Since the inception of Black Lives Matter, conservatives have been triggered by black people speaking against racism and social injustice. They have smeared and condemned the movement as racist and as promoting violence against law enforcement.
The evidence? According to them, the movement reveres and worships cop killing terrorists like Assata Shakur. Assata Shakur, was a radical revolutionary who was a member of the BLA who allegedly shot and killed a state trooper on a New Jersey turnpike in 1973. In 1979, she escaped imprisonment, fled to Cuba, where she was granted political asylum, and has since maintained her innocent.
Other alleged evidence is that they openly call for the murder of law enforcement officers. But when you actually examine the alleged evidence, it’s not so much evidence at all. It’s all made up to smear the movement as dangerous and extreme.
Katie Pavlich is one of Black Lives Matter’s most triggered opponents. In a series of articles at TownHall and The Hill, she attempted to link the killings of several police officers to BLM. She was not the first to do so.
In one article she wrote:
It’s time to expose the Black Lives Matter ( BLM ) movement for what it is: a racist, violent hate group that promotes the execution of police officers. The evidence is in their rhetoric and written on their shirts. If you take a look at the BLM Twitter feed you’ll find photos of activists wearing shirts that say, ‘Assata Taught Me.’
They’re referring to infamous cop killer Assata Shakur, otherwise known as Joanne Chesimard, who shot and killed a New Jersey State trooper back in 1973…
BLM glorified Shakur as a hero and use her writings and materials during training sessions.
First of all, BLM is not a racist hate group, nor have they ever promoted the execution of police officers. Pavlich and anyone else who has ever made these claims, are simply full of s**t and lying through their teeth. Either that, or they’re ignorant and don’t know what the f**k they’re talking about. There is no evidence of it in their rhetoric or on their shirts.
If we are to condemn an entire movement based on the criminal actions of others, why don’t we start by condemning the police? The police are an out of control gang of thugs and murderers with badges, and because they wear badges they believe they are above the law. They somtimes get away with violating the civil rights of American citizens, planting drugs on people, and outright murder, and when one is accused of misconduct, his buddies and fellow cops usually won’t hesitate to back him up, and they are often backed by a legal system that allows them to get away with these criminal activities.
Would Pavlich and others of her ilk be open to the idea of denouncing and condemning them for what they are, criminals with badges? Not a chance. Pavlich would argue that they should not be condemned because of the actions of a few, but when it comes to a movement she doesn’t like or agree with – in this case, Black Lives Matter – everyone, the entire movement, must be condemned. She is a hack. Blind obedience to authority is all she cares about. The police are sacred, and must never be questioned or criticized. Anyone doing so will be labeled anti police, anti American, and any other anti you can think of.
Her insistence that BLM must be condemned, while the police should get a free pass for it’s violence, is rather childish and to be expected from an authoritarian like Pavlich.
Black Lives Matter has no history of violence connected to it, such as murders, bombings, and arson. But there is a movement that does. It’s a movement that carries a misnomer that is completely opposite to it’s stated mission or claim. And that is the RTL, the national right to life movement. Unlike BLM, they have a history of incredible violence behind it. Again, conservatives would never condemn it because, they agree with it’s ideology.
Another of Pavlich’s pet peeves is that the black guy in the White House and the Democratic party had the audacity to give BLM legitimacy when they clearly should have been condemned.
Not only have the leaders of the Democratic Party refused to condemn the movement, they’ve desperately tried to embrace it. In the age of Obama, where Democrats thrive on division and embrace a racial justice narrative, this isn’t surprising.
What’s really not surprising is that Pavlich, who has spent her entire career thriving on divisive politics – xenophobia, Islamophobia, and racism – and whining about everything Obama, and the Democrats said and did, would accuse them of doing that of which she is guilty. Obama rarely spoke about race issues, and when he did he was always accused of sowing racial division, which is bulls**t.
Black Lives Matter activists in Minneapolis changed, “pigs in a blanket, fry em’ like bacon,” as they marched down the street. This rhetoric also came just one day after the execution of Texas Sheriff Deputy Daron Goforth while he was filling up his patrol car at a local gas station. If you aren’t familiar, “pigs in a blanket” refers to the bodies of dead police officers in body bags.
The pathetic attempt to pin the deputy’s murder on BLM was evidence how pathetic conservatives are. There was no evidence linking the shooting to BLM.
Currently, there is also no established connection between the Black Lives Matter movement and the Harris County deputy’s death. But that didn’t stop local officials from drawing a link. Consider the following facts from CBS News’s report:
1. In a nationally televised press conference local officials repeatedly suggested that the BLM movement was fostering hatred toward the police and caused the shooting. Sheriff Hickman, for instance, said anti police rhetoric was out of control, while referencing BLM.
2. Investigators have no evidence about a motive, according to the sheriff.
These facts are inherently contradictory. If there’s no information about the motive, how can officials make any connection between the shooting and any movement, whether it’s BLM or something else? But Fox News went with the narrative. A Fox And Friends segment on Monday suggested BLM is a “hate group” and a “murder movement” because some protesters in Minnesota briefly chanted pigs in a blanket during a march after the Texas deputy’s death.
On that segment, which included Richard Fowler, Pavlich writes:
Despite Richard Fowler’s claim that he’s “watching a different Black Lives Matter movement,” we aren’t and the calls for police executions are not isolated incidents ( he also lied about the Tea Party connection to the Tucson shooting of former Congresswoman Gabrielle Gifford’s, there wasn’t a connection as he claims but that’s a topic for a other post ).
Despite Pavlich’s claim, she is the one who is watching a different BLM movement, one that exists in her own mind, where a non existent BLM is openly calling for the execution of police officers, and where police get the benefit of the doubt and are idolized as saints who are totally blameless and can do no wrong.
Jarrod Loughner may have not been connected to the Tea Party, but there were a pair of killers who were. Amanda and Jerad Miller, both of whom murdered the two LV police officers in 2014 They were Tea Party activists, and yet, I don’t recall Pavlich or any other conservative condemning the group, and denouncing it for it’s violent anti government rhetoric. How ironic.
Pavlich also tried and failed miserably to connect the five Dallas police officers, and the two New York cops to Black Lives Mater.
Even after BLM spokespeople denounced and condemned the killings, she wrote:
Make no mistake, the history of BLM shows not only empathy for cop killers, but idolatry and promotion.
The Hill – 07/12/16
Actually, there is, and never has been, any history to show that BLM wants or promotes the deaths of cops. It only exists in her mind.
She then repeats the same weak argument of Assata Shakur’s non involvement in the movement, and the ridiculous Pigs in a blanket chant that, according to Pavlich, is a homage to dead cops in body bags, and the alleged video of the What do we want? Dead cops chant which was debunked by Snopes.
There are more examples, Pavlich writes in the same article, though she fails to list any other examples that would apparently bolster her argument, and the reason she does not do so, is because there are no more examples. The afore mentioned examples she cites, are the only examples she and other conservatives have, to argue that BLM’s real message is the promotion of violence against cops – and it’s dishonest.
From the same article:
During an interview with CNN this week, a BLM activist argued that stating “all lives matter” is inherently racist. She also argued the entire police system is corrupt and refused to acknowledge that the majority of police are good. Falsely accusing all police officers of being the problem, as BLM does, rather than acknowledge that bad actors exist in every profession, shuts the door on progress and certainly isn’t the path toward sympathy or alliances.
The Hill, 07/12/2016
All lives matter may not be racist, but those who use it, don’t understand the phrase Black Lives Matter. Everyone knows that all lives matter, but black lives don’t matter to a system that values white lives over black lives.
And the entire policing system is corrupt. It’s rotten to the core. It’s just a fact.
Again, Pavlich is eager to condemn BLM movement for a false perception of violence. But on the other hand, she is not so willing to hold law enforcement to the same standards for their actual corruption and violence, that it’s not all cops, just a few bad actors, as she insists, and then complains that doing so impedes progress.
How are we supposed to work together when these are the standards on which demands for “justice” are placed – when we can’t simply state that all lives matter regardless of the color of our skin?
The Hill, 07/12/2016
We work together by acknowledging that there is systemic racism and that racial profiling exists in policing, and we find solutions. We don’t bury our heads in the sand and pretend that nothing is wrong. We don’t pretend that everything was fine until Obama came along and stirred up racial division, like Pavlich and conservatives were so fond of proclaiming. We don’t smear a movement and pretend it’s real intention is to kill cops, which is antithetical to their message and their goals.
But Pavlich and conservatives are not interested in working together with anyone who has legitimate grievances with the policing system, whether they are black, or white. She would rather they shut up and not complain.
Until conservatives like Pavlich are willing to acknowledge that all lives matter is a divisive talking point, not black lives matter – as she claims – racial tension will continue.
Finally, and predictably, Pavlich – like so many other conservatives who claim they’re not racist – falls back on the racial stereotype that black people are inherently more violent. It’s a white supremacist talking point, a distraction from the issue of police violence. Black people commit more crimes than white people, black people kill each other at alarming epidemic rates, so why aren’t they concerned about violence in their own communities? Hypocrites!
If Pavlich is so concerned about working together and making progress, she needs to start by removing the white hood she’s been wearing. It’s obstructing her vision. All she can see is white.
One Reply to “Exposing Katie Pavlich For What She Is: A Race Baiting White Supremacist”
BLM is a marxist organization admitted by one of the co founders…
Yet Karl Marx in personal correspondences admits clearly his dis like of black people…
Cognitive dissonance anyone?
LikeLiked by 1 person