search results matching tag: Rally

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (587)     Sift Talk (14)     Blogs (75)     Comments (1000)   

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Did you enjoy the dueling speeches yesterday when Sleepy Joe steamrolled Brain Dead Donny?

Biden delivered a long, coherent, topical, devastating for Trump acceptance speech, Trump, again ignored precedent and manners by holding rallies and giving rambling, disjointed speeches at the same time as the Democratic nomination like a two year old screaming for attention at an opera, talking about low flow showers that he says barely drip water, mosquitoes, how he hates sharks, and attacking Joe for moving from his birthplace, accusing the then 10 year old Biden of "Abandoning" Scranton.

You say Biden is losing it?! LMFAHS!!
Trump at his best never held a candle to Biden at his worst. It's going to be hilarious to watch sleepy Joe wipe the floor with Dumb Donald at the debates, Trump can't edit the footage to his advantage there, and gaff to gaff, Biden comes out looking like an adult, but not Trump. How's he going to spin being made a fool by the guy he says is suffering dementia and rapid mental decline?
Kamala V Mike is gonna be a massacre. It should probably be NC17, she's gonna eviscerate him and send him crying to mother.

BTW, did you throw your Goodyear tires away yet? You know Donny said to boycott them because they won't let his people wear maga hats at work. (They don't allow any politics at work, especially campaign clothing). Better get to it, Trump has cancel cultured them, he's counting on you to destroy that American business.

Trump and Fox Struggle to Attack Sen. Kamala Harris

luxintenebris jokingly says...

sure.

say it, but surely place a bet on it, if it's a shoo-in?

if you believe your johnson is a lolly and women are begging for a taste, just unzip, roll it out and wait for women in the target fitting rooms to prove it.

that's just as equally sound as believing dj has made more fans, and no one cares about killing complete strangers.

but i get it. if donnie does lose, i'd stay away from any post-rallies. especially, far far away from the free drinks served after.

bobknight33 said:

OK

I'll say it.

Trump will win by a fucking landslide.

More supporters today than 2016. Democrats fed up with the far left of their party, not to mention Finger Banging JOE loosing his mental grip will push Trump to victory.

The fake news, BLM rioters, Democrat lead cities dumping on Blue lives, cutting funding. Crime spiking, looting, murder rates spiking will lead to total victory.


Covid is a non issue. People want to go tow work not be ordered by Democrat mayors, Governors to stay shut down.

Covid death rates are low % , except elderly, and not worth the economic damage to people, states, nation.

Moving Day

newtboy says...

Trump's covid "response", Trump's economy, Trump's unemployment numbers, Trump's (total lack of a) plan, his new idea is (probably unconstitutionally) offer 1/2 the relief needed contingent on bankrupt states coming up with another 1/6 from thin air....a plan blatantly designed to fail, but Trump will claim he tried and states just didn't want the money because they hate Trump and want to make him look bad. 🤦‍♂️

So yes, it's Trump's fault people don't have money to pay their bills nor any way to earn it. Leaders in other countries infected at the exact same time as the U.S. actually led and S Korea and New Zealand never had the issues we did and didn't have to lock down long at all. We had leadership that actively made things worse, not better, spread misinformation constantly, contradicted itself daily, and insanely conflated ignoring and denying public health emergencies with freedom and civil rights.

Longer than necessary? What states have met the required two weeks of consistent low numbers and a solid declining infection rate that even Trump says are the minimum guidelines for opening?

Buddy, you've never read the constitution, and wouldn't comprehend it if you did. You probably think Trump suspending payroll taxes is constitutional because he's the one trying it.

Yes, 3-5% death rate with up to 15% disabled for life is definitely worth closing businesses and keeping them closed.....unless morons like Trumpsters continue to ignore the recommendations and extend the shutdown indefinitely.

Precondition groups? You mean anyone with a pre-existing condition which makes them more susceptible? You're implying those without preexisting conditions are safe, utter bullshit. They aren't. BTW, obesity is a preexisting condition that covers >40% of America all by itself, being overweight covers >70%....and it's just one of dozens.

Can't go to work if it's closed. Can't safely reopen until infection rates decline, rates won't decline until morons stay home long enough without attending rallies and parties. Duh. After Sturgis, expect the second wave nationwide in two weeks extending shutdowns for months at least, fucking morons.

Gov cheese ran out now because Republicans want billions-trillions in unrelated payoffs, pork, pet projects, and tax cuts to consider continuing them, after grifting billions from the last, totally unregulated handout to businesses,... your brother is coming to live with you soon. If everyone got the extra unemployment and every business shut down and people stayed home, we could be like S Korea, but with Trump's (total lack of) leadership we have become a worldwide pariah, unwelcome around the world, and with 4% of the population we have 25% of infections and deaths and rising.
You said you work largely from home. We're you lying then, or are you being intentionally dishonest, misleading people now by hiding it?

bobknight33 said:

And how is this Trumps Fault?

People not paying their bills is Trumps fault?

Democrats keeping states closed down longer than necessary keeping people out of work is un Constitutional and how is this Trumps fault?

Is a 3% death rate with 1/2 of deaths for those past retirement age and government should keep business closed?


Precondition groups should be told to stay home and receive aid.

Mask Up, Go to to work, Pay your bills.


My brother has a precondition and was told by his Dr. to stay home. He collects more $ from gov cheese.

I've yet to miss a day of work.

hypocrisy of the left

JiggaJonson says...

@newtboy @BSR I mean you can take ANY of those claims and pick them apart in short order.

You can burn churches? even in covid heavy places they are letting people go to church still, even though the rest of us think it's stupid and will cause more infections just so people can visit their imaginary friend.

Unless you don't feel that way, in which case stop spreading your hate propaganda.

I don't have to apologize for being white, but i can recognize history and when there is a disparity in the way the police enforce the law I can stand with them and say "THATS NOT FAIR" Standing up for people isn't me apologizing for myself, and it doesn't make me less of a person.

But I digress, he's been hearing this from people on this site for ~ ten years. Dont waste your time, let the dumb dumbs who think covid isn't real Darwin themselves.

So yeah, @bobknight33, go to a megachurch, go to a trump rally like she suggests. Prove you're done with our bullshit if you feel that way.

hypocrisy of the left

newtboy says...

If you say all lives matter in response to black lives matter, you're a racist blinding yourself to the truth that in many ways black lives don't seem to matter to authority. It's like sitting at a big table where everyone but you gets served dinner, and when you mention that your dinner matters you get answered with an angry "all dinners matter" but no food.

You can't commit crimes, dumbass. How moronic are you?

You can't (edit: or shouldn't, I guess you still can in most places) go to church because Covid is real, not a fake virus as some morons insist. I wish these deniers would sign a petition denouncing and refusing any medical treatment for covid related issues, then go party with each other making sure to shake hands and kiss each other ceaselessly. Put your health where your mouth is...or don't you believe the dangerous bullshit you spout?

Peaceful protesters don't carry bricks, those are Boogaloo boys looking to start riots. Peaceful protests at capitals protesting masks and shutdowns aren't what happened, heavily armed violent takeovers of federal buildings to denounce public health measures and threaten public officials with lynchings and mob murders is what happened....but with no feds sent in after them like was done preemptively in Portland.

Protests in the streets by mask wearing, social distancing people is not a major risk factor, indoor Trump rallies without masks or social distancing ARE a major risk factor, and sparked outbreaks.

So much nonsense and ignorance in such an annoying package is almost impressive.

Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism

newtboy says...

Don't pretend to be so oblivious.
The gallery is one person making decisions on who to allow to hold private rallies in secret at her establishment, and she chooses Nazis and white power personalities. I thought you support taking individual responsibility.
The Nation of Islam, and I'm no fan at all, is a huge, multinational organization of millions I assume lead by some form of committee and encompassing a wide range of views and opposing extremes....They did not all choose to be associated with that one extremists nor did they all agree with him by far, then or now, only some did. That's similar to the same question but changing "nation of Islam" to "America". Obviously that's comparing apples to the president's drag queen makeup.

I won't comment much on Canada blm because I don't know them and don't choose to take the time needed to sleuth out some truths about them, but assuming what you say is correct it sounds like they have some racism in their midst that they should weed out before they become the monster they wish to destroy.

Brett Stevens, did you read any of the links? Or my quotes from them? Did you visit America.com, his website, or his blog amerika? (i won't) Do you have a clue who he is and the racist mass murderer he celebrates?

They have a right to speak, the crowd has a right to protest and take any civil legal action they choose to remove the soapbox from their neighborhood. I never said different. You must have confused me with the protesters.
They don't have a right to shout or hold their signs emblazoned with their stupid wrong things intended to provoke at a protest and attempt to spark violence, even if they cleverly camouflage it so on the surface their message seems agreeable, which is what I think was his intent. If successful, he would gain more fuel for the argument that the racists and Nazis planning a violent race war aren't the problem, it's the fascist liberal grandma shovers and sign thieves we should really be worried about....just like the boogaloos in America that caused many if not most of the riots, shot cops, and planned multiple mass murders and bombings all of which they intended to pin on blm.

They don't actually need any place to speak today, there's a soapbox in every cellphone.

But

This facility was holding their alt-right events in secret, hiding their speech itself. They wanted it hidden. You can't bemoan their voices being silenced while also defending their secret rallies which no one who might confront or correct them was told happened, can you?

And side note
The government isn't stopping them, so it's not censorship before that idea crops up.

Again, your bar for crying violence in this instance is subterranean. No one would ever be prosecuted for the level of violence without injury that he suffered, nor compensated for his miniscule loss of cardboard. Do you see him hit, kicked, punched, shoved hard, anything? Time stamp please. I'll change my tune if he was actually injured, I didn't see it anywhere, just his sign yanked after being slowly shoved away from one specific spot.

Could you honestly say ANY right wing event, especially any alt-right event infiltrated by a fairly quiet blm activist with a sign bemoaning police corruption would be as gentle and non violent? Edit: I doubt it.

The point of this video as presented is to pretend that's the case, that the shove from grandma is societies downfall, a direct attack on freedom not a rejection of a defender and facilitator of racists and Nazis (if he's not one himself). The Nazis and racists resurfacing and arming themselves (happening here in America) are nothing to be upset about or oppose....they're good people, not like disgusting anti free speech granny and those other freedom haters.
I'm astonished I'm apparently the only one willing to object to that long ago debbunked distortion of reality.

Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism

newtboy says...

It sure didn't sound like she publicly posted the personal info of any right wing artists. She would never have another event if she had....and the gallery would probably have been firebombed.
She's a liar, one who bitches and moans when her lies are exposed. I don't trust a self serving word she says, she's a proven liar.

Nazis and white power groups are bad enough that standing with them makes one my foe....like NAMBLA. Some ideologies don't deserve any help spreading their message, even though they have a right to. When you offer your soapbox and amplifier to them, you become complicit in their support for hate crimes.

Sorry, but I've seen far too much alt-right lies and misdirection to buy it, and plenty of evidence that the gallery is abusing support for free speech to support and spread racist, racist alt-right ideologies, and blatantly lying about it. Their actions prove it to me. Pro-racist mass murderer speakers at events open only to alt-right listeners and kept secret from the public = rally, not roundtable.
Alt-right IS code for Nazi or white power, their own code. I'll just call them nazis, KKK, and random white power fans.

I'm still waiting for an admission that the title and description are bullshit, lies, and right wing propaganda. Can you be that honest please?

bcglorf said:

I did read about 'doxxing' those artists but the owner of the Gallery is also quoted as saying she did NOT send it to Amerika, but published the list for everyone, and sounded like it was what she always did.

I am a skeptic, and I've too often seen people just lumping others into camps of either friend/foe, and then accelerating the process by identifying anyone that associates with a foe is obviously now a foe too.

I'm sorry, but evidence against the gallery and the guy in the video here looks pretty limited. Might be right, but also might be wrong and I've seen too much witch hunting in Canada where anyone not on board is automatically alt-right, and alt-right is really just code for nazi, and if you've called them alt-right long enough then you can just start calling them a nazi.

It's dishonest, divisive and dangerous.

Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism

newtboy says...

Try the first one....lazybones. ;-) It lays out both the stated intent and the actions that belie that statement.

When the video guy is well known for publicly defending the far right, neo Nazi supporting gallery that holds private, secret white power rallies, that's enough for me. He clearly made himself look like a Nazi or Nazi sympathizer, and that's how the community sees him. He may just be a friend to Nazis, not one himself, but that's both a distinction without a clear difference and an image he created without stating clearly that he disagrees with them but supports their right to be wrong. That's on him.

It seems far easier to read the links than try to research it yourself, so I don't understand why you decided to ignore the research offered in favor of your own unproductive but far more labor intensive research. Seems a bit like putting fingers in your ears and saying you hear no evidence during a discussion.

bcglorf said:

Not that I'm lazy, but I don't care enough to read every single article you linked. I read the couple that seemed most promising, and then I went and did some searches for more evidence, I haven't found better evidence than what I mentioned.

Do you have a specific link, or one of those above, that clearly lays out the intent of gallery or any other evidence against the video guy than, he dared suggest the gallery was covered under free speech?

Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism

newtboy says...

If the same standard applies, then yes, you are saying you expect a lone BLM activist at a clan rally to be treated better...because this treatment is unacceptable in your opinion.

His speech, or at least the speech he's defending, has been used to exactly that effect publicly and repeatedly in recent past, maybe just seconds earlier we don't know, so now it seems you've come around to my side. Am I wrong?

No, I never heard of this before this video, I have no other info, nor have I independently verified what I found. That said, a gallery that repeatedly hosts Nazis and white power speakers, surely bringing with them crowds of Nazis and white power groups into a neighborhood IS acting as a neo Nazi hq, at least during those multiple events.

I think if the gallery wasn't in a residential neighborhood but in the country, the "wrong think" would be fine, it's that they repeatedly turn the neighborhood into a race war zone by holding what amounts to white power rallies people would be outraged by, imo...but I'm not British, I can imagine they think worse about Nazis than Americans do and might be less tolerant.

I don't disagree that the gallery may have intended to just be an open space available to anyone, but what they became was a beacon to Nazis and racists, a safe place to hold rallies and events in a neighborhood that clearly doesn't want them. A place from which to provoke. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
When they saw how angry their neighbors were at the groups they brought to the neighborhood they should have changed how they operate, or where, but seemingly didn't.


So, while the gallery may not be specifically a Nazi HQ, by hosting the speakers and groups it does, it supports their ideologies and facilitated spreading their message by offering them a platform. That makes them complicit, intentionally so after the first protest when they were put on notice the neighbors are outraged.

bcglorf said:

@newtboy
Do you honestly believe a BLM sign holder at a clan March would be treated better? What about at a Trump rally? If you claim to think either case wouldn't end in hospitalization, you're not being honest.

Not only did I never claim that, I have trouble figuring why you think I would? My second sentence again:"My opinion though lies the same whether it’s this guy treated as he was in the video, or if the situation was reversed and the lone guy had a BLM sign instead, same standard applies."

I oppose meeting speech with force excepting when that speech is being used to promote violence or harm, I'm also willing to allow that 'speech' can also amount to being disruptive or harassment like your notion of bringing inappropriate material to a kids park, or using a megaphone inches from someone's face.

I kind of thought on that point we'd find agreement, or at least understanding and agree to disagree?

Opening a new point from you're statement:He was the instigator. His sign amounts to "you will not silence our Nazi voice" at a rally pushing to silence their Nazi voice in their neighborhood.

I've read a few of the links you provided, and looked up a few articles on the gallery and I'm having troubles with the characterization. Do you have a good specific link that more clearly focuses on the nazi support from the gallery? The reading I've done seems to describe an art gallery, that allowed exhibits and talks from far-right and at least arguably fascist speakers on possibly a few occasions. You seem to talk like it was operating openly as a neo-nazi HQ.

So, what I've looked up so far, it does look an awful lot like a gallery pulled in speakers that people disliked, so they rallied to shut down the gallery as punishment for allowing wrong-think to be spoken. Then when guys like the one in the video came to defend free-speech, they too were classed as nazi's and lumped in as enemies too. Last article I found by the guy in video, so maybe he's lying, but other articles I've found also suggest that the gallery operated more generally rather than being an explicitly alt-right hub:
https://medium.com/@dctvbot/i-regret-nothing-c05401636032

Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism

bcglorf says...

@newtboy
Do you honestly believe a BLM sign holder at a clan March would be treated better? What about at a Trump rally? If you claim to think either case wouldn't end in hospitalization, you're not being honest.

Not only did I never claim that, I have trouble figuring why you think I would? My second sentence again:"My opinion though lies the same whether it’s this guy treated as he was in the video, or if the situation was reversed and the lone guy had a BLM sign instead, same standard applies."

I oppose meeting speech with force excepting when that speech is being used to promote violence or harm, I'm also willing to allow that 'speech' can also amount to being disruptive or harassment like your notion of bringing inappropriate material to a kids park, or using a megaphone inches from someone's face.

I kind of thought on that point we'd find agreement, or at least understanding and agree to disagree?

Opening a new point from you're statement:He was the instigator. His sign amounts to "you will not silence our Nazi voice" at a rally pushing to silence their Nazi voice in their neighborhood.

I've read a few of the links you provided, and looked up a few articles on the gallery and I'm having troubles with the characterization. Do you have a good specific link that more clearly focuses on the nazi support from the gallery? The reading I've done seems to describe an art gallery, that allowed exhibits and talks from far-right and at least arguably fascist speakers on possibly a few occasions. You seem to talk like it was operating openly as a neo-nazi HQ.

So, what I've looked up so far, it does look an awful lot like a gallery pulled in speakers that people disliked, so they rallied to shut down the gallery as punishment for allowing wrong-think to be spoken. Then when guys like the one in the video came to defend free-speech, they too were classed as nazi's and lumped in as enemies too. Last article I found by the guy in video, so maybe he's lying, but other articles I've found also suggest that the gallery operated more generally rather than being an explicitly alt-right hub:
https://medium.com/@dctvbot/i-regret-nothing-c05401636032

Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism

newtboy says...

Pure provocation.

Bullshit, he's not protesting in favor of free speech, he's instigating by supporting hate speech and violent hate groups as a spokesman for such groups inserting himself in a protest against them.
He is the equivalent of an Illinois Nazi marching in Skokie during an NAACP rally. That's a great description of what he's doing. He just isn't wearing a uniform.

I defend his right to hate speech, but not in a place and time designed to provoke violence. That's what this is, intentional provocation.

He was being a well known NAZI at an anti Nazi rally! I guess that's not enough for you to consider his presence legal provocation? It clearly was enough for the cops to think so. Before the cut he was probably telling them how subhuman they are, or race traitors supporting sub humans if they're whites. That's what his groups support, and is exactly the type of speech he was defending.

Could I go to the front of a church and hock statues of pagan gods raping Jesus without expecting a more violent reaction? No.

Provocation IS a defense to violence, not that I see any true violence in the video, but it would be justifiable if there were because his presence is definitely, undeniably, intentionally provocative.

Some ideologies are so disgusting that supporting them in public is legal provocation and does excuse violence legally. Advocating child rape would be an example, Nazism is another.

Buttle said:

I'm sure the sign-holder's gallery isn't filled with rainbows and fuzzy ducklings, but he wasn't the equivalent of Illinois nazis marching in Skokie, either. The old school Liberal antidote to hateful speech is more and better speech, not mob violence.

It seems that one of his crimes was showing material in support of Donald Trump, who, loathe him if you will, is still the legally elected president of one of the UKs chief allies. If his supporters can't make their case in public then I fear for the future of civil discourse.

Regardless of the content of whatever expression this guy may have made elsewhere, in the video he really is protesting in favor of free speech, and he really is being assaulted while the cops wander away. I hold with the friends of Voltaire, who, though they might disapprove of what he says would defend to the death his right to say it.

As for editing the video, what could he have been doing in the lead up to this scene? Hawking Trump bobble-heads?

Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism

newtboy says...

Do you honestly believe a BLM sign holder at a clan March would be treated better? What about at a Trump rally? If you claim to think either case wouldn't end in hospitalization, you're not being honest.

I'm just guessing, but I bet his chosen spot was right behind the speakers who were on camera...so would be stealing their soapbox. He could have been inside the gate, 3 ft away, and held his sign just as visibly....but nope, he had to be in the middle of the protest against Nazis telling them they're wrong, you just need to give those poor Nazis and white power organizations more of a platform and more time to espouse their hatred, and ignore the real violence and murders they commit.

Ok, you see a violent attack, mob violence, I see an older woman gently walking him out and others yelling, not touching.
You see a violent robbery of his sign, I see his tool for disruption being removed.
You act like his treatment was SO far over the line and 100% unacceptable. I see him treated with kid gloves in a way that his group wouldn't even fathom, because they use ACTUAL violence to do ACTUAL harm, not slow tender shoving without hands or feet out of the middle of their event, punches, kicks, machetes, torches, nooses, etc. This wasn't even turnabout, and turnabout is always fair play.

If this crosses your line, and this group needs some repercussions, what does his actually violent hate group need? More than a protest.

So, when is your child's next birthday party? I guess I can come and advocate for more incest pornography, and you would just let me be? Bullshit.
As you saw, the police were there and not getting involved. It's not honest to say "it's the police and court system you want to pull in" when the police were there.

Again, what park do your children have parties in, I'll be there with my sign before the party starts so I won't be "invading" your party and I expect you to protect me from all the angry parents....yeah right. That's asinine. If I intentionally provoke them to violence, that's on me.

He was the instigator. His sign amounts to "you will not silence our Nazi voice" at a rally pushing to silence their Nazi voice in their neighborhood. He is (in part) exactly what they are protesting. It's almost a certainty that before his heavily edited video starts he was being loud and disruptive, then acted reasonable and meek after instigating violence with his typical hate speech. Provocation actually is a legal defense to violence.

Can you at least admit the title and description are total lies? They called him a Nazi for being one, not for supporting free speech.
The liberals removed him from their event for being a well known Nazi, not the sentiment on his sign.
The way this is portrayed is absolutely bullshit. He's not a victim he's an instigator, he wasn't hurt, he's absolutely not interested in freedom of speech for everyone.

bcglorf said:

I openly admit I’m plenty ignorant on the background to all this.

My opinion though lies the same whether it’s this guy treated as he was in the video, or if the situation was reversed and the lone guy had a BLM sign instead, same standard applies. You had a very large crowd around him not content to shout him down, but intent on using force to chase him off and trying to again use force to take his sign from him. Thats over the line and I don’t care who is doing the pushing or what the sign actually says. As above, if the sign or message is itself a promotion of violence, then its the police and court system you want to pull in, not the mob or vigilantism.

The little background I read from your links though suggests the large crowd had been there repeatedly with the same purpose of getting the gallery/HQ shutdown. Seems awful likely to me guy with sign was then standing outside said gallery and all the more aught have the right to stand near it with a simple sign, without being dismissed as the one ‘invading’ or stealing the protestors platform. To be honest most of the discussion about giving or blocking platforms reeks to me of just renaming stuff so folks can duck the well worn arguments in support of free speech.

Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism

newtboy says...

Lol. Yeah, right, more liberal (my liberal friends think I'm pretty conservative, I say I'm old school republican... socially liberal and fiscally responsible, definitely not a neocon)...but do you feel the same about BLM activists disrupting other events, they should be allowed to stay and speak, holding their anti police violence signs high even at anti BLM rallies? Would they be allowed?

I agree, getting slightly physical with him was stooping ever so slightly closer to his ilk's level, although the extent they got physical was pretty minor, wasn't it?
Oh no...they grabbed his cardboard sign equivalent to an all lives matter sign at a BLM march. VIOLENCE!! Pay him one cent in restitution if he sues. It's not a civil rights case, it's what he was hoping for.

When a known white power spokesman shows up at a protest against a white power organization he's associated with it's international provocation. Don't be naive.

Removing him by having an older woman slowly walk into him until he's out of the middle of the protest doesn't bother me one bit. I don't call that violence, I call it the opposite. If they punched him, violently grabbed him (not his sign), kicked him, or actually assaulted him I might think differently, but I saw none of that.

If he wasn't doing this in the middle of a protest against his pro Nazi racist organization in an effort to disrupt and distract from the anti racist crowd, I might feel differently. He has every right to his voice, but not their soapbox. No one stopped him from standing outside the active protest area with any sign.

They grabbed his cardboard, he was so intimidated that he held on and went back into the angry mob with it instead of letting them steal it, then cries for years about how he was attacked violently by an entire mob that didn't touch him. He was poking the bull, got a snort, and cries he got both horns.

What I saw was a person who was identified as a well known racist spokesman intentionally provoking anti racists at an anti racist event and being calmly moved out of the crowd without anyone laying hands on him.

I did not see what the title and description describes at all.

It was his well known public support of Nazism being considered support for Nazism, not free speech.

It was not the disingenuous words on his sign they found unacceptable it was his public support of racist positions that were the unacceptable sentiments. (disingenuous because I assume he doesn't think blacks should have a right to openly join discussions of ideas, but his sign meant Nazi/white supremacist opinions matter and you must let them espouse them whenever and wherever they wish including at anti racist events or you're anti free speech...which I find to be hypocritical nonsense).

bcglorf said:

Well, we’ve finally found an area where I lean more left/liberal than you do.

I hate how little evidence seems required to class someone ‘alt-right’ and equally how little effort is needed to re-class anyone ‘alt-right’ as a fascist, racist and nazi. It’s beyond intellectual laziness, and stinks of modern day witch huntery sometimes.

For the video here though, I can even hypothetically cede that all too you, and lets just pretend the guy in the video is 100% a committed, public Hitler enthusiast.

Even then, if all he wants to do is stand in the street with a sign, as he is in the video, then I lean left/liberal enough that I still believe you then meet him with words and counter protest, reveal his ideas as the vile poison they are. You do NOT get to use force and violence to chase him off by shoving him out, physically making him leave, and trying to steal his sign or assault him.

If he crosses the line of messages that promote violence, then the police get to use force to bring him in front of a judge and charge him. Angry mobs crushing dissenting opinion though is NOT the way forwards.

Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism

newtboy says...

Sorry @Buttle it seems you fell for some far right bullshit.
This video is apparently three years old.
It also hides the truth of what's happening, this is not some man on the street, he's a public figurehead of white supremacist organisations in the UK, standing in front of what amounts to their headquarters.


From Reddit-
u/kanyeguisada did the work on this three years ago - here's there very level headed account of this.

"So looking into this...
The place being protested was the LD50 gallery in Hackney, London. They and owner Lucia Diego describe themselves as "neo-reactionary" but they are in fact supporting literal fascists and white supremacists and were trying to become the organizing spot in London for such groups to give them legitimacy and attempt to convert white progressives to their cause through the art world:

In the summer, it held a “Neo-reaction conference” which included a talk by Brett Stevens, a white supremacist who has lauded the “bravery” of Anders Breivik - the Norwegian white supremacist who killed 77 people in 2011.

Mr Stevens' writing was said to be an inspiration to Breivik.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ld50-gallery-protest-lucia-diego-donald-trump-alt-right-hackney-dalston-a7596346.html

http://www.eastlondonlines.co.uk/2017/03/video-protesters-gather-outside-dalston-art-gallery-over-controversial-exhibition/

http://www.hackneygazette.co.uk/news/politics/ld50-gallery-anti-fascist-protesters-march-through-dalston-1-4907083

https://www.hackneycitizen.co.uk/2017/02/25/ld50-gallery-protest-video-anti-fascists-clash-lone-counter-protester/

https://shutdownld50.tumblr.com/

The "free speech protestor" in this video is Daniel/DC Miller, who not only gave his name to the media, but is a public figure apparently widely known in Hackney for his support of LD50 and who holds (and tries to hold) public lectures on literal white-supremacist fascists:

https://www.facebook.com/events/100614430464838/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Evola

http://www.metamute.org/editorial/articles/it-ok-to-punch-nazi-art-gallery

http://thebaffler.com/latest/ld50-nolan

Now I'm all for free speech in the US. I think even white supremacists like the KKK have the right to speak their disgusting speech and hold rallies and people thinking otherwise should ask themselves what happens when speech they support suddenly might become considered hate speech. For instance many people on the left who support BDS/sanctions on Israel are often accused of "hate speech" simply for calling Israel an apartheid state. Free speech isn't just something the right cares about.

However, other people have the right to free speech too, and can yell right back at you and of course https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/free_speech.png. The guy in this video wasn't just some guy off the street supporting free speech rights but was actually a supporter of literal far-right white-supremacist fascism and was known to the community before this happened, so maybe hold off on the outrage about how mean the protestors were to him until you get the whole picture."

*fakenews

A 1921 Mob Destroyed America's Richest Black Neighborhood

scheherazade says...

I looked into the date of the massacre, and it's May31 and June 1.

The OK Trump rally was originally schedule for Juneteenth (June 19) - ostensibly to commemorate the end of slavery. Then it was pushed back 1 day due to people complaining about using Juneteenth.

The two dates are different.

-scheherazade

vil said:

And this is why Trump chose Tulsa and picked the date. He needs more white extremist votes, there are not enough plain stupid people, gun nuts, anti-abortionists and anti-alphabet-people to tip the balance. I dont include the coal lobby cause thats really declining.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon