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.
As it has been said in about 25 other posts, the group that did the damage are not supporters of anybody, or any political party.
They are anarchists and they oppose hierarchical government and private property in all their forms, and they don't care that property damage doesn't play well in polite society. They look to getting the reward that violence brings them, attention.
Those violent protesters were Anarchists. They hate all establishment parties.
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike
No, they wouldn't.
Vandalism is vandalism, period. Destruction of private property that does not belong to the owner if vandalism, and the vandals can come from any political persuasion or none at all.
The left, right and middle all subscribe to the same saying equally:
Your freedom of speech ends where my nose begins.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chriz Brown
They were not Hillary supporters. They were just opportunists.
Protests are great times to commit crimes you would usually have a hard tome getting away with so criminals come out in force to take advantage.
If what you all say is true, why do we almost never hear strong and forceful condemnation from Dem leaders and the msm? The Great Obama has always been pretty reluctant to use his famous oratory skills to address these groups.
They are expressing their first amendment rights is what the left would say
Tearing apart businesses and running rampant causing chaos? No, that's not what the left would say is expressing their first amendment rights. Today's marches...peaceful, with permits, following rules, working with the police to keep things under control (thank you DPD!), having a purpose...that was expressing first amendment rights.
Is this a protest of stupid people and criminals who should be charged with a felony.
Starbucks supported and donated to Hillary and still the store gets looted and vandalized!
I wonder what the CEO is thinking about the Hillary supporters and people calling for the protests!
A thug smashed the window glass of a Starbucks is not the same thing as destroying Starbucks.
Was this particicular thug eligible to vote?
Was this particular thug registered to vote?
Did this particular thug vote?
This particular thug represents no one other than himself.
The CEO probably thought about the insurance claim his district office would make.
Media interviewed some of the frothing at the mouth protestors along the parade route. None could articulate their anger.
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.
