1921 Tulsa Massacre WAS A BIG LIE

[Gdjjr]

Nope.

Next.

Wow! How erudite- impressive

 

[TNHarley]

It was a massacre. Dozens of people died. On both sides.

 

[Crepitus]

Nope.

Next.

Wow! How erudite- impressive

Water is wet.

Deal with it.

 

[Gdjjr]

It was a massacre.

Not according to dictionaries-

 

[TNHarley]

More people have died, and wayyyyy more in damage, in the BLM/ANTIFA riots than this.
Wonder if that will be considered a massacre.
LOL JK
Because.
Cult.

 

[Gdjjr]

Water is wet.

Deal with it.

You're stupid- I'm trying to deal with it-

Post 20

The usual suspects Uncle Tom ed the video- and, helped prove his point- relying on propaganda to verify their feelings- vs using common sense/logic and evidence to come to a conclusion- it seems, that some, maybe many, badly want to point a finger at their perception of wrong- refusing to see where three fingers point back- always blaming someone else for their perceived problems- and, it isn't just liberals that do that, BTW- it's a common characteristic of people in general-

No, I'm not defending wrong doing- so just stop, before you start, and think! for crying out loud- on your own- the results (which we're living in) speak for themselves- or, if you can cite evidence that what the guy in the video said/thinks is wrong- just do it- no, you haven't- tell us how what he said is inaccurate- don't use published, always skewed, views- lead us to how you've arrived at your conclusions- that's what the video did- common courtesy and decorum protocol dictates the course of action-

 

[Gdjjr]

Because.
Cult.

Because: Lies

 

[TNHarley]

Because.
Cult.

Because: Lies

Whats a lie?

 

[Gdjjr]

Whats a lie?

an untruth-

 

[TNHarley]

Whats a lie?

an untruth-

LOL you know what I meant!

 

[YoursTruly]

Fact is, there's two sides of this. One sides is telling at least a partial truth. The other side is probably telling the partial truth. We only know what we're told. None of us have a crystal ball to see actually what happened?
Was the woman telling the truth? Or was the young man telling the truth? Were both of them lying just a little, with enough truth to make their stories seem factual?
Who knows?

So then, we pick a side to believe and just go with it.
Question is, why do we choose to believe one sides over the other, when all we have to go on is what we're told?

 

[Gdjjr]

when all we have to go on is what we're told?

Results- speak for themselves. Like any problem, you start at the problem and work back- in cases like this consider the source also has to apply- the source(s) are known to have agendas- what are they in this case? What we're told is always agenda driven- as is said about history- the winner writes it- in this case, the winner is an agenda of vilifying white people- and trust me when I say, I have very little use for white people, even though I am one- but, to blame them for what happened is agenda driven and the agenda isn't the truth- how do I know? Results. In this case BLM, making saints of common criminals and Black "leaders" cashing in on it for, get ready, their agenda-
There is always more than one side to any story- again, results. That a story teller, no matter what his title or standing is biased should be no surprise- however, in the video, the bias isn't what is expected- and, his version of events coincides with what little reading I've done on other matters of similar topics- always looking to blame someone else- finger pointing- three point back- the alleged rape in the elevator- how do you rape someone in an elevator for crying out loud? Especially that long ago- they were just mechanized cages moving up and down in an open space shaft- now, let's work back a little farther to what he said about slavery and the south- that's an argument old as the war itself- and who wins that argument? Winners of the war- but, if you read anything besides the approved texts the winner is shown to be a liar- really? Yeah, the north was envious of the southern commerce of cotton- the northerners had slaves they called house boys- the north also conscripted black people to fight for it, the north- let's visit the case he talked about the black man owning slaves that went to court- do the approved winner texts teach that? I don't remember it from school-
Results- have answers.

 

[bodecea]

Anything that suggests a "black Wall Street" is suspect from the get-go. We are talking about the stupidest people in the world here, and Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Fascinating, Chubby. Your comment fits in nicely with the trump cult views on minorities.

 

[bodecea]

More people have died, and wayyyyy more in damage, in the BLM/ANTIFA riots than this.
Wonder if that will be considered a massacre.
LOL JK
Because.
Cult.

300 plus people have died in the so-called BLM/ANTIFA riots?

 

[Gdjjr]

300 plus people have died in the so-called BLM/ANTIFA riots?

How many have to die to suit your agenda?

 

[Gdjjr]

so-called BLM/ANTIFA riots?

What would you call the actions?

 

[bodecea]

300 plus people have died in the so-called BLM/ANTIFA riots?

How many have to die to suit your agenda?

"to suit my agenda"? What is that even supposed to mean to you?

 

[Gdjjr]

"to suit my agenda"? What is that even supposed to mean to you?

so-called BLM/ANTIFA riots?

 

[YoursTruly]

Results- speak for themselves. Like any problem, you start at the problem and work back- in cases like this consider the source also has to apply- the source(s) are known to have agendas- what are they in this case? What we're told is always agenda driven- as is said about history- the winner writes it- in this case, the winner is an agenda of vilifying white people- and trust me when I say, I have very little use for white people, even though I am one- but, to blame them for what happened is agenda driven and the agenda isn't the truth- how do I know? Results. In this case BLM, making saints of common criminals and Black "leaders" cashing in on it for, get ready, their agenda-
There is always more than one side to any story- again, results. That a story teller, no matter what his title or standing is biased should be no surprise- however, in the video, the bias isn't what is expected- and, his version of events coincides with what little reading I've done on other matters of similar topics- always looking to blame someone else- finger pointing- three point back- the alleged rape in the elevator- how do you rape someone in an elevator for crying out loud? Especially that long ago- they were just mechanized cages moving up and down in an open space shaft- now, let's work back a little farther to what he said about slavery and the south- that's an argument old as the war itself- and who wins that argument? Winners of the war- but, if you read anything besides the approved texts the winner is shown to be a liar- really? Yeah, the north was envious of the southern commerce of cotton- the northerners had slaves they called house boys- the north also conscripted black people to fight for it, the north- let's visit the case he talked about the black man owning slaves that went to court- do the approved winner texts teach that? I don't remember it from school-
Results- have answers.

The guy in the OP... His sources may have been agenda driven. Or the source they got it from may have had one. That's sort of the point. If we read a news article, from a source that we trust, that's still just being told by someone else.
The original source was the woman and the 19yr old young man. No one else was in the elevator with them. The 2nd source was the all white police officers. The third source was a bunch of blacks who for the most part, and by law, had very little to do with whites.
The womans statement, it could've been true. The black guy may have came onto her. On the otherhand, the woman maybe have been a racist and didn't feel like she should be having to give any assistance to a black man.

Obviously there was already tension between blacks and white. They were segregated for a reason.
#1 it was a law.
#2 Blacks did a lot better amongst themselves back then.

 

[Gdjjr]

His sources may have been agenda driven.

Or they may have been true- may have is ambiguous- the media (and war winners) have always had an agenda- and truth had very little to do with it (results from History proves that) - like I said, reading other than war- winner approved stories is how you get other evidence contradicting the war-winners narrative- so, when you consider the source(s) which do you prefer; Known liars as history proves, or a different non-war-winner source who has nothing to gain- there are many stories I have read that contradict the war-winners narrative about slavery in the south- I'll admit I've never seen a percentage, but, when you consider the number of land owners with enough land to garner outside (slaves) labor 6% sounds pretty reasonable vs the narrative the war-winner narrative demands is the truth, that the south was all about slavery - that was physically impossible- as far as Tulsa goes, I stand by my assertions there as well- agenda driven narratives- elevators back then were open cages- nobody in his right mind, never mind a black kid in a racist culture, would even consider raping a white woman knowing full well there was an end to the elevator ride- not even a white man would do that- it's preposterous on its surface, never mind digging into it- as for me, I also know white men are racist as all get out and white women don't fair well in the truth dept- I also agree with the video man that black people now days have lost their ever lovin mind- especially some old black people who claim victim every time they open their mouth- I also agree there are some really good black people and some pretty good white people- I also know that white people define a narrative and some black people perpetrate it- at this point in time, the Tulsa deal is narrowed to a a what? Massacre? How many actually died? Sand Creek was a massacre- Little Big Horn, the Thibedeaux sugar cane fields killings were a massacre- Hiroshima was a massacre- Nagasaki- even the jews in europe were massacred- there was no massacre in Tulsa as the "narrative" depicts- that is agenda driven.