Originally Posted by
Niall_Quinn
Why do you say that? Are you claiming what I said is not factual? Did you look? Or are you just assuming it?
Which part is non-factual? BLM's stated aims? This is old news really, not even disputed as far as I know. Mainly ignored.
Did you not like the idea that all crime should be treated equally, regardless of colour?
Do you dispute Biden's and Harris' involvement in enacting state and federal policies that greatly disenfranchised blacks in terms of drug offences and incarceration? This was even brought up in the Dem primaries. You may remember Gabbard obliterating Harris's credibility on the issue? And Biden openly boasts about his role.
Or the Clinton's involvement in drug trafficking? That's certainly disputed (or otherwise they'd be in jail), but the evidence has been clearly laid out and well documented, by Webb in particular. Hell, Hollywood even made a film about it.
I think the thing is not to go backwards and forwards on information that has long been in the public domain and is mostly a matter of official record, but rather to realise these issues didn't jump straight from the era of slavery to Trump's America, as parties who played a direct role in making the situation worse would have you believe.
That's very much planet earth, although I accept it's the opposite of planet media. All depends where you prefer to live really.