The Black Panthers are coming to the RNC convention.

[donnay]

Just to clarify the "Black Panthers" are not at all affiliated with the "New Black Panthers", the latter are contrived agent provocateurs and should be shunned at every opportunity

I definitely agree.

 

[oyarde]

Which ones? where from ( cities ) ? ( Black Panthers , not code Pink ) , by the way if you see any of those pink ones, ask them where they hell they have been the past four years ? are they still anti war or did the girlfriends just buy them a ticket to get the fuck rid of them for the weekend ??

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Excuse me if I misunderstood your post. But the way I took it was; you couldn't be bothered to listen to an interview hosted by Alex Jones. Alex's guest was Larry Pinkney, veteran Black Panther, who knows from experience how the government uses Cointelpro to continue their tyranny by dividing us in the process.

You are right that I can't be bothered to listen to AJ. However I have been utterly silent on that point since the start of all this in 2007 when I first heard of Alex Jones.

So your position (taking your earlier post) would be that my being silent about AJ is somehow dividing the movement. You would rather I be open and vocal about how much I think he is harming the liberty movement? You would rather I do like you and force people to pick sides and divide themselves around something (someone) so irrelevant?

Seems to me that you, sir, are the one dividing the movement by forcing people to take sides around some random blowhard that you happen to like. I will continue to seek common ground to unite the movement towards our common goal of restoring liberty, and you, sir, can keep calling out people based on their personal take on Alex Jones and splitting us up between "reals" and "fakes," and when it's all done and said we will discover if my "uniting" strategy or your "dividing" strategy has been more divisive to the movement.

As for your earlier post, especially when you consider that I have avoided any discussions on AJ like the plague for the last 5 years, are you really trying to say that anybody who doesn't love and adore Alex Jones is automatically an enemy of the liberty movement? Because that's what it looks like from here, and if so that would tell me that your priorities are not centered on liberty, but on some Bill O'Reilly wannabe out of Austin Texas.

You continue to focus on Alex Jones if you like, I will continue to focus on liberty and ignore him altogether. If you think I am the one being divisive, then I suggest you invest in a mirror, sir.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Just to clarify the "Black Panthers" are not at all affiliated with the "New Black Panthers", the latter are contrived agent provocateurs and should be shunned at every opportunity

The real Black Panthers completely disavow any associations with the group calling themselves the "New Black Panthers"
http://www.blackpanther.org/newsalert.htm

There Is No New Black Panther Party: An Open Letter From the Dr. Huey P. Newton Foundation

In response from numerous requests from individual's seeking information on the "New Black Panthers," the Dr. Huey P. Newton Foundation issues this public statement to correct the distorted record being made in the media by a small band of African Americans calling themselves the New Black Panthers. As guardian of the true history of the Black Panther Party, the Foundation, which includes former leading members of the Party, denounces this group's exploitation of the Party's name and history. Failing to find its own legitimacy in the black community, this band would graft the Party's name upon itself, which we condemn.

Firstly, the people in the New Black Panthers were never members of the Black Panther Party and have no legitimate claim on the Party's name. On the contrary, they would steal the names and pretend to walk in the footsteps of the Party's true heroes, such as Black Panther founder Huey P. Newton, George Jackson and Jonathan Jackson, Bunchy Carter, John Huggins, Fred Hampton, Mark Cark, and so many others who gave their very lives to the black liberation struggle under the Party's banner.

Secondly, they denigrate the Party's name by promoting concepts absolutely counter to the revolutionary principles on which the Party was founded. Their alleged media assault on the Ku Klux Klan serves to incite hatred rather than resolve it. The Party's fundamental principle, as best articulated by the great revolutionary Ernesto "Che" Guevara, was: "A true revolutionary is guided by great feelings of love." The Black Panthers were never a group of angry young militants full of fury toward the "white establishment." The Party operated on love for black people, not hatred of white people.

Furthermore, this group claims it would "teach" the black community about armed self-defense. The arrogance of this claim is overwhelmed by its reactionary nature. Blacks, especially in the South, have been armed in self-defense for a very long time; indeed, the spiritual parent of the Party itself was the Louisiana-based Deacons for Defense. However, the Party understood that the gun was not necessarily revolutionary, for the police and all other oppressive forces had guns. It was the ideology behind the gun that determined its nature.

Because the Party believed that only the masses of people would make the revolution, the Party never presumed itself to be above the people. The Party considered itself a servant of the people and taught by example. Given massive black hunger, the Party provided free breakfast for children and other free food programs. In the absence of decent medical facilities in the black community, the Party operated free medical clinics. In the face of police brutality, the Party stood up and resisted. Considering the overwhelming number of blacks facing trials and long prison terms, the Party developed free legal aids and bussing-to-prison programs.

The question the Foundation raises, then, is who are these people laying claim to the Party's history and name? Are they reactionary provocateurs, who would instigate activities counterproductive to the people's interests, causing mayhem and death? Are they entertainers, who would posture themselves before the media, and, according to numerous sources, with empty guns, to spin gold for themselves? Are they, given the history of their late-leader Khalid Muhammad, a group of anti-Semites like the very Ku Klux Klan they allegedly oppose? What is their agenda?

Conditions for blacks in America today are worse than when the Black Panther Party was formed in 1966. Blacks in the main continue to live in poverty; disproportionate percentages of blacks die from AIDS and cancer, as the black infant mortality rate continues to be double that of whites. There is a desperate need for liberation agenda. The Black Panther Party unarguably set the example, espousing principles and a history that certainly should be embraced by all those still struggling for freedom. Rather than appropriating the Party's name, however, groups that purport to represent African Americans ought to follow the Party's true historical example. In the absence of such commitment, the Foundation denounces the usurpation of the Black Panther Party name by this questionable band of self-appointed leaders.

For further reading on the Black Panther Party, please visit our website at www.blackpanther.org. Books by and about the Black Panthers can also be purchased online through this site. Suggested reading includes Revolutionary Suicide, To Die for the People, War Against the Panthers, This Side of Glory, and A Taste of Power.

 

[James Madison]

Wow, Black Panthers and now Code Pink are headed to the RNC, Tampa, FL...

Should be fun and interesting to watch... BRING YOUR VAGINA TO TAMPA

http://www.codepink4peace.org/article.php?id=6178

Why are two dudes in a Code Pink video?

 

[Muwahid]

You are right that I can't be bothered to listen to AJ. However I have been utterly silent on that point since the start of all this in 2007 when I first heard of Alex Jones.

So your position (taking your earlier post) would be that my being silent about AJ is somehow dividing the movement. You would rather I be open and vocal about how much I think he is harming the liberty movement? You would rather I do like you and force people to pick sides and divide themselves around something (someone) so irrelevant?

Seems to me that you, sir, are the one dividing the movement by forcing people to take sides around some random blowhard that you happen to like. I will continue to seek common ground to unite the movement towards our common goal of restoring liberty, and you, sir, can keep calling out people based on their personal take on Alex Jones and splitting us up between "reals" and "fakes," and when it's all done and said we will discover if my "uniting" strategy or your "dividing" strategy has been more divisive to the movement.

As for your earlier post, especially when you consider that I have avoided any discussions on AJ like the plague for the last 5 years, are you really trying to say that anybody who doesn't love and adore Alex Jones is automatically an enemy of the liberty movement? Because that's what it looks like from here, and if so that would tell me that your priorities are not centered on liberty, but on some Bill O'Reilly wannabe out of Austin Texas.

You continue to focus on Alex Jones if you like, I will continue to focus on liberty and ignore him altogether. If you think I am the one being divisive, then I suggest you invest in a mirror, sir.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

Just to clarify the "Black Panthers" are not at all affiliated with the "New Black Panthers", the latter are contrived agent provocateurs and should be shunned at every opportunity

This. The Black Panthers are some cool cats.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

I think I'm gonna grow a vagina so I can take it to the RNC.

 

[donnay]

You are right that I can't be bothered to listen to AJ. However I have been utterly silent on that point since the start of all this in 2007 when I first heard of Alex Jones.

So your position (taking your earlier post) would be that my being silent about AJ is somehow dividing the movement. You would rather I be open and vocal about how much I think he is harming the liberty movement? You would rather I do like you and force people to pick sides and divide themselves around something (someone) so irrelevant?

Seems to me that you, sir, are the one dividing the movement by forcing people to take sides around some random blowhard that you happen to like. I will continue to seek common ground to unite the movement towards our common goal of restoring liberty, and you, sir, can keep calling out people based on their personal take on Alex Jones and splitting us up between "reals" and "fakes," and when it's all done and said we will discover if my "uniting" strategy or your "dividing" strategy has been more divisive to the movement.

As for your earlier post, especially when you consider that I have avoided any discussions on AJ like the plague for the last 5 years, are you really trying to say that anybody who doesn't love and adore Alex Jones is automatically an enemy of the liberty movement? Because that's what it looks like from here, and if so that would tell me that your priorities are not centered on liberty, but on some Bill O'Reilly wannabe out of Austin Texas.

You continue to focus on Alex Jones if you like, I will continue to focus on liberty and ignore him altogether. If you think I am the one being divisive, then I suggest you invest in a mirror, sir.

Gunny,

I have been a member as long as you have. I have read your posts and knew where you stood--that's why I wrote what I wrote. No one is forcing you to do anything, so you need not be so melodramatic.

Alex Jones, whether you want to believe it or not, is on the side of Liberty. You, being a politician and all, would rather disassociate yourself with a loud bombastic man who yells in a bull horn that 9/11 was an inside job. Because heaven knows, you cannot be associated with anyone who uses his first amendment for unpopular speech. I understand that might not look good when trying to stealthily work within the GOP.

And, for the record, it's ma'am to you.

 

[oyarde]

This. The Black Panthers are some cool cats.

Well if you guys meet my buddy "Phil" , there, tell him Oyarde said I would like to have my Smith & Wesson back I lent him in 1981 , no questions asked , it was already , at least a three owner anyway , but one of the coolest things I had won in a poker game back in the day when I played cards , five card and all I had was an ace .....

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Gunny,

I have been a member as long as you have. I have read your posts and knew where you stood--that's why I wrote what I wrote. No one is forcing you to do anything, so you need not be so melodramatic.

Ahem. You directly accused me of dividing the liberty movement. I'm not the one being melodramatic.

Alex Jones, whether you want to believe it or not, is on the side of Liberty. You, being a politician and all, would rather disassociate yourself with a loud bombastic man who yells in a bull horn that 9/11 was an inside job. Because heaven knows, you cannot be associated with anyone who uses his first amendment for unpopular speech. I understand that might not look good when trying to stealthily work within the GOP.

I don't care if Alex Jones is on the side of liberty or if he is on the side of Big Macs with special sauce lettuce and cheese. Alex Jones has demonstrated far too often for me that AJ is about AJ period, and if it were to come down to a single decision to save America and cast AJ into obscurity or push America on towards destruction but make AJ a famous hero, AJ would choose the famous hero.

As far as I can see, AJ is in it for AJ alone.

Why are you doing this? I thought you didn't want to divide the liberty movement and yet here you are hacking away with a machete because you don't like the fact that i consider Alex Jones a selfish self centered self aggrandizing charlatan?

Just look at all this angst boiling up behind...your...action.

I'm not the one dividing the movement, Donnay, you are. You who would split us into the greater ones that like AJ and then the lesser ones that don't, that is by definition divisive.

I am sure that you still think that I am the one splitting and destroying the liberty movement. If I have learned anything in the last 5 years it's that people do not change their minds through debate. I mean, I do but apparently I am some kind of freak.

When you divide members of the liberty movement around whether they adore, like, don't care, dislike, or despise Alex Jones, then I'm sorry to say it is not me but you doing the dividing.

Me, I don't care about Alex Jones, at all. One way or the other. Your claim to knowledge that I hate him is a false one. I don't like him, I don't dislike him, I consider him self-absorbed and irrelevant. What I hate, is when people use AJ as a wedge to divide the liberty movement.

And yes, I am extremely annoyed that you accused me of dividing the liberty movement simply because I don't worship at the alter of Alex Jones. To me, that alone tells me more than I need to know about his role in the movement. Your line of posts here is the very thing that will push me from "don't care" to "don't like" as through your agency he is becoming an agent of division.

And, for the record, it's ma'am to you.

My apologies to the honorable gentlelady from New Hampshire.

 

[oyarde]

New Black Panthers are just a bunch of mis guided commies who make an ordinary boshevik look civilized, maybe ....

 

[donnay]

Ahem. You directly accused me of dividing the liberty movement. I'm not the one being melodramatic.

"And with all due respect, your own prejudice of Alex Jones is why so many of us stay divided." How did you get that I was directly accusing you of dividing the liberty movement in that statement?

My point was (and still is), what Larry Pinkney had to say was relevant to the discussion of this thread. It's NOT about Alex Jones. It's not about YOU, and it's not about ME. It's about understanding how the system operates. It's about how they (TPTB) can continue down the path of tyranny, as they have done, by keeping us divided. You know, united we stand, divided we fall?

In order for us to stop this tyranny we must be vocal NOW! We have a small window of opportunity still available. Everyone has their opinions, prejudices and bugaboos about someone or something. We have to learn to put our differences aside, and realize the common goal is to unite for liberty. That is all!

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.

~Martin Niemöller (1892-1984)

 

[GunnyFreedom]

"And with all due respect, your own prejudice of Alex Jones is why so many of us stay divided." How did you get that I was directly accusing you of dividing the liberty movement in that statement?

How is that not?

My point was (and still is), what Larry Pinkney had to say was relevant to the discussion of this thread. It's NOT about Alex Jones. It's not about YOU, and it's not about ME. It's about understanding how the system operates. It's about how they (TPTB) can continue down the path of tyranny, as they have done, by keeping us divided. You know, united we stand, divided we fall?

In order for us to stop this tyranny we must be vocal NOW! We have a small window of opportunity still available. Everyone has their opinions, prejudices and bugaboos about someone or something. We have to learn to put our differences aside, and realize the common goal is to unite for liberty. That is all!

So what you are telling me is that I am not being vocal enough in my opposition to the present encroaching tyranny?

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.

~Martin Niemöller (1892-1984)

I don't know how I can shout any louder than I already am. I'm being heard by a whole state. Unless you have $5 Million just laying around to help kick off a run for US Senate?

 

[donnay]

How is that not?

Do we really need a Supreme Court interpretation? Prejudices blind people. So many in this movement are blinded by prejudices. In this case, you disregarded and dismissed a message because you are prejudice of the messenger.

So what you are telling me is that I am not being vocal enough in my opposition to the present encroaching tyranny?

As I see it, you are still playing their game. The power is with the people and the ultimate power resides in each and every one of us. Individual Resistance is how we gain ground. Playing by their rules, gets us nowhere. We have played far too long, and to much of our liberty has been taken, playing by their rules.

I don't know how I can shout any louder than I already am. I'm being heard by a whole state. Unless you have $5 Million just laying around to help kick off a run for US Senate?

I answered this question above.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Do we really need a Supreme Court interpretation? Prejudices blind people. So many in this movement are blinded by prejudices. In this case, you disregarded and dismissed a message because you are prejudice of the messenger.

No, I asked you where the pertinent information was within in the video because I was not about to spend a whole hour listening to Alex Jones. You responded that the whole video was pertinent and I was helping to divide the liberty movement because I didn't like Alex Jones.

You still haven't told me where the pertinent information was in the video, and you are still treating me like I am hostile to liberty simply because I am not a fan of Alex Jones.

As I see it, you are still playing their game.

QED.

The power is with the people and the ultimate power resides in each and every one of us. Individual Resistance is how we gain ground. Playing by their rules, gets us nowhere. We have played far too long, and to much of our liberty has been taken, playing by their rules.

And the only way to be the correct flavor of rebel is to kiss Alex Joneses feet?

I answered this question above.

I must have missed it amongst all the "you are still playing their game" accusations.

 

[BuddyRey]

I just had a crazy idea (or at least, it will probably be considered a crazy idea), but with all of the false flags and economic morass being hinted at by secret sources, how likely is it that the target for these potential false flags might be the convention cities for the DNC and RNC?

Could there be something in the works for Charlotte and Tampa to get people all riled up about alleged international or homegrown threats again?

 

[donnay]

No, I asked you where the pertinent information was within in the video because I was not about to spend a whole hour listening to Alex Jones. You responded that the whole video was pertinent and I was helping to divide the liberty movement because I didn't like Alex Jones.

You still haven't told me where the pertinent information was in the video, and you are still treating me like I am hostile to liberty simply because I am not a fan of Alex Jones.

You spent more than an hour arguing with me--you could have listened to the interview. But, I digress

QED.

I am guessing QED is; quod erat demonstrandum? The left/right false paradigm

And the only way to be the correct flavor of rebel is to kiss Alex Joneses feet?

Maybe I wasn't clear, it's not about Alex Jones. It's about dismissing and discounting an empowering message simply because you have a prejudice against the messenger.

How about Samuel Adams? Would you dismiss his rabble-rousing?

“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!”

I still like the way the Anti-Federalist think.

 

[donnay]

The first thing that popped into my head was maybe some type of setup coming. Militant Black Panthers+armed citizens. Hmmmm. Could be a really interesting convention.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/03/us-usa-guns-tampa-idUSBRE8411E320120503

All of Tampa is going to be in full blown Martial Law. I pray nothing happens.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

You spent more than an hour arguing with me--you could have listened to the interview. But, I digress

And you could have just taken less than a minute and told me where the pertinent information was in the video instead of arbitrarily deciding that I don't adore Alex Jones and therefore I am an enemy of liberty, and from there launching into an argument trying to prove that I am either too stupid to know who the enemy is or complicit in it's evil.

I am guessing QED is; quod erat demonstrandum? The left/right false paradigm

Actually, latin is completely nonpartisan. I think the Catholics try to claim it, but they are not really a political party.

or are you going back to your canard about me still playing their game and trying to insinuate that I am a deceived little sheeple locked into the false left-right paradigm?

Maybe I wasn't clear, it's not about Alex Jones. It's about dismissing and discounting an empowering message simply because you have a prejudice against the messenger.

I don't consider Alex Jones empowering, I consider him enslaving. I remember the video where there was this crapton of Paulers and Tea Partiers coming together to defend gun rights, and AJ jumps in and starts shouting over everybody, insulting everybody, and destroyed the impending unity into chaos, dissolution, and enmity.

And again, look at all your accusations here. If anybody is dividing us, it's you. But you can't let it go, can you? Come hell or high water I will either be forced into submission and start pretending to like Alex Jones, or by god you will see me cast from the liberty movement as a bigoted prejudiced outsider.

Is it any wonder I am not enamored of Alex Jones? This is exactly the sort of thing his followers like to do. Come after US with a freaking machete while accusing US of being the divisive ones.

How about Samuel Adams? Would you dismiss his rabble-rousing?

“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!”

I positively adore Samuel Adams, but Samuel Adams did not accuse William Dawes of trying to destroy the American Revolution for simply failing to put Thomas Paine on a pedestal.

This whole exchange, look for yourself, you are being divisive, I am not. If that's what Alex Jones does to a person then thank God in heaven I never fell into that trap.

I used to not care about AJ one way or the other, but now I positively dislike him, thanks to our exchange here. If AJ makes people run around dividing up the liberty movement according to who does or does not worship him, and then accuse all those who do not worship him of being the ones dividing the movement, then clearly AJ is a much deeper evil than the mere selfish lout I took him for.

In the future, when people ask me why I don't like Alex Jones, I will point them to you and say "Ask Donnay, before she jumped all over me about him I didn't care about AJ one way or the other, but she convinced me that AJ is poisoning people's minds."

I still like the way the Anti-Federalist think.

Personally I prefer the Articles of Confederation, which were even more Anti Federalist than the Anti Federalists. I would not put AJ into the same category as Thomas Jefferson and Samuel Adams. Ron Paul maybe, certainly not AJ.

Thank you Donnay for showing me what manner of creature I am dealing with in AJ. Because of you I now dislike Alex Jones.