The Oath.
 

Without realizing what you have said, you have come to the heart of the issue. The issue is Free Speech.

1. You claim that the people "who wanted to have their 'free speech' were the White Supremacists and Neo-Nazis that were in Charlottesville last weekend."

2. You are correct that in Boston there was "a counter march of around 15,000 to silence the racists."

Having said that, how can you deny that the march to "silence the racists" was not an assault on Free Speech? You see, the racists have a right to free speech too.

As I have pointed out repeatedly, the Supreme Court has ruled that Free Speech includes "hate speech," and it is protected by the First Amendment.

I have never personally advocated hate speech. I only insist that it is protected speech. That is why I originated this thread, to point out that even the worst among us have the right to express their opinions, no matter how disgusting and objectionable they may be.

On several occasions (Army, Secret Service, Sheriff's Office twice) I have sworn to "preserve, protect and defend" the Constitution of the United States. I took it seriously, and the positions that I advocate are in support of that oath.

Carl in Tampa
.
.
.

Carl:

my aplogy. This poster draws some sort of connection because I responded to one of your post by copying(quote button) and moved mistakenly to make a non-existent personal connection to you and me.

I apply the quote only for the purpose(s) of continuity to a specific train of thought

As to the subject matter of identity politic it is widely discussed across America by both conservatives and liberals.

Personal Best Regards:

Context
 

No apology necessary.

As you observed, there are those on this thread who seem to have a personal "beef" with us simply because we express a view contrary to theirs. Some resent my references to my background and employment history. I make such references only to give context to my positions on issues.

Carl in Tampa
.
.
.

Come on guys. Grow up

I do not resent your references at all. I only suggest that those who compliment you and bash the rest of us in comparison have no idea of the background of each poster.

By the way, I get ridiculed (over and over) when I try to give context by mentioning my background so I stopped.....funny the way that goes....it all depends on who you support.

You are obviously much more "in tune" than I or anyone else. Our context is bashed and ridiculed, and yours is subject of....well, honor.

And yes I AM bitter....you guys really think you are special and those who do not support white nationalism or Trump are trash and stupid. Yes, I DO resent that. AND yes, that is and has been said about me and others (Coldnomore) as one......many many times. You remember Coldnomore...that is the guy YOU accused me of being or being buddies with...funny how that works huh

YES, I am bitter.....I KNOW a few things but YOU nor anyone in your camp dare listen....we are the enemy. Political forum, my a$$....this is becoming a place for documentation of the white national groups and you stick together, that I will give you.

I have been told how rank and stupid I am by Gracie Girl, Rubicon, BTK, NEVER supplying any information to cast a doubt on what I say, but just sarcasm. Heck, COLDNOMORE was required to show his drivers liscense just to get on here. I mention those three because in reading it seems you have an allegiance or something....now do not lecture...I never said you knew them...do not want to be lectured again.

Today I was told how dumb I was in the middle of an intelligent conversation and they followed it up and kept it going. That does not seem to happen if you are not a white nationalist. I never disagree without supplying facts or links. Both can be disputed with your own facts, but NOBODY....NOBODY...NOBODY EVER DOES....NEVER.

Since you guys do not discuss, just preach, I assume you will simply continue until I get tired and leave....not going anywhere.....I was here before you and will continue.

So give your background for context....seems to work for you. I was called a liar, a phony and many many other obscene things....seems to work for you do keep enthralling everyone...made you and expert.

[QUOTE=Guest]Without realizing what you have said, you have come to the heart of the issue. The issue is Free Speech.

1. You claim that the people "who wanted to have their 'free speech' were the White Supremacists and Neo-Nazis that were in Charlottesville last weekend."

2. You are correct that in Boston there was "a counter march of around 15,000 to silence the racists."

Having said that, how can you deny that the march to "silence the racists" was not an assault on Free Speech? You see, the racists have a right to free speech too.

As I have pointed out repeatedly, the Supreme Court has ruled that Free Speech includes "hate speech," and it is protected by the First Amendment.

I have never personally advocated hate speech. I only insist that it is protected speech. That is why I originated this thread, to point out that even the worst among us have the right to express their opinions, no matter how disgusting and objectionable they may be.

---------

You are either for or against racist speech. You can say it is protected but if racist speech is happening and you do nothing, you are as racist as the speaker.

Would YOU tolerate racist talk from any of your friends without saying anything? I hope not.

"a view contrary to theirs." Ah! There within lies the fallacy of identity politics..theirs is the only view. there can be no debate. Free speech to them is an anachronism. History must be re-written. identity politics dominates their agenda

The radical wing of the left knows only how to destroy but is incapable of building anything including relationships.

Personal Best Regards:

Personal Bet Regards:

[QUOTE=Guest]Let me be clear as I do not know who you are speaking to but my objection was your presentation as I said over and over.

You totally misrepresented in your post. You never mentioned the background of the group who began the march and inferred that everyone else were bad guys and they were marching against FREE SPEECH.

They were there to object to a radical white nationalist march that were deeply involved in the Charlottesville fiasco just a week

earlier. I saw NOT ONE SIGN or chant against FREE SPEECH, BUT THEY WERE attacked by our President as "anti police protestors".......with no justification or support with facts.

I object to the groups who rally like this, but mostly I object to not being accurate in speaking about them. Why is there a need to make your general characterization.

You guys are tag teaming this afternoon

You folks, with your incessant labeling of people and groups by color or poliltical philosophy and your ignoring of the issues and solutions to problems is outstanding.

You cannot continue to just label people by skin color or whatever label you choose to use. It is not going to serve American well,


"While President Barack Obama clearly had a special connection to African-Americans because of what he represented in terms of race, identity and history, Trump seems to have a similar connection with white voters for reasons that can't be separated from race, identity and history.
The Trump campaign, and now the Trump presidency, is infused with identity politics, just not the kind reporters, pundits, pollsters and political strategists tend to talk about that often: white identity politics and the politics of white resentment.
Trump ran on the promise of restoration, a nostalgia for a time gone by, and the sense that America, particularly white America, is losing and has been for many years.
In this scenario, Trump is the foremost culture warrior and defender."


What Trump understands about white identity politics - CNNPolitics

"Now identity politics acolytes seek to divide the country once again by bringing our differences — gender, class, religion and, most of all, race — back into the foreground. And by singling out race as the defining aspect of American life, activists on the left are basically asking white men to “own” their identity. In Charlottesville, they did."

Stop blaming white supremacy on ‘identity politics’ - The Washington Post

"There is nothing new about white supremacist groups in the U.S., or anti-Semitism, or people who defend the symbols of the Confederacy. (The “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, was to protest the planned removal of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee.) From Richard Nixon’s “law and order” platform to Ronald Reagan’s invocation of the “welfare queen,” presidents (mostly Republican, at least in recent decades) have regularly appealed to white, conservative-leaning voters by playing up fears and stereotypes about African-Americans and other minority groups.

What is different about this iteration of white nationalism is how the movement is framing its ideas, and the place those ideas occupy in U.S. politics. One of the chants white nationalists repeatedly turned to as they marched in Charlottesville on Friday night and Saturday was “white lives matter” — a direct response to the “Black Lives Matter” movement that emerged after the killing of Michael Brown by Ferguson, Missouri, police in August 2014 and the resulting protests.

That context is important to understand this moment in American politics — the events in Charlottesville and the “alt-right” generally. There are two competing narratives about race and racism at the center of today’s discussions. One perspective — most directly expressed by Black Lives Matter activists but also shared by many Democratic politicians, the media and other elite institutions — is that a “Black Lives Matter” movement is necessary because, by a lot of metrics, America has left blacks behind. The wealth of the average white family still dwarfs that of the average African-American family. The black jobless rate is about double that of the white one. Black men are disproportionately killed by police officers. Black children are more likely than white ones to attend high-poverty schools."


Charlottesville And The Rise Of White Identity Politics | FiveThirtyEight

Sad to see............
 

It is genuinely saddening to see such bitterness.

I don't understand the bitterness except in the context of continuing to misunderstand my postings. It is simply wrong to assert that I advocate or promote hate speech or White Supremacy, which I have repeatedly disavowed. There seems to be a disconnect from reality. After several attempts, I don't see any way to correct it.

Carl in Tampa
.
.
.

It's my fault of course......join us while I am being attacked.someday to gain an understanding although I have my doubts you care.....nobody ever said, as often as you keep saying it, that you advocated anything, thus there is nothing to correct.

I could not be clearer...my problem was the presentation of your OP. Your goal of making me look stupid has been achieved..ok ? You are wonderful. By the way, I have very good touch with reality.

BUT...

With the firing of Bannon, Gorka leaving, the addition of Kelly. MAYBE DAWN is breaking finally in the White House.

President will address the nation on Afghanastan, etc tomorrow.

This is such a positive step. Not a rally, not politics.....actual governing.

I think it is positive because the last 7 months of this has been tiring.

Last repetition of these facts.
 

[QUOTE=Guest]The response was to Sandtrap328, whose post was quoted.

I didn't mention the group, but acknowledged that Sandtrap328 asserted that they were White Supremacists.

I then used Sandtrap328's statement that the counter-marchers intended to "silence the racists." THIS was the attack on free speech that I referenced.

I just don't see how it could be any plainer, and I'm tired of repeating it.

Oh, yes. All thirty-three of the rioters arrested by the police were in the mob marching in opposition to the Free Speech meeting, and many of them can be seen on TV assaulting the police. At one point the police commissioner called upon the rioters to quit throwing rocks and bottles of urine at the police. Perhaps this was why the President called them "anti-police."


Carl in Tampa
.
.
.

Yes, 33 protesters were arrested in Boston. There are a few in every group that overstep the limits. That is 33 out of an estimated 40,000 protesters.

I would hate to think you, Carl, would not speak out against NeoNazis. Imagine having a group of brown shirted NeoNazis with swasticas on armbands speaking at Lake Sumter Landing. Hate speech is not an American value, is it? Carl, would YOU tolerate any of your friends using racist speech in your presence? I certainly hope not.

The people of Boston are to be commended for not allowing the hatefulness of one group to take over their city and for standing up to racism and bigotry with peaceful protests.

Boston Strong!

ST

So you think only 33 crimes were committed?

My brothers and sisters
 

You don't hear a lot of racist, or homophobic, speech around my crowd.

That could be because I have brothers and sisters of various races and practices. They are often closer to me than my blood relatives because we are "under the badge" together, and we have risked our lives to protect each other.

I have gay friends extending back to my high school days with whom I am still in frequent contact. It should be no shock to anyone that there are a good many lesbians in law enforcement. Among them are some of my closest friends at the office where I used to work.

I count among my Black friends one retired deputy sheriff who is about the size of former football star "Rosey" Grier. We worked together and are still prepared to watch out for each other should the need arise. The same is true for a multitude of friends of various other races. WE are family.

And, guess what. All of us, regardless of sex, race, or personal views had careers in which defending the Constitution was of paramount importance over any personal feelings of "taking offense" at "hate speech" that might be directed in our direction.


Carl in Tampa

.

To the average American that desires this nation return to balance the response to the above-cited post is six of one and a half dozen of the other.

Personal Best Regards:

Sandy - I would not care if neo nazis wanted to speak at Lake Sumter Landing (obviously it is not going to take place during the hours of 5 till 9 PM), no more than I would care if gay rights group wanted to speak at LSL. I don't have to listen to either group if I do not wish too!

I also don't need to go and counter protest words spoken to a small group of people that already sympathize with either cause.

USA STRONG!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

Oh don't give Carl all the credit, you have been pretty successful at making yourself look stupid too!

One thing I have noticed about Carl, he posts his own words (don't believe he needs to copy and paste someone else's words in bold)...



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

I cannot speak for Sandtrap, but "perhaps" you are misunderstanding his meaning.

I think that the "attacks" on those "attacking" nazi slogans etc is to allow to paint a picture of the counter protesters as the bad guys and give the nazi folks credibility.

That is what our President did in both cases, and how I interpeted the OP of this thread. Do not allow anyone to know the motive behind the primary march, and then paint those who DID KNOW the purpose as the bad guys.

This is probably going to work. It will bring out more anti nazi people but that will be used over and over as an "excuse" for nazism.

I am glad you feel so comfortable with ignoring Nazi propoganda...that is how it was in the 1930's and keep in mind.

YOU CANNOT PUT THE CAP BACK ON THE BOTTLE ONCE IT IS OUT.

Free speech protects them for sure, but american values should ot allow it to become an accepted thing by our President or anyone.

Brown shirts, nazi slogans and signs, having boy scouts shout in cheers adoration for the President, led by the President should alarm every single american.

Remember, this Nazi movement was based on these marches, thESE cheers and rallies AND ATTACK ON THE MEDIA.


Sandtrap can speak for himself, but that is how I have seen this entire thread.

You can choose to not listen, they do have the right, but in my opinion, they do not need empowerment from anyone, especially the President who speaks for all of us.

Your entire premise...is pure bull$hit. :oops:

There is no "assault" on free speech...simply TWO groups exercising that same right.

While hate speech is protected, as it should be under the COTUS...SO ARE THE RIGHTS OF THOSE WHO CALL IT FOR WHAT IT IS.

Your purposely pathetic (or maybe it's just incompetence?) attempt to try and imply that exercising free speech rights against those whose sole purpose is to spread hate, should for some reason be condemned for exercising their own free speech rights...simply exposes more of your already seen prejudices. :ohdear:



Then again, it looks like it was just part of your early indoctrination.

‘Before the Law Was Equal’ explores racism in court system | tbo.com



Deepest Sincere Wishes: :wave:

Bucco,
You are more eloquent than I am - and those were my thoughts but not written as well as you did.

We must always speak out against any form of Nazism. Sitting back and ignoring it cannot be an option. If opposing hate speech is assaulting free speech, I will be assaulting it. I would be proud to have any and all who think the same linked arm in arm with me.
ST

Explaining it AGAIN.
 

Well, as you see, I opted to respond to a portion of your post, in spite of your vulgar language.

You erroneously state that I "...attempt to try and imply..." that those who are "exercising free speech rights" against those who are engaging in hate speech should be condemned for exercising their own free speech rights.

You couldn't be more wrong. And I'm beginning to wonder about your reading comprehension ability because I have repeatedly stated that this is not my position.

I would be overjoyed to see a peaceful counter-demonstration against any assembly engaged in hate speech. Remember that I am the one who conducted investigations and surveillance of neo-Nazis in my federal career. I have also done crowd control duty in riot situations where police officers near me were injured.

My criticism is of the violence committed by the counter-demonstrators. Watch the videos of the riots. A principal group that engages in violence is the Antifa, typically dressed all in black and having faces covered to avoid identification because they came with the intent to break the law. In the Boston riots virtually everyone you see committing an assault on police officers is dressed all in black.

As was stated in a previous post, the counter-demonstrators in Boston were there "to silence the racists." THAT is an assault on Free Speech.


Carl in Tampa
.
.

Anti-American
 

I guess you are saying that the Antifa are not as "serious" as the skin heads and neo-Nazis.

You may have that perception because Antifa has not been in the headlines as much as the others, and has no central point of organization.

But, in fact, there is a widespread network of autonomous Antifa groups that communicate through social media, and organize protests in this medium.

It is also true that Antifa groups advocate anarchism, socialism, and communism. The Antifa groups in Germany and Italy in the 1930s were anti-fascists who clashed with the followers of Hitler and Mussolini. But, they were not for the status quo, they were pushing for Communism.

Today's American Antifa often show up at demonstrations wearing all black, with masks over their faces, and carrying weapons.

Because of their frequent assaults on police officers and their support of anarchy, I regard them as Anti-American.


Carl in Tampa
.
.

Sandy, I am disappointed in your thought process. The few peoe that would attend a neo Nazi speech...were already sympathetic to that cause. Knock your self out, but you are not changing them no more than they are changing you.

Rockface- go stick your head up your ass, never mind it is already there. I hope someone successfully silences your free speech and quickly!

Carl - I see your point about the counter protesters desire to silence the free speech, because they don't agree with the cause nobody can talk about it.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

Hey Sandy - did you speak any hateful words towards the North Vietnamese? How would you feel if somebody told you you can't speak that way?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

Your weaseling and lying is becoming more pathetic...with every one of your posts. :oops:

The "silencing" that the overwhelming majority of counter-protestors attempted in Boston, was simply to out yell and show superior numbers against the hate-groups...and yet you still try to equivocate to make it fit your own bigotry.

In fact, let's go back to your post...that started this thread.


https://www.talkofthevillages.com/fo...625-post1.html
Sorry dude, but anyone with even a modicum of intelligence would instantly know that while there might have been a very small number of those counter-protestors who were looking for a physical confrontation (and I condemn those)...you tried to justify your own obvious prejudice by labeling the entire group as such.

YOUR words...jerk.






Now go back and read that article the article/link regarding Hillsborough County (where you were trained), their despicable racial history and then come back and try to convince anyone...that you aren't a bigot and haven't deliberately tried to mislead.

And oh yeah, you can occasionally 'say' anything you want, but your true intent is spelled out clearly...in almost every one of your posts. :ho:

You're exactly the type that give the overwhelming number of good and decent LEO's...a bad rep.




Deepest Sincere Wishes: :wave:

Now thats why we call her (unt...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

Carl Derangement Syndrome
 

Well, it appears that your case of Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) has transmogrified into a severe case of Carl Derangement Syndrome (CDS.)

You are blinded by your unaccountable animus and your sad need to spray vitriol at me.

If only you could have managed to be civil in your posts we could have had a discussion.


Carl in Tampa
.

:BigApplause:

:1rotfl:

Hey smile, you're not the first one to have been outed and eviscerated with your own words...so suck it up buttercup. :D



Deepest Sincere Wishes: :wave:

Heroes
 

Let's not overlook the heroes at these demonstrations and riots.

They are the police officers who are present, not to take sides, but to maintain peace and order. For this thankless task they are reviled and assaulted.

To be particularly honored are the Black officers who go about doing their duty and protecting the hate speech groups that hold them in contempt due to the color of their skin, from counter-demonstrators who would assault the haters if given the opportunity.

A Black officer protecting the Klan is a picture of dedication to the First Amendment.

A White officer taking verbal abuse from a Black demonstrator is a picture of self-restraint and professionalism.

Carl in Tampa

.

It's too late to try and hide now, you outed yourself in your first post...regardless of your faux accolades now. :oops:

You're correct about one thing though, both of your examples are of LEO's who should be mostly admired (although I'm trying to understand how you think the white cop is showing "restraint")...given that he is under no threat.

Oh wait, I forgot, you're the one that keeps touting your professional background with the attempt to bolster your desperate need to feel that your opinion is superior.

I'll bet there were many times, when you wished (did?) that you could go ahead and abuse your authority...simply because someone pi$$ed you off.

Silly me.




Deepest Sincere Wishes: :wave:

I realize I am just bitter, as you said, but I read every post in this thread, and unless I missed it....

You never once criticized or had a harsh word for the Nazi skinheads, or thier group. Not one that I saw.

I just find that interesting since you have, in almost every other post criticized the other group, not that they do not deserve criticism, but you "seem" to endorse the Nazi white marchers, not just thier right to March.

Understand, nobody here has defended Antifa...nobody, yet you seem very reluctant to criticize the Nazi whit nationalist movement, even though it was their march, they cleansed their Facebook page and disinvited anyone who spoke at Charlottesville (although they were pRt of the organizers and the group admitted they cancelled them only because of media coverage). Nothing but praise for police on here. So everyone is in accord EXCEPT your lack of criticism if the Nazi marchers.

Just find that curious, but then again, I am simply bitter and not up to your lofty ideals.

:BigApplause:

27 counter protesters were arrested, some for assaulting police officers.

I do not support the KKK/Nazis, but I also do not support the AntiFA (Anti-First Amendment) radicals either. And I do not support the BLM scumbags either.

So, for those idiots that wish to say that if I support the President, then I support the KKK and Nazis, I have preempted you. I will counter that with accusing you of supporting the radical and violent Anti-American groups out there that are tearing down statues, destroying property and assaulting those that do not agree with them. The left is Anti first amendment until proven otherwise.

You are so blatantly stupid.

What you type and reality and what others have posted are in different universes. Nobody...not one person has said what you claim, but then again, nobody expects you to understand anything.

Well said.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Well said.



Sent from my computer using my keyboard, brains and the truth.

Attacking Free Speech on Campus
 

I don't understand how any observant person could deny that there are efforts underway in our country to suppress Free Speech.

Are they not seeing the riots in Berkeley in opposition to having Conservative speakers deliver speeches on campus? Did they not see the rioting, the fires, the destruction of property?

Anyone with a web browser can find a multitude of examples of Conservative speakers being shouted down, and even assaulted. Here are a couple of speakers that you could research.


1. Milo Yiannopoulous at Berkeley. More than 1,500 people gathered in front of UC Berkeley's Sproul Hall to protest Yiannopoulous' scheduled speech. Protesters held signs that read "Hate Speech Is Not Free Speech” and pledging to shut down the event. (They did.)

The planned speech was on the subject of "cultural appropriation" — the use of elements of one culture by members of another culture. You know, like wearing a sombrero and serape as a Halloween costume.

2. Ann Coulter at Berkeley, and other universities where she is invited and then cancelled when campus protesters raise a fuss is another example.

At Berkeley, the police received information of planned demonstrations even after Coulter's speech was canceled. They reported spending "tens of thousands" of dollars in security preparations. This is a major disincentive to inviting Conservative speakers in the future.

3. Charles Murray, co-author of the book The Bell Curve tried to deliver a speech at the Vermont campus of Middlebury College. Violent protesters drove him from the stage and physically injured a school professor who was with him.

And the "Safe Spaces" on university campuses, where controversial utterances are forbidden, are getting larger while "free speech zones" are getting smaller. In fact, on some campuses the free speech zone is only a few square feet on a campus that covers several acres.

Attacking Free Speech:

Leftists & Antifa Burn Free Speech Sign at Berkeley March4Trump Rally 3-4-17 - YouTube


Carl in Tampa

.

Anything or anyone that is anti Trump is ok no matter how criminal. Very sad. This is why you can't even debate these morons. Just ignore them and treat them like the retards they are.

Example. Anyone that comes in contact with Tal. Smile and yes them till they go away, far away.