U. OF HOUSTON STUDENT LEADER PUNISHED FOR “ALL LIVES MATTER” POST

[AFTiger 282]

Homer, really?

"WHAT DO WE WANT?  DEAD COPS. WHEN DO WE WANT THEM? NOW."

It seems that BLM has a message, DEAD COPS.

[homersapien 11,569]

9 minutes ago, AFTiger said:

There message is totally destroyed by this and other BLM inspired assassins.

So why in the world would they support or condone such murders???

[homersapien 11,569]

3 minutes ago, AFTiger said:

Homer, really?

"WHAT DO WE WANT?  DEAD COPS. WHEN DO WE WANT THEM? NOW."

It seems that BLM has a message, DEAD COPS.

What, that happened at a single protest?  Were the people shouting that actually members of BLM?

But if that's your standard, then what does that make Tea Party?

A small Tea Party group decided to take advantage of the event and staged a protest. With the White House in the background, they stood for about two hours with signs calling for the impeachment of President Obama and Attorney General Holder. Other props included the Gadsden flag, and various early American flags. One man with a megaphone was dressed in colonial garb.

“Hang the lying Kenyan traitor!," one man could be heard shouting. 

Other shouts, as Right Wing Watch reports, included, “Hang the traitor!,” “We’ve got rope,” “Plenty of trees in the front yard, wouldn’t be the first one hung on one of them trees,” “Don’t snap his neck, you watch him choke to death,” and, “He’s just biding his time until Satan takes him home to where he belongs.” 

Laughing can also be heard as the calls for lynching were made.

[AFTiger 282]

The TEA party result? nothing.  The BLM result- dead police.

"Pigs in a blanket, fry 'em like bacon" 

Sorry Homer.

8 minutes ago, homersapien said:

So why in the world would they support or condone such murders???

They don't condone them, they encourage them.

[icanthearyou 4,465]

2 minutes ago, AFTiger said:

The TEA party result? nothing.  The BLM result- dead police.

"Pigs in a blanket, fry 'em like bacon" 

Sorry Homer.

They don't condone them, they encourage them.

I suppose the Catholic Church encourages child molestation?  They are an organization of child molesters?

 

[AFTiger 282]

ICHY give it up.

[homersapien 11,569]

7 minutes ago, AFTiger said:

The TEA party result? nothing.  The BLM result- dead police.

"Pigs in a blanket, fry 'em like bacon" 

Sorry Homer.

They don't condone them, they encourage them.

That's just BS opinion.  You've got nothing but your opinion.

For all you know some of the cops who have been so quick to shoot were Tea party members.

“Hang the traitor!,”  “Don’t snap his neck, you watch him choke to death,”

Apparently, The Tea Party condones and encourages such racism.

[AFTiger 282]

Homer, you have now descended to ICHY's level of nonsense. 

[homersapien 11,569]

47 minutes ago, AFTiger said:

Homer, you have now descended to ICHY's level of nonsense. 

No, I am just presenting a parallel argument which is just as valid as yours.

 

[AFTiger 282]

No. You are not. 

[AURaptor 1,129]

Well, Obama is a liar. That much isn't up for debate. 

[AuburnNTexas 7,203]

Everybody is twisting one thing it isn't really important what the young lady said.. In the 50's, 60's and 70's free speech on college campuses went a long way in changing US Society from a segregated society to an integrated society.  Free speech helped defeat McCarthyism and is a vital part of what makes America a great country. People in positions of leadership be it a Dean, or an SGA president should not in any way try and stop free speech on college campuses. This girl in an emotional time said something that some people took as offensive and others didn't. She even removed it and apologized but even if she had said something much worse she should have had the right to say it. I strongly disagreed with a vocal minority in the BLM movement who chanted "What do we want? Dead Cops"  I disagree with those people but in this country it is their right to make those types of statements. Nothing was done to them why should anything have been done to this young lady by a person in a position of leadership.

Most of the leaders during the 50's, 60's, and 70's disagreed with the free speech that helped change our society but they allowed it. How much longer would segregation remained the norm in this country if the leaders had denied what started out as a minority from using free speech.

Free speech can have consequences in the way people react to it and the actions they might take but we can't suppress free speech  whether we agree with what was said or not.

 

[homersapien 11,569]

31 minutes ago, AuburnNTexas said:

Everybody is twisting one thing it isn't really important what the young lady said.. In the 50's, 60's and 70's free speech on college campuses went a long way in changing US Society from a segregated society to an integrated society.  Free speech helped defeat McCarthyism and is a vital part of what makes America a great country. People in positions of leadership be it a Dean, or an SGA president should not in any way try and stop free speech on college campuses. This girl in an emotional time said something that some people took as offensive and others didn't. She even removed it and apologized but even if she had said something much worse she should have had the right to say it. I strongly disagreed with a vocal minority in the BLM movement who chanted "What do we want? Dead Cops"  I disagree with those people but in this country it is their right to make those types of statements. Nothing was done to them why should anything have been done to this young lady by a person in a position of leadership.

Most of the leaders during the 50's, 60's, and 70's disagreed with the free speech that helped change our society but they allowed it. How much longer would segregation remained the norm in this country if the leaders had denied what started out as a minority from using free speech.

Free speech can have consequences in the way people react to it and the actions they might take but we can't suppress free speech  whether we agree with what was said or not.

 

That was a fair statement. 

[AURaptor 1,129]

35 minutes ago, AuburnNTexas said:

Free speech can have consequences in the way people react to it and the actions they might take but we can't suppress free speech  whether we agree with what was said or not.

Unless you're the University of Houston, then I guess you can. 

[homersapien 11,569]

It only lacked in the identification of an enemy to detest.  

[TitanTiger 20,563]

6 hours ago, AFTiger said:

What she said was a perfectly reasonable response to the deaths of Dallas policemen. To draw anything else or imply anything else  is twisting the event beyond resason.

No, perfectly reasonable is saying "all lives matter" or some similar sentiment.  Saying "forget BlackLivesMatter" is a jab, or at least can be reasonably interpreted that way.  It added nothing of value to a message about Dallas police officers.

[AURaptor 1,129]

So damn what if it's a jab. My god 

[TitanTiger 20,563]

1 hour ago, AURaptor said:

So damn what if it's a jab. My god 

Again, I said the university president overreacted.  Were I in that position, I would have had the student make a simple apology for taking a swipe at one group of people in an attempt to honor another.  But I do believe we wouldn't even be having this discussion if all she'd have done was keep her comments to honoring police rather than taking jabs at others.

[aujeff11 6,243]

I really dont understand why she was punished. Even intentionally swiping BLM by saying "Forget BLM" doesnt warrant that type of punishment. WTH

[TitanTiger 20,563]

15 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

I really dont understand why she was punished. Even intentionally swiping BLM by saying "Forget BLM" doesnt warrant that type of punishment. WTH

Me either.  It was silly.  As student body VP, you do have a role that is different from the average student and I get that.  You have to be able to be seen as representing all students, not just ones you happen to agree with socially or politically or ones that you relate to culturally.  So I would have asked her to clarify/apologize for the remark to smooth things over.  But that's as far as I would have taken it.

[icanthearyou 4,465]

3 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

Again, I said the university president overreacted.  Were I in that position, I would have had the student make a simple apology for taking a swipe at one group of people in an attempt to honor another.  But I do believe we wouldn't even be having this discussion if all she'd have done was keep her comments to honoring police rather than taking jabs at others.

If I understand the article correctly, she was not sanctioned by the "university president" or, the university.  She was sanctioned by the student body president.  

[TitanTiger 20,563]

36 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

If I understand the article correctly, she was not sanctioned by the "university president" or, the university.  She was sanctioned by the student body president.  

Ah.  Still an overreaction IMO, but not quite as authoritarian as the university doing it.

[AFTiger 282]

The war on free thought is alive and well. Look at the attacks on scientists producing evidence questioning the validity of climate models.

[AURaptor 1,129]

1 minute ago, AFTiger said:

The war on free thought is alive and well. Look at the attacks on scientists producing evidence questioning the validity of climate models.

Questioning will NOT be tolerated. It's bigoted and racist. Or something. 

[icanthearyou 4,465]

1 hour ago, AFTiger said:

The war on free thought is alive and well. Look at the attacks on scientists producing evidence questioning the validity of climate models.

That rite there is on the money.  They is lockin up folks for not agreeing with king barry.  We is livin in a police state.