FabSwingers.com forum: Charlottesville

By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge

Alt-right protesters carrying burning torches and adopting ISIS sytle tactics by using a vehicle as a weapon to mow down innocent people leaving at least one dead so far.

Trump is disavowing the violence, but does he have blood on his hands, or is Trump just another symptom of the dark side of America?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

pisser

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I suppose Trump was responsible for the civil war too

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad."

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

And CandM shows his true colours again...

The thing Ifind hard to swallow abou what has happened is when the trouble first started in the morning before the governor declared a state of emergency report say the police stood watching the neonazis begin attacking the counter protesters and did nothing to stop the violence.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge

pisser"

Why are you laughing about a white supremacist terrorist attack?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Why are they even considering taking down the General E lee statute ??

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

"Why are they even considering taking down the General E lee statute ?? "

Because he was one of a group of slave owners who were responsible for the civil war and 150 years of racial repression in the southern states because they were unwilling to voluntarily give up their right to own slaves. Some things just should not be memorialised.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

That's one point of view , Look at it this way in the Phoenix park in Dublin there is the Wellington Testimonial was built to commemorate the victories of Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington. Wellington, the British politician and general, also known as the 'Iron Duke', should we take that down just cause we don't agree with his political belief ???

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

oh boy... where do i start

okay... a couple of statements...

Do i believe Trump is solely responsible for what happened today.... no

do I believe that Trump is partly responsible for what happened today... yes

trump in the last few years has emboldened the alt right and white nationalism.... he has refused to disavow them

heck he has a few in high places in his cabinet!!!

he is very quick to use the words "radical islamic terrorism" when it suits his narritive (for example after the london and manchester attacks) and yet goes very silent when it is white nationalists commiting acts of terror...

and please... lets just call this what it is... it was an act of domestic terrorism!!!

but trump decides to comdemn "all sides"... well it wasn't all sides driving that vehicle and killing people today!!!!!

and i bet it will be will "crickets"....

it will be interesting to see which reps go on the sunday morning political shows, because a lot of republicans, to their creidt this evening, have come out and said his statements are weak!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

"That's one point of view , Look at it this way in the Phoenix park in Dublin there is the Wellington Testimonial was built to commemorate the victories of Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington. Wellington, the British politician and general, also known as the 'Iron Duke', should we take that down just cause we don't agree with his political belief ???

Not quite the same is it? Wellington may not have been a friend to Irish Catholics but he was not their enemy either. Now if the were a memorial to Oliver Cromwell or Henry VIII then I would fully understand and approve if the people of Dublin wanted it removed because they did persecute the Irish because of their religion.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

Just seen this!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ic1yRK5Ld0s

I've been saying he is using the hitler playbook but this!!!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *andS66Couple
over a year ago

Derby

"oh boy... where do i start

okay... a couple of statements...

Do i believe Trump is solely responsible for what happened today.... no

do I believe that Trump is partly responsible for what happened today... yes

Should any others be held partly responsible as well?

For example, the people that voted him into office, or the people who voted him in as their presidential nominee?

What about those who didn't even turn out to vote against him?

And what about the previous administrations? If Trump was voted in as a 'protest against the establishment', as many have said, then shouldn't the 'establishment' bear some responsibility also? What could they have done differently to have avoided a Trump Presidency?

And if the previous administrations should bear some of the blame, then shouldn't also those that voted for them?

Wherever, and however, blame is apportioned, it's a sad day, and I'm not sure that any part of society can claim themselves to be totally blameless.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *uxinteriorMan
over a year ago

south west , continental

I would imagine that there is allsorts of spun news items coming out of this incident depending on where you get your 'facts' from.

No one really knows what happened yet.

Perhaps the people in the car were trying to get away from being hurt themselves? What would you do if your car that you worked hard to buy was being attacked or you felt in danger ?

I would imagine it was not a nice place to be and that people on both sides of opinion were baying for blood and there is a huge amount of antagonism that kicks these things off.

I think the courts gave permission for the March to go ahead so I'm not sure how it descended into a shut down of free speech. Which is interwoven into the constitution of the USA.

Those anarchic communists are not all angelic choir boys and girls either.

This is a very fresh incident and we should all look at the evidence before proportioning blame and pointing fingers.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

pisser

Why are you laughing about a white supremacist terrorist attack? "

No I'm laughing at you

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Why are they even considering taking down the General E lee statute ??

Thats right, lets rewrite history, pretend things didn't happen, tear down reminders so that we never learn. Genius

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Why are they even considering taking down the General E lee statute ??

Thats right, lets rewrite history, pretend things didn't happen, tear down reminders so that we never learn. Genius"
Do you honestly think the alt reich nazis marching want the statue kept so the can teach us about the horrors of slavery.They dont want their white supremist history removed beacuase theyre proud of it.

You seem easily triggered by this what do you wish to teach the World about slavery .

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Why are they even considering taking down the General E lee statute ?? "
.

Coz it's in hot pursuit by sheriff p roscoff.... And flash

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Why are they even considering taking down the General E lee statute ??

Thats right, lets rewrite history, pretend things didn't happen, tear down reminders so that we never learn. Genius Do you honestly think the alt reich nazis marching want the statue kept so the can teach us about the horrors of slavery.They dont want their white supremist history removed beacuase theyre proud of it.

You seem easily triggered by this what do you wish to teach the World about slavery ."

No I don't think they do. But it reminds the rest of us. What do I wish to teach the world about slavery? That it happened.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *nleashedCrakenMan
over a year ago

Widnes

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad.""

I feel that's a little harsh on Robert E Lee who's position on both slavery and the Union was somewhat more nuanced than your statement suggests.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *lem-H-FandangoMan
over a year ago

salisbury

I've heard that the driver was a member of the republican party with links to antifa.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *lem-H-FandangoMan
over a year ago

salisbury

Sounds like he was going to protest against the nazi's. Told his mum he was going to an Alt-right rally.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad."

I feel that's a little harsh on Robert E Lee who's position on both slavery and the Union was somewhat more nuanced than your statement suggests."

'There is a war coming and these young men who have never seen war cannot wait for it to happen, but I tell you, I wish that I owned every slave in the south, for I would free them all to avoid this war'

Robert E Lee

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad."

I feel that's a little harsh on Robert E Lee who's position on both slavery and the Union was somewhat more nuanced than your statement suggests.

Robert E Lee

What is your point? He might have been ambivalent about slavery, but it doesn't change the fact that the man was the most experienced general the south had and he fought for the south, against the union (in other words, the USA) because he held his status as a "Virginian" higher than his status as either an American or as a supporter of freedom. If that's the best he's got to defend him, then he isn't worth defending.

I stand by my statement, because it's true - he fought against the United States to support a government that wanted to retain the institution of slavery.

It's no coincidence that it's his statues the white supremacists and neo-Nazis are rallying around. Think about that.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad."

I feel that's a little harsh on Robert E Lee who's position on both slavery and the Union was somewhat more nuanced than your statement suggests.

Robert E Lee

I stand by my statement, because it's true - he fought against the United States to support a government that wanted to retain the institution of slavery.

It's no coincidence that it's his statues the white supremacists and neo-Nazis are rallying around. Think about that. "

I'm not defending him. I'm just putting another side to the debate. Who was he fighting for against the Mexicans?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Why are they even considering taking down the General E lee statute ??

Not quite. The reason they are removing the statues is because I'm 2015 9 black people were killed at their church in South Carolina by a white supremacist. A high school student suggested a plan whereby some of these statues are removed because they support white supremacy (one statue that was in the south even openly had written on it that it was a statue to white supremacy).

It's the same as why the confederate flag is being removed from many state legislatures. This stuff was a tolerated during reconstruction when American was a healing country. Now they are just symbols of hate that should never had been erected to begin with - as evidenced by yesterday's rally and murder.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad."

I feel that's a little harsh on Robert E Lee who's position on both slavery and the Union was somewhat more nuanced than your statement suggests.

Robert E Lee

I stand by my statement, because it's true - he fought against the United States to support a government that wanted to retain the institution of slavery.

It's no coincidence that it's his statues the white supremacists and neo-Nazis are rallying around. Think about that.

I'm not defending him. I'm just putting another side to the debate. Who was he fighting for against the Mexicans?"

When it came to picking sides between the USA and Virginia, he chose Virginia -even with the reprehensible ideas they were fighting for. I'm not going to respect the man because he chose the USA over Mexico. His colors were shown when it mattered and he chose to fight for slavery. It was the most important decision of his life and it was shameful and it should shape his legacy.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad."

I feel that's a little harsh on Robert E Lee who's position on both slavery and the Union was somewhat more nuanced than your statement suggests.

Robert E Lee

I stand by my statement, because it's true - he fought against the United States to support a government that wanted to retain the institution of slavery.

It's no coincidence that it's his statues the white supremacists and neo-Nazis are rallying around. Think about that.

I'm not defending him. I'm just putting another side to the debate. Who was he fighting for against the Mexicans?

'So far from engaging in a war to perpetuate slavery, I am rejoiced that slavery is abolished. I believe it will be greatly for the interest of the south. So fully am I satisfied of this that I would cheerfully have lost all that I have lost by the war and have suffered all that I have suffered to have this object attained'

Robert E Lee

So I don't really think from the things he said that he was actually fighting for slavery, do you? Do you not think there was more to it than that?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad."

I feel that's a little harsh on Robert E Lee who's position on both slavery and the Union was somewhat more nuanced than your statement suggests.

Robert E Lee

I stand by my statement, because it's true - he fought against the United States to support a government that wanted to retain the institution of slavery.

It's no coincidence that it's his statues the white supremacists and neo-Nazis are rallying around. Think about that.

I'm not defending him. I'm just putting another side to the debate. Who was he fighting for against the Mexicans?

Robert E Lee

So I don't really think from the things he said that he was actually fighting for slavery, do you? Do you not think there was more to it than that?"

I've already said, if you read what I wrote, that he fought with the south because he held his status as a Virginian above his status as an American. I know why he claimed to have fought for the south, but where was he during the civil war? What side was he fighting on? Quotes pale in comparison to action. I'll state what I already said: he fought for a government that supported the institution of slavery. None of your quotes can change what he did. It was shameful. His legacy is shameful.

If it weren't for the efforts of more forgiving and caring men after the civil war, people like Lee would have been tried in court as traitors - because that's what they were. As evidenced by the confederate flag visible at all the white nationalist rallies. He fought for that flag - not for the US flag. He fought under a symbol of succession and slavery. That is the man he was.

I am a New Yorker to my bone, but I wouldn't fight under a New York flag against my fellow Americans to support slavery. It says enough that he did. Actions over words.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock

"Why are they even considering taking down the General E lee statute ??

I suppose you'd also ban The Dukes of Hazard from being shown on television too because the car is called the General Lee and has a confederate flag on the roof?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock

I thought Trump's statement was absolutely spot on. Absolutely right to condemn the violence on ALL sides.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad."

I feel that's a little harsh on Robert E Lee who's position on both slavery and the Union was somewhat more nuanced than your statement suggests.

Robert E Lee

I stand by my statement, because it's true - he fought against the United States to support a government that wanted to retain the institution of slavery.

It's no coincidence that it's his statues the white supremacists and neo-Nazis are rallying around. Think about that.

I'm not defending him. I'm just putting another side to the debate. Who was he fighting for against the Mexicans?

Robert E Lee

So I don't really think from the things he said that he was actually fighting for slavery, do you? Do you not think there was more to it than that?

I am a New Yorker to my bone, but I wouldn't fight under a New York flag against my fellow Americans to support slavery. It says enough that he did. Actions over words."

Well correct me if I'm wrong and I don't know what position Lee held in Virginia other than being a general, but when generals are told to go to war by politicians, isn't that what they have to do? Or can they refuse or switch sides?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *andemanMan
over a year ago

bedforshire

Did Trump Drive the Car? No.

But in so many otherways he is responsable.

As "President" (i do not feel he is worthy of the title) his first duty is to protect the Amarican people.

He not only has failed his words and deeds have encoraged this outcome. Why? POWER.for who? HIMSELF.

Amarican history is complex on the Civil War. Yes the trigger was Slavery and the slave owners just plain wrong! Proud to say my Mothers Family wore Blue! As would i have if there at the time.

But it was also an argument about self determination individualism vs Collectavism and the Rule of law. States power vs federal power. Agrarian society vs industrialisation. Old vs new. Tradition vs Democracy.

In that way the themes of the war took on meaning and decided the direction of the country for the future. Freedom modernaty collective industrialisation the rule of law and collective democracy. Those who died in this conflict right or wrong died to achive that end, even those who wore Gray.

If the US want to keep thier statues they need to do so understanding those facts. If they dont want to make the effort than wrip them down as they have become a symbole of racism!

Lazy argument and poor education leads to open doors for people to hijack these symbols for thier own end, as Trump has shown.

Wishing no disrespect to the people who have died or been injured in this terror attack, the real issue now is North Korea and the clear insanity of two men with Nuclear weopons at thier disposal. No great themes no great principles to fight over but death and power.

If we do not stop this there will be no one left to build statues of anyone and our graves will go unmarked.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

"I thought Trump's statement was absolutely spot on. Absolutely right to condemn the violence on ALL sides. "

then like him you have exhibited a lack of condemnation for what is an act of domestic terrorism..

only you know why..

what the fuck is it with some people who choose the language of excuse or diverting the blame from such an act when a white person commits it..

its the same type of attack that took place on Tower Bridge, London Bridge in the initial stage and the attack in East London..

Yes it is right that such violence is condemned but the attack with the car was above and beyond what had occurred earlier..

Also Centaur you have on many occasions been very clear and loud on Corbyn for saying what Trump has said..

if its not good enough for one its surely not for the other..?

or are you ok exhibiting hypocrisy..

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

When any of us start excusing an act that is clearly an act of terrorism because of the colour of the skin of the driver then we are playing into the hands of those who think using such vile acts is acceptable..

London, Nice, Berlin and Charlottesville..

same intent..

same act or terrorism..

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *andemanMan
over a year ago

bedforshire

"When any of us start excusing an act that is clearly an act of terrorism because of the colour of the skin of the driver then we are playing into the hands of those who think using such vile acts is acceptable..

London, Nice, Berlin and Charlottesville..

same intent..

same act or terrorism.."

Absolutly true. But having a proper understanding of the history behind these acts is the first step to stopping them being repeated.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

"I thought Trump's statement was absolutely spot on. Absolutely right to condemn the violence on ALL sides. "

funny enough it wasn't "all sides" that decided to play a car into innocent civilians....

and funny enough when i car was plowed into innocent civilians on westminster bridge, donald trump and his son were one of the first people on twitter to scream "radical islamic terrorism"...

they weren't blaming "all sides" that day!!!

the trump has that he has a hard time criticising any of his base.... even david duke of the KKK was at the march yesterday saying they were there to fulfill trumps promises and take their country back!!!! and "white america put you in presidency"

he never disavows... and that is what emboldens the alt right!!!! just like after brexit a lot of people with nasty views were emboldened to think they could say those in public with no backlash! (the "time to go home!" crowd)

the president didn't get the message right..... the governor of virginia in his statement did....

if the president was getting criticised by the likes of john mccain, of marco rubio, of rob portman, of Orin Hatch, of Ted Cruz, of Chuck Grassley.... all big hitters in the party, saying that his statement went nowhere near hard enough! then you know you have issued....

Trump was always to one having a go at obama for not calling terrorism what it was... and for not coming out and naming groups!!! and yet, here we are... trump had the oppotunity to do exactly that!!! and what to we get from the "tweeter in chief" for the last 20 hrs..... radio silence!!!!!!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad."

I feel that's a little harsh on Robert E Lee who's position on both slavery and the Union was somewhat more nuanced than your statement suggests.

Robert E Lee

I stand by my statement, because it's true - he fought against the United States to support a government that wanted to retain the institution of slavery.

It's no coincidence that it's his statues the white supremacists and neo-Nazis are rallying around. Think about that.

I'm not defending him. I'm just putting another side to the debate. Who was he fighting for against the Mexicans?

Robert E Lee

So I don't really think from the things he said that he was actually fighting for slavery, do you? Do you not think there was more to it than that?

I am a New Yorker to my bone, but I wouldn't fight under a New York flag against my fellow Americans to support slavery. It says enough that he did. Actions over words.

I'm not trying to be insulting, but this question makes me think you know next to nothing about the civil war and the status of state militias when fighting in it. I think you should do some research on it. If the confederacy was fighting against the union, against the President,then what politician do you think told Lee to raise up arms against the US? The fact is he was asked by the President to command the Union army. He turned down the request and resigned from his post in the army because he said he couldn't raise arms against his native Virginia. He then accepted a post in the confederate army, fighting against the United States.

Anyway, since you like Lee quotes, try this one:

"I think it however a greater evil to the white man than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strong for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things. How long their subjugation may be necessary is known & ordered by a wise Merciful Providence. Their emancipation will sooner result from the mild & melting influence of Christianity, than the storms & tempests of fiery Controversy."

Growing up my father was really into civil war history. He read every book, watched every documentary. My first holiday as a child was a tour of civil war battlefields. It was a minor obsession.

In high school I decided I wanted to read the memoirs of the greatest American general, Robert E. Lee. And it was in reading his memoirs that I realised what type of person he really was. His own words convinced me of his character. This modern re-writing of history to make him out to be this kindly father figure of the south is a joke. It depends on selectively choosing quotes and reorganizing his own opinions while completely ignoring his actions.

If you really want to defend Lee then don't rely on quotes you find off Google. Read his own words in his memoirs. See how his religion shaped his opinion of the inferiority of black people. How he thought slavery was good for them because they needed discipline. That is who he was, in his own words, in his own letters and memoirs.

If you don't want to put in the effort to read his memoirs, then read this article in the Atlantic: "The Myth of the Kindly General Lee." I read it last month and it's a good summation.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *andemanMan
over a year ago

bedforshire

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad."

I feel that's a little harsh on Robert E Lee who's position on both slavery and the Union was somewhat more nuanced than your statement suggests.

Robert E Lee

I stand by my statement, because it's true - he fought against the United States to support a government that wanted to retain the institution of slavery.

It's no coincidence that it's his statues the white supremacists and neo-Nazis are rallying around. Think about that.

I'm not defending him. I'm just putting another side to the debate. Who was he fighting for against the Mexicans?

Robert E Lee

So I don't really think from the things he said that he was actually fighting for slavery, do you? Do you not think there was more to it than that?

I am a New Yorker to my bone, but I wouldn't fight under a New York flag against my fellow Americans to support slavery. It says enough that he did. Actions over words.

Anyway, since you like Lee quotes, try this one:

Growing up my father was really into civil war history. He read every book, watched every documentary. My first holiday as a child was a tour of civil war battlefields. It was a minor obsession.

If you don't want to put in the effort to read his memoirs, then read this article in the Atlantic: "The Myth of the Kindly General Lee." I read it last month and it's a good summation."

Spot on. And before anyone pipes up with "context and time" might i remined people that A) the book the general relyed on for his justification states that the 11th commandment is do unto others what you would have done unto you. It does not say unto white folks.

B) read sheakspears Othello, a white guy explaining the effect and wrongness of racism 100s of years before lee was born. If Sheakspear could see it Lee had no excuss not to as well. As frankly the founding fathers of the us should have seen in 1776!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock

"I thought Trump's statement was absolutely spot on. Absolutely right to condemn the violence on ALL sides.

then like him you have exhibited a lack of condemnation for what is an act of domestic terrorism..

only you know why..

what the fuck is it with some people who choose the language of excuse or diverting the blame from such an act when a white person commits it..

its the same type of attack that took place on Tower Bridge, London Bridge in the initial stage and the attack in East London..

Yes it is right that such violence is condemned but the attack with the car was above and beyond what had occurred earlier..

Also Centaur you have on many occasions been very clear and loud on Corbyn for saying what Trump has said..

if its not good enough for one its surely not for the other..?

or are you ok exhibiting hypocrisy..

Are you blind! The violence and attacks were coming from BOTH sides, the Antifa protesters came with knives, baseball bats, shields and other weapons looking for a fight. Of course it fits your agenda to turn a blind eye to that though doesn't it. Both sides involved in the violence there are as bad as each other and both sides actions should be condemned.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I thought Trump's statement was absolutely spot on. Absolutely right to condemn the violence on ALL sides.

funny enough it wasn't "all sides" that decided to play a car into innocent civilians....

and funny enough when i car was plowed into innocent civilians on westminster bridge, donald trump and his son were one of the first people on twitter to scream "radical islamic terrorism"...

they weren't blaming "all sides" that day!!!

the president didn't get the message right..... the governor of virginia in his statement did....

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock

London, Nice, Berlin and Charlottesville..

same intent..

same act or terrorism.."

What a ridiculous argument, so the Antifa protestors who came with knives should also be put on the same level with the various islamic terrorists who have carried out knife attacks in recent months and years then,

Same intent, same act or terrorism.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

"I thought Trump's statement was absolutely spot on. Absolutely right to condemn the violence on ALL sides.

then like him you have exhibited a lack of condemnation for what is an act of domestic terrorism..

only you know why..

what the fuck is it with some people who choose the language of excuse or diverting the blame from such an act when a white person commits it..

its the same type of attack that took place on Tower Bridge, London Bridge in the initial stage and the attack in East London..

Yes it is right that such violence is condemned but the attack with the car was above and beyond what had occurred earlier..

Also Centaur you have on many occasions been very clear and loud on Corbyn for saying what Trump has said..

if its not good enough for one its surely not for the other..?

or are you ok exhibiting hypocrisy..

what you appear to be doing is ducking an act of terrorism because the perpetrator is white?

only one 'side' decided to use deadly force..

you condemned the violence on both sides, as did i in my response..

yet your running away from condemning the later act which killed one person and injured nearly 20..

why?

your loud and clear when its other terrorism in France, Germany and in the UK as have many of us on here, what is your issue with accepting that this was an act of terrorism also ..?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock

"I thought Trump's statement was absolutely spot on. Absolutely right to condemn the violence on ALL sides.

then like him you have exhibited a lack of condemnation for what is an act of domestic terrorism..

only you know why..

what the fuck is it with some people who choose the language of excuse or diverting the blame from such an act when a white person commits it..

its the same type of attack that took place on Tower Bridge, London Bridge in the initial stage and the attack in East London..

Yes it is right that such violence is condemned but the attack with the car was above and beyond what had occurred earlier..

Also Centaur you have on many occasions been very clear and loud on Corbyn for saying what Trump has said..

if its not good enough for one its surely not for the other..?

or are you ok exhibiting hypocrisy..

what you appear to be doing is ducking an act of terrorism because the perpetrator is white?

only one 'side' decided to use deadly force..

you condemned the violence on both sides, as did i in my response..

yet your running away from condemning the later act which killed one person and injured nearly 20..

why?

your loud and clear when its other terrorism in France, Germany and in the UK as have many of us on here, what is your issue with accepting that this was an act of terrorism also ..?

When people bring knives then there is intent to kill. Why are you turning a blind eye to the actions of the Antifa protestors?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

London, Nice, Berlin and Charlottesville..

same intent..

same act or terrorism..

Same intent, same act or terrorism. "

Bullshit Centaur, look at the footage of the guys carrying automatic military grade weapons amongst the alt right and the neo nazi's..

by the way i am not saying they were intent on anything, its their right etc, myopic again eh..

the only thing that is ridiculous is that you ignore, divert or duck and bluster when terrorism is carried out by one group..

its all terrorism no matter who commits it, decent people can see that and rightly condemn it..

why don't you in this instance..?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

"I thought Trump's statement was absolutely spot on. Absolutely right to condemn the violence on ALL sides.

then like him you have exhibited a lack of condemnation for what is an act of domestic terrorism..

only you know why..

what the fuck is it with some people who choose the language of excuse or diverting the blame from such an act when a white person commits it..

its the same type of attack that took place on Tower Bridge, London Bridge in the initial stage and the attack in East London..

Yes it is right that such violence is condemned but the attack with the car was above and beyond what had occurred earlier..

Also Centaur you have on many occasions been very clear and loud on Corbyn for saying what Trump has said..

if its not good enough for one its surely not for the other..?

or are you ok exhibiting hypocrisy..

what you appear to be doing is ducking an act of terrorism because the perpetrator is white?

only one 'side' decided to use deadly force..

you condemned the violence on both sides, as did i in my response..

yet your running away from condemning the later act which killed one person and injured nearly 20..

why?

your loud and clear when its other terrorism in France, Germany and in the UK as have many of us on here, what is your issue with accepting that this was an act of terrorism also ..?

When people bring knives then there is intent to kill. Why are you turning a blind eye to the actions of the Antifa protestors? "

your not normally stupid, read what has been written then you won't look like you are ignoring what is obvious..

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad."

I feel that's a little harsh on Robert E Lee who's position on both slavery and the Union was somewhat more nuanced than your statement suggests.

Robert E Lee

I stand by my statement, because it's true - he fought against the United States to support a government that wanted to retain the institution of slavery.

It's no coincidence that it's his statues the white supremacists and neo-Nazis are rallying around. Think about that.

I'm not defending him. I'm just putting another side to the debate. Who was he fighting for against the Mexicans?

Robert E Lee

So I don't really think from the things he said that he was actually fighting for slavery, do you? Do you not think there was more to it than that?

I am a New Yorker to my bone, but I wouldn't fight under a New York flag against my fellow Americans to support slavery. It says enough that he did. Actions over words.

Anyway, since you like Lee quotes, try this one:

Growing up my father was really into civil war history. He read every book, watched every documentary. My first holiday as a child was a tour of civil war battlefields. It was a minor obsession.

If you don't want to put in the effort to read his memoirs, then read this article in the Atlantic: "The Myth of the Kindly General Lee." I read it last month and it's a good summation."

As I said before though, I wasn't defending Lee. The point I was trying to make was that the civil war was fought about more than slavery and when statues and monuments, of which there are over 700 in the U.S. I beleive relating to the civil war, then it seems to me like an attempt to delete/re-write history and is wrong. Do we take down statues of Victoria or Churchill or Thatcher or Marx because we don't like some of the things they did, stood for? And when you say you wouldn't take up arms against your fellow Americans? What if they were trying to take away what you believe are your rights?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

When statues/monuments are removed, meant to say

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The situation in America has gotten so bad. Political violence has gotten more common and become a lot more accepted. Not surprised it's ended up with someone dead

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago

upton wirral

The USA is very different to the UK and it is a nation of extremes and this is just another symptom of it.

Sadly racsism is part of there society and many Americans wish slavery still existed they are not a model to follow and they are not civilised in many ways.

They are also very two faced I find,and I do apologise to are American friends as I am generalising but they are a violent people on my view.

As for Trumps comments well the violence is on both sides so he said the right thing and as for the ISIS style attack,it is out there and will no doubt become part of violent behaviour in the future that is life.It is an easy way to harm others you do not have to be a terrorist to do it.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad."

I feel that's a little harsh on Robert E Lee who's position on both slavery and the Union was somewhat more nuanced than your statement suggests.

Robert E Lee

I stand by my statement, because it's true - he fought against the United States to support a government that wanted to retain the institution of slavery.

It's no coincidence that it's his statues the white supremacists and neo-Nazis are rallying around. Think about that.

I'm not defending him. I'm just putting another side to the debate. Who was he fighting for against the Mexicans?

Robert E Lee

So I don't really think from the things he said that he was actually fighting for slavery, do you? Do you not think there was more to it than that?

I am a New Yorker to my bone, but I wouldn't fight under a New York flag against my fellow Americans to support slavery. It says enough that he did. Actions over words.

Anyway, since you like Lee quotes, try this one:

Growing up my father was really into civil war history. He read every book, watched every documentary. My first holiday as a child was a tour of civil war battlefields. It was a minor obsession.

If you don't want to put in the effort to read his memoirs, then read this article in the Atlantic: "The Myth of the Kindly General Lee." I read it last month and it's a good summation.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad."

I feel that's a little harsh on Robert E Lee who's position on both slavery and the Union was somewhat more nuanced than your statement suggests.

Robert E Lee

I stand by my statement, because it's true - he fought against the United States to support a government that wanted to retain the institution of slavery.

It's no coincidence that it's his statues the white supremacists and neo-Nazis are rallying around. Think about that.

I'm not defending him. I'm just putting another side to the debate. Who was he fighting for against the Mexicans?

Robert E Lee

So I don't really think from the things he said that he was actually fighting for slavery, do you? Do you not think there was more to it than that?

I am a New Yorker to my bone, but I wouldn't fight under a New York flag against my fellow Americans to support slavery. It says enough that he did. Actions over words.

Anyway, since you like Lee quotes, try this one:

Growing up my father was really into civil war history. He read every book, watched every documentary. My first holiday as a child was a tour of civil war battlefields. It was a minor obsession.

If you don't want to put in the effort to read his memoirs, then read this article in the Atlantic: "The Myth of the Kindly General Lee." I read it last month and it's a good summation.

Didn't Stalin also do the same thing?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad."

I feel that's a little harsh on Robert E Lee who's position on both slavery and the Union was somewhat more nuanced than your statement suggests.

Robert E Lee

I stand by my statement, because it's true - he fought against the United States to support a government that wanted to retain the institution of slavery.

It's no coincidence that it's his statues the white supremacists and neo-Nazis are rallying around. Think about that.

I'm not defending him. I'm just putting another side to the debate. Who was he fighting for against the Mexicans?

Robert E Lee

So I don't really think from the things he said that he was actually fighting for slavery, do you? Do you not think there was more to it than that?

I am a New Yorker to my bone, but I wouldn't fight under a New York flag against my fellow Americans to support slavery. It says enough that he did. Actions over words.

Anyway, since you like Lee quotes, try this one:

Growing up my father was really into civil war history. He read every book, watched every documentary. My first holiday as a child was a tour of civil war battlefields. It was a minor obsession.

If you don't want to put in the effort to read his memoirs, then read this article in the Atlantic: "The Myth of the Kindly General Lee." I read it last month and it's a good summation.

You need to stop selectively choosing what to quote and what not to quote. I never said I wouldn't take up arms against my fellow Americans. I said I wouldn't do so to support slavery. Read more carefully. I firmly believe that there are principles that overrule patriotism. It's this very belief that allows me to condemn a man who fought on the side of abhorant principles, like slavery.

As for rewriting history, I agree. We shouldn't rewrite history. Rewriting history is exactly what supporters of the confederacy have been doing for over 100 years when they pretend that the civil war was fought over anything besides defending the right of slaveholders.

The civil war was fought over one thing - slavery. Every single state that seceded quoted slavery in their secession documents as the reason for their secession. The reason why violence erupted was because the union did not believe it was a consititonal right of individual States to secede. That constitutional disagreement, however, was an afterthought. The impetus was slavery. Again, read the actual documents. Read the secession documents. Every one of those cites slavery as a cause. The declaration of secession for Virginia says that the federal government was "perverting” its powers “not only to the injury of the people of Virginia, but to the oppression of the Southern Slaveholding States.” It always came back to slavery. Much like the protest and murder yesterday.

Statues of former leaders are removed all the time. Statues of Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, and more have been torn down to cheers. We remove these symbols because they do not constitute history. History is taught in the classroom. These monuments are symbols. They are honors. They should no longer be welcome. When a young white male self identifies as a white supremacist, holding a confederate flag in videos he himself posted to YouTube goes into a black church in south Carolina and guns down 9 innocent people these symbols become incitement to violence. They represent a society that has not moved on from the divisive era of the civil war.

There is free speech in America. If someone wants to carry a confederate flag or put a statue of Lee in his front yard he can go right ahead. But our government shouldn't honor these symbols of hatred by displaying them in public parks and flying confederate flags outside of state legislatures. It only serves to embolden those who can see the confederacy for what it was when they commit acts of terrorism and murder people simply for being black or for disagreeing with while natinalism.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago

upton wirral

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad."

I feel that's a little harsh on Robert E Lee who's position on both slavery and the Union was somewhat more nuanced than your statement suggests.

Robert E Lee

I stand by my statement, because it's true - he fought against the United States to support a government that wanted to retain the institution of slavery.

It's no coincidence that it's his statues the white supremacists and neo-Nazis are rallying around. Think about that.

I'm not defending him. I'm just putting another side to the debate. Who was he fighting for against the Mexicans?

Robert E Lee

So I don't really think from the things he said that he was actually fighting for slavery, do you? Do you not think there was more to it than that?

I am a New Yorker to my bone, but I wouldn't fight under a New York flag against my fellow Americans to support slavery. It says enough that he did. Actions over words.

Anyway, since you like Lee quotes, try this one:

Growing up my father was really into civil war history. He read every book, watched every documentary. My first holiday as a child was a tour of civil war battlefields. It was a minor obsession.

If you don't want to put in the effort to read his memoirs, then read this article in the Atlantic: "The Myth of the Kindly General Lee." I read it last month and it's a good summation.

Exactly right history should be preserved so that it's there to serve as a reminder and a record for future generations. The American civil war and the confederacy are an Important part of American history. It's terrorist groups like ISIS who destroy historical monuments and try to rewrite history as they have done with many important historical archaeological sites in Syria. "
Being British I do not know enough about American history but do agree that the past should be remembered good or bad,this should be for every nation,I do like your article

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

"When statues/monuments are removed, meant to say"

see it makes me giggle a bit when the likes of CandM and Centaur talk about the statues and history

their arguement would have a lot more sway if the same bunch on alt-right/ white nationalists had not tried to attack the statue of Thomas Jefferson on the Uva Campus in charlottesville THE VERY NIGHT BEFORE and were pushed back by students who were guarding the statue

so apparently one set of free speech is fine.... and the other... well, the president still hasn't come out and explicitly condemned...

actually.. jessie jackson may has been right at the end of the day when he said the only reason why trump had to say "all sides" was because effectively david duke embarrassed him enough that he had not option but to....

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"When statues/monuments are removed, meant to say

see it makes me giggle a bit when the likes of CandM and Centaur talk about the statues and history

so apparently one set of free speech is fine.... and the other... well, the president still hasn't come out and explicitly condemned...

If by CandM you mean me for some reason, then I would condemn equally the far right attacking a statue of Jefferson had it been on a thread like this

. What is wrong with you? Are you totally myopic?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Any act of mindless violence should be condemned and I for one condemn this one if it proves to be that. What I do not understand though is this;

Why were the anti fascists protesting against the demo ratic right of others to protest. Surely that in itself is an act of fascism? Ignore the wrongs for a moment. Don't the far right have as much freedom to demonstrate as the next group?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *andemanMan
over a year ago

bedforshire

"I thought Trump's statement was absolutely spot on. Absolutely right to condemn the violence on ALL sides.

then like him you have exhibited a lack of condemnation for what is an act of domestic terrorism..

only you know why..

what the fuck is it with some people who choose the language of excuse or diverting the blame from such an act when a white person commits it..

its the same type of attack that took place on Tower Bridge, London Bridge in the initial stage and the attack in East London..

Yes it is right that such violence is condemned but the attack with the car was above and beyond what had occurred earlier..

Also Centaur you have on many occasions been very clear and loud on Corbyn for saying what Trump has said..

if its not good enough for one its surely not for the other..?

or are you ok exhibiting hypocrisy..

what you appear to be doing is ducking an act of terrorism because the perpetrator is white?

only one 'side' decided to use deadly force..

you condemned the violence on both sides, as did i in my response..

yet your running away from condemning the later act which killed one person and injured nearly 20..

why?

your loud and clear when its other terrorism in France, Germany and in the UK as have many of us on here, what is your issue with accepting that this was an act of terrorism also ..?

When people bring knives then there is intent to kill. Why are you turning a blind eye to the actions of the Antifa protestors? "

I assume you either have an agenda or just have little understanding of Amarica and were not watching the news carfully.

The Nazis (KKK AltRight its all the same, no actually it is so dont go there please.) Turned up fully armed with assualt Rifles hadguns sheilds (compleate with thier club logos) spears and German army helmets. Its the 2nd Amendment in fully glory.

The vast majority of the AntiFash (do please get it right if you are going to use our language and terms) were unarmed and those who did turn up armed had clearly never heard the maxim," dont take a knife to a gun fight!".

While those of the AntiFash who turned up looking for violance are stupid and criminally so. Your total lack of proportionality reveals an insight to your view point.

Oh and for the record case you forget, President Lincoln was a Republican!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *andemanMan
over a year ago

bedforshire

"Any act of mindless violence should be condemned and I for one condemn this one if it proves to be that. What I do not understand though is this;

In absolute Libertarian terms you are right its the Vultair maxim, " I disagree fundrmentally with what you are saying but I will defend unto my own death your right to say it."

While I hold the AntiFash line i recognise your point.

But we also need to remember that rights to free speach have to be tempered by accountability. If you lie slander defame or INSIGHT you are accountable for that action and to the reaction of others.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock

"I thought Trump's statement was absolutely spot on. Absolutely right to condemn the violence on ALL sides.

then like him you have exhibited a lack of condemnation for what is an act of domestic terrorism..

only you know why..

what the fuck is it with some people who choose the language of excuse or diverting the blame from such an act when a white person commits it..

its the same type of attack that took place on Tower Bridge, London Bridge in the initial stage and the attack in East London..

Yes it is right that such violence is condemned but the attack with the car was above and beyond what had occurred earlier..

Also Centaur you have on many occasions been very clear and loud on Corbyn for saying what Trump has said..

if its not good enough for one its surely not for the other..?

or are you ok exhibiting hypocrisy..

what you appear to be doing is ducking an act of terrorism because the perpetrator is white?

only one 'side' decided to use deadly force..

you condemned the violence on both sides, as did i in my response..

yet your running away from condemning the later act which killed one person and injured nearly 20..

why?

your loud and clear when its other terrorism in France, Germany and in the UK as have many of us on here, what is your issue with accepting that this was an act of terrorism also ..?

When people bring knives then there is intent to kill. Why are you turning a blind eye to the actions of the Antifa protestors?

I assume you either have an agenda or just have little understanding of Amarica and were not watching the news carfully.

While those of the AntiFash who turned up looking for violance are stupid and criminally so. Your total lack of proportionality reveals an insight to your view point.

Oh and for the record case you forget, President Lincoln was a Republican! "

Antifa is the correct term to use in this case. Infowars is an American website and the term used on there (by Americans) is Antifa NOT Antifash so if you are American it seems you are disagreeing with your fellow Americans on Infowars about the correct term. I also did watch the news carefully and the violence on display was of an equal nature on BOTH sides that's why Trump was right to condemn the violence on BOTH sides.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Any act of mindless violence should be condemned and I for one condemn this one if it proves to be that. What I do not understand though is this;

They weren't protesting against the white supremacists' right to protest. They were counter protesting. It's done at every major protest in the United States because both sides are represented.

In the past, traditionally liberal organizations like the ACLU have defended the right of the kkk and other white nationalist groups to protest peacefully. An iconic example of this was the kkk march in Skokie, Illinois. The difference here was that the white nationalists came looking for a fight. They were armed. They had practiced roman-style defense positions. They were looking for a fight. They even brought torches to a night protest at the University of Virginia (historically connected to the kkk's proclivity for setting crosses on fire and lynching people).

I'm glad the white nationalists staged their protest - it speaks volumes about the lies being built up around Lee's legacy. They have every right to protest. And their counter protesters had every right to protest as well. Images can be seen of cops arresting counter protesters who blocked the path of the white nationalists protest.

But it was a white nationalist who drove a car through a bunch of counter protesters, murdering a 32 year old woman. Why did he feel he had a right to protest but the counter protesters didn't?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

"Any act of mindless violence should be condemned and I for one condemn this one if it proves to be that. What I do not understand though is this;

i think the act of getting into a vehicle and driving to where one can run down others goes beyond what would be mindless violence..

2 people squaring up in the moment and one hits the other is more akin to that..

the driver of the vehicle intentionally drove at others, yes one could say it mindless and its certainly violent but its far beyond what was kicking off earlier in the day..

on the free speech, yes i get the idea that i will defend your right to say what you want even if i strongly disagree but when one side is marching with swastika's..?

bit like attending the Mums net annual conference in a Jimmy Saville was innocent tee shirt or something equally vile to do with children..

some would say a person has the right under free speech to do that but societies if only to stop mayhem and anarchy need governance and laws..

the swastika should never be seen as acceptable..

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *andemanMan
over a year ago

bedforshire

"I thought Trump's statement was absolutely spot on. Absolutely right to condemn the violence on ALL sides.

then like him you have exhibited a lack of condemnation for what is an act of domestic terrorism..

only you know why..

what the fuck is it with some people who choose the language of excuse or diverting the blame from such an act when a white person commits it..

its the same type of attack that took place on Tower Bridge, London Bridge in the initial stage and the attack in East London..

Yes it is right that such violence is condemned but the attack with the car was above and beyond what had occurred earlier..

Also Centaur you have on many occasions been very clear and loud on Corbyn for saying what Trump has said..

if its not good enough for one its surely not for the other..?

or are you ok exhibiting hypocrisy..

what you appear to be doing is ducking an act of terrorism because the perpetrator is white?

only one 'side' decided to use deadly force..

you condemned the violence on both sides, as did i in my response..

yet your running away from condemning the later act which killed one person and injured nearly 20..

why?

your loud and clear when its other terrorism in France, Germany and in the UK as have many of us on here, what is your issue with accepting that this was an act of terrorism also ..?

When people bring knives then there is intent to kill. Why are you turning a blind eye to the actions of the Antifa protestors?

I assume you either have an agenda or just have little understanding of Amarica and were not watching the news carfully.

While those of the AntiFash who turned up looking for violance are stupid and criminally so. Your total lack of proportionality reveals an insight to your view point.

Oh and for the record case you forget, President Lincoln was a Republican!

I am (born there as a Scot) and I do.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *avidnsa69Man
over a year ago

Essex & Bridgend

"Any act of mindless violence should be condemned and I for one condemn this one if it proves to be that. What I do not understand though is this;

Noone is questioning anyone's right to protest. Driving a car into a crowd deliberately is an act of terrorism. This time it was a white supremacist terrorist. Trump should be condemning that act appropriately rather than being mealy mouthed and sucking up to those holding vile views who helped elect him.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *andemanMan
over a year ago

bedforshire

"Any act of mindless violence should be condemned and I for one condemn this one if it proves to be that. What I do not understand though is this;

Again spot on.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Driving a Car into a Crowd is Terrosm !!!

Wether they are Left, Right , Christian , Muslim , Black , White or Bloody Pink , Green or Bloody Purple !!! Grrrrrrr ffs it's Wrong !!!!!!!!!!!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge

"Driving a Car into a Crowd is Terrosm !!!

Wether they are Left, Right , Christian , Muslim , Black , White or Bloody Pink , Green or Bloody Purple !!! Grrrrrrr ffs it's Wrong !!!!!!!!!!! "

I agree with you Mr Suit, but many on here don't unfortunately.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge

I know we have our disagreements and often see things from different points of view, but I honestly thought you were better than "Info Wars". It is documented as denying mass shootings, 9/11 and "FEMA Death Camp" conspiracies, as well as alien conspiracies. It's not news.

During the custody battle for his child, the ex-wife of the host said that the views expressed on the show prove the host should not have custody of the children. The host then defended himself by saying that it was just entertainment and he was only playing a character with those views.

You cant expect to use such a site as a source and for reasonable people to believe that it is credible.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

"Driving a Car into a Crowd is Terrosm !!!

Wether they are Left, Right , Christian , Muslim , Black , White or Bloody Pink , Green or Bloody Purple !!! Grrrrrrr ffs it's Wrong !!!!!!!!!!!

I agree with you Mr Suit, but many on here don't unfortunately. "

the majority do yes but some, albeit a small minority look at the colour of the skin of the perpetrator or what their 'politics' is and choose to be subjective in whom they condemn..

its sad..

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge

"The USA is very different to the UK and it is a nation of extremes and this is just another symptom of it.

Sadly racsism is part of there society and many Americans wish slavery still existed they are not a model to follow and they are not civilised in many ways.

They are also very two faced I find,and I do apologise to are American friends as I am generalising but they are a violent people on my view.

Sorry emma, but I'm going to have to call you out here. This wasnt a traffic accident, this was a deliberate and deadly attack on innocent people by someone who thought that their political views were more important than the lives of others. That is terrorism, and you should call it terrorism.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *uxinteriorMan
over a year ago

south west , continental

Are some policemen dead as well from this incident? How did that happen?

I really don't understand some organised protest rallies at all these days. It appears that some are allowed to shout the loudest but others are not.

All these rallies to me all seem very hateful of everyone and anything.

What happened to civilized debate and acceptance that not everyones point of view is the same. Why is some people's point of view being censored but others are allowed to speak?

There is some really strange stuff happening at the moment.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge

"Are some policemen dead as well from this incident? How did that happen?

I really don't understand some organised protest rallies at all these days. It appears that some are allowed to shout the loudest but others are not.

All these rallies to me all seem very hateful of everyone and anything.

What happened to civilized debate and acceptance that not everyones point of view is the same. Why is some people's point of view being censored but others are allowed to speak?

There is some really strange stuff happening at the moment."

Two policemen died in a helicopter crash, they were observing the protests.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *uxinteriorMan
over a year ago

south west , continental

Crikey that's bad how did that happen exactly?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *uxinteriorMan
over a year ago

south west , continental

I'm reading on Google that it was shot down by a white supremacist?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *lem-H-FandangoMan
over a year ago

salisbury

I've just seen that white supremacists killed JFK and always stop England progressing in international football tournaments.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *uxinteriorMan
over a year ago

south west , continental

"I've just seen that white supremacists killed JFK and always stop England progressing in international football tournaments. "

Did you read that on Google too! They really have their finger on the pulse.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The alt right have always been a lower case KKK.They dont make them like the use to.There are no bigger snowflakes than the alt right here and over there. Youve got to fight for your right to be a racist these days boys.The alt right on the thread are all.Wah Wah Wah.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *uxinteriorMan
over a year ago

south west , continental

It's all coming out now in the wash, how come the news stories, journalists, narratives never mention Antifa or those BLM thugs that went along to this rally without a permission permit? Causing grief again no doubt!

Was it really white supremacists or a small proportion of white supremacists? It was a unite the right rally which was meant to protest the removal of a Statue of general Lee. Crikey that general was against slavery, he's on written record stating that.

Going on Antifa and BLM's record their really nice folk!

I've met real white supremacists they were not pretty, lots of Swastika and NF tattoo's, the one who broke my nose was a particular nasty piece of work with Screwdriver tattooed on his forehead. Not nice when your enjoying a few pints in the intrepid fox (now gone I believe) with your punk mates!

White supremacists indeed! Oh just like all those Trump supporters....

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago

Barbados

"It's all coming out now in the wash, how come the news stories, journalists, narratives never mention Antifa or those BLM thugs that went along to this rally without a permission permit? Causing grief again no doubt!

Going on Antifa and BLM's record their really nice folk!

White supremacists indeed! Oh just like all those Trump supporters...."

Yup, white supremacy has moved on. It now wears a polo shirt and tries to look respectable. I guess when you have a known white supremacist sat next to the president it legitimises these things. It has been normalised. That is the scary part.

-Matt

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

The problem is now that there are some people is visible roles in the administration that have known links to the alt right.... bannon, miller and gorka to name 3! And then they still get breibart to do their smear work for trump

Notice that trump is happy to go after anything but putin and the alt right... he knows who he needs to keep happy!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

What I find really scary is how at the same time as Trump is refusing to condemn white supremacists for race hate inspired violence and murder the spokespeople for the same groups are threatening revolution if Trump, any member of the Trump family, the Trump election campaign team or administration is indicted for any crimes by the grand jury.

But then that's just more of the hitler playbook been rerun.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

2010..Hillary Clinton fawns over kkk leader Robert Byrd..calls him.."My mentor and my friend".

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

"2010..Hillary Clinton fawns over kkk leader Robert Byrd..calls him.."My mentor and my friend"."

Really?

I find that hard to believe, can you post a link?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"2010..Hillary Clinton fawns over kkk leader Robert Byrd..calls him.."My mentor and my friend".

Really?

I find that hard to believe, can you post a link?"
...Well i'm glad you find it hard to believe...google ..Clintons and their kkk friends

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

"The problem is now that there are some people is visible roles in the administration that have known links to the alt right.... bannon, miller and gorka to name 3! And then they still get breibart to do their smear work for trump

Notice that trump is happy to go after anything but putin and the alt right... he knows who he needs to keep happy!"

Listened to an interview over the weekend with a US political commentator who passed a telling comment about how Trump never says anything negative about Putin...

If you're a gambling addict in deep hock to your bookie your always nice to them, the one last thing you do is slag them off!

I wonder when Russian kompromat 'the pee pee tapes' will start surfacing.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

"2010..Hillary Clinton fawns over kkk leader Robert Byrd..calls him.."My mentor and my friend".

Really?

I find that hard to believe, can you post a link?...Well i'm glad you find it hard to believe...google ..Clintons and their kkk friends"

I did, i dismissed all the alt right and nazi propaganda pages and stopped at this:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/yashar-hedayat/the-breitbartification-of_b_11987814.html

Seems Byrd was not a KKK leader and that the story is much more nuanced than you suggest, including the fact that Senator Robert Byrd died in 2010 and had spent decades publicly apologizing for what he did as a KKK member in his 20's.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"2010..Hillary Clinton fawns over kkk leader Robert Byrd..calls him.."My mentor and my friend".

Really?

I find that hard to believe, can you post a link?...Well i'm glad you find it hard to believe...google ..Clintons and their kkk friends

I did, i dismissed all the alt right and nazi propaganda pages and stopped at this:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/yashar-hedayat/the-breitbartification-of_b_11987814.html

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge

"2010..Hillary Clinton fawns over kkk leader Robert Byrd..calls him.."My mentor and my friend".

Really?

I find that hard to believe, can you post a link?...Well i'm glad you find it hard to believe...google ..Clintons and their kkk friends

I did, i dismissed all the alt right and nazi propaganda pages and stopped at this:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/yashar-hedayat/the-breitbartification-of_b_11987814.html

You are giving trump a pass for his....

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"The alt right have always been a lower case KKK.They dont make them like the use to.There are no bigger snowflakes than the alt right here and over there. Youve got to fight for your right to be a racist these days boys.The alt right on the thread are all.Wah Wah Wah.

Bit like UKIP and the EDL then

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Bit like UKIP and the EDL then

This gets me I've voted UKIP before but I'm nowt like the thugs in the EDL !

See my earlier post grrrrrrrrrrrr

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Bit like UKIP and the EDL then

This gets me I've voted UKIP before but I'm nowt like the thugs in the EDL !

See my earlier post grrrrrrrrrrrr

Wasnt aimed at you Mr Suit in the slightest but they are aligned in there thoughts

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

White power white power...

As Django said... Kill white People and get paid for it, what's not to like?.

The usa is fucked, it can't put the past behind it where it belongs

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

"2010..Hillary Clinton fawns over kkk leader Robert Byrd..calls him.."My mentor and my friend"."

i think it is really telling that instead of codemning, you decide to defend and to point fingers

well done....

very well done!!!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

i think it was also really telling that it took 45 minutes this morning for trump to attack the black CEO who decided to resign from his business committee over his response this morning on twitter...

but it took more than 48hrs to finally open his mouth on this subject.......

nothing like priorities.....

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *xplicitlyricsMan
over a year ago

south dublin

"2010..Hillary Clinton fawns over kkk leader Robert Byrd..calls him.."My mentor and my friend"."

Pathetic. In a discussion about a terrorist attack that happened this week and the reaction to it you bring up something innaccurate from 7 years ago thats completely unrelated.

The vioence on display this weekend should be condemned by everyone. This is not a positive development or one that should be ignored. Its an evil that shoukd be rooted out and destroyed.

Its very telling that the alt right are now so emboldened and feel embraced by the mainstream conservative movement that they didnt feel the need to hide their faces. They feel they have institutional support now from both leaders like Trump and ordinary people who will try and direct the debate to Hillary a former politician.

Funny how its some of the same posters who demand tougher action against muslims when this happens but find excuses and distractions when its violence against minorities. I wonder why they arent equally as outraged over both acts of terrorism......

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge

"2010..Hillary Clinton fawns over kkk leader Robert Byrd..calls him.."My mentor and my friend".

Pathetic. In a discussion about a terrorist attack that happened this week and the reaction to it you bring up something innaccurate from 7 years ago thats completely unrelated.

The vioence on display this weekend should be condemned by everyone. This is not a positive development or one that should be ignored. Its an evil that shoukd be rooted out and destroyed.

Ever notice how the same people complain about Muslim communities supposedly not condemning a Muslim terrorists attack, yet here those very same people are refusing to even admit that a terrorist attack took place.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"2010..Hillary Clinton fawns over kkk leader Robert Byrd..calls him.."My mentor and my friend".

Pathetic. In a discussion about a terrorist attack that happened this week and the reaction to it you bring up something innaccurate from 7 years ago thats completely unrelated.

The vioence on display this weekend should be condemned by everyone. This is not a positive development or one that should be ignored. Its an evil that shoukd be rooted out and destroyed.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"2010..Hillary Clinton fawns over kkk leader Robert Byrd..calls him.."My mentor and my friend"."

Ohh, are we playing jeopardy?

*ahem*

What are "outright lies"?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *xplicitlyricsMan
over a year ago

south dublin

"2010..Hillary Clinton fawns over kkk leader Robert Byrd..calls him.."My mentor and my friend".

Pathetic. In a discussion about a terrorist attack that happened this week and the reaction to it you bring up something innaccurate from 7 years ago thats completely unrelated.

The vioence on display this weekend should be condemned by everyone. This is not a positive development or one that should be ignored. Its an evil that shoukd be rooted out and destroyed.

I said "some" of the same posters. I know its not all.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

Anyone see Trump's latest condemnation on the news?

Even now he still failed to call it a terrorist attack.

To quote Trump...

Bad, so bad, terrible, so much losing.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I've been predicting this for awhile, I happened to say to somebody if Bernie Sanders doesn't get in, Hillary or trump will bring on the underlying chaos!

Civil war its just around the corner for the USA again, history always repeats itself unless your willing to learn from it openly and honestly and more importantly move on from it.

Just around the corner from now is the biggest bubble ever waiting to go pop and when it does the place will explode with violence... They all sense it, that primitive instinct hasn't gone, its just shrouded by modern bullshit.

Democracy, the greatest thing since sliced bread

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I actually think the statue should be kept, though not maintained immaculately, but have it with a plaque explaining what he did and what he stood for in the most blunt of manners.

The bulk of people will understand that it's a chance to learn about the progress forward the US has made.

Anyone who regards it as an actual memorial, and celebrates anything like racism or white supremacy around it will probably be shunned by society.

If you get rid of it, you are likely to martyr the far-right and the 'culture' they endorse - if you try that you are likely to just lend them sympathy. Just let them keep the statue, then as I said, turn it into a history lesson so they can slink back to their dark internet forums.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Thing is, statues of specific people are there to commemorate them, and says "this person is important to us" so even a plaque on the statue saying that Lee was an "oathbreaker, traitor, and fought for slavery" isn't going to undo the symbolism of having a commemorative statue.

Benedict Arnold doesn't have a plethora of statues in his honour across the states (and the one commentating his actions at the battles of Saratoga, never names him), so I don't see why Lee and other Confederate leaders would either.

Well, y'know, except for the whole racism thing.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago

Cambridge

"Thing is, statues of specific people are there to commemorate them, and says "this person is important to us" so even a plaque on the statue saying that Lee was an "oathbreaker, traitor, and fought for slavery" isn't going to undo the symbolism of having a commemorative statue.

Well, y'know, except for the whole racism thing."

Exactly, Hitler played a big part in history, how many statues do you see of him?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

Well, y'know, except for the whole racism thing."

The other irony is that this particular statue isn't really that old... it was basically put in the park in the mid 60's as a giant "f you" to the then rise of the civil rights movement

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Alt-right protesters carrying burning torches and adopting ISIS sytle tactics by using a vehicle as a weapon to mow down innocent people leaving at least one dead so far.

Trump is disavowing the violence, but does he have blood on his hands, or is Trump just another symptom of the dark side of America? "

A deeply divided society on most major issues. They got their work cut out to heal the festering wounds of inequality and injustice.

Isn't it odd that in the home of capitalism, the NFL flourishes, thanks in part to its socialist stance of giving the weakest teams the biggest help. Imagine if newly promoted Huddersfield or Brighton got Lukaku and Morata...

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Alt-right protesters carrying burning torches and adopting ISIS sytle tactics by using a vehicle as a weapon to mow down innocent people leaving at least one dead so far.

Trump is disavowing the violence, but does he have blood on his hands, or is Trump just another symptom of the dark side of America?

A deeply divided society on most major issues. They got their work cut out to heal the festering wounds of inequality and injustice.

Way off topic I know...

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Well, y'know, except for the whole racism thing.

The other irony is that this particular statue isn't really that old... it was basically put in the park in the mid 60's as a giant "f you" to the then rise of the civil rights movement "

Oh, if it's a recent statue and basically there as middle finger sod it. I thought it'd be some 150 year old thing.

It's hardly history or culture in this case then - it's not like the walls of York or a European Cathedral.

Although maybe it'd be worthwhile actually putting massive signs and info boards around it illustrating how disgusting the slave trade was and how wrong the Confederates were. Yo know, try and turn one middle finger into your own middle finger.

I imagine certain groups within the alt-right and the far right as a whole would actually hate to see 'their' monument being used to educate against their ideology.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The statue is of a loser.Pull it down.Only the bitter racist losers want it kept.You can teach the history from books.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *uxinteriorMan
over a year ago

south west , continental

I guess any statue is going to offend someone somewhere. What about statues in the UK? Drake, Nelson, Wellington I'm pretty sure the French and the Spanish are not particularly keen on them.

Churchill? French again would be happy after what he ordered on the French fleet.We had some pretty nasty kings and Queens, let's get rid of those statues too, please a few folk around the world!

History is History and symbols serve as a reminder of what's been and gone. Perhaps a reminder of not to revisit that particular past event. It's impossible to erase history. Sadly folk have a damn good try though!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

Education about what the statue good and bad is the better way, pulling such things down only gives a pyrrhic victory for those opposed to it as without doubt those who support white supremacy in this case will construe their own narrative..

i grew up in Liverpool and we were never properly educated at all about the Cities wealth being partly down to the slave trade and that many of the streets we used to know in the centre are named after slavers..

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Look at northern Ireland prime example , murals on buildings ,

Murals in Northern Ireland have become symbols of Northern Ireland, depicting the region's past and present political and religious divisions.

Belfast and Derry contain arguably the most famous political murals in Europe. It is believed that almost 2,000 murals have been documented since the 1970s. In 2014, the book, The Belfast Mural Guide estimated that, in Belfast, there were approximately 300 quality murals on display, with many more in varying degrees of age and decay. Murals commemorate, communicate and display aspects of culture and history. The themes of murals often reflect what is important to a particular community. A mural therefore exists to express an idea or message and could generally be seen as reflecting values held dear to that community.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock

"The statue is of a loser.Pull it down.Only the bitter racist losers want it kept.You can teach the history from books."

Let's take down the statue of Martin Luther King as well then, as you say you can teach the history from books. Fabio said the statue of General Lee is not that old only put there in the 60's. Statue of Martin Luther King is even less old than the Lee one.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"The statue is of a loser.Pull it down.Only the bitter racist losers want it kept.You can teach the history from books.

Why would you want to take down a statue of a great leader of freedom or rights...and keep one of someone that fought to enslave people....i thought you being a big advocate of freedom of rights would want to keep that....not the oppressive ones....you have some very strange thoughts

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock

"The statue is of a loser.Pull it down.Only the bitter racist losers want it kept.You can teach the history from books.

The removal of this General Lee statue would inevitably raise tensions and I wouldn't be at all surprised to see retaliation attacks of vandalism or defacing of statues of people like Martin Luther King. Just leave both statues be and let people get on with their lives in peace. This is not going to end well and will only escalate if the Lee statue is removed.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Well, y'know, except for the whole racism thing.

The other irony is that this particular statue isn't really that old... it was basically put in the park in the mid 60's as a giant "f you" to the then rise of the civil rights movement "

They're also made really cheaply, which is why people pulled down a confederate statue in Durham, North Carolina just today the legs buckled and warped.

They really want to celebrate their "southern heritage" but they didn't want to spend a lot of money....

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *oxychick35Couple
over a year ago

thornaby

There just statues nothing more u don't have to look at them it's history we can't just learn about one side of history we need to learn from the good and the bad depending on the side your on

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock

Well, y'know, except for the whole racism thing.

The other irony is that this particular statue isn't really that old... it was basically put in the park in the mid 60's as a giant "f you" to the then rise of the civil rights movement

They're also made really cheaply, which is why people pulled down a confederate statue in Durham, North Carolina just today the legs buckled and warped.

They really want to celebrate their "southern heritage" but they didn't want to spend a lot of money...."

I don't think the person who designed the statue envisaged mindless vandals deliberately pulling it down. I live in a former mining area a concrete statue of a miner was put up in the middle of a roundabout last year, within a couple of weeks some mindless moron had knocked the arm off it, I don't think the person who designed it envisaged that happening either.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

To be honest the only opinion that matters are the descendents of the atlantic slave trade.Who cares what white supremacists think.Pull it down.

It'll get destroyed now in any case by some righteous soul.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Well, y'know, except for the whole racism thing.

The other irony is that this particular statue isn't really that old... it was basically put in the park in the mid 60's as a giant "f you" to the then rise of the civil rights movement

They're also made really cheaply, which is why people pulled down a confederate statue in Durham, North Carolina just today the legs buckled and warped.

They really want to celebrate their "southern heritage" but they didn't want to spend a lot of money....

Mindless isn't the word I'd use to describe them, it was a very deliberate act.

Or do you assume they must be unthinking savages because you disagree with their actions?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Well, y'know, except for the whole racism thing.

The other irony is that this particular statue isn't really that old... it was basically put in the park in the mid 60's as a giant "f you" to the then rise of the civil rights movement

They're also made really cheaply, which is why people pulled down a confederate statue in Durham, North Carolina just today the legs buckled and warped.

They really want to celebrate their "southern heritage" but they didn't want to spend a lot of money....

Mindless isn't the word I'd use to describe them, it was a very deliberate act.

Or do you assume they must be unthinking savages because you disagree with their actions?"
I wouldnt use the words righteous intent.

In the case of these statues in the USA.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"The statue is of a loser.Pull it down.Only the bitter racist losers want it kept.You can teach the history from books.

"
.

It wasn't all about slavery although it was a factor.

Ulysses grant kept slaves if I remember correctly

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *oxychick35Couple
over a year ago

thornaby

It was as much about a north south divide money wise

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It was, literally, all about slavery.

The declarations of Secession from Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas all mention slavery multiple times throughout.

For example, this from the Mississippi declaration

"In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course. Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world."

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"It was as much about a north south divide money wise "
The south needed slaves otherwise their economic model would collapse.So it was about money.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"The statue is of a loser.Pull it down.Only the bitter racist losers want it kept.You can teach the history from books.

It wasn't all about slavery although it was a factor.

Ulysses grant kept slaves if I remember correctly"

Were did i mention slavery...i mentioned freedom of rights thats the difference...the other guy was fighting for some people namely the black ones not to have them

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"It was, literally, all about slavery.

The declarations of Secession from Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas all mention slavery multiple times throughout.

For example, this from the Mississippi declaration

Every single secession declaration references slavery. Not to mention even the protection of States' rights was to defend the States' rights to own slaves. It was about slavery, completely.

Here's a bit of Texas' declaration of secession:

“We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.”

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

When people say it was about state's rights, they have a hard time with the inevitable follow up.

"A state's right to what, sir?"

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 15/08/17 17:02:06]

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad.""
Wrong Again

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad." Wrong Again"

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad." Wrong Again"

You know, it makes me sad that a group of British people can have an informed debate about this, about a subject dear to Americans and integral to their history and identity and yet, when a fellow American joins the debate the most he can offer is "wrong again."

Yet another reason I feel for my country.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

"The statue is of a loser.Pull it down.Only the bitter racist losers want it kept.You can teach the history from books.

Wow..... wanting to conflate Martin Luther king to general lee.... okay... not sure that is an avenue you want to go down but have at it....

The statue was put in the park because the name of the park was originally called lee park, but they changed it to emancipation park a while back..

It's a bit like the confederate flag controversy in South Carolina... the flag is going into a museum, there is no need to fly it above the state house

The lee statue being removed was agreed via a democratic vote... one side went in to violently object to that... one side decided to weapon up, one side drove a car into people protesting peacefully and some on here first reaction was to point fingers rather than condemn

That is the sad thing

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Apparently trump re-tweeted a message on Twitter calling himself a fascist (he has since un-re-tweeted it).

There should be a word for things that are funny, but in a sad way. Does anyone know of one?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad." Wrong Again

Yet another reason I feel for my country.

Mrs., Well said.

We are on a path to another civil war. Our country is filled with entirely too much hate and violence. The government and media both play a big part in it and most of what is shown is to divide us, not bring us together.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yet another reason I feel for my country.

I'd lay off praising us tbh, there's plenty of Brits guilty of the same. And anyway, I don't want this to be passed off as American Exceptionalism... Liberals in this country have been really complacent about the growth of the far right. Liberal journalists have been giving them a platform for years, thinking that their edgy cutting questions like "do you know that some people don't agree with you?" will change their minds.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"It was as much about a north south divide money wise The south needed slaves otherwise their economic model would collapse.So it was about money."
.

99% of fighters in the confederacy had never owned a slave and never likely to own one either, 45% of them were substance farmers who barely feed themselves, their wages were actually depressed by slavery, a few wealthy people in the south certainly made much money from slavery and were holding onto it no matter what, I've read quite a bit on the civil war and I'm far from convinced that the majority were fighting for slavery rights myself

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"When people say it was about state's rights, they have a hard time with the inevitable follow up.

"A state's right to what, sir?""
.

Self govern!

I find most of the middle Easts self determined governing ideas wrong like I find America's execution policies wrong or chinas... But where do I draw the line in having a war with them over it?.

What was the legalities of secession? Did they have any more right to cede than the revolutionary fighting forces against the British?.

Should you legally be able to hold a state in the union against its democratic will.... And more importantly will people ever get the concept of give and take and learn to just fucking stop being plebs.... Brexit anybody

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Why were the anti fascists protesting against the demo ratic right of others to protest. Surely that in itself is an act of fascism? Ignore the wrongs for a moment. Don't the far right have as much freedom to demonstrate as the next group?"

Not sure where to start with this one. Fascism is a set of ideological beliefs, so however authoritarian you think something is, no that doesn't make it fascism.

Also you're arguing that the far right have a democratic right to demonstrate, but antifa doesn't have any right to demonstrate.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel for my country. I really do. All this over the statue of a man who fought against the United States in order to preserve slavery. To quote Trump: "Sad." Wrong Again

Yet another reason I feel for my country.

Mrs., Well said.

"
..

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"When people say it was about state's rights, they have a hard time with the inevitable follow up.

"A state's right to what, sir?".

Self govern!

I find most of the middle Easts self determined governing ideas wrong like I find America's execution policies wrong or chinas... But where do I draw the line in having a war with them over it?.

What was the legalities of secession? Did they have any more right to cede than the revolutionary fighting forces against the British?.

But that's the thing, though, isn't it? They wanted to self-govern regarding slavery. The Constitution sets out what powers are given to the federal government and which are given to the States and the southern States signed onto that. Meaning the whole point of secession was about slavery and the position of black people in American society.

The question of whether they were allowed to leave legally was never mentioned in the Constitution. One of my law professors wrote a book where he argued that the civil war was, effectively, a war for a second constitution - by which he meant that the civil war was a war deciding the Constitutional question of whether states could choose to leave the union. When the confederacy lost it answered the Constitutional question in the negative.

It doesn't change the fact that slavery was the impetus for secession and for the formation of the confederacy, though. Each State proudly declared that in their secession documents and other related documents.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"When people say it was about state's rights, they have a hard time with the inevitable follow up.

"A state's right to what, sir?".

Self govern!

I find most of the middle Easts self determined governing ideas wrong like I find America's execution policies wrong or chinas... But where do I draw the line in having a war with them over it?.

What was the legalities of secession? Did they have any more right to cede than the revolutionary fighting forces against the British?.

Fuck states. What about PEOPLE's right to self govern? And not, in this case, be slaves? States rights are basically rights of the people who control the state to do whatever the fuck they want to their subjects. In other words, authoritarianism.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"It was as much about a north south divide money wise The south needed slaves otherwise their economic model would collapse.So it was about money..

Bootlickers are everywhere. Maybe they thought they might become slave owners, like working class people who defend the class system do now. And maybe they were fighting to preserve their own status in the system, which may not have been up at the top, but at least they could assert their superiority over black people.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *hetalkingstoveMan
over a year ago

London

Ugh. Protesting against fascism is not fascism. Fascism is explicitly advocating killing/subjugating certain groups of people.

As soon as you start doing that, you lose your right to free speech. Free speech does not include incitement to murder or discriminate.

There's far too much of this 'oh, the two sides are basically the same' shit. No they aren't.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"When people say it was about state's rights, they have a hard time with the inevitable follow up.

"A state's right to what, sir?".

Self govern!

I find most of the middle Easts self determined governing ideas wrong like I find America's execution policies wrong or chinas... But where do I draw the line in having a war with them over it?.

What was the legalities of secession? Did they have any more right to cede than the revolutionary fighting forces against the British?.

There's many authoritarian states today, I'm not in favour of it myself.

Self governing people?... Yeah no I'm not in favour of that either, most people are complete fucking tools who I'd trust less than a Tory party leadership contest

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"There's far too much of this 'oh, the two sides are basically the same' shit. No they aren't. "

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"It was as much about a north south divide money wise The south needed slaves otherwise their economic model would collapse.So it was about money..

I think it's more complex than just slavery just like I think brexit is more complex than just "poles"... Certainly I think the monetary part of it was more on most poor peoples mind's

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *entaur_UKMan
over a year ago

Cannock

"There's far too much of this 'oh, the two sides are basically the same' shit. No they aren't.

Wasn't it Jeremy Corbyn who said the 2 sides are basically the same in Venezuela when he condemned the violence on all sides there rather than specifically condemning Madura, who he had previously been praising.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

One of the monuments that was removed in New Orleans had this inscription on it:

"[Democrats] McEnery and Penn having been elected governor and lieutenant-governor by the white people, were duly installed by this overthrow of carpetbag government, ousting the usurpers, Governor Kellogg (white) and Lieutenant-Governor Antoine (colored).

United States troops took over the state government and reinstated the usurpers but the national election of November 1876 recognized white supremacy in the South and gave us our state."

The civil war was about slavery. Those who fought in the south who didn't have slaves shared the sentiments of white supremacy that were prevalent at the time - and which were reflected in the laws put in place in the south after the civil war subjegating black Americans. The subsequent forumation of the KKK further solidified this stance.

I don't think monuments with inscriptions like the one above should be taken care of with tax payer dollars and displayed on public land. The construction workers who removed the monument had to do so in the middle of the night because they received death threats.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Wasn't it Jeremy Corbyn who said the 2 sides are basically the same in Venezuela when he condemned the violence on all sides there rather than specifically condemning Madura, who he had previously been praising. "

Not sure what this has to do with anything. Are you saying Antifa are responsible for Jeremy Corbyn's stances on International Relations now?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"There's far too much of this 'oh, the two sides are basically the same' shit. No they aren't.

What the fuck has Jeremy Corbyn got to do with some fascists in USA has beat me....he has condemned whatever is going on....this post just another stick to beat him with....you always know you have someone backed in a corner when they try to deflect and defend using others

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

"There's far too much of this 'oh, the two sides are basically the same' shit. No they aren't.

again you attempt to divert away from or down play what was an act of domestic terrorism..

your attempts to try and diminish this act are wholly at odds with your very correct and shared condemnation by the vast majority of decent people whenever such vile and cowardly murder has taken place as in Berlin, Nice and London..

what is it about this one that you refuse to acknowledge and rightly condemn..?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"When people say it was about state's rights, they have a hard time with the inevitable follow up.

"A state's right to what, sir?".

Self govern!

And that their self governance was built around and dependent on the subjugation of other human beings brings us right back to the crux of the issue.

A state's right to *what*.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"One of the monuments that was removed in New Orleans had this inscription on it:

United States troops took over the state government and reinstated the usurpers but the national election of November 1876 recognized white supremacy in the South and gave us our state."

I agree but then I don't think Rudyard Kiplings white mans burden should be removed from history!.

Slavery certainly wasn't the preserve of white people, Jefferson himself fought the Barbary wars over white people being being enslaved, although they were certainly better and more proficient at it.

Don't misunderstand me, there was and still is a hardcore of white supremacists in the southern states but in all honesty what the fuck has the united states been doing with education in the what 160 years since... It's quite staggering that in the 21 century this mindset still exists to me a white guy from a white country

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Also, Texas v. White decided, once and for all, that states may not secede from the Union.

So no, they've no legal right to leave.

They were, by every definition of the word, traitors.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"One of the monuments that was removed in New Orleans had this inscription on it:

United States troops took over the state government and reinstated the usurpers but the national election of November 1876 recognized white supremacy in the South and gave us our state."

I agree but then I don't think Rudyard Kiplings white mans burden should be removed from history!.

Slavery certainly wasn't the preserve of white people, Jefferson himself fought the Barbary wars over white people being being enslaved, although they were certainly better and more proficient at it.

I completely agree with your last paragraph. I went to law school with a woman whose family taught her (home schooled until college) that God put different races on different continents so they wouldn't mix. She admitted it to me when she told me she liked a black guy at our school but couldn't go out with him. She was from South Carolina, btw. It isn't a small segment of US society that feels this way - it's everywhere.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"When people say it was about state's rights, they have a hard time with the inevitable follow up.

"A state's right to what, sir?".

Self govern!

And that their self governance was built around and dependent on the subjugation of other human beings brings us right back to the crux of the issue.

A state's right to *what*. "
.

Well we enter into the tricky world of what?.

The states right to execute prisoners.

The states right to invade countries

The states right to carpet bomb civilian areas.

The states right to subjugation of Palestinians?.

The problem with democracy is it often throws up shit that I don't like.

Do car owners have the right to kill 350,000 people a year through air pollution?.

Were in a catch 22 position of needing a state and hating the state at the same time?.... And unfortunately it's a catch 22 that's used by many at the top for their own gain

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"One of the monuments that was removed in New Orleans had this inscription on it:

United States troops took over the state government and reinstated the usurpers but the national election of November 1876 recognized white supremacy in the South and gave us our state."

I agree but then I don't think Rudyard Kiplings white mans burden should be removed from history!.

Slavery certainly wasn't the preserve of white people, Jefferson himself fought the Barbary wars over white people being being enslaved, although they were certainly better and more proficient at it.

"
.

How can it still be everywhere though, its mindbogglingly maddening that the US has failed miserably to even grasp evolutionary aspects of homosapiens.... And I'll say it again... Where you find religion you find backward thinking citizens because of it

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Ps Rudyard Kipling... Very religious

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"When people say it was about state's rights, they have a hard time with the inevitable follow up.

"A state's right to what, sir?".

Self govern!

And that their self governance was built around and dependent on the subjugation of other human beings brings us right back to the crux of the issue.

A state's right to *what*. .

Well we enter into the tricky world of what?.

Actually, no. We don't.

States don't have carte blanche to do as they please, so pretending that slavery is simply a matter for individual states is wrong.

So. Again, a state's right to what?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Also, Texas v. White decided, once and for all, that states may not secede from the Union.

So no, they've no legal right to leave.

They were, by every definition of the word, traitors."
.

Well your all traitorous to the British, the none traitorous were given Canada

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"When people say it was about state's rights, they have a hard time with the inevitable follow up.

"A state's right to what, sir?".

Self govern!

And that their self governance was built around and dependent on the subjugation of other human beings brings us right back to the crux of the issue.

A state's right to *what*. .

Well we enter into the tricky world of what?.

Actually, no. We don't.

States don't have carte blanche to do as they please, so pretending that slavery is simply a matter for individual states is wrong.

So. Again, a state's right to what?"
.

Democratic will!!... Where do states get there power from? The people.

The founding fathers were not fans of democracy for this very reason

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"When people say it was about state's rights, they have a hard time with the inevitable follow up.

"A state's right to what, sir?".

Self govern!

And that their self governance was built around and dependent on the subjugation of other human beings brings us right back to the crux of the issue.

A state's right to *what*. .

Well we enter into the tricky world of what?.

Actually, no. We don't.

States don't have carte blanche to do as they please, so pretending that slavery is simply a matter for individual states is wrong.

So. Again, a state's right to what?.

Democratic will!!... Where do states get there power from? The people.

The founding fathers were not fans of democracy for this very reason"

And this "Democratic will" was to strip people of their rights and personhood, based solely on the colour of their skin.

Simply because can be done, does not mean it should be done. So it becomes the same question as before a state's right to what?

Because for all your dodging, it's the "right" of a state to treat people within the state as nothing more than property.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"When people say it was about state's rights, they have a hard time with the inevitable follow up.

"A state's right to what, sir?".

Self govern!

And that their self governance was built around and dependent on the subjugation of other human beings brings us right back to the crux of the issue.

A state's right to *what*. .

Well we enter into the tricky world of what?.

Actually, no. We don't.

States don't have carte blanche to do as they please, so pretending that slavery is simply a matter for individual states is wrong.

So. Again, a state's right to what?.

Democratic will!!... Where do states get there power from? The people.

The founding fathers were not fans of democracy for this very reason

And this "Democratic will" was to strip people of their rights and personhood, based solely on the colour of their skin.

Simply because can be done, does not mean it should be done. So it becomes the same question as before a state's right to what?

Because for all your dodging, it's the "right" of a state to treat people within the state as nothing more than property. "
.

We treat prisoners as property, we execute prisoners for breaking laws that are enforced by the "state".

The whole purpose of the Bill of rights is an indelible right that can't be removed via democracy was more my point.

I'm not a fan of democracy,I don't like most people, I don't like the things most people like, I don't like most people's ideas of life.

I'm not dodging the fact that racists exist or that hypocrites exist, the entire civilisation of everything is built on the slavery and abuse of somebody?.. Sadly Not alot has changed on that point since the US civil war.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *imiUKMan
over a year ago

Hereford

"When people say it was about state's rights, they have a hard time with the inevitable follow up.

"A state's right to what, sir?".

Self govern!

And that their self governance was built around and dependent on the subjugation of other human beings brings us right back to the crux of the issue.

A state's right to *what*. .

Well we enter into the tricky world of what?.

Actually, no. We don't.

States don't have carte blanche to do as they please, so pretending that slavery is simply a matter for individual states is wrong.

So. Again, a state's right to what?.

Democratic will!!... Where do states get there power from? The people.

The founding fathers were not fans of democracy for this very reason

And this "Democratic will" was to strip people of their rights and personhood, based solely on the colour of their skin.

Simply because can be done, does not mean it should be done. So it becomes the same question as before a state's right to what?

Because for all your dodging, it's the "right" of a state to treat people within the state as nothing more than property. .

We treat prisoners as property, we execute prisoners for breaking laws that are enforced by the "state".

The whole purpose of the Bill of rights is an indelible right that can't be removed via democracy was more my point.

I'm not a fan of democracy,I don't like most people, I don't like the things most people like, I don't like most people's ideas of life.

No, comrade, or; they needn't be.