Black Lives Matter: 47 years ago today.

MisterBouncyBounce

MisterBouncyBounce

Well-Known Member
December 4, 1969, 47 years ago today Chicago police officers assassinated Fred Hampton and Mark Clark.

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals found that the FBI along with their lawyers "obstructed justice" by suppressing documents, that there was "serious evidence" to conclude the FBI and Cook County State's Attorney Edward Hanrahan and his police unit were part of and had a strong hand in a "conspiracy designed to subvert and eliminate the Black Panther Party and its members" by planning and carrying out the raid in which both panthers were killed, in order to suppress a "vital radical Black political organization."

The Seventh Circuit Court further concluded they also carried out a conspiracy to "cover up evidence" about the raid and "to conceal the true character of their pre-raid and raid activities," and to "harass the survivors of the raid" and to "frustrate any legal redress the survivors might seek."

This is the Justice Dept. recognizing federal and local agencies conspired to commit murder, suppress and destroy political dissent and then cover it up.

Our own courts, USA Courts say we do these things.

What is Castro guilty of again, concerning political dissent?

Describe it, then call it COINTELPRO.

It's almost 50 years and where are we?

Lets stop arguing about what we all know is true. a group of gangsters have been running our country too long.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
MisterBouncyBounce said:
December 4, 1969, 47 years ago today Chicago police officers assassinated Fred Hampton and Mark Clark.

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals found that the FBI along with their lawyers "obstructed justice" by suppressing documents, that there was "serious evidence" to conclude the FBI and Cook County State's Attorney Edward Hanrahan and his police unit were part of and had a strong hand in a "conspiracy designed to subvert and eliminate the Black Panther Party and its members" by planning and carrying out the raid in which both panthers were killed, in order to suppress a "vital radical Black political organization."

The Seventh Circuit Court further concluded they also carried out a conspiracy to "cover up evidence" about the raid and "to conceal the true character of their pre-raid and raid activities," and to "harass the survivors of the raid" and to "frustrate any legal redress the survivors might seek."

This is the Justice Dept. recognizing federal and local agencies conspired to commit murder, suppress and destroy political dissent and then cover it up.

Our own courts, USA Courts say we do these things.

What is Castro guilty of again, concerning political dissent?

Describe it, then call it COINTELPRO.

It's almost 50 years and where are we?

Lets stop arguing about what we all know is true. a group of gangsters have been running our country too long.
Click to expand...

All coercion based governments are run by gangsters, the means used, coercion, makes that self evident.

Albeit, some may be unaware of their thuggery.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
All coercion based governments are run by gangsters, the means used, coercion, makes that self evident.

Albeit, some may be unaware of their thuggery.
Click to expand...
coercion?

like using your gun to tell black people you won't serve them at your place of business?
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
coercion?

like using your gun to tell black people you won't serve them at your place of business?
Click to expand...

I would not deny service to a person based solely on their race. I think it's poor manners and poor business practice.

Of course, I'd never demand anybody on their own property be forced to associate with me either if they preferred not to.
I don't think I have the right to force anyone to serve me, like I own them. Pity you don't feel the same.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
I would not deny service to a person based solely on their race. I think it's poor manners and poor business practice.
Click to expand...
you also think it is polite and reasonable to hang a "no negroes allowed" sign though.

you mut have read a different dictionary than the rest of us.
 
MisterBouncyBounce

MisterBouncyBounce

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
I would not deny service to a person based solely on their race. I think it's poor manners and poor business practice.

Of course, I'd never demand anybody on their own property be forced to associate with me either if they preferred not to.
I don't think I have the right to force anyone to serve me, like I own them. Pity you don't feel the same.
Click to expand...
your simplistic thinking is irrelevant. if you have a restaurant that's open to the PUBLIC then IT IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.

if you want to discriminate then open a private restaurant, like all those country clubs.
 
BM9AGS

BM9AGS

Well-Known Member
Unclebaldrick said:
I, for one, wish more racist business owners would thus self identify. I once accidentally gave money to Papa Johns.
Click to expand...
You do understand there's people that are racist against whites also right? And Hindu and every race there is. Also discriminative against people of religions. Also fat people. Where's your cut off point. You're a human so you've discriminated before as all humans do. What's your cut off point and who are you to have a say?
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
BM9AGS said:
You do understand there's people that are racist against whites also right?
Click to expand...
i'm sorry to hear about how difficult life is for you white people.

if you need a shoulder to cry on, i am here for you. as a white person, i will understand your plight, pain, and suffering.
 
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
BM9AGS said:
You do understand there's people that are racist against whites also right? And Hindu and every race there is. Also discriminative against people of religions. Also fat people. Where's your cut off point. You're a human so you've discriminated before as all humans do. What's your cut off point and who are you to have a say?
Click to expand...
I am not sure what you are asking me.
 
BM9AGS

BM9AGS

Well-Known Member
Unclebaldrick said:
I am not sure what you are asking me.
Click to expand...
You want to label business owners based on color discrimination. Why only color? Why not all discrimination every type? What is your ethical break off for labeling these business owners? And why? Is it only whites that don't like blacks? Are you going to ask whe whites why they don't like blacks? What if they're daughter was raped by a black man do they get a free pass for hating? What about sexist men who rape women and believe women exist for male entertainment?
What about an all black business? All white business?

Discrimination is a bigger problem in the world. And we all do it. If you've ever hired someone you've discriminated.
 
Justin-case

Justin-case

Well-Known Member
BM9AGS said:
You want to label business owners based on color discrimination. Why only color? Why not all discrimination every type? What is your ethical break off for labeling these business owners? And why? Is it only whites that don't like blacks? Are you going to ask whe whites why they don't like blacks? What if they're daughter was raped by a black man do they get a free pass for hating? What about sexist men who rape women and believe women exist for male entertainment?
What about an all black business? All white business?

Discrimination is a bigger problem in the world. And we all do it. If you've ever hired someone you've discriminated.
Click to expand...

Bernie?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top