Woman with Burqa beats up woman because she sells Bikinis in Berlin

[StrawberryBlond 15,567]

22 hours ago, Whispering said:

Nope, didn't miss the point.

That still gives them attention, which is what they wanted. 

What would have stopped violence is if that idiot hadn't gotten into his car and plowed into human beings at a high speed. The person who caused the violence was the one who was the perpetrator of the crime, not the victims. 

This country's biggest steps forward were pushed by protests and counter protests. As always, there are many avenues to bring about change, with marching being one of them. 

New York and Washington have plenty of rural areas, too, ya know. People move to cities for jobs and opportunities. If they want safety, they move to the suburbs. Everyone has a car. Southern states are not more rural than the mid-west, North or West. Practically every state has rural and urban areas. 

Also, 24 out of the 35 crimes listed in my OP were committed OUTSIDE of the Southern states.  Most of the crimes committed by white supremacists/neo nazis are not in the Southern states. 

It's common sense that large crowds can lead to accidents, people getting trampled, people fainting, that kinda thing, not to mention a rebuttal from the other side. It's not blaming the victims to point this out, it's just an occupational hazard of protesting. Now, I'm not saying anything in opposition to the counter protesters, but some of them carried sticks and shields, as if they were prepared to fight if need be. And they did. They swung the sticks, punched, threw bottles, sprayed chemicals and threw paint/ink filled balloons. Several people were already injured by this time. Then the car ploughed into the crowds. So, there was already fights, violence and injuries before all this happened. The white supremecists incited the violence but the counter protesters fought back. It was hardly like everyone had peace on their minds.

Yes, marching is ideal, but it's not always safe. The Charlottesville case is one of the reasons why I choose not to march. There's nothing wrong with wanting to be safe.

Yes, every city has urban and rural areas, but some are more rural than others and some have very small cities. I live in Scotland, I think I know what I'm talking about when I say there's many spaces where there's basically no one living there. And not everyone has a car, obviously.

Ok, fine, most of these incidents occurred outside the south, but again, more people = more crime, so it makes sense that more built-up areas would have it. And when I say south, I'm talking about the deep south - Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi. Not Tennessee, Kentucky and suchlike, places that sit shoulder-to-shoulder with blue states.

And I saw you omitted the more antagonistic side of your post earlier on, to hide your true colours. But never fear, I saw it, even if no one else did. Just as well I read it several hours before responding.

[Whispering 18,865]

32 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

It's common sense that large crowds can lead to accidents, people getting trampled, people fainting, that kinda thing, not to mention a rebuttal from the other side. It's not blaming the victims to point this out, it's just an occupational hazard of protesting. Now, I'm not saying anything in opposition to the counter protesters, but some of them carried sticks and shields, as if they were prepared to fight if need be. And they did. They swung the sticks, punched, threw bottles, sprayed chemicals and threw paint/ink filled balloons. Several people were already injured by this time. Then the car ploughed into the crowds. So, there was already fights, violence and injuries before all this happened. The white supremecists incited the violence but the counter protesters fought back. It was hardly like everyone had peace on their minds.

Yes, marching is ideal, but it's not always safe. The Charlottesville case is one of the reasons why I choose not to march. There's nothing wrong with wanting to be safe.

Yes, every city has urban and rural areas, but some are more rural than others and some have very small cities. I live in Scotland, I think I know what I'm talking about when I say there's many spaces where there's basically no one living there. And not everyone has a car, obviously.

Ok, fine, most of these incidents occurred outside the south, but again, more people = more crime, so it makes sense that more built-up areas would have it. And when I say south, I'm talking about the deep south - Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi. Not Tennessee, Kentucky and suchlike, places that sit shoulder-to-shoulder with blue states.

And I saw you omitted the more antagonistic side of your post earlier on, to hide your true colours. But never fear, I saw it, even if no one else did. Just as well I read it several hours before responding.

The person who was at fault here was the person who got behind the wheel of a vehicle and drove it at high speeds into human beings on a street. The victims were not at fault. 

There is nothing wrong with wanting to peacefully protest, either. No one said that you were wrong for not ever wanting to march. 

Every STATE has urban and rural areas. I live in the US and have traveled the US extensively. I know that New York doesn't mean New York City and that California doesn't mean LA. Well...the majority of those that live in suburbs. We have very few areas of the country with extensive mass transportation systems. 

Tennessee is the Deep South, if you are going to include Texas. 

No, what it means is there are white supremacists all over the US. 

 

[StrawberryBlond 15,567]

3 hours ago, Whispering said:

The person who was at fault here was the person who got behind the wheel of a vehicle and drove it at high speeds into human beings on a street. The victims were not at fault. 

There is nothing wrong with wanting to peacefully protest, either. No one said that you were wrong for not ever wanting to march. 

Every STATE has urban and rural areas. I live in the US and have traveled the US extensively. I know that New York doesn't mean New York City and that California doesn't mean LA. Well...the majority of those that live in suburbs. We have very few areas of the country with extensive mass transportation systems. 

Tennessee is the Deep South, if you are going to include Texas. 

No, what it means is there are white supremacists all over the US.

So, you're denying that the counter protesters were violent at all before any of this happened? Yet you get on at me about denying facts?

No, there's nothing wrong with peaceful protests but you were making it sound as if it's the best and only way to make your voice heard.

I just said that every state has urban and rural areas. But some of them are super urban and some are super rural. The biggest crime statistics are occurring in all the massive, cosmopolitan cities of millions because out of millions of people, something's bound to go wrong eventually.

I don't view Tennessee as deep south. To me, deep south should mean the extreme bottom of the country, but it's a matter of opinion.

Yes, there are white supremacists all over. Are you happy now? Why is it so easy for you to admit to white failings but so hard for you to admit to minority failings? Treating the problems on an equal level of occurrence and severity would at least be fair.

[Whispering 18,865]

3 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

So, you're denying that the counter protesters were violent at all before any of this happened? Yet you get on at me about denying facts?

No, there's nothing wrong with peaceful protests but you were making it sound as if it's the best and only way to make your voice heard.

I just said that every state has urban and rural areas. But some of them are super urban and some are super rural. The biggest crime statistics are occurring in all the massive, cosmopolitan cities of millions because out of millions of people, something's bound to go wrong eventually.

I don't view Tennessee as deep south. To me, deep south should mean the extreme bottom of the country, but it's a matter of opinion.

Yes, there are white supremacists all over. Are you happy now? Why is it so easy for you to admit to white failings but so hard for you to admit to minority failings? Treating the problems on an equal level of occurrence and severity would at least be fair.

I'm saying that someone took their car and ran over a group of people. The people who were injured and the woman who died are the victims.

No, I never said that. Don't put words in my mouth.

I don't really care what your view is of Tennessee. As someone who actually LIVES in the state, and has for decades, I can tell you that your "feelings" are wrong.

Why is it so easy for you to admit to minority failings but so hard for you to admit to White failings? Nazis and the KKK currently have no equal level of occurance and severity, outside of other terror organizations. I don't play in false equivalency land. 

[StrawberryBlond 15,567]

13 hours ago, Whispering said:

I'm saying that someone took their car and ran over a group of people. The people who were injured and the woman who died are the victims.

No, I never said that. Don't put words in my mouth.

I don't really care what your view is of Tennessee. As someone who actually LIVES in the state, and has for decades, I can tell you that your "feelings" are wrong.

Why is it so easy for you to admit to minority failings but so hard for you to admit to White failings? Nazis and the KKK currently have no equal level of occurance and severity, outside of other terror organizations. I don't play in false equivalency land. 

Yes, they are the victims. But don't act like the counter protestors were completely peaceful up until then either.

I'm not putting words in your mouth. I'm just saying what how I felt what you were saying was coming across.

Would've helped if you'd just said earlier that you lived there when it first came up. But then you couldn't have had the payoff of making me look like a fool.

No, sweetie, I'm an equal opportunist when it comes to admitting failings. I treat bad white people on the same level as bad non white people. You just see one topic where I come down hard on one side and assume I must worship anyone who's not like that. This is something that drives me crazy about my fellow liberals - assuming that someone would be totally cool with wrongdoings if they came from their own kind. Basing their judgement of a person's entire belief system on one instance, rather than taking a while to work out who they actually are and if they are consistent in their behaviour towards everyone.

[Morphine Prince 109,682]

9 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Yes, they are the victims. But don't act like the counter protestors were completely peaceful up until then either.

This sounds like victim blaming. You sound like Trump, actually. 

The Nazis were actually being violent the entire time, beating several black people on the streets. Antifa was also being aggressive IN RESPONSE to actual white supremacist scum being on the streets. I don't think violence is the answer but many people WERE being beaten and abused by the white supremacists. 

The "both sides" narrative tries to play down the fact that a white supremacist ran over and killed someone. 

[StrawberryBlond 15,567]

2 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

This sounds like victim blaming. You sound like Trump, actually. 

The Nazis were actually being violent the entire time, beating several black people on the streets. Antifa was also being aggressive IN RESPONSE to actual white supremacist scum being on the streets. I don't think violence is the answer but many people WERE being beaten and abused by the white supremacists. 

The "both sides" narrative tries to play down the fact that a white supremacist ran over and killed someone. 

No, it's not victim blaming. I'm just saying the facts. The Washington Post put up a full timeline of events. The white supremacists started it, but the counter protestors fought back. They came armed with some form of weapons too. Not all of them, and they may not have been as deadly as the other side, but they still came anticipating a fight and participated in one. Liberals are supposed to be lovers, not fighters, so it really dilutes the message and puts them on the same level as the scumbag aggressors. I'm just telling it like it happened.

The white supremacists are obviously the worse ones and I'm not trying to defend them. All I'm saying is that things got violent before the car ploughed into the people. I'm just laying down the facts as opposed to believing that it all kicked off after the car incident. It had already got violent, there were already injuries beforehand. What you think about all this is separate from the laying down of facts. I thought liberals dealt in facts?

[Morphine Prince 109,682]

3 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

No, it's not victim blaming. I'm just saying the facts. The Washington Post put up a full timeline of events. The white supremacists started it, but the counter protestors fought back. They came armed with some form of weapons too. Not all of them, and they may not have been as deadly as the other side, but they still came anticipating a fight and participated in one. Liberals are supposed to be lovers, not fighters, so it really dilutes the message and puts them on the same level as the scumbag aggressors. I'm just telling it like it happened.

The white supremacists are obviously the worse ones and I'm not trying to defend them. All I'm saying is that things got violent before the car ploughed into the people. I'm just laying down the facts as opposed to believing that it all kicked off after the car incident. It had already got violent, there were already injuries beforehand. What you think about all this is separate from the laying down of facts. I thought liberals dealt in facts?

Antifa are not "liberals," nor do they identify as such. They are far-left anti-fascists, anti-capitalism, many are communists and some believe in anarchy. 

They are not your typical American liberal. Stop lumping them with liberals. 

Similarly, alt-righters are not your typical conservative. 

These two are extremes. 

[StrawberryBlond 15,567]

51 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

Antifa are not "liberals," nor do they identify as such. They are far-left anti-fascists, anti-capitalism, many are communists and some believe in anarchy. 

They are not your typical American liberal. Stop lumping them with liberals. 

Similarly, alt-righters are not your typical conservative. 

These two are extremes. 

I wasn't arguing about anything to do with that. What you said has nothing to do with what I just posted. There were all kinds of people on the anti side, with all different agendas. As you've just said, being against the alt right doesn't make you an automatic liberal. But considering that most supporters of the anti protestors were liberal, they have mysteriously decided to leave out the fact that they were there for a fight as well, to case them in the most positive light, so they wouldn't have to criticise them in any way. Every side does it, liberals are no exception. Liberal news channels have tried to stifle the truth in their coverage by cutting off crucial moments when they cut to footage and not putting things into context, for example. Conservative channels do the same thing, just in reverse. But neither side will admit to doing it themselves.

[Whispering 18,865]

1 hour ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Yes, they are the victims. But don't act like the counter protestors were completely peaceful up until then either.

I'm not putting words in your mouth. I'm just saying what how I felt what you were saying was coming across.

Would've helped if you'd just said earlier that you lived there when it first came up. But then you couldn't have had the payoff of making me look like a fool.

No, sweetie, I'm an equal opportunist when it comes to admitting failings. I treat bad white people on the same level as bad non white people. You just see one topic where I come down hard on one side and assume I must worship anyone who's not like that. This is something that drives me crazy about my fellow liberals - assuming that someone would be totally cool with wrongdoings if they came from their own kind. Basing their judgement of a person's entire belief system on one instance, rather than taking a while to work out who they actually are and if they are consistent in their behaviour towards everyone.

Which has nothing to do with the victims in the street that day. The people who were injured and killed were victims. 

Well, you were wrong.

I have said where I lived many times before in this World News section. You need to realize that many regulars in this section are POC and/or live in the southern US. 

I'm not your sweetie. 

[Morphine Prince 109,682]

44 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I wasn't arguing about anything to do with that. What you said has nothing to do with what I just posted. There were all kinds of people on the anti side, with all different agendas. As you've just said, being against the alt right doesn't make you an automatic liberal. But considering that most supporters of the anti protestors were liberal, they have mysteriously decided to leave out the fact that they were there for a fight as well, to case them in the most positive light, so they wouldn't have to criticise them in any way. Every side does it, liberals are no exception. Liberal news channels have tried to stifle the truth in their coverage by cutting off crucial moments when they cut to footage and not putting things into context, for example. Conservative channels do the same thing, just in reverse. But neither side will admit to doing it themselves.

Actually it does because you were spewing typical conservative talking points about "loving liberals" 

Yes, it's true many people were there but the Antifa group is distinct and you must recognize that. 

And what has been hidden? All the news channels I've seen have mentioned the violence coming from both sides. 

THE POINT is that when there's a terror attack, there is only ONE side that has to be condemned. 

Us discussing this both sides nonsense distracts from the fact white supremacists in this country are so emboldened that they comitted a terror attack in broad daylight with media coverage around them. 

If that isn't frightening idk what is. 

[StrawberryBlond 15,567]

40 minutes ago, Whispering said:

Which has nothing to do with the victims in the street that day. The people who were injured and killed were victims. 

Well, you were wrong.

I have said where I lived many times before in this World News section. You need to realize that many regulars in this section are POC and/or live in the southern US. 

I'm not your sweetie. 

Look, you're not budging on this concept, so I'll just drop it.

Pardon me for not reading every single post you make and remembering where each and every member comes from. And what does the fact that most people in this section are POC and/or southerners have to do with anything? I'm always mindful of everyone feelings, even if you don't think I am.

But no reubuttal to what I actually said after that? In the words of someone you like: "Honey, I rose up from the dead, I do it all the time, I got a list of names and yours in red, underlined."

17 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

Actually it does because you were spewing typical conservative talking points about "loving liberals" 

Yes, it's true many people were there but the Antifa group is distinct and you must recognize that. 

And what has been hidden? All the news channels I've seen have mentioned the violence coming from both sides. 

THE POINT is that when there's a terror attack, there is only ONE side that has to be condemned. 

Us discussing this both sides nonsense distracts from the fact white supremacists in this country are so emboldened that they comitted a terror attack in broad daylight with media coverage around them. 

If that isn't frightening idk what is. 

I'm not a conservative. My thoughts are mine, I don't put a political label on them.

I didn't even know about Antifa until a few days ago. I don't care about what all these new groups are calling themselves. As long as they all formed together fighting for the same cause, they were all one and the same to me.

I'm not talking about this incident specifically when I was referring to keeping stuff hidden. I'm referring to general news coverage, particularly when it comes to race. Conservatives try to artificially make minorities look guilty even when they're not, liberals try to artificially make minorities look innocent even when they're not. It's rare to see the facts put down without veiling them with political bias beforehand. But for the record, I didn't actually know that there was violence before the car even crashed, I only found out when I actually researched the story. A lot of liberal outlets kept that fact out of their coverage, is all I'm saying.

I am only condemning one side but I'm also simply saying that the counter protestors shouldn't have fought back because then that puts them on the same level, in a lot of people's eyes. I was always condemning the white supremacists right from the beginning. It was only when certain people decided to go off-topic by bringing this up and making assumptions about me that I was forced to even talk about my feelings on the matter. This was supposed to be a discussion about an altercation in Europe and its ended up being about America.

[Morphine Prince 109,682]

2 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I'm not a conservative. My thoughts are mine, I don't put a political label on them.

I didn't even know about Antifa until a few days ago. I don't care about what all these new groups are calling themselves. As long as they all formed together fighting for the same cause, they were all one and the same to me.

I'm not talking about this incident specifically when I was referring to keeping stuff hidden. I'm referring to general news coverage, particularly when it comes to race. Conservatives try to artificially make minorities look guilty even when they're not, liberals try to artificially make minorities look innocent even when they're not. It's rare to see the facts put down without veiling them with political bias beforehand. But for the record, I didn't actually know that there was violence before the car even crashed, I only found out when I actually researched the story. A lot of liberal outlets kept that fact out of their coverage, is all I'm saying.

I am only condemning one side but I'm also simply saying that the counter protestors shouldn't have fought back because then that puts them on the same level, in a lot of people's eyes. I was always condemning the white supremacists right from the beginning. It was only when certain people decided to go off-topic by bringing this up and making assumptions about me that I was forced to even talk about my feelings on the matter. This was supposed to be a discussion about an altercation in Europe and its ended up being about America.

Every single political thought has a political label to it. Whether that be independent or whatever else. You may not be a conservative but your rhetoric sure sounds like American conservative talking points.

As for the rest of your post, I mean I do acknowledge media bias but the facts are out there. I'm not debating the facts, I'm debating on what should be the focus of the discussion on this topic specifically. 

[Whispering 18,865]

8 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

 

But no reubuttal to what I actually said after that? In the words of someone you like: "Honey, I rose up from the dead, I do it all the time, I got a list of names and yours in red, underlined."

There is nothing I want to say to all that. And lol, you embrace those lyrics if they make you feel better! 

[StrawberryBlond 15,567]

7 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

Every single political thought has a political label to it. Whether that be independent or whatever else. You may not be a conservative but your rhetoric sure sounds like American conservative talking points.

As for the rest of your post, I mean I do acknowledge media bias but the facts are out there. I'm not debating the facts, I'm debating on what should be the focus of the discussion on this topic specifically. 

Well, I don't limit my ideals to political labels. It's so trite working out "I think this way, so shouldn't I be supporting this?" or "what label would you put this thought under?" It just serves as a distraction to working out what you truly believe in. Liberals claim they hate labels but are currently obsessed with them. I don't owe it to anyone to tell them what kind of liberal I am, what kind of feminist I am, where I fall on the sexual orientation scale. Just take my views as they are. I base them on facts, logic and reason, not politics. Notice how I didn't try to label yours? Please pay me the same courtesy.

The way things were going, some people might have started to think I was on the side of white supremacists and I didn't want my already sullied reputation in the eyes of some to be ruined even more than it already is. This topic's got completely out of hand and caught me off guard as I've started arguing over something I didn't even set out to do. A Muslim woman beats up a fellow Muslim woman in Germany and somehow this leads to a discussion about the Charlottesville protests in America. Only on GGD can that leap be taken.

Just now, Whispering said:

There is nothing I want to say to all that. And lol, you embrace those lyrics if they make you feel better! 

Right back at you. And that song could have been written about you! Does it please you that you're making enemies of people around here? I think our altercations show that I'm not as fake as some make out, anyway.