I was in Charlottesville. Trump was wrong about violence on the left

A repeat from a few pages earlier......
This is NOT the Mud Pit!!!

All rules for polite political debate will be enforced.
Reaffirming Our Desire For Productive Political Debate (REVISED)

Go After the Ball, Not the Player!

The END of Hate Speech, subtle or otherwise, on ATS
**ALL MEMBERS** The recent surge in Hatred, Racism, and Sheer Stupidity STOPS NOW
Community Announcement re: Decorum

You are responsible for your own posts.....those who ignore that responsibility will face mod actions.
This could include temporary posting bans.


and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

So you are equally outraged he said there were fine people on the other side. I mean, if he was just talking about the violent people on both sides, surely there were no good people on the left either.

Depends on the context in which they chose to get violent. If it was in defense, they could be a fine person. If it was just to be violent, they are not.

No WS/Neo-Nazi is a fine person.

Isn't the right to defend one's self supposedly a highly held belief amongst many Americans?

I think it's highly regarded by most people in general.

Oh absolutely, my own country included. I am just making the point that the same people who shout the loudest about owning weapons for personal safety and defence seem to be the same people trying really hard to paint the counter-protesters as the instigators of violence. I just found that interesting to note.

I agree.

Overall, I think this entire debate is ridiculous. The Left is trying to say the Neo-Nazis started it, which does appear to be true in regards to Friday, and I'm unsure about Saturday. And the Right is trying to blame the Left in their typical fashion, in order to continue their never-ending bashfest, and in doing so give the impression to some that they are defending Neo-Nazis.

What we should be saying, as reasonable adults, is that there is blame to be had on both sides of this situation. Period. End of story.

But we can't do that. Partisan hacks will keep using this to push their narratives and bicker back and forth like a bunch of children. One side is saying the Right are Nazi defenders and the other side is saying the Left are their own brand of Nazis.

Then there are people like me that just want to say all of you are fricken nuts! (Not you personally)

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Kryties

yeah too bad the quote was not "side with" though

stretch it however you like it matters not

I'll rephrase it so as there is no confusion (not sure how there could be but OK here we go...)

Do the reporters who go to North Korea go there because they are on the North Koreans "side" (quoted exactly as per your post)?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert

If you did not mean it in the context we are discussing in this thread, then it's completely irrelevant.

Let me fix that
If you did not mean it how I want it then it is completely irrelevant.

PFFF
you are irrelevant
it is why you scream the loudest

This is an internet forum where we post anonymously.

We are all irrelevant.

a reply to: introvert

What we should be saying, as reasonable adults, is that there is blame to be had on both sides of this situation. Period. End of story.

JFC
This is essentially what trump said, but because HE said it you wont acknowledge it.
MY GOD the Hypocrisy is astounding.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert

What we should be saying, as reasonable adults, is that there is blame to be had on both sides of this situation. Period. End of story.

JFC
This is essentially what trump said, but because HE said it you wont acknowledge it.
MY GOD the Hypocrisy is astounding.

He did, but he also said a bit more that some people took offense to.

Perhaps you know that and is why you used the word "essentially".

There is a great deal of dishonesty going on here, more on the side of the Left but some on the right as well.
I know some people who were at the rally on the right and they tell a different story than the OP posted.
I will dig up some links to their accounts and post them later.

What needs to be considered is the time line that preceded Va.
The precedent that was set late last year shortly after the election.
Last year the Alt-right emerged and threw its support behind Trump. They had several rallies and gatherings. When this anti-statue movement began, there were several protests that occurred. At those events there were Alt-right, League of the South, Sons of Confederate Veterans and other right wing groups that protested. At all of these events there was no violence. There were verbal confrontations but there was no real fight even when counter protestors were present.

Now contrast that with Anti-Fa.
Last year in California there was a pro Trump rally organized by the California RNC. There was a massive protest to this rally. The local police department were ordered to disperse the rally. They proceeded to push the rally attendants and speakers out of the park and into the crowd of violent protestors. These protestors (anti-fa, pro immigration and BLM) attacked the pro-trump rally participants. The police did nothing to stop them and did nothing to protect the people being literally chased down. This was the event where the women in the Trump shirt was pelted with Eggs while she was trying to get inside of a building all caught on video and posted on Youtube. The city and police are now being sued for civil rights violations by people who were assaulted and attacked during this rally.

This event lead to the next protest where we saw Anti-fa protest and riot because Milo was going to speak at Berkley. Another event where the protestors attacked the people who simply wanted to hear the speech.

That event lead to another protest where we saw again violent armed Anti-fa attacking pro-trump, anti immigration protestors. Only this time the right wing protestors showed up with protective gear and sticks. This was the rally where Based Stick man fought back and won internet fame.

We have the Anti-fa protests and riots that took place on Inauguration day. Violent left wing protestors destroyed private and public property because they did not like the results of the election.

What we have is a history of left wing violence even when Right wing protestors were not present.

When this event in Va was announced it was organized as a protest to the removal of historical statues. It was billed as a means to bring together Anti-left wing groups and unite them under a common purpose. There was an understanding that all the people there would not be ideological kin. Most of these groups are not lock step in their beliefs and ideology. What they do share is a hatred for Communism. It was understood that the left wing Anti-fa and communists would learn of this event and they would bring their violence in order to disrupt it. So why does it surprise anyone that given the history of Left wing violence in the last year that the anti-left would arm themselves to protect themselves?
What was not understood is that the local police would be given the same playbook that was used in California.
The park was blocked off with two entrances. One was supposed to be for protestors and the other was supposed to be for counter protestors. The police said that this was agreed to by the Alt-Right but the Alt-right didnt follow the plan. Well from first hand accounts of those that were there this is what happened.
The Alt-right assembled in parking lots several blocks from the park. They gathered up in the groups that they knew and approached the park together. The Anti-fa (a catch all from this point forward) were already lining the streets and blocking the entrances to the park that the police had told the Alt-right to use. The Alt-right groups were herded down the street in a gauntlet and were attacked by the Anti-fa with verbal insults that quickly escalated to water bottles and small objects being thrown at them. As they arrived at the entrance to the park they were held up by a human chain that blocked the park entrance. There was a clash there as the Alt-right tried to gain entry. In the mean time many other Alt-right who had seen that there was a large crowd gathered on one entrance circled the block and approached to the other entrance (one of the persons who posted this account did this) he was able to gain entrance to the park from that side. The speakers and a couple of the ALt-right groups were able to make it into the park and prepare for the speeches that were to be made. The report was that inside the park it was calm and people talked and joked and had no idea that there was already an escalating clash taking place just outside the park. At this point the police declared that the event was an illegal assembly (violation of the first amendment) and formed a riot line. They pushed everyone IN the park out of the two entrances and into the mob of Anti-fa outside. This is when the violence took off and things got really bloody. As the Alt-right groups were pushed out they were isolated into smaller groups and attacked on their way back to the parking lots. There was plenty of violence on both sides but the accounts that I have read and the fact that the police actions mirror that which took place earlier in California tell me what really occurred.
The local city officials are left wing. They ordered the police to herd the protest into a pin and once it was surrounded by Anti-fa they pushed the protestors into the mob with the full intention of allowing that mob to violently attack the protestors. The fact that the alt-right people showed up armed and ready to fight is the reason that more people were not hurt or killed. Had they shown up with no protection it would have still been violent and would have been even more so than it was.
Now you can believe me or not, honestly I was not there but I have seen enough photo and video evidence to support the accounts that I have read. One thing that will settle this if anyone can get there hands on it is a video that was taken. It was taken by the Virginia State Police from their position over looking the park. They were on the roof top with a clear view of the entire event and they took video and photo evidence of everything that happened.

a reply to: Kryties

it must just be galling to you that the word side has different meanings
There were embedded vice reporters on the neo nazi side, everyone saw that when they released their report
are they not fine people?

side does not mean they have to agree with them, it could be thats where they happened to end up

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

So you are equally outraged he said there were fine people on the other side. I mean, if he was just talking about the violent people on both sides, surely there were no good people on the left either.

Depends on the context in which they chose to get violent. If it was in defense, they could be a fine person. If it was just to be violent, they are not.

No WS/Neo-Nazi is a fine person.

Isn't the right to defend one's self supposedly a highly held belief amongst many Americans?

I think it's highly regarded by most people in general.

Oh absolutely, my own country included. I am just making the point that the same people who shout the loudest about owning weapons for personal safety and defence seem to be the same people trying really hard to paint the counter-protesters as the instigators of violence. I just found that interesting to note.

I agree.

Overall, I think this entire debate is ridiculous. The Left is trying to say the Neo-Nazis started it, which does appear to be true in regards to Friday, and I'm unsure about Saturday. And the Right is trying to blame the Left in their typical fashion, in order to continue their never-ending bashfest, and in doing so give the impression to some that they are defending Neo-Nazis.

What we should be saying, as reasonable adults, is that there is blame to be had on both sides of this situation. Period. End of story.

But we can't do that. Partisan hacks will keep using this to push their narratives and bicker back and forth like a bunch of children. One side is saying the Right are Nazi defenders and the other side is saying the Left are their own brand of Nazis.

Then there are people like me that just want to say all of you are fricken nuts! (Not you personally)

So would you say that Donald Trump was the adult in his response blaming both sides and the media, leftist pundits, and CEOs using this to step down from whatever position are acting like children?

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: introvert

You do realize there are a lot of people into civil war history...like that is a huge hobby. People go hunt artifacts all over the country...and its those type of people who would protest removing the statue as well...which incidentally have nothing to do with the disgusting element of that protest...those are the people Trump was talking about when saying there were some fine people on both sides.

For example, I know a Hillary supporter, dyed in the world liberal. He's a Civil War reenactment person. He plays both sides but usually plays the Confederate side. Go figure

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

So you are equally outraged he said there were fine people on the other side. I mean, if he was just talking about the violent people on both sides, surely there were no good people on the left either.

Depends on the context in which they chose to get violent. If it was in defense, they could be a fine person. If it was just to be violent, they are not.

No WS/Neo-Nazi is a fine person.

Isn't the right to defend one's self supposedly a highly held belief amongst many Americans?

I think it's highly regarded by most people in general.

Oh absolutely, my own country included. I am just making the point that the same people who shout the loudest about owning weapons for personal safety and defence seem to be the same people trying really hard to paint the counter-protesters as the instigators of violence. I just found that interesting to note.

I agree.

Overall, I think this entire debate is ridiculous. The Left is trying to say the Neo-Nazis started it, which does appear to be true in regards to Friday, and I'm unsure about Saturday. And the Right is trying to blame the Left in their typical fashion, in order to continue their never-ending bashfest, and in doing so give the impression to some that they are defending Neo-Nazis.

What we should be saying, as reasonable adults, is that there is blame to be had on both sides of this situation. Period. End of story.

But we can't do that. Partisan hacks will keep using this to push their narratives and bicker back and forth like a bunch of children. One side is saying the Right are Nazi defenders and the other side is saying the Left are their own brand of Nazis.

Then there are people like me that just want to say all of you are fricken nuts! (Not you personally)

So would you say that Donald Trump was the adult in his response blaming both sides and the media, leftist pundits, and CEOs using this to step down from whatever position are acting like children?

No. He appeared to have been a bickering child right along with the rest of them.

originally posted by: Dragoon01

There is a great deal of dishonesty going on here, more on the side of the Left but some on the right as well.

I know some people who were at the rally on the right and they tell a different story than the OP posted.
I will dig up some links to their accounts and post them later.

So the people you know that went there that are on the "right" can be trusted not to be biased when giving their accounts?

If they have video or evidence like that that proves what they are saying, I'd love to see it.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Kryties

it must just be galling to you that the word side has different meanings
There were embedded vice reporters on the neo nazi side, everyone saw that when they released their report
are they not fine people?

side does not mean they have to agree with them, it could be thats where they happened to end up

"Galling"? Not in the slightest.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Kryties

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

So you are equally outraged he said there were fine people on the other side. I mean, if he was just talking about the violent people on both sides, surely there were no good people on the left either.

Depends on the context in which they chose to get violent. If it was in defense, they could be a fine person. If it was just to be violent, they are not.

No WS/Neo-Nazi is a fine person.

Isn't the right to defend one's self supposedly a highly held belief amongst many Americans?

I think it's highly regarded by most people in general.

Oh absolutely, my own country included. I am just making the point that the same people who shout the loudest about owning weapons for personal safety and defence seem to be the same people trying really hard to paint the counter-protesters as the instigators of violence. I just found that interesting to note.

I agree.

Overall, I think this entire debate is ridiculous. The Left is trying to say the Neo-Nazis started it, which does appear to be true in regards to Friday, and I'm unsure about Saturday. And the Right is trying to blame the Left in their typical fashion, in order to continue their never-ending bashfest, and in doing so give the impression to some that they are defending Neo-Nazis.

What we should be saying, as reasonable adults, is that there is blame to be had on both sides of this situation. Period. End of story.

But we can't do that. Partisan hacks will keep using this to push their narratives and bicker back and forth like a bunch of children. One side is saying the Right are Nazi defenders and the other side is saying the Left are their own brand of Nazis.

Then there are people like me that just want to say all of you are fricken nuts! (Not you personally)

So would you say that Donald Trump was the adult in his response blaming both sides and the media, leftist pundits, and CEOs using this to step down from whatever position are acting like children?

No. He appeared to have been a bickering child right along with the rest of them.

How? He stated both sides were culpable and the media and leftist pundits went apesh*t accusing him of trying to give moral equivalence to the two groups. You aren't being honest.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Kryties

it must just be galling to you that the word side has different meanings
There were embedded vice reporters on the neo nazi side, everyone saw that when they released their report
are they not fine people?

side does not mean they have to agree with them, it could be thats where they happened to end up

So you're actually suggesting that Trump ONLY meant the Vice News crew when he talked of the right being "fine people"?

Temp. closure so members can read this:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Reopened.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Grambler


I saw it. It was disdainful, I'll freely admit it. It didn't have anything to do with the rally though, it happened on Tuesday.

Looks like it was Tuesday. You are right.

You can't find one single picture of the people that Trump claimed existed. Not one. But by your reckoning, I on the other hand must prove that 100% of the people there weren't these people that Trump made up? That is so intellectually dishonest.

So you can point to every single person in every single picture or video from the right and say they are bad people.

Even the ACLU that was their to defend the right, who said the cops set them up?

The NYT reported on some people who were not white supremacists.

“Good people can go to Charlottesville,” said Michelle Piercy, a night shift worker at a Wichita, Kan., retirement home, who drove all night with a conservative group that opposed the planned removal of a statue of the Confederate general Robert E. Lee.

After listening to Mr. Trump on Tuesday, she said it was as if he had channeled her and her friends — all gun-loving defenders of free speech, she said, who had no interest in standing with Nazis or white supremacists: “It’s almost like he talked to one of our people.”

Conservatives like Ms. Piercy, who have grown only more emboldened after Charlottesville, believe that the political and media elite hold them and Mr. Trump to a harsh double standard that demands they answer for the sins of a radical, racist fringe. They largely accept Mr. Trump’s contention that these same forces are using Charlottesville as an excuse to undermine his presidency, and by extension, their vote.

www.nytimes.com...

But that group is evil too, right? The NYT was duped, and she really is a klansmen.

Are you denying that it was a white nationalist/white supremacist rally? If you're just going to be unreasonable, then what's the point? Do we care about the truth or scoring points? You have eyes in your head just like I do. Neither one of us is insane or stupid. You know exactly what that rally was. You know exactly who would attend such a rally. Why then can't you bring yourself to concede even that point? Ugh.

Yes and no.

I am saying that many, whaat may be a overwhelming majority were scumbags. But there were people there that claimed to not be associated with racism, and just about free speech and the statue.

Explain to me how you know they are lying?

You haven't seen it from me. I haven't looked at your video, I came into the thread a little late. I've got to knock out some work. I'll look at it when I have chance and comment and I can assure you that as much political bias as I might have, I'm not going to stoop to denying what is plainly obvious.

I know you are reasonable, and I know this is getting heated.

All I am saying is that to freakl out over Trump saying there were some good people on both sides, as if that proves he likes nazis, who he called out by name as rejecting, is not fair in my opinion.

To argue thaat, you must prove that there were ZERO people there that were not bad, and I don't think that is the case.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: PublicOpinion

They did? Beheadings or the usual tyranny? Any footage?

Miss this photo from earlier in the thread.

In irony of all irony almost a direct quote from Starship Troops.

That was a FASCIST REGIME.

'The only good bug is a dead bug'.

Would you like to know more ?'

But wait, why would peace loving good people hang around with a group like that?

Surely everyone on that side must have been evil.

a reply to: Grambler

At 1:40 you see them walking away saying nothing as a man with a bat or weapon swings it staring them down. The whole time they group being ledt through the counter protestors is basically silent while the other scream at them things like "watch my Bat!"

Saw it.

At 3:25 one of the leftist throws his stick at the protestors.

Actually, no. What happens if you look closely is that he smacks the stick out of the neo-Nazi's hand. Still, that was instigation.

4:10, another leftist throws something. Still no violence from the right yet.

Yep, couldn't tell what it was.

Now pause at 5:34. Leftists guy in pink shirt is swinging his bat at someone hitting them.

Yes, I see it. I wish I could see what happened right before but you can clearly see him swinging his stick/bat at the neo-Nazi. It looks to me like the guy in the red shirt did likely instigate that particular skirmish.

Film goes forward and everything looks calmed down. 6:44 a leftist protestor comes in and swings, and then runs. Guy he hits collapses and doesn' get up.

That appears to be 4 actual Antifa. By the time the camera swings around, the one guy is collapsing but it looks like he got hit with something. I'll assume the Antifa struck first.

7:40 left wing guy screaming at the media for protecting the right wingers.

You're assuming that the guy screaming is "left wing" because? He appears to be a local ("our city") and I think he's actually screaming at the cops.

Okay, so we have two fights in an approximately 10 minute period that look to have been instigated by people who *aren't* the white nationalist/white supremacist invaders.

The person who ultimately gets beat down in the garage btw, is DeAndre Harris. He's a 20 year-old Charlottesville resident. I have no idea if he has any political leanings. He suffered a broken wrist and a lacerated scalp that required eight staples.

You can see him get knocked over in the video (he's in the shorts). He then appears to get up and run a few steps before getting knocked down again and then gets the s# beat out of him with poles.



The person who took that photo was Zach D Roberts. As he was shooting the video, one of the neo-Nazis pulled a pistol on him, according to Roberts:

Tell me where I am wrong in any of this.

Looks like your assessment of this particular video was fairly accurate. You do realize this was just one video of two of the skirmishes? At any rate, I'll be straight up with whatever. I hope you can pay me the same respect and not continue to piss down my leg and tell me it's "very fine people."

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

So you are equally outraged he said there were fine people on the other side. I mean, if he was just talking about the violent people on both sides, surely there were no good people on the left either.

Depends on the context in which they chose to get violent. If it was in defense, they could be a fine person. If it was just to be violent, they are not.

No WS/Neo-Nazi is a fine person.

Your distinction makes no sense to me.

See my post above how the NYT interviewed a lady from a group that is not racist.

Why in gods name wouldn't she be considered as being on one of the two sides?