And you said you could point a gun at a cop. That would be violent white privilege, wouldn't it? I guess we'd have to agree the lines are blurred.
They proved the narrative wrong by controlling it with non-violence. The public became incensed, as you stated. Particularly when a woman, whose name slips my mind, gave her account on live tv, that was abruptly cut into, but the news already grabbed it and ran with it, and more after bloody sunday. Would the public have been so incensed had the protesters been violent from the start? I say no.
They proved the narrative wrong by controlling it with non-violence. The public became incensed, as you stated. Particularly when a woman, whose name slips my mind, gave her account on live tv, that was abruptly cut into, but the news already grabbed it and ran with it, and more after bloody sunday. Would the public have been so incensed had the protesters been violent from the start? I say no.
I can't remember where this verse is from, I think it got removed from canon:
"I don't hang around with mostly men because I'm gay. It's because men are better than women. Better trained, better equipped...better. Just better! I'm not gay."
For context, this is the previous verse:
"Hi Jesus" -robvalue
"I don't hang around with mostly men because I'm gay. It's because men are better than women. Better trained, better equipped...better. Just better! I'm not gay."
For context, this is the previous verse:
"Hi Jesus" -robvalue
