Trump's remarks | Imamother

Fox

Wed, Aug 16 2017, 4:22 pm

Aylat wrote:

Sorry, I didn't articulate fully. My strong reaction on reading your post was that comparing a statue honouring a man who fought for slavery to an statue that is ugly - was flippant and therefore insulting.

On the contrary. Our refusal to be a little flippant is what has caused this problem.

There can be lots of legitimate reasons for deeming art inappropriate. You or I may find some of the reasons insignificant or silly, but people deserve a chance to be heard and a process through which to reject public art for various reasons.

Creating subcategories of potentially problematic public art does no one any good. It flames various ethnic and social divides without providing any real resolution, and it denigrates groups of people based on their preferences.

Why issue mass judgments when there's absolutely no need? Is a statue of a Confederate general who believed in slavery worse than a statue of Robert E. Lee, who didn't? What about a statue of Woodrow Wilson? Or Andrew Jackson? A governing body can consider context, community, and testimony regarding the matter.

The best way to respect the sensitivities of those bothered by Confederate monuments is to provide a process through which everyone's voice is shown respect, even if we secretly find some voices more compelling than others.

Miri7

Wed, Aug 16 2017, 4:22 pm

The neoNazis and white nationalists/supremacists are planning on coming to my town. My DH and I both plan to be there to protest. We are not black block or antifa or radical in any way. But we believe that we must come out to show that we will not stand for this kind of hate in our community.

DH and I watched a Vice News 30 minute special on charlottesville. (I encourage you to watch this, though it's very upsetting). I wept as I saw the nazis shouting "Jews will not replace us" and "Blood and soil" marching with torches. At one point when some nazi type was speaking, I think Richard Spencer, DH turned to me and said, there is no way I could contain myself if I were there. I would punch this guy. Then, on screen, someone punched him.

A few years ago a friend's uncle, a rabbi, was accosted in the airport by a neoNazi. The rabbi told the nazi to leave him alone. When the nazi kept harassing him with anti Semitic slurs, the rabbi punched him. Honestly, I don't hold the rabbi much at fault.

I think that time would be better spent discussing how to best counter these Nazi types rather than focusing on the antifa black bloc people. In my area, the antifa are mostly young people looking to take a political stand and are pretty ridiculous. I hate that they infiltrate peaceful protests and counter protests, but here, especially as Jews, I think we need to focus on the real enemy - the Nazis and white supremacists/nationalists.

In the video of Charlottesville, it certainly appears that the bulk of the people counter protesting are not antifa, but regular folks who have a problem with Nazis.

SixOfWands

Wed, Aug 16 2017, 4:27 pm

Fox wrote:

I think it is quite appropriate to challenge the conclusions of people who proudly claim not to know much about the situation in Charlottesville or elsewhere.

If someone has never heard of Antifa, well, I have to question how informed she is about this and related topics. As I suggested before, check Google. The MSM has been filled with descriptions and discussions about Antifa.

Now, I can understand missing a beat in the news cycle. We've all done it at one time or another.

But you're claiming ignorance as an excuse for defending anarchists who wish to do away with the rule of law and totalitarians who want to be the law. You're siding with people who venerate some of the world's most evil people for the simple reason that they've declared themselves in opposition to those who venerate others of the world's most evil people.

As I said on my first post on this thread, I would be delighted for the white supremacists and the Antifa thugs to battle it out amongst themselves. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

SHE WASN'T SIDING WITH THE ANTIFAS.

None of this has anything to do with the Antifas.

This has to do with a President whom you continue to defend, who took TWO DAYS to condemn white supremacists.* Who continues to state that many of them are really good people because most of them didn't try to murder anyone. Who has yet to call the murder of Heather Heyer the act of a terrorist. Who tweeted about the "Trump Train" plowing down CNN reporters, just the way Heyer was plowed down, the say after her murder. And who continues to claim an equivalency between the people who waved Nazi flags along with Confederate flags, and the largely peaceful church-based groups (and, yes, many Antifa as well) who opposed them.

*Contrast that to the 1 hour it took him to condemn Kenny Frazier. And the less than 1 hour it took him to claim that a trashcan bomb in NYC was a terrorist act, and to suggest that it was perpetrated by Muslims. Correctly, as it turns out. But not based on any information at the time.

I don't believe that these people represent the right, or the Republican party. They are evil. And the apologetics here disgust me.

WhatFor

Wed, Aug 16 2017, 4:29 pm

Fox wrote:

I'd ask you to please quote the nonexistent text where I "defended anarchists, totalitarians, and sided with ppl who venerate the world's most evil people", but again, that would only assist you in taking the conversation away from what happened here:

Armed white supremacists with the stated intention of ridding the US of minorities, particularly highlighting Jews, organized a rally and traveled from multiple states and Canada to spread hatred and ultimately killed and injured people.

If you cannot see why that deserves its own condemnation without a diversionary whatabboutism to qualify it, then I am confident that I will be unable to explain it to you.

sushilover

Wed, Aug 16 2017, 4:34 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

Here are some quotes I found. As SixOfWands only posted reports pointing to the white nationalist scum as the instigators, I'll post reports that the antifa scum were the instigators. For the record, I think they are both violent scum (if you haven't figured that out yet).

Washington Post reporter Joe Heim: “Counter-protesters fought back, also swinging sticks, punching and spraying chemicals. Others threw balloons filled with paint or ink at the white nationalists. Everywhere, it seemed violence was exploding. The police did not move to break up the fights.”

University of Virginia student Isabella Ciambotti: “I was on Market Street around 11:30 a.m. when a counter-protester ripped a newspaper stand off the sidewalk and threw it at alt-right protesters. I saw another man from the white supremacist crowd being chased and beaten. People were hitting him with their signs. A much older man, also with the alt-right group, got pushed to the ground in the commotion. Someone raised a stick over his head and beat the man with it, and that’s when I screamed and ran over with several other strangers to help him to his feet.”

Peter Beinart of the Atlantic regarding the Portland Rose Festival : the parade’s organizers received an anonymous email warning that if “Trump supporters” and others who promote “hateful rhetoric” marched, “we will have two hundred or more people rush into the parade … and drag and push those people out.” When Portland police said they lacked the resources to provide adequate security, the organizers canceled the parade. It was a sign of things to come.

There's more...
Can we now all agree that violence is terrible, no matter which 'side' it's coming from? I don't see what's so controversial about this?

Fox

Wed, Aug 16 2017, 4:38 pm

WhatFor wrote:

I didn't necessarily mean you, personally. There are a number of posters who have claimed that hatred on the part of neo-Nazis is ipso facto more troubling than other forms of hatred.

You are absolutely correct. You cannot explain to me why you are so reluctant to condemn the goals of Antifa along with the goals of white supremacists. As I have said, ad infinitum, they both belong on the trash heap of history.

Fox

Wed, Aug 16 2017, 4:42 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

How do you do that?

Don't they have freedom of speech as well?

Or do you reserve that for the folks who want to throw you in the ovens?

Of course, they have freedom of speech. However, the organizers of a counter-protest can

a) tell them publicly that they are not welcome;
b) refuse to cooperate with them if they show up;
c) denounce their ideology; and
d) denounce their presence.

Oh, and do so in a timely manner that leaves no room for misinterpretation! Otherwise, I might believe that the counter-protesters were allied with people who want to eliminate Jews through starvation and execution.

WhatFor

Wed, Aug 16 2017, 4:46 pm

sushilover wrote:

On one side, we have armed (some with multiple guns) white supremacists, with the stated intention of increasing its base and getting rid of Jews and other minorites, invading a town they don't live in to promote violence, hate, and intolerance. They kill a person and injure almost twenty more, some critically.

On the other side, you have a bunch of town residents (and perhaps others) opposed to Nazism, some with balloons with ink and paint, sticks, and signs. Someone threw a newspaper stand at the Nazis.

I just don't see the moral justification of condemning both sides in this particular context.

SixOfWands

Wed, Aug 16 2017, 4:54 pm

WhatFor wrote:

Did you notice that Heim said that the counter-protesters "fought back." Not that they attacked.

So we have a single reference to counter-protesters acting violently, perhaps without being attacked first. Another reference to them fighting "back," not provoking attack. And a third reference to a completely different incident, because, well, why not muddy the waters.

Fox

Wed, Aug 16 2017, 5:09 pm

Miri7 wrote:

I honestly don't understand why you would respond this way to a Jewish lady who says she plans to go stand in protest against Nazis.

As someone said several pages ago, the enemy of your enemy is not necessarily your friend.

Antifa is every bit as hostile to Jews as white supremacists; they just couch it differently.

As I said earlier, were I planning to participate in a demonstration against Nazis and Antifa showed up to lend support, I would skeddadle out of there in a New York minute. I would no more march alongside Antifa than alongside the Nazis -- even if they were both advocating "Be Kind to Puppies Week."

WhatFor

Wed, Aug 16 2017, 5:29 pm

Fox wrote:

Except that the rally that resulted in the death of a woman was organized by Unite the Right promoting multiple white supremacist groups as its base.

Miri didn't say she planned to attend a rally organized by racists; she said she planned to protest nazis ideologies.

sushilover

Wed, Aug 16 2017, 6:06 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

SHE WASN'T SIDING WITH THE ANTIFAS.

None of this has anything to do with the Antifas.

This has to do with a President whom you continue to defend, who took TWO DAYS to condemn white supremacists.*

I don't believe that these people represent the right, or the Republican party. They are evil. And the apologetics here disgust me.

Show me where Fox defends Trump's statements or inaction. Or are you saying that anyone condemning antifa scum is by default a white supremacist apologist? Wow. Just wow.

Miri7

Wed, Aug 16 2017, 6:07 pm

mommy3b2c wrote:

What Fox is saying is:

What would Miri do if when she shows up at the counter protest, it was being run by left wing extremists? Would she join them anyway or run the other way?

I think what Fox asked is whether, while I was there, Antifa showed up to "lend support" I would skedaddle away as she would.

First, I would not join a protest that I knew was organized by an anti-Semitic group.

However, I'm sure antifa is going to be in town somewhere to do their thing. Will I let that stop me from doing my thing - standing in protest against Nazis? No.

What I would do, if I was part of an organized protest against an anti-semitic group and then a second anti-semitic group* showed up to "lend support" to me, is try to distance myself from both anti-semitic groups. That's probably a lot easier said than done in a big crowd of people. I don't want to give up my opportunity to express my views just because another group shows up to disrupt.

To that end, the discussion among folks here in town is how to do a counter protest that positively expresses tolerance and love for all people to counter the Nazi message and doesn't deteriorate into a clash between Nazis and antifa. So folks are talking about doing a gathering all the way across town from the Nazis, maybe even a silent protest (think thousands of people sitting together in silence). The idea is that the violence will occur where the main Nazi protest is, so it would be a good idea to have a huge peaceful gathering across town.

I'm also of a mind that the Nazis can march and everyone else can agree to give no press coverage, to desert the area, so they can do their sad little thing all alone, in silence. Videos of them yelling and screaming with no audience will just look pitiful. That's my other idea but I think it's unlikely to happen.

* I don't accept Fox's premise that antifa is as antisemitic as Nazis. I haven't heard anything about our local, active antifa/black bloc folks being anti-Semitic, and I live in a community where the Jewish community is pretty good at informing everyone about local anti-Semitism. Our local black bloc folks engage in too much violence if you ask me, but their stated purpose is to fight against facism, sexism, and racism, including anti-Semitism, in all its forms. My view iz that they are largely young folks who like causing a ruckus and are too anarchist for my taste. But I reject the idea that our local antifa folks are as anti-Semitic as Nazis. Also, like Sixof Wands, I have heard a lot from people who were there in Charlottesville that the antifa folks were largely fighting back against violence rather than instigating and stepping in between peaceful protesters and Nazis. I think that the act of stepping in between Nazis and clergy members is commendable.

WhatFor

Wed, Aug 16 2017, 6:07 pm

mommy3b2c wrote:

What Fox is saying is:

What would Miri do if when she shows up at the counter protest, it was being run by left wing extremists? Would she join them anyway or run the other way?

See, what happened in Charlottesville wasn't good people accidentally showing up at a rally and discovering it was run by white supremacists. White supremacist organizations came together and got a permit to march in Charlottesville. Anyone who heard about that event knew what it was about. I find it incredible to believe that anyone who heard about that rally didn't know about the people they were marching with.

The killed someone, injured many more.

Then the president said there were good people with the Nazis. That was painful and concerning to hear from the person supposed to run the United States.

So I started this thread about that.

What I see some people doing on this thread is saying, "yeah, Nazis marched and killed someone that was bad and the president continues to minimize that, but I want to change the subject and talk about something else that is bad. Now you go and condemn those things I want to raise that are not at all relevant to why innocent people are dead or in the hospital...Oh you want to march against Nazis? But if other bad people showed up while you were marching against Nazis, would you leave? Answer me!"

My question is, why does it make some people uncomfortable to denounce Nazism and let the denunciation hang as the conclusion of the conversation? Why do some people feel the need to switch the subject when denouncing Nazis?

I believe that some feel uncomfortable with the fact that these people are self-professed Trump supporters, so they need to keep bringing up people who are anti-Trump who they believe are also reprehensible to try to minimize the fact that a portion of Trump supporters hold a despicable ideology.

I'll admit that I don't know how someone can wholly support Trump at this point, but trying to switch the subject away from condemning Nazis and bringing up that there are bad people on the left side is not going to be a compelling argument in this particular circumstance. It's not only irrelevant, it gives an appearance of dismissiveness toward the tragedy that just occurred.

dancingqueen

Wed, Aug 16 2017, 6:09 pm

Fox wrote:

And you're okay with this? Rather than debate and/or discuss the proper thing to do through the city council or some other governing body, you prefer a situation in which the threat of mob violence drives the decision?

Point for Antifa and the Stalinists!

How is that a point for Antifa? If anything it's a point for the white supremacists and Nazis who started the protest over the issue in Charlottesville. They successfully scared everyone.

For the record, though the term Antifa is relatively new to me, I don't like what I hear of them. I don't like violent extremists on either side, and was dismayed by how violent some of the BLM protests and marches got last year.

However, in Charlottesville, it was the Nazi group who were the instigators, and went on to murder a young women and injured many more. So in this case they deserve the condemnation, it shouldn't be hard to do.

MagentaYenta

Wed, Aug 16 2017, 6:13 pm

WhatFor wrote:

...
My question is, why does it make some people uncomfortable to denounce Nazism and let the denunciation hang as the conclusion of the conversation? Why do some people feel the need to switch the subject when denouncing Nazis?
...

Human nature makes it difficult for people to admit they were wrong. It's probably harder for those who are more vested in the current presidency, people who have been his standard bearers since the primaries.

I can understand that reticence, but really at what cost? We're not talking a mere difference of opinion, we're talking about standing and saying no, the encroaching naziism in this country is not ok and I will stand against it. For a Jew, IMHO, that shouldn't be hard to do.