In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
On August 16 2017 01:37 Falling wrote: Well, I mean, I can see some delay in a specific condemnation. (In Muslim terror attacks this is certainly the case because it takes some time for it to be established and/or released that it was such an attack.) And so in this case, I could see keeping your powder dry until such time that it confirmed to be a white supremacist attack.
Because if you have your ear to the ground there were all sorts of rumours: that it was false flag or that the car was surrounded, the driver panicked and gunned it to get out. Turns out, no he is a white supremacist and there is more video footage that shows the car lining up and accelerating into the crowd, but in the first hours there could be some sense in holding off condemning a white terror attack if it wasn't so clear to you at the time that that is what it was. Of course everything cleared up pretty quickly and so that would be the time to roundly condemn it.
Except Trump doesn't show this kind of calm, calculated, response with attacks done by "brown" people. He goes straight to Islamic Terrorism, as he had done multiple times.
Has he been wrong about Islamic terror attacks before though?
Irrelevant to the point at hand. He jumps to conclusions in some cases and is super cautious with others. The only relevant difference between the 2 is the color of the skin of the people involved. Draw your own conclusion from that.
On August 16 2017 02:06 Mohdoo wrote: So is ISIS able to apply for their own rally? What if there was a group that advocated for exterminating Christians and instating Sharia law across the US? Would they be granted a permit?
Probably, yes. There are some outer bounds here when dealing with discriminating on the content of speech, I just don't know exactly where they are other than that they are way out there.
Did anyone already post the VICE NEWS video that had all the primary source reporting of what the Nazis in Charlotseville had to say? If you watch the primary sources doing the talking, then DJT's efforts to spin and equivocate and blame many sides becomes even more monstrous. The white pride crew came there for violence and hate. If you are still spinning for Trump here, that makes you an enabler. EDIT: seriously, why are people still trying to spin Trump's equivocation for these guys? If you watch the video, there can be no equivocation. There are no "many sides" here.
On August 16 2017 01:37 Falling wrote: Well, I mean, I can see some delay in a specific condemnation. (In Muslim terror attacks this is certainly the case because it takes some time for it to be established and/or released that it was such an attack.) And so in this case, I could see keeping your powder dry until such time that it confirmed to be a white supremacist attack.
Because if you have your ear to the ground there were all sorts of rumours: that it was false flag or that the car was surrounded, the driver panicked and gunned it to get out. Turns out, no he is a white supremacist and there is more video footage that shows the car lining up and accelerating into the crowd, but in the first hours there could be some sense in holding off condemning a white terror attack if it wasn't so clear to you at the time that that is what it was. Of course everything cleared up pretty quickly and so that would be the time to roundly condemn it.
Except Trump doesn't show this kind of calm, calculated, response with attacks done by "brown" people. He goes straight to Islamic Terrorism, as he had done multiple times.
Has he been wrong about Islamic terror attacks before though?
EDIT: No, it was not a statement made directly by trump, but he did not clarify or apologize for his staff in the following days either...
EDIT2: All of these little infractions are extremely consistent and point to the very core of his intent as president. Anyone who wants to argue that is not the case is being either disingenuous or malicious. Thats my take on it at least.
That Vice News ideo is amazing. I'll watch it later but gotta give it to them for getting this up and in such great quality so quickly. You cannot watch this and still try to defend trump or the alt-right and their M.O
On August 16 2017 01:37 Falling wrote: Well, I mean, I can see some delay in a specific condemnation. (In Muslim terror attacks this is certainly the case because it takes some time for it to be established and/or released that it was such an attack.) And so in this case, I could see keeping your powder dry until such time that it confirmed to be a white supremacist attack.
Because if you have your ear to the ground there were all sorts of rumours: that it was false flag or that the car was surrounded, the driver panicked and gunned it to get out. Turns out, no he is a white supremacist and there is more video footage that shows the car lining up and accelerating into the crowd, but in the first hours there could be some sense in holding off condemning a white terror attack if it wasn't so clear to you at the time that that is what it was. Of course everything cleared up pretty quickly and so that would be the time to roundly condemn it.
Except Trump doesn't show this kind of calm, calculated, response with attacks done by "brown" people. He goes straight to Islamic Terrorism, as he had done multiple times.
Has he been wrong about Islamic terror attacks before though?
How did we forget the blowing green massacre? Where the White House was so wrong, they made up an entire a terrorist attack and then "forgot" correct the record.
On August 16 2017 02:09 Jockmcplop wrote: This documentary has enlightened me somewhat as to the mindset of these people. It reminds me of football fans in the UK in the 80s. They all just look they enjoy chanting and shouting at each other with a fairly small subset who are their for as much violence as they can manage.
At the point where someone's rallying with actual Nazis, you lose my sympathy as someone who "just enjoys chanting and shouting".
At the point where you find yourself next to someone waving a Swastika flag, you had several decision points where you could have made the choice that this wasn't something you wanted to be a part of. And at one of those, someone made the choice to stand next to a Nazi.
On August 16 2017 01:37 Falling wrote: Well, I mean, I can see some delay in a specific condemnation. (In Muslim terror attacks this is certainly the case because it takes some time for it to be established and/or released that it was such an attack.) And so in this case, I could see keeping your powder dry until such time that it confirmed to be a white supremacist attack.
Because if you have your ear to the ground there were all sorts of rumours: that it was false flag or that the car was surrounded, the driver panicked and gunned it to get out. Turns out, no he is a white supremacist and there is more video footage that shows the car lining up and accelerating into the crowd, but in the first hours there could be some sense in holding off condemning a white terror attack if it wasn't so clear to you at the time that that is what it was. Of course everything cleared up pretty quickly and so that would be the time to roundly condemn it.
Except Trump doesn't show this kind of calm, calculated, response with attacks done by "brown" people. He goes straight to Islamic Terrorism, as he had done multiple times.
Has he been wrong about Islamic terror attacks before though?
On August 16 2017 01:37 Falling wrote: Well, I mean, I can see some delay in a specific condemnation. (In Muslim terror attacks this is certainly the case because it takes some time for it to be established and/or released that it was such an attack.) And so in this case, I could see keeping your powder dry until such time that it confirmed to be a white supremacist attack.
Because if you have your ear to the ground there were all sorts of rumours: that it was false flag or that the car was surrounded, the driver panicked and gunned it to get out. Turns out, no he is a white supremacist and there is more video footage that shows the car lining up and accelerating into the crowd, but in the first hours there could be some sense in holding off condemning a white terror attack if it wasn't so clear to you at the time that that is what it was. Of course everything cleared up pretty quickly and so that would be the time to roundly condemn it.
Except Trump doesn't show this kind of calm, calculated, response with attacks done by "brown" people. He goes straight to Islamic Terrorism, as he had done multiple times.
Has he been wrong about Islamic terror attacks before though?
I think his administration has referenced three terror attacks that never happened (Bowling Green, Sweden and.... another?) They also put out a list of 'terror attacks' that included things like a fire that caused minimal damage to a building.
It's his call on where the government's focus goes, but it's not exactly burdensome to say 'Nazi terror is bad. Sad!.'
On August 16 2017 01:37 Falling wrote: Well, I mean, I can see some delay in a specific condemnation. (In Muslim terror attacks this is certainly the case because it takes some time for it to be established and/or released that it was such an attack.) And so in this case, I could see keeping your powder dry until such time that it confirmed to be a white supremacist attack.
Because if you have your ear to the ground there were all sorts of rumours: that it was false flag or that the car was surrounded, the driver panicked and gunned it to get out. Turns out, no he is a white supremacist and there is more video footage that shows the car lining up and accelerating into the crowd, but in the first hours there could be some sense in holding off condemning a white terror attack if it wasn't so clear to you at the time that that is what it was. Of course everything cleared up pretty quickly and so that would be the time to roundly condemn it.
Except Trump doesn't show this kind of calm, calculated, response with attacks done by "brown" people. He goes straight to Islamic Terrorism, as he had done multiple times.
Has he been wrong about Islamic terror attacks before though?
he was wrong to push for the use of the words "radical islamic terror", that was just partisan hackery; as to the attacks themselves, I don't know. but the pattern of response is troubling due to its inconsistency depending on type of perpetrator.
The pushing of Radical Islam isn’t just a Trump thing, but it is deeply stupid. Those words translate poorly into other languages. It isn’t even a complex issue.
On August 16 2017 02:09 Jockmcplop wrote: This documentary has enlightened me somewhat as to the mindset of these people. It reminds me of football fans in the UK in the 80s. They all just look they enjoy chanting and shouting at each other with a fairly small subset who are their for as much violence as they can manage.
At the point where someone's rallying with actual Nazis, you lose my sympathy as someone who "just enjoys chanting and shouting".
At the point where you find yourself next to someone waving a Swastika flag, you had several decision points where you could have made the choice that this wasn't something you wanted to be a part of. And at one of those, someone made the choice to stand next to a Nazi.
A good chunk of the football hooligans in Europe are neonazis too, it's an apt equivalence.
On August 16 2017 02:09 Jockmcplop wrote: This documentary has enlightened me somewhat as to the mindset of these people. It reminds me of football fans in the UK in the 80s. They all just look they enjoy chanting and shouting at each other with a fairly small subset who are their for as much violence as they can manage.
At the point where someone's rallying with actual Nazis, you lose my sympathy as someone who "just enjoys chanting and shouting".
At the point where you find yourself next to someone waving a Swastika flag, you had several decision points where you could have made the choice that this wasn't something you wanted to be a part of. And at one of those, someone made the choice to stand next to a Nazi.
I think reasonable and even unreasonable people saw where this was heading and backed out of it. A bunch of the free speech guys were initially going to be involved and then realized who else was going to be there and said, nope not for me as long as you have those Nazi guys there. They are now glad as all hell they stayed away (see Gavin McInnes for instance).
Like, as a history guy I appreciate Lee as a general- similar to Rommel. So I have some sympathy regarding the statue... although even if I was living in that city, I wouldn't care enough to protest its taking down. But supposing I did, and supposing I didn't know in advance who was going to show up... at the point where I see a bunch of Nazi paraphenelia waving around, I'm hopping back in my car and driving home. No thanks, no Nazis for me.
On August 16 2017 02:09 Jockmcplop wrote: This documentary has enlightened me somewhat as to the mindset of these people. It reminds me of football fans in the UK in the 80s. They all just look they enjoy chanting and shouting at each other with a fairly small subset who are their for as much violence as they can manage.
At the point where someone's rallying with actual Nazis, you lose my sympathy as someone who "just enjoys chanting and shouting".
At the point where you find yourself next to someone waving a Swastika flag, you had several decision points where you could have made the choice that this wasn't something you wanted to be a part of. And at one of those, someone made the choice to stand next to a Nazi.
I think reasonable and even unreasonable people saw where this was heading and backed out of it. A bunch of the free speech guys were initially going to be involved and then realized who else was going to be there and said, nope not for me as long as you have those Nazi guys there. They are now glad as all hell they stayed away (see Gavin McInnes for instance).
Like, as a history guy I appreciate Lee as a general- similar to Rommel. So I have some sympathy regarding the statue... although even if I was living in that city, I wouldn't care enough to protest its taking down. But supposing I did, and supposing I didn't know in advance who was going to show up... at the point where I see a bunch of Nazi paraphenelia waving around, I'm hopping back in my car and driving home. No thanks, no Nazis for me.
The reasonable pro statue view would be for the statue to be respectfully removed and given to a museum where it, and other parts of Confederate history, can be appropriately contextualized.
On August 16 2017 02:09 Jockmcplop wrote: This documentary has enlightened me somewhat as to the mindset of these people. It reminds me of football fans in the UK in the 80s. They all just look they enjoy chanting and shouting at each other with a fairly small subset who are their for as much violence as they can manage.
At the point where someone's rallying with actual Nazis, you lose my sympathy as someone who "just enjoys chanting and shouting".
At the point where you find yourself next to someone waving a Swastika flag, you had several decision points where you could have made the choice that this wasn't something you wanted to be a part of. And at one of those, someone made the choice to stand next to a Nazi.
I think reasonable and even unreasonable people saw where this was heading and backed out of it. A bunch of the free speech guys were initially going to be involved and then realized who else was going to be there and said, nope not for me as long as you have those Nazi guys there. They are now glad as all hell they stayed away (see Gavin McInnes for instance).
Like, as a history guy I appreciate Lee as a general- similar to Rommel. So I have some sympathy regarding the statue... although even if I was living in that city, I wouldn't care enough to protest its taking down. But supposing I did, and supposing I didn't know in advance who was going to show up... at the point where I see a bunch of Nazi paraphenelia waving around, I'm hopping back in my car and driving home. No thanks, no Nazis for me.
Ironically Rommel was fairly monstrous but was built up by pro-German nazi propaganda.
On August 16 2017 02:09 Jockmcplop wrote: This documentary has enlightened me somewhat as to the mindset of these people. It reminds me of football fans in the UK in the 80s. They all just look they enjoy chanting and shouting at each other with a fairly small subset who are their for as much violence as they can manage.
At the point where someone's rallying with actual Nazis, you lose my sympathy as someone who "just enjoys chanting and shouting".
At the point where you find yourself next to someone waving a Swastika flag, you had several decision points where you could have made the choice that this wasn't something you wanted to be a part of. And at one of those, someone made the choice to stand next to a Nazi.
I think reasonable and even unreasonable people saw where this was heading and backed out of it. A bunch of the free speech guys were initially going to be involved and then realized who else was going to be there and said, nope not for me as long as you have those Nazi guys there. They are now glad as all hell they stayed away (see Gavin McInnes for instance).
Like, as a history guy I appreciate Lee as a general- similar to Rommel. So I have some sympathy regarding the statue... although even if I was living in that city, I wouldn't care enough to protest its taking down. But supposing I did, and supposing I didn't know in advance who was going to show up... at the point where I see a bunch of Nazi paraphenelia waving around, I'm hopping back in my car and driving home. No thanks, no Nazis for me.
Ironically Rommel was fairly monstrous but was built up by pro-German nazi propaganda.
On the contrary, I think British propaganda had most to do with it. He was the general we were actively engaged in fighting, and the general over whom we achieved our key victories early in the war. It was in the British interest to exaggerate his talents at the expense of the eastern front commanders. Meanwhile the Nazis didn't rate him enough to send him to the real conflict and eventually forced him to commit suicide.
On August 16 2017 02:09 Jockmcplop wrote: This documentary has enlightened me somewhat as to the mindset of these people. It reminds me of football fans in the UK in the 80s. They all just look they enjoy chanting and shouting at each other with a fairly small subset who are their for as much violence as they can manage.
At the point where someone's rallying with actual Nazis, you lose my sympathy as someone who "just enjoys chanting and shouting".
At the point where you find yourself next to someone waving a Swastika flag, you had several decision points where you could have made the choice that this wasn't something you wanted to be a part of. And at one of those, someone made the choice to stand next to a Nazi.
I think reasonable and even unreasonable people saw where this was heading and backed out of it. A bunch of the free speech guys were initially going to be involved and then realized who else was going to be there and said, nope not for me as long as you have those Nazi guys there. They are now glad as all hell they stayed away (see Gavin McInnes for instance).
Like, as a history guy I appreciate Lee as a general- similar to Rommel. So I have some sympathy regarding the statue... although even if I was living in that city, I wouldn't care enough to protest its taking down. But supposing I did, and supposing I didn't know in advance who was going to show up... at the point where I see a bunch of Nazi paraphenelia waving around, I'm hopping back in my car and driving home. No thanks, no Nazis for me.
The reasonable pro statue view would be for the statue to be respectfully removed and given to a museum where it, and other parts of Confederate history, can be appropriately contextualized.
While raising absolute hell about the fact that social studies classes in the US suffer from more "coach who teaches on the side" than any other academic position. But hey, baby steps, ehh?
On August 16 2017 02:09 Jockmcplop wrote: This documentary has enlightened me somewhat as to the mindset of these people. It reminds me of football fans in the UK in the 80s. They all just look they enjoy chanting and shouting at each other with a fairly small subset who are their for as much violence as they can manage.
At the point where someone's rallying with actual Nazis, you lose my sympathy as someone who "just enjoys chanting and shouting".
At the point where you find yourself next to someone waving a Swastika flag, you had several decision points where you could have made the choice that this wasn't something you wanted to be a part of. And at one of those, someone made the choice to stand next to a Nazi.
I think reasonable and even unreasonable people saw where this was heading and backed out of it. A bunch of the free speech guys were initially going to be involved and then realized who else was going to be there and said, nope not for me as long as you have those Nazi guys there. They are now glad as all hell they stayed away (see Gavin McInnes for instance).
Like, as a history guy I appreciate Lee as a general- similar to Rommel. So I have some sympathy regarding the statue... although even if I was living in that city, I wouldn't care enough to protest its taking down. But supposing I did, and supposing I didn't know in advance who was going to show up... at the point where I see a bunch of Nazi paraphenelia waving around, I'm hopping back in my car and driving home. No thanks, no Nazis for me.
The reasonable pro statue view would be for the statue to be respectfully removed and given to a museum where it, and other parts of Confederate history, can be appropriately contextualized.
The issues go beyond the statues and which historical figure they honor. That is one part of it. I posted yesterday, but the majority of the monuments were put up in the Jim Crow era to remind blacks they whites had all the power. They changed the streets names, the school names. They are also symbolic of a deeply racist era in US history and that is how they are viewed by blacks. They are a monument to white’s efforts to repress them. As Kwark said, moving them to a museum and detailing their full history would be the best thing to do at this point.
EPT
