This movement has lead to nothing but burned down stores, looted stores, and cop killings. If any other group behaved like this, the media would call them terrorists in a heartbeat. But what they do is okay just because a few cops shot a few black kids. I think not.
First, spot on Baren. Second, it's irrelevant what they BLM says...Look at their actions and the associated events the occur when BLM is involved. It's simple. Whenever I've observed 'whites' protesting things in D.C., for example, other than a few getting arrested for rowdy behavior...Nothing burns, nothing is looted, no one is killed, etc. And above all, the rationale for the protest makes common sense. Nor does anyone 'demand' someone is fired or relieved of their position...Only so it can be filled by their same race. Talk about some racist BS. They essentially use violence, intimidation, and bullying to take over whatever while hiding behind rants of racism, oppression, etc...All these easy to "claim" and very few, if any, produce supportive evidence. If BLM wants to be credible, they seriously need to revise their message, methods, tactics, and police themselves. Until, they're as terrorist as they come.
18 U.S.C. § 2331 defines "international terrorism" and "domestic terrorism" for purposes of Chapter 113B of the Code, entitled "Terrorism”:
"Domestic terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics:
◾Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
◾Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. Or kidnapping; and
◾Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.
BLM is any agenda is
1. Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law.
Just by closing down major intersections and roadway that interferes with first responders and ambulances services.
Injured Law enforcement officers
2. To intimidate or coerce a civilian population and there by influencing the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion.
Demanding without facts for local government officials to resign
Directly threaten LEO with death ... “Pigs in a blanket, fry ‘em like bacon!”.
If this was a KKK protest and they used the similar chant that wanted to kill Black Americans, the Black communities and leaders would be demanding that the LEO and government declare the KKK domestic terrorist in a heart beat.
They should not be allowed a double standard in America.
If something happens and the local government has identified the problem and using due process ... Then what is there to protest? BLM is just a politically hate driven agenda group that demands national attention.
"We further strongly urge our own black community to withdraw support from these demonstrations, and to unite locally in working peacefully for a better Birmingham. When rights are consistently denied, a cause should be pressed in the courts and in negotiations among local leaders, and not in the streets. We appeal to both our white and black citizenry to observe the principles of law and order and common sense
That wasn't a quote from some conservative candidate or pundit Speaking on Black Lives Matter, it was a message from several white clergymen to MLK Jr demanding he stop stirring unrest with his nonpeaceful protest against racial injustice. This argument happens all of the time, whenever the powerful feel overtly threatened by any kind of uprising against the status quo.
Yes their has been violence associated with the BLM movement, but all evidence points to the terrorism being the actions of violent individuals, not the actual organization. In any protest, some individuals will want to use violence, looting and killing to force their views on others. The actual leadership of BLM does not advocate violence, and so BLM is not a terrorist organization. Feel free to disagree.
Quote courtesy of Vox.Com, great article on BLM, I recommend you check it out.
Government definitions to identify, scrutinize, and ultimately punish serve the interests of the status quo. It more often than not, has little to do with right or wrong, just or unjust. By the very definition provided on the "yes" side, you could also make an argument that Martin Luther King Jr and other Civil Rights leaders were terrorists, that women suffragists were terrorists, that abolitionists were terrorists, and in fact, that this nation's founding fathers and the supporters of the American Revolution were in fact, terrorists. Labeling BLM as a terrorist group is just a convenient way to try and dismiss and silence the legitimate concerns and grievances they, as an organization, are trying to bring to light. The issues they want brought to the table are much more than police violence, that is only a small part; there is a much a bigger picture that most Americans, who are just fine with the status quo don't want to see and are content in ignorant bliss. As human beings, none of us are perfect and very few are willing to admit we are wrong, this human tendency permeates our society. We as groups are reluctant to recognize, admit, and rectify our collective injustices towards others, especially when the majority is oblivious to the plight of the few. Therefore it is not inconceivable that aggressive action taken by individuals is the result of frustration and repeated marginalization, in opposition to more peaceful means promoted by the group towards resolution; it is human nature. If it were common place to condemn an entire group for perceived actions of a few, then we would live in a much different world. A world where as a woman I could not vote, a world where as a minority, I'd be a slave and worked to death, a world were there would be no Declaration of Independence, no Bill of Rights, and world were we could not even have this discussion.