Nazis driven out of Liverpool (crimes, college, taxes)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A Nazi march which was planned to walk through Liverpool never happened as Liverpudlians never allowed them out of the station turning them back, chanting "Nazi scum, off our streets". I am proud of them all.
A Nazi march which was planned to walk through Liverpool never happened as Liverpudlians never allowed them out of the station turning them back, chanting "Nazi scum, off our streets". I am proud of them all.
Would you also be "proud of them all" if groups did the same thing to homosexuals marching for their beliefs, trying to express them?
If not, why not?
So you are comparing a human right, to love whoever you want, to bloody nazi's Vector? These scumbags deserve more than getting shouted at - they are on par with ISIS supporters.
Would you also be "proud of them all" if groups did the same thing to homosexuals marching for their beliefs, trying to express them?
If not, why not?
`
Gay rights groups and supporters don't stand for denigrating, demonizing, and committing acts of violence including murder against people of color.
So yes, I am proud whenever citizens speak up against racism and xenophobic hatred. Just like whenever I see people back in the U.S. force back KKK and neo nazi groups trying to spew their hatred. They are free to do express their feelings, we are free to fight back.
So you are comparing a human right, to love whoever you want, to bloody nazi's Vector? These scumbags deserve more than getting shouted at - they are on par with ISIS supporters.
Don't even try to play that conflation game with me, because it rightly falls on deaf ears.
My point is that while I can abhor a message, it does not mean I believe the message should be drown out to the point of people not being able to express their points of view.
There are of course limits, such as incitement to active violence. Yet the Nazi's should be able to express a political point of view, even if it is distasteful to the majority.
For example here across the pond, the Nazi's, KKK, Black Panthers, Black Hebrew Israelites, etc., all preach racial purity, dislike of other races/religions, and some form of segregation. They presumably also try to recruit new membership.
I have no problem with this, provided they are treated no better or worse than any other group that wishes to express their political point of view. The only time I think it should be curtailed, is if they wish to choose a specific location designed to inflame and/or purposely antagonize people who will never be receptive to their message, nor ever join them.
For example, the Nazi's may attempt to march through a heavily Jewish part of town. Needless to say, they are not doing it to convert minds or increase membership. So while they should be allowed to march and preach their message, it should not be done in the aforementioned area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburban_Guy
Gay rights groups and supporters don't stand for denigrating, demonizing, and committing acts of violence including murder against people of color.
So yes, I am proud whenever citizens speak up against racism and xenophobic hatred. Just like whenever I see people back in the U.S. force back KKK and neo nazi groups trying to spew their hatred. They are free to do express their feelings, we are free to fight back.
I understand what you are saying, but "fighting back" is probably where we part ways.
The ability to speak and express a persons point of view is part of what a free society thrives on, and is enshrined in our governing document. I may oppose homosexuals parading through the streets trying to redefine traditional marriage, but I think they have a right to do so, provided they remain decent and lawful. Those who wish to stop their expression have no right to cause such an environment to where they do not have the ability to engage in free speech.
Let me give you an example of how groups are treated differently, based on the political popularity of the day. When "Occupy Wall Street" got going, they did not apply for nor pay for permits. They did not post bonds for the eventual cleanup if they failed to do so for themselves. Yet because they expressed a liberal point of view, and the media was treating them as quasi hero's, they got away with it. Even when crimes such as assaults and rapes were occurring within the public areas they seized, little to nothing was done, and most of the press was complicit in covering for them.
Then compare that with "Tea Party Rallies" where they applied and paid for all the necessary permits, posted cleanup bonds (even though they cleaned up after themselves for the most part), and did not engage in illegal activities.
Yet liberal kooks who undoubtedly felt the need to "fight back" tried to and sometimes succeeded in drowning out their message. Their goal was not to allow a different point of view to be expressed, even though it was simply protesting against government waste, high taxes, and the like.
When the government allows a popular viewpoint to be expressed (either directly or being complicit), todays popular view might be tomorrows prohibited one.
You need to look no further than todays college campuses, where liberal kooks, even some who have committed terrorism and murder are embraced. Yet take someone like Condi Rice who is "fought against" to the point of not being able to give a commencement speech. Blacks & women are encouraged to speak, provided they are the right type of blacks and women.
Heck even the liberal and self proclaimed socialist Bernie Sanders was shouted down to the point of having to stop his speech because he dared say the despicable thought of "all lives matter".
The point is that for everyone to have freedom of speech and expression, we must be tolerant of opposing points of view. Otherwise a day will come to where your point of view might be outside the popular belief of the time, and you will never have a chance to exercise that right.
---
For the two posters above, or anyone who agrees with them, consider reading two well written books
on the subject;
One is written by a liberal journalist, and the other is even co-authored by a homosexual conservative.
Both are very enlightening and thought provoking.
A lot of noise. You wanna debate with racists that is your prerogative. Me I'd spit on them.
You think being openly racist and plain fking dangerously dumb is free speech? We are stifling debate because we refuse to listen to their vile nonsense?
You call this a political view? Wanting other humans treated as a lesser being OR worse.
There is free speech but also decency. It is a balance.
Don't even try to play that conflation game with me, because it rightly falls on deaf ears.
My point is that while I can abhor a message, it does not mean I believe the message should be drown out to the point of people not being able to express their points of view.
There are of course limits, such as incitement to active violence. Yet the Nazi's should be able to express a political point of view, even if it is distasteful to the majority.
For example here across the pond, the Nazi's, KKK, Black Panthers, Black Hebrew Israelites, etc., all preach racial purity, dislike of other races/religions, and some form of segregation. They presumably also try to recruit new membership.
I have no problem with this, provided they are treated no better or worse than any other group that wishes to express their political point of view. The only time I think it should be curtailed, is if they wish to choose a specific location designed to inflame and/or purposely antagonize people who will never be receptive to their message, nor ever join them.
For example, the Nazi's may attempt to march through a heavily Jewish part of town. Needless to say, they are not doing it to convert minds or increase membership. So while they should be allowed to march and preach their message, it should not be done in the aforementioned area.
I understand what you are saying, but "fighting back" is probably where we part ways.
The ability to speak and express a persons point of view is part of what a free society thrives on, and is enshrined in our governing document. I may oppose homosexuals parading through the streets trying to redefine traditional marriage, but I think they have a right to do so, provided they remain decent and lawful. Those who wish to stop their expression have no right to cause such an environment to where they do not have the ability to engage in free speech.
Let me give you an example of how groups are treated differently, based on the political popularity of the day. When "Occupy Wall Street" got going, they did not apply for nor pay for permits. They did not post bonds for the eventual cleanup if they failed to do so for themselves. Yet because they expressed a liberal point of view, and the media was treating them as quasi hero's, they got away with it. Even when crimes such as assaults and rapes were occurring within the public areas they seized, little to nothing was done, and most of the press was complicit in covering for them.
Then compare that with "Tea Party Rallies" where they applied and paid for all the necessary permits, posted cleanup bonds (even though they cleaned up after themselves for the most part), and did not engage in illegal activities.
Yet liberal kooks who undoubtedly felt the need to "fight back" tried to and sometimes succeeded in drowning out their message. Their goal was not to allow a different point of view to be expressed, even though it was simply protesting against government waste, high taxes, and the like.
When the government allows a popular viewpoint to be expressed (either directly or being complicit), todays popular view might be tomorrows prohibited one.
You need to look no further than todays college campuses, where liberal kooks, even some who have committed terrorism and murder are embraced. Yet take someone like Condi Rice who is "fought against" to the point of not being able to give a commencement speech. Blacks & women are encouraged to speak, provided they are the right type of blacks and women.
Heck even the liberal and self proclaimed socialist Bernie Sanders was shouted down to the point of having to stop his speech because he dared say the despicable thought of "all lives matter".
The point is that for everyone to have freedom of speech and expression, we must be tolerant of opposing points of view. Otherwise a day will come to where your point of view might be outside the popular belief of the time, and you will never have a chance to exercise that right.
---
For the two posters above, or anyone who agrees with them, consider reading two well written books
on the subject;
One is written by a liberal journalist, and the other is even co-authored by a homosexual conservative.
Both are very enlightening and thought provoking.
`
Well, you are probably American like me. You're a right winger, UNlike me. But we do not live in England where this event occurred. In the US we have different laws. If it were up to ME, and if anyone asked MY opinion, I'm glad they threw them out.
Haters and killers shouldn't be tolerated, any more than people walking around carrying GUNS should be tolerated. (Put that in your pipe and smoke it, lol.)
Anyway, a group of neo-Nazis started demonstrating on the steps of the town hall here a few years ago and same thing happened--citizens got after them and booted them out. No, they were not arrested because it's not illegal, but ordinary people found their beliefs to be obnoxious enough to not want this happening in our town.
So-- Good for the Liverpudlians.
Last edited by in_newengland; 08-16-2015 at 07:59 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
