Bye bye Alt Right

Discussion in 'Politics' started by SmokinP, Aug 16, 2017.

  1. agree and to be straight here, I never said everything he said is 100% true (also in another thread) however, he was certainly 100% true about what he said yesterday. Why isn't the media doing their jobs and actually researching who was there and talking about it? why are they so focused, as always, on everything the president says and trying to vilify him. Its almost like they share a common goal or something isn't it? Hmm...
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. You were saying that nobody contested the driver's actions. Clearly someone was. And when did I say that it was you?

    Are we in court here? No, we're on stoner forum.
    Talking about a disgusting event that should be completely clear to anyone who had seen the video.

    Save your law degree for something useful.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. no one said we were in court, but he is 100% correct, and you know it as well. Why argue semantics again? seriously.
  4. Because what happened is inexcusable. It's not semantics. I don't expect you to understand that, however.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. I was directly responding to your outrage over someone daring suggest "innocent until proven guilty".


    Several here have contested whether or not prior damage was being done to his car that may have provoked the speed off. A logical question, considering that IS what has been happening on US streets for a few years now.

    No one here was contesting whether or not it was just that that woman died or those people got injured.
    The crime will be paid for. The point of due process (when not corrupted) is to see that it gets done justly.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. The sad reality is that most Americans did not vote; due to the electoral college, my vote truly does not count with the majority of my state carrying torches of their own.
    • Like Like x 2
  7. Lol ok. So all the guys screaming Jews will not replace us and blood and soil were just good old fashion patriots who were sick of antifa and wanted to preserve history. You guys can't see the forest through the damn trees and will break your neck trying to downplay the boatant anti Semitism and white supremacy that was prevalent at this protest. Not saying you are this way if you supported keeping the statue but it's clear a lot of the people there had disgusting racist/anti semetic ideas based on what they were chanting and saying clearly to reporters. Let's get it straight not all people who support conserving confederate statues are racists but a lot of those people there in this case protesting to keep the statue were clearly racists. You guys have become so skeptical of the left screaming racist that you now overlook blatant racism and downplay it.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. So now we agree that some people have contested the driver's behavior. Only took three tries to figure it out. Well done.
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
  9. but what you don't get, is that they still have the RIGHT to peacefully assemble, regardless of how much you disagree with the message. Thats the point that EVERYONE on here is trying to make. no one, well none of the regulars, have agreed with the message, just agreed that they have the right. No one is downplaying what they said or what their views are at all, and again, none are condoning it.
  10. I disagree with most of your politics, but you're one of the few members on GC that I respect. I will be very civil to ensure our disagreement woudnlt jeapordize my respect for you.

    I disagree, baked Alaska may be whatever you want to label him, but attaching a label does not remove his right as an American to express his views on a public forum.

    I like to think we have laws within this country to prevent mob justice.

    Sensational links? I like to source my claims its only fair to the person I'm having a discussion with, so they can either retort with the same information I have, it's not a mean of sensational, but part of civilized discourse.

    I'm not pushing a National Socialist agenda. I also think many on GC and the media often conflate white nationalist and white supremacy. These two things are completely diffrent.

    White nationalist are this that recongnize their Europeans accomplishments to a global society and want to preserve said accomplishments such as: declaration of Independents, constitutions, architecture, literature, and etc....

    They don't think their means is superior quite the contrary they believe they have a vested interest in preserving their heritage.

    To deny any other group the right to preserve their heritage is disgusting. Every group has a right to preserve their heritage be it, Asian, African, Jews, Palestinians, Native American, we all contributed to the global civilization, but why is when Europeans want to preserve their legacy is a problem?

    I'm not even white, but I kept an honest and open mind in listening to the "deplorable" and they do have a legitimate concern.

    History is in itself offensive to someone, therefore we should censor history all together?

    Do you think the monument to Genghis Khan Equestrian Staue in Mongolia should be torn down considering he conquered the known world and some other group find offensive?

    What about the US bills for the majority has slave owners should be erase our history?

    How about the Arabs and Jews that participated in the slave trade is that history offensive?

    What about the United kingdom conquering the knowing world would the union Jack be considered offensive?

    What about the pyramids that represented the pharoes arent they offensive to the jews "that supposedly built it" do they find it offensive?

    History is offensive.

    What they're trying to accompished is the preservation of their history and once you start censoring history you started unraveling a thread to destroy the fabric of your culture. You're culture is your identity.

    Look in Germany one cannot even discuss Adolf Hitler without going to jail. Why? What exactly are the goverment afraid of, we all been exposed to the disinformation the media enslaved our minds to ensure we won't question the status quo.

    Truth doesn't fear scrutiny.

    As far as I'm concern the point I'm trying to.communciate friend is to be open minded dare to look at without the lens of Racism, identity politics, party politics, these things cloud your judgement and it's a difficult thing to ask considering we all including my self has a bias.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
  11. of course, considering there is tons of video showing the car getting pelted before he hit those people. Its not rocket science. Everyone should question the coverage of this whole thing, absolutely, 100%. If you dont..well..sorry I guess.
    • Funny Funny x 1
  12. Let's not claim representation for the entire Jewish race. I know the Left likes to speak for everyone of a particular group as a unit. Those who don't fall in lines are blasphemers and Uncle Toms.

    Ben Shapiro receives more white supremacist death threats than any Jew in America and he couldn't be more ardently against Antifa's antics. He is obviously not the only one.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. You are misrepresenting what is being said. Not sure if on purpose or poor reading comprehension.

    Many people have contested whether or not he just went there to plow people down, or if he was a 20 year old idiot who got attacked in his car, lost his mind, and plowed ahead.

    Why are you uninterested to find out what happened before?

    ***Duty calls, be back shortly.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. Because to me it makes zero difference. What he did was a crime. How do you fail to see this simple point?
  15. Do you know that cars are capable of going in reverse?
    If he was "getting pelted", then he clearly drove in the wrong direction.

    I'm glad you are debating this. Really shows your true colors.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  16. it wasnt a 1 way street was it? I don't know what was going through the guys mind, and neither do you. We only know the end result. No one has said he didn't do this, or wasn't at fault. What I'm debating is your assertion that there was only one reason this could have happened, and we are saying there could be several. And again, the charges against him speak volumes don't they? If it was something premeditated then he would have been charged with 1st degree and domestic terrorism. He wasn't.

    also, I would caution you against making assumptions on me, personally, based on your emotional reaction to what happened. You should know by now that I don't believe what the MSM tells me, I research it. I provide links all the time to back up what I'm saying and what I'm debating.
    • Like Like x 2
  17. One way street .. seriously?

    Your Infowars-based research is very inspiring.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  18. A one way street. :laughing::laughing:

    Well he saved himself the traffic ticket of going the wrong way on an alleged one way, and caught a murder charge instead.

    • Like Like x 2
    • Funny Funny x 2
  19. #119 Praetorian, Aug 16, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 16, 2017
    You seem to be very emotionally invested in this, to the point of your your judgment and reading comprehension being clouded. Either that or you are purposely ignoring what is being said.

    No one is contesting that mowing people down in a car isn't a crime. What is being contested is what kind of crime it was in Charlottesville that day. This is standard procedure in any nation with a due process of law.
    This is why the US operates on "innocent until proven guilty". Another reason would be to hold back the lynch mobs so that the law they all claim to support can actually do its job before the perp is massacred in the streets to mob justice.

    First or Second degree, among other things, will have to be determined before any judgment is passed, according to current US law.
    First-degree murder: any intentional murder that is willful and premeditated with malice aforethought. Felony murder is typically first-degree.
    Second-degree murder: any intentional murder with malice aforethought, but is not premeditated or planned.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. There is also a law on the books called Super recklessness
    Look it up

Share This Page