Latest Update on the Health Care Bill — at 4 p.m. ET Today. Watch Facebook Live

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 1,936
Registered: ‎01-24-2014

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 21 of 78 (43 Views)

Tx

 Since when is protesting creating havoc?  Do you by any chance remember the great Dr. Martin Luther King and the good he did for so many Americans just a few short years back? 

 The premise of your argument is invalid- a white supremacist came up and sucker punched a very small young lady who was just taking pictures of the event, and there is no other way to spend that because that is the truth . 

 I have been to protests.  I have never once said anything rude to anybody,  I have never once threatened anybody,  and I have never once gone with anything on my mind other than making my case be heard, nor have any of the other people I have ever seen at these events.

 Protests are often what drives our democracy, white supremacist do not.

 By the way tx,  there was a thread not too long ago in which another poster,  who is on the right,  posted an article which told us that authorities said that outside agitators came from the right wing.


politics, cats, kids, and dogs!!
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 19,022
Registered: ‎11-09-2011

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 22 of 78 (44 Views)

Watched 4 video's, saw ZERO bottles in the hands of the woman who got punched. Appears the fascisti have decided to talk about something that doesn't exist until people believe it does...again.

Respected Social Butterfly
Posts: 39,409
Registered: ‎06-03-2013

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 23 of 78 (42 Views)

pc6063 wrote:

  The way this is starting to look to me is that Republicans feel that it's OK to disrupt, be violent, and say or do anything they want, as long as it's done by another Republican.


--

A person goes to a location determining to create havoc, but gets smashed in the nose, then cries 'foul'?  Then everyone expresses concern for the instigator?

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
— Albert Einstein —
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 1,936
Registered: ‎01-24-2014

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 24 of 78 (43 Views)

  The way this is starting to look to me is that Republicans feel that it's OK to disrupt, be violent, and say or do anything they want, as long as it's done by another Republican.  On the other hand, if anyone of the above is done by a Democrat then, it is a despicable crime snd 

should burn in Hades. 

 Seems biased and ignorant to Me, but very much in keeping with the Republican Party and  Donald Trump, the criminal in chief.


politics, cats, kids, and dogs!!
Respected Social Butterfly
Posts: 39,409
Registered: ‎06-03-2013

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 25 of 78 (47 Views)

Richva wrote:



Yes. She was certainly asking for it. Just like when women wear those short skirts and then get groped or sexucally assaulted right?


--

A very facetious dismissal of her actions.  But of course an attempt to ignore that she went looking for a fight by actually stating she was wanting 'rumble', even dressing for the part with a bandana covering her face, fighting gloves and swinging glass bottles. 

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
— Albert Einstein —
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 23,536
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 26 of 78 (46 Views)

creppelrm wrote:

So the 98 lb. female got what she deserved?  :Would you have done the same to her if you were there?


So a person who came to town looking for scalps, intentionally in the middle of a violent confrontation with a bottle as a weapon could well be described as "deserving it".

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 23,536
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 27 of 78 (45 Views)

Richva wrote:

TxGrandpa2 wrote:

creppelrm wrote:

As was the case when a 98 lb. anti-Trump female supporter had to defend herself against a 230 lb. male white supremacist.  .



--

That 98 lb female went to the protest looking for trouble.  Wasn't she the one who wrote that she was determined to bring back '100 nazi scalps'? 


Yes. She was certainly asking for it. Just like when women wear those short skirts and then get groped or sexucally assaulted right?


Come on now, Rich, try to focus. I looked again and saw no short skirt. And what happened could hardly be called "groping".

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 1,234
Registered: ‎03-06-2012

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 28 of 78 (45 Views)

So the 98 lb. female got what she deserved?  :Would you have done the same to her if you were there?

Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 22,168
Registered: ‎07-11-2013

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 29 of 78 (46 Views)

TxGrandpa2 wrote:

alferdpacker wrote:

Is there a link providing proof that her attacker had knowledge of her making that statement prior to his nevertheless unlawful attack?

 


--

Yes there is.  Google is a good method of finding it.  Additionally there were posts on several Democratic orientated sites.  Google 'antifas girl' and one comes up with video, etc.

 

Not only has it been reported that she made that comment, but the group she was with bandanas over their face..  Some says that she was was hitting people with bottles, even with video.

 


Saw it.

He sucks  just like all the rest of them.

 

 

 

 

KAKISTOCRACY
Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 10,565
Registered: ‎02-28-2008

Re: UC-Berkely Attacks FREE SPEECH (again)

Message 30 of 78 (47 Views)

TxGrandpa2 wrote:

creppelrm wrote:

As was the case when a 98 lb. anti-Trump female supporter had to defend herself against a 230 lb. male white supremacist.  .



--

That 98 lb female went to the protest looking for trouble.  Wasn't she the one who wrote that she was determined to bring back '100 nazi scalps'? 


Yes. She was certainly asking for it. Just like when women wear those short skirts and then get groped or sexucally assaulted right?