Hate Group Urges Gangs To Kill Cops After Dallas Shootings

Lone Wolf

Granule said:
Groups like the New Black Panther Party are applauding the man who killed five Dallas police officers on Thursday, while another group is calling for more dead cops.

As people across the racial spectrum gathered Friday to mourn and condemn the deadliest attack on police in recent history, a group of fringe black extremist organizations found cause for celebration over the deaths of cops.

After sniper fire brought down five officers and wounded more at a Black Lives Matter march in Dallas Thursday evening, the group issued a swift statement denouncing violence. Their statements were echoed by the president, political leaders from both parties, and across social media. But, some members of black vigilante hate groups seized on Thursday’s sniper shooting in Dallas to issue a rallying cry for more violence and bloodshed against police.

“WE ARE CALLING ON THE GANGS ACROSS THE NATION! ATTACK EVERYTHING IN BLUE EXCEPT THE MAIL MAN, UNLESS HE IS CARRYING MORE THAN MAIL!,” Dr. Mauricelm-Lei Millere, an “advisor” to the New Black Panther Party and head of the African American Defense League posted on Facebook on Friday. The message was accompanied by an image of blue and red fists embracing each other and the hashtag #BloodsAndCripsUnite, in reference to the notorious street gangs, which are typically rivals.

http://www.vocativ.com/338505/hate-group-urges-gangs-to-kill-cops-after-dallas-shootings/


It is our sincerest hope & desire that law enforcement will refrain from further provocation of our beloved persons of African-American Descent.

-- The Left
Click to expand...

It's the lone wolf you and police should be worried about? Especially if these Barney Fife's in Baton Rouge and Minneapolis go free?
lone-wolf-terrorists1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Taft2016 said:
Yes, there are. However one must also factor in the fact that blacks also commit a higher percentage of the violent crimes.

Admittedly statistics don't always tell the whole story, but they're a helluva lot more reliable than a media-generated perception.
Click to expand...

Well, everything suggests that in the 'States, being 'black' at all amounts to a felony, and actually moving about while 'black', particularly driving, constitutes violence. I realise that this is an overstatement, but wonder by just how much.
 
iolo said:
Well, everything suggests that in the 'States, being 'black' at all amounts to a felony, and actually moving about while 'black', particularly driving, constitutes violence. I realise that this is an overstatement, but wonder by just how much.
Click to expand...

actually it isn't true that everything suggests it.......its usually only braindead liberal twits that suggest it......
 
Badlaama said:
Please don't sulley that word anymore. There's no "Liberal" in sharia except in it's intrusion and overbearance in the subjects lively matters,)
Click to expand...

Why do extremist weirdoes keep calling everyone 'Liberal'? As I frequently point out, the last Liberal in my family died in 1927. It is antique stuff!
 
iolo said:
Why do extremist weirdoes keep calling everyone 'Liberal'? As I frequently point out, the last Liberal in my family died in 1927. It is antique stuff!
Click to expand...
if you're going to post on an American board don't pretend we need to stick to Your-a-peon definitions......
 
iolo said:
Well, everything suggests that in the 'States, being 'black' at all amounts to a felony, and actually moving about while 'black', particularly driving, constitutes violence. I realise that this is an overstatement, but wonder by just how much.
Click to expand...

A good place to begin your journey of discovery on these matters would be to Google image search the President of the United States we elected 8 years ago, and take a long look at what he looks like. Then compare that image to every prime minister or royal in your nation's history to reach a determination regarding which country has progressed further in racial relations.

From there I would look to actual United States Federal Bureau of Investigations statistics which will show you interesting facts such as white males are killed in fatal police encounters at a higher rate than black males, and that black and hispanic police officers are more likely to employ deadly physical force against minority suspects than white officers.

Best of luck in your research.
 
Taft2016 said:
A good place to begin your journey of discovery on these matters would be to Google image search the President of the United States we elected 8 years ago, and take a long look at what he looks like. Then compare that image to every prime minister or royal in your nation's history to reach a determination regarding which country has progressed further in racial relations.

From there I would look to actual United States Federal Bureau of Investigations statistics which will show you interesting facts such as white males are killed in fatal police encounters at a higher rate than black males, and that black and hispanic police officers are more likely to employ deadly physical force against minority suspects than white officers.

Best of luck in your research.
Click to expand...

Good one lol. In terms of elected minority leadership, the US leads all other western nations. I never thought about that.

American exceptionalism.
 
There is simply no question that Black Lives Matters is a group dedicated the murder of police officers in the United States. Their long-standing organizational homages to convicted cop killer and fugitive Joanne Chesimard, protected complicitly by Obama and the Castros, clearly demonstrates this. As did many of the marchers in Dallas who mocked the Dallas police as they were being gunned down.

"'BlackLivesMatter—the activist group that demands a 'racial justice agenda' that includes constant criticism and activism against police—invokes the words of convicted cop killer Assata Shakur at 'all its events.'

At a recent event for female bloggers, BlackLivesMatter leaders had a crowd of thousands repeating lines from a letter written by Shakur that include an explicit reference to the Communist Manifesto.

The BlackLivesMatter group, which has met with President Obama and largely been given a free pass by the media, has skyrocketed to national prominence after its involvement with unrest and rioting in Ferguson, Baltimore, and a recent takeover of events the Netroots Nation conference for progressive Democrats in Phoenix, Arizona.'"

The BLM Movement dovetails with another long-term goal of American leftists; the federalization of local state and municipal aw enforcement. Al Sharpton let the agenda slip not long ago. Constitutional problems such as posse comitatus, federal enforcement of state laws (if state laws are to continue to exist), and housing of federal prisoners in state prisons (if state prisons are to continue to exist), will require massive civil unrest to bring about at the moment, but another decade or two of this constant national crisis mode may wear down resistance.

Another contributing factor is the spoiled brat factor. The millennials have been raised by parents and teachers who have abdicated all guidance in terms of personal behavior. By the time the millennials complete college the first person they ever encounter who dares tell them they cannot do something is usually a law enforcement representative intruding upon their "safe space."

This is all Alinksy stuff. We elected a president who embarked on his political career with two domestic terrorists; Bill Ayres and Bernardine Dohrne. It was predicted 8 years ago, and it's now beginning to bear fruit.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...o-marxist-cop-killer-at-every-event-it-holds/
 
Taft2016 said:
A good place to begin your journey of discovery on these matters would be to Google image search the President of the United States we elected 8 years ago, and take a long look at what he looks like. Then compare that image to every prime minister or royal in your nation's history to reach a determination regarding which country has progressed further in racial relations.

From there I would look to actual United States Federal Bureau of Investigations statistics which will show you interesting facts such as white males are killed in fatal police encounters at a higher rate than black males, and that black and hispanic police officers are more likely to employ deadly physical force against minority suspects than white officers.

Best of luck in your research.
Click to expand...

Well, the proportion of 'black' people here was minimal until after the war, and is still fairly small, but we had Indian MPs from very early on, whereas Mr Obama's 'black' father wasn't American, and his presidency seems to us to have been accompanied from the start by the most violent, rancid racism. That's a matter of opinion, obviously, but the reaction to such an obviously right-wing president from right-wingers is otherwise inexplicable, I think. I also think the key thing is that the degree of racism necessary to preserve slavery was hugely greater than that needed to preserve imperialism, and that the latter takes fewer generations to get over.
 
iolo said:
Well, the proportion of 'black' people here was minimal until after the war, and is still fairly small, but we had Indian MPs from very early on, whereas Mr Obama's 'black' father wasn't American, and his presidency seems to us to have been accompanied from the start by the most violent, rancid racism. That's a matter of opinion, obviously, but the reaction to such an obviously right-wing president from right-wingers is otherwise inexplicable, I think. I also think the key thing is that the degree of racism necessary to preserve slavery was hugely greater than that needed to preserve imperialism, and that the latter takes fewer generations to get over.
Click to expand...

The American left likes to portray legitimate political opposition to Obama as being racially motivated. The fact is, he is the most radically left-wing president we've ever had. There are countless problems with his positions to protest without even considering his race.

In his first year in office, there was a special election for a vacant US Senate seat in Massachusetts, known to be one of the 2 or 3 most left-wing states in the nation. IIRC, Massachusetts was even the first state to send an African American candidate to the US Senate in the post-Reconstruction era.

This special election would determine if Obama maintained his filibuster-proof majority in the US Senate. But even Massachusetts was given pause by the radical nature of Obama's first year in office, and for the first time decades elected a Republican to the US Senate, and removed Obama's filibuster-proof majority. So no, the majority of opposition to Obama's presidency was not predicated on racism.

his presidency seems to us to have been accompanied from the start by the most violent, rancid racism. That's a matter of opinion, obviously, but the reaction to such an obviously right-wing president from right-wingers is otherwise inexplicable
Click to expand...

Obama is not a "right-wing president" by any stretch of the imagination. Unless one is a Josef Stalin deeming Mussolini and Hitler to be the "right wing" of the extreme left.

I also think the key thing is that the degree of racism necessary to preserve slavery was hugely greater than that needed to preserve imperialism, and that the latter takes fewer generations to get over.
Click to expand...

That's demonstrably false. Our country divided into two and fought our most costly war to end slavery, while more than a century later your government was still slaughtering unarmed demonstrators to maintain the dying embers of its empire in six rural counties in Northern Ireland.
 
Taft2016 said:
That's demonstrably false. Our country divided into two and fought our most costly war to end slavery, while more than a century later your government was still slaughtering unarmed demonstrators to maintain the dying embers of its empire in six rural counties in Northern Ireland.
Click to expand...

Oh, and also to maintain its sectarian supremacy, every bit as pernicious as racism.

Perhaps if the day ever arrives when the UK elects an Irish Roman Catholic to the Prime Ministers's office, we will be able to discuss actual parity in progress against bias.
 
Last edited:
Taft2016 said:
The American left likes to portray legitimate political opposition to Obama as being racially motivated. The fact is, he is the most radically left-wing president we've ever had. There are countless problems with his positions to protest without even considering his race.

In his first year in office, there was a special election for a vacant US Senate seat in Massachusetts, known to be one of the 2 or 3 most left-wing states in the nation. IIRC, Massachusetts was even the first state to send an African American candidate to the US Senate in the post-Reconstruction era.

This special election would determine if Obama maintained his filibuster-proof majority in the US Senate. But even Massachusetts was given pause by the radical nature of Obama's first year in office, and for the first time decades elected a Republican to the US Senate, and removed Obama's filibuster-proof majority. So no, the majority of opposition to Obama's presidency was not predicated on racism.



Obama is not a "right-wing president" by any stretch of the imagination. Unless one is a Josef Stalin deeming Mussolini and Hitler to be the "right wing" of the extreme left.



That's demonstrably false. Our country divided into two and fought our most costly war to end slavery, while more than a century later your government was still slaughtering unarmed demonstrators to maintain the dying embers of its empire in six rural counties in Northern Ireland.
Click to expand...

I cannot imagine what anyone sees as 'left-wing' about Mr Obama, who is roughly equivalent, historically, to the actual Taft. You live in an unhistorical dream. Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini, as you know, all repressed working people and socialism, the political philosophy that represented their interests. Your country fought a war to end Secession, and abolished formal slavery as a tactical move in that process. It has never abolished racism, which is manifestly alive and well and stinking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top