groups that were rioting and looting.

 

[Ana the Ist]

it is not conservatives who are trying to make this a communist country!

I can agree with that...I'm pretty sure it was Kamala who put out the whole "equality of outcomes" communist propaganda video

That they’ve shifted so far to the Right that revolution seems inevitable to them, (the very antithesis of “conservatism”!), but they still see themselves as the downtrodden “good guys”.

What makes you think they've shifted "so far to the right"?

I can't really think of any issues they've shifted substantially to the right on. Is it an ideological shift? If so....what do you think changed ideologically on the right?

 

[A2SG]

Sure....they were just supporting the groups that were rioting and looting.

By "the groups" do you mean the individuals associated with those groups?

And if that is what you mean, then even if said group officially denounces violence, is it your contention that the group is still responsible for any and all actions committed by those individuals who are associated with the group?

That is what you mean when you say the groups are rioting and looting, isn't it?

-- A2SG, think carefully now.....don't listen to Admiral Akbar......

 

[Pommer]

I can agree with that...I'm pretty sure it was Kamala who put out the whole "equality of outcomes" communist propaganda video



What makes you think they've shifted "so far to the right"?

I can't really think of any issues they've shifted substantially to the right on. Is it an ideological shift? If so....what do you think changed ideologically on the right?

Conservatives are still conservatives.

People who think that President Trump is the rightful President come this Wednesday and who are willing to try and make it happen are no longer Conservative.

If you consider yourself conservative, now might be a good time to make the break?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Still not making your case here. I see several examples of individuals performing violent acts, but none of the organization, itself, specifically and unequivocally promoting violence.

But feel free to keep trying.

Nah....I think I've pretty firmly established that you aren't basing your opinion on the evidence.

If I see an official statement from Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, Inc. that specifically says they promote violence, then I'll accept your claim that they promote violence. Otherwise, all you've got is your own opinion based on your own assumptions.

I've got multiple examples of BLM promoting violence. Again, you aren't interested in evidence if the only evidence you'd accept is a signed confession.

I'm curious why you defend Black Lives Matter? Do you think the police are guilty of racism or brutality or the mistreatment of black people?

I can only go by the article you posted, where she said she was asked to not attend BLM events or speak on their behalf.

There's no official statement from BLM in the article so I don't know where you're getting this from.

I'm not part of BLM, I can't speak for them, nor is it my responsibility to defend them. I leave it to them to speak for themselves.

Cool....I've quoted them supporting violence and looting.

Are we done since you aren't defending them anymore?

 

[A2SG]

Nah....I think I've pretty firmly established that you aren't basing your opinion on the evidence.

There hasn't been any evidence. You claim BLM promotes violence, but you haven't shown them specifically saying that.

I've got multiple examples of BLM promoting violence.

No, you've provided examples of individuals committing violent acts. Nothing official from the organization explicitly promoting those acts.

Again, you aren't interested in evidence if the only evidence you'd accept is a signed confession.

I'll accept anything that actually shows BLM doing what you accused them of doing, explicitly promoting violence.

I'm curious why you defend Black Lives Matter? Do you think the police are guilty of racism or brutality or the mistreatment of black people?

I never defended them. I'm just trying to figure out what you base your accusations on. So far as we can tell here, not on anything BLM has actually said.

There's no official statement from BLM in the article so I don't know where you're getting this from.

The article you cited. The one that did not say BLM promotes violence; nor did it say that BLM endorsed the individual's actions either.

So I'm still trying to figure out where you got the idea that they did from.

Cool....I've quoted them supporting violence and looting.

Nope, you've offered no such quote.

Are we done since you aren't defending them anymore?

I've never even tried to defend them.

Look, you've obviously missed the point here, so let me try to break it down for you. Again.

You claim that BLM promotes violence. They say they don't.

So I asked what you based your conclusion on. You present a bunch of links and articles and such, none of which show BLM actually saying they promote violence.

So, why do you think they promote violence when they never say they do?

You assume so, based on the actions of individuals who support or are associated with BLM.

You seem to be saying that BLM is responsible for the violent acts committed by those individuals associated with it. To avoid making any unwarranted assumptions, I've even asked you if that is what you meant to say.

If so, please confirm; if not, please explain why not.

-- A2SG, make sure you think before answering, because it might not lead you down a path you'll like.....

 

[Ana the Ist]

Conservatives are still conservatives.

Ummmm........so no examples then?

There hasn't been any evidence.

There's been a lot of evidence.

You claim BLM promotes violence, but you haven't shown them specifically saying that.

I said BLM commits/supports political violence.

No, you've provided examples of individuals committing violent acts. Nothing official from the organization explicitly promoting those acts.

I've given examples of BLM members, organizers and officials engaging in violence and the organization as a whole celebrating it as an achievement.

I'll accept anything that actually shows BLM *snip*

BLM leader: we'll "burn" the system down if U.S. won't give us what we want

There's a black lives matter leader promoting violence.

You're going to deny it like you did the dozen pieces of evidence I gave you before this one.

I never defended them.

You have.

I'm just trying to figure out what you base your accusations on.

I haven't made any accusations....I've stated facts. Facts supported by evidence.

 

[Zoii]

Nah....I think I've pretty firmly established that you aren't basing your opinion on the evidence.



I've got multiple examples of BLM promoting violence. Again, you aren't interested in evidence if the only evidence you'd accept is a signed confession.

I'm curious why you defend Black Lives Matter? Do you think the police are guilty of racism or brutality or the mistreatment of black people?




There's no official statement from BLM in the article so I don't know where you're getting this from.



Cool....I've quoted them supporting violence and looting.

Are we done since you aren't defending them anymore?

It's quite simple. Your party lost the election. Your party lost court appeals. Your party did not get the majority of electoral votes. Your party, ie MAGA supporters, committed insurrection resulting in several deaths, threats to public officers, and the humiliation of your country internationally. This abominable act occurred because they did not wish to follow constitutional law. They wanted to overthrow that which occurred through democratic processes, and those supporting it are traitors to their country.

 

[A2SG]

There's been a lot of evidence.

None showing BLM explicitly promoting violence.

I said BLM commits/supports political violence.

And they, themselves, said this...where, exactly?

I've given examples of BLM members, organizers and officials engaging in violence and the organization as a whole celebrating it as an achievement.

Musta missed the celebrating it part, and I certainly missed where the organization promoted violent acts.

BLM leader: we'll "burn" the system down if U.S. won't give us what we want

There's a black lives matter leader promoting violence.

So she did. Now, is the entire organization responsible for her actions, just because she supports that organization?

You're going to deny it like you did the dozen pieces of evidence I gave you before this one.

Until you show me BLM specifically and explicitly promoting violence, I cannot accept your claim that they actually do promote violence, no.

"I never defended them."

You have.

Nope. I'm not their spokesman.

I haven't made any accusations....I've stated facts. Facts supported by evidence.

Not that support your contention that BLM itself explicitly promotes violence.

Oh, you missed a part:

I asked:
You seem to be saying that BLM is responsible for the violent acts committed by those individuals associated with it. To avoid making any unwarranted assumptions, I've even asked you if that is what you meant to say.

If so, please confirm; if not, please explain why not.

I'm really curious about your answer.

-- A2SG, though I can't really blame you for avoiding answering it.....

 

[KCfromNC]

It's fair to question why you defend political violence.

Not when you've utterly failed to show that I do. Otherwise it is just an underhanded bit of rhetoric, on par with despicable attempts like "have you stopped beating your wife yet".

But I will say that it is a smart strategy to stop trying to pull quotes of of context to "prove" your attempts at character assassination. From the responses I saw, people were starting to catch on to that. Better to go with the "big lie" approach instead - just make something up and keep repeating it over and over and over hoping some would fall for it. That at least has a chance of working ... at least for people who are predisposed to needing an excuse to dismiss what I wrote rather than thinking about it and addressing it on its merits.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Not when you've utterly failed to show that I do.

The first post of yours I linked is your attempt to minimize Antifa beating up innocent civilians because....according to your argument....it happened awhile ago.

 

[MIDutch]

Nah....I think I've pretty firmly established that you aren't basing your opinion on the evidence.

I also always find it hilarious when conservative creationists claim liberal scientists aren't basing their "opinions" on evidence.

.
.
.
Oh, wait.

 

[stevil]

Sure....they were just supporting the groups that were rioting and looting.

People support the Black Lives Matter cause because Police brutality on blacks is a thing.
There are videos of police being brutal to unarmed unagressive blacks leading to the murder of those blacks.
The ironic thing, in response to a peaceful protest at lafayette park, the police broke out the tear gas and attacked the black protesters.

Supporters of the BLM cause support the peaceful protesters but do not support rioting and looting.

People that criticise the Trump supporter protests point to the patheticness of the cause of the protests
1. protests against wearing masks (and hence against saving lives propogated by Trump's lies that Covid-19 is no worse than the flu and insistence that Trump won't be wearing a mask)
2. protests against losing a democratic election (propogated by Trump's lies of a stolen election)

People that are shocked by the insurrection, do not blame all Trump protesters for this and do not assume that all Trump protests will be insurrections.

However, Foxnews promote that all BLM protests were riots with looting.

At many large protests, including Trump protests and BLM protests. word of these protests get out and then you have many aggressive groups also join those protests with the desire to cause mayhem.

 

[Ana the Ist]

None showing BLM explicitly promoting violence.

False.

And they, themselves, said this...where, exactly?

There's more ways to support violence than words.

Musta missed the celebrating it part, and I certainly missed where the organization promoted violent acts.

You didn't miss it....you just deny it.

So she did. Now, is the entire organization responsible for her actions, just because she supports that organization?

Let's see BLM leader...

At a BLM protest...

Describing what BLM is going to do to the press if they don't get their way...

To answer your question, yes.

Until you show me BLM specifically and explicitly promoting violence, I cannot accept your claim that they actually do promote violence, no.

I see the problem....you don't know what the word promote means...

Definition of PROMOTE

Promote-to contribute to the growth or prosperity of

See there's lots of ways to promote political violence. You could donate to a group that commits political violence. You can bail out people guilty of political violence. You can voice your support for the people and groups committing political violence.

There's a lot of ways that BLM promotes political violence. If you want to deny them...fine...but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

Nope. I'm not their spokesman.

Apparently you don't know what the word defend means either. You don't have to be affiliated with a group to defend them.

Not that support your contention that BLM itself explicitly promotes violence.

Oh, you missed a part:

I asked:
You seem to be saying that BLM is responsible for the violent acts committed by those individuals associated with it. To avoid making any unwarranted assumptions, I've even asked you if that is what you meant to say.

If so, please confirm; if not, please explain why not.

I'm really curious about your answer.

-- A2SG, though I can't really blame you for avoiding answering it.....

There's no question in what you wrote.

 

[Ana the Ist]

People support the Black Lives Matter cause because Police brutality on blacks is a thing.
There are videos of police being brutal to unarmed unagressive blacks leading to the murder of those blacks.

That's pretty generous....

BLM also protests when police shootings are entirely justified and completely legal.

The Breonna Taylor shooting was ruled legal. The Jacob Blake shooting was ruled legal too.

BLM protested those shootings, and others, despite the fact that they were legally justified shootings. The Jacob Blake protests got people killed.

 

[tall73]

I don't see it listed as an "accomplishment" anywhere. It appears to simply be a news story. But, regardless, they cut ties with her and asked that she no longer attend any BLM events.

Not sure why you think that translates to promoting or supporting violence, exactly, but.....

-- A2SG, you do you, I guess.....

This is a section of what you said appears to be a news story.

You say it is not evidence of support.

It states that organizers from around the world sent letters of support.

Multiple local chapters assisted with fundraisers and legal support.

How is that not "support"?

 

[stevil]

That's pretty generous....

BLM also protests when police shootings are entirely justified and completely legal.

The Breonna Taylor shooting was ruled legal. The Jacob Blake shooting was ruled legal too.

BLM protested those shootings, and others, despite the fact that they were legally justified shootings. The Jacob Blake protests got people killed.

I don't know the specifics of these cases, but people are entitled to protest against "legal rulings".

 

[Ana the Ist]

I don't know the specifics of these cases, but people are entitled to protest against "legal rulings".

Then I don't understand what your complaint is in post 115.

If people are justified in protesting the legal actions of police and legal rulings of the justice system, then they're certainly justified in protesting the results of the election and pandemic mandates.
..