quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


Two quick thoughts, here:

Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it.

And ... does this mean we're going to tear down statues of Sen. Byrd, J. William Fullbright, and Margaret Sanger, also?

Byrd was a grand exalted poobah the clan and the other two were racists/eugenecists.



Michael

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

If the permits are used to control "traffic" control they are reasonable.

Exactly what part of "shall make no law" are you having trouble with here man?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Note that it doesn't say you have to allow freedom of speech in such a way as to guarantee a riot.
For example allowing the Klan and the black panthers to demonstrate in the same place. You can allow them to demonstrate away from each other with out infringing on their rights.
And this is control, for the purpose of public safety.

It does say the right to peaceably assemble which would agree with your point. However, that brings in issues of prior restraint.

Keeping people away from each other who have previously proclaimed their mutual hatred would seem to justify this.
The city also screwed up in not providing enough police till things had already gotten out of hand.

There should have been enough police there to keep them apart.

I believe that not having enough police and not separating the two groups is a political ploy by local politicians to stir up passion for 2018 elections. But, that's just me. Cops are too good at this sort of thing now a days to make that error. Look at Boston today as an example. I believe Terry Mcaullife is planning ahead for 2020 as well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

If the permits are used to control "traffic" control they are reasonable.

Exactly what part of "shall make no law" are you having trouble with here man?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Note that it doesn't say you have to allow freedom of speech in such a way as to guarantee a riot.
For example allowing the Klan and the black panthers to demonstrate in the same place. You can allow them to demonstrate away from each other with out infringing on their rights.
And this is control, for the purpose of public safety.

It does say the right to peaceably assemble which would agree with your point. However, that brings in issues of prior restraint.

Keeping people away from each other who have previously proclaimed their mutual hatred would seem to justify this.
The city also screwed up in not providing enough police till things had already gotten out of hand.

There should have been enough police there to keep them apart.

I believe that not having enough police and not separating the two groups is a political ploy by local politicians to stir up passion for 2018 elections. But, that's just me. Cops are too good at this sort of thing now a days to make that error. Look at Boston today as an example. I believe Terry Mcaullife is planning ahead for 2020 as well.

Either they deliberately set up for violence, or they are idiots.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

If the permits are used to control "traffic" control they are reasonable.

Exactly what part of "shall make no law" are you having trouble with here man?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Note that it doesn't say you have to allow freedom of speech in such a way as to guarantee a riot.
For example allowing the Klan and the black panthers to demonstrate in the same place. You can allow them to demonstrate away from each other with out infringing on their rights.
And this is control, for the purpose of public safety.

It does say the right to peaceably assemble which would agree with your point. However, that brings in issues of prior restraint.

Keeping people away from each other who have previously proclaimed their mutual hatred would seem to justify this.
The city also screwed up in not providing enough police till things had already gotten out of hand.

There should have been enough police there to keep them apart.

I believe that not having enough police and not separating the two groups is a political ploy by local politicians to stir up passion for 2018 elections. But, that's just me. Cops are too good at this sort of thing now a days to make that error. Look at Boston today as an example. I believe Terry Mcaullife is planning ahead for 2020 as well.

Either they deliberately set up for violence, or they are idiots.

As I saw state police on scene (or pictures anyway) as well as other departments besides just the local city cops, I have to lean away from the idiot hypothesis. But, again, that's just me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

If the permits are used to control "traffic" control they are reasonable.

Exactly what part of "shall make no law" are you having trouble with here man?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Note that it doesn't say you have to allow freedom of speech in such a way as to guarantee a riot.
For example allowing the Klan and the black panthers to demonstrate in the same place. You can allow them to demonstrate away from each other with out infringing on their rights.
And this is control, for the purpose of public safety.

It does say the right to peaceably assemble which would agree with your point. However, that brings in issues of prior restraint.

Keeping people away from each other who have previously proclaimed their mutual hatred would seem to justify this.
The city also screwed up in not providing enough police till things had already gotten out of hand.

There should have been enough police there to keep them apart.

I believe that not having enough police and not separating the two groups is a political ploy by local politicians to stir up passion for 2018 elections. But, that's just me. Cops are too good at this sort of thing now a days to make that error. Look at Boston today as an example. I believe Terry Mcaullife is planning ahead for 2020 as well.

Either they deliberately set up for violence, or they are idiots.

As I saw state police on scene (or pictures anyway) as well as other departments besides just the local city cops, I have to lean away from the idiot hypothesis. But, again, that's just me.

But they didn't take action till things were out of hand.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

If the permits are used to control "traffic" control they are reasonable.

Exactly what part of "shall make no law" are you having trouble with here man?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Note that it doesn't say you have to allow freedom of speech in such a way as to guarantee a riot.
For example allowing the Klan and the black panthers to demonstrate in the same place. You can allow them to demonstrate away from each other with out infringing on their rights.
And this is control, for the purpose of public safety.

It does say the right to peaceably assemble which would agree with your point. However, that brings in issues of prior restraint.

Keeping people away from each other who have previously proclaimed their mutual hatred would seem to justify this.
The city also screwed up in not providing enough police till things had already gotten out of hand.

There should have been enough police there to keep them apart.

I believe that not having enough police and not separating the two groups is a political ploy by local politicians to stir up passion for 2018 elections. But, that's just me. Cops are too good at this sort of thing now a days to make that error. Look at Boston today as an example. I believe Terry Mcaullife is planning ahead for 2020 as well.

Either they deliberately set up for violence, or they are idiots.

As I saw state police on scene (or pictures anyway) as well as other departments besides just the local city cops, I have to lean away from the idiot hypothesis. But, again, that's just me.

But they didn't take action till things were out of hand.

The stand down came from politicians. The state police had to be tasked by Mcaullife to be subordinate to the locals or told to stand down by Mcaullife. Which is my point. Identity politics is in the democrat pantheon and having a fired up electorate would seem beneficial to them. I, personally, can't imagine a beat cop wanting to stand down in that situation. I can't imagine any cop wanting to stand down.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

If the permits are used to control "traffic" control they are reasonable.

Exactly what part of "shall make no law" are you having trouble with here man?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Note that it doesn't say you have to allow freedom of speech in such a way as to guarantee a riot.
For example allowing the Klan and the black panthers to demonstrate in the same place. You can allow them to demonstrate away from each other with out infringing on their rights.
And this is control, for the purpose of public safety.

It does say the right to peaceably assemble which would agree with your point. However, that brings in issues of prior restraint.

Keeping people away from each other who have previously proclaimed their mutual hatred would seem to justify this.
The city also screwed up in not providing enough police till things had already gotten out of hand.

There should have been enough police there to keep them apart.

I believe that not having enough police and not separating the two groups is a political ploy by local politicians to stir up passion for 2018 elections. But, that's just me. Cops are too good at this sort of thing now a days to make that error. Look at Boston today as an example. I believe Terry Mcaullife is planning ahead for 2020 as well.

Either they deliberately set up for violence, or they are idiots.

As I saw state police on scene (or pictures anyway) as well as other departments besides just the local city cops, I have to lean away from the idiot hypothesis. But, again, that's just me.

But they didn't take action till things were out of hand.

The stand down came from politicians. The state police had to be tasked by Mcaullife to be subordinate to the locals or told to stand down by Mcaullife. Which is my point. Identity politics is in the democrat pantheon and having a fired up electorate would seem beneficial to them. I, personally, can't imagine a beat cop wanting to stand down in that situation. I can't imagine any cop wanting to stand down.

Clearly the problem is with the politicians than the cops. The worse it gets before action is taken the more dangerous it is for the cops.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Danemora

Those who have the money is honestly my best guess. The US Government has become by, of, and for those who have all the money. It sadly stopped being about "We the people" somewhere along the way. In my honest opinion, they get us fighting amongst ourselves so we are distracted by the battle...and not the sneaky shady shit being ramrodded through behind the scenes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: Danemora

Those who have the money is honestly my best guess. The US Government has become by, of, and for those who have all the money. It sadly stopped being about "We the people" somewhere along the way. In my honest opinion, they get us fighting amongst ourselves so we are distracted by the battle...and not the sneaky shady shit being ramrodded through behind the scenes.

I totally agree with you.
And they want to weaken the American people so they can control us.
With the help from the media (controlled by those rich people you referred to), the American people are playing right into their hands.
Divide & conquer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: Danemora

Those who have the money is honestly my best guess. The US Government has become by, of, and for those who have all the money. It sadly stopped being about "We the people" somewhere along the way. In my honest opinion, they get us fighting amongst ourselves so we are distracted by the battle...and not the sneaky shady shit being ramrodded through behind the scenes.

I totally agree with you.
And they want to weaken the American people so they can control us.
With the help from the media (controlled by those rich people you referred to), the American people are playing right into their hands.
Divide & conquer.

BINGO
and BINGO

thats why I laught my ass off at the lefty rightee idjits.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSCqZmGIOyA

thats what politics is about today

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: Danemora

Those who have the money is honestly my best guess. The US Government has become by, of, and for those who have all the money. It sadly stopped being about "We the people" somewhere along the way. In my honest opinion, they get us fighting amongst ourselves so we are distracted by the battle...and not the sneaky shady shit being ramrodded through behind the scenes.

I totally agree with you.
And they want to weaken the American people so they can control us.
With the help from the media (controlled by those rich people you referred to), the American people are playing right into their hands.
Divide & conquer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

You mean millions of people were killed but we can't find the bones?

You sick, sad, sock.

You just want to hate me because your kind likes to hate.

I asked a question.

You poor little subbie boi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Danemora

Those who have the money is honestly my best guess. The US Government is by, of, and for those who have all the money. It sadly stopped being about "We the people" somewhere along the way. In my honest opinion, they get us fighting amongst ourselves so we are distracted by the battle...and not the sneaky shady shit being ramrodded through behind the scenes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

gentlemen, could you trim your quotes please?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

gentlemen, could you trim your quotes please?

I've started to do so twice and have just not. I realize it gets bothersome.