Trump condemns 'hate' after protest violence in Virginia

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, rijb said:

Same to you.  

Indeed, dude.

[JCauto]

1 minute ago, sirineou said:

Those of you who know how I feel about Trump and his kind. Also know how I feel about free speech.

You are for free speech only when you protect the free speech you disagree with. 

If those right wing idiots were allowed to protest, non of this would have happened, and they would had being exposed for the idiots they are.

But it takes two to tango ,

 don't forget not even for a moment that fascism can exist on the left as well as the right.  

Nobody prevented these idiots from protesting. I don't believe it's at all been determined who started the fighting. I don't understand why they didn't have more of a police presence to ensure that the violence didn't break out, but that's a different issue. 

The right to free speech does not include the right to be immune from the consequences of your free speech, one of which is to have people who disagree with you express that point of view, or even drown it out. I noted this previously in my point about the Westboro Baptist Church. They're free to obnoxiously offend people, just as others are free to reduce their effectiveness at doing so by having counter-protests. Is your point that they should have prevented people from counter-protesting? Wouldn't that infringe upon their rights?

[onthesoi]

A few feet away, a young white man with a buzzed haircut and sunglasses leaned towards them over a facing barrier. "You'll be on the first f*****g boat home," he screamed at the black woman, before turning to the white woman. "And as for you, you're going straight to hell," he said. Then he gave a Nazi salute.

 

A very confused and conflicted young man by the sounds....

[sirineou]

1 minute ago, JCauto said:

Nobody prevented these idiots from protesting. I don't believe it's at all been determined who started the fighting. I don't understand why they didn't have more of a police presence to ensure that the violence didn't break out, but that's a different issue. 

The right to free speech does not include the right to be immune from the consequences of your free speech, one of which is to have people who disagree with you express that point of view, or even drown it out. I noted this previously in my point about the Westboro Baptist Church. They're free to obnoxiously offend people, just as others are free to reduce their effectiveness at doing so by having counter-protests. Is your point that they should have prevented people from counter-protesting? Wouldn't that infringe upon their rights?

In a free society people are free to express their point of view  ( how ever wrong) within the limits of the law. If they exceed the legal limits it is the responsibility of the police to arrest them and the legal system to prosecute them . Anything else is vigilantism.

[JCauto]

Just now, sirineou said:

In a free society people are free to express their point of view  ( how ever wrong) within the limits of the law. If they exceed the legal limits it is the responsibility of the police to arrest them and the legal system to prosecute them . Anything else is vigilantism.

Agreed. So I ask you once again, do you have any information to the effect that these people were prevented from protesting or that the counter-protesters were the ones to start the fighting?

[RobFord]

Too bad he can't condemn the white supremacy movement that he tacitly supports. 
 
I dont recall there being this many neo-nazis and white supremacists during the administration of Obama, or Bush or Clinton. 

I just shrugged off the occasional racist and bigoted comments that were let slip during 20 plus years of business trips to those red states.

After all, it was just some goof, and had nothing to do with the US government.

All that changed with the election of the orange ass hatchling.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[heybruce]

24 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

 

 

"No child should ever be afraid to go outside and play and be with their parents and have a good time."

 

Huh?

Maybe he's suggesting the alt-right people have the mentality of children.

[sirineou]

24 minutes ago, JCauto said:

Agreed. So I ask you once again, do you have any information to the effect that these people were prevented from protesting or that the counter-protesters were the ones to start the fighting?

I don,t know who threw the first punch , I am not sure anyone knows.

But that's not the point

The counter protesters were not there to express their right of free speech they were there to   disrupt other people's right.

They could just as easily have had a counter protest later  after the right wingers, at a different location . or a different day , Their counter protest could had being peaceful and on point, showing the world how they were different.

Instead they took the bait and crawled in the mud with them .

Edited August 13, 2017 by sirineou
thypos LOL

[ilostmypassword]

46 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Actually I think Muslims in the US are cool with female drivers.  I understand a lot of US Muslim women drive.

Not only are American Muslims cool with female drivers. They are also a lot more favorably disposed to gay marriage than are christian evangelicals.

[Thakkar]

Joe Biden: "There is only one side"

 

https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/896496130497929220

[Thakkar]

Anne Frank Center (@AnneFrankCenter)

13/8/2017, 9:48 AM

.@POTUS, if you refuse to name the evil, you do not believe it is evil. The evil is neo-Nazi White Supremacy. It is not any other side.

[Thakkar]

30 minutes ago, RobFord said:

 

I just shrugged off the occasional racist and bigoted comments that were let slip during 20 plus years of business trips to those red states.

After all, it was just some goof, and had nothing to do with the US government.

All that changed with the election of the orange ass hatchling.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

They were always there. They just never had a champion in the WH—till now.

[JCauto]

1 minute ago, sirineou said:

I don,t know who threw the first punch , I am not sure anyone knows.

But that's not the point

The counter protesters were not there express their right of free speech they were there to   disrupt other people's right.

They could just as easily have had a counter protest later  after the right wingers, at a different location . or a different day , Their counter protest could had being peaceful and on point, showing the world how they were different.

Instead they took the bate and crawled in the mud with them .

Of course they were! They were there to let the world know that these idiots were not representative of the views of the majority and that they supported the decision to remove the statue. And it's very effective, after all, there were far more of them and it was a far more diverse group of people. A protest after they left would have been less effective, and in fact would have provided the idiots with the kind of false equivalence that we're seeing more and more of. 

As with Scott Pruitt of the EPA forming "Red" and "Blue" teams to "debate" climate change, this is simply a tactic designed to provide an illusion that there is serious doubt about an issue (there is not, at least among those who are informed) and to give the whacko viewpoint some kind of standing beyond what it has earned. Climate change deniers were provided opportunity to review the data and findings and despite having enormous funding to do so failed to sway scientific consensus. Why should they now be given a national platform and megaphone to broadcast what they already have had discredited by the best informed and trained people on the issue? I use this as a parallel, obviously. Similarly, the view that White people are superior to others has been completely discredited. Why should they be allowed to protest without having more enlightened people demonstrate to show that they're both wrong and that their views are contrary to those of civil society? 

[zzaa09]

America's true colours across the board.

 

Historically reflected.

[sirineou]

4 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

Joe Biden: "There is only one side"

 

https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/896496130497929220

And unfortunately , no one in Charlottesville belonged to that side.

[Thakkar]

24 minutes ago, heybruce said:

49 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

"No child should ever be afraid to go outside and play and be with their parents and have a good time."

 

Huh?

Maybe he's suggesting the alt-right people have the mentality of children.

Haha! Yes, he's saying the Nazis should be allowed to play outside with their torches and hate speech without having to contend with other people pointing and saying what hateful little sh!ts they are.

[Thakkar]

6 minutes ago, sirineou said:

12 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

Joe Biden: "There is only one side"

 

https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/896496130497929220

And unfortunately , no one in Charlottesville belonged to that side.

The diverse group of counter protesters belonged to that side, the side that represents what America, at its best, aspires to be. 

 

Let's be clear that one side was protesting for the preservation of a celebration of a symbol of a war fought for the continuation of human slavery. The other side had every right to object to that and to object to it AT THE TIME IT WAS HAPPENING, not at a more convenient later date.

 

 

[sirineou]

4 minutes ago, JCauto said:

Of course they were! They were there to let the world know that these idiots were not representative of the views of the majority and that they supported the decision to remove the statue. And it's very effective, after all, there were far more of them and it was a far more diverse group of people. A protest after they left would have been less effective, and in fact would have provided the idiots with the kind of false equivalence that we're seeing more and more of. 

As with Scott Pruitt of the EPA forming "Red" and "Blue" teams to "debate" climate change, this is simply a tactic designed to provide an illusion that there is serious doubt about an issue (there is not, at least among those who are informed) and to give the whacko viewpoint some kind of standing beyond what it has earned. Climate change deniers were provided opportunity to review the data and findings and despite having enormous funding to do so failed to sway scientific consensus. Why should they now be given a national platform and megaphone to broadcast what they already have had discredited by the best informed and trained people on the issue? I use this as a parallel, obviously. Similarly, the view that White people are superior to others has been completely discredited. Why should they be allowed to protest without having more enlightened people demonstrate to show that they're both wrong and that their views are contrary to those of civil society? 

I respectfully disagree with you

and state again.  

You are only for free speech when you allow that which you disagree with  otherwise you engage at a different form of fascism.

I am , as we all should be against all forms of fasism

No disrespect to you, you have have being pleasant and reasonable in this little conversation we had, and I appreciate   you taking the time to engage me in this , But I don't know how many different ways I can make the same point.

 

 

[RobFord]

1 hour ago, sirineou said:

I respectfully disagree with you
and state again.  
You are only for free speech when you allow that which you disagree with  otherwise you engage at a different form of fascism.
I am , as we all should be against all forms of fasism
No disrespect to you, you have have being pleasant and reasonable in this little conversation we had, and I appreciate   you taking the time to engage me in this , But I don't know how many different ways I can make the same point.
 
 

 

No disrespect dude, but you <deleted> up fasism.



Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

[sirineou]

7 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

The diverse group of counter protesters belonged to that side, the side that represents what America, at its best, aspires to be. 

 

Let's be clear that one side was protesting for the preservation of a celebration of a symbol of a war fought for the continuation of human slavery. The other side had every right to object to that and to object to it AT THE TIME IT WAS HAPPENING, not at a more convenient later date.

 

 

That's your opinion I happen to have a different one

If you believe This " represents what America, at its best, aspires to be.  " 

Then me and you are at profound disagreement in this subject.

[sirineou]

1 minute ago, RobFord said:

 

No disrespect dude, but you f'd up fasism.



Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

Perhaps I did , I am certainly not beyond doing that

could you please show me  how I did that?

 

[RobFord]

55 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Perhaps I did , I am certainly not beyond doing that
could you please show me  how I did that?
 

 

OK, I humbly apologize as I have <deleted> up many times myself.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

[Thakkar]

5 minutes ago, sirineou said:

That's your opinion I happen to have a different one

If you believe This " represents what America, at its best, aspires to be.  " 

Then me and you are at profound disagreement in this subject.

 

Singling out the violence as if there was no context is disingenuous, and you should know better.

 

To people like us, it may be an academic dispute over free speech, to many African Americans, many of them descendants of slaves who have daily experience of racism, it is a lot more personal. It is unreasonable to expect them to wait till a less confrontational moment to confront the the white supremacists' demand for the preservation of symbols celebrating slavery.

 

You are undermining your own key point, which I fully agree with: even the haters have a right to free speech.

 

But it cannot go unchallenged. And it must be challenged AT THE TIME IT HAPPENS, not later.

 

T

 

[KhonKaenKowboy]

75% of all Civil War battles took place in Virginia, and they want to remove mention of the likes of Lee and Jackson?  Did you know Arlington National Cemetary was built on land confiscated from the Lee family?

Edited August 13, 2017 by KhonKaenKowboy

[rijb]

55 minutes ago, zzaa09 said:

America's true colours across the board.

 

Historically reflected.

Get real.  

[Jingthing]

13 minutes ago, KhonKaenKowboy said:

75% of all Civil War battles took place in Virginia, and they want to remove mention of the likes of Lee and Jackson?  Did you know Arlington National Cemetary was built on land confiscated from the Lee family?

Hello there KKK, 

Who is they?

A city council in a liberal city decided on this.

It's not a universal decision.

It's on a case by case basis all over the south.

There are reasons to preserve such monuments for historical purposes but that could be done by moving them to MUSEUMS. 

Edited August 13, 2017 by Jingthing

[sirineou]

29 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

 

Singling out the violence as if there was no context is disingenuous, and you should know better.

 

To people like us, it may be an academic dispute over free speech, to many African Americans, many of them descendants of slaves who have daily experience of racism, it is a lot more personal. It is unreasonable to expect them to wait till a less confrontational moment to confront the the white supremacists' demand for the preservation of symbols celebrating slavery.

 

You are undermining your own key point, which I fully agree with: even the haters have a right to free speech.

 

But it cannot go unchallenged. And it must be challenged AT THE TIME IT HAPPENS, not later.

 

T

 

I respectfully disagree

I am 60 years old, and have being politically active, with a left leaning since high school.

In my life I have being involved in many of these , both in the US, and Europe , and in most instances where opposing functions are allowed to  mix it up it always ends the same way with the predictable results.

I know of events where the police infiltrated the protesters and threw molotov cocktails at their own giving the the excuse to  retaliate. 

And the opposite.

Discipline , however difficult   is always the best advice,often these events are infiltrated by "Agent provocateurs " with their own agendas 

If you have idiots marching , armed with helmets , shields and clubs, and you block their way. What do you expect to happen?????

When they crossed the lawful line. the police would had dealt with them

Stay in the sidelines, ridicule them,show them for the idiots they are.

Ridicule, discounts them,  engagment give's them power.

So ask yourself , what is your goal? discounts them or give them power?

I understand the impulse to engage, but trust me, it is counter productive

 

Edited August 13, 2017 by sirineou

[dunroaming]

Trump can't come out and condemn the white supremacists because as many have said they make up a considerable proportion of his voter base, especially now so many people have seen the light over this moronic POTUS.  But these American citizens were there before Trump and will be there long after he has gone.  They are part of the cancer  in the USA and there will always be a hard core of them.  They are motivated by hate and ignorance with an unwillingness to lift their heads out of the sand.  You cannot educate these people but you can pity them.  They do know they do.....But simply cannot control their vitriol.

[rijb]

1 minute ago, dunroaming said:

Trump can't come out and condemn the white supremacists because as many have said they make up a considerable proportion of his voter base, especially now so many people have seen the light over this moronic POTUS.  But these American citizens were there before Trump and will be there long after he has gone.  They are part of the cancer  in the USA and there will always be a hard core of them.  They are motivated by hate and ignorance with an unwillingness to lift their heads out of the sand.  You cannot educate these people but you can pity them.  They do know they do.....But simply cannot control their vitriol.

Every country has to deal with hate and ignorance in their own back yard.  However, the world prefers to focus on America's dirty laundry.

[KhonKaenKowboy]

The high courts already ruled that even groups like the American Nazis have a right to protest.  Skokie, Illinois comes to mind.