You got a cite for MLK saying any of that?
It was the reference that was made earlier. And it was made because the presence of contemporaneous race riots were CLEARLY not presented as part of the Civil Right Movement on the wiki page.
[/quote]
I’m talking about the fucking page.
[/quote]
That page also refers to the Black Power Movement and does not seem to include it in the Civil Rights Movement.
Yes, the wiki page you cite. The Wiki page you cite says:
“The movement was characterized by major campaigns of civil resistance. Between 1955 and 1968, acts of nonviolent protest and civil disobedience produced crisis situations and productive dialogues between activists and government authorities. Federal, state, and local governments, businesses, and communities often had to respond immediately to these situations, which highlighted the inequities faced by African Americans. Forms of protest and/or civil disobedience included boycotts such as the successful Montgomery Bus Boycott (1955–56) in Alabama; “sit-ins” such as the influential Greensboro sit-ins (1960) in North Carolina; marches, such as the Selma to Montgomery marches (1965) in Alabama; and a wide range of other nonviolent activities.”
This cite distinguishes the civil rights movement from the violence associated with the black power movement and Malcolm X.
In fact almost ALL cites seem to be able to easily separate the riots from the activities of MLK. Why do you seem to have so much trouble doing so. There are plenty of sites that lump it all together but plenty that distinguish the riots from the civil rights movement as well.
http://www.scholastic.com/teachers/article/civil-rights-movement-overview
This one doesn’t mention the riots at all.
Then my answer is, I’m not hijacking the thread.
I haven’t made the case that BLM is pertinent to this thread? Are you fucking serious?
I haven’t made the case that BLM’s legitimacy is undermined by violence? Are you fucking serious?
You and iiandyiii. Your objection to my portrayal of the Civil Rights movement as a peaceful movement is effectively an argument that BLM is violent but so was the civil rights movement so its OK.
Then lots of sites about the civil rights movement seem to be denying history. They seem to be able to distinguish between the peaceful civil rights movement versus the violence of the black power movement, Malcolm X and urban riots.
And I note that you are saying that the Civil Rights movement was violent and this is largely because you want to excuse BLM for their violence.
I’ll just answer this, since I’m too sick about the election to get into everything else.
We aren’t saying the civil rights movement, or BLM, is violent. We’re saying that they’re both largely peaceful protest movements marred by a very small amount of violence. We don’t call movements violent just because some very small portion of their activities devolves (or is sabotaged) into violence. Groups like Hamas are entirely different since their stated goal requires violence.
Yeah. Lets just drop it. I’m feeling ill about the election as well.
To what extent, if any, do you think that small amount of violence affected the election?
I don’t know. I don’t trust that I have a good handle on these things at this time. My predictions were miles away from what happened.
Why yes.
And from that same speech in September 1967 to the APA:
Bolding mine.
I’m not sure my assumptions of a functional western democracy were entirely valid. Please come back later.
we are all in flux right now. Take your time.
I think this is now the second time I’ve been proud to know you in this thread. In other threads, I’m generally proud to know you, but for this thread it’s unusual.
At least now we know that there is a tipping point for you re: bad cops. 
[Mistrial declared:
I was shocked by this, though this has been a week of shocks for me.
As a Cincinatian who was here for the 2001 riots, let me first say that I hope there is no violence associated with this verdict.
That said, I thought this was in the bag. I thought the video evidence was pretty compelling. If I had to hazard a guess, I would say taht one of the jurors was like our resident starving artist, and refused to convict in light of any evidence, but we will know more once the jurors start talking.
I hope that there is a retrial.
I’ve been noticing some pretty violent non-BLM riots recently. Fucking white people need to get their shit together.
It legitimizes many things that conservatives think about liberals and undermines the argument against Trump.
All liberals are complicit in the violence of the anti-Trump riots, which are the most violent riots in the history of mankind.
No, not all liberals.
If any liberals are involved, then it tars us all.
I for one, think that it is a perfectly good time to protest. To let the new Trump regime know that we are still here.
The riots and violence and breaking of things though, that needs to stop.
I mean, wait until he actually does something worth rioting over, anyway. He starts rounding up undesirables into box cars, yeah, that’s a pretty good time to riot, but we are a long ways from that. (I hope)
Don’t be a hypocrite. If BLM is responsible for rioters at BLM protests, then liberals are responsible for rioters at anti-Trump protests.
Stupid violent liberals.
No hypocrisy here. Liberals as a whole are not engaging in anti-trump protests (just like folks who are against police abuse and murder are not generally members of BLM). At most, you could extend my logic to say that the anti-trump movement is a violent movement. The anti-Trump folks are responsible for the anti-trump protests, not liberals generally any more than liberals generally are responsible for BLM. I don’t support the anti-trump protests and I am by most accounts a liberal. I don’t support BLM 9anymore) and I am by most accounts a liberal.
Did anyone incite violence at these anti-Trump protests? Was there violent language being used? Or did the violence actually develop organically without any prodding or encouragement from the organizers of the protest?
The anti-Trump movement has been delegitimized (if it ever had much legitimacy to begin with) by the violence, especially if there was inciteful language 9like “burn the bitch down” or if there was ciolent rhetoric being used during the march.
Yes but it doesn’t make liberalism a violent movement.
I think protesting at this time is pretty close to protesting democracy.
I agree. If he starts doing any of that then it probably goes beyond rioting. If he starts putting people in box cars then tyranny has come and the heller case may not seem so wrongly decided to some folks anymore.