- This topic has 17 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
On July 4th, this was was a tweet that was published on the internet. I have been called a racist before for questioning the actions of others, but NEVER because I honor the American Flag…
This tweet was under the banner of the Utah chapter of the BLM, it stated the following, “When we black Americans see this flag we know the person flying it is not safe to be around. When we see this flag we know the person flying it is a racist. When we see this flag we know the person flying it lives in a different America than we do. When we see this flag, we question your intelligence. We know to avoid you. It is the symbol of hatred.”
The purpose of this editorial is not meant to be political. Instead it is simply to ask you a question about the future of the nation in which we have lived for years.
We have our opinion and though we have tried our best to avoid political discussions in the past, the time has finally come to realize that if we as a nation, accept this belief without objection, “one nation, under God” will disappear before our eyes.
Did you have a grandfather who fought in World War I, a father or loved one who fought in World War II and/or the Korean War?
Did you have a mother who might have been characterized as “Rosie the Riveter”?
Were you a part of the Vietnam conflict, or did you have a loved one serve in Desert Storm or in Afghanistan?
And in all those conflicts, did race make a difference when standing next to one another to defend our nation?
Color of one’s skin made no difference in these cases over the centuries did it?
As a matter of fact, we don’t even know the race of the Unknown Soldier, do we?
And…as you answer these questions, we would like to pose this question to all of our readers:
Is this, our flag.. racist?
When you see it fly, does it “question your intelligence”, and is it “a symbol of hatred”?
Finally, when these service men raised our flag over Iwo Jima did that make ANY OF THEM racist?
If you need help with an answer, just ask these attendees at the recent NHL games in New York…repeated in Tampa a week later.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9XszOyy01Y
Got a comment? Send it to us at:
or feel free to comment below-
COMMENTS ON THIS TOPIC ARE NOW CLOSED
comment from Neal Graham:
The term “racist” is nothing more than a means for the Socialists to shut down debate or facts. They do this through mockery and ridicule of their opposition, Americans who love their country (unlike themselves, who despise it). By defending in any way our non-racism, it is really engaging them on their own terms, and we should really stop it.
Comment from Patricia Becker
Every generation of my family served in the US military. I grew up in Flint, MI. in the 1950’s and never knew about racism until age 16. My grandparents had me fly to Florida to join them for my birthday and I went to get a drink of water and noticed everyone staring at me and when I looked down saw sign saying, “For Colored only” for the first time.” The older I get the more proud I am that it meant nothing to me.
I am constantly astonished at how some people (in this case, Neal Graham) are so eager to question the loyalty and patriotism of any American who does not march in lock step with his brand of politics. Calling anyone who disagrees with you a “Socialist” and disloyal to our country is not only rude, it is vicious and reflects the “my way or the highway” mentality of today’s Republican extremist right-wing. Here’s some shocking news for you: those of us who disagree with you simply disagree with you, and it doesn’t make us unpatriotic, or “Socialists” or worthy of any other words Fox News may encourage you to use to attack us. You behave like a petulant child rather than a thinking adult. Try using your own brain a bit more and spitting out the bile from Fox News a bit less.
Mr. Sectary, unlike the previous posts, and all too familiar of those of his like thinking, for some reason, rather than addressing the issue of a tweet that in my opinion, was so defamatory toward Americans by a Socialistic organization, chose to demean and insult Mr. Graham, using language that accomplished nothing other than the typical hatred of a person who cannot address an issue, but must use a demeaning comment toward another instead.
How about addressing the issue at hand,. Mr. Sectary? Mr. Graham did not name call any one person, but somehow you felt it necessary to do so. Why ?
Do you believe that BLM is a valuable organization? If so, why?
Do you believe that that those who love and display the symbol of America, are racists?
Do you believe our flag is a sign of hatred?
How about your opinions rather than insulting another person?
It’s obvious that the BLM person utah, wrote their opinions out of anger. When in emotion, best to cool down before you write. However, some people are always angry and steadfast about their positions.
There are BLM people who will never understand that the world is nuanced, and extreme opinions are rare.
You can’t fix people who will hold this country and perhaps white people responsible for bad hair days.
On the other hand, Fox does feed thoughts into people’s minds labeling those who are not conservative enough “Marxist/Leninists”. This is deliberate, not out of anger but out to keep the nation divided giving Fox constant dialogue to continue to rant and show “anti american” actions what would anger some and have no effect on others. Keep in mind constant rhetoric calling out wokes, marxists, liberals, traitors, anti fas (haven’t seen them around in a while) and pushing the myth that the fun and games at the capital on Jan 6, was nothing but fun and games. It’s even funny, the first week, both Mcconell and Mccarthy condemn Trump for such fun and games, but a week later both are kissing Donald’s ring. Can some explain that for me, and forgive me for the spelling
This is in response to Mr. Miller who, rather than tackling the subject of FACTUAL tweet, instead chose to look at it as on individual’s “opinion out of anger.” Not so, Mr. Miller, I will educate you and others on the BLM shortly, but first what does the tweet have anything to do with Mr. McConnell or Mr. McCarthy, or as usual, the typical “shot” at Donald Trump whenever people your thought persuasion look for excuses to avoid the subject at hand?
Now to the BLM tweet. It was sponsored by “BLM: Utah” the organization, not an individual.
Let’s look a bit closer to what the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation is REALLY ALL ABOUT…it’s a great deal more than merely the words “Black Lives Matter”.
Black Lives Matter’s fund raising machine also has an interesting link to supporters of the Democratic Party, one of which is an organization called “Act Blue”.
To be fair, there are a number of groups that use the phrase “Black Lives Matter” in their name; however in this case, BlackLivesMatter.com is operated by an umbrella Black Lives Matter organization called the Black Lives Matter Global Network.
To collect donations, the website uses ActBlue Charities, a 501(c)(3) organization that specifically makes the platform available to charitable organizations.
In 2020, it was discovered that ActBlue’s top political recipients were the presidential campaigns of Sen. Bernie Sanders, former Vice President Joe Biden, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
ActBlue isn’t itself donating money.
It’s just the online platform that campaigns and groups use to solicit and collect donations.
It has an alliance with THOUSAND CURRENTS.
AMOUNTS ARE TAX DEDUCTIBLE
Where does the money go? 25%: Salary & Benefits, 46% Consultant Fees
Contributions made to the Black Lives Matter movement through that organization are deductible as well.
After checking the above organizations, I then decided to visit the Black Lives Matter website itself, something I suggest all do to understand their objectives.
Within the body of their objectives, Black Lives Matter has made it clear that, as an organization, it exists to overthrow the existing order within the United States, stating on its website about its plan to “disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement” and to “foster a queer‐affirming network.”
Let’s look at an individual who has been associated with Thousand Currents, the organization that SPONSORS and has an ALLIANCE with “Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation”.
Susan Rosenberg
Susan Rosenberg has served as vice chair of the board of directors for Thousand Currents, an organization that provides fund raising and fiscal sponsorship for the Black Lives Matter Global Movement.
She was an active member of revolutionary left-wing movements whose illegal activities included bombing U.S. government buildings and committing armed robberies.
As recently as June 24, 2020 the date on which the Capital Research Center published their report, the Thousand Currents website listed Susan Rosenberg as vice chair of the organization’s board of directors, describing her as a “human and prison rights advocate and writer.”
The entire “board of directors” page has since been removed from the site.
Rosenberg’s prominent position within Thousand Currents is clear, as are that organization’s close links to the Black Lives Matter Global Network (and thereby the broader Black Lives Matter movement).
Originally from New York City, Rosenberg was an active member of several revolutionary left-wing groups and movements during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s.
In November 1984, she was arrested in Cherry Hill, New Jersey after police said she and an associate, Timothy Blunk, were found transferring 740 pounds of explosives, an Uzi submachine gun, an M-14 rifle, a rifle with a telescopic sight, a sawed-off shotgun, three 9-millimeter handguns and boxes of ammunition from a car into a storage locker.
Rosenberg was tried and convicted on the following charges:
“Conspiracy to possess unregistered firearms, receive firearms and explosives shipped in interstate commerce while a fugitive, and unlawfully use false identification documents …; possession of unregistered destructive devices, possession of unregistered firearm (two counts) …; carrying explosives during commission of a felony … ; possession with intent to unlawfully use false identification documents…; false representation of Social Security number, possession of counterfeit Social Security cards.”
In May 1985, New Jersey U.S. District Court Judge Frederick Bernard Lacey gave Rosenberg and Blunk the maximum available sentence of 58 years each in prison.
She spent 16 years in prison and was released in 2001 through executive clemency by then President Bill Clinton on his final day in office.
Her commutation produced a wave of criticism by police and New York elected officials at the time.
According to several contemporaneous news reports, Rosenberg had previously been charged with multiple offenses as part of a major 1982 conspiracy case against several prominent left-wing revolutionaries.
Along with the others, Rosenberg was charged with conspiracy and racketeering offenses in connection with the following incidents:
Then there is Joanne Chesimard.
The 1979 prison escape of Joanne Chesimard (also known as Assata Shakur)…
..a former leader of the Black Liberation Army who had been serving a life sentence for the 1973 murder of a New Jersey State Trooper named Werner Foerster.
The 1976 attempted robbery of an armored car in Pittsburgh.
The 1980 robbery of an armored car in Manhattan.
Three attempted robberies of armored cars in Danbury, Connecticut.
Four attempted robberies of armored cars in Nanuet, New York, in 1980 and 1981.
The most high-profile incident was the October 1981 Brink’s robbery in Nyack, New York.
Several members of the Weather Underground and Black Liberation Army groups were accused of having orchestrated and carried out the violent robbery of a Brink’s armored vehicle at the Nanuet Mall, stealing total of $1.6 million.
In the course of a police chase and shootout, two police officers and a Brink’s guard were killed.
The money was recovered.
Specifically, Rosenberg was accused of having driven one of the getaway cars.
After Rosenberg’s arrest in New Jersey in 1984, and her subsequent conviction and imprisonment on the weapons and explosives possession charges, prosecutors dropped the conspiracy and racketeering charges against her, and she was never tried or convicted in relation to the 1981 Brink’s robbery, the 1979 Shakur prison escape, or other armed robberies.
The prosecutor who oversaw the decision not to proceed with that case, in the 1980s, was Rudolph Giuliani, then U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York.
After Rosenberg’s release in 2001, Giuliani, by then Mayor of New York City, told the New York Times the charges were dropped because her existing 58-year prison sentence made a further prosecution unnecessary.
In 1988, Rosenberg was charged with aiding and abetting a series of bombings which took place between 1983 and 1985, at the Capitol building, Fort McNair, the Washington Navy Yard Computer Center and the Washington Navy Yard Officers’ Club, all in Washington,
D.C. Bombs were also planted, but did not detonate, at several sites in New York: the FBI’s office in Staten Island, the Israeli Aircraft Industries building, the South African consulate and the New York Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association.
However, prosecutors dropped those charges in 1990 as part of a plea deal involving other suspects in the bombings.
As a result, Rosenberg was never tried or convicted on any charges relating to the 1983-1985 bombing campaign.
Bet you never knew the REAL MEANING OF THE WORDS, did you?
Note: This is a HISTORY, not opinions.
And of course, there is Patrisse Khan-Cullors, the former leader of Black Lives Matter and a self-described Marxist, recently purchased a $1.4 million home in an exclusive Los Angeles neighborhood where the vast majority of residents are white, according to reports.
No Mr. Miller, this not anger, this is fact. This Socialistic organization that destroyed so many cities in 2020, assisted in financing the campaign of the current President of the United States.
“Dick”… thank you for proving my point. “Socialist organization”? Do I believe the flag is a symbol of hatred? Do I believe that those who love and display the symbol of America are racists? How utterly ridiculous and perfectly in sync with the nonsense spewed forth by the right wing media machine to an audience only too willing to swallow every word. So you seem to believe that anyone who disagrees with you reviles the American flag? Anyone who disagrees with you should be branded a “Socialist”? Anyone who disagrees with you must be attacking you as a racist? Well, “Dick,” the only way to know if you’re a racist is to observe what you say and do… and draw reasonable conclusions from your words and actions. I didn’t accuse you or anyone of being a racist. I accused Mr. Graham of being intolerant of anyone’s opinion to the extent it differs from his own, and I believe what he wrote suggests precisely that. I would suggest that your response does, too. Nowhere in my comment did I call him a name, and nowhere did I call him a “racist”. I did call him a “petulant child” and I stand by it, because his writing suggests the mindset of one. As to Black Lives Matter… one has to acknowledge that they have a point when we are all confronted with the simple reality that our nation has a history of racism at its core, from its very inception — yes, our Founding Fathers owned slaves, they perpetuated slavery as they drafted our founding documents, they refused to allow blacks to be treated as equals, so please spare me any revisionist history that seeks to pretend our nation has a stellar history on the subject of racial equality, because facts say otherwise. And in the nearly 250 years since, we’ve had a Civil War, Dred Scott, Jim Crow, and endless evidence of the racial animus targeting people of color. Even today, there is little doubt that black Americans are treated differently by law enforcement, and indeed by the entire legal system… and if you refuse to see it, I’d suggest it’s because you prefer to wear blinders because the plain truth is just too inconvenient for you. And in this very thread… beginning with Mr. Graham equating anyone’s belief that Black Lives Matter might actually have a valid complaint to make, one is branded a “Socialist” for daring to believe it. You called it a “Socialist organization” yourself… you’re no less guilty of the name-calling than he is. For your enlightenment, “Dick,” socialism is an economic system, not a political one, and Black Lives Matter is about seeking redress of wrongs through political action, not suggestive of adoption of a different economic system in America. So before you throw your epithets around, perhaps think a bit about what epithets your throw, so you don’t come across as a complete idiot for not knowing the difference.
As I previously stated, name calling from a Mr. Sectary. typical. Sir, I stated facts about that socialistic and Marxist organization using their own words and citing “notable” examples who runs it. I see you failed to mention any of that is your rage of calling another individual “an idiot for not knowing the difference”. I will not lower myself to such behavior.
When I read your hateful remarks, all I would think of was the saying “You Can’t Handle the Truth”.
By the way, like so many others like yourself, you never answered the questions posed to you.
Another response to “Dick” who has posted a very lengthy screed about the perils of Black Lives Matter, and refers us to their website, which he claims to quote verbatim. Well, “Dick,” please tell us where you found this on their site:
“Within the body of their objectives, Black Lives Matter has made it clear that, as an organization, it exists to overthrow the existing order within the United States, stating on its website about its plan to “disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement” and to ‘foster a queer‐affirming network.’”
Because when I looked, this is what I found as the stated objectives of Black Lives Matter, as posted online:
“#BlackLivesMatter was founded in 2013 in response to the acquittal of Trayvon Martin’s murderer. Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, Inc. is a global organization in the US, UK, and Canada, whose mission is to eradicate white supremacy and build local power to intervene in violence inflicted on Black communities by the state and vigilantes. By combating and countering acts of violence, creating space for Black imagination and innovation, and centering Black joy, we are winning immediate improvements in our lives.
We are expansive. We are a collective of liberators who believe in an inclusive and spacious movement. We also believe that in order to win and bring as many people with us along the way, we must move beyond the narrow nationalism that is all too prevalent in Black communities. We must ensure we are building a movement that brings all of us to the front.
We affirm the lives of Black queer and trans folks, disabled folks, undocumented folks, folks with records, women, and all Black lives along the gender spectrum. Our network centers those who have been marginalized within Black liberation movements.
We are working for a world where Black lives are no longer systematically targeted for demise.
We affirm our humanity, our contributions to this society, and our resilience in the face of deadly oppression.
The call for Black lives to matter is a rallying cry for ALL Black lives striving for liberation.”
Sure doesn’t seem like a dreadful set of objectives to me! Then again, I admit, I’m not triggered by suggestions of inclusivity that involve “queer and trans folks, disabled folks, undocumented folks, folks with records…” etc.
And about your claim that contributions to ActBlue are tax deductible… very misleading, but donations for any political activity are most certainly NOT tax deductible, and ActBlue states that quite clearly. Only contributions to registered 50a(c)(3) charitable organizations through ActBlue ARE tax deductible, and yes, Black Lives Matter FOUNDATION is a federally-registered 501(c)(3) organization based in California. But that is NOT the same as the Black Lives Matter social justice movement, which is a political organization, for which contributions are NOT tax-deductible under federal and state tax laws. You wrote that “Contributions made to the Black Lives Matter movement through that organization (ActBlue) are deductible as well.” THAT IS A LIE. Again, your screed is deliberately misleading, or else reflects willful ignorance of the facts. Contributions made to the “movement” are political, not charitable, and are NOT tax deductible, and it is clearly stated on the ActBlue website.
As to your lengthy screed about Susan Rosenberg… her violent history led to her imprisonment (served 16 years), and rightly so. But she was released from prison twenty years ago, so it’s old history. She does serve on the Board of Thousand Currents… but in spite of your attempt to make that organization sound sinister, one has to wonder what is sinister about their charitable work in support of social justice, climate justice and food security for those in need in this country. Yes, they support the CHARITABLE FOUNDATION known as Black Lives Matter FOUNDATION… but again, try as you might, that’s NOT the political organization, but, rather, a federally-chartered charitable organization. I know you like to use words to label people and organizations in ways that make them seem oh, so frightening… but that’s a disingenuous attempt on your part to mislead your readers, and you do it constantly.
I’m not going further into your screed, because it has become quite apparent that you like to cherry-pick your facts and then use them to mislead your readers into drawing conclusions that are either factually inaccurate or woefully unfair. Not a surprise. When have people like you cared about honesty, integrity, truth or fairness? Never, when there’s a good lie to be spread around, “Dick.” Keep spreading.
You’re right, “Dick”… if you don’t know the difference between socialism as an economic system and any political system, then yes, you ARE an idiot, and my saying so merely states the obvious. Socialism is NOT a political system. You keep saying that it is. That’s stupid, ignorant, and downright dumb. Do your research. What you do seem to enjoy is misleading your readers with flat-out lies… “contributions to Black Lives Matter are tax deductible” you claim… and that is either a deliberate lie on your part, knowing that the FOUNDATION is different from the social justice movement, or it reflects complete ignorance of the difference between the two… I would suggest willful ignorance because saying so only makes you think your statements have credence, when they do not. They are LIES, and whether you write them deliberately and with malice, or from complete ignorance, you bear responsibility for spreading the lies you spread. I know, I know… the Republican Party… the Party of Personal Irresponsibility. We see it every day.
Oh, I forgot “Dick”… you won’t lower yourself to calling people names? So when you call others “Socialists” you are saying it as a compliment, right? Not in any way meant as an attack or term of disparagement? I’m sorry, I apologize for thinking you meant it as an insult.
Well Mr. Sectary, let us see how the nation reacts to BLM in ’22? My guess is that you might see a few problems at the polls supporting that organization.
By the way, have you any compassion for that same group, you know, the one who was responsible for a Las Vegas Metro officer being paralyzed for the rest of his life, the one that burned cities to the ground while destroying many small businesses last summer?
You seem to forget that this entire thread began with a BLM SPONSORED tweet that insulted any American who chose to honor the American flag. I didn’t make that up, they proudly published it.
Because you seem to avoid that subject completely, would you please clarify your views on that tweet, rather than continue to avoid them? I don’t want to ASSUME anything as you have done, while at the same time, continuing to “boil over” with one rant after another.
This is the 3rd request. Stop beating around the bush and answer the questions. Do you agree or disagree with that tweet? It’s real simple question you seem to avoid. A simple “yes” or “no” answer will more than suffice.
And while you’re pondering how you’ll likely avoid any answer by beating around the bush again, how about one more question for you?
What kind of a “patriotic” organization would publish such a tweet?
One that wishes to change our system to another one, Marxism and Socialism, where none have ever been successful on the earth, except making everyone who follows it, is a pauper? How’s Cuba doing today?
One that others should send their money (especially where less than 25% goes to the “cause”)?
One that insults every veteran who served in the USA?
One who insults law enforcement?
Fly your BLM flag high, Mr. Sectary, while the rest of us look at them for what they have demonstrated themselves to be….terrorists who will use violence to accomplish a goal.
Now please, just answer the questions without the trash talk.
“Dick”… I thought I’d made it clear that I felt the effort to suggest that people like me are unpatriotic or don’t honor the American flag was nonsense, but apparently my saying that isn’t enough to convince you of it. Trying to get words through that thick skull seems to be an endlessly-frustrating exercise. Clearly, in answer to your repeated question, and in spite of my having answered it sufficient to satisfy anyone but YOU, I’ll say it again: no, I do not support dishonoring the American flag, and yes, I am a patriotic American citizen. The thing is, “Dick,” I wouldn’t suggest that anyone supporting the basic quest for justice of the BLM movement is, by definition, unpatriotic or willing to dishonor the flag. That would be like someone suggesting that anyone who supported Donald Trump ALSO supports using the American flag on flagpoles to assault Capitol and DC Metro Police officers on January 6th, wouldn’t it? Does the fact that thousands of rioters storming the US Capitol desecrated the American flag in the process, assaulted police officers in the process, violated numerous laws in the process, also mean that anyone who supports Donald Trump (as they all did) MUST, by definition, also support the violence, the attacks on police, the desecration of the flag? No, of course not, and I wouldn’t suggest that supporters of Trump (70 million strong) ALSO support what some of his supporters did on January 6th. But YOU, “Dick,” insist on trying to equate those of us who support the quest of the BLM movement for equal justice under the law with any violence or insults to the American flag SOME of the BLM protesters obviously demonstrated. The question for you is WHY? WHY do you insist on equating sympathy with their cause with acceptance of the violent tactics of SOME of them? WHY do you insist on demanding that I defend the violence, while I haven’t suggested that YOU should have to do the same regarding Trump’s insurrectionists on January 6? The reason I don’t, “Dick,” is because I don’t ASSUME for one moment that you or anyone else supports that kind of assault upon our Capitol or our police. I ASSUME you don’t, and I ASSUME you would call out against any of those who did that. Why don’t you grant me the same courtesy by ASSUMING that my political point of view does not mean that I support violence or lawlessness or the desecration of the flag?
That’s a question for YOU to consider, “Dick.” And I would ask you, regarding the Trump supporters who behaved as they did on January 6, “What kind of ‘patriotic’ group would behave that way?” One that wishes to change our system to another one, Fascism or some other form of totalitarian state, where none have ever been successful on earth, except making everyone who lived under it suffer under poverty and political terrorism? A group that has no patriotism to the Constitution, the rule of law, or basic democratic principles. A group that INSULTS LAW ENFORCEMENT (I’d say attacking them, gouging their eyes out, spraying them with bear spray, kind of amounts to that, wouldn’t you, “Dick”?). So I’d say to those who support that (and I sure don’t suggest that YOU do, “Dick”) fly the Trump flag high, and the Confederate flag as well, while the rest of us look at them for what they demonstrated themselves to be… terrorists who will use violence to accomplish a goal… enemies of the American constitutional system of government… traitors to the United States… determined to undermine our very democracy to get their way. Kind of the very definition of a terrorist organization, isn’t it, “Dick?”
Now, have I answered your questions? And why not answer mine: Do YOU support the January 6 insurrectionists, and Donald Trump’s Big Lie that spurred them on, and does to this very day?
We’ll wait, “Dick.”
I have to admit, “Dick,” you’ve made me rethink my assumptions. So I’m going to adopt your thinking, as follows.
You wrote:
“Stop beating around the bush and answer the questions. Do you agree or disagree with that tweet? It’s real simple question you seem to avoid. A simple “yes” or “no” answer will more than suffice.”
So my response is:
Stop beating around the bush and answer the question. Do you agree or disagree with the lawlessness and violence of the January 6th Trump insurrectionists? It’s a real simple question you seem to avoid. A simple “yes” or “no” answer will more than suffice. See, if everyone who agrees with the basic goals of Black Lives Matter for racial and social justice MUST, by your thinking, mean that they also agree with the tactics of the few who are lawless and violent, then the same standard clearly must apply to those who agree with the basic goals of the Trump Republican Party… if you agree, then you must therefore be supportive of the treasonous conduct of the group at the Capitol on January 6. I accept your mode of thinking on this.
You wrote:
“What kind of a “patriotic” organization would publish such a tweet?”
My response: What kind of “patriotic” organization would conduct themselves as these rioters at the Capitol on January 6?
You concluded:
“One that wishes to change our system to another one, Marxism and Socialism, where none have ever been successful on the earth, except making everyone who follows it, is a pauper? How’s Cuba doing today?”
My response:
One that wishes to change one system to another, Fascism and totalitarianism, an undemocratic system, where none have ever been successful on earth, except making everyone who follows it poor and victimized by political terrorism? How’s Russia doing today? Venezuela? Shall I continue the list?
You wrote:
“One that others should send their money (especially where less than 25% goes to the “cause”)?”
My response:
How much money have Trump supporters funneled directly into Trump’s own pockets, even as they were duped into making monthly donations they didn’t wish to make and in many cases couldn’t afford to make? Cash not going to the RNC or a Trump campaign, but directly into his personal accounts, because that’s where the money has gone since he lost the election in 2020.
You wrote:
“One that insults every veteran who served in the USA?”
My response:
Indeed, as Trump let Russia place bounties on the heads of America’s servicemen and women in the Middle East, and as Trump called them “losers and suckers” for sacrificing their lives to defend a democracy he sought to destroy.
You wrote:
“One who insults law enforcement?”
My response:
Nothing like attacking US Capitol Police officers and DC Metro Police officers with metal flag poles, dragging them down steps, beating them, spraying them with chemical irritants, gouging out their eyes, even leading to their deaths to “insult” law enforcement.
You wrote:
“Fly your BLM flag high, Mr. Sectary, while the rest of us look at them for what they have demonstrated themselves to be….terrorists who will use violence to accomplish a goal.”
My response:
Fly your TRUMP 2020 flag high, “Mr. Dick,” while the rest of us look at them for what they have demonstrated themselves to be… terrorists who will use violence to accomplish a goal.
Now please, just answer without the trash talk, Mr. “Dick.”
Mr. Sedary,
Answering questions by asking more questions, is a typical manner in which liberals answer anything nowadays. You certainly are no exception.
As usual, you bring up topics that have no bearing on the subject at hand, namely the BLM tweet which speaks for itself.
Instead, as is the typical response from those of your mindset, President Trump always seems to enter a discussion for no other reason other to dodge the subject at hand.
Got some news for you. Get over him. He left the White House 6 months ago and so far, things haven’t turned out so well since the new guy took over, especially in the violence department of many large cities who, by some coincidence, seem to be located in states that fall within the “blue” category. But of course, your response will likely consider the source of the problem, the former President of the United States. It’s all you have, and it’s getting very old, and wearing very thin on a daily basis while people are realizing that life isn’t as good as it once was a short time ago.
Oh well your “leaders” now calls the shots and so far, even they can realize that big problems loom for them soon. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t spend as much time on the “I Hate Trump” theme.
As I have said previously, your manner of rhetoric speaks for itself and the time has come to realize it is a waste of time for both us.
Let the voters decide the merits of BLM.
My bet is that you will come out on the short end when seeking the opinions of others next year, comrade.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.