The Press Declares the Alt:Right to be Bigotted and Terrorist

FreeinChrist said:

I have to address this one.

Right-wing terrorism - Wikipedia

New America's tally shows right-wing terrorist attacks causing 68 fatalities since September 11, 2001. These were:[39]

• The 2017 murder by driving a car into counter-protestors there to protest against the alt-right in Charlottesville, Virginia (1 killed).
• The 2017 Portland train attack (2 killed),
• The 2017 stabbing of Timothy Caughman in New York City (1 killed),
• The 2017 shooting of three Indian men in a bar in Olathe Kansas (1 killed),
• The 2015 Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood shooting (3 killed),
• The 2015 Charleston church shooting (9 killed),
• The 2014 ambush attack on Las Vegas police officers (5 killed),
• The 2014 Overland Park Jewish Community Center shooting in Kansas (3 killed),
• The 2014 Pennsylvania State Police barracks attack in Blooming Grove, Pennsylvania (1 killed),
• A 2012 tri-state killing spree by white supremacists, David Pedersen and Holly Grigsby (4 killed),
• A 2012 ambush of St. John the Baptist Parish, Louisiana police (2 killed),
• The 2012 Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting (6 killed),
• The 2011 FEAR group attacks (3 killed),
• A murder in 2010 in Carlisle, Pennsylvania (1 killed),
• A 2010 suicide attack by airplane in Austin, Texas (1 killed),
• The 2009 shooting of Pittsburgh police officers (3 killed),
• The 2009 United States Holocaust Memorial Museum shooting (1 killed),
• The 2009 assassination of George Tiller (1 killed),
• The 2009 murders of Raul and Brisenia Flores in Pima County, Arizona (2 killed),
• The 2009 murders in Brockton, Massachusetts (2 killed),
• The 2008 Knoxville Unitarian Universalist church shooting (2 killed),
• And the 2004 bank robbery in Tulsa, Oklahoma (1 killed).

Timothy McVeigh was inspired to turn against the US government and eventually blow up the Okahoma Federal building after reading The Turner Diaries. That book has been described as the bible of the racist right and advocates the extermination of Jews, non-whites, and gays.

The statue itself was erected in the Jim Crow era and the park named Lee park at that time. No black person would go there - it was a slap in their face. They are Americans, too. The city decided to remove the statue and have renamed to park. Perhaps they could move it to some other location and not also have a park with it. Perhaps they should also have statues of prominant blacks from history or other historical folks like George Washington. The statue itself is not historical. It isn't Gettysburg battleground or Mt. Vernon or where Lincoln lived or where Ulysses S Grant was buried or Arlington. It isn't Plymouth Rock or the site of Jamestown or where Daniel Boone is buried or the Alamo.

Click to expand...

You proved nothing except my point. None of your attempts were even close to violent " GANGS" all were one man shows, bar fights, church groups which consist of all races. So good try but it failed.
You can't prove a lie and violent white racist gangs are non existant for past 100 yr.s now.

Pappy&Me said:

You proved nothing except my point. None of your attempts were even close to violent " GANGS" all were one man shows, bar fights, church groups which consist of all races. So good try but it failed.
You can't prove a lie and violent white racist gangs are non existant for past 100 yr.s now.

Click to expand...

Violent white gangs have been non-existent for the past 100 years???? Perhaps you need to learn your history.

Archivist said:

Perhaps you don't understand how republican democracy works. We elect officials, they make decisions on our behalf. In this case a majority of city council voted to remove the statue.

Click to expand...

And that is what, 3 of 5 or so? Not many to destroy a hundred years of history.

pat34lee said:

And that is what, 3 of 5 or so? Not many to destroy a hundred years of history.

Click to expand...

Again, you need to learn your history. Tulsa, 1921, Little Rock, 1927, Detroit , 1943.

FreeinChrist said:

I have to address this one.

Right-wing terrorism - Wikipedia

Click to expand...

Now, where is the other list? That of left-wing terrorism and its death toll?
People list one side of nuts and think that settles everything.

"Right & Left Violence: Timeline, by leftist Greg Correll, 10 Jan 2011, claims to compare left and right violence in the US since 1990.
It has many problems:

It lists a load of personal hate crimes. It is unclear that any of these count as political violence. Even if we include them, it is inconsistent:
It assigns all racist attacks by whites to the "right". But it does not assign all racist attacks by blacks to the "left". It just omits them.
It assigns all attacks on gays to the "right". But it does not assign all attacks by Muslims on Jews to the "left". It just omits them.
It does however include white attacks on Jews, which it assigns to the "right", despite the left's strong hatred of Israel and Zionism.
It omits all Islamic "honour killings" in the US. Why? They are the result of an ideology that - if you had to choose - is on the "left".
It lists inter-racial hate crimes, but it only lists white-on-black crimes, not black-on-white crimes.
There are evil people of all races and all countries, but this list makes it look as if there is only evil by whites."
Left-wing v. right-wing violence

pat34lee said:

Now, where is the other list? That of left-wing terrorism and its death toll?
People list one side of nuts and think that settles everything.

"Right & Left Violence: Timeline, by leftist Greg Correll, 10 Jan 2011, claims to compare left and right violence in the US since 1990.
It has many problems:

It lists a load of personal hate crimes. It is unclear that any of these count as political violence. Even if we include them, it is inconsistent:
It assigns all racist attacks by whites to the "right". But it does not assign all racist attacks by blacks to the "left". It just omits them.
It assigns all attacks on gays to the "right". But it does not assign all attacks by Muslims on Jews to the "left". It just omits them.
It does however include white attacks on Jews, which it assigns to the "right", despite the left's strong hatred of Israel and Zionism.
It omits all Islamic "honour killings" in the US. Why? They are the result of an ideology that - if you had to choose - is on the "left".
It lists inter-racial hate crimes, but it only lists white-on-black crimes, not black-on-white crimes.
There are evil people of all races and all countries, but this list makes it look as if there is only evil by whites."
Left-wing v. right-wing violence

Click to expand...

Did you see the comment to which he was replying? Your tu quoque butwhataboutism is irrelevant.

Archivist said:

Again, you need to learn your history. Tulsa, 1921, Little Rock, 1927, Detroit , 1943.

Click to expand...

What confederate memorial is in Tulsa, Little Rock or Detroit?

Jenny_8675309 said:

Did you see the comment to which he was replying? Your tu quoque butwhataboutism is irrelevant.

Click to expand...

I went back and read it. The list only proved the point of the other poster.
Crazies and one-offs are the majority of so-called right-wing violence.
On the left, it is more systemic and mainstream. So much so that it is
almost never even described as either terrorism or hate crimes.

What boils my blood is that the police were there and refused to
intervene in a terrorist act by a crazed mob.
JUST LIKE CHARLOTTESVILLE.
The police and city leaders chose sides, and sided with the anarchists.

pat34lee said:

What boils my blood is that the police were there and refused to
intervene in a terrorist act by a crazed mob.
JUST LIKE CHARLOTTESVILLE.
The police and city leaders chose sides, and sided with the anarchists.

Click to expand...

It's nice to see someone here acknowledging that driving a car into a crowd to kill and maim at random is a terrorist act.

pat34lee said:

What confederate memorial is in Tulsa, Little Rock or Detroit?

Click to expand...

Perhaps you should take the time to read the post to which I was responding. It claimed that white gangs hadn't been violent for over 100 years. That is incorrect. We weren't discussing monuments.

"Bigots and terrorists" seems like an apt description to me. I'd also use terms like "thugs", "scoundrels", and "evil" to describe the alt-right.

-CryptoLutheran

Monk Brendan said:

If I have posted this in the wrong forum, please move it to the correct one, thank you.

First of all, I must point out that I am horrified at the activity in Charlottesville. NOBODY on the Left, Right or Center has ANY right to kill, hurt, or in any other way injure anyone else.

Now, to begin at the beginning, the trouble began when several states, mostly driven by politically correct citizens, demanded that the statues of various heroes of the South be taken down. That's okay. It is their state, and every citizen has the right to be heard. I may be for or against such a measure, but I am allowed to state an opinion, so that's cool.

What I do have a problem with is taking down statues of General Robert E. Lee. If the PC Police want to vilify him, well, freedom of the press means that whoever owns the press has the freedom to print what they want. Robert E. Lee was a pious church man, and, notwithstanding what most web sites say, he was not in favor of slavery or secession. Before the Civil war began, he was asked to take over as Superintendent of West Point. When a Black man came to Communion (Episcopalian) after the war, Lee was the only man in the congregation to come down to the communion rail with him and kneel beside him.

He graduated #2 from West Point. When the Civil War started, he was offered several prominent posts in the Union Army. When Virginia seceded, he followed his own state into the Confederacy, even though he was opposed to the secession.

He is a historic figure, and making him an unperson will confuse all future students of the Civil War. General Grant will end up taking the surrender of this obscure Southern General that nobody knows, because he has been erased from History

Click to expand...

Oh this is about so much more the General Lee, Grant loved him like a brother by the way, they both served in the Mexican American War. Lee handed Grant his sword and Grant gave it back to him. When Johnson wanted to put Lee on trial for treason Grant threatened to resign in protest, Johnson relented.

Johnson was on the brink of impeachment, coming within one vote of it, because he believed punishing the south would violate their civil rights.

Who in that melee was not fighting for civil rights? They love that sacred natural law so much, it is so important to our Constitutional Republic, that they would deny free speech to others. We risk too much to let the protestors and counter protestors clash like this, yet we dare not deny either side their right to protest. I watched that car plunge into a crowd, nearly live and grieve with every fiber of my being this evil abuse of our cherish right to free speech.

I don't think I care about that statue anymore. Take it down, leave it there, it no longer matters. I will not accept that this is how our founding fathers believed the Bill of Rights is honored. I wish I could blame one side or the other, the Nazis are easy, the counter protestors are not innocent and the police, failed to keep them separated, I leave their choices to their conscience and to history.

Our boarders are not threatened by any power on earth, the threat is from within. Civil unrest will be our undoing, and when it comes we will richly deserve it. I'm ashamed of my people today, the alt right, the alt left and those who stood by and let it happen. Did we forget so easily how much the Civil War cost us? If it were in my power I would make it a law no hate group may protest in the public square again. It's a flagrant abuse of the First Amendment and I would end the wretched abuses of the counter protestors in the same act.

But I can't, because the same First Amendment that allows hate speeches and excessive actions of counter protestors allows Christian ministers preach from the pulpit. Should we silence the sermons of the righteous to end the slogans and profanity of the wicked? Across this country thousands of peaceful sermons filled the houses of worship Sunday, and the media was oblivious. Let them rant, let them swear, let them fly the bird like a flag. Let them hurl their angry words and beat one another with the mean fists, stealing one anothers flags as trophies, turning a peaceful little town into a disaster area.

I don't like Trump but this isn't his fault. He suggested both sides are wrong, how dare he!, speak the truth that has escaped our vaunted and venerated press, shame on him.

I'm ranting, I know that, this isn't helping much but I don't care. I thought we were better then this. When it comes to hate be careful, you may become the very thing you despise, if you hate them back. Do not repay evil for evil, but overcome evil with good.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled discussion. I'm going to climb down from my soap box and go to bed.

Grace and peace,
Mark

Since I'm not alt-right, I've mostly ignored them. Roaming Millennial did an expose on them, however, and interviewed Milo for it. From what I saw, the media constantly conflating alt-right with neo-nazis actually lead to an influx of neo-nazis using the term and has basically ruined it. Many of the original alt-right now just call themselves New Right.

Aldebaran said:

Posting a picture and then calling people names because you don't agree with them is easy. Perhaps someone would like to put a caption under pictures that show what the "other side" does.

Click to expand...

Why so dedicated to the cause of "butwhataboutism"?

Aldebaran said:

That's like saying, "No, no! You're not supposed to point out anyone's hypocrisy! This isn't about us, it's all about YOU!"

Click to expand...

Pointing out hypocrissy is fine. Excusing your own problems by shifting attention to someone else's is not.