33 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I seriously doubt buildings will be demolished. Not seeing that to be honest. 

 

At the moment, not. As a possible near future demand or development, not far fetched. I think the main reason buildings were spared, so far, was that technically they are harder to destroy. If it comes down to that, guess it'll be more about arson.

Moronic antifa terrorists take down statue of anti slavery union colonel who DIED fighting the confederacy "Hans Christian Heg".

 

This was never about slavery or racism. We told you that you stupid, incompetent Liberals

Edited June 25, 20206 yr by Canuck1966

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

At the moment, not. As a possible near future demand or development, not far fetched. I think the main reason buildings were spared, so far, was that technically they are harder to destroy. If it comes down to that, guess it'll be more about arson.

I mostly agree with your positions on the threads over this issue so far, but here we will have to agree to disagree. I just don't see it becoming a part of the BLM protests.

Just now, Bluespunk said:

I mostly agree with your positions on the threads over this issue so far, but here we will have to agree to disagree. I just don't see it becoming a part of the BLM protests.

Have you even seen the protests, you seem to have little clue about what is actually happening. 

I assume you are being spoon fed by the Clinton News Network 

14 minutes ago, morrobay said:

It is not relevant if the generals are not in favor. The president declared national emergency and orders the military into these distressed cities. And who are you saying are not equipped to deal with this criminal anarchy??? These saps for mayors and over whelmed police forces .

 

 

Yes, the President may order this and that. What I was commenting on is the armed forces take on the situation and the benefits of military involvement. While Trump, on past occasion, asserted that he knows more than the generals, I kinda doubt that's true.

 

Military forces are generally ill trained to deal with civilian unrest, unless by "deal" one means apply too much force. There are reasons why military and police are distinct.

Just now, Canuck1966 said:

Have you even seen the protests, you seem to have little clue about what is actually happening. 

I assume you are being spoon fed by the Clinton News Network 

It's amazing how often you are wrong.

20 hours ago, mikebike said:

What is, "digital book burning"?

Using a Kindle as kindling, perhaps ?

On 6/24/2020 at 7:48 AM, PremiumLane said:

you should read some history, nothing changed without protest, and I don't mean the walking around asking for permission kind of protest. You should also read MLK's Letter From Birmingham Jail, he was very clear what he thought about people who are more concerned with 'order' than justice

 

So you're o k with terrorist activities to bring about change?

 

Presumably only the changes you happen to agree with. What if Biden wins, is declared mentally unfit and his chosen running mate "a woman of colour" becomes POTUS and starts implementing massive racially discrimination laws aimed at black privilege whilst oppressing white, latinos and native Americans. Would you support terrorism, lawlessness, riots and mass looting to protest against her?

31 minutes ago, Canuck1966 said:

Moronic antifa terrorists take down statue of anti slavery union colonel who DIED fighting the confederacy "Hans Christian Heg".

 

This was never about slavery or racism. We told you that you stupid, incompetent Liberals

 

Of course, it's been hi-jacked by the extreme left who want to bring about change through revolution in which they become the only allowed totalitarian power and can apply the laws and behaviours they deem acceptable and reasonable.

 

What's sad is the way many young black people are deluded into thinking they'll be the ones in power and get a share of all the wealth to be redistributed. If they had half a brain they'd read history and just see how the masses got treated after such revolutions.

 

Hope they like the gulags!

8 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

So you're o k with terrorist activities to bring about change?

 

Presumably only the changes you happen to agree with. What if Biden wins, is declared mentally unfit and his chosen running mate "a woman of colour" becomes POTUS and starts implementing massive racially discrimination laws aimed at black privilege whilst oppressing white, latinos and native Americans. Would you support terrorism, lawlessness, riots and mass looting to protest against her?

BB lay off whatever you have been smoking. U hallucinating 2 much. 

1 hour ago, ChouDoufu said:

 

which led to the american...........revolution.

never heard it called the american freedom-of-speech protest, nor read about the trending #coloniallivesmatter.

Wow! Successful protest leads to revolution... what an insight.

 

I guessing many, many people didn't know that, I mean, I just learned it yesterday and, you know it's not something people know about. By the way, have you seen my crowd size?

4 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Upheaval? If and when something actually changes, perhaps. Remains to be seen. Worldwide? Sorta, not in every country, not in the same force, not even with same agenda always. And hyperbole aside, it is not a worldwide majority or even a US one. Most people do not partake, most people aren't fully signed to all that's related to the protests, the vandalism and violence in particular.

Ok, I agree it is not a majority in the streets (is Hong Kong?) but it is people making a stand against bigotry and racism in many places around the world and I feel is overdue and large enough to make a noticeable statement, possibly resulting in meaningful change. Violence (police) is a thug mentality and I see no one being hurt by tearing down the symbols that glorify the subjugation of humanity in any form. 

Edited June 25, 20206 yr by Dap

34 minutes ago, Dap said:

Ok, I agree it is not a majority in the streets (is Hong Kong?) but it is people making a stand against bigotry and racism in many places around the world and I feel is overdue and large enough to make a noticeable statement, possibly resulting in meaningful change. Violence (police) is a thug mentality and I see no one being hurt by tearing down the symbols that glorify the subjugation of humanity in any form. 

 

Attendance in protests is almost never by a  majority, the question is more to do if the protest and various sentiments associated with it represents majority views and opinions. I'd venture to say that in most cases there's no wholesale public identification with what a protest is "about". Some may support this, but feel less strongly about that, while distancing themselves from the other. What can be counted upon is that at some point someone will attempt to claim the protests "prove" general public support for something.

 

With all due respect to the latter bit, I kinda doubt all following, related and semi-related protests revolve around exactly the same issues. In many places it's more to do with local variants, or with groups taking a ride to further agendas. Using the same slogan doesn't actually mean everyone's united behind a cause.

 

Noticeable statement, sure. Meaningful change? Not really, or more accurately, not immediately following protests. Violence is not only from the police side, although I'd agree that when it is, there ought to be more condemnation than when "civilians" engage in it. Officers of the law are supposed to be held to higher standards.

 

I'm not going to debate specifics of monuments and statues. It can be suggested though that removal or replacement of such symbols can be achieved by other ways other than vandalism, and that the way things seem to develop, looks more like a mob mentality on that one, what with some of the statues vandalized. Further, acknowledging the protests narrative doesn't automatically imply superiority to all other narratives. It's conceivable that people would feel differently about historical figures etc. and for different reasons. Judging the merit solely based on the supposed tenets of the protestors is not always reasonable or even acceptable.

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Attendance in protests is almost never by a  majority, the question is more to do if the protest and various sentiments associated with it represents majority views and opinions. I'd venture to say that in most cases there's no wholesale public identification with what a protest is "about". Some may support this, but feel less strongly about that, while distancing themselves from the other. What can be counted upon is that at some point someone will attempt to claim the protests "prove" general public support for something.

 

With all due respect to the latter bit, I kinda doubt all following, related and semi-related protests revolve around exactly the same issues. In many places it's more to do with local variants, or with groups taking a ride to further agendas. Using the same slogan doesn't actually mean everyone's united behind a cause.

 

Noticeable statement, sure. Meaningful change? Not really, or more accurately, not immediately following protests. Violence is not only from the police side, although I'd agree that when it is, there ought to be more condemnation than when "civilians" engage in it. Officers of the law are supposed to be held to higher standards.

 

I'm not going to debate specifics of monuments and statues. It can be suggested though that removal or replacement of such symbols can be achieved by other ways other than vandalism, and that the way things seem to develop, looks more like a mob mentality on that one, what with some of the statues vandalized. Further, acknowledging the protests narrative doesn't automatically imply superiority to all other narratives. It's conceivable that people would feel differently about historical figures etc. and for different reasons. Judging the merit solely based on the supposed tenets of the protestors is not always reasonable or even acceptable.

Well stated.

4 hours ago, darrendsd said:

Trump has been out of step with most of the country, blasting the protests even though a majority of Americans sympathize with them

We shall see in November after President Trump wins in a landslide! But of course the liberals will not accept it! They still haven't gotten over 2016!

Get STUCK IN!

9 minutes ago, MyTHaiMyKe said:

We shall see in November after President Trump wins in a landslide! But of course the liberals will not accept it! They still haven't gotten over 2016!

I thought that pre-virus but now I'm less sure. The virus has been a Godsend to dinosaur Biden's campaign but if BLM and ANTIFA keep it up and escalate maybe he can still do it.  Wait and see.

24 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

I thought that pre-virus but now I'm less sure. The virus has been a Godsend to dinosaur Biden's campaign but if BLM and ANTIFA keep it up and escalate maybe he can still do it.  Wait and see.

Creepy Joe has to come out of the basement at some point

I think he will just collapse in the debates.

He literally doesn't make any sense when he opens his mouth

Incoherent babbling old pervert

22 hours ago, car720 said:

The Dickheads desecrated their own memorial. Shameful action that backfired.

How do they know why wrote that ? Did they catch the people who did it ??

52 minutes ago, MyTHaiMyKe said:

We shall see in November after President Trump wins in a landslide! But of course the liberals will not accept it! They still haven't gotten over 2016!

A landslide huh? Facing reality ain't your thang huh? 

16 minutes ago, Canuck1966 said:

Creepy Joe has to come out of the basement at some point

I think he will just collapse in the debates.

He literally doesn't make any sense when he opens his mouth

Incoherent babbling old pervert

Very mature. 

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

A landslide huh? Facing reality ain't your thang huh? 

"Thang" sounds racist to me.

4 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

"Thang" sounds racist to me.

 

Triggered much?

Some inflammatory posts have been removed. 

On 6/24/2020 at 2:33 PM, 3NUMBAS said:

water cannons needed to flush em away

Give em some soap first lol.

On 6/23/2020 at 11:53 PM, Eric Loh said:

Have you heard of the phrase “those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it”. The statues are a reminder of the past and a powerful symbols of tragic and brutal events. It should not be around as symbols that give psychological sustenance and succor to white supremacists. It help normalized the ideology of these groups. 

So your suggestion, so that we do not forget the past, is to efface all these historical monuments--the only purpose of which is to validate "white supremacy"? Much better to erase history, or re-write it, than actually to confront it. Get rid of it entirely from the history books, and somehow we're NOT going to repeat history? Why not just support the burning of books by the same logic?

People on the Right, or even disillusioned people on the Left, or the civil libertarians, need to abandon this silly and sanguine notion that the radical Left can be "reasoned" with. All they care about is power-dynamics. They don't care about such lofty concepts as intellectual honesty, consistency of thought, argumentation, or even a juvenile's innate disdain for hypocrisy. Ergo, zero possibility of reasoning with such mentalities. Even less of appeasing them or--seriously?--reconciling with them. There's no meeting of the minds here. There's only the question as to when the opposition is going to allow itself the same freedom to exert their "might is right" against the Left. And that is what they absolutely should, but are unwilling, to do. Power against power. And the Left loses scarcely before the battle has begun. But at some point the Anti-Left will lose its patience, realize that any attempt at reconciliation is futile, and always was, and will shrug off its restraints and welcome the Left on the battlefield. And that will not be a good day for the Left.

14 hours ago, Dap said:

Ok, I agree it is not a majority in the streets (is Hong Kong?) but it is people making a stand against bigotry and racism in many places around the world and I feel is overdue and large enough to make a noticeable statement, possibly resulting in meaningful change. Violence (police) is a thug mentality and I see no one being hurt by tearing down the symbols that glorify the subjugation of humanity in any form. 

You might actually want to spend five minutes studying whatever country's history before green-lighting the destruction of its monuments in the name of "the subjugation of humanity." It must be a nice, warm, cozy feeling to live in such a morally and historically unambiguous universe. Children are normally granted that privilege because we want to protect them from reality. But I assume you're an adult, right?

 

On a side note, I'm not sure why a leader of a country, who vows to protect such historical monuments from wanton, and decidedly undemocratic, destruction, should be characterized as taking a "hard-line" stance on the matter. Can we get one article on this forum where the political conclusion isn't contained in the headline? Before all this nonsense began, I seem to recall a time when the destruction of property not your own was considered illegal and punishable by law. Call me a "hard-liner." The fact is Trump has been far too lenient.

 

Edited June 25, 20206 yr by OZinPattaya

On 6/24/2020 at 12:48 PM, PremiumLane said:

you should read some history, nothing changed without protest, and I don't mean the walking around asking for permission kind of protest. You should also read MLK's Letter From Birmingham Jail, he was very clear what he thought about people who are more concerned with 'order' than justice

LOL.

Those vandals and hooligans are not trying to bring about a better world- all they want to do is riot and break things.

Without "order" society breaks down and everyone gets hurt.

 

You go Donald, give the thugs a message even they understand.

28 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

LOL.

Those vandals and hooligans are not trying to bring about a better world- all they want to do is riot and break things.

Without "order" society breaks down and everyone gets hurt.

 

You go Donald, give the thugs a message even they understand.

"A message even they understand"--the only message they can understand, which is a commensurate use of force. They only understand force, therefore give them force. The only question is when the right-wing will understand this and oblige them.