pandarilla Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/how-bernie-sanders-supporters-shut-down-donald-trump-s-rally-n537191 Supporters of "democratic socialist" Bernie Sanders. Heavy on the socialist. Light on the democratic. But of course we all knew that was the case from the beginning. What's your take on the civil rights movement in the 60s? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee Willie Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 It' jjust typical disgusting British colonialism. John pilger did a great documentary on Iit called the stealing of a nation, well worth a watch. All his stuff is good. It's on YouTube I just checked but can't post a link as on a tablet, you both should definitely watch it when you have a spare hour. Aye, I found it. http://www.sprword.com/videos/stealinganation/ STEALING A NATION (John Pilger, 2004) is an extraordinary film about the plight of people of the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean - secretly and brutally expelled from their homeland by British governments in the late 1960s and early 1970s, to make way for an American military base. The base, on the main island of Diego Garcia, was a launch pad for the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 Aye, I found it. http://www.sprword.com/videos/stealinganation/ STEALING A NATION (John Pilger, 2004) is an extraordinary film about the plight of people of the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean - secretly and brutally expelled from their homeland by British governments in the late 1960s and early 1970s, to make way for an American military base. The base, on the main island of Diego Garcia, was a launch pad for the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. That's the one its really good you should watch it when you have the time only 54 minutes long Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 The chagos islands Which is why we have an ongoing Supreme Court case which will be giving its judgment soon in which the legality of the U.K. Governments' actions there will be assessed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 Yes. Very funny. America was founded on the idea that a person the majority of people might support can't even give a speech. Oh wait, that's the 3rd world and not the USA where that is supposed to happen. Freedom of speech also comes with responsibilities - Trump's language is anything but responsible. He deserves the response he is getting. The right have used freedom of speech to incite race hatred - it's no coincidence over here that when the BNP used to organise rallies there was an increase in racist attacks as a direct result of their racist agenda. Trump is no different - he might be a billionaire who the press suck up to - but it's still a racist agenda he is pursuing. Ask yourself this - would you have used the freedom of speech argument if Hitler's rallies had been interrupted by protesters? Peaceful protest has always been a right as well - what we saw in Chicago was Trump's red-neck thugs reacting to this protests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 It's the 1920's all over again: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/donald-trump-kkk/473190/?google_editors_picks=true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotbawmad Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 Ask yourself this - would you have used the freedom of speech argument if Hitler's rallies had been interrupted by protesters? Peaceful protest has always been a right as well - what we saw in Chicago was Trump's red-neck thugs reacting to this protests. Hitler's speeches in the beer halls were frequently interrupted and on one occasion he nearly died. However, the parallel with Trump is. The protesters are only giving legitimacy and more importantly allowing Trump to play the victim card. However, I will say the fact you're blindly siding with one party when there was clearly fault on both sides is somewhat telling. There is nothing to separate the protesters from what they claim to be protesting against, which is why I have no respect for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 Hitler's speeches in the beer halls were frequently interrupted and on one occasion he nearly died. However, the parallel with Trump is. The protesters are only giving legitimacy and more importantly allowing Trump to play the victim card. However, I will say the fact you're blindly siding with one party when there was clearly fault on both sides is somewhat telling. There is nothing to separate the protesters from what they claim to be protesting against, which is why I have no respect for them. There is a huge difference. Trump has been encouraging his supporters to assault peaceful protesters, even silent ones. Of course he'll be delighted if the protests get more violent, he's based his whole campaign on whipping up hatred and rabble rousing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beermonkey Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 The chagos islands That's Interesting. I cannot ever recall hearing of the Chagos Islands but I knew of Diego Garcia. I googled them and found this. Some interesting comments. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7ff172c4-4a76-11e5-9b5d-89a026fda5c9.html#axzz42mby4yj3 …It has been half a century since the UK took direct control of the islands and created one of the world’s last colonies — using tactics UK ministers have recently described as shameful… …The saga also casts a spotlight on international relations, military strategy and underhand domestic tactics by British officials and politicians under successive — mostly Labour — administrations, as well as the current challenges in righting an historical injustice… Edit: It's from the FT and unfortunately they won't allow me to read it a second time. They want a subscription. It's a fascinating and shocking story. The removed inhabitants, described as "Tarzans and Man Fridays" in official communications at the time, have been trying to win the right to go back for decades but the UK government continue to block them. A few years ago, at the suggestion of the US, we created a marine reserve around the islands to ensure no resettlement is possible. A shameful state of affairs all round. It' jjust typical disgusting British colonialism. John pilger did a great documentary on Iit called the stealing of a nation, well worth a watch. All his stuff is good. It's on YouTube I just checked but can't post a link as on a tablet, you both should definitely watch it when you have a spare hour. Thanks for that, I'd never heard of this story either, just watched the Pilger documentary, shocking stuff, but not really surprising after some of the stuff i've been "just realising" over the last 5 or 6 years, there isn't a politician walking this earth that i would trust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 I'm scared.. Self funding my arse. http://shop.donaldjtrump.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 Which is why we have an ongoing Supreme Court case which will be giving its judgment soon in which the legality of the U.K. Governments' actions there will be assessed. Wow only 50 years after we stole an entire country to give as a military base to our besties, we're so humanitarian. And the UK Supreme Court is going to rule whether the UK acted illegally, I'm sure they'll be very impartial, was it not the same people that ruled we acted legally when we illegally invaded Iraq and killed a million people? But it turns out there is no need as the UN has already said we did act illegally, presumably we'll be giving their country back now, apologising profusely and paying massive compensation. I am literally going to hold my breath waiting for this to happen, can't be long now. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/19/un-ruling-raises-hope-of-return-for-exiled-chagos-islanders Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 Thanks for that, I'd never heard of this story either, just watched the Pilger documentary, shocking stuff, but not really surprising after some of the stuff i've been "just realising" over the last 5 or 6 years, there isn't a politician walking this earth that i would trust. You should some of Pilger's other stuff its all fantastic. Surely the best political documentary maker there has been. For social stuff Werner Herzog is outstanding too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee Willie Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 Which is why we have an ongoing Supreme Court case which will be giving its judgment soon in which the legality of the U.K. Governments' actions there will be assessed. Ffs it happened 50 years ago. Dae you think that a bunch of lords sitting in London is gonnae say that the Queens ministers acted illegally, underhandedly & unfairly. That's tantamount tae treason. You're the fledgling diplomat. Why no write a treatise on the subject vindicating the ministers concerned. I'm sure that would calm any international tensions then ye can stick it on your blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 Ffs it happened 50 years ago. Dae you think that a bunch of lords sitting in London is gonnae say that the Queens ministers acted illegally, underhandedly & unfairly. That's tantamount tae treason. You're the fledgling diplomat. Why no write a treatise on the subject vindicating the ministers concerned. I'm sure that would calm any international tensions then ye can stick it on your blog. There are good reasons for believing that David Miliband's Home Office acted illegally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 There are good reasons for believing that David Miliband's Home Office acted illegally. I would say a wee bit more than that was illegal and the illegality started a long time miliband got into politics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 I would say a wee bit more than that was illegal and the illegality started a long time miliband got into politics The point is there was supposed to be an acceptance of that historic injustice and a serious attempt at resettlement on Miliband's watch and he blocked it, almost certainly unlawfully even as a matter of domestic law, let alone international law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 The point is there was supposed to be an acceptance of that historic injustice and a serious attempt at resettlement on Miliband's watch and he blocked it, almost certainly unlawfully even as a matter of domestic law, let alone international law. Wellthat's the most reasonable thing I've read you write so well done. I'm sure the current tory government will be determined to right this wrong as soon as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee Willie Posted March 14, 2016 Share Posted March 14, 2016 The point is there was supposed to be an acceptance of that historic injustice and a serious attempt at resettlement on Miliband's watch and he blocked it, almost certainly unlawfully even as a matter of domestic law, let alone international law. In 2004, the government used the royal prerogative to nullify the rulings but this was overturned by the high court and court of appeal. The government then went to the House of Lords in 2008 to argue that allowing the islanders to return would seriously affect defence and security. That Mrs Windsor has a lot tae answer for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yank Mike Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 What's your take on the civil rights movement in the 60s? People did not have democratic recourse so obviously they deserve a lot more leeway in how they chose to express their views. Also, demands for the equal rights of people whose ancestors had been in this country for 400 years is different than demanding equal rights in this country for people who illegally moved here last year or who currently live on the other side of the world. The violence in some northern cities by the more extremist northern leaders was obviously unacceptable. The 99% peaceful movement in the south was a model for how political goals can be achieved non-violently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yank Mike Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 Freedom of speech also comes with responsibilities - Trump's language is anything but responsible. He deserves the response he is getting. The right have used freedom of speech to incite race hatred - it's no coincidence over here that when the BNP used to organise rallies there was an increase in racist attacks as a direct result of their racist agenda. Trump is no different - he might be a billionaire who the press suck up to - but it's still a racist agenda he is pursuing. Ask yourself this - would you have used the freedom of speech argument if Hitler's rallies had been interrupted by protesters? Peaceful protest has always been a right as well - what we saw in Chicago was Trump's red-neck thugs reacting to this protests. When has he incited race hatred? I would be for direct action against a political candidate who was advocating against the basic rights of citizens or against liberal democratic society, like Hitler. Trump is arguing that future immigration should be restricted and that people from other countries currently in the US illegally should not be given citizenship. What we saw in Chicago was an organized effort to shut down the speech of someone who is against immigration and the intimidation of people who support this policy. Hence why they chanted "We stopped Trump." It is clear that they were not trying to make their voice heard. They were trying to shut up political opponents. And the people being shut down are not Nazis or Marxist revolutionaries or other such antidemocratic people. Their opponents are people arguing peacefully for a democratic change to our immigration policy. The "protesters" were trying to intimidate people who might want to go to these rallies, and they were trying to intimidate people who might be on the fence about voting for Trump by showing that a small organized minority will cause chaos if this policy is implemented. It's unacceptable behavior in a democratic society, and it's especially unacceptable in America. And the fact that this was partially organized by Hispanic politicians is a travesty and just shows why the rest of the country is right to be worried about how these people are going to vote once they become the majority. As for your claim about redneck thugs reacting to peaceful protesters: The rallies have gotten progressively worse over the past few weeks as more and more people have made organized efforts to infiltrate private events. There have been no problems with protesters standing outside and registering their opinions peacefully. The Second City Cop blog has posted eye witness accounts from police on the scene. Direct quote from the blog: The media is downplaying the "protests" as isolated. It seems they aren't broadcasting footage of the debris being thrown across Harrison by Sanders/Hillary supporters at Trump fans. They also aren't mentioning the hordes running through the UIC parking structure breaking the windows of cars with Trump 2016 stickers. We haven't seen any mention of the Eisenhower takeover, nor the Incident Team call-outs from assorted Districts. It's almost like they're ashamed that the UIC tradition of supporting leftist terrorists (Ayers and his spawn) has come home to roost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.