exactly.....he has nothing to lose.....except maybe a corporate position or board seat ?
Obama Critical of Black Lives Matter Movement
- Thread starter TheyCallMeBe
- Start date
exactly.....he has nothing to lose.....except maybe a corporate position or board seat ?
I think both Obama and Black Lives Matters are dead wrong, no matter how well intentioned either may be! They're both institutionally-centric , which is their fatal flaw. They are both merely debating about the method of Black integration into further institutional reliance. Should we work within that institution for "incremental" rights or try to shame it into granting us basic human rights? The problem is that the institution that Obama wants us to work with and the institution that Black Lives Matter is appealing too is the same institution that Black Community can NEVER thrive within: that institution is called the system of White Supremacy--which is White ran and largely dominated by White men.
According to this Washington Post article (link below) from 10/8/2014, 90% of all elected officials in America are White and 65% of them are White males. That's the abyss both Obama and Black Lives Matter are leading Black people further into. Are you fucking kidding me? We've been here for 4 fucking centuries with this same shit! When are we going to realize that we MUST divest from White Supremacy--block by block, street by street, town by town, city by city, and state by state; and build a Black Economic base from which we can wield real power, not beg and bargain for our freedom.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...all-american-elected-officials-are-white-men/
Black Lives Matter does at least have an organizational apparatus within the Black Community, while Obama is completely gone. He is a true believer in America. He cannot be saved. However, Black Lives Matter must be radicalized, overtaken, and re-oriented away from being a P.R. campaign for the Gay & White Progressive agenda into a real nation-wide Black Power political organization. That means no White money, no White assistance, and no White influence and no intersectional mixed messaging. Real Black Empowerment through Black Economic Empowerment--period! All we won't from non-Blacks is for them to consume our goods and then go get the fuck out our face---period!
But that's just one side of it, the Black Community must be de-pacified and embrace they fact that we must also have Black Militant organizations too. We have been taught a BIG LIE that non-violent struggle is the only way to fight White Supremacy--wrong. Yes, Martin Luther King was influenced by Ghandi's non-violent movement against British White Supremacy, but India also had militant organization that were fucking the British up too, this gave Indian Liberation greater political leverage. The White Supremacists don't want you to know that. They love enslaving non-Black people through military power and then telling them to ask for their freedom peacefully. That's bullshit! And, truth be told, Martin Luther King's SCLC and other non-violent Black organizations needed Malcolm X and the threat of other Black militants for political leverage--as we still do now. We're at war people. And, war is politics just as much as diplomacy is too. They work hand in hand.
We already have Black Militants organization but White Supremacy calls them "steet gangs" and has used counterintelligence tactics (like the "War on Drugs") to turn us against them and re-orient them away from the pro-Black Community "Black Power!" agenda to the "Get rich or die tryin" agenda (which is no agenda)--and 99.9% of the time they either go to jail or "die tryin."
In closing, I say fuck any so called Black person or so called Black organization that's talking about Black People integrating into or petitioning White Supremacy for our freedom-- knowingly or unknowingly, they're agents and they're leading us toward ultimate destruction. We've tried to be good Americans for 4 centuries--partly even when there was no America--and White Supremacy still has no fucks to give, not that we should even want them too. We must end this abusive relationship with White Supremacy before it kills us!
According to this Washington Post article (link below) from 10/8/2014, 90% of all elected officials in America are White and 65% of them are White males. That's the abyss both Obama and Black Lives Matter are leading Black people further into. Are you fucking kidding me? We've been here for 4 fucking centuries with this same shit! When are we going to realize that we MUST divest from White Supremacy--block by block, street by street, town by town, city by city, and state by state; and build a Black Economic base from which we can wield real power, not beg and bargain for our freedom.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...all-american-elected-officials-are-white-men/
Black Lives Matter does at least have an organizational apparatus within the Black Community, while Obama is completely gone. He is a true believer in America. He cannot be saved. However, Black Lives Matter must be radicalized, overtaken, and re-oriented away from being a P.R. campaign for the Gay & White Progressive agenda into a real nation-wide Black Power political organization. That means no White money, no White assistance, and no White influence and no intersectional mixed messaging. Real Black Empowerment through Black Economic Empowerment--period! All we won't from non-Blacks is for them to consume our goods and then go get the fuck out our face---period!
But that's just one side of it, the Black Community must be de-pacified and embrace they fact that we must also have Black Militant organizations too. We have been taught a BIG LIE that non-violent struggle is the only way to fight White Supremacy--wrong. Yes, Martin Luther King was influenced by Ghandi's non-violent movement against British White Supremacy, but India also had militant organization that were fucking the British up too, this gave Indian Liberation greater political leverage. The White Supremacists don't want you to know that. They love enslaving non-Black people through military power and then telling them to ask for their freedom peacefully. That's bullshit! And, truth be told, Martin Luther King's SCLC and other non-violent Black organizations needed Malcolm X and the threat of other Black militants for political leverage--as we still do now. We're at war people. And, war is politics just as much as diplomacy is too. They work hand in hand.
We already have Black Militants organization but White Supremacy calls them "steet gangs" and has used counterintelligence tactics (like the "War on Drugs") to turn us against them and re-orient them away from the pro-Black Community "Black Power!" agenda to the "Get rich or die tryin" agenda (which is no agenda)--and 99.9% of the time they either go to jail or "die tryin."
In closing, I say fuck any so called Black person or so called Black organization that's talking about Black People integrating into or petitioning White Supremacy for our freedom-- knowingly or unknowingly, they're agents and they're leading us toward ultimate destruction. We've tried to be good Americans for 4 centuries--partly even when there was no America--and White Supremacy still has no fucks to give, not that we should even want them too. We must end this abusive relationship with White Supremacy before it kills us!
And you can't build something without getting dirty too.
I think both Obama and Black Lives Matters are dead wrong, no matter how well intentioned either may be! They're both institutionally-centric , which is their fatal flaw. They are both merely debating about the method of Black integration into further institutional reliance. Should we work within that institution for "incremental" rights or try to shame it into granting us basic human rights? The problem is that the institution that Obama wants us to work with and the institution that Black Lives Matter is appealing too is the same institution that Black Community can NEVER thrive within: that institution is called the system of White Supremacy--which is White ran and largely dominated by White men.
According to this Washington Post article (link below) from 10/8/2014, 90% of all elected officials in America are White and 65% of them are White males. That's the abyss both Obama and Black Lives Matter are leading Black people further into. Are you fucking kidding me? We've been here for 4 fucking centuries with this same shit! When are we going to realize that we MUST divest from White Supremacy--block by block, street by street, town by town, city by city, and state by state; and build a Black Economic base from which we can wield real power, not beg and bargain for our freedom.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...all-american-elected-officials-are-white-men/
Black Lives Matter does at least have an organizational apparatus within the Black Community, while Obama is completely gone. He is a true believer in America. He cannot be saved. However, Black Lives Matter must be radicalized, overtaken, and re-oriented away from being a P.R. campaign for the Gay & White Progressive agenda into a real nation-wide Black Power political organization. That means no White money, no White assistance, and no White influence and no intersectional mixed messaging. Real Black Empowerment through Black Economic Empowerment--period! All we won't from non-Blacks is for them to consume our goods and then go get the fuck out our face---period!
But that's just one side of it, the Black Community must be de-pacified and embrace they fact that we must also have Black Militant organizations too. We have been taught a BIG LIE that non-violent struggle is the only way to fight White Supremacy--wrong. Yes, Martin Luther King was influenced by Ghandi's non-violent movement against British White Supremacy, but India also had militant organization that were fucking the British up too, this gave Indian Liberation greater political leverage. The White Supremacists don't want you to know that. They love enslaving non-Black people through military power and then telling them to ask for their freedom peacefully. That's bullshit! And, truth be told, Martin Luther King's SCLC and other non-violent Black organizations needed Malcolm X and the threat of other Black militants for political leverage--as we still do now. We're at war people. And, war is politics just as much as diplomacy is too. They work hand in hand.
We already have Black Militants organization but White Supremacy calls them "steet gangs" and has used counterintelligence tactics (like the "War on Drugs") to turn us against them and re-orient them away from the pro-Black Community "Black Power!" agenda to the "Get rich or die tryin" agenda (which is no agenda)--and 99.9% of the time they either go to jail or "die tryin."
In closing, I say fuck any so called Black person or so called Black organization that's talking about Black People integrating into or petitioning White Supremacy for our freedom-- knowingly or unknowingly, they're agents and they're leading us toward ultimate destruction. We've tried to be good Americans for 4 centuries--partly even when there was no America--and White Supremacy still has no fucks to give, not that we should even want them too. We must end this abusive relationship with White Supremacy before it kills us!
I understand this sentiment, but what you are advocating means that we still have white people making laws and passing judgements that affect black and other citizens who are poc.
Under President Obama fewer white men have been appointed as federal judges than any other president.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ing-federal-judges-has-plummeted-under-obama/
I'm also very happy with his appointment of women to the Supreme court. They were on it when it came to the discussion of abortion and reproductive rights. The men on the court blindly accepted what was told to them, the women pushed back and knew what questions to ask. ( There was a better summary somewhere but here is a link it has the transcripts https://www.yahoo.com/news/best-moments-scotus-abortion-case-164800700.html)
You have to have people who look like you, experience what you do, and who have similar self interests (for themselves, their families, their communities etc) in positions of power. Otherwise you are always in a position of begging someone else to help you, or having to educate someone else on what your needs are (as far as our legal/political system goes). I'm all for supporting black business, and addressing community needs within the community, but there are outside forces that affect us no matter how well that has been done in the past. Black Wall Street, Tulsa etc were thriving self-sufficient black communities, who had no power or legal recourse when outside forces came in and destroyed all that they worked for and accomplished. I don't believe everything is either/or. It's both/and plus more when it comes to solving issues and thriving. We can self mobilize, strive for self reliance, and infiltrate all at the same time.
I agree.
He actually did call them to a meeting to discuss. One of the chicks fronted on him and said she wasn't coming as a political statement.
might not need a green book but traveling unhampered is questionable
Dude trying to compare traveling the country today vs. Back in the day like our grandparents and parents did does a disservice to what they went through.
Yeah there are racist spot and killer cops, but we still relatively travel freely compared to them.
Negro please, do you even know what coon means? It literally means raccoon and that's what white ppl use to hunt us like fool. Just like we were literally alligator bait if you'd do your research. I don't even care about BLM all that much because I think it's disjointed in its approach and too involved with the homosexual movement who have appropriated any gains made into their own agenda. BUT and its a big but Obamas reaction (out of the country of all places) finally seals the deal on his presidency and lack of support for his "own" community. Can you name me any social movement that brought light to the situation and then comprised w the gov? Hell the American Revolution itself was an overthrow of an unjust gov and system they didn't meet with the Brits and compromise they went to war. Furthermore Obama has proved who his allegiances are to the LBGT movement. Singing laws for them and he's never critical of what they are trying to do. Yet when police keep murdering our brothers and sisters he's silent. He's lying to you all wanting us to believe the gov will actually listen to us and work w us. It's no secret we are getting murdered why do we have to draw attention and alert the gov when anybody can see what's going on. He's a product of the system and is only critical on blacks thru his whole presidency meanwhile being a pawn for LBGT, hence he a coon.
dudes like you use the 'coon' word without even knowing what it means either historically or literally. the fact that you use it to describe president Obama let's me further know that you don't know what you're talking about. the dude wasn't critical of blm. one of the first things he articulate was all about giving them props. but then he kicked this; “Once you’ve highlighted an issue and brought it to people’s attention and shined a spotlight, and elected officials or people who are in a position to start bringing about change are ready to sit down with you, then you can’t just keep on yelling at them,” Mr. Obama said.
“And you can’t refuse to meet because that might compromise the purity of your position,” he continued. “The value of social movements and activism is to get you at the table, get you in the room, and then to start trying to figure out how is this problem going to be solved.”
that sheit was on point. after you brought attention to a problem then it's up to everybody to address it and not just the ones u think are 'pure'. and this whole thing with showing up to public spots and screaming at politicians will get u a cool hashtag on twitter but does zero when it comes to actually accomplishing anything tangible. first you gain attention, then you gain influence through that attention, then you meet with officials who have the power to change what you want changed. and if they're not receptive? use your newfound influence to rally a lot of others to your cause and funnel that energy to back someone you know and trust and run them opposite of that bullsheit sitting politician who you don't like. then do what you feel needs doing in the community. cause after a certain point all that screaming in public begins to sound like whining. and you stop being interesting or influential.
that's what fuked up with occupy movement a few years back. they had local politicians scrambling like 'what do you need me to do? I want to be down' but instead of using their newfound fame and exposure to actually get some things done long term they were like 'fuk u! you're part of the problem. we want a revolution. down with the 1%'. that sheit looks good on a t-shirt but what tha fuk did it accomplish long term? nuthin. younger dudes who want to be activists gotta look at dudes like Julian Bond and Stokely Carmichael back in the 1960s when they were young men coming up in their movements. they had similar shine like these blm and occupy dudes do today, but they used that media spotlight to align themselves with local and national figures to actually get things done first in their communities then later on a more national level. all those programs that so helped black and brown communities back in the late 60s and through the late 70s didn't happen by chance. and if it wasn't for that beatch azz Ronald regan cutting funding to those programs to pay for his bullsheit tax cuts for the wealthy and wasteful arms race, those tax dollars would still be funneled into our communities all over the nation
I don't want to hear him all vocal and shit once he get out of office now either
Killer cops have been a constant and were even more out of control back in the days. What people had to go through back in the 1950s is insane compared to now.
Evidently, it was not forgotten by the President - considering he mentioned it directly.
Who else in Black Lives Matter refused a White House invitation? How do you know that her goal was getting attention? Do you know her personally? Did you click the link and read her complete comments on why she didn't go?
Please answer all four of those questions.
Think.
If she did not publish her reasons she chose not to attend, the administration, media etc would have come up with their own reasons. In all likelihood, it would have been something completely counter to what her actual reasons were.
You are conveniently ignoring the itinerary for that day.
Each was given 90 seconds to speak.
24 minutes for 16 people to give Loretta Lynch approved scripted comments, and then a speech about Black History month by the President.
No discussion. No panel. No planning and implementing. No laying anything out in detail on ANYONE'S part.
.
Negro(?) can you read AT ALL? Have you ever heard of Google?
Exactly. She never said she was against discussion. But that's not what was planned that day. It's what was publicly sold as.
Exactly.
Fuck outta here with that. You should be ashamed of yourself for not doing even the smallest amount of research into what they do.
Correct.
First of all, what you refer to as "screaming on politicians" has resulted in those presidential candidates being forced to have to address the issue of an epidemic of police murders of unarmed Black people and the non-prosecution of the assailants. This is the first time I can remember ever witnessing such a thing.
I find it troubling that you continue to reduce BLM to "screaming" and "yelling at racists 'not to' (sic)."
The misfortune in all this is, most people don't really have easy and immediate access to information on what all BLM is doing, so it's easy to make assumptions based on what you see on the news. You almost really need to be in the organization to be in the know. Part of me feels like Black Lives Matter, the organization could benefit from having their own newspaper or regular newsletter geared towards letting non-members know specifically what is going on across the country towards reform, as regards BLM. Another part of me resists that, as it could potentially put an even bigger target on their backs.
CNN, MSNBC, major newspapers are not reliable nor trustworthy in reporting on Black issues - particularly those that seek to upset the status quo.
Black Lives Matter are definitely not agenda-less. Your television and local news station is not going to show you meetings with city officials, police board hearings, community summits, networking with lawyers, legal experts and academia, political education, old guard civil rights leaders coalescing with BLM and associated groups, etc. These things are going on not just in Chicago but all around the U.S.
On point. However, I am unaware of any meeting President Obama has had at the White House with BLM leaders.
I can read. She just said they won't get involved. Why google what's already there?
You are making a lot of assumptions and generalizations.
Black Lives Matter has met with people in power many times. How many documented cases can you recount of Black Lives Matter leaders not accepting invitations to the White House? I count one.
Your information in the second paragraph about who BLM is, IS somewhat correct. There is an organization, Black Lives Matter. The term, "Black Lives Matter" is also something media uses as a catch-all label towards any Black individuals participating in activism and/or protest who seek justice for unarmed victims of police murder. We're in agreement on that. However, that correct assessment you made - doesn't match with this: "I was beyond frustrated with them crashing events and then refusing to meet with people who are in a position to help them get their agenda passed."
The conflict is that your statement assumes that those individuals crashing events are the same ones that have been invited to the White House. To date, to my knowledge there has been one Black Lives Matter leader who refused to attend a so-called meeting. Her reasons are documented in this thread - as is the itinerary for that day. Barack Obama's intent was not to help, but to give the appearance that he was helping.
Black Lives Matter has and is organizing locally to get politicians out who are detrimental to the lives of Black people.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/03/chicago-primary-black-lives-matter
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35817890
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...lives-matter-won-on-tuesday-prosecutors-lost/
Speaking of hospitals, the protest movement in Chicago was able to secure a much needed trauma center on Chicago's South Side
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...-south-side-trauma-center-20150910-story.html
Who? And involved with what?
I think it is you who needs to brush up on your reading skills my friend. It's right there.
Honestly I wish he would've done more to make sure black lives matter became a dominant political force.
He could do it. He should've done it.
Every other president that's ever been in office served their self interest. Every one. No president was being presidential and tried to be impartial and all of this other stuff that they want to try and say his excuse for being neutral on issues he should have had a strong stance on.
we are the issue he should have had a strong stance on.
period.
the excuse of "well we didn't have everything together perfectly to present the proposal" and then the thought that if we did laws would magically change is just not true.
other groups get shit done because people like them (minority or gay) are in a position of power to lobby for them and take care of their folks.
we had the highest person in office .
He could do it. He should've done it.
Every other president that's ever been in office served their self interest. Every one. No president was being presidential and tried to be impartial and all of this other stuff that they want to try and say his excuse for being neutral on issues he should have had a strong stance on.
we are the issue he should have had a strong stance on.
period.
the excuse of "well we didn't have everything together perfectly to present the proposal" and then the thought that if we did laws would magically change is just not true.
other groups get shit done because people like them (minority or gay) are in a position of power to lobby for them and take care of their folks.
we had the highest person in office .
I never said the people who crashed events were the same people who declined the WH invitation, however it is common theme amongst many. Marissa, the one who crashed the Bernie Sanders event with another activist, has publicly said she does not believe activists should meet with politicians, and she was whom I had in mind when I made my remarks. My apologies for not being clear that I was speaking in general, and not specific to the WH invitation.
Edit: I also did a search to see if this was posted, I saw the twibprime post about Marissa's response to Killer Mike, but this was the original interview she did in August, right after their action. This starts out reviewing the incident and the where Elon and Imani play the recording, and then Marissa joins.
To be clear, I have no problem with the action that she took. She seems really cool, I follow her on twitter and I'm in a facebook group she participates in. However, if you listen to her explain what really happened, she was groped and everything, to go thorough all that and not seek to meet with people who can be a driving force behind their agenda is a huge disconnect for me.
Last edited:
where was the meeting held that the Chicago chapter lady refused to attend ? I thought it was at the WH.....she refused but other "leaders" did attend
That meeting was held at the White House. However as we know, she did not attend that gathering.
What I was saying is, out of the remaining invitees who did attend, none of them were leaders within Black Lives Matter. As far as I know, there have been no other Black Lives Matter leaders who have met at the White House with the President on other occasions either.
PERIOD
you idiot. no, historically that's NOT what the term meant in the black community. when black folks would label another black person a 'coon', it was a slang term that meant 'cooning' as in blackface, as in acting a fool in front of white people in order to curry favor with them. the shucking and jiving and shuffling of feet and showing nuthin but teeth hoping to grab a morsel of acceptance from whites.
and if a dumb fuk like u can't even find out the meaning of a passe slang term then NOBODY should fool themselves into thinking u have the mental fortitude to do something more serious by actually doing any research into what president Obama does or more importantly, WHY he does it. so git tha fuk out of this post cause it's over your head
BLM got more recognition than separation. Until blacks separate their will be no truth in power. They love to see us devoted to adding on to their empire and their reality. It is like the big picture in Jonestown. All the followers were whores of Jim Jones and his reality. Even talking about separation was not to be tolerated.
yes there were........she was the only invited leader of black lives matter that did not attend.
Flanked by liberal legislators, and Black Lives Matter founders Brittany Packnett and DeRay Mckesson, President Obama told White House meeting of young militant leftists that they “are much better organizers” than he was at their age, and that he is “confident that they are going to take America to new heights.”
Those two people attended but that quote is totally incorrect. Firstly DeRay and Brittany are not founders of Black Lives Matter. They are with Campaign Zero. Neither has ever been a member of Black Lives Matter.
C'mon ballscout. A quote from Breitbart? Really, my dude?
The phrase "black lives matter" did not take off until the murder of Mike Brown. It went viral during the time right after he died. The BLM organization had been created prior to that. In a way, Mike's death brought attention to them because no one had heard about them before that. (Some (white) people try to discredit and dismiss BLM, because they say it created on a lie that Mike Brown was innocent and they maintain he was a thug/criminal )
DeRay and Brittany (along with several others) became highly visible protesting there in Ferguson, and became known to be associated with it because very few people had heard the phrase before then, but they are not apart of the official organization. They just get lumped in under the BLM umbrella because they are also doing work against police brutality. Also many magazines and news articles list him as a leader, as they did any black person who organized and spoke out, but he will tell you he is not affiliated with them as an official member. DeRay is also known to go to different cities to bring visibility to brutality cases. (Some call him a "professional protester" as a slur. ) IMO though, he has been more effective in many ways, at least when it comes to national attention, and getting responses and meetings with influential candidates. He also has a very sharp mind and can hold his own well during TV interviews and the like. He mentions something on his twitter timeline, and people will reach out to him for a meeting or to set the record straight/apologize whatever. He is also running for mayor of Baltimore right now, following the tea party example of trying to get our people in place so we can effect change more effectively.
Re: the WH meeting, if I recall properly DeRay and the others who attended said at the time it was a good meeting, not something just for show or a photo op to pay lip service to their cause.
I'm aware of all that. I'm also aware that mainstream media tries to hold DeRay up and market him as the "face of Black Lives Matter", when he is definitely not that.
Brittany heads up a group that DeRay affiliates himself with called, "Teach for America" which advocates the building of charter schools. This is a position that official Black Lives Matter is not down with. DeRay is the chosen "media darling" because he is middle of the road - definitely not radicalized. But this is a time when "radical" individuals and radical thinking is what's needed. The real heroes of Black Lives Matter are not seen schmoozing it up with Stephen Colbert, Jon Stewart and the like. They're doing the work.
I would not give him, Netta nor Brittany much credit for spreading the visibility of Black Lives Matter. BLM has been doing that themselves by shutting down, dying in, protesting, advocating for, marching, speaking truth directly to the power, exposing, boycotting, educating, documenting, building coalitions, galvanizing and organizing the people. This is already resulting nationwide in public officials being removed from office, reform taking place, mandatory body and dash cams, reparations going to victims of police torture and much more across the nation. State's Attorney Alvarez was removed from office largely in part because BLM Chicago consistently exposed her. But what are the names of BLM Chicago's leaders? Cleveland's corrupt state's attorney was removed too largely due to the efforts of BLM Cleveland, but what are the names of their leaders? They are unsung and they work from outside of the system - for the people, galvanizing and empowering the people.
Last edited:
I haven't followed the charter school issue. I recall there being a dispute over it and his association with it, tho I don't recall the details. My comments weren't meant for you, tho. They were meant for ballscout, whom I quoted.
As you (and I) have said, MSM labels him a leader so it is natural for people to assume he is one. Which comes to another point: MSM follows DeRay and other activists who have had meetings with political leaders. Anytime something happens, they are the first ones they reach out to for comment. I understand the desire to not be seen as a pawn in a political game. Regarding the WH meeting tho, to have been invited to begin with, meant that the President thought you were significant enough to engage to begin with. BLM might not care what the President or white people think, but it would have lent credibility and legitimacy to their organization which OTHERS do care about and which can be useful in getting help for your cause.
It would have been far more effective, imo, to have the meeting, and then sound off it it was fluff. They would have been viewed as someone willing to listen, but independent and free thinking enough not to go along with someone just because they are in a powerful position. As someone who actually attended, they would have had the ear of every news organization, and they would have been able to say what was wrong, why, what needs to be done differently that what was proposed at the meeting, and get their message to a larger audience. If the meeting turned out to be useful, then their cause would have been helped more, or they could have made new contacts. To be seen as someone who has the ear of the President or who has had a face to face meeting, carries a lot of weight with people. Also, once he gets out of office, who knows what other help he may be able to provide. The news reports that I saw didn't cover their agenda, for the most part they were just short blurbs saying they thought it was a photo op and didn't care to be a part of the charade and then went on to mention the other people who were attending. As I've said before tho, you don't have to be friends with someone to use them to move your agenda forward. I would have taken the meeting. I respect their work tho, and perhaps they see a path I don't.
the bottom line is that black lives matter is not the typical group that has a hierarchy like the SNCC, BPP or even the NAACP so what you may consider a leader is not so in the normal regard.
the same way that anybody black who protests or does anything and are black are lumped into BLM by the media.
the point is that of all the people associated with BLM that were invited only one said no because she felt it was a photo op and in that regard she wasn't an originator but is associated with the Chicago Chapter.
Black Lives Matter Co-Founder Reflects On The Origins Of The Movement
From Oscar Grant to Trayvon Martin to Ferguson, the movement has steadily grown in prominence over the past two years.
WASHINGTON — In July 2013, Opal Tometi walked out of a New York movie theater. She had just finished watching Fruitvale Station, a film documenting the lead-up to Oscar Grant’s death at the hands of a police officer in 2009. As Tometi stepped out onto the sidewalk, her phone buzzed.
That is when she discovered that George Zimmerman, who had been charged in the murder of 18-year-old Trayvon Martin, had been acquitted. “I remember sitting on the street corner and getting a slew of text messages, tweets [from] folks who were frantic,” Tometi, who went on to co-found Black Lives Matter, said Wednesday during the Washington Ideas Forum. The forum is a two-day series of conversations and debate about America’s most pressing issues.
“I remember in that moment, just sitting with the fact that everybody knew what took place,” Tometi continued. “And despite all the knowledge, despite the testimonies, despite all of that, Trayvon Martin was put on trial for his own death … I was struck with the fact that my younger brother — who was 14 at the time — could have been Trayvon.”
BUTCH DILL/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Tracy Martin, whose teenage son Trayvon Martin was fatally shot in 2012, stages a protest outside the Civil Rights Institute in Birmingham, Alabama, in June 2015.
After hearing the news, Tometi was inspired to build a movement to prevent this from happening again. She read a Facebook post by Alicia Garza arguing that the anger people felt was justified and that “black lives matter.” Inspired by Garza’s post, Patrisse Cullors put a hashtag on that crucial phrase and began posting it on social media. Tometi then called Garza and Cullors and said the nascent movement needed its own platforms.
“Beyond just our walls, we need this to actually be very public,” Tometi recalled telling the other two, who would become her co-founders. “We need to have other people interact with this message and also share the work that they’re doing to ensure black lives matter. And how can we, as a collective … make sure that we are coordinated and uplifting a message that will ensure that all of our black lives would matter?”
“We created #BlackLivesMatter. We created a platform,” she continued. “We used our social media presence online in order to forward a conversation about what is taking place in black communities ... This was actually a racial justice project for black people.”
JEMAL COUNTESS/GETTY IMAGES
Black Lives Matter co-founders Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors and Opal Tometi attend The New York Women’s Foundation Celebrating Women Breakfast on May 14, 2015, in New York City.
The movement gained significant traction after the fatal shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. Tometi deemed the protests that followed Brown’s death an exemplar of civic engagement.
“People were willing to put some skin in the game and say ‘Hey, Mike Brown was murdered here. Our lives aren’t mattering. We want to make sure people know about this. There’s a crisis here,’” she said. “I think they were very much involved in their right and I’m just so inspired by the people who are taking action all across the country.”
Asked about the group’s goals, philosophies and tactics — mainly activists disrupting speeches by presidential hopefuls — Tometi said Black Lives Matter is open to a variety of strategies for addressing systemic racism, and doesn’t claim that one tactic is more effective than another.
“You have a duty in this moment in history to take action and stand on the side of people who have been oppressed for generations … Whatever means you need to take, we believe that folks should do that,” she said, adding that the interruptions were courageous and helping to redefine the political process.
ROSS D. FRANKLIN/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Black Lives Matter and Black Immigration Network activists shout down the first of two Democratic presidential candidates speaking at a Netroots Nation town hall meeting in July.
Tometi also addressed the allegation that Black Lives Matter is provoking violence. After the death of a police officer in Harris County, Texas, earlier this month, Fox News host Elisabeth Hasselbeck asked why the Black Lives Matter movement hasn’t been classified as a “hate group,” while an on-screen banner labeled Black Lives Matter a “Murder Movement.” Hasselbeck’s colleague Bill O’Reilly later piled on.
“When we say black lives matter, we’re not saying that any other life doesn’t matter. That has never, ever been our message,” Tometi said. “Our message has always been from a place of love for our people and even love for our society.”
“It’s a distraction anyway when people want to pick apart the words,” she added. “But if they truly understand the reality of the black experience in the U.S., they would not be so scared to come alongside us.”
the same way that anybody black who protests or does anything and are black are lumped into BLM by the media.
the point is that of all the people associated with BLM that were invited only one said no because she felt it was a photo op and in that regard she wasn't an originator but is associated with the Chicago Chapter.
Black Lives Matter Co-Founder Reflects On The Origins Of The Movement
From Oscar Grant to Trayvon Martin to Ferguson, the movement has steadily grown in prominence over the past two years.
WASHINGTON — In July 2013, Opal Tometi walked out of a New York movie theater. She had just finished watching Fruitvale Station, a film documenting the lead-up to Oscar Grant’s death at the hands of a police officer in 2009. As Tometi stepped out onto the sidewalk, her phone buzzed.
That is when she discovered that George Zimmerman, who had been charged in the murder of 18-year-old Trayvon Martin, had been acquitted. “I remember sitting on the street corner and getting a slew of text messages, tweets [from] folks who were frantic,” Tometi, who went on to co-found Black Lives Matter, said Wednesday during the Washington Ideas Forum. The forum is a two-day series of conversations and debate about America’s most pressing issues.
“I remember in that moment, just sitting with the fact that everybody knew what took place,” Tometi continued. “And despite all the knowledge, despite the testimonies, despite all of that, Trayvon Martin was put on trial for his own death … I was struck with the fact that my younger brother — who was 14 at the time — could have been Trayvon.”
BUTCH DILL/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Tracy Martin, whose teenage son Trayvon Martin was fatally shot in 2012, stages a protest outside the Civil Rights Institute in Birmingham, Alabama, in June 2015.
After hearing the news, Tometi was inspired to build a movement to prevent this from happening again. She read a Facebook post by Alicia Garza arguing that the anger people felt was justified and that “black lives matter.” Inspired by Garza’s post, Patrisse Cullors put a hashtag on that crucial phrase and began posting it on social media. Tometi then called Garza and Cullors and said the nascent movement needed its own platforms.
“Beyond just our walls, we need this to actually be very public,” Tometi recalled telling the other two, who would become her co-founders. “We need to have other people interact with this message and also share the work that they’re doing to ensure black lives matter. And how can we, as a collective … make sure that we are coordinated and uplifting a message that will ensure that all of our black lives would matter?”
“We created #BlackLivesMatter. We created a platform,” she continued. “We used our social media presence online in order to forward a conversation about what is taking place in black communities ... This was actually a racial justice project for black people.”
JEMAL COUNTESS/GETTY IMAGES
Black Lives Matter co-founders Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors and Opal Tometi attend The New York Women’s Foundation Celebrating Women Breakfast on May 14, 2015, in New York City.
The movement gained significant traction after the fatal shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. Tometi deemed the protests that followed Brown’s death an exemplar of civic engagement.
“People were willing to put some skin in the game and say ‘Hey, Mike Brown was murdered here. Our lives aren’t mattering. We want to make sure people know about this. There’s a crisis here,’” she said. “I think they were very much involved in their right and I’m just so inspired by the people who are taking action all across the country.”
Asked about the group’s goals, philosophies and tactics — mainly activists disrupting speeches by presidential hopefuls — Tometi said Black Lives Matter is open to a variety of strategies for addressing systemic racism, and doesn’t claim that one tactic is more effective than another.
“You have a duty in this moment in history to take action and stand on the side of people who have been oppressed for generations … Whatever means you need to take, we believe that folks should do that,” she said, adding that the interruptions were courageous and helping to redefine the political process.
ROSS D. FRANKLIN/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Black Lives Matter and Black Immigration Network activists shout down the first of two Democratic presidential candidates speaking at a Netroots Nation town hall meeting in July.
Tometi also addressed the allegation that Black Lives Matter is provoking violence. After the death of a police officer in Harris County, Texas, earlier this month, Fox News host Elisabeth Hasselbeck asked why the Black Lives Matter movement hasn’t been classified as a “hate group,” while an on-screen banner labeled Black Lives Matter a “Murder Movement.” Hasselbeck’s colleague Bill O’Reilly later piled on.
“When we say black lives matter, we’re not saying that any other life doesn’t matter. That has never, ever been our message,” Tometi said. “Our message has always been from a place of love for our people and even love for our society.”
“It’s a distraction anyway when people want to pick apart the words,” she added. “But if they truly understand the reality of the black experience in the U.S., they would not be so scared to come alongside us.”
My bad. I didn't see you were replying to ballscout1 and not me.
Legit BLM leaders have been interviewed on mainstream networks. Our Chicago chapter leader was on nationwide news three times being interviewed at which time she exposed some of the horrors in Chicago which the country at large wasn't aware of. After she spoke on the illegal police black site on the West Side, Homan Square, it got picked up by The Guardian and other news organizations.
I somewhat disagree with what you said about, "if she showed up", it would have caught the ear of many people. Actually you are incorrect about that on two counts. Firstly, as was stated previously, it was just a photo op - so there was no deep, comprehensive discussion. She called me immediately after the White House contacted her. Initially, she was torn as to whether to go or not - as she did not know what the true agenda was, whether it was a sincere effort to address the relevant issues, etc. I told her, "If you feel in your heart that it would be helpful to attend then go. If not, I respect your decision because I know you will have made it, thoughtfully."
About a day or so later she told me she wasn't going and explained and showed me why.
As it happened, her comprehensive reasons for not attending - which I quoted in this thread made headlines both nationally and internationally, and she was quoted in all the major newspapers. Ironically, more relevant information regarding the injustices in Chicago and injustice nationwide got mass exposure in that essay than if she would have attended.
http://time.com/4229329/black-lives-matter-activist-snubs-white-house-invite/
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/18/politics/obama-civil-rights-leaders-meeting/
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...eject-white-house-meeting-20160218-story.html
http://www.ebony.com/news-views/activist-rejects-white-house-invite
http://atlantablackstar.com/2016/02...stice-is-more-important-than-publicity-stunt/
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/02/oba...s-they-are-much-better-organizers-than-i-was/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obama-black-lives-matter_us_571b9414e4b0d4d3f7238bb6
Secondly, daily we are contacted by many, many folks who want to be down. This, without being on the cover of magazines and the like. BLM succeeded in getting these very relevant issues into the national dialogue.
of course she has been on TV because Chicago been pooping for various reasons.
the coverup of the McDonald murder
the efforts and success of the get out to vote to get rid of Anita Alverez
The call to oust Rahm
Holman Square
and of course the amount of shootings.
Just as they kept Deray on the news when Baltimore was in the news for the joy ride killing.
And to clarify Derays organization you mentioned is an offshoot from his work in Black Lives Matter just as his run for mayor is.
Again there is no central leadership of black lives matters......only local leadership
but just as she has been on TV the national media has ignored the group of mothers who have been out doing work...
ballscout1 you are getting mired in semantics. To be wrong about something is not a disgrace. No one is right 100% of the time. You originally quoted from ultraconservative rag, breitbart.com in a failed attempt to correct me. you are not in Black Lives Matter Chicago. You likely don't know the names of those who are leaders. You can quote as many mainstream media articles as you want to but it won't change those facts in bold. The mainstream media is not more in the know than someone close to Chicago BLM leadership.
It's not about "what I consider a leader", sir. It's about WHO IS a leader: who is organizing, who cofounded, who is planning actions, obtaining and creating resources for those actions, reporting back to national leadership and who is accepted as a leader by those whom she leads. Stop making assumptions just to be right. I'm speaking on who I know and what I am part of.