-So the cops on the scene testify that she didn't have a weapon. -There were none of her fingerprints on any of the weapons involved -Forensics showed that her bullet wounds were consistent with her hands being raised above her head when they hit her shoulder -Police witness admitted lying -Truck driver witness stated cop was struggling with a black man (not a woman) How is it that she is a murderer in your book? I mean if all of that doesn't matter to you, than I'm sorry to say, you are really kinda being brainwashed by whatever you are reading.
Honestly, showing my ignorance here, I knew nothing about this person you guys are talking about.. Here's a link I found that discusses her story: https://www.washingtonpost.com/life...acb602-b7e5-11e2-aa9e-a02b765ff0ea_story.html
Oh my.....did someone post a propaganda video in response to being asked to provide concrete examples of police "getting away with it"?
She's one of the major role models for the founders of the BLM movement and thus certain people here have to defend her no matter what.
I'd prefer you give examples because I've learned that some people on this board have pretty hilarious ideas when it comes to issues like this.
So you think the evidence for her conviction was rock solid? That's the dispute, right? Just asking, I haven't really looked at it myself.
I think that given her affiliations with hate groups and her own admissions about what she was hoping to accomplish, if there was a shootout during a police stop and a cop ended up dead, I don't think you can give her the benefit of the doubt. She's a racist who was looking to start a race war and advocated for the killing of cops. If a black guy happened to get murdered at David Duke's house, would you give him the benefit of the doubt? I wouldn't.
Basically you just admitted you are a racist. And as usually you misrepresent the facts to tell a misleading story. Food stamps skyrocketed during the bush admin - 14.7 million added in his term, 13.4 mill in Obama and it's in decline. Why can't you be honest in your postings? I get it that you are balancing the other side, but the ones of us who live in the world of data and facts and truth look at you as a joke. Do you want to be a joke or taken seriously? Maybe you want to be Joker_Jorge
I see, but I think it could also be argued that her affiliation makes it more likely she would be wrongly convicted if she did not in fact shoot the officer. For a fair conviction, there needs to be better quality evidence than that, which there very well may be in this case (again, I don't know as I haven't looked at it). I wasn't aware that she advocated for the killing of cops. That certainly is a strike against her to consider. Your question about David Duke is interesting. Actually, I'd wonder what a black guy is doing in his house, and consider it at least plausible that David Duke killed him in self-defense.
I haven't been able to find anything so far that she advocated the killing of cops. Right wing blocks claim it but do not link to any source. So I am not sure where they are getting that from. What I do see is that she was trying to form a separate country for blacks and that she was in trouble for sedition. She was a revolutionary.
[Educational Post] Actually, none of the criteria I listed were race based. Ignorance, aggression, violence, poor speech, poor language -- none of those are racial. It was you that assumed that those items referred to blacks, which of course is racist on your part. You have some soul searching to do after this incredibly revealing moment. What upsets so many people is when ignorant people with their own shortcomings and flaws climb up on their moral soapbox and give condescending lectures to others. That's what you just did. It suggests that you have an inner conflict in your own mind, racially impure thoughts perhaps, that you are trying to correct outwardly. Virtue signalling is so rampant these days, with people showing offense at the slightest comments. People that virtue signal are people with guilty consciences. My conscience is squeaky clean -- because I am not racist. You on the other hand, have a lot of explaining to do after what you just said. GOOD DAY
Well if there was doubt about her being there then sure, there's some doubt about a possible set up, but she was there and there was a shootout and a cop was killed so I think it's less likely there was a set up. No matter what she's not a role model due to the violence she advocated for even if we want to give her the benefit of the doubt that it was just those who she was affiliated with who killed the cop instead of her having a part in it as is widely believed. She was a leader of a terrorist organization that assassinated 13 police officers much like the guy did last night and they were responsible for numerous bombings and other murders. In fact, the crazy b*stard that shot up those cops last night would probably have been good friends with Shakur if they had ever met. They see eye to eye when it comes to using violence.
Yes, that I see. One should also consider the environment she came out of (growing up in Jim Crow era, COINTELPRO period of the late 60s / early 70s) and how that must have informed her radical political positions. After a little reading, I do see that several BLA members were convicted of murders during the 70s. Was that a centrally-directed goal of the organization that all the members bought into? Maybe, I don't know.
There was another shooter at the scene who was convicted, wasn't there? I assumed her story was that she was not the shooter, not that a shooting didn't take place.
There was a lot of violence in militant black power groups - most of it was black on black. It was a different time. People might criticize the Black Panthers heavily, but they are credited with playing an instrumental role in gaining civil rights not just by blacks but historians. It's always more complex that it appears.
Well yeah, I'm sure that's her story, but even then, I'm not sure it matters. She was the leader of the Black Liberation Army, if one of her soldiers does the deed, it's still on her. She's directed plenty of people to murder people, to commit robberies and bombings. If you can convict Charlie Manson of having others kill people, I don't see how she'd be exempted from doing the same. When you are the leader of an organization that regularly carries out terrorist actions and other criminal activities.....well, when a cop ends up dead while you are there, what is anyone supposed to think?
The Black Panthers were a hate group, of course you are here trying to defend them because that's just what you do, but even you can't defend Shakur's other group, the Black Liberation Army.....or maybe you'll still try. Who knows with you.
