Where in that quote is there any insinuation that the stabber was also saying "black lives matter?"

In fact that quote doesn't say anything about stabbings, so where did you get that from?

Your post once more. Notice the comas.

You are blatantly lying in your post to make it look like the stabber was chanting black Lives matter. Because that is what you want to have had happen.

You're trying to walk it back. But luckily for all of us here, text doesn't change no matter your protestations. That is what you wrote. It was dishonest and disgusting.

The BBC article you linked has this quote:

So how does this put BLM in a bad light?

http://www.unilad.co.uk/news/police-...turns-violent/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZwH9sjY5yg

Maybe if you clicked my links, and got over your obsession with the mail, you might know where I got that information.

I'll try and make this simple for you, a gang of youths were chanting "black lives matter" whilst fighting with police, in the same incident a black youth stabbed (at least) another black youth. You should maybe do more reading, and less posting.

I've read plenty. Please post here, with quotes from any ****ing article you choose, somebody... anybody saying that the person who stabbed the police was chanting black Lives matter.


That is exactly what your post said, now you ****ing back it up

roddy: If you're talking to me, I clicked the link in your first post, and then quoted a sentence from it where the police claim that the incident "had nothing to do with the Black Lives Matter movement."

I take it you disagree with them, because of the reported chanting. We could have a conversation about that. I think the first question would be how do you decide whether or not an event reflects poorly on a social movement as a whole rather than on the individuals directly involved? What point were you trying to make by posting the link to begin with? What is your opinion of BLM, and how does this event either reflect or alter your opinion? How does an event like this relate to how you evaluate the validity of BLM claims about the criminal justice system?

You don't have to answer all of those, or even any of them, but it's not really clear to me what kind of conversation you want to have about this. Also I know almost nothing about BLM in the UK.

Cop and two others stabbed during Hyde Park water fight as youths chant ‘Black Lives Matter’

From the unilad article...seriously, how many ****ing times do I have to say this

No, my post wasn't aimed at you, I linked the BBC article after just reading the headline and not full article, just to give that idiot extra links. I really don't know much about BLM, I thought I read something about them inciting violence, if I got that wrong I'm willing to admit that. BTW what's been happening in America with black men and the police is a disgrace imo. Me posting that OP does not mean I side with the police. And I'm definitely not a daily mail reader, I'm just against violence on both sides, regardless of colour.

What annoyed me is that idiot thinking I'm some kind of KKK, daily mail reader, because I made a post about BLM

That is a photo of a tweet from The Sun.

Is this your paragon of magnificent journalism?

Read your post. You are saying that the stabber was shouting black lives matter. You have no evidence to this. What made you decide to post that?

with quotes from any ****ing article you choose, somebody... anybody saying that the person who stabbed the police was chanting black Lives matter

Are you going for most lame/boring poster of the year? You get my vote

All them daily mail articles are frying your brain

Not to take anything away from master, but if well named joins the fray that's a sign to close up shop.

p.s. does this actually fly on the average non2p2 forum? roddy drops a take like that and gets a bunch of hi-fives?

Yeah silly me for posting something like that. Next time I'll make sure I only post something that makes the white guy look bad, lesson learned.

And like I said I only made the OP, because I believed BLM incited violence

Some people who reject BLM's claims about the police also assert that they incite violence. On the one hand, it seems easy to dismiss those complaints as attempts to discredit the movement rather than addressing it's claims. On the other hand, violence has occurred around BLM protests on occasion, and I don't blame anyone for deploring that violence.

The question: is how do you evaluate responsibility for it? How do you weigh the good goals of a social movement against the seemingly inevitable fits of extremism that occur on the fringes? BLM isn't an individual, or even a single organization. Given the nature of the social problems BLM is protesting, it's not surprising that the movement creates tension and high emotions. The creation of tension and the raising of awareness caused by that increased tension is a primary goal of protest.

It may be reasonable to say, academically, that the tension created makes violence more likely, which I think is the only basis of anti-BLM claims about incitement, but that is true despite the non-violent intentions of the movement's main organizers. And that's the thing: no important or official leader of BLM is directly inciting violence or hatred of the police. In the cases of recent shootings of police, the shooters had explicitly rejected BLM calls for non-violence. They rejected the movement because they felt it wasn't radical enough.

To answer my own question about evaluating responsibility: I think it's reasonable to ask that social movement organizers consider the ways in which their framing of issues and the forms of protest they employ might spill into violence, and to try to mitigate against it. I think doing so is also useful from the standpoint of achieving their own goals, for the most part. It's reasonable to ask BLM to disavow violence. But I also think BLM activists have mostly done a reasonable job at this.

However, It's not reasonable to tar an entire movement because of the horrific actions of some very few, especially when the motive for doing so is mostly to avoid having to address the social problems being raised by the group. I'm not accusing you of doing this intentionally, but it seems based on your first and second posts that you're fallen into that trap, perhaps out of ignorance. Almost everyone on both sides of the issues deplores violence. It's ease to be misled by accusations that somehow BLM activists don't.

How did BLM incite violence?

He should eat a ban. We have a clear rule about posting unsupported garbage

You're out of your gourd. I clearly stated that the mail link was the first one to appear when typing a search for black lives matter hyde park into the search. You are employing a classic tactic of attempting to discredit me by claiming untrue things, oddly enough just as you did with the initial OP about the incident.

It's cowardly and transparent and everyone here sees it. Your take is laughable and offensive. Feel bad.

Oh... boo hoo. You poor little victim. Getting called out on your bull**** hurts your fee fees. Wahhhhhhhh.

Pathetic.

No no no, you're an arrogant little man who thinks he knows it, and when you realised I didn't read about this on the mail website it embarrassed you, and you've had your panties in a twist since, nit picking my wording etc, to worm your way out, "in front of class". I mean why would I randomly google BLM hyde park? Obviously I already know about the story.

Have you gone mental?

I agree with all this, including the part about my ignorance. I usually research what I talk about, and obviously should've done here.

What exactly am I cherry picking in the bold here?

You didn't put quotes around this, and then referenced a story on a website that says nothing like this, so how exactly is anyone supposed to imagine those are anything but your own words?

So in that post, you, in your own words, stated that youths in London stabbed a police officer while chanting Black Lives Matter.

Am I cherry picking, or literally stating exactly what you wrote in your post.

And remember, text doesn't change.