Blame on both sides

Status
Not open for further replies.
Who wandered into whose town looking for violence? That's the question here.

Well one side went to protest something, the other side went to "counter-protest". I don't really get the purpose of a counter protest, generally speaking, why not just have a separate protest of your own on another day?
 
Well one side went to protest something, the other side went to "counter-protest". I don't really get the purpose of a counter protest, generally speaking, why not just have a separate protest of your own on another day?

Because free speech also allows you to say how stupid other peoples views are? You are an advocate of free speech aren't you?
 
I'd be curious to know how much of the violence occurred on the prescribed route compared to when they started deviating from it.

I don't think they deviated from a 'route' per say but rather they had a permit to protest in a park and that protest was later shut down causing them to spill out onto the street

reading the above linked reports it seems the violence occurred when they were trying to initially enter the park and were blocked by counter protestors and then after the police shut down the event leading to protestors spilling out into the streets and mixing with counter protestors

you then had the situation later after various protestors had left and a bunch of counter protestors had gathered in a street when the vehicle attack occurred


it does seem like the local law enforcement could have done a lot better to try and prevent this and keep both groups separated - like having a pen/location for the counter protest which could have stopped the initial violence when the protestors tried to enter the park. The thing is local authorities have a lot of control/influence over law enforcement over there and the local authority really didn't want this protest, it went ahead because of a ruling by a federal judge. The local police didn't properly separate the protestors and then managed to shut down the protest anyway which seems to have helped allow a lot of the violence between the two sides.
 
Because free speech also allows you to say how stupid other peoples views are? You are an advocate of free speech aren't you?

I'm not sure that free speech needs to mean both sides in the same place at the same time when they clearly have wildly opposite views, there does need to be consideration for safety and property when the inevitable clashes occur.
 
I'm not sure that free speech needs to mean both sides in the same place at the same time when they clearly have wildly opposite views, there does need to be consideration for safety and property when the inevitable clashes occur.

If someone holds repugnant views then they should be challenged, doing it a couple of days later isn't really challenging them.

If you believe in a free society where people are allowed to air their views then, unfortunately, violence like this is almost inevitable or policing costs are much higher. Why should such vile views as these white supremacists go unchallenged on the day?
 
I'd be curious to know how much of the violence occurred on the prescribed route compared to when they started deviating from it.

Not entirely sure it is relevant as the counter protestors were blocking the protest from entering the park. Both sides went expecting, anticipating and probably wanting trouble.
 
Well one side went to protest something, the other side went to "counter-protest". I don't really get the purpose of a counter protest, generally speaking, why not just have a separate protest of your own on another day?
One side went to protest and to stir up trouble and intimidate people, I think you mean.
 
One side went to protest and to stir up trouble and intimidate people, I think you mean.

You've already made your mind up even though you weren't there, I don't know why you're actually debating. I'm saying not everyone there was a Neo Nazi, there were people there with legitimate views who aren't racists, and also there was trouble makers on both sides. I feel it's wrong to slap the big fat Nazi label on anyone disagreeing with your views. If however you disagree with that then I'm not going to attempt to change your mind.
 
One side went to protest and to stir up trouble and intimidate people, I think you mean.
You'll never resolve who should have walked where and who's allowed to protest / counter protest what. All one can do is judge each person by the individual's values of morality and human decency, something shown to be sorely lacking on both sides.
 
Oh shocker! who cares? LOL? Its NOT about race, its about religion these days - ISIS - yeah, lets **** off your absolute **** religion.
With love, an atheist. Come after my young niece and I will.. haha, just try me, I'll absolutely r you like anything has ever experienced and I will, absolutely take absolutr take extreme pleasure in ... yeah, whatever it is, proper... come on... extremism on extremism, I want it, brute on brute.

MI5 if you need anyone to do any torturing, hack me, employ me, I will do the most extreme thing things anyone could possibly imagine - with absolute pride and pure "whateverness" - literally, just try me, I'll do it for free I assure you with zero regret, I'm perfect for the job.
Is this a wind up after downing a few special brew?
 
Really? From the BBC

The rally on Boston Common, which attracted only a small crowd, disbanded early and the participants were escorted out by police.

30,000 counter protestors showed up. Proud of you Boston :)

And nobody in America needs a rally for 'free speech' as it's protected by their 1st amendment rights.
 
Last edited:
If the left wing media hear this video then CNN etc would probably be reporting the worlds first far right black woman... :p


It's good to see common sense still exists.

What statue are the left tearing down to manufacture some conflict next?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom