In 30 seconds I found a 1966 Tribune article explaining why King and SNCC are responsible for "creating a white backlash"pic.twitter.com/e6NRM5A5Si
Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
In 30 seconds I found a 1966 Tribune article explaining why King and SNCC are responsible for "creating a white backlash"pic.twitter.com/e6NRM5A5Si
Here's one from 1968 that says that a judge's writings **praising both King and Gandhi** are disqualifying bc King and Gandhi were both militant provocateurs!pic.twitter.com/k3TUpYXZ51
Here is a 1966 Tribune editorial arguing that MLK's real goal is to incite violencepic.twitter.com/bzJNfn2ZZh
anyway historical literacy is important if you are going to professionally use historical arguments to scold people
Sorry here's another one where the Chicago Tribune editorial board explicitly calls for King to be imprisoned for nonviolent marches in white neighborhoodspic.twitter.com/7zCnziPKQ8
Just reread this and marveled again that white people responded to a nonviolent civil rights march by ***rioting, injuring 20 police officers, and burning a dozen cars*** and the Tribune editorial board blamed ***Martin Luther King***
In case you thought we were in some uniquely up-is-down 1984 kind of moment
mlk wasn't granted "civility" status until after he was dead and was no longer a threat to the people who hated him
@conor64 has no idea what he is talking about.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.