'Black Lives Matter' shirt Pulled From Wallmart's website, At Fraternal Order of Police request

a reply to: Sublimecraft

I see that time.com said that it isn't a hate group. I just recall seeing the riots and it seemed the group was always yelling and involved in the mess we saw last summer.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Sublimecraft

I see that time.com said that it isn't a hate group. I just recall seeing the riots and it seemed the group was always yelling and involved in the mess we saw last summer.

yeah - any propaganda outlet that insists BLM ain't racist whilst ignoring all the bigotry & racism from them is exactly that - a propaganda outlet pushing an agenda of social engineering. Such outlets, imo, have about as much credence as the 'official polls' leading up to the election.

AKA: The opposite is true.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

Are you telling me it is Fake news?

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Are you telling me it is Fake news?

No, only anti-Hillary / pro-Trump websites and news outlets push fake news, all the pro-Hillary / anti-Trump websites and news outlets only give you the facts, without emotion.........apparently.

a reply to: seasonal

thats good they should pull it off ho do they think they are saying that black lives matter as on the shirt it should say ALL lives matter not just BLACK ...................

a reply to: Sublimecraft

No, it's not - No law can protect an individual from the consequential effect resultant from him or her spewing racism.

Of course it does. If a person physically attacks someone that has called them a racial slur, legally, the First Amendment protects the victim of the attack. The resulting attack response does not initiate a need for the speaker to "check themselves."

Now, chanting racism may be protected via the 1A but if the recipient of the racism decides to kill you because of it, the onus is back on the racist...

You seem to have confused me. Only the listener can decide if what is being said is racist and many are falsely accused of being one. Racism, in some instances, has the potential to be substantiated.

If you remove the physical aspect behind any protest or movement, they may in your opinion be labelled as a "hate group," but nevertheless have the right to exist and spout their hate.

I'm certainly not someone that wants to defend the BLM, but if Wal-mart wants to sell t-shirts that say "Death to Whitey," at least I know that I can still buy one and wipe my ass with it.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

The fake news thing was designed to shut the pizza gate stuff down. Seems like the Dems are short sited.

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: seasonal

Ugh, why is a corporate entity like Walmart even selling an activist tee shirt? Did they also sell Occupy Wall Street tees? It should be a political statement, not a means to make a profit. What the hell Walmart?

I cannot think of a more appropriate retailer than The Evil Empire to be carrying a line of clothing that promotes hatred and division. That is right up their alley, for sure.

originally posted by: seasonal
'Black Lives Matter' shirt Pulled From Wallmart's website, At Fraternal Order of Police request

I never had any respect for Walmart in the first place, so their cowardly caving to the fascist cops leaves them no further down, in my opinion.
Perhaps the cops should just concern themselves with learning 'ethics' and doing a good job, and get out of the tee shirt business?

a reply to: Swills

You try to paint a picture,these dirt bags attacked people and property,they all should be in jail,how do you justify in saying they are ok,unless you are one of them,Walmart should have never carried this race baiting crap

Really?

BLM protests what they see as unnecessary and illegal killings (shootings, mostly) of black people at the hands of police, and they think that good marketing for the group is to use the word "bulletproof?"

Seriously?

But to be on-topic, Walmart can do what it wants--the FOP didn't make Walmart take it down, the company chose to do so because it weighed the pros and cons of leaving it on its site, and made a business decision that it would do more harm in the PR department by continuing to sell it.