Okay? That still justifies driving a car into a crowd?
You never, ever heard me say that the counter protesters didn't fight back, or that I knew who instigated the fighting. Running over people is wrong. I don't care if they are kicking your car, your personal property is not more valuable than people's lives.
The problem is not that Trump said "both sides shouldn't be using violence", its that he didn't denounce white supremacy. One of those viewpoints is objectively wrong, and that is those at the "unite the 'right' " rally. If there was a large group of people walking down the streets promoting the literal genocide of a group of other people, yes citizens should not use violence to stop them, but they president of the united states should denounce that group. This is not an opinion that should be given credit any more than the "men should own women" opinion of Muslim extremists.
And no, I am not saying that they should be silenced. If Trump had said "Both sides were using violence, that is not the way we do things in America." and then went on to denounce the white supremacist movement you wouldn't hear anything from me.
Originally posted by Threedog: Okay? That still justifies driving a car into a crowd?
You never, ever heard me say that the counter protesters didn't fight back, or that I knew who instigated the fighting. Running over people is wrong. I don't care if they are kicking your car, your personal property is not more valuable than people's lives.
The problem is not that Trump said "both sides shouldn't be using violence", its that he didn't denounce white supremacy. One of those viewpoints is objectively wrong, and that is those at the "unite the 'right' " rally. If there was a large group of people walking down the streets promoting the literal genocide of a group of other people, yes citizens should not use violence to stop them, but they president of the united states should denounce that group. This is not an opinion that should be given credit any more than the "men should own women" opinion of Muslim extremists.
And no, I am not saying that they should be silenced. If Trump had said "Both sides were using violence, that is not the way we do things in America." and then went on to denounce the white supremacist movement you wouldn't hear anything from me.
quote
I would love to a single legitimate source saying that the left "started the fighting" or fought back "just as hard"
You implied they weren't as violent, I posted proof earlier that they were. As for personal property. 1. I believe you have a right to defend personal property. 2. A reasonable person would conclude, that if antifa thugs were able to get to the driver, the driver would likely incur substantial injury and/or death.
[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 08-17-2017).]
The problem is not that Trump said "both sides shouldn't be using violence", its that he didn't denounce white supremacy. One of those viewpoints is objectively wrong, and that is those at the "unite the 'right' " rally. If there was a large group of people walking down the streets promoting the literal genocide of a group of other people, yes citizens should not use violence to stop them, but they president of the united states should denounce that group. This is not an opinion that should be given credit any more than the "men should own women" opinion of Muslim extremists.
And no, I am not saying that they should be silenced. If Trump had said "Both sides were using violence, that is not the way we do things in America." and then went on to denounce the white supremacist movement you wouldn't hear anything from me.
With every post you make your language becomes more and more like that of Chaiman Mao's Communist Red Guard.
This will obviously come as a complete surprise to you young man, but the only governments that have been in the regular business of denouncing anything or anyone are totalitarian and Communist regimes.
Because the previous leftist administration, (Obama) had no reservations about "denouncing" ideas, politics and even people does NOT mean that the practice is right, legal or proper in this country.
The government has NO constitutional legal right to "denounce" anything or anyone, particularly American citizens.
The President was absolutely correct and proper in taking the stance he has.
The depth of your ignorance that you are displaying on topics ranging from the causus belli of the civil war to basic American civics is astonishing.
...and concerning.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 08-17-2017).]
With every post you make your language becomes more and more like that of Chaiman Mao's Communist Red Guard.
This will obviously come as a complete surprise to you young man, but the only governments that have been in the regular business of denouncing anything or anyone are totalitarian and Communist regimes.
Because the previous leftist administration, (Obama) had no reservations about "denouncing" ideas, politics and even people does NOT mean that the practice is right, legal or proper in this country.
The government has NO constitutional legal right to "denounce" anything or anyone, particularly American citizens.
The President was absolutely correct and proper in taking the stance he has.
The depth of your ignorance that you are displaying on topics ranging from the causus belli of the civil war to basic American civics is astonishing.
...and concerning.
If he has no right to denounce anything, why is it okay that Trump constantly denounces Islam?
If he has no right to denounce anything, why is it okay that Trump constantly denounces Islam?
I have read of the President speaking out against Islamic extremism / terror, as here:
"Trump denounces Islamic extremism, calls for unity in Saudi speech
May 21, 2017
President Trump on Sunday delivered his much-anticipated speech on Islam and the war on terror before leaders representing 50 Muslim-majority nations in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Trump began by announcing his intention to share "a message of friendship, hope, and love" in "the heart of the Muslim world," promising the United States would "not seek to impose our way of life on others." He soon pivoted to the subject of terrorism, calling for cooperation to fight "Islamic extremism, and the Islamicists, and Islamic terror of all kinds." He praised the U.S.-Saudi arms and business deals announced the day before, and thanked a laundry list of Muslim-majority nations for opposing terrorism and hosting refugees. The question of our era, Trump concluded, is "Will we be indifferent in the presence of evil?" With unity among the assembled states, he said, "nobody, absolutely nobody, can beat us."
It is manifestly obvious that he is speaking about criminal, terrorist activity. Murdering people. Terrorists who are actively committing such crimes.
I have never heard of him speaking against the entire religion as a whole or peaceful individuals as you suggest. Especially American citizens, and in particular muslim ones.
Can you provide a verifiable example of such a thing?
I also pray that it isn't your intent to take this down the usual leftist "well what about ________?" rabbit hole of illogical discourse.
I won't play that child's game with you.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 08-17-2017).]
I have read of the President speaking out against Islamic extremism / terror, as here:
"Trump denounces Islamic extremism, calls for unity in Saudi speech
May 21, 2017
President Trump on Sunday delivered his much-anticipated speech on Islam and the war on terror before leaders representing 50 Muslim-majority nations in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Trump began by announcing his intention to share "a message of friendship, hope, and love" in "the heart of the Muslim world," promising the United States would "not seek to impose our way of life on others." He soon pivoted to the subject of terrorism, calling for cooperation to fight "Islamic extremism, and the Islamicists, and Islamic terror of all kinds." He praised the U.S.-Saudi arms and business deals announced the day before, and thanked a laundry list of Muslim-majority nations for opposing terrorism and hosting refugees. The question of our era, Trump concluded, is "Will we be indifferent in the presence of evil?" With unity among the assembled states, he said, "nobody, absolutely nobody, can beat us."
It is manifestly obvious that he is speaking about criminal, terrorist activity. Murdering people. Terrorists who are actively committing such crimes.
I have never heard of him speaking against the entire religion as a whole or peaceful individuals. Especially American citizens, and in particular muslim ones.
Can you provide a verifiable example of such a thing?
I also pray that it isn't your intent to take this down the usual leftist "well what about ________?" rabbit hole of illogical discourse.
I won't play that child's game with you.
Murdering people, exactly like what the Neo Nazis are calling for? Many of them are literally calling for more deaths so they can get their way.
Murdering people, exactly like what the Neo Nazis are calling for? Many of them are literally calling for more deaths so they can get their way.
Please don't play that nonsense game with me.
You know damn well there is a distinct difference between speech, ("calling for" as you put it), and actual ACTS.
...or do you?
I sure as hell don't see you trying to stop BLM "calling for" the killing of police "so they can get their way".
Do you think there is somehow a moral difference?
By the way, as you have repeatedly done in many other threads, you have refused to answer a direct question.
I'll repeat it:
I have never heard of him, (The President), speaking against the entire religion as a whole or peaceful individuals as you suggest. Especially American citizens, and in particular muslim ones.
Can you provide a verifiable example of such a thing?
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 08-17-2017).]
FROM A CHARLOTTESVILLE COPS OWN WORDS: A Charlottesville police officer has come forward to express his anger at being told to “stand down” by the city mayor during violent clashes between protestors. He also claims the protests, which pitched “Unite The Right goer's” against members of Antifa, were “set up” to further the agenda of the elites. “We [Charlotesville police] were ordered to bring the rival groups together. As soon as they were in contact with each other, we were told to stand down. It was outrageous. We weren’t allowed to arrest anyone without asking the mayor first. We weren’t even allowed to stop the driver as he sped away.“ “The event was being set up as far back as at least May and it went like clockwork.” Michael Signer, the mayor of Charlottesville, ordered police to stand down during the most chaotic and destructive period of the protests – despite police protests against the orders. “We wanted to do our job and keep the peace. But these mother******s in charge really want to destroy America.” Fox News reporter Doug McKelway was on the scene in Charlottesville and he backs up the police officer’s claims. “I can say, having been in Emancipation Park from early on that morning, that what I saw with my own two eyes confirms what this law enforcement source told us.
3dog oh 3 dog, where are you 3dog
[This message has been edited by Keel (edited 08-18-2017).]
Originally posted by Threedog: Okay? That still justifies driving a car into a crowd?
Anyone remember when the BLM sniper targeted white cops in Dallas? Remember how quick the media were to tell us that the protesters weren't guilty by association because of the actions of one person? Now every single person not willing to bow to the Marxist line was guilty of being behind the wheel of the Challenger. It's almost as though the left is all about forcing you to submit or something.
You never, ever heard me say that the counter protesters didn't fight back, or that I knew who instigated the fighting. Running over people is wrong. I don't care if they are kicking your car, your personal property is not more valuable than people's lives.
The problem is not that Trump said "both sides shouldn't be using violence", its that he didn't denounce white supremacy. One of those viewpoints is objectively wrong, and that is those at the "unite the 'right' " rally. If there was a large group of people walking down the streets promoting the literal genocide of a group of other people, yes citizens should not use violence to stop them, but they president of the united states should denounce that group. This is not an opinion that should be given credit any more than the "men should own women" opinion of Muslim extremists.
And no, I am not saying that they should be silenced. If Trump had said "Both sides were using violence, that is not the way we do things in America." and then went on to denounce the white supremacist movement you wouldn't hear anything from me.
Well, mister mister, if the vehicle is getting pelted with rocks, balloons with piss and balloons with acid, would you just sit there until they pulled you out of car and started using the bats on you???
Hint the acid and piss and rock marks are on that vehicle, and the cops have said vehicle, the truth will come out. Sadly it'll be forced to wait till the "peaceful" protesters cool off.. That's the part that buries your narrative, The facts that both the rocks/bats/piss/ and acid left trace on the body of vehicle.. if it wasn't getting battered and hit with this stuff it not have trace of it on the body.. so try again.. don't forget to read the bold print, that I added that showcases your and the lefties double standards..
How ever did you get a teachers lic. Does your boss know how clueless you are of civics/history/etc..?? I think he should find out..
[This message has been edited by E.Furgal (edited 08-18-2017).]
Originally posted by Threedog: Murdering people, exactly like what the Neo Nazis are calling for? Many of them are literally calling for more deaths so they can get their way.
This is EXACTLY what black lifes matter say. They say kill cops.
Originally posted by Threedog: Okay? That still justifies driving a car into a crowd?
You never, ever heard me say that the counter protesters didn't fight back, or that I knew who instigated the fighting. Running over people is wrong. I don't care if they are kicking your car, your personal property is not more valuable than people's lives.
The problem is not that Trump said "both sides shouldn't be using violence", its that he didn't denounce white supremacy. One of those viewpoints is objectively wrong, and that is those at the "unite the 'right' " rally. If there was a large group of people walking down the streets promoting the literal genocide of a group of other people, yes citizens should not use violence to stop them, but they president of the united states should denounce that group. This is not an opinion that should be given credit any more than the "men should own women" opinion of Muslim extremists.
And no, I am not saying that they should be silenced. If Trump had said "Both sides were using violence, that is not the way we do things in America." and then went on to denounce the white supremacist movement you wouldn't hear anything from me.
This is a change of tune for you. But not enough change, it is also wrong for black lifes matter to riot, loot and chant about violence and murder of cops and white people. Let's start with you Threedog, do you denounce black lifes matter for such behavior?
The problem is not that Trump said "both sides shouldn't be using violence", its that he didn't denounce white supremacy. One of those viewpoints is objectively wrong, and that is those at the "unite the 'right' " rally. If there was a large group of people walking down the streets promoting the literal genocide of a group of other people, yes citizens should not use violence to stop them, but they president of the united states should denounce that group. This is not an opinion that should be given credit any more than the "men should own women" opinion of Muslim extremists.
And no, I am not saying that they should be silenced. If Trump had said "Both sides were using violence, that is not the way we do things in America." and then went on to denounce the white supremacist movement you wouldn't hear anything from me.
Did obama "denounce" the black panthers that were threatening to "kill whitey" at the voting booths?.?.? Why is it only white racists are damned?.?.? You hear any other race saying or doing anything racist, and it's ok?.?.? I tend to find there are more non-white racists than white ones.
Hell during the obama administration if someone called the cops here in Vegas and said it was a mexican that committed the charge, they would do nothing about it, for fear of being charged with hate crimes. Even border patrol was getting that way too.
The problem is not that Trump said "both sides shouldn't be using violence", its that he didn't denounce white supremacy. One of those viewpoints is objectively wrong, and that is those at the "unite the 'right' " rally..
Is it the presidents job to throw out moral rulings? I don't really see it that way. When Obama did it I found it odd. Yes racism is wrong.
Is it the presidents job to throw out moral rulings? I don't really see it that way. When Obama did it I found it odd. Yes racism is wrong.
Anyone who looks to the President to be a moral compass is misguided. Ones moral compass lies within, and should be nurtured by their elders, clergy and their God. The President is the Chief Executive, tasked with protecting the Country and enforcing the laws. The best bosses I ever had were hard nosed, businesslike and brusque. They were easy to understand and deal with. If you did your job, and looked to improve the workplace, you were golden. Perhaps if the protesters had any job experience, they would understand this.....
your personal property is not more valuable than people's lives.
THAT is where the left and right differ greatly....at far as we are concerned YES, our personal property IS worth more than the life of the criminal trying to steal or destroy it. If the criminal valued his own life, he wouldn't be attacking and we are more than willing to match his valuation.
Many already know history, but I challenge those that think they have knowledge to begin with Germany in the spring of 1933. Spend some time looking into how nazis took over a distracted needy government of peoples. Look into the take over of public media, the burning of over 25,000 books (including those of Einstein and Freud), and the systematic segregation of humans. Read the history and tell me that there is no stark coincidence as to the way the demoncratic party is operating currently within our borders. I dare you different...
Source? I would love to see a major BLM rally that is calling for the death of police officers, and not just some independent idiot on Twitter/Tumblr
I was listening to BBC on the radio today and the topic was about pulling the pug on hate speach web domains on the Internet. They had 2 people that worked for the aclu, one of them is in favor of such actions because of the possibility of the hate speach being manifest into real physical harm or death. The other person was against shutting down such sites out of fear that they would loose what he called one of the most beneficial anti-police violence resources = the black lifes matter sites. Because of their violent history, hate speach and racism. Threedog, the source you asked for is the aclu. His fear is that the blm sites would be interpreted as hate groups and as such would get their domain sites removed.
[This message has been edited by Rickady88GT (edited 08-18-2017).]
Source? I would love to see a major BLM rally that is calling for the death of police officers, and not just some independent idiot on Twitter/Tumblr
Fixing problems in America starts with those that want to change America. Threedog, do you denounce the hate, violence and racism in the black lifes matter movement?
Many already know history, but I challenge those that think they have knowledge to begin with Germany in the spring of 1933. Spend some time looking into how nazis took over a distracted needy government of peoples. Look into the take over of public media, the burning of over 25,000 books (including those of Einstein and Freud), and the systematic segregation of humans. Read the history and tell me that there is no stark coincidence as to the way the demoncratic party is operating currently within our borders. I dare you different...
But it'll be different this time.. we'll have a limit on it, it won't get to that point.. That is all you'll here or they will go.. whhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat your crazy, it could never happen here..
Fixing problems in America starts with those that want to change America. Threedog, do you denounce the hate, violence and racism in the black lifes matter movement?
You are not going to get an honest answer.. My grandmother always said actions speak louder than words.. you can't bullshit actions like you can the spoken/written word..
" Running over people is wrong. I don't care if they are kicking your car, your personal property is not more valuable than people's lives."
N0. In self defense your allowed to use any means necessary to stop the threat. He had a mob attacking him. That makes it self defense, and mark my words a lawyer will get an acquittal. Id do exactly the same thing if Im surrounded by a mob beating my car im in with bats and 2x4s. He only backed up because the other 2 cars in front of him blocked that way out. My property will always be worth more than any terrorists life to me. Its even worth more than a thief's life.
They call themselves anti-fascist, but in reality they are nothing more that anarchist.
They are actually a communist subversive group that dates back to 1921
The Antifaschistische Aktion, also known as "The Red Front", and also sometimes called "The United Front" was officially formed by the Soviet Union’s third Communist International, ("Comintern"), held at the World Congress in Moscow in July 1921
Note the sign being held up by these German Antifa Communists and the similarity to the "bash the fash" illustrations and symbols of Antifa today.
Although these guys engaged in street fights with the National Socialists, (Nazis), their primary and stated goal was a communist revolution in Germany.
The 2016 annual report by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), Germany’s domestic intelligence service, notes the the label of “fascism” pushed by Antifa is often not actual fascism, but merely a label they assign to “capitalism.”
Many of the "Antifa" factions have now been outlawed in Germany.
For many years before, and just after, the reunification of Germany, the SED, (Communist Party of East Germany / DDR), organized and funded the Antifaschistische Aktion, (Antifa), to stir up trouble in West Germany. Operations of "Antifa" were managed by the Communist East German secret police, (Stasi).
Pure and Simple. They're communists.
That said, many, if not most, of the young Americans involved in Antifa have the political IQ of a tree stump.
They have no idea of Antifa's real origins, political goals or leadership.
They are prime examples of what Vladimir Lenin called: "полезные идиоты", ("useful idiots").
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 08-20-2017).]
.
.jpg)
