The " Bloods and Crips unite to kill cops" story is fake!

a reply to: Entreri06

i see that you know that one set may or may not follow the other set's example and do their own thing.
it is entirely possible that one or more set of bloods, might have sided with the black guerrilla family and crips may have united with them.

in the the other gang thread, i see people posting about the meeting in the church. i posted this there.

this was four months ago.

The suspect said he was sent to the station under orders by the notorious prison gang which had declared open season on cops. The man did not enter the station willingly but 'had very little option according to his statement,' Police Commissioner Anthony Batts said.
Armed man entered Baltimore police station claiming to test security for Black Guerrilla Family: commissioner

part of my post.

maybe since then the informants in the gangs now and are not talking about the meeting in the church. i saw no mention of it saying when and where the info came to them, other than the informants.

so we don't know where the info came from. just as much chance to have come from informants or undercover officers that are in the gang ranks now. as it is to be fake.

Can somebody embed the interview vid in my link from page 2?

I cant figure that stuff out and it seems that most are too damn lazy to click on a link.

Agents Provocateur pose a significant challenge to mass demonstration. Each and every demonstration is inherently at risk to the influence of this very effective tactic for breaking it up.

If one were to study on the techniques of non-violent resistance employed by any civil-rights movement, it would be evident that the only way to ensure beyond doubt that the demonstration is NOT involved in violence or vandalism is this: swear an oath be peaceful and even to turn the other cheek. And it must be done every demonstration forever.

It isn't nearly as easy or fun as rioting.

It does have a more favorable effect in the long run.

The police don't militarize nearly as much. They feel guilty.

originally posted by: Boomorangatangarang
Agents Provocateur pose a significant challenge to mass demonstration. Each and every demonstration is inherently at risk to the influence of this very effective tactic for breaking it up.

If one were to study on the techniques of non-violent resistance employed by any civil-rights movement, it would be evident that the only way to ensure beyond doubt that the demonstration is NOT involved in violence or vandalism is this: swear an oath be peaceful and even to turn the other cheek. And it must be done every demonstration forever.

It isn't nearly as easy or fun as rioting.

It does have a more favorable effect in the long run.

The police don't militarize nearly as much. They feel guilty.

I'm not saying people should riot or anything, but "the police feel guilty?" The same ones who shoot unarmed people and then demonize them in the media to help cover it up. The same ones who even the good ones don't speak out against the bullies?

Doubtful...

a reply to: Entreri06

While attempting to simplify, I misworded the effect to police behavior that peaceful civil-resistance brings about, historically.

It is precisely when pubic outrage over the human-rights violations reaches the point of swaying office holders that the reform may begin and the cops stand down.

The general public is largely ignorant of most critical aspects of man's worldly machinations(most know more about sports movies and video games than current events).
So in order to claim innocence in the instance of agents provocateurs, the demonstration must publicly state that it will disband in a peaceful non-violent retreat and march another day soon, should agents provocateurs be the most unfortunate circumstance.

originally posted by: Boomorangatangarang
a reply to: Entreri06

While attempting to simplify, I misworded the effect to police behavior that peaceful civil-resistance brings about, historically.

It is precisely when pubic outrage over the human-rights violations reaches the point of swaying office holders that the reform may begin and the cops stand down.

The general public is largely ignorant of most critical aspects of man's worldly machinations(most know more about sports movies and video games than current events).
So in order to claim innocence in the instance of agents provocateurs, the demonstration must publicly state that it will disband in a peaceful non-violent retreat and march another day soon, should agents provocateurs be the most unfortunate circumstance.

I don't know man... I'm not saying looting and rioting are good... But neither is murder and we glorify that in every war. Can anyone really say that peacful protests have lead to change? Maybe there are examples, but I can't think of any.

Who's Hoover?

Who you ride for?

originally posted by: LOSTinAMERICA
Who's Hoover?

Who you ride for?

Larry Hoover top GD?!?!


I got down a a simon city royal back in like 99 when I had to do a year and a half. Drove the get away car for a house burglary. Totally bored kid stuff. All they stole was a camcorder and 4 pairs of Oakley sunglasses. All a week before my 17th birth day so they charged me as an adult. Had always grown up with GD's and was locked up with people who knew me, so they sent me to the royals. I'm white, so I wouldn't have been able to advance as a GD. A white GD is cool, but he will never carry any rank (not because of GD laws, just the politics of it all).

(Drops the mic and walks off stage... Lol)



All that said it has no place outside of jail. In jail it's reality, but the second you walk out the door it has little to know value.

a reply to: Entreri06

Non-violent conflict.org


Whether by peaceful demonstration or rioting and looting, change occurs either way. The nature of the change is reflected in the methods employed to bring it about. I can't think of any example of violent groups of people bringing about a lasting peace.

They don't ever unite on anything!