Blame on both sides
- Thread starter Felon
- Start date
- Status
I think you're looking at this from the wrong angle. You want to be asking why they wanted to march in the first place, not what they are marching for.
Arguably they have either never marched in the past or they have and nothing controversial happened. So aside from the murder and rioting, what was different about this, that made the scenario happen.
Either they've never marched in the past and something has triggered them to march now or they've marched in the past, but something has triggered violence from both sides.
I'm pretty sure that when Jason Kessler applied for the permit, he didn't explicitly write "we're protesting, and we're going to shout about killing blacks and jews" on the form, but I don't think it matters, anyone with an ounce of intelligence, can read between the lines and predict exactly what's coming.
And that's the point I'm making, anyone signing off on that permit knows exactly what they're signing off on - a far right kkk/nazi rally, and anyone under any illusions as to what that truly is, is a berk as far as I'm concerned.
I think you're reading too much into them shouting "allahu akbar". You could shout that and be pro or anti war. It only means "God is great" and it's more a mantra than anything else. It's like "whatever happens, God is great". You see people saying it, shouting it, whatever, under any and all circumstances. I don't think it's fair to try to intrinsically tie it to anti war or anti west or anti infidel/kaffir/whatever feeling. It could be linked to any of those things or none of them.
There's comparable sentiments in the bible for what it's worth "the Lord gives and the Lord takes away; blessed be the name of the Lord".
You brand it as white nationalism, or white separatism, and say that you don't want any violence per se, you just want all the non-white folk to peacefully leave. Now you might say that evicting someone is an act of violence of sorts, but I'm sure they could find a way to argue their case for it somehow...
You want to be asking what the Jews did to make the Nazis try to exterminate them.
What? What does your comment have to do with anything I've just said? Other then an attempt to derail it.
Try to get rid of him, protest against him, write articles against him, watch his popularity plummet...
Protest, peacefully. Write your congressman. Attend rallies.
Even if he doesn't go you might be able to force his hand on specific issues. Trump isn't exactly in a strong position. He has enemies everywhere, even in the Republican party. Perhaps they might get the message, rather than continuing to support a president who is dragging the reputation of their party through the mud.
Or face the less attractive possibility that the US is still a deeply racist country, and enough people support Trump to keep him in power, saying what he likes. In that case, not much you can do, apart from fight grass roots level campaigns and involve yourself in shaping the attitude of future generations. Which takes time.
Democracy is always vulnerable to the tyranny of the majority. No-one has the individual power to vote out a president.
I am the last person to support Trump and certainly find the far right as distasteful as any sane person. I get that this was Trump's opportunity, at this moment in time to be clear and categorical in his condemnation. His ego overpowers him and frankly when he is put on the spot he is utterly useless and falls back on the whole 'everyone is against me' because his ego is all he has. However, we can't ignore the fact that the press is against him with solid reasons too, but they are incredibly biased in their reporting and in being so they perpetuate the problem and strengthen his hand. They need to realise that many people in the US see the press as the biggest enemy and when you see videos like this you can understand why. The press right now needs to look at itself and work out how to combat him without their quite obvious agenda.
Be clear, this man needs to go as he is incompetent and will get nothing done, but the press really needs to stop doing what it's doing and the people with fame need to be more objective. You respect the office not the person, so why does the BBC mainly refer to him still as Donald Trump, not President Trump? The media has an agenda and in the same way I will never support the far right, or Trump, I have similar views for a media who seeks to perpetuate an image and drive an agenda by bias in reporting. World is a mess, great people stand up at this time and their voice stands testament but right now I am seeing little of this from our media, just agenda politics to suit agendas. More facts, less spin would be a good start.
Also, what's with the music on these bloody videos.
You plainly haven't read my post properly if this is your response. And this is another example of why I should have just stayed out of this thread entirely. This is my last post. If you want a response to the above, simply re-read what I originally wrote.
I have understood it, I'm just saying you can't interpret that phrase as meaning anything in isolation. Yes, you get many voices in protest marches, so they could have been for or against any number of things, but that phrase on its own is borderline meaningless.
Well if you don't agree with the majority (about something), and you feel strongly enough, there's always the option to move somewhere else where the majority agree with you.
Otherwise it's a long, uphill struggle to fight and campaign against (whatever it is) until you are now the majority.
That's a general reply not specific to this incident/issue.
As such, democracy should represent the majority in the main.
I'm sure the white nationalists would love that.
It isn't even possible in a lot of cases. Britain refused entry to a lot of Jewish refugees in the 30s. A lot of people still take a dim view of asylum seekers.
What agenda and who sets the agenda? Are you just rambling yet another conspiracy theory?
Almost every important Republican made a clear statement after the event and condemned racism and white supremacists. Trump didn't, that's why the media is on him, he deserves it. The media are doing their job.
White nationalists aren't close to being a majority AFAIK.
But if they were, and they elected a white nationalist president, you couldn't say he/she wasn't representative of the country.
Like it or not, democracy does tend to enact the will of the majority. Or is supposed to.
This.
It isnt all some big agenda or conspiracy theory.
He is just an utterly terrible person and isnt fit to be president of the United States and will therefore have more bad than good things written about him.
Which gives Hillary Clinton the dubious honour of losing to the worst presidential candidate of all time
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 4,590
Different angle from a other person.
Close up
https://youtu.be/_TWCEV5U09c?t=446 You can see the "cop" AT 7:26 shake hands with an uniformed police officer.
Now, we still don't know if this guy was a cop or not. He could be wearing a CCW (Concealed Carry Weapon) badge, but you have be some sort of nerd to really want to have one. Investigations are still on-going.
Is this fake to you as well? Because it's in the media now: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...aceful-protest-virginia-ku-klux-a7894161.html
This gif below isn't from the same protest, but a normal pro Trump rally, the guys in black are ANTIFA beating up a 80+ year old man.
http://i.imgur.com/EesNvOQ.gifv
Last edited:
- Status