One year after Charlottesville rally, Trump says he condemns all racism

[rooster59]

One year after Charlottesville rally, Trump says he condemns all racism

 

People embrace at a memorial near the site where Heather Heyer was killed during the 2017 Charlottesville "Unite the Right" protests in Charlottesville, Virginia, U.S., August 11, 2018. REUTERS/Lucas Jackson

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Saturday he condemns "all types of racism and acts of violence," appealing for unity ahead of the anniversary of a deadly white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia.

 

Trump drew strong criticism in the days after the Charlottesville rally last year for equating white supremacists with counter-protesters and saying "both sides" were to blame.

 

On Saturday, Trump wrote on Twitter that the "riots" in Charlottesville "resulted in senseless death and division. We must come together as a nation. I condemn all types of racism and acts of violence. Peace to ALL Americans!"

 

White nationalists held a "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville last year, billing it as a protest over the removal of a statue honouring a commander of the Confederate Army, the losing side in the U.S. Civil War.

 

Counter-protesters turned out to demonstrate against the rally. James Alex Fields, Jr. is charged with driving his car into a group of counter-protesters, killing 32-year-old Heather Heyer and injuring dozens of people. He has pleaded not guilty and his trial is set to begin in November.

 

The organizer of last year's event, white nationalist Jason Kessler, was denied a permit in Charlottesville this year but has secured permission to hold a demonstration on Sunday in Washington, across the street from the White House.

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-08-12

[Samui Bodoh]

As much as I would like to believe him (the thought of an American President in 2018 being racist is abhorrent), I simply don't.

 

When one side of a dispute are Nazis and/or white supremacists and the other is not, there is no "both sides". There is ONE side and that is against Nazis and white supremacists.

 

It is really that simple...

 

[DM07]

A dollar too short, a year too late and a lie, anyways!

[Bluespunk]

4 hours ago, rooster59 said:

I condemn all types of racism

Such as?

[ballpoint]

There he goes, making a mistake with words again. Types condemn when he meant to say condone.

[Expatthailover]

How can you tell when don the draft dodging misogynist is lying?

His lips are moving

[Emster23]

34 minutes ago, Expatthailover said:

How can you tell when don the draft dodging misogynist is lying?

His lips are moving

or his fingers if he's tweeting

[huainnews]

I think it was Mattis who said 'I only believe what Donald says when it is typed on a memo'

[billd766]

1 hour ago, huainnews said:

I think it was Mattis who said 'I only believe what Donald says when it is typed on a memo'

 

Trump would probably call that a forgery anyway.

[spidermike007]

He had his opportunity to show leadership, at the time, and he failed abysmally. He equated the racists with decent, hard working, tolerant Americans. That was unforgivable. The man is a racist. He despises brown people. He despises people who are not wealthy, though he tolerates his white followers who are common men and women, for purposes of support. He is a misogynist, a hater, a completely bitter fool. He is a loser on every level that is measurable, except for net worth. Not a single redeeming bone in this man childs body. 

[johnnyonesock]

7 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

As much as I would like to believe him (the thought of an American President in 2018 being racist is abhorrent), I simply don't.

 

When one side of a dispute are Nazis and/or white supremacists and the other is not, there is no "both sides". There is ONE side and that is against Nazis and white supremacists.

 

It is really that simple...

 

There is ONE side and that is against Nazis and white supremacists.

 

correct me if i am wrong but are you saying....their rights end where your feelings begin?

[Redline]

6 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Such as?

Against white men, and I don’t mean the ones with pus****

[Redline]

3 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

He had his opportunity to show leadership, at the time, and he failed abysmally. He equated the racists with decent, hard working, tolerant Americans. That was unforgivable. The man is a racist. He despises brown people. He despises people who are not wealthy, though he tolerates his white followers who are common men and women, for purposes of support. He is a misogynist, a hater, a completely bitter fool. He is a loser on every level that is measurable, except for net worth. Not a single redeeming bone in this man childs body. 

I’m afraid his net worth is not even close to what he declares it to be.  I believe he has some big loans coming due soon as well.  He will be fighting law suits long after he is no longer President, and that should take him down another notch

[jenny2017]

5 hours ago, Emster23 said:

or his fingers if he's tweeting

Or his eyes blinking......

[Bluespunk]

12 minutes ago, Redline said:

Against white men, and I don’t mean the ones with pus****

You’ve lost me with that post. 

[spidermike007]

30 minutes ago, Redline said:

I’m afraid his net worth is not even close to what he declares it to be.  I believe he has some big loans coming due soon as well.  He will be fighting law suits long after he is no longer President, and that should take him down another notch

According to an article I read when he was running for office, he was worth slightly over a billion, with $680,000,000 in debt. He tried for five years to lobby a guy who worked on compiling the Forbes list to get on the wealthiest Americans list, back in the late 1970's. Finally they put him on, after he lied about the value of the apartments he was about to inherit from his father. He has lied about his net worth, the size of his anatomy (shockingly small, no doubt) and anything else he could, his entire life. All he does is lie. He has no relationship to truth, nor does he feel the need for one. He is such a lightweight, and the very definition of an empty suit. A total charlatan. He could not negotiate his way out of a paper bag!

[Tug]

If it quacks like a duck looks like a duck acts like a duck pretty good chance it is a duck!He is a racist on every level he is a predator on every level he needs to be contained then dumped into the dustbin of history only to be used as an example of what not to do!!im not nearly as eloquent as spidermanmike007 and some others but the feeling is the same it’s laughable to suggest trump is not a racist 

[Redline]

21 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

You’ve lost me with that post. 

Trump only condones racism against white men

[JAG]

On 8/12/2018 at 2:26 PM, johnnyonesock said:

There is ONE side and that is against Nazis and white supremacists.

 

correct me if i am wrong but are you saying....their rights end where your feelings begin?

I am sure that SB can speak for himself, but I think that although of course, as individuals, they have rights before the law, their views, utterances and expressed beliefs deserve no support, recognition or equivalance, especially from political office holders. 

 

Maybe that is what he meant. 

[attrayant]

I am sure that SB can speak for himself, but I think that although of course, as individuals, they have rights before the law, their views, utterances and expressed beliefs deserve no support, recognition or equivalance, especially from political office holders. 
 
Maybe that is what he meant. 

It’s amazing to me that the sentiment “Nazis and white supremacists are bad” is not clearly understood and requires further clarification.

[johnnyonesock]

1 hour ago, attrayant said:

 

It’s amazing to me that the sentiment “Nazis and white supremacists are bad” is not clearly understood and requires further clarification.

I dont think people actually understand what National Socialism  means...which is putting your own people and country first..a political viewpoint that has been made impermissible and demonised by the elites desire to flood  Western countries (and only Western Countries) with the 3rd world for political reasons ably supported by their owned media especially Hollywood...the term "Nazi" is an insult in use long before the rise of Adolf Hitler's party. It was a derogatory term for a backwards peasant – being a shortened version of Ignatius, a common name in Bavaria, the area from which the Nazis emerged. Opponents seized on this and shortened the party's title Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, to the dismissive "Nazi"

[Credo]

2 hours ago, johnnyonesock said:

I dont think people actually understand what National Socialism  means...which is putting your own people and country first..a political viewpoint that has been made impermissible and demonised by the elites desire to flood  Western countries (and only Western Countries) with the 3rd world for political reasons ably supported by their owned media especially Hollywood...the term "Nazi" is an insult in use long before the rise of Adolf Hitler's party. It was a derogatory term for a backwards peasant – being a shortened version of Ignatius, a common name in Bavaria, the area from which the Nazis emerged. Opponents seized on this and shortened the party's title Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, to the dismissive "Nazi"

What a deflection and soft pedaling of a well debunked theory that those other than Whites are superior.   Note the word 'supremacy' in white supremacist.   As for the Nazi version of this, it's not about putting your own people first, it's about what was done to those that they didn't consider their 'own people'.   Remember many of those people were citizens of the country, but they were still put in the gas chambers.

 

 

[JAG]

5 hours ago, johnnyonesock said:

I dont think people actually understand what National Socialism  means...which is putting your own people and country first..a political viewpoint that has been made impermissible and demonised by the elites desire to flood  Western countries (and only Western Countries) with the 3rd world for political reasons ably supported by their owned media especially Hollywood...the term "Nazi" is an insult in use long before the rise of Adolf Hitler's party. It was a derogatory term for a backwards peasant – being a shortened version of Ignatius, a common name in Bavaria, the area from which the Nazis emerged. Opponents seized on this and shortened the party's title Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, to the dismissive "Nazi"

People fully understand what National Socialism means. What it means was fully revealed to the world in 1945, when Europe emerged from the terrible war which it launched, and the world discovered and witnessed the full horrors unleashed by that creed. If people adopt or approve the iconography and political ethos of National Socialism, then they also approve and adopt what it brought with it. 

 

You are clearly an apologist for that creed, and all it entails and led to. Your pathetic attempt at semantics, linking it's abbreviation (so universally and enthusiastically adopted by its adherents) to a Bavarian dialect pun is a feeble attempt to deflect. 

[jerojero]

Ya right! ...... Pants on fire. Nuff said.

[johnnyonesock]

16 hours ago, Credo said:

What a deflection and soft pedaling of a well debunked theory that those other than Whites are superior.   Note the word 'supremacy' in white supremacist.   As for the Nazi version of this, it's not about putting your own people first, it's about what was done to those that they didn't consider their 'own people'.   Remember many of those people were citizens of the country, but they were still put in the gas chambers.

 

 

i would love to answer your comment and put you straight but fear it would get me an extended holiday..again

[johnnyonesock]

13 hours ago, JAG said:

People fully understand what National Socialism means. What it means was fully revealed to the world in 1945, when Europe emerged from the terrible war which it launched, and the world discovered and witnessed the full horrors unleashed by that creed. If people adopt or approve the iconography and political ethos of National Socialism, then they also approve and adopt what it brought with it. 

 

You are clearly an apologist for that creed, and all it entails and led to. Your pathetic attempt at semantics, linking it's abbreviation (so universally and enthusiastically adopted by its adherents) to a Bavarian dialect pun is a feeble attempt to deflect. 

no..some of us know the truth about this period of history..some of us get our "facts" from Hollywood....maybe you can tell me why the hammer and sickle flag of the USSR under which up to 100 million people died or maybe the 60 million that died under Maos Great Leap Forward policy doesnt receive the same treatment?

 

[JAG]

1 hour ago, johnnyonesock said:

no..some of us know the truth about this period of history..some of us get our "facts" from Hollywood....maybe you can tell me why the hammer and sickle flag of the USSR under which up to 100 million people died or maybe the 60 million that died under Maos Great Leap Forward policy doesnt receive the same treatment?

 

The truth about this period in history, and National Socialism is documented, has been exhaustively researched and is in many cases drawn from the detailed records kept by the National Socialist regime itself. Hollywood may have (has) been less than supportive of your point of view, but that does not change the facts about what the NAZI party did, both within Germany itself and in the countries and territories which it enslaved, ravaged and harried. Revisionists such as David Irving have produced books, articles and films which seek to deny National Socialism's excesses. They have all been thoroughly debunked by many far more eminent historians. My knowledge and understanding, my "facts" as you put it, come from many years of reading widely, including, whilst holding my nose, some of the nauseating outpourings of David Irving and Ernst Nolte.

 

I absolutely abhor the uncountable deaths resulting from the regimes of Stalin  and Mao. Why they have not received equal treatment at the hands of Hollywood and other media is a philosophical point which I cannot answer. Perhaps because they were not the deliberate actions of a cultured, civilised, modern, industrial society, gripped by a madness and enthusiasm for utterly destroying those people who they regarded as racial inferiors. Maybe because they were just regarded as examples of brutal dictatorships, such as have emerged from time immemorial. Notwithstanding that, to use that as any sort of justification for the foul acts committed by the Third Reich, or to excuse or justify the stated aims of the (ineffective) American clones and wannabee Fuhrers such as Jason Kessler - which is after all the topic of this thread - is what has been described by cleverer more perspicacious minds than mine as "immoral equivalence". You have bought into that "immoral equivalence"! 

[Becker]

24 minutes ago, JAG said:

The truth about this period in history, and National Socialism is documented, has been exhaustively researched and is in many cases drawn from the detailed records kept by the National Socialist regime itself. Hollywood may have (has) been less than supportive of your point of view, but that does not change the facts about what the NAZI party did, both within Germany itself and in the countries and territories which it enslaved, ravaged and harried. Revisionists such as David Irving have produced books, articles and films which seek to deny National Socialism's excesses. They have all been thoroughly debunked by many far more eminent historians. My knowledge and understanding, my "facts" as you put it, come from many years of reading widely, including, whilst holding my nose, some of the nauseating outpourings of David Irving and Ernst Nolte.

 

I absolutely abhor the uncountable deaths resulting from the regimes of Stalin  and Mao. Why they have not received equal treatment at the hands of Hollywood and other media is a philosophical point which I cannot answer. Perhaps because they were not the deliberate actions of a cultured, civilised, modern, industrial society, gripped by a madness and enthusiasm for utterly destroying those people who they regarded as racial inferiors. Maybe because they were just regarded as examples of brutal dictatorships, such as have emerged from time immemorial. Notwithstanding that, to use that as any sort of justification for the foul acts committed by the Third Reich, or to excuse or justify the stated aims of the (ineffective) American clones and wannabee Fuhrers such as Jason Kessler - which is after all the topic of this thread - is what has been described by cleverer more perspicacious minds than mine as "immoral equivalence". You have bought into that "immoral equivalence"! 

A very well written and factual post but I'm afraid you've wasted your time. 

The poster you replied to has clearly been lost to the dark side.