It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How a narrative was formed to say Trump said some Nazis are good people

page: 1
22

log in

join
share:
+2 more 
posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 03:39 PM
link   
The institutions of cultural power in this country are largely controlled by the left wing. By this, I mean all of the institutions that have the pwer to influence peoples thoughts on issues and things.

The MSM, academia, Silicon valley and the social media companies, the entertainment industry, athletes, etc.

This poweerful collective is able to shape political discousre and history in certain ways, and often do.

This is what happened with the narratove that Trump has said some Nazis are good people.

Trump never said that, and yet it is repeated by pundits on tv, celebrities, and even on ATS quite frequently. This is then used to smear him and his followers as racist, and a reason to reject their ideas or not listen to them.

Despite this being the bnarrative many believe, few know the actual events surrounding trumps speeches after the horrendous Charlotteville attack.

SO I wanted to go through the actual speeches and see what was said by Trump.

Now to start with, Trumps statement where he said there were good people on both sides was actaully his third public discussion after the protest.

Here is exactly what he said that people claim mean he said some nazis are good people.


Excuse me, excuse me. They didn’t put themselves -- and you had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides.


The narrative is that everyone on the side of those wanging the statue to stay up were nazis or white supremacists, therefore this statement shows trump says nazis can be fine people.

So lets dig further.

Lets start with Trumps first speech after the horrible murder of heather heyer.

I will link all the speeches, but will not quote them in entirety because they are too long.

Here is the relevant part.


But we're closely following the terrible events unfolding in Charlottesville, Virginia. We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides, on many sides. It's been going on for a long time in our country. Not Donald Trump, not Barack Obama, this has been going on for a long, long time. It has no place in America


www.vox.com...

The media immediately began to go into overdrive.

How dare trump say violence on all sides! Only the white supremacists were to blame! The other side were good people who were attacked.

And so article after article came out about how trump was giving cover to white supremacists. This despite the fact trump called out all violence and hatred and bigotry.

Look at the video at the bottom of the vox article I linked for an example, but there are many more.

Now compare this to how the media treated democratic statements after one of their own shot up a ball field containing republicans and nearly killed steve scalise.

Benrie and Pelosi etc., issued statements that condemned ALL violence. This despite the fact that incident of violence was done only by left leaning people. This is particularly troubling for Benrie, who called out republicans after the shooting of Gifford for only condemning all violence instead of just right wing violence.

So did the media hammer the dems for not calling out radical left wing violence by name? Nope.

Yet here that is what we see. And unlike the Scalise shooting where clearly there was only one side acting violently, in the Charlotteville situation, both sides did in fact commit violence.

Both sides had many people show up armed for combat, and attacking the other side. Now you may say that the antifa types were more noble because white supremacists are the worst ( I too hate white supremacists) but nonetheless they were violent thugs.

And yet the media celebrated them as heroes. Ironically, the media gave cover to groups that would then later on go to commit violence against innocent people, the very thing they accused trump of doing.

So trump, seeing that the violence from the left was being ignored or celebrated, took the time to condemn all of the violence.

Now you may disagree, but that is hardly him not calling out racists. In fact, we see the perils of saying some violence is mrore justified than others. People then attack innocents with moral righteousness as they feel their violence against non violent people is ok so long as they have the right ideology.


Needless to say, after being beat up in the media for a manufactured scandal that his statement gave cover to nazis, Trump then gives another speech.


As I said on Saturday, we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence. It has no place in America.

And as I have said many times before: No matter the color of our skin, we all live under the same laws, we all salute the same great flag, and we are all made by the same almighty God. We must love each other, show affection for each other, and unite together in condemnation of hatred, bigotry, and violence. We must rediscover the bonds of love and loyalty that bring us together as Americans.

Racism is evil. And those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans.


www.whitehouse.gov...

He specifically calls out race hatred groups by name and says they are to be condemned. he makes overtures to all of us, no matter what race we are, needing to come together.

Despite this, it was not enough.

The media continued to push nonstop that Trump was covering for racist, even when he named them.

It took to long, he didnt out them by name in his first speech!

And of course, because some of this racist may have voted for trump or like his policies, that must mean Trump is covering for them and is racist as well.

This sort of guilt by association is not only a terrible thing to do, it is also selectively applied, which proves its used exclusively for political calculations.

Consider the case of Louis Farrakhan, noted Jew hater who a week before the Pittsburgh Synagogue shooting likened Jews to termites. Now Obama and many other democrats, including man in the congressional black caucus have not only been at events with Farrakhan, but had photos taken with him. Yet was Obama or the rest asked to repeatedly condemn Farrakhan? Were they smeared as racist for palling around with Farrakhan?

Yet when David duke says something nice about trump, trump must repeatedly over and over and over condemn him.

ANd so despite calling out bigotry and hatred for a second speech, and this time calling out these hate groups by name, the media still blasted trump.

(more below)




posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 03:49 PM
link   
The simple fact is that some Nazis were good.

Karl Plagge
Albert Battel

Are two of the most famous.

All one has to do is google Nazis who saved Jews and you will come up with countless stories of nazis who refused orders and saved countless individuals.


For anyone to use this fact against president Trump only shows political BS at its finest.



posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 03:52 PM
link   
I think you have too much time on your hands.



posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 03:56 PM
link   
And so we come to the third speech.

This actually wasnt a speech at all, but a press conference about Trumps infrastructure plane.

The media however had their narrative designed to take down trump (which is really what almost all of the msm is always doing) and wanted to talk about Charlottesville again.

Lets look at some of their fair questions.


why did you wait so long to blast neo-Nazis?

Why do Nazis like you?

David Duke was there.

you're not putting these protestors on the same level as neo-Nazis --

Is the alt-left as bad as white supremacy?


abcnews.go.com...

And so while being badgered like this and going off the cuff, Trump says his statement about both sides having fine people that I put at the top.

Now here is the rest of the exchange a few sentences later.


So you know what, it’s fine. You’re changing history. You’re changing culture. And you had people -- and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists -- because they should be condemned totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists. Okay? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly.

Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people. But you also had troublemakers, and you see them come with the black outfits and with the helmets, and with the baseball bats. You had a lot of bad people in the other group.


Trump is saying that he feels there were good people on that side, but he specifically says not the kkk and neo nazis. And yet despite this, we are to believe that Trump was actually saying some of the nazis were fine people.

The only way for that narrative to work would be to prove that Every. Single. Person. on that side was a neo nazi.

And still there are two problems.

1. This doesnt prove that trump was saying nazis were fine people, only he was ignorant or inaccurate in his assessment they werent all nazis. This is proven by the fact he specifically called out nazis, as he did in his previous speech.

2. That side didnt have all neo nazis or white supremacists.

There were also other groups there trying to keep the peace and defending free speech.

Here is one woman telling of that.




Michelle Piercy, who travelled to Charlottesville to participate as a neutral peacekeeper for American Warrior Revolution, a group that stands up for individual free speech rights and acts as a buffer between competing voices, knew there was going to be violence, but went anyway.

“We were made aware that the situation could be dangerous, and we were prepared.” Piercy says. The Wichita night-worker for a Kansas retirement home said that “the situation was completely disorganized, the police were responsible for herding white supremacists on the street where Antifa and BLM were located. All chaos broke out. I witnessed police officers say, ‘that’s not our problem’ and ‘you shouldn’t have come’ and refused to help the injured.”

Piercy says that she doesn’t support white supremacy, Naziism, or alt-right causes. Nor does she believe the president has that in his heart.

“My partner is a black man who travelled to Charlottesville for the same reason I did [to protect free speech]. We were in groups and he’s a very good man. What we were trying to do is talk to Antifa and Black Lives Matter and let them know that the way they were protesting is the wrong way to go about it.”

Blaming the police is one thing, but criticizing President Trump’s handling of the violence that led to the deaths of three people is another. Piercy says “I believe President Trump is doing what he can.”

...

“Good people can go to Charlottesville,” says Piercy, who drove all night with other people who she says “also love and defend free speech, who are the furtherest thing from bigots, Nazis or white supremacists.


mediaequalizer.com...

Now I have heard people over and over say no one who isnt a piece of garbage would stand with neo nazis. And yet it seems this woman did.

yet the media and their narrative has to smear thios woman as a nazi in order for their narrative to work.

Now I will throw a bone to the left here, in that I think there is reason to criticize trump.

First he was dumb for being so clumsy with his language knowing that journalism is basically dead and they are all out to get him.

But even beyond that.

I dont think Trump watched much of the footage of the protest. I think he just knows that there are good people that want the statue to stay up, and so assumed they were there as well.

And that is terrible; he should have been more closely reviewing the film.

But that well warranted criticism is a far cry from Trump says nazis can be fine people.

Again, he specifically called out nazis at least twice, including in explaining he was not talking about them immediatly after he said there were fine people on both sides.

Yet I guarantee the most people who repeat the trump said nazis can be good people line have no idea he gave three speeches condemning bigotry and racism and violence, and even specifically said he was not talking about nazis as good people.

This is because the establishment left and their msm mouthpieces have successfully controlled the narrative.

(more below)


edit on 8-1-2019 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 04:00 PM
link   
This narrative has had three negative consequences.

1. Smeared goof people like Ms. Piercy as nazis.

2. Allowed trump and by proxy his supporters to be accused of saying nazis can be good people. This along with the "is it ok to punch a nazi" push all but justifies violence against them which we have seen

3. Gave cover for groups like antifa to commit violence against innocent people and smear them as nazis.

It also gives an example of how these narratives can be very effective at rewriting history, and why we should be vigilant in pushing facts.

And it shows how much of the msm are not journlists, but propgandists.



That was long winded, so for those of you that would rather hear my soothing voice discuss this, here is a video.




posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: LordAhriman
I think you have too much time on your hands.


Who is wasting their time more, the guy making a thread, or the guy commenting it was a result of too much free time?



posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 04:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

This was obvious to anyone with a modicum of common sense. It's a shame this stuff has to be point out, but it does, because often the misinformation is accepted as fact.

As you pointed out, the networks also circled the wagons for Antifa. It led Don Lemon to make this bright observation. "“It says it right in the name: Antifa. Anti-fascism, which is what they were there fighting”.
edit on 8-1-2019 by Propagandalf because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Well thought out, well written.

A rational thread providing solid information.


Will be curious to the replies.



posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
The institutions of cultural power in this country are largely controlled by the left wing.


Pure utter nonsense. Money talks. Republicans have 99% of the money.

The Republicans that own every media outlet you mentioned are not part of some grand left-wing conspiracy. It's a very simple calculus. Say or claim the most outrageous statements, really piss people off, make them stark raving mad and frothing at the mouth by what you say. Just make up stuff. Use focus-groups to maximize the most angry reaction. Engineer perfect hate. And here's why. Hate sells. Make people angry and you will make money with advertising. It's all about exploiting the people and making money.

Hate = ratings
Ratings = money


edit on 8-1-2019 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 04:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: LordAhriman
I think you have too much time on your hands.


Who is wasting their time more, the guy making a thread, or the guy commenting it was a result of too much free time?


You didn't link to the news outlets or politicians saying trump called nazi fine people.



posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 04:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: EternalSolace
The simple fact is that some Nazis were good.

Karl Plagge
Albert Battel

Are two of the most famous.

All one has to do is google Nazis who saved Jews and you will come up with countless stories of nazis who refused orders and saved countless individuals.


For anyone to use this fact against president Trump only shows political BS at its finest.


Add John Rabe to the list. He single-handedly saved hundreds, if not thousands, of Chinese during the Rape of Nanking.



posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 04:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: odzeandennz

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: LordAhriman
I think you have too much time on your hands.


Who is wasting their time more, the guy making a thread, or the guy commenting it was a result of too much free time?


You didn't link to the news outlets or politicians saying trump called nazi fine people.



Ok I will when I have time

I thought this was common knowledge that the media outlets still push this but you are right I will add it



posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 05:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Grambler
The institutions of cultural power in this country are largely controlled by the left wing.


Pure utter nonsense. Money talks. Republicans have 99% of the money.

The Republicans that own every media outlet you mentioned are not part of some grand left-wing conspiracy. It's a very simple calculus. Say or claim the most outrageous statements, really piss people off, make them stark raving mad and frothing at the mouth by what you say. Just make up stuff. Use focus-groups to maximize the most angry reaction. Engineer perfect hate. And here's why. Hate sells. Make people angry and you will make money with advertising. It's all about exploiting the people and making money.

Hate = ratings
Ratings = money



correct! but you forgot the factor fear. its all about fear. on all sides.



posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Ok so lets go thru the groups i said.

Entertainment industry.


Of the more than $4 million in federal donations made by the top Hollywood executives and entertainers, 99.7 percent went to Democrats and Democratic-leaning political action committees or organizations, according to a Hollywood Reporter data review of Federal Election Commission records.


www.hollywoodreporter.com...

Academia


Democratic professors outnumber Republicans 10 to 1, study shows


www.washingtontimes.com...

Tech companies


Tech workers overwhelmingly support Democratic candidates. As you can see below, just over 1 percent of the $15 million sent to candidates went to Republicans, while 23 percent of the funds went to Democrats.


www.wired.com...

And lastly, the media, which I thought was most obvious.


Nate Silver, who pointed out that the ideological clustering in top newsrooms led to groupthink. “As of 2013, only 7 percent of [journalists] identified as Republicans,


www.politico.com...


Of the 430 people CPI identified as "journalists, reporters, news editors or television news anchors ­— as well as other donors known to be working in journalism," 96 percent gave money to Clinton, according to federal campaign finance filings


www.washingtonexaminer.com...


The media routinely fixate on conservatives. Not because they agree with them, mind you. But because they hope to destroy them. In Trump's case, more than 90% of the stories about him are negative.

...

ll six portrayed Trump’s first 100 days in highly unfavorable terms (see Figure 6). CNN and NBC’s coverage was the most unrelenting—negative stories about Trump outpaced positive ones by 13-to-1 on the two networks. Trump’s coverage on CBS also exceeded the 90 percent mark. Trump’s coverage exceeded the 80 percent level in The New York Times (87 percent negative) and The Washington Post (83 percent negative). The Wall Street Journal came in below that level (70 percent negative), a difference largely attributable to the Journal’s more frequent and more favorable economic coverage.


shorensteincenter.org... _medium=email&utm_term=0_10959edeb5-ab6d830a9d-189799085

Oh and you say republicans control 99% of the money?


Democrats are replacing Republicans as the preferred party of the very wealthy


www.vox.com...


edit on 8-1-2019 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 05:45 PM
link   
The US media is no longer a good source of any kind of untainted information. They have an agenda. It is all about ratings and spinning the story to fit their narrative in order to sell it. The US media is a shadow of its former self. It is not longer the truthful fact gathering information center it was. It does not present facts for us to decipher and make up our own minds about. It exists now to mold and shape your thoughts based on popular opinion alone. It is the most distasteful and disgraceful part of the News industry.

Here is what I want. Untainted, fact based news presented to me as clean and unslanted as possible so that I can make up my own mind on what is and is not to my liking. Let me form my own opinions.

I do not watch any news source from the US anymore.



posted on Jan, 8 2019 @ 06:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: odzeandennz

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: LordAhriman
I think you have too much time on your hands.


Who is wasting their time more, the guy making a thread, or the guy commenting it was a result of too much free time?


You didn't link to the news outlets or politicians saying trump called nazi fine people.



Not all of these are the exact phrase, but they all imply he said nazis were fine.

www.usatoday.com...

thehill.com...

progressive.org...

chicago.suntimes.com...

www.rollcall.com...

www.weeklystandard.com...

www.miamiherald.com...

www.nj.com...

foreignpolicy.com...

www.theatlantic.com...

There are many many more.


edit on 8-1-2019 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 02:18 AM
link   
First of let me say I don't think Trump is a white supremacist or supports white supremacists. I do think his wording, particularly in the first statement, was pretty poor, but that is not the same as him saying Nazis are fine people.

However this does raise the issue (also seen in the Australian thread recently) of what point people cease to be 'fine people' based on who they associate with. And before anyone jumps down my throat I am not arguing for collective guilt.

I think most people on here (sadly not all) would agree that racial supremacy (of any type) is a reprehensible view point. But when is it OK to find common ground with racial supremacists?

There is very little control over who attends a rally, so I think most people would not refuse to support a cause just because some supremacists might attend.

Equally I doubt many would attend an outright supremacist rally just because they agreed with one issue.

However what if a large number of of attendees were supremacists?

Or even the majority?

Is it OK if an invited speaker is an supremacist?

What if it is organised by one?

I think it important to understand why there can be different view points about if what Trump said was appropriate/ offensive or not.




edit on 9-1-2019 by ScepticScot because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2019 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: odzeandennz

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: LordAhriman
I think you have too much time on your hands.


Who is wasting their time more, the guy making a thread, or the guy commenting it was a result of too much free time?


You didn't link to the news outlets or politicians saying trump called nazi fine people.



Not all of these are the exact phrase, but they all imply he said nazis were fine.

www.usatoday.com...

thehill.com...

progressive.org...

chicago.suntimes.com...

www.rollcall.com...

www.weeklystandard.com...

www.miamiherald.com...

www.nj.com...

foreignpolicy.com...

www.theatlantic.com...

There are many many more.



Implying isn't the same as quoting him actually saying it, is it? In your opinion they mean the same thing is what you are saying......................... like every other thread you post where your assumption is suddenly fact.

Sad, very sad.
edit on 9-1-2019 by uncommitted because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
22

log in

join