Politics White Nationalist Rally turns to violence and terrorism

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Since you wanna talk about dangerous behavior and influence. I don't think this is okay, I watched this clip and in no where does trump side with the nazis but celebrities tweet it out and the youth believes it and it just creates more hate, it's a real issue.






This is the kind of over reaction I'm talking about
 
MarAzul said:
Been here more than long enough to know, one step is never the end.
Click to expand...

It's funny, then, that you don't take the long view. Given all the steps you've seen in your long life... from the dark ages to the renaissance to the industrial age to the Internet... how can you argue that progress is a bad thing and that civilization would be better off if it was frozen in amber?

barfo
 
bodyman5000 and 1 said:
Fight for her how? Protest? Break her out?

Kill the DA and any witnesses?

This shit is getting out of hand. They keep saying the cops and the klan go hand in hand. Really?

The cops that keep sitting back and letting people do whatever they want.....good job people.
Click to expand...
Wait, what? You must have missed the part where she was arrested?
 
SlyPokerDog said:
Again, the KKK and whitey groups are free to erect as many statues as they want in their homes or on private property.

They could even open a few museums.

There are more museums in this country than Starbucks or McDonald's.
Click to expand...
No way..... really?
 
MarAzul said:
>>> Really! What wrong exactly do Christian need to take responsibility for correcting? Not being Catholic or even Christian, I don't understand? I thought Jesus taught tolerance and not judging a couple thousand years ago. Yes, even overriding the teachings of Leviticus. It was Mohammad that double down on Leviticus.


>>> What difference? I can't think of where or when any Gay person has express caring what Christians think? Did I mis it?


>>> Alright what specific failing do all Christians do, that needs specific attention where the LGBT are concerned? Do they need to change the Bible to conform with SCOTUS on the definition of marriage being the joining of a man and woman perhaps?

Interesting Post can you elaborate?
Click to expand...

I have been involved with churches and communities that speak very negatively of homosexuality or more to the point the people who are gay. I’m not catholic but I know the Pope is a leader for Catholic Church and the acceptance of people who are gay has changed a lot in the last 10 years. Not all of that has been because of what the Pope says but it certainly has an affect. You are 100% correct that Jesus taught acceptance but there are a lot of people who don’t live that way. Some of these people are leaders in Christian churches and their influence shapes a lot of peoples views.

I know some Christians that are gay and were treated very poorly by other Christians. I would say it mattered to them.

I don’t know if by your use of the word “all” you are trying to imply that I was comparing Christians to Nazi’s because that was not what I was doing. I was using an example of a leader of a group and how being specific in his speech is important.

I don’t think they should change the Bible in any way. It’s not about the act of being gay that I’m speaking about it’s about the treatment of people who are gay. I went to a church and joined a small bible study group there. At one study we were talking about homosexuals adopting. The argument was made that being gay was against the Bible and what God taught us, so they should not be able to adopt. I looked around the room and there were 3 couples that had previous marriages and 1 of them had adopted kids. So I asked why was it ok for people who had been divorced to adopt kids but not people who were gay. The response from the leaders of the group was “if I feel passionate about that I should do something about it but that wasn’t the issue they were talking about.”

You seem like you are strong minded and are not as influenced, but there are a lot of people that can be influenced by what a leader they believe in says. Say whatever you want about his approval ratings, there are still people that believe in him and are influenced by what he says.
 
Last edited:
If the cops saw the Challenger driver revving the engine before ramming the other cars should they have tried to stop him or videotape it and charge him after?

I was all for naming the Nazi demonstrators until I saw that they're making mistakes. Not cool.
 
South East said:
I have been involved with churches and communities that speak very negatively of homosexuality or more to the point the people who are gay. I’m not catholic but I know the Pope is a leader for Catholic Church and the acceptance of people who are gay has changed a lot in the last 10 years. Not all of that has been because of what the Pope says but it certainly has an affect. You are 100% correct that Jesus taught acceptance but there are a lot of people who don’t live that way. Some of these people are leaders in Christian churches and their influence shapes a lot of peoples views.

I know some Christians that are gay and were treated very poorly by other Christians. I would say it mattered to them.

I don’t know if by your use of the word “all” you are trying to imply that I was comparing Christians to Nazi’s because that was not what I was doing. I was using an example of a leader of a group and how being specific in his speech is important.

I don’t think they should change the Bible in any way. It’s not about the act of being gay that I’m speaking about it’s about the treatment of people who are gay. I went to a church and joined a small bible study group there. At one study we were talking about homosexuals adopting. The argument was made that being gay was against the Bible and what God taught us, so they should not be able to adopt. I looked around the room and there were 3 couples that had previous marriages and 1 of them had adopted kids. So I asked why was it ok for people who had been divorced to adopt kids but not people who were gay. The response from the leaders of the group was “if I feel passionate about that I should do something about it but that wasn’t the issue they were talking about.”

You seem like you are strong minded and are not as influenced, but there are a lot of people that can be influenced by what a leader they believe in says. Say whatever you want about his approval ratings, there are still people that believe in him and are influenced by what he says.
Click to expand...

Good Post South East. I would agree that some Christians and some Churches need to work on being Christian as taught by the origin teacher. But then most of us could do better.
I kind a chuckle over you not thinking they should change the Bible in any way. Ha! I think I would have to agree. That is one where I never will understand how the great Scotus could come up crosswise with the Bible. The only way that can happen is by changing the meaning of a word they lack the authority to change. But Hey we all need to work to get better.
I mean, it takes a man and a woman to create a child. Marriage is the vow to join and gain the right to become a breeding pair. Errr at least it was. But then, perhaps it is to those that knew it.
 
MarAzul said:
Good Post South East. I would agree that some Christians and some Churches need to work on being Christian as taught by the origin teacher. But then most of us could do better.
I kind a chuckle over you not thinking they should change the Bible in any way. Ha! I think I would have to agree. That is one where I never will understand how the great Scotus could come up crosswise with the Bible. The only way that can happen is by changing the meaning of a word they lack the authority to change. But Hey we all need to work to get better.
I mean, it takes a man and a woman to create a child. Marriage is the vow to join and gain the right to become a breeding pair. Errr at least it was. But then, perhaps it is to those that knew it.
Click to expand...

The bible has been changed far to many times. Meanings of words change over years and translations. I think we're led to live a holy life and try to do things right. But I see more often then not the people who are judging others are hiding their own sins. I work every day to do my best and I hope in the end I made the right decisions.

Far to many people find their purpose in life by hating others. It is something that I can never understand.
 
Last edited:
Further said:
I think you are correct, but it also can bring awareness and and discussion that can lead to improvements.

I know you don't agree that the president should have said more, but forego that bent for moment. I want people to understand that words of the president have consequences. By showing that daily stormer shit, and how the white surpremisists feel emboldened by Trump not immediately condemning them, that stormer shit might have what I view as a positive effect and convince someone that what the president communicates matters.

You may dissagree with me but I believe the more we sweep this issue under the rug and claim it's just a tiny group not influenced or emboldened by those in power placating them for votes, the worse off we will be.

After WWII many holocaust museums put Nazi propaganda exhibits up. Was that offensive and promote hatemongets? Yes, but I'm sure you can see the reasons why it was still a worthwhile exhibit.
Click to expand...

The president said plenty. The media won't give him any credit where any credit is due. These racist lowlifes are being given airtime and even posted here by people who claim to oppose them. It's downright amazing how low people are willing to go to destroy this president. Rasta's twitter feed is now Nazi propaganda. Well done!

I'm sure some awful people supported Obama, but that's not on Obama. I'm thinking Black Panther, Farrakan, and other left wing terrorist groups.

The only odd thing Trump has said is about there being some good people on the side of keeping the statue. That may be true, but I'm not sure where he saw that.

I do not think these things are intentionally racist or about hate:

general-lee-car-main.jpg


upload_2017-8-16_7-4-15.png

I don't have any love of this flag or anything, but I do see that to a lot of people it isn't about oppression and slavery days. More about pride, and maybe a sort of nationalism (proud to be from the south - I am proud to be from California or wherever I've lived).

This whole statue removal bit is reminiscent of the Taliban blowing up the (religious) historical works of art. I find that a scary thought. A lot of thoughtless people these days.
 
Last edited:
SlyPokerDog said:
David Duke is very public with his views. He's not a random person. You don't have to go deep at all to see where he stands on things. He is a racist.

You keep asking what was Trump suppose to do. It's simple, tell a racist to go support someone else. A very well known racist endorses you, you tell them to fuck off.

It's not hard.
Click to expand...

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/03/politics/donald-trump-disavows-david-duke-kkk/index.html

Trump denounces David Duke, KKK

Washington (CNN) -- Donald Trump issued a crystal clear disavowal Thursday of former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke after stumbling last weekend over a question about the hate group leader on CNN.

"David Duke is a bad person, who I disavowed on numerous occasions over the years," Trump said on MSNBC's "Morning Joe."

"I disavowed him. I disavowed the KKK," Trump added. "Do you want me to do it again for the 12th time? I disavowed him in the past, I disavow him now."
http://www.cnn.com/profiles/eugene-scott
 
Nikolokolus said:
My definition came from Merriam-Webster.
Click to expand...

Which came from the patriot act.

https://www.aclu.org/other/how-usa-patriot-act-redefines-domestic-terrorism

Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act (Pub. L. No. 107-52) expanded the definition of terrorism to cover ""domestic,"" as opposed to international, terrorism. A person engages in domestic terrorism if they do an act "dangerous to human life" that is a violation of the criminal laws of a state or the United States, if the act appears to be intended to: (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping. Additionally, the acts have to occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States and if they do not, may be regarded as international terrorism.

Section 802 does not create a new crime of domestic terrorism. However, it does expand the type of conduct that the government can investigate when it is investigating "terrorism." The USA PATRIOT Act expanded governmental powers to investigate terrorism, and some of these powers are applicable to domestic terrorism.

The definition of domestic terrorism is broad enough to encompass the activities of several prominent activist campaigns and organizations. Greenpeace, Operation Rescue, Vieques Island and WTO protesters and the Environmental Liberation Front have all recently engaged in activities that could subject them to being investigated as engaging in domestic terrorism.
 
Denny Crane said:
Which came from the patriot act.

https://www.aclu.org/other/how-usa-patriot-act-redefines-domestic-terrorism

Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act (Pub. L. No. 107-52) expanded the definition of terrorism to cover ""domestic,"" as opposed to international, terrorism. A person engages in domestic terrorism if they do an act "dangerous to human life" that is a violation of the criminal laws of a state or the United States, if the act appears to be intended to: (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping. Additionally, the acts have to occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States and if they do not, may be regarded as international terrorism.

Section 802 does not create a new crime of domestic terrorism. However, it does expand the type of conduct that the government can investigate when it is investigating "terrorism." The USA PATRIOT Act expanded governmental powers to investigate terrorism, and some of these powers are applicable to domestic terrorism.

The definition of domestic terrorism is broad enough to encompass the activities of several prominent activist campaigns and organizations. Greenpeace, Operation Rescue, Vieques Island and WTO protesters and the Environmental Liberation Front have all recently engaged in activities that could subject them to being investigated as engaging in domestic terrorism.
Click to expand...
This is what politics has done to us. Everything is about the label we put on it now. We can all agree that the car hitting the people is horrific but we have to fight over the wording.

One person here said he was just glad a white person was called a terrorist. That's something to be happy about.

Now another said if Trump dropped dead he'd smile and go on about his day.

We're soooo classy.
 
There are plenty of white terrorists that we all know about.

Unabomber, Oklahoma City bombing, Branch Davidians, the KKK, Neo-Nazis, some of the militias, etc.

Also ecoterrorists, the anarchists who protest at the WTO meetings, weather underground, and all sorts of bad guys in our hemisphere (the leadership in Venezuela, for example).
 
Denny Crane said:
There are plenty of white terrorists that we all know about.

Unabomber, Oklahoma City bombing, Branch Davidians, the KKK, Neo-Nazis, some of the militias, etc.

Also ecoterrorists, the anarchists who protest at the WTO meetings, weather underground, and all sorts of bad guys in our hemisphere (the leadership in Venezuela, for example).
Click to expand...
I know. People are more interested in labels today.
 
Denny Crane said:
The president said plenty. The media won't give him any credit where any credit is due. These racist lowlifes are being given airtime and even posted here by people who claim to oppose them. It's downright amazing how low people are willing to go to destroy this president. Rasta's twitter feed is now Nazi propaganda. Well done!

I'm sure some awful people supported Obama, but that's not on Obama. I'm thinking Black Panther, Farrakan, and other left wing terrorist groups.

The only odd thing Trump has said is about there being some good people on the side of keeping the statue. That may be true, but I'm not sure where he saw that.

I do not think these things are intentionally racist or about hate:

general-lee-car-main.jpg


View attachment 15672

I don't have any love of this flag or anything, but I do see that to a lot of people it isn't about oppression and slavery days. More about pride, and maybe a sort of nationalism (proud to be from the south - I am proud to be from California or wherever I've lived).

This whole statue removal bit is reminiscent of the Taliban blowing up the (religious) historical works of art. I find that a scary thought. A lot of thoughtless people these days.
Click to expand...
Personally, I am not a crusader against the removal of these statues but I do think they are better off in private collections or museums, not the focal points on public grounds.

But that's not my focus. There are good folks who may want the statues left. That was not who populated this Unite the Right rally. Those good folks would not march alongside people chanting 'the Jews will not take over or Blood and Soil. Good folk will not march alongside folks giving the Nazi salute. And there is zero moral equivalency to those who came to preach bigotry and hate, and those who came to protest it.

This President crossed the line. It is disgusting to see the President not stand up with full moral authority to denounce unequivocally the people who populate these groups. I fully understand people voting against Hillary, I fully understand people voting for fiscal responsibility or economic policies the perceive to be beneficial. But Trump had crossed the line. Any support for him from this day forward is Inexcusable . He is a deplorable person and those who do continue to folllw him are placing themselves into a well deserved basket of deplorable. This is not a game.
 
Further said:
those who do continue to folllw him are placing themselves into a well deserved basket of deplorable.
Click to expand...

Ah! Further my friend. I just want to let you know, we all remember being called deplorable. Hillary sort of reserved the use of that pejorative for her personal use. We may not have
greatly appreciated the labeling to begin with but it sort of grew on us with a little time. But you sir, have no special right to be insulting, so please GFY.
 
MarAzul said:
Ah! Further my friend. I just want to let you know, we all remember being called deplorable. Hillary sort of reserved the use of that pejorative for her personal use. We may not have
greatly appreciated the labeling to begin with but it sort of grew on us with a little time. But you sir, have no special right to be insulting, so please GFY.
Click to expand...
But you apparently have a special right to be continually insulting. Maybe you're the one who needs to GFY......that suits your debating skills the most appropriately.......
 
Daily Stormer, the Neo-Nazi website that was kicked off GoDaddy and Google, has found a new home in Russia: dailystormer.ru
 
MarAzul said:
Oh my! Testy, but not quite insulting.
Click to expand...
No not testy at all. Just highly amused at your false sense of superiority......when you can't hold your own in a debate, you throw up your hands and fall back on GFY.......what a waste of all that education and life experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top