Politics and religion

[EasTexOutlaw]

[Mighty Mouse]

That's funny.

[EasTexOutlaw]

[EasTexOutlaw]

[EasTexOutlaw]

[Mexican]

You must be in love with that family

[EasTexOutlaw]

No brother. It’s a funny 🥳

[EasTexOutlaw]

[Mexican]

I have zero respect for those fuckers, they are not a joke, they are thieves and vandals!!!!

[EasTexOutlaw]

BLM was founded by three women: Opal Tometi, Alicia Garza and Patrisse Cullors. Each is more extreme and deranged than the next. Opal is a student of liberation theology and studied under Stuart Hall. He’s an infamous radical Marxist who pushed for the downfall of western society. Opal has never shied from showing her affinity for Marxist teachings. She has even openly praised Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro, after he starved millions of his own people.

Alicia Garza is an openly radical Marxist. According to an interview she gave, she and the other two are “trained Marxists”. The whole reason for BLM is to push that Marxist radicalism, rather than do anything for black people in America. Only the abolition of western society will suffice.

Then we get to Patrisse Cullors. She’s a witch. That’s not a metaphor. She’s an actual praying-to-mother-earth-spirits witch. She regularly participates in rituals to try to call the spirits of the dead to fuel the movement. She has even claimed to get to know spirits of the dead long after their passing.

If only this was a weird joke!

Considering the founders, it shouldn’t surprise you that BLM is a radical movement. It’s not about black lives. It’s not even about police brutality. According to the organization charter, their goals are to instill Marxism and bring down western civilization. They want to annihilate the concept of the nuclear family, release all prisoners and abolish all police. None of which have anything to do with raising up black people.

The goal of BLM is the destruction of America.

So, we have a radical movement, founded by radical witches. They have publicly announced their goals to destroy America. You might think that would make major companies shy away from support. Quite the opposite is true. Here’s a shortlist of major donations:

• Cisco–$5 million
• Microsoft–$1.5 million
• Amazon–a whopping $10 million
• Gatorade–$500,000
• DoorDash–$1,000,000
• Intel–$1,000,000
• Airbnb–$500,000

[EasTexOutlaw]

[Tripps]

[Tripps]

Luckily he was still able to vote.

[Tripps]

[EasTexOutlaw]

We need a “partial like” button

[EasTexOutlaw]

[Speedy]

We ask the police to do too much. Especially dealing with those with a mental illness. Society would be better served by police deferring to trained social workers when possible. The very act of showing up with overwhelming force escalates tensions rather than promote safety for all. I am for police services, but the "us" versus "them" attitude does a disservice to society. Police officers should not have absolute power to enforce their commands. Police are meant to be peace officers, not juries, judges and executioners. When overwhelming force is used for situations where it is possible to de-escalate and follow up later, the risk to officers, the individual, and the general public is increased. The "brotherhood" may foster attitudes of authority and control beyond what may is needed to serve us.

It is unfortunate that some people think defunding the police is a good idea. What I think is needed is a re-assessment of our expectations of a peace force, how those institutions are structured and controlled, who we recruit to serve us, and how some functions may be better performed by other institutions.
.

[1olbull]

We ask the police to do too much. (Correctamundo!) Especially dealing with those with a mental illness. Society would be better served by police deferring to trained social workers when possible. (Hell yeah, send social workers to handle the section 8 calls. Surely they are best equipped, trained and willing to deal with the unexpected behavior, aka danger.) The very act of showing up with overwhelming force escalates tensions rather than promote safety for all. I am for police services, but the "us" versus "them" attitude does a disservice to society. (Most all police are cordial when greeting citizens. The "us v them" comes not from police, but rather from dirt-bags they frequently are confronted with. Seen any TV news footage lately?) Police officers should not have absolute power to enforce their commands. Police are meant to be peace officers, not juries, judges and executioners. When overwhelming force is used for situations where it is possible to de-escalate and follow up later, the risk to officers, the individual, and the general public is increased. (This is misinformed and incorrect. Police use that force necessary to overcome the force threarening them. You resist a lawfull arrest and the escalation will begin. Understand police need only probable cause to arrest. An arrest does not equate to guilt. Prosecuting attorneys determine the charges filed and juries determine guilt, not the police.) The "brotherhood" may foster attitudes of authority and control beyond what may is needed to serve us. (Police serve law abiding citizens - not criminals. Police treat you as you treat them. Once you resist an arrest, you have committed a crime. If the arrest was unlawful, get a mouth piece and enrich him/her and yourself.)

It is unfortunate that some people think defunding the police is a good idea. What I think is needed is a re-assessment of our expectations of a peace force, how those institutions are structured and controlled, who we recruit to serve us, and how some functions may be better performed by other institutions. (Do not worry about defunding, police officers are rapidly leaving. Soon a dangerous shortage will see even more rise in crime. Have you noticed gun sales? Best prepare yourself, because anarchy and violence is coming to a place near you!)
.

Speedy, Speedy, Speedy.
I love your discourse, but sone of what you have stated has drawn me into responding. 😃
For clarity, my comments are inserted into your text.