Posted on 08/13/2017 3:39:02 AM PDT by BobL
Good morning people,
A few of things to keep in mind about the violence yesterday: 1) The NAZI / KKK / Alt Right / White Supremacists / Trump Supporters (whatever you want to call them) had a legal permit to march in Charlottesville. 2) The march was peaceful until the 'counter protesters', the people without permits (the Bernie people), showed up. 3) The police were ordered to stand-down, by the government - hence the violence was intentional.
One Leftist that I know says that the easy way to avoid the violence is to not permit the NAZIs (and similar groups) to protest. In other words, if there's a threat of violence, not from the marchers, but from their opponents, then don't allow the march. So I pointed out a few things:
1) Where does it end? Right after Trump took office there was 'Million Women March' - if Trump's people had threatened to attack that march with guns, would the proper response be to tell those women to go home and forget it? Or, instead, have the police round up Trump's people? Hopefully most would agree that Trump's people would need to be rounded up? [but, of course, no violence happened, since our side never instigates the violence]
2) So does that mean that someone in government gets to 'decide' which peaceful groups (i.e., the NAZIs or the Women) get to march and which ones do not? Doesn't sound good to me. What if Trump government decide that violence is more likely when Women march than when the KKK marches...would that be ok? Or should every peaceful group be allowed to march, with implication anyone who starts violence is arrested and held accountable?
3) How far should this extend? If Trump wants to hold a rally in Springfield, Missouri, but the local Democrat Party (or some other group) promises that they will violently attack the Trump people, should the event then be canceled? Should Trump be allowed to address any large group, if violence is threatened? Should Trump be permitted to address any group (large or small) if violence is threatened. Should any Republican be permitted to address any group, if violence is threatened? Should any Republican be allowed to speak in public, at all?
4) In Australia a Jewish Synagogue was refused a building permit last week, not because the Jews in Australia are violent, but because other groups (and we know who they are) might attack the synagogue. Is that the end game...no more houses of worship if just the existence those houses of worship might incite people? In Texas, there's a battle between What-A-Burger and In-and-Out Burger going on in Dallas right now. If the people working at What-A-Burger threaten to burn down In-and-Outs, should In-and-Out be denied building permits, even though In-and-Out is a peaceful company? Should the people of Dallas have to continue to suffer under the reign of What-A-Burger because of the threat of violence against In-and-Out? Like I ask, where does this end?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3574364/posts
Are you sure though?
I see it different. As more Americans see through this garbage look for them to hand to both the Dems and RINOS their rear ends in the 2018 midterms. Folks have had it up to their eyeballs with the left.
Agree !!!
I hope you are right, but we shall see.
Here’s a clue, there was already riots and violence going on before Donald Trump was even in office, while Obama was president. I honestly doubt Trump being out of office would pacify it. If anything, it would only embolden the instigators and baiters to get more extreme if he left.
Maybe it would help if we loudly and clearly denounced them.
I denounce Nazis. My grandfather fought them, and if it comes to that, I will fight them. Defend the Constitution!
What we are seeing is evidence that 300+ million people cannot live in an empire. Eventually it splits apart.
Pretty telling when everyone is nice and helpful as can be AFTER the car rams thru the crowd. Everybody helping everybody. Seconds ago you were screaming at each other, now you are trying to save each others lives.
Bunch of folks need to get their mind right.
White racists have always been democrats (e.g. Kkk, Rebels, etc.). I smell Soros...false flag
Lorenz was filming the aftermath of a fatal car rampage when she was punched in the face
'Rev' is for revolutionary.
'Com' is for communist.
Revcom.us bills itself as "the voice of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA." The explicit objective is to overthrow our constitutional republic and replace it with an oligarchical collectivist dictatorship along the lines of North Korea and the Soviet Union.
Why would advocates of a communist police state agitate against the police? Because as leftists used to admit openly, the issue is never the issue.. This isn't about the police, any more than it is about blacks. It is about destabilizing the system so as to create opportunities to weaken it and eventually overthrow it.
That's what community organizing boils down to. These people have taken over the executive branch of the federal government; why would they stop there?
The next hill they take will be federal control of local police. After that, things will start to get scary.
http://moonbattery.com/?p=54033
____________________________________________
From the website of the Revolutionary Communist Party (revcom.us):
"Create Public Opinion, Seize Power: We are preparing minds and organizing forces for the time when there is a major crack in the system, whenever it comes and wherever it comes from: an opening that makes it possible to bring the future Revolutionary Army of the Proletariat (R.A.P.) into the field and wage a revolutionary armed struggle that actually has a chance of winning.
And we have said that building our party itself is the most important part of organizing forces for revolution. This is true now, and it is true looking forward to the creation of that future R.A.P. and the waging of that armed struggle.":
http://revcom.us/a/v20/1000-1009/1000/barw.htm
*********************************************************
The 1992 LA/Rodney King riots were instigated by the Revolutionary Communist Party...
From David Horowitz's FrontpageMag.com /DiscoverTheNetworks.org:
"Throughout its history, one of RCP's [Revolutionary Communist Party] principal objectives has been to foment civil unrest in the United States. The most notable example of such efforts occurred on April 29, 1992, when RCP members looted and trashed the downtown and government districts of Los Angeles, triggering the infamous Rodney King riots. During the days immediately preceding the violence, RCP -- which maintained close ties to the L.A. gangs known as the Crips and the Bloods -- had circulated throughout South Central Los Angeles a leaflet featuring a statement by RCP National Spokesman Carl Dix, titled 'It's Right To Rebel' -- a quote popularized by Mao Zedong.
Encouraged by Dix, RCP activists helped lead the riots that would leave 58 people dead, more than 2,300 people injured, some 5,300 buildings burned, and $1 billion in property damaged or destroyed. On the ten-year anniversary of the rioting, RCP member Joseph Veale fondly recalled the violence as 'the most beautiful, the most heroic civil action in the history of the United States.'"
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6197
__________________________________________
I just hope Whataburger wins the fight.
No doubt Terry McAuliffe gave the police chief the order to stand-down, as he knew when the pre-planned violence did erupt, the liberal media would carry his message for it all to be blamed it on Trump.
From what I do know is that Russia and a few other countries have put out warrants for Soros arrest.
Yet the GOP gets the blame.
It’s heckler’s veto, and it’s wrong.
With the economy picking up steam and with the alternative news sources getting more eyeballs, my prediction will more likely happen.
Not surprised.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.