No, she dismissed one group that is has a goal for how to improve the world and correct a perceived injustice, and then promotes a second "group" (I use that word this hesitantly since it not like they meet up for rallies or anything) that does nothing but try to shut down the former.
Dismissed as a bad idea for good reason.
She seems to be in a position of authority though, so her words are more scrutinized. You can't really compare what she said to some random person on the internet.
Yes you can. Her words can be scrutinized and any criticism she received she needs to be responsible for, but at the end of the day, she remains free to say whatever she wants. And the consequences should not be attempted censureship because she disagrees with an opinion popular at the university she goes to.
That alllivesmatter is merely a rascist suppression of the blacklivesmatter movement, its stands for nothing except the suppression of the black voice. If you want to start a new group that focuses on police brutality in general rather than just black people that great, the world can always use more people working together for a better future. Alllives matter is not that though.
No, it stands for the suppression of BlackLivesMatter, a racist, supremacist, insane group made up of a mix of normal, passive members and active, cultist members. As you said before, AllLivesMatter isn't a group, it's just an idea, which is always a better option than a "group with an ideology that you either follow or don't follow, and if you don't, you're the enemy". Do scumbags use #AllLivesMatter? Of course, but all it is is a common sense idea that people can use and interpret in whatever way they wish.
BlackLivesMatter supporters can tweet about celebrating the deaths of cops, so a student girl can make a tweet about disagreeing with them, without having sanctions thrown at her and being told to get "educated".