By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - White Supremacist Drives Car into Counter-Protesters (20 Injured, One Dead)

FIT_Gamer said:
outlawauron said:

uhhhh, what?! This isn't close to true. Here, take a look.

They even organize it by type.

Wikipedia? Really? You do realize anyone can change the info there? 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-us-has-a-homegrown-terrorist-problem--and-its-coming-from-the-right/2017/05/26/10d88bba-4197-11e7-9869-bac8b446820a_story.html?utm_term=.f0c028ab0d15

and another one...

https://theintercept.com/2017/05/31/the-numbers-dont-lie-white-far-right-terrorists-pose-a-clear-danger-to-us-all/

Everything in the article is sourced with evidence of each attack. Your first link is a opinion piece. I mean, really.....



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Around the Network

Is there solid proof that the guy was a white supremacist?



A rather despicable act and the right wing better denounce this extremism as much as the left wing needs to denounce ANTIFA's actions.



Slimebeast said:

I want to bring another thing up. We don't know the details yet, but there's a chance this murderous attack won't be categorized as terror.

My spontaneous feeling is that this was a spontaneous act by a "lone disturbed young man with serious anger management issues" type of person.

For something to be labeled as terror in its real sense, you really need some other factors, like the act being planned beforehand, the purpose of the act being to spread a disproportionate fear into a more general group of people, and to advance some kind of ideological message or movement.

And I suspect this 20 year old disgusting guy doesn't fullfill anything of this criteria.

It was probably more that he has a background of having sympathized with alt-right politics for a while, while not being organized or socialized with anyone else. It's a person who has felt frustrated and angry for a long while, and in the last 24 hours he felt tense and on the edge, and something among the protestors triggered him emotionally just a few minutes before he decided to crash his car into the crowd.

County sheriff already announced it's being considered as premeditated and officials are pushing for it to be investigated as a domestic terrrorist act.



eye witnesses said he stopped the car a few blocks away before it sped up and crashed into the protesters. They said they find it strange that he suddenly stop because no other cars was blocking him.



Around the Network

Fuck this guy. I do foresee this becoming a bigger problem though. First the regressive left, now the alt right. It was only a matter of time before they reacted violently.



Locknuts said:
Fuck this guy. I do foresee this becoming a bigger problem though. First the regressive left, now the alt right. It was only a matter of time before they reacted violently.

Alt Right is nothing new. It's just a "rebranding" of white supremasists who were here in the 20s, the 30s, the 40s, 50s, the 60s, the 70s, the 80s, the 90s, the 2000s, the 2010s. 

They have been emboldened by Trump's election and think they now have more room to come out of the shadows like coackroaches. 

That's the only thing different today from 10-15 years ago. And they will always be met by resistance now ... because never again in this country's history will they be allowed to parade around in public and to terrorize/bully/expouse their hatred without being met in kind with force.



Soundwave said:
Locknuts said:
Fuck this guy. I do foresee this becoming a bigger problem though. First the regressive left, now the alt right. It was only a matter of time before they reacted violently.

Alt Right is nothing new. It's just a "rebranding" of white supremasists who were here in the 20s, the 30s, the 40s, 50s, the 60s, the 70s, the 80s, the 90s, the 2000s, the 2010s. 

They have been emboldened by Trump's election and think they now have more room to come out of the shadows like coackroaches. 

That's the only thing different today from 10-15 years ago. And they will always be met by resistance now ... because never again in this country's history will they be allowed to parade around in public and to terrorize/bully/expouse their hatred without being met in kind with force.

Alt-Right isn't a thing.  It was an invented word during the primaries to try and paint Trump /His supporters as racists (It didn't work, it's only served to dilute the word and give it no meaning). "Racist" in liberal lingo literally can mean, someone you disagree with.   A vast majority of "hate" crimes that were painted to be labeled against Trump and his supporters have all been proven to be false flags, or outright fabrications. (Just like the sexual charges they claimed to have).  

These protests and the violent turn they are taking is likely the logical outcome/counter response to the well documented accounts of ANTIFA showing up to events with the intent to cause violence for the past two years.  

Hillary Clinton was a crap candidate, that ran on crap platforms, that represented the status quo in one of the most stagnant, and poor performing periods of this countries history.  The Democrats lost at every level politically (Not just the Presidency) because their ideology when met with reality failed.  Nobody cares about David Duke, or the KKK, or "White Supremacy".  

Blaming everything negative that happens on Trump (Which is what I've read from you since the election), is pretty transparent and weak.



Rpruett said:
Soundwave said:

Alt Right is nothing new. It's just a "rebranding" of white supremasists who were here in the 20s, the 30s, the 40s, 50s, the 60s, the 70s, the 80s, the 90s, the 2000s, the 2010s. 

They have been emboldened by Trump's election and think they now have more room to come out of the shadows like coackroaches. 

That's the only thing different today from 10-15 years ago. And they will always be met by resistance now ... because never again in this country's history will they be allowed to parade around in public and to terrorize/bully/expouse their hatred without being met in kind with force.

Alt-Right isn't a thing.  It was an invented word during the primaries to try and paint Trump /His supporters as racists (It didn't work, it's only served to dilute the word and give it no meaning). "Racist" in liberal lingo literally can mean, someone you disagree with.   A vast majority of "hate" crimes that were painted to be labeled against Trump and his supporters have all been proven to be false flags, or outright fabrications. (Just like the sexual charges they claimed to have).  

These protests and the violent turn they are taking is likely the logical outcome/counter response to the well documented accounts of ANTIFA showing up to events with the intent to cause violence for the past two years.  

Hillary Clinton was a crap candidate, that ran on crap platforms, that represented the status quo in one of the most stagnant, and poor performing periods of this countries history.  The Democrats lost at every level politically (Not just the Presidency) because their ideology when met with reality failed.  Nobody cares about David Duke, or the KKK, or "White Supremacy".  

Blaming everything negative that happens on Trump (Which is what I've read from you since the election), is pretty transparent and weak.

While I agree Hilary was a crap candidate, I don't agree with your other points. Alt-Right isn't a "new" thinig, it's just the same ol' brand of racists, I would say though it's a more desperate brand of racism, desperate because the died-in-the-wool racists know they have lost in America and this is basically their death spasm, pinning their hopes on a reality TV buffoon. In 4-8 years they will find there are even more people of color in this country and somehow it isn't 1955 again then what? They will eventually turn on Trump and claim they were betrayed and blah, blah, blah. 

Trump isn't a white supermasist I don't think. He is simply a egomanic/oppurtunist/conman. And in his mind this is a voter block that he doesn't want to piss off, he wants to be able to wink at them in hushed tones. He will probably be forced to have to now specifically condemn white supremasists by name, which is likely internally a disaster for him. That's the last thing he needed this week. "Bad white supremasists, bad. No. No. You can't chew on the shoes, now the Republicans are going to make me have to put you in the back yard and I didn't want that". 

About "losing on every level" the fact of the matter is Democrats have won 5/6 of the last majority votes. That means the majority of Americans do support liberal values in many, many instances. I would say Republicans are fairly lucky that 6/6 of the last presidents haven't all been Democrats (Bush won in 2004 mainly because of 9/11 and Americans not wanting to switch presidents in a war time situation, but if Gore had won in 2000, that would've benefitted him). But that is a seperate discussion. This isn't all about politics, Nazis and KKK should transcend the political spectrum and face condemnation from any person who values any kind of human dignity and has any morality whatsoever. 



monocle_layton said:
Ka-pi96 said:
Why? Just why? I have a hard time imagining even punching someone, let alone driving a car in to a whole crowd of people.

it's acceptable for these racist pieces of shit to kill others because they realize they're nothing more than retarded pussies. They don't have facts to support themselves, so they just go ahead and hurt others.

Seeing this happen in America is sickening. I hope the dude gets a life sentence for this. He could've killed many more people - thank god it wasn't more than one person. 

 

They talk about free speech, but at the end of the day at least the "super evil" SJW's won't kill you if you disagree with them : 

That's a convenient way of putting it. What makes you say they won't kill you when way back in the electorial campaigns one tried to light a person's hair during a debate?