The person allegedly (legal term of art) responsible for the murder has been charged with the murder. Being there, chanting thoroughly obnoxious things, that still doesn't make you an accomplice to the murder.
American White Supremicist Nazi's are being outted on Twitter...Hallelujah!!!
- Thread starter Baller Time
- Start date
Glad you qualified the same part. But the word traitor has come up more than once as well.
My point is I don't believe that leaders should be held accountable for every follower who goes wacko. If degenerate racists chose to park their vote with Trump it is their right. But when they try to legitimatize themselves with that vote it means nothing.
They are still degenerate racists. But that doesn't mean Trump is.
No doubt, the IRA and Sinn Fein deserve most of the credit for the peace process and the eventual Belfast Accord but I would be remiss if I didn't also mention the UDA (as reluctant as they were) as well as the British government under Prime Minister Tony Blair. Last but definitely not least the Great Peace Advocate President Bill Clinton who invited Gerry Adam to the White House. Honourable mention to Senator George Mitchell and General John de Chastelaine.
"The Troubles" is over and there is now a whole generation of Irish men and women who have no blood on their hands. This is Martin McGuinness' (R.I.P.) greatest legacy. It would also not be a surprise if Sinn Fein win the most votes in the next election or the one after that
But he sure as shit should be held accountable for for being reluctant to blame the hate filled loons and trying to shift the blame.
Funny that you quote a Jewish group at the same time as a site suggesting a Jew is manipulating the world.
You can't really believe what you wrote unless you have a fundamental comprehension problem. Trump did not "shift the blame". He made a truthful statement. He said that some who were protesting the removal of the statue are not bigots and were protesting peacefully, and that some who came to counter protest were violent. He's right about both. I've been watching CNN tonight. They've had quite a few panelists who seem to be of the view that you can be aggressive and "shut down" others if you are in the right. That's the problem. It's an unworkable ethic whether you're purporting to present news on TV or engaging in dialogue in the public square. Trump is trying to condemn violence - on all sides. At no time did he blame the victims of the car attack for that attack.
I'll make it simple:
1. The car attacker is murderer (barring a defence that has yet to be publicly disclosed).
2. Some protesters were aggressive, intentionally provocative and/or violent.
3. Some counter protesters were aggressive, intentionally provocative and/or violent.
The city council and the police also totally failed in their duties to create the conditions for peaceful protest and counter protest.
And, of course, the media were there to take pictures of the horror and disgrace, because that sells. Truth, not so much.
Then you explain why his shifting the blame is not shifting the blame.
Yes there were two sides. On one side was a group that was expressly there to promote racism and bigotry. Despite Trump's claims, there was no way that 'fine people' were marching along chanting with others about Jews and blacks. On the other side were people opposed to the unabashed hatred.
Simply put, one side was promoting abhorrent ideas and to not admit that is just wrong.
Your comments are too objective for the hysterical crowd.
On the subject of outing, why don't we also out all the BLM (and their violent rants) and the G20 protesters?
Wrong, again. Some people on one side were promoting abhorrent ideas. Not everyone at this protest was marching or chanting. Some were. Some people just didn't agree with the left's take on the symbolism of these statues, and don't want them removed. Some people just think its a waste of money to remove them. Some people on the other side came to Charlottesville to pick a fight with people they disagree with. These people don't respect the police or the law. They only govern themselves by their own personal sense of what is right/justified. No thanks to living in their ideal world! Of course, not everyone at the counter protest was an anarchist. Some simply wanted to voice their opposition to any public demonstration by neo-nazis, or feel that the statues are symbols of racism. Yet, the leaders on the left have not denounced the anarchist trouble makers in their ranks, because they were "protecting" the good folks (see the statements of Cornel West on CNN last night).
I think the time that public demonstrations had any impact on real political decision making has come and gone. At best, they are just rallying points for potential future political movements.
These demonstrations and counter demonstrations, and even the death of a woman, clearly changed nothing.
He was quite clear in his blame. What I don't get is giving the alt left a pass for violent behavior. They also showed up armed and itching for a fight. Used the weaponry.
And the cops stood back and let it happen.
By not condemning both you are actually Encouraging the alt left to use violence and they will get a pass. Even if the instigate. Inciting a riot is inciting a riot. One side should not get a pass.
Here you go Bud:
https://video.vice.com/en_ca/video/...-news-tonight-on-hbo/59921b1d2f8d32d808bddfbc
A thousand plus torch bearing, racist spewing 'very fine people' in a ominous night time march onto the Univ. of Virginia campus met by a few UV students surrounding the Robert E. Lee statue.
Please feel free to point out some of those 'very fine people' in that march who were not promoting 'abhorrent ideas'.
The torches, the night, the anger, the hate, the marching ..... all that was missing to complete the images of the post civil war and post WW1 KKK rallies was the hoods and the lynchings.
I watched Fox News last night and they deliberately did not show the Neo-Nazi demonstration in context to these so called "Very Fine and Peaceful" people. Instead they will go back to videos of Trump denouncing the KKK, and then calling out all the Fake News in defence of Trump. That is the problem with the very biased and polarised news in the USA. You will always then find the Youtube picking everything out of context and the alt right supporters on this board trying to post all the hoax videos.
One group of thugs fighting another group of thugs is one thing.
The difference is one group was fighting for hatred and the other against. It sure makes a moral difference in my mind.
More significant, the newsworthy part of this event was the fact some racist fuck became a terrorist and rammed his car into people he disagreed with. That was the serious action and came only from one side.
This same group of thugs who showed up to fight the Nazi's are the ones who show up to Berkeley to set fires and stop free speech. The ones who show up armed and escalate things. I think that when you show up armed you are not their for anything but to bust heads.
And that is defined as vigilantism.
As to the terrorist who used the car no one with a wit of human decency is supporting or even attempting to de-escalate his actions. He needs to have every damn law book thrown at him and be made a example with a public trial. No if ands or buts.
But I can compartmentalize this. The initial melee was a joint effort. Reports say the first pepper sprayer was an Alt Left rioter. And the footage I saw shown everyone giving as good as getting.
Lots of protesters did not engage in violence. The ones that did were wrong.
And more so the LE who let two sets of extremists square off in public should be ashamed for the danger they placed the public and legitimate protesters in. It's their job to stop it before it escalates.
And apparently the newsworthy part isn't the driver or the victim. It's the President. Again.
And this is only the beginning. There is no putting this genie back now. Not without a lot of police brutality. The extremists on both sides are feeling empowered now. They are not going to let this go and I expect a lot more coming up.
Depends on how you interpret "aid and abetting", Counsel. Depends what you were chanting. Why you were chanting it. Where you were chanting it when the murder took place. Criminal Law 101.
Speaking of armed, have you looked at any pictures of the racist shits showing up?
Plenty of stuff going on. Racist fucks march to promote their racism. People show up to protest their racist bullshit. Both sides were prepared for violence. Only one side showed up preaching abhorrent hatred. Only one side had someone try to deny free speech by driving their car into them.
And as I said, this is not news because protesters fought each other. It is news because openly racist scum marched in big numbers and someone plowed into a crowd of people, thankfully killing only one.
The U.S. Supreme Court has spoken a number of times on this issue. Was it an immediate threat "kill those Hungarians by the streetlight" or was it more general, "all Albanians are scum." or even "kill all the Albanians." The later is political free speech the first remark would in all likelihood be criminal.
Not saying it is pretty, or that I approve of it but shades of F.G.E. Martin Niemöller. . . .
I think that you're over simplifying. How about shouting "All Albanians are scum" 3 feet away from the Albanian being beaten up, while forming a circle around the Albanian?
That'd satisfy s.21 and then some.
