bgz
  • bgz
  • Herf-A-Holic
9 years ago

Since we are a civil society that supports free speech by all, and that is the law of the land....you're right bgz. The Neo Nazis should be allowed to speak, and if permitted to do so in a public area, they should be allowed to do so in a secure area with plenty of law enforcement officers to keep the peace. Does it matter how much this will cost and that we all will pay?

RIP the two police officers who were killed in a chopper crash while monitoring this sorry showdown...they seem to have been forgotten in the turmoil following the event...

delta1 wrote:



What I read is that the mayor pushed them into a path and a situation where they would likely fight. If it was incidental, it would be one thing, but one of the police officers is claiming that the violent escalation was premeditated by the mayor (and I'm assuming his staff).

So I'm not saying anything about how much resources we should put towards keeping the peace, I'm saying that if the police officer is correct, then the mayor should be punished for his act of malice and disregard for the safety of the people.

Yes, it's sad that two officers died, but I don't think it has any direct correlation unless they were trying to get in to get better pictures or something (can't blame the protesters for pilot fail).
DrafterX
9 years ago
I saw a video a couple days showing the nazis at a park about 2 miles away from the so called rally and the anti-nazis at another park about 2 miles away... both groups marched to the rally point and clashed there.... this is why I kept saying there were prolly already at the park not associated with the nazis... I can't find that video now tho... 🤔





and yes.. RIP to the Highway Patrolmen.. 🙏
teedubbya
9 years ago
My understanding is the nazi group had a permit for one park and the anti nazi groups had two permits for other parks (or maybe 1 permit for 2 parks... whichever)
DrafterX
9 years ago
maybe.. but they both marched to the destination.. it was a gang fight.. 😟
teedubbya
9 years ago

maybe.. but they both marched to the destination.. it was a gang fight.. 😟

DrafterX wrote:




to bad the nice folks didn't know it.... they were lead to slaughter.... poor poor innocent people marching to fight along with the nazis... why didn't the nazis give them any clues?
victor809
9 years ago
Poor tcby.... 😞
TMCTLT
9 years ago

Poor tcby.... :(

victor809 wrote:




Don't feel sorry for me sh*t slinger....
victor809
9 years ago
I do anytime I see you post...

Like feeling sorry for the crack babies... you can't help it.
gummy jones
9 years ago
i thought this was pretty good
i dont always love this author
but my overall feelings on the matter seem well expressed

Fighting Nazis is a good thing, but fighting Nazis doesn't necessarily make you or your cause good. By my lights this is simply an obvious fact.

The greatest Nazi-killer of the 20th century was Josef Stalin. He also killed millions of his own people and terrorized, oppressed, enslaved or brutalized tens of millions more. The fact that he killed Nazis during WWII (out of self-preservation, not principle) doesn't dilute his evil one bit.

This should settle the issue as far as I'm concerned. Nazism was evil. Soviet communism was evil. It's fine to believe that Nazism was more evil than communism. That doesn't make communism good.

Alas, it doesn't settle the issue. Confusion on this point poisoned politics in America and abroad for generations.

Part of the problem is psychological. There's a natural tendency to think that when people, or movements, hate each other, it must be because they're opposites. This assumption overlooks the fact that many -- indeed, most -- of the great conflicts and hatreds in human history are derived from what Sigmund Freud called the "narcissism of minor differences."

Most tribal hatreds are between very similar groups. The European wars of religion were between peoples who often shared the same language and culture but differed on the correct way to practice the Christian faith. The Sunni-Shia split in the Muslim world is the source of great animosity between very similar peoples.

The young communists and fascists fighting for power in the streets of 1920s Germany had far more in common with each other than they had with decent liberals or conservatives, as we understand those terms today. That's always true of violent radicals and would-be totalitarians.

The second part of the problem wasn't innocent confusion, but sinister propaganda. As Hitler solidified power and effectively outlawed the Communist Party of Germany, The Communist International (Comintern) abandoned its position that socialist and progressive groups that were disloyal to Moscow were "fascist" and instead encouraged communists everywhere to build "popular fronts" against the common enemy of Nazism.

These alliances of convenience with social democrats and other progressives were a great propaganda victory for communists around the world because they bolstered the myth that communists were just members of the left coalition in the fight against Hitler, bigotry, fascism, etc.

This obscured the fact that whenever the communists had a chance to seize power, they did so. And often, the first people they killed, jailed or exiled were their former allies. That's what happened in Eastern Europe, Cuba and other places where communists succeeded in taking over the government.

If you haven't figured it out yet, this seemingly ancient history is relevant today because of the depressingly idiotic argument about whether it's OK to equate "antifa" -- anti-fascist left-wing radicals -- with the neo-Nazi and white supremacist rabble that recently descended on Charlottesville, Virginia. The president wants to claim that there were "very fine people" on both sides of the protest and that the anti-fascist radicals are equally blameworthy. He borrowed from Fox News Channel's Sean Hannity the bogus term "alt-left" to describe the antifa radicals.


The term is bogus for the simple reason that, unlike the alt-right, nobody calls themselves "the alt-left." And that's too bad. One of the only nice things about the alt-right is that its leaders are honest about the fact that they want nothing to do with traditional American conservatism. Like the original Nazis, they seek to replace the traditional right with their racial hogwash.

The antifa crowd has a very similar agenda with regard to traditional American liberalism. These goons and thugs oppose free speech, celebrate violence, despise dissent and have little use for anything else in the American political tradition. But many liberals, particularly in the media, are victims of the same kind of confusion that vexed so much of American liberalism in the 20th century. Because antifa suddenly has the (alt-)right enemies, they must be the good guys. They're not.

And that's why this debate is so toxically stupid. Fine, antifa isn't as bad as the KKK. Who cares? Since when is being less bad than the Klan a major moral accomplishment?

In these tribal times, the impulse to support anyone who shares your enemies is powerful. But it is a morally stunted reflex. This is America. You're free to denounce totalitarians wherever you find them -- even if they might hate the right people.


https://townhall.com/columnists/jonahgoldberg/2017/08/18/altrights-despicability-doesnt-make-antifa-the-good-guys-n2370132 
teedubbya
9 years ago
Mcaulif (so) is a moron and Clinton psycophant
frankj1
9 years ago
did you spell (sp) incorrectly?
Users browsing this topic