It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

BLM Leader Shaun King predicts American coup.

page: 11
29
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:13 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth



I am not dismissing the thought because it IS possible


That is all that is required to engage in a discussion with BLM and others. I don't think things would have gone as far as it has if we were willing to talk to people that have certain grievances, and not dismiss them outright.

But we didn't talk to them. When they said blacklivesmatter, we dismissed it by saying alllivesmatter. Then we wonder why they might just be pissed off.
edit on 18-7-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-7-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth

If you look at the statistics I provide, you are also 3 times more likely to be pulled over if you are black, vs. white drivers.


Which makes sense - because blacks are more than 3 times more likely to commit serious crime.


What if that crime statistic is directly tied to the fact they are targeted more by police?


I'd base it on location moreso than being a target. I live on the outskirts of a country town with a population of 800. With a good breeze, I can smell weed being smoked by a neighbor two or more houses down. If I smoked weed, I could do it on my back porch or even in my front yard and never be caught. People could drive to my house and buy it and neither of us would ever be caught unless the buyer was pulled over on his way home and narc'd me out. However, if crime statistics were terrible in the country and cops patrolled regularly, I couldn't get away with it. In the inner cities, you can't smoke outside or deal without looking over your shoulder constantly. Having said that, while breaking the law might happen in the country, it's not nearly as often as the inner cities so we don't get patrolled. Not the white neighborhoods, not the black neighborhoods.



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:18 PM
link   
Both sides of this seem to be projecting a meaning into an ambiguous quote. The quote does not indicate that blm is going to stage a coup if Trump wins. It also does not say they won't. "We", in the quote, could be we as in America, or, it could be we as in blm. I think the speaker is the only one who knows what he actually meant.

That being said, I can see people from the left, so afraid of their world collapsing, that a coup could seem like a reasonable response to a Trump win. Some of the things said and the rabid manner in which some obvious falsehoods are maintained would indicate that nothing is beyond the realm of possibility. Sadly, I can say the same thing if hillary wins. I am fairly certain this nation can not survive another 4, or God forbid 8, years of democrats in the White House. Neither party has been stellar as of late, but it is plain to see that this administration is a failure, and another just like it won't fare any better.

For one reason or another, regardless of what those reasons are, a coup attempt is possible. It will be an epic failure regardless of who launches it. But it is possible.
edit on 18-7-2016 by Vroomfondel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: AnonymousStateCollege
a reply to: yuppa

Christopher Dorner: Navy
Micah Johnson: Army
Gavin Long: Marines

Air Force is up to bat...


Yeah, these aren't our run of the mill lowlife subhuman drug dealing weed toking alcoholic welfare abusing thugs that can't shoot.



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



I am not dismissing the thought because it IS possible


That is all that is required to engage in a discussion with BLM and others. I don't think things would have gone as far as it has if we were willing to talk to people that have certain grievances, and not dismiss them outright.

But we didn't talk to them. When they said blacklivesmatter, we dismissed it by saying alllivesmatter. Then we wonder why they might just be pissed off.


But they shouldn't be pissed off by alllivesmatter. All includes black, but does not exlude non-black. It is inclusive and dismisses no one. It makes me wonder if they are pissed because white lives matter too or because their personal grudge is expanded to make it universal.



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP



Trying to influence elections through fear

That's all Trump has done so expect others to do the same thing.



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



I am not dismissing the thought because it IS possible


That is all that is required to engage in a discussion with BLM and others. I don't think things would have gone as far as it has if we were willing to talk to people that have certain grievances, and not dismiss them outright.

But we didn't talk to them. When they said blacklivesmatter, we dismissed it by saying alllivesmatter. Then we wonder why they might just be pissed off.


Agreed.
The challenge now is to reverse out of a period of entrenchment on both sides.
Not going to be easy. Someone has to make the first move.
I understand why #alllivesmatter is offensive to blacks. It's not about the words, it's about the perception that the BLM is not relevant.
I firmly believe a BLM movement is badly needed because blacks have legitimate grievances in so many areas of society. I just think focusing on the police is not the right focus.
edit on 18/7/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



I am not dismissing the thought because it IS possible


That is all that is required to engage in a discussion with BLM and others. I don't think things would have gone as far as it has if we were willing to talk to people that have certain grievances, and not dismiss them outright.

But we didn't talk to them. When they said blacklivesmatter, we dismissed it by saying alllivesmatter. Then we wonder why they might just be pissed off.


But they shouldn't be pissed off by alllivesmatter. All includes black, but does not exlude non-black. It is inclusive and dismisses no one. It makes me wonder if they are pissed because white lives matter too or because their personal grudge is expanded to make it universal.


What is offensive is that time and again, the death of blacks is treated completely differently than the death of whites by the police and the media. If a black man is shot by the police, the media will scrounge up a picture of the victim looking "gansta." If a white college boy commits a rape or murder, they publish his graduation portrait. We hear all about a black victim's police record, but we are never made privy to the complaints filed about the policeman doing the shooting.

Pretending that this is not happening is precisely the reason why the movement is trying to raise the public consciousness. Calling peaceful protesters "terrorists," and falsely associating members of known hate groups like the New Black Panthers with the BLM movement is part of a deliberate campaign to spread hatred and fear. There are groups who are actively trying to incite a race war. BLM is not one of them.



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



I am not dismissing the thought because it IS possible


That is all that is required to engage in a discussion with BLM and others. I don't think things would have gone as far as it has if we were willing to talk to people that have certain grievances, and not dismiss them outright.

But we didn't talk to them. When they said blacklivesmatter, we dismissed it by saying alllivesmatter. Then we wonder why they might just be pissed off.


Why someone that hears "black lives matter" be ok to get pissed off? The way I see it, all lives have mattered since most of us were born. Yesterday, a guy on Twitter said that all lives matter is untrue because is leaves out black people. I pasted the definition of "all" and asked him why black had to stand out. He never wrote me back. All lives have mattered for decades and there was never any reason to change that and single out one race or group of people.



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Lulz!

This guy ain't leading but two things, Jack and sh*t, and Jack left town. *Movie reference


His prediction is about as probable a Nibiru appearing in 2012.

Maybe if he read a book, he'd understand why a coup in America has 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% chance of success, and I was being very... sorry for the pejorative, liberal... with the numbers.



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:40 PM
link   
With all due respect to Mr. King (God, how we could use DR. KING right about now....please), BLM and the people who support BLM wouldn't have a chance in hell in staging a coup. And if another group did, BLM would not have a seat at the table.

Neither would you or I, for that matter.

#businessasusual



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:40 PM
link   
a reply to: LSU0408


All lives have mattered for decades and there was never any reason to change that and single out one race or group of people.


It's just that some lives matter more than others.



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Correct; he is not talking about BLM staging a coup, because they are not in a position to do so. By definition, a coup is on the part of a group inside the government or power base. It is the intentionally distorted phrasing that has led to this false impression, as it was supposed to.



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Exactly. You beat me to it.



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:44 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Or stopping traffic or blocking major highways or being violent or being disruptive.



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Masterjaden
a reply to: Gryphon66

No they weren't... The study you keep referring to refers only to population, not normalized population based on crime rates.

Jaden


Which study is that?

Link it. Or link my post.



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



I am not dismissing the thought because it IS possible


That is all that is required to engage in a discussion with BLM and others. I don't think things would have gone as far as it has if we were willing to talk to people that have certain grievances, and not dismiss them outright.

But we didn't talk to them. When they said blacklivesmatter, we dismissed it by saying alllivesmatter. Then we wonder why they might just be pissed off.


But they shouldn't be pissed off by alllivesmatter. All includes black, but does not exlude non-black. It is inclusive and dismisses no one. It makes me wonder if they are pissed because white lives matter too or because their personal grudge is expanded to make it universal.


What is offensive is that time and again, the death of blacks is treated completely differently than the death of whites by the police and the media. If a black man is shot by the police, the media will scrounge up a picture of the victim looking "gansta." If a white college boy commits a rape or murder, they publish his graduation portrait. We hear all about a black victim's police record, but we are never made privy to the complaints filed about the policeman doing the shooting.

Pretending that this is not happening is precisely the reason why the movement is trying to raise the public consciousness. Calling peaceful protesters "terrorists," and falsely associating members of known hate groups like the New Black Panthers with the BLM movement is part of a deliberate campaign to spread hatred and fear. There are groups who are actively trying to incite a race war. BLM is not one of them.


Rubbish. There is hardly any media coverage of whites killed by police - even though there are more of them



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

So, men are more violent and prone to violent actions?

If that's true then all the arguments about "the patriarchy" are true then, according to you.

Since all men, in jail or not, are prone to bad controlling behaviors?

LOL



posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



I am not dismissing the thought because it IS possible


That is all that is required to engage in a discussion with BLM and others. I don't think things would have gone as far as it has if we were willing to talk to people that have certain grievances, and not dismiss them outright.

But we didn't talk to them. When they said blacklivesmatter, we dismissed it by saying alllivesmatter. Then we wonder why they might just be pissed off.


But they shouldn't be pissed off by alllivesmatter. All includes black, but does not exlude non-black. It is inclusive and dismisses no one. It makes me wonder if they are pissed because white lives matter too or because their personal grudge is expanded to make it universal.


What is offensive is that time and again, the death of blacks is treated completely differently than the death of whites by the police and the media. If a black man is shot by the police, the media will scrounge up a picture of the victim looking "gansta." If a white college boy commits a rape or murder, they publish his graduation portrait. We hear all about a black victim's police record, but we are never made privy to the complaints filed about the policeman doing the shooting.

Pretending that this is not happening is precisely the reason why the movement is trying to raise the public consciousness. Calling peaceful protesters "terrorists," and falsely associating members of known hate groups like the New Black Panthers with the BLM movement is part of a deliberate campaign to spread hatred and fear. There are groups who are actively trying to incite a race war. BLM is not one of them.


You're joking, right?




posted on Jul, 18 2016 @ 02:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU0408

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: UKTruth



I am not dismissing the thought because it IS possible


That is all that is required to engage in a discussion with BLM and others. I don't think things would have gone as far as it has if we were willing to talk to people that have certain grievances, and not dismiss them outright.

But we didn't talk to them. When they said blacklivesmatter, we dismissed it by saying alllivesmatter. Then we wonder why they might just be pissed off.


Why someone that hears "black lives matter" be ok to get pissed off? The way I see it, all lives have mattered since most of us were born. Yesterday, a guy on Twitter said that all lives matter is untrue because is leaves out black people. I pasted the definition of "all" and asked him why black had to stand out. He never wrote me back. All lives have mattered for decades and there was never any reason to change that and single out one race or group of people.


The issue is now though that it is not about the definition of 'ALL' that causes a reaction. It''s the fact that it underplays the problem. There is a problem. You only have to look at income, family structure sand education to know that there is a disparity in society. Something is not right. That something is just not the police. When I hear black lives matter, I think about how income gaps, education and employment opportunities can be equalised and how infrastructure and facilities can be brought to very run down inner cities.



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join