Violence in Charlottesville

[a completely inoffensive name]

White Nationalism is now in vogue with Trump in office.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/12/u...=top-news&_r=0

[Strike For The South]

Awful but not surprising. White nationalism has been allowed to fester since 9/11.

Nazi punks go home.

[Beskar]

I remember pre-11/9/01 where Islam and Muslims were virtually never discussed, it was basically a religion and a way of life for people in the Middle East. Sure, there were people who used to go "Pakis" "Ragheads" and typical xenophobic slurs but that was done to all ethnics except whites to the same degree.

When the twin tower attack happened, things changed. The government's wanted to go to war so in their interest to ram up anti-muslim sentiment to get people on side
War in Afghanistan went ahead with little protest, especially with Media campaigns leading the charge, and 'unfortunate incidents' like when BBC news showed a scene of sewer rats when talking about the Taliban. Anti-Muslim agenda was vogue and state sponsored.

I believe a lot of the current Anti-Muslim rhetoric comes from this period and it caused isolation and failure for integration in communities as people did not want to be associated with the enemy. It was a constant downhill process, and it took almost a decade later to realise the impact this caused hence a government sponsored effort to try to reintegrate the Muslim community which people turned against them 'see through' these efforts due to their fostered dislike.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Well if we take that metric we can say black nationalism was downright chic even before Obama took his.
http://www.wnd.com/2010/05/155653/

As the popularization of communists bolsters fascists; black identitarianism has bolstered white.

To denounce one and ignore or excuse the other is to encourage both, the best course of action is to let both extremes feel the truncheon with equal enthusiasm.

But that is not what we are taking about. The first thing you say in response to a white nationalist terrorist attack that killed a woman is a classic What About ism to a random article about the black panthers.

No condemnation of the white nationalists, but a scummy appeal to denounce an organization that had nothing to do with the rally yesterday, as a false prelude of fairness.

scummy. I don't think i want to acknowledge your posts anymore.

[Husar]

We need more love, love is the only answer, don't listen to the globalist Soros propaganda.
The poor (and also despicable) racists just walked right into an antifa-globalist Soros trap, see.
It all makes sense, asking for less racism breeds violence from the poor oppressed white males.

[insert crazy Alex Jones video here]

Also don't forget to buy some caveman juice...

[Hooahguy]

One instance of two Black Panthers engaging in voter intimidation is hardly much of an example of resurgent black nationalism. Now when the President has a couple of advisers with dubious ties to white nationalism, now that gets me paying closer attention.


Also, I don't want to see any far-right (or far-left for that matter) sites like WND linked to, so cut it out.

[Greyblades]

But that is not what we are taking about. The first thing you say in response to a white nationalist terrorist attack that killed a woman is a classic What About ism to a random article about the black panthers.

No condemnation of the white nationalists, but a scummy appeal to denounce an organization that had nothing to do with the rally yesterday, as a false prelude of fairness.

My first response to the blood on the charlottesville street was quote: "the best course of action is to let both extremes feel the truncheon with equal enthusiasm."

No, serrah, it was my first response to a person on the internet making spurrious the claim that white nationalism is now acceptable in trump's america, that being to exhibit a case of a black nationalist intimidation being allowed to go unpunished by the actions of the President of the United States. This was motivated twofold: either to shake you of your most alarmist notion or bait you into exposing a belief in an absurd dichotomy of which you have so eagerly obliged.

Every pundit and publication of whom you rely on to substitute thought have used this womans death for political ends; that being to convince the easily swayed that white nationalism has only suddenly become a problem in america solely because of the ascendance of one man. That the discontent of the people on the street is entirely unwarrented and irrational. This while ignoring the years of pandering and enabling by the first and fourth estates that has allowed anti white racism to become the only racism acceptable, of which this backlash has been long fed by.

scummy. I don't think i want to acknowledge your posts anymore.

I have long thought nothing of value would be lost by losing the attention of such a blatantly moralistic granstander, yet I keep coming back.

If you're finally done you can run along now.

One instance of two Black Panthers engaging in voter intimidation is hardly much of an example of resurgent black nationalism. Now when the President has a couple of advisers with dubious ties to white nationalism, now that gets me paying closer attention.

Should have been paying attention when your president was using dead delinquents to grand stand on. Maybe you will notice what was scrawled upon Lee's collumn.

Also, I don't want to see any far-right (or far-left for that matter) sites like WND linked to, so cut it out.

Excuse my ignorance on the orientation of some of america's news sites, but I must ask what rule did I break? There is nothing on the faq that warrants this action, if I am not mistaken you are acting out of bounds of a moderator.
It seems like the action either of someone worried his site will be flaged or someone who actually thinks truth can be changed by it's source. It could be because you worry about impressionable young minds who have no capacity to double check but frankly I do not see you viewing us in such an insultingly childish manner.

Whatever, will this do?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Bl...imidation_case

Trump is an ass. His incoherence is making Obama's smooth banality look incredibly classy.

Class was all he had and it was getting tired.

[Hooahguy]

Should have been paying attention when your president was using dead delinquents to grand stand on. Maybe you will notice what was scrawled upon Lee's collumn.

Not even close to being the same thing. Using a tragedy to bring light to an issue and press for police reform is not anywhere comparable to what is going on now with white nationalists marching down streets carrying tiki torches and giving the Nazi salute.

Excuse my ignorance on the orientation of some of america's news sites, but I must ask what rule did I break? There is nothing on the faq that warrants this action, if I am not mistaken you are acting out of bounds of a moderator.
It seems like the action either of someone worried his site will be flaged or someone who actually thinks truth can be changed by it's source. It could be because you worry about impressionable young minds who have no capacity to double check but frankly I do not see you viewing us in such an insultingly childish manner.

Whatever, will this do?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Bl...imidation_case

It falls under a rule within the FAQ:

"Posts containing any generally objectionable material: knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, etc, etc."

WND is well known to peddle conspiracy theories as well as other generally objectionable material that has no place on the Org and as admin I will enforce this. The same would be true for any similar website linked here, no matter the political alignment. If you have further issue with this, please take it up via PM and I would be happy to explain further. That being said, I do not appreciate your snarky tone.

[Husar]

No, serrah, it was my first response to a person on the internet making spurrious the claim that white nationalism is now acceptable in trump's america, that being to exhibit a case of a black nationalist intimidation being allowed to go unpunished by the actions of the President of the United States. This was motivated twofold: either to shake you of your most alarmist notion or bait you into exposing a belief in an absurd dichotomy of which you have so eagerly obliged.

Every pundit and publication of whom you rely on to substitute thought have used this womans death for political ends; that being to convince the easily swayed that white nationalism has only suddenly become a problem in america solely because of the ascendance of one man. That the discontent of the people on the street is entirely unwarrented and irrational. This while ignoring the years of pandering and enabling by the first and fourth estates that has allowed anti white racism to become the only racism acceptable, of which this backlash has been long fed by.

You accuse "the left" of having wrongfully excused black racism for too long because someone posted a picture of two black panthers supposedly intimidating voters somewhere and excuse white racism yourself by saying it's "only" a reaction of the victims of said black racism?
Not only is the white racism far worse, you admit yourself that it is not even a recent problem, so it might as well be the primary reason black racism exists. If white racism is the reason for black racism, then black racism cannot be a legitimate excuse for white racism. In the end you're just whining and victimizing "your group".

[Beskar]