I wonder if any police departments have flame throwers?
Posted on 07/17/2016 9:45:55 AM PDT by ek_hornbeck
As you may have heard, earlier this month a petition was filed with the White House’s “We the People” platform requesting that Black Lives Matter be recognized as a terrorist organization.
In case you need a few quick reminders on some of the Black Lives Matter tactics and why so many suggest they should be labeled as terrorists, here are a few photos:
(Excerpt) Read more at allenbwest.com ...
Especially with the Baton Rouge events today.
There are all sorts of ways to generate fear to advance political ends, and the only even-handed way to employ that term is to use it in all appropriate circumstances - which indeed would make the term so general as to be nigh-useless.
Which is my contention, and why we need to retire the word. There is nothing particularly special about head-chopping as a means of producing fear (I can think of many things scarier), and blowing up civilians wholesale is primarily the domain of governments, which are for some reason immune to the charge of terrorism even though they are far and away the biggest creators of fear for political ends there have ever been.
King George III though the same way, but things didn’t quite work out as he planned.
I wonder if any police departments have flame throwers?
If whites attempted to do this type of violence they would be crushed after the first attempt. We don't put up with that kind of crap from our own communities. White elites are paying for black goons - goons to be ‘violent by proxy’...
It's got to stop.
Time to unmask white people behind BLM - then STOP paying for cops to babysit the black community. Time for a twofer. We're assisting with the infantilizing of the black community - a process democrats use to keep blacks dependent AND on the dem plantation.
Cheesers, Man.
Chopping off the heads of members of another religion on camera is intended to terrorize the viewing audience and scare and drive members of that religion out of the area. Encouraging or financing someone to kill 80 people in a holiday crowd is terrorism. We need a word to identify who or what we are fighting. Things should be identified by a word or phrase if for nothing more than the efficient use of language. War on islamic Terrorism works for me, but I welcome a superior phrase.
I surrender the last word, before I become terrorized. : )
Those who armed need to espouse that there is no more thinking about getting a gun, it is well past time have one and be armed at all times.
White communities really have little to fear from the BLM. They can project power into those communities. However, they can still come protest or interrupt meals and the like. If you are willing to stand for those life interruptions, well that’s an individual choice, but it only emboldens BLM.
Its commuters into urban areas and integrated communities that are in real trouble.
Agreed.
Even with “Islamic terrorism” the word “terrorism” is completely unnecessary. The ONLY reason to add it is to falsely imply that Islam itself is somehow essentially different from what is being called “terrorism”. But it’s not - this is simply Islam itself executing its age-old, oft-repeated total war doctrine.
It’s not “Islamic terrorism”. It’s just plain old “Islam”.
No matter which way one uses it, the word “terrorism” always obscures truth.
There is more than one form of terrorism, so the use of the word Islamic applies to that form regardless of whether or not Islam is inherently terrorism. The adjective identifies the type of terrorism and distinguishes it from other sources and types.
now you are way through the looking glass on your parsing comment and I am only more resolved than before in my belief you are wrong.
Let’s part in disagreement or we may bore others to death and totally hijack a thread.
If I said last word to you, allow me to apologize, and repeat the offer. I’m out.
They know it, they refuse to admit it. Puts the responsibility on them and not whitey.
They channel all their self anger at whitey.
Obama. Once a traitor, always a traitor. And that goes for the Demonicrats who voted for him and the RINOcrats who supported him.
Now you understand why Americans have been buying guns and ammo the last couple of years now.
The word "terrorist" has an accepted meaning that almost everyone understands.
Attacks on military targets in combat are not "terrorism," so I would agree that the term was over-used during the Iraq and Afghan wars to describe what was basically guerilla warfare on the part of Iraqi and Taliban militias, for instance.
However, in domestic/peacetime situations, it's reasonable and accurate to describe coordinated attacks on non-military targets in the name of political or religious ideology as "terrorism." By this criterion the recent BLM-inspired attacks were certainly terrorist acts.
No offense taken, and you made a valid point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.