Hitler's Tour of Paris, June 23, 1940

Agree ...the history is terrible but its the truth ...

Both sides AOC far left and Trump far right are doing sowing the seeds of revenge for past grievances in these current times, in different but similar ways ...not good .

Didn't Trump try to justify the tariffs against Canada by replying to Trudeau over the phone: "Didn't you guys burn down the White House?" referring to the War of 1812. That sounds like sowing the seeds of revenge for past grievances to me.

And no, I'm not a fan of reparations either but I assume the "same kind of language" you're referring to is Whiteness and White privilege. Yes, in some circumstances, these can become disturbing, but I don't think the intention is the result to round up white people and put them in concentration camps. I've seen far more language referring to brown people and immigrants (both legal and illegal) in terms of rounding them up. I find the latter much more disturbing when the government actually contributes to this.

That said, I'm also concerned about some projects to highlight the importance of black history but not the intention; the methods. Methods, I assume, are drastic only because they've been met with a high number of resistance for actual progress toward easing racial tensions. Especially in Southern States.

Perhaps Timber1972 is the reincarnation of Roland Freisler?

Could be. But the similarity in his behavior is uncanny.

No, I think he's more a modern interpretation of McCarthy. Only because Timber attacks political ideology and associates it with stereotypical generalizations. Maybe based on personal experiences, maybe based on second-hand experiences, possibly based on nothing at all but the garbage he reads.

The closest I can make to compare him to Freisler is his penchant to redefine terms so that they fit his argument. The only difference is, the terms are not so rigidly and coherently defined as Freisler would've liked. In contrast, Timber is a conservative and only alludes to vague definitions when they suit his argument.

But any idiot can do that.

Fair enough...

I'll check up on McCarthyism. Not something I know much about...

Never mind with timber1972. He's trying to frame me with doctored pictures of deleted comments. Apparently he's screen capturing every single comment! Now I'm sure o_0/snare lives rent free in his redneck skull. Also notice how timber1972 has multiple posts from that person on his account. Just like a serial killer that keeps a reminder of his deeds.

You mean like the truth that you were mistaken in the fact that Trump would use past grievances to justify current policies?

I did not call everything you've read garbage. Only the things that make you arrive to the conclusion that the Left hate America and want to destroy it. I'm not so radicalized as you are as to arrive at that conclusion. I do not see the people who are rioting as left or right, but those in poverty who are disenfranchised by the police. If you perceive authority is threatening your life, attempt to peacefully protest, and are met with anti-riot strategies, it absolutely makes sense to me to behave violently. That said, they are radicalized by the same kind of divisionist bullshit that you swallow. Even Trump Supporters, and Trump himself, has threatened Civil War if he is removed from office.

Notice how Timber here is not actually attacking the arguments when we debate but always the person whose made the arguments. He succeeds when the debate becomes about the two people making it rather than actual observations.

I'm very happy to be proven wrong. Perhaps Timber will actually argue without addressing, you, the imagined audience, or myself and stick to the facts. That would make me quite happy.

Of course, there are very little facts here. It's just two (or three) imgflipper's bitching about each other.

I don't much care about it.

I entertain a lot of people. Engaging with someone who you think is an undesirable, or that thinks you an undesirable has nothing to do with intellectual honesty. In fact, I defended you from his rather exaggerated claims but alas, you're far more interested in "destroying" your opponent than arriving at the truth.

"No, you don't. You mock Trump, with malice, because you hate him."

Says you.

"You're offended that someone would mock Trudeau, so you interpret those comments to be a serious justification for policy...which is both absurd and politically correct."

Not at all. I'm merely correcting you on your error. I don't much care for Trudeau but rather merely pointing out that Trump is not above using a tactic that you just recently criticized and you've gone simply ape shit over it. It is quite spectacular, actually and I have no intention of ending it until this year is over.

"Again, you insult our collective intelligence with comments like this. No one is trying to prevent you from saying anything you want to say, within the bounds of the law and imgflip terms (which are very, very broad.)"

It was a joke. It's like you don't understand me or something.

"I don't have any problem with it. If I did, I wouldn't be able to handle imgflip, because it's filled with feral Leftists viciously attacking Trump...far more viciously than you do...every single day."

Not everyone who points out Trump's incompetence, pokes fun at him for his silly demeanor and Twitter posts, and pitiful attempts to justify his policies are leftists out to get you or anyone else. Most are just average Americans of all political spectrum.

I never claimed I don't do personal insults. I said I loathe them.

And saying you're going "ape shit" isn't an insult. It's what you would call a basic observation.

If you grow bored of these silly games then try not to engage them. You started this when you couldn't accept the fact that I corrected you.

I believe we're both guilty of repeating the same words over and over again. And I'm happy to tire you out until you realize that either you were wrong to engage in what you would call an intellectually dishonest debate by making this about me and you and not about the fact that Trump is capable of using the same liberal tactics that you yourself say are a determent to our country. A tall order, of course. But I have limits. A year seems small to someone as long lived as I. You're young yet.

You may enjoy making these repeated comments, but you're also growing bored. I have only just begun.

It is clearly you who are more bothered that I dare comment and correct you.

Have a good nap, I'll be here when you're done.

Cute but Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump did use past grievances to justify policy.

I agree it shouldn't be used as justification for policy. Nonetheless, that is exactly what Trump did. It doesn't matter if he gave Trudeau a hard time at his and mine expense. The fact remains he is not above doing the very thing you claimed he wouldn't do.

Irrelevant if it existed or not. Trump still tried use past grievances to justify policy. The only reason why it's absurd is that he did it and not that he couldn't successfully justify it.

No, merely refuting your claim that Trump is not sowing the seeds of revenge for past grievances. It is very clear he is not above using past grievances to justify his policy.

Yes, it was nonsense for Trump to arbitrarily use the War of 1812 as a reason to levy tariffs against Canada.

It's not an opinion, it's a fact.

Trump did use a past grievance to justify his actions. Has probably done it loads of times but I don't have evidence of that so I wouldn't presume to make that erroneously claim that he has.

Only you and I are seeing this and if we were to tally up all my upvotes to yours in this comment, I'm pretty sure mine outnumber yours. Including the meme's upvotes.

The difference is, I don't much care about other people's opinions. I care when people make erroneous statements and cannot admit when they are wrong. It happens. I've been wrong? I'll happily admit when I've been wrong. For instances, I was wrong to claim that we were spamming Imgflip. So, I have no problem making the same repeated comments to you especially while you continue to deny the fact that Trump used a past grievance to justify policy.

You're inability to drop the conversation and have to continue responding proves my point that you cannot handle being wrong.

You are right about one thing, we are at an impasse. I'm more than capable of admitting when I'm wrong. You're not. If so, then prove me wrong.

Sure.

I never said I didn't understand him. Just that it wasn't my job to do so.

I understand him perfectly well. And not everyone is going to like him.

You're just going to have to accept that.

I've already explained I know why Trump is doing what he is doing. The key part you're ignoring is he is not above using past grievances to justify his actions whether or not he's giving Trudeau a hard time.

I'm not making an argument. I'm stating a fact and you're arguing that fact.

Yes, some people will have different opinions and share the same values.

You're just incapable of accepting different opinions and apparently the fact that Trump used past grievances to justify current policies. Like you said, he wouldn't. He did.

Don't forget that Trump did use past grievance to justify tariffs against Canada. Doing exactly what you claim Trump doesn't do.

Here is what I do understand. Trump did use them as an excuse when Trudeau pushed him for an explanation for the tariffs. Because, as Trudeau understands, tariffs are meant to only be used in diplomatic retaliation for something his government did and was asking for justification.

I also perfectly understand that Trump is using tariffs because he thinks this will improve domestic trade.

So, my understanding is pretty clear and irrelevant as the two situations are indeed comparable. I support a free market but when a government offers fewer incentives to promote domestic trade, their are consequences to where domestic companies will buy their supplies. Canada offering cheaper supplies to compete with America's domestic supply market is just business. And Donald Trump pushing tariffs is also just business. Yet, diplomatically, there are consequences to abusing tariffs in this manner.

Still, my point is made. Trump has no problem using policies to justify past grievances. All you can argue is ...

"He did not do that." or "He did not REALLY do that." or "You don't understand him."

But he did?

Would you like proof that he did do that? And would you care to explain what he was really doing so that I do understand him? Or should we keep spamming Imgflip with our perpetual messages of

"he used policies to justify past grievances"

"you don't understand him"

/repeat

It's okay to be wrong, Timber. You messed up. Trump is on the news 24/7 for 365 days of the year so, it's okay if you missed the episode where he did the thing that you said he never does.

It's not an opinion. Trump used past grievances to justify his policy.

I brought up the upvotes because you said "everyone could see what I was doing" The fact of the matter is, most people probably look at this, roll their eyes and move on. And I don't blame them. I only bring up the upvotes because I'm mildly amused that someone bothered to upvote...

And to them I say... thank you. Unnecessary, but thanks.

I wonder if they're actually reading what what we're saying.

The difference between my concession and yours is that I actually conceded on your point that we were spamming Imgflip. Only yours was meaningless and used as an insult. You very clearly are still taking this seriously. It's not a conversation. It's you howling that Trump didn't mean to say what he meant to say in the way he said it or that I'm taking him too literal.

I don't think people are stupid. I think people are too comfortable with their own mindset and would rather seek vindication than challenge their political beliefs and perspective. Ideally, in a way that would not insulting but I understand that some people are a little too sensitive about this and then find it interesting that these same sensitive individuals are not on the left, but right-wing Trump Supporters who bitch about political correctness with their own variant of that tripe.

The fact remains, at the end of the day, Trump used past grievances to justify his policy.

They are comparable when you break them down to the core statement that they're both policies to justify past grievances.

Neither Canada nor the current living American people are responsible for America's poor domestic trade and slavery respectively.

Yes, it is your opinion that I do not understand him.

I do.

We've just reached different conclusions and you do not appear to be able to accept that.

So, you were wrong. Trump did use a past grievance to justify his actions.

But I'm not for political correctness. At what point did I mention or even suggest that I enjoy or support political correctness in my actions, words, comments, or memes? Please, feel free to call me out on those memes. But I'm pretty sure they don't exist.

I poke fun at Trump all the time.

You seem to have a problem with that.

It's almost like you're a totalitarian or something.

I'm not the one still arguing after the erroneous statement was made and refuted.

Two mistakes now... See, I made another concession.

You zero, me two. It appears I'm right. You just don't like it when people point out your mistakes.

You also said that your concession was meaningless, so that doesn't count. How stupid do you think everyone is on Imgflip?

You are not an honest individual. You complain all day about intellectual honesty of the Left all day but you have none. Not a single shred. You're utterly incapable of insulting people you disagree with and take any replying comment as an insult. To you, it would be weakness to admit you were wrong about something as petty as "Trump wouldn't use past grievances to justify policy."

Trump is certainly not honest about who he is. In fact, the man lies constantly.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidmarkowitz/2020/05/05/trump-is-lying-more-than-ever-just-look-at-the-data/#689f968a1e17

But I'm perfectly willing to admit when "my shit stinks" So, no? I refute your accusation that I'm trying to make you politically correct by correcting you on your error. Just correct.

And now you're wrong again. We are at an impasse until you can accept that Trump used past grievances to justify his policy. That was where you were wrong.

Whether or not Trudeau is a tyrant does not justify Trump's petulant response.

""Ugh! It's so beneath the dignity of the office! The president should be above such pettiness!!""

and

"You: "2 + 2 = 5"

Me: "You don't understand math.""

There you go putting words into my mouth. Never said that.

You were wrong, Timber. Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

This isn't a conversation. It's a correction. You were wrong. It happens.

It's not my job to understand Trump.

It's my job to evaluate his performance as President and I give him one out of five stars.

Sorry you don't like my opinion.

Angered? Not at all. You've not really challenged anything that I've said but merely questioned my sobriety and seriousness.

I did not say Trump enacted tariffs against Canada because of the War of 1812. I said he used it to justify the tariffs. Which is in dispute of your denial of the claim that Trump doesn't use past grievance to justify his actions. I'm not sure why Trump felt the need to do it, and I'll spare you my personal observation as to why he might have done it. However, it can never be claimed that he hasn't done it nor is he above doing it.

I don't feel embarrassed in the least. I'm enjoying my time very well and looking forward to replying to your next comment which I'm about to read and probably reply to in a moment.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump did use past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump did use past grievances to justify policy.

It goes both ways ...both sides should have come together along long time ago to resolve their grievances were both sides get equal justice for their unresolved social issues...but now its far too late both sides are too far apart ...hence far left far right ...I listen to no one , I form my own opinions. I hear you on a lot of this especially this .." But if this "destroy the white man for his blood guilt"...especially from white people (and white women in particular) ".... The left is unreasonable on some issues as the far right are ...I do not agree with BLM because of their own hypocrisy at the same time the far right has its own hypocrisy. Both are too far from the middle .

The KKK are still an active organization. And White Supremacy is now operating under the disguise of White Nationalism. There are no riots, but there are rallies and marches. There was a recent one in February at Capitol Hill. However, because they legally coordinated with police, they were allowed to even have a police escort.

There are still a number of people who think Muslims are not true Americans or cannot be Americans. There has been a brash of anti-refugee sentimentality sweeping the world and has been bubbling over for decades. It's not unique to the US, of course, but we're still reeling from the repercussions of Venezuela. There is plenty of video evidence of white people acting out against people of color, often telling them to "Go back to their country."

As for where white people are asking people of color to bow for their past crimes? It's a bit of a stretch, I suspect you may find it laughable, but could it be by those police officers that racial profile and literally command them to get on the ground for fitting the description of a suspect? It's not the same thing that black people are now asking of white people, of course. Far from it.

And I do not think you should bow to anyone you do not serious revere. Anyone asking people to do otherwise is a shallow victory that will only build resentment rather than true compassion.

"Enunciate" is more spoken. I think you mean "elaborate".

Enunciate, v. 1. say or pronounce clearly. 2. express (a proposition, theory, etc.) in clear or definite terms. 3. proclaim.

Again, it's not really written.

Elaborate means more to expand on what you have said.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

You asked;

"Where are the marches and demonstrations in support of white supremacy?" If you kept reading, I went on to expand on that.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Not at all, while I haven't been above correcting someone's grammar or how they should have written something; I'm not doing it out of malice. I do this quite often on PoliticsToo and have not had to go into a long over-bloated comment chain that keeps firing between orange and red level comments. And my snark is usually reserved for the subject rather than the person addressing it.

What tends to end up happening is that people juxtapose themselves onto the subject. They feel personally attacked when I add another layer of perspective. Or when I simply offer my personal opinion. And I've met such juvenile behavior from the left as well. I've often compared such vicarious attachments as something akin to sports fanaticism. I've never been much of a sports fan. I played quite a bit of it in my youth but never really followed a team or went to a game. Many people develop these fanaticism and usually they're harmless.

If the New York Yankees won the World Series, it wouldn't affect many people outside of the sport. Politics, on the other hand, does seem to have repercussions. This is obvious, of course. But I find it very dangerous to go into it with the same fanatic mentality as a sports team. Our government is a very important institution and requires quite a bit of scrutiny that cannot be used with blanket devotion to one political party or even one politician. And it's not just about how it affects the individual person but the overall community as well. Voting is more than just a right, but a responsibility and it just seems shallow to squander it with petty insults over the internet to other voters.

It is also very counter-productive.

That said, you do have some very good insults. I just wish you put more effort in your debates. That said, you do occasionally have some good advice in your memes even if they are a bit too... "The Left is out to get you" for my taste. I'm sure there is a word for that but paranoid is a bit strong. There is nothing wrong with a healthy bit of paranoia and I wouldn't want you to think that you're one of those I regard as too paranoid.

I've not made that kind of observation of you, and I mean that sincerely.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Stating a fact isn't intellectually dishonest.

Let me tally how many times we've both used "you" and "I" in this comment chain alone and see who is more interested in making this a personal attack rather than a political debate. Not counting this comment, of course.

Timber1987: 19 "you"s and 8 "I"s
DoctorStrangeLove: 5 "you"s and 3 "I"s

Very interesting.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

"Why can't you have an honest debate?"

Is an intellectually dishonest question. I don't have to take the bait and make this about you and me. It's not. I think you've "mud wrestled" with JohnF and Vaga plenty. You know that is not what I do. I'm snarky, yes, but I'm not much a fan of ad homenims and personal insults like you are.

Point of fact, White Nationalists have about as much influence over the right as BLM has over the left. So, they absolutely have political and cultural power. Stephen Miller and several members of the White House staff have known connections to White Nationalist organizations.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

It's true. Most of my comments are not ad homenims but stick to the focus of the comment. Initially, I corrected you and you took it personally. You tried to make this personal and succeeded. This why your tactic of using ad homenims ultimately doesn't work. It doesn't solve anything and reduces any sane argument into what we're now engaging in. Some people have to learn the hard way and I'm happy to teach you.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump did use past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

This is a yellow level comment. The above is green and the below is orange.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Bingo.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump did use past grievances to justify policy.

Trump did use past grievances to justify policy.

Trump did use past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

When I say voting is a responsibility, I mean people should take it seriously and do their homework as opposed to just mindlessly checking names on a list that look good or have the appropriate party's initial by it.

I think what most people do, and I'm not accusing you directly, is that they do just that. Then try to justify their votes all year long or until the next election cycle. I do not find this to be a very constructive way to handle politics.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

You know what, I can respect that. I just don't buy that's what Trump wants. He appears to want to use the government to manipulate the government to increase domestic trade and I honestly don't fault him for that. What I do fault him for is using our country's past grievances to justify that policy.

I understand your inabiliy to give the benefit of the doubt. I do not think you do what I am claiming. Not exactly. I cannot accuse you of it and I don't really see the point in doing so. It is odd that you're being extra defensive about it but perhaps you're more insulted at the accusation than the accuracy of my claim.

Anyway.

Term limits, in my opinion, will be about as effective as "duck and cover" would've been to the nuclear bomb. Or what you might say masks are to Covid-19. I think the better solution would be to undo the very systems that prevent third and fourth parties from mattering. You do that by holding the parties in power accountable. Which is why I sometimes appear more critical to Republicans nowadays than Democrats.

I think more Trump Supporters want a one-party hegemony.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump did use past grievances to justify policy.

Trump did use past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

I agree with a lot you have to say about how white men are being vilified , they are being used as scapegoats in the BLM movement and that is wrong ...

I agree with a lot you have to say about how white men are being vilified ,BLM is wrongly scapegoating them . The main issue in all of this social unrest is there are too many radicals left and right ...nothing will be resolved for everyone's benefit until people grow up and stop behaving like adolescents , both sides want it their way or the highway ...this will lead to eventual disaster like history has shown .The only way this will be resolved is when the dust settles and the independents/moderate adults step into the mess to clean up after the fallout . I listen to no one, my own opinions are from real life experience ...I have lived in many places in my life and lived among many different people so I have seen it from both sides ...I walked home from work through a riot in a major city ( police had shot a criminal )...I have been affected by gun violence, I have been physically assaulted / injured etc .I've lived in crime ridden areas I've lived in low crime areas , small towns ,big towns ..I have never been sheltered in my life from how the real world is...I've seen good neighborhoods go bad with crime ...i have not lived in a bubble , I know what life is and I will tell you this ...both sides are not angels there are many lousy folks on both sides but there are good folks too except the good folks get drowned out by the noise . BLM have to address the crime, gun violence , murder in their own communities without scapegoating economics or white as the reason why or i just cannot take them seriously . You ask ...Where are the marches and demonstrations in support of white supremacy? Whites are more covert in what they do ... There have been demonstrations in recent years remember them proud boys ? The issue is neither side can see their own faults . Both sides want revenge and make any excuse to get it . Both sides want to play victim . Where were most of the white men from the 1980s until 2008 ? They checked out from everything that was going on around them , they devoted most of their free time from work drinking their beers or smoking weed, addicted to watching TV while lounging in their recliners until they got "WOKE" when Obama became president . Until then they ignored most everything around them . Had the white men been involved all along things may not have gotten this bad in society ,you all woke up too late to this party gone bad . I think that's why so many white women resent white men they were left holding the bag for too long.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump did use past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump did use past grievances to justify policy.

The main issue in all of this social unrest is there are too many radicals left and right ...nothing will be resolved for everyone's benefit until people grow up and stop behaving like adolescents , both sides want it their way or the highway ...this will lead to eventual disaster like history has shown .The only way this will be resolved is when the dust settles and the independents/moderate adults step into the mess to clean up after the fallout . I listen to no one, my own opinions are from real life experience ...I have lived in many places in my life and lived among many different people so I have seen it from both sides ...I walked home from work through a riot in a major city ( police had shot a criminal )...I have been affected by gun violence, I have been physically assaulted / injured etc .I've lived in crime ridden areas I've lived in low crime areas , small towns ,big towns ..I have never been sheltered in my life from how the real world is...I've seen good neighborhoods go bad with crime ...i have not lived in a bubble , I know what life is and I will tell you this ...both sides are not angels there are many lousy folks on both sides but there are good folks too except the good folks get drowned out by the noise . BLM have to address the crime, gun violence , murder in their own communities without scapegoating economics or white as the reason why or i just cannot take them seriously . You ask ...Where are the marches and demonstrations in support of white supremacy? Whites are more covert in what they do ... There have been demonstrations in recent years remember them proud boys ? The issue is neither side can see their own faults . Both sides want revenge and make any excuse to get it . Both sides want to play victim . Where were most of the white men from the 1980s until 2008 ? They checked out from everything that was going on around them , they devoted most of their free time from work drinking their beers or smoking weed, addicted to watching TV while lounging in their recliners until they got "WOKE" when Obama became president . Until then they ignored most everything around them . Had the white men been involved all along things may not have gotten this bad in society ,you all woke up too late to this party gone bad . I think that's why so many white women resent white men , they were left holding the social issue bag for the past 26 yrs , racial issues , the meth issue , opioids ,crime ..the white men had checked out ! Interesting ...

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Trump did use past grievances to justify policy.

The far right radicals are the ones who when they got " WOKE " in 2008 made things worse when they arrived with swastikas,nooses and conference flags ...all it did was turn folks away ,no one would be willing to hear any kind of message from any white man carrying those items ...those white guys ruin any constructive messages ..that visual message trumps all else ...White guys like Trump shoot themselves in their own foot ... any time a white man posts anything with Hitler in it as well meaning as it may be will not be taken in a positive light by anyone they are trying to get their message across ...

The main issue in all of this social unrest is there are too many radicals left and right ...nothing will be resolved for everyone's benefit until people grow up and stop behaving like adolescents , both sides want it their way or the highway ...this will lead to eventual disaster like history has shown .The only way this will be resolved is when the dust settles and the independents/moderate adults step into the mess to clean up after the fallout .

I had to post it again to fit it into paragraphs there was no space...

There is no right side because folks as too far apart , too angry . The middle is the right side ...Both sides have grievances that need to be addressed . Both sides are not being taken seriously by us in the middle .

The White man could get their message across better without resorting to the posting of anything with Hitler in it ,confederate flags ,nooses etc because that is connected to too many negatives in history ...death & destruction .

We have bigger issues than that Hitler stuff ,like drug addiction, lack of good paying blue collar jobs for the younger generation , violence , white collar crime and a lack of men black and white men being mentors to the young men in their communities .

My concern for young men these days is the black young men being recruited by gangs to sell drugs , guns ,prostitution ... and the white young men being recruited by white supremacist gangs that traffic guns, prostitution, sell drugs both have high chances of being incarcerated ...we need the older men on both sides to stand up and be men , not these victims we have today ...the only way to stop this is for the older men to be mentors so show the younger guys what is right and wrong ... not these blamers or victims we have today masquerading like men , there's more to life than themselves.

I was at a anti drug March in my neighborhood decades ago, I had grown weary of all the young kids getting hooked on drugs many prostituted themselves or ended up in prison and got aids while there ... their parents hung out in the pubs in their free time and neglected the kids and everything else , most of the neighborhood was like that ... not one white man marched with us in that anti drug March not one , it was all women and teens .

I think that men need to be more pro active not reactive , especially when it comes to the younger folks ...they need guidance not condemnation ... the issues we are dealing with today are due in part to the men being checked out for decades ...while some is due to the media , men need to step up in the right way ...not with nooses or swastikas ..

I listen to no one, my own opinions are from real life experience ...I have lived in many places in my life and lived among many different people so I have seen it from both sides ...I walked home from work through a riot in a major city ( police had shot a criminal )...I have been affected by gun violence, I have been physically assaulted / injured etc .I've lived in crime ridden areas I've lived in low crime areas , small towns ,big towns ..I have never been sheltered in my life from how the real world is...I've seen good neighborhoods go bad with crime ...i have not lived in a bubble , I know what life is and I will tell you this ...both sides are not angels there are many lousy folks on both sides but there are good folks too except the good folks get drowned out by the noise .

BLM have to address the crime, gun violence , murder in their own communities without scapegoating economics or white as the reason why or i just cannot take them seriously . You ask ...Where are the marches and demonstrations in support of white supremacy? Whites are more covert in what they do ... There have been demonstrations in recent years remember them proud boys ? The issue is neither side can see their own faults . Both sides want revenge and make any excuse to get it . Both sides want to play victim . Where were most of the white men from the 1980s until 2008 ? They checked out from everything that was going on around them.

Trump used past grievances to justify policy.

Its gone over your head ...

They don’t even like the country why should they derive the protection of its laws. Public officers are sworn to defend the constitution from all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC. Just because they are from here doesn’t mean they aren’t enemies of the country.