Posted on 08/23/2017 6:37:58 AM PDT by Kaslin
Charlottesville, Virginia, a city named after Britain's first black queen, was the scene of a bloody riot Saturday, Aug. 12. The fray resulted in the death of one woman, who was mowed down by a car; plus, there were many other people injured. Have politicians and the news media told the correct and complete story about what happened, or have Americans been deliberately misled? Let's look at it.
One does not have to accept the racist and nationalist vision of the Unite the Right organization to recognize and respect its First Amendment rights. Moreover, the group obtained a city permit to hold a peaceful rally to protest the lawful removal of the statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee from Emancipation Park, formerly known as Lee Park. It was the leftist protesters who did not have a city permit to assemble for a rally on that day. Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe said: "There has got to be a movement in this country to bring people together. The hatred and rhetoric that has gone on and has intensified over the last couple months is dividing this great nation." He denounced "the white supremacists and the Nazis." However, when asked a question about whether he would include the left-wing, pro-violence antifa in his condemnation, he ignored the question and walked out of the room.
Here's a question for you: Did the authorities of the city of Charlottesville have a duty to protect Unite the Right rally attendees? The American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia said they had a right to rally, saying, "The First Amendment is a critical part of our democracy, and it protects vile, hateful, and ignorant speech." Thus, the ACLU of Virginia defended the white supremacists' and neo-Nazis' right to march and rally against the removal of the statue of Lee. Both the Unite the Right organizers and the leftist counter-protesters charged that the Charlottesville police did not do their job. They just stood back and watched the melee.
This was documented in several reports. The Daily Caller article titled "Why Were The Police Held Back In Charlottesville?" reports: "Law enforcement was on hand at the dueling demonstrations on Saturday, decked out in riot gear and looking prepared for the worst. Except they weren't allowed to do their job." According to the ACLU of Virginia, police on the scene were reported to have been ordered to "not intervene until given command to do so." That kept them from suppressing the numerous scuffles that broke out (http://tinyurl.com/ycpnrzv7). I'd like to ask any policeman, Since when did the police need a command to intervene when they are witnessing people assaulting one another? In a ProPublica article titled "Police Stood By As Mayhem Mounted in Charlottesville," the authors reported that "state police and National Guardsmen watched passively for hours as self-proclaimed Nazis engaged in street battles with counter-protesters." ProPublica reporter A.C. Thompson, who was on the scene, reported that "the authorities turned the streets of the city over to groups of militiamen armed with assault rifles" (http://tinyurl.com/yc9al2lk). Instead of owning up to his dereliction of duty -- by not having ordered his police force to protect life and limb -- Charlottesville Mayor Mike Signer chose to demagogue the situation by blaming the rise of white nationalists on President Donald Trump.
Many politicians, racists, hustlers and tyrants have an agenda that consists mostly of making the U.S. Constitution meaningless and giving government greater control over our lives, thereby destroying personal liberty. The alt-right and white supremacists seek to achieve their goals through racist propaganda. The leftists seek to achieve their goals by tricking Americans into believing that all they want are brotherhood and multiculturalism. If either group achieves its goals, we Americans will lose not only our liberty but also our civility. Few Americans recognize and respect the fact that multiracial societies are inherently unstable. What we've been doing for decades, through various government policies, is stacking up combustible racial kindling awaiting a racial arsonist to set it ablaze. There are too many historical examples of what happens to a nation when race hustlers are allowed to take over.
Not exactly, My view on the Police is that they are nothing more than paid enforcers and political pawns. I see very little in the term as Peace Officers, they are now Law Enforcement officers and they act exactly as the term sounds. But I will never forget my Grandfather telling us kids how he fought against Hitler and his Law Enforcement officers the SS.
How far is Mecklenburg-Strelitz from the Schwartzwald?
Mr. niteowl77
No statute, but a 2005 Supreme Court Ruling.
Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone
Many politicians, racists, hustlers and tyrants have an agenda that consists mostly of making the U.S. Constitution meaningless.
Fabian society still at work.
`We was kangs an' ... '
“No statute, but a 2005 Supreme Court Ruling.”
Thanks for the reference to the ruling.
We need to reconcile that with the police showing up at public events. Why are they at public events? To keep things peaceful which means stopping violence and arresting lawbreakers.
Why do they do that? Seems to me to protect people and property at the public events.
Are policemen free to leave a riotous scene if they feel threatened? My answer would be only if their superiors ordered them to leave.
On the PBS website page for this episode, Valdes interprets an excerpt of a poem reproduced there as attesting to Charlotte’s African features,[35] but it clearly refers to her as descended from the Vandals, an East Germanic tribe.
Critics of Valdes’ theory point out that Margarita’s and Madragana’s distant perch in the queen’s family tree – nine and 15 generations removed, respectively – makes any African ancestry that they bequeathed to Charlotte negligible.[38] In addition, Charlotte shared descent from Alfonso and Madragana with a large proportion of Europe’s royalty and nobility.[38]
Madragana was perceived by Valdes as African because she was described as a Moor by a single author.[39] This is denied by most other authors,[40][41][42][43][44] that point out that Madragana was most likely a Mozarab: an Iberian Christian living in the Iberian Peninsula when it was under Muslim control.[45]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlotte_of_Mecklenburg-Strelitz
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.