White Nationalist Rally at University of Virginia.

So what? I see Italian Americans flying their flags. I see Irish Americans having fun on the 17th of March wearing green. This country IS diverse. That's it's strength. If you wanted to crack down on illegal immigration you need ONLY attack the businesses. No one does that. As for refugees....great empathy you have there.

The only flag I don't care to see if the confederate flag.

Edit: And now I must add the Nazi flag to the list I don't care to see.

I need proof that there is an organization trying to kill off whites.

One can not view when the actual violence occurred? You know damn well an honest and objective assessment can be made but doing so would halt an agenda.

Now that days have passed, its clear the videos do not reflect what the MSM is promoting because it looked as if both the alt right and alt left did a good job brawling.

We know one group does hate I guess just about everything non-white or not catering towards whites. We also know the other group is akin to fighting and destructiveness as professional "protestors." Really there can't be any side to sit on.

It was a volatile situation but not all the people protesting hate were there to fight. They wanted to stop the terrorist organizations. They aren't responsible is another hate group showed up as well. The responsibility for the entire situation however comes down to the far right. They did incite the event. As to who threw the first punch.....I cannot say with any degree of confidence.

Elaborate a bit more on that declaration if you will. Are you saying a protest of the removal of a statue incited the event or something more?

Marching through the streets spouting hate speech is and incitement to get counter groups out the next day. They did not go there to protest a statue removal. That was a vehicle for their display of hate. And while I am for free speech.....it does have consequences.

"There can't be any side to sit on"? Are you serious? How about the side that isn't for white supremacy, racism, Nazis, and neo-confederates?

Then again, your previous posts would suggest you harbour some sympathy for the alt-right... Why not just tell us how you really feel instead of concern trolling and pretending you're some objective viewer in this? That act is quite tiresome and easy to see through.

Both groups had differing views resulting in violence. Realistically neither gets support.

If the "act" is tiring, it says a lot when you get roped in quite easily with a reply.

Edit: This country has seen violent protests and riots during the past X amount of years but now the line is crossed when the whites do it. Now that makes me laugh.

Violence is wrong. But to become an apologist for domestic terrorism groups is beyond the pale dude.

Supporting the right of people to have an opinion (whether right or wrong) along with actual protest hardly qualifies an an apologist unless you believe only those with certain views should be allowed to protest and voice their thoughts.

Edit: Yes, violence is wrong even when you don't like the opinions of others and apparently neither the left or right groups protesting understand.

No one is talking about the opinion per se but the actions that happened and the fact that Trump flat out refuses to condemn the hate.

lol see? This is exactly it. Finally your true colours come out. Was that so hard? Whites in America have been protesting since the country was born. Even someone with a rudimentary understanding of American history would know that.

Which group is the one with a history of violence, racism, lynching, and the systemic murder of black people in the US? It sure as hell isn't the group counter protesting. It's the white supremacists, Neo nazis, neo confederates, and the KKK. To equivocate them shows you're simply an idiot at best and at worst a sympathizer of racists and terrorists.

And predictably you come back for more and you'll continue coming back for more.

The sympathizer here is the person excusing the violent counter group based on the actions of a group from decades past unless you think those with the tiki torches were out doing the Mississippi Burning. Basically what you are saying is the violence of the anti fascist group is fine since it was against the neo-nazis but the violence of the nazis against them was bad.

"Both Groups". There was more than 2 groups. Many of the anti-protesters were not BML or ANTIFA. Such as the woman killed.

You don't have to be in some group to join a counter protest against KKK and Nazis.

The only person who killed others and used ISIS style terror tactics was a right wing white nationalist. There is some fucked up false equivalency going on here. Fortunately many GOP even see through this, and are actually calling it for what it is. White Supremacist Terrorism.

I don't remember saying "all violence is bad" as that would be idiotic. But sometimes violence is needed to fight back against evil like the Nazis during WWII and now these modern-day Nazis that have popped up because of Trump. Throughout American history violence has been used to advance social movements and fight back against the status quo, such as the Stonewall Riots and the Civil Rights movement in the 60s.

Having said that, the counter protesters aren't the ones running over innocent people with cars.

herp derp trump refuses to utter the phrase "white nationalist terrorist"

Violence is appropriate to silence opinion? That's alarming but quite typical from someone with your ideologies.

The left didn't run anyone over but they sure acted in their typical antifa tactics and you have openly excused such behavior.

You do know there was more than two groups.....right?

Point out to me where I said "Violence is appropriate to silence opinion"? I said it was appropriate to fight back, as in defend oneself against evil forces and oppression. I didn't think I needed to explain that again as it was quite obvious but you have no argument except muddying the waters and concern trolling.

Was the man who ran people with his car merely giving his "opinion"?

You said violence was needed. Period. You've excused one violent group because you agree with what they were protesting so go on the record and condemn how they used violence against the nazi's.

There were more than 2 groups there for the second time.

Say it a third and maybe a forth time. He will not condemn the actions of the alt left who used violence like the alt right.

There is no such thing as alt left. And he won't denounce the terrorist groups because they are his base. Pathetic!

Pay attention. Notice the other person in this topic chain? He won't condemn the alt left.....which does exist.

"It ain't easy being white."

And? I don't understand where you are going with this. Of course I'm going to excuse violence caused by people fighting back against terrorism, racism, white supremacism, and Nazism. Do you have a better solution to the problem? Do you think you can reason with people who want to run over others with a car?

Did you have a problem with the Allies fighting back against Hitler during WWII...? Should Roosevelt have invited Hitler to a formal debate at the White House? Would that have solved the Nazi threat?

It's interesting how I only ever see this "using violence against people with different opinions!" crap when it comes to the far-right, yet never when it's about Islamic terrorism. Do you have an issue with the US mission in Iraq and Syria vs. ISIS? I mean, following your brain dead logic when it comes down to it those ISIS people merely have a different opinion too. If you don't have an issue with it, you're plainly a hypocrite.

It's a made up term by the right's talking points buffoons......it does NOT exist.

How can their possibly be any other view besides this one? We may all have our agendas but surely we can agree with the facts @zaryia posted above?

All of these groups should be easy to unite as they have more in common than they think.

Also no reasonable person should be taking sides here. Neo Nazis, KKK, Antifa and BLM are all extremest violent hateful groups.

People can have reprehensible opinions but that doesn't justify violence like you seem to support by the counter protestors (antifa). No one can argue in favor of the actions of the driver who killed one and injured others but you can not also excuse the other acts of violence. I've seen photos online of the alt-left protestors hitting their counterparts with clubs so lets cut the babe in the woods routine by acting as of they were innocent. Christ, they showed up in helmets and protective gear. Anyone doing that is looking for a fight. Now that I have taken the time to read various articles and such I have seen a few liberal pieces saying the shit didn't hit the fan until Saturday morning when hundreds of counter protestors showed up. Did they have a permit to protest like the alt right?

The only thing that this thread has taught me is that procreating with other races and allowing other races into your country illegally is considered genocide for some people.

@RageQuit4Life said:

@zaryia said:

@RageQuit4Life said:

"Jew will not replace us", they meant those globalists are waging war on white people to attempt erase them with endless of high fertility immigrants/refugees.

Turn off the Info Wars, you conspiracy nut.

Also America was never a white only country. You're going to have to deal with the fact Whites will eventually/possibly become a minority in the future within USA.

Well well why am I not surprised for getting called "conspiracy nut" by Zaryia. I don't watch or read Info Wars sir. It's called using your brain.

You're right, US was never a white only country (duh) but using illegal immigrant/refugees to wipe the white people in the country on purpose is a crime under UN resolution 260 (III), look below.

Article 3

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

• (a) Killing members of the group;
• (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
• (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
• (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
• (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Article 4

The following acts shall be punishable:

• (a) Genocide;
• (b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
• (c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
• (d) Attempt to commit genocide;
• (e) Complicity in genocide.

SOURCE

It's amazing how useful this pic still is:

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN

BOYS AND GIRLS

WELCOME TO...............

POLITICAL GAMERS

The most depressing place on GS since SW

In this thread nazi sympathizers

The Republicans? Obama hosted Black Live Matters at the White House. You think that has not caused a divide. Your thinking is so screwed up you never look at all the facts> you ignore anything that does not meet with your ideas.

What's funny is that if this happened in Belarus or something, CNN would call it "The fucsia revolution" or whatever and some of you would be cheering for the "peaceful protesters," never mind the fact that it would be the same nazi scum.

LMAO most ironic thing I've ever read on here. You are delusional.

Two days after an attack on the rally in Charlottesville, VA that left Heather Heyer and two officers dead and many others injured, Trump condemns the hate groups and calls racism evil. It's about time!

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/days-after-charlottesville-violence-trump-calls-hate-groups-repugnant-n792491

"I'm not racist! I just don't believe that nonwhites should be allowed in our country or that different races should mix!"

The only divide would be created by people who didnt agree with what they said and decided to take it above and beyond a disagreement and decide to make it a divide. Mentally a person has to be very far gone in order to suggest "a divide" when someone simply says something they do not agree with.

When they were at the white house, all they were really talking about was the disproportionate number of blacks affected by our legal system and worse, the high percentage of unarmed black citizens being murdered by police.... and even worse, the systematic excusing of these actions and behaviors.

The thing he really should have added to that speech was condemning those who thought the same things.

Far too often i find people will say "im not a neo nezi or a KKK member!" but then talk about how they support 90% of their beliefs and ideas. So it gives people more mental gymnastics to do to avoid self reflection (if they are being honest, half i dont think are) or public admittance.

Wonder where the police were, from what I've read the police were told to stand down by the mayor. They should be in there cracking skulls and bringing order.

People are trying really hard to create separation between these groups and those of the past, and it's starting to get hilarious-bad. One of the guys gave a statement that he's not an angry racist, he's just a white nationalist. A bunch of guys today were discussing how terrible it was that people were leaking the names of some of those in pictures at the rally - that they should be allowed to retain their privacy. When I responded that perhaps they should have worn hoods, it was not taken well :-P

I was waiting for him to say "There's nothing wrong with saying I'm proud to be white" when white pride is generally a motto associated with: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_pride

When minorities say it they mean there's nothing wrong with being black, brown, yellow, etc.

"High" percentage of unarmed blacks are being murdered?

Im not sure what the 2016 numbers but for 2015 it was roughly 25% of all unarmed citizens killed were black males between like 13 and 30, a little over 2% of the population. If i remember correctly it was 134 unarmed black males murdered by police. It ends up being like 8% of all police murders. These are not acceptable numbers and high when everything is put into context.

This is without getting into the number of black males murdered by police for having "something" considered a non-firearm weapon.... which we've seen police chalk up cell phones as a weapon. Which i believe was another 40% or so of black males murdered by police. So..... whatever you want to derive from that.

The point made was that its a very real and serious issue that Obama and the BLM group was addressing and that the only people would take "divide" or feel "divided" over someone speaking on it and/or suggesting having a national discussion on it (which is really all that happened), would be psychopaths or racists. Someone recommending we further evaluate a problem is not a "divide" created.

They probably thought it was one of their own.

@angeldeb82: more empty words and bs. His actions speak far louder than anything he could say.

He played golf yesterday.

Trumps speech today was the equivalent of forgetting your wife's birthday. Her getting mad, and you buying a present three days later while saying her expectations are too high and she can't be satisfied.

So pretty much what I expected, no facts to back up any of your claims. Do you always make decisions based on feelings and what others tell you?

apparently, the black teen was with a group of blacks who were stalking the Alt-Right that was walking away. the black thug got what he wanted and all his friend bail out on him, i don't feel bad for him