Freedom of speech and protest

[DB008]

Conditioning 101

 

[moXJO]

How could the Conan sword not sell it for you?
And nazis don't forget them. Oh plus you become a wife beater if you don't lick boot. Come on sp that speech had it all.

Jokes aside, once you cut out the Hollywood bs then the heart of the message is correct.

There is just no way I can see the US coming together at this time. I'm going to walk back my comments of a smooth transition. The demonstration provoked the exact reaction from the media to stoke the fire.

 

[basilio]

Jokes aside, once you cut out the Hollywood bs then the heart of the message is correct.

There is just no way I can see the US coming together at this time. I'm going to walk back my comments of a smooth transition. The demonstration (!!?) provoked the exact reaction from the media to stoke the fire.

"The heart of the message is correct " That message was Arnies concern that the events at the Capitol were a destruction of the principles democracy was based on. He also excoriated the politicians who supported the mob attack and saw them as culpable as Trump in promoting the lies about election outcome. It has been these lies which have been used to drive this ongoing attack on the legitimacy of the Biden government.

So if we agree on the heart of the message we at least have reached the first step.

That makes "demonstration" as the description of attack on the Capitol building even more creative. The organisation of key members of the mob showed how determined they were to wreck havoc on Pence and co to stop the counting of the votes that would confirm Biden as President. There is plenty of footage showing what happened. Check it out.

Recalling Nazis From His Childhood, Arnold Schwarzenegger Decries The Capitol Assault

In an emotional video posted to Twitter, the former governor and Austrian immigrant says the mob that attacked the U.S. Capitol "trampled the very principles on which our country was founded."

www.npr.org

 

[sptrawler]

We in Australia don't have the firearm issues the U.S have, we aren't as politically outspoken and emotional about politics as the U.S is.
But we aren't as pure as driven snow, with regarding storming the capital building either, but as usual we do have a lot to say about other peoples behaviour. Something China has been quick to pick upon.
As usual bricks and glass houses come to mind, but as usual some people love to throw anyway.

1996 Parliament House riot - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

From the article:

The Australian Council of Trade Unions called the "cavalcade to Canberra" rally to protest against the industrial relations reform agenda of the Liberal-National Coalition Howard Government. The protest began with senior Australian Trade Union officials including ACTU President Jennie George and Assistant Secretary Greg Combet, as well as senior members of the Australian Labor Party rallying demonstrators from a podium.[1][2]

According to then President of the Senate, Margaret Reid, the initially peaceful protest deteriorated into violent action when a new group of demonstrators arrived in the early afternoon and, joined by people from the main protest, attacked the entrance to Parliament. Around 90 personnel were injured —including lacerations, sprains, and head and eye injuries. Damage to the forecourt and foyer of Parliament was initially estimated at $75,000 and the Parliamentary shop was looted. Nine rioters were arrested and charged with a variety of offences.


T]his group refused to accept police direction, forced a breach in police lines and ran towards the main front entrance of Parliament House. Unfortunately, it was apparent that some of these demonstrators were affected by alcohol. This group was supported by participants from the more general demonstration who were incited to join those involved in riotous conduct by a speaker from the official platform.

Police formed a protective line along the perimeter of the Great Verandah which was subsequently forced back to the main doors. The police line was withdrawn from this area due to the level of violence being experienced by officers and was redeployed to an area inside the front doors in support of parliamentary security personnel. This deployment stabilised the situation for a short period. However, demonstrators using increasing force broke through the first line of doors.

Once inside this area, demonstrators used weapons, including a large hammer, a wheel brace, a steel trolley and a stanchion torn from the external doors to break open the internal doors. Simultaneously, a second group of demonstrators used other weapons to break into the Parliament House shop, but were held at the internal doors. The shop was ransacked by demonstrators and major damage was caused by persons who subsequently occupied the area. After some two hours, the demonstrators were finally repelled from Parliament House and driven back onto the forecourt area and, shortly afterwards, they dispersed.

Parliament stormed in Australian riots

Amid scenes unprecedented in Australia, dozens of chanting rioters yesterday stormed Parliament House in Canberra, smashing its front doors and leaving its public entrance hall spattered with blood. They threw acid and urine at more than 300 riot police who were called in to control the...

www.independent.co.uk

rioters at australian parliament 1996 images - Google Search

 

[SirRumpole]

We in Australia don't have the firearm issues the U.S have, we aren't as politically outspoken and emotional about politics as the U.S is.
But we aren't as pure as driven snow, with regarding storming the capital building either, but as usual we do have a lot to say about other peoples behaviour. Something China has been quick to pick upon.
As usual bricks and glass houses come to mind, but as usual some people love to throw anyway.

1996 Parliament House riot - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

From the article:

The Australian Council of Trade Unions called the "cavalcade to Canberra" rally to protest against the industrial relations reform agenda of the Liberal-National Coalition Howard Government. The protest began with senior Australian Trade Union officials including ACTU President Jennie George and Assistant Secretary Greg Combet, as well as senior members of the Australian Labor Party rallying demonstrators from a podium.[1][2]

According to then President of the Senate, Margaret Reid, the initially peaceful protest deteriorated into violent action when a new group of demonstrators arrived in the early afternoon and, joined by people from the main protest, attacked the entrance to Parliament. Around 90 personnel were injured —including lacerations, sprains, and head and eye injuries. Damage to the forecourt and foyer of Parliament was initially estimated at $75,000 and the Parliamentary shop was looted. Nine rioters were arrested and charged with a variety of offences.


T]his group refused to accept police direction, forced a breach in police lines and ran towards the main front entrance of Parliament House. Unfortunately, it was apparent that some of these demonstrators were affected by alcohol. This group was supported by participants from the more general demonstration who were incited to join those involved in riotous conduct by a speaker from the official platform.

Police formed a protective line along the perimeter of the Great Verandah which was subsequently forced back to the main doors. The police line was withdrawn from this area due to the level of violence being experienced by officers and was redeployed to an area inside the front doors in support of parliamentary security personnel. This deployment stabilised the situation for a short period. However, demonstrators using increasing force broke through the first line of doors.

Once inside this area, demonstrators used weapons, including a large hammer, a wheel brace, a steel trolley and a stanchion torn from the external doors to break open the internal doors. Simultaneously, a second group of demonstrators used other weapons to break into the Parliament House shop, but were held at the internal doors. The shop was ransacked by demonstrators and major damage was caused by persons who subsequently occupied the area. After some two hours, the demonstrators were finally repelled from Parliament House and driven back onto the forecourt area and, shortly afterwards, they dispersed.

Parliament stormed in Australian riots

Amid scenes unprecedented in Australia, dozens of chanting rioters yesterday stormed Parliament House in Canberra, smashing its front doors and leaving its public entrance hall spattered with blood. They threw acid and urine at more than 300 riot police who were called in to control the...

www.independent.co.uk

rioters at australian parliament 1996 images - Google Search

I suspect that after some of these anarchists are arrested, convicted for insurrection and gaoled for life, the rest will disappear into the woodwork.

 

[sptrawler]

I suspect that after some of these anarchists are arrested, convicted for insurrection and gaoled for life, the rest will disappear into the woodwork.

It just makes me cringe, when I hear our ranter's and chanters, acting as though we have the high moral ground.
Also it surprises me how little research people do, before shooting off at the mouth, but that is the way today. Right or wrong it is freedom of speech, for all.

 

[wayneL]

"insurection"

LMAO, oh please!

Not discounting the possibility but you wanna really see the shyt hit the fan? Honestly that would be a fast track to either civil war, or absolute tyranny.

I don't think even you would want either of those, Horace.

 

[bellenuit]

Have those who claim Trump's free speech has been denied considered that he can hold press conferences, including official White House press conferences, at any time without censorship. He risks being asked questions though.

 

[wayneL]

Have those who claim Trump's free speech has been denied considered that he can hold press conferences, including official White House press conferences, at any time without censorship. He risks being asked questions though.

Like the Twitter band it would be contingent upon the mainstream media actually broadcasting such a press conference.

There are many accusations been made against The Donald, which I'm finding it difficult to either confirm or repudiate because of the bans.

It seems to me that, ipso facto, Trump is being denied the opportunity to defend himself in the public arena in sofar as the majority of people have access to. I WANT TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT HE SAID, but finding it difficult to source that information accurately.

With a position such as POTUS, that is super important and should not be up to the whims of an obviously biased social media company.

Consider if, after biden's latest pronouncement, that he was deemed to be a racist (and it pretty fair assumption based on that pronouncement), he was banned from social media.

Can you predict your reaction? If you can't, I certainly can.

I would invite you to look deeply into your soul and consider the monumental hipocracy that you and those like you are indulging in. In no way is it healthy for our western culture.

 

[rederob]

Like the Twitter band it would be contingent upon the mainstream media actually broadcasting such a press conference.

As @bellenuit notes, Trump can say what he likes, and the White House YouTube account can live stream and archive it, so your point about contingency is without merit.

There are many accusations been made against The Donald, which I'm finding it difficult to either confirm or repudiate because of the bans.

You can find all the repudiations on fact checking sites although, with over 25000, there is a fair bit to go through if there is something specific you are concerned about.

It seems to me that, ipso facto, Trump is being denied the opportunity to defend himself in the public arena in sofar as the majority of people have access to. I WANT TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT HE SAID, but finding it difficult to source that information accurately.

Rather disingenuous as Trump has made an artform of not being responsive to questions from the media, lying when he's in trouble, and otherwise hiding from public scrutiny. Specifically, however, every public comment Trump has made can be found on the internet.

With a position such as POTUS, that is super important and should not be up to the whims of an obviously biased social media company.

Media organisations do not want to be associated with further incitement attempts and have legitimately removed platforms that facilitate his proven delusions.

WRT to your comment on Biden, it's an unworthy, unsubstantiatable, false equivalence.

 

[bellenuit]

Like the Twitter band it would be contingent upon the mainstream media actually broadcasting such a press conference.

But Fox would broadcast it even if he stated blatant lies. The other MSMs would too, so long as he is not instigating violence. The White House web site would in any case carry the complete text of what he said. There is no way you can claim that you couldn't access what he would have said if you just use a little initiative.

 

[wayneL]

Interesting mental gymnastics....

But okay @rederob & @bellenuit

I do have limited time, I do have to make a living and have other commitments, perhaps you can help me.

Notwithstanding he has said some pretty dumb shyt in recent days, can you direct me to the comments which particularly incite violence? I don't deny that he has made such comments but would like to see/hear them.

I would also appreciate your analysis in comparing to any such comments to comments from the democratic side of politics which have obviously incited violence over the last year eg Maxine Waters and Kamala Harris ( et et al (sic))

 

[rederob]

Interesting mental gymnastics....

But okay @rederob & @bellenuit

I do have limited time, I do have to make a living and have other commitments, perhaps you can help me.

Notwithstanding he has said some pretty dumb shyt in recent days, can you direct me to the comments which particularly incite violence? I don't deny that he has made such comments but would like to see/hear them.

I would also appreciate your analysis in comparing to any such comments to comments from the democratic side of politics which have obviously incited violence over the last year eg Maxine Waters and Kamala Harris ( et et al (sic))

Trump has an obligation to uphold the Constitution, above all others. That includes respecting all laws and facilitating a smooth transition from office.
Instead, Trump fomented post-election supporter outrage and actively encouraged the falsehood that the election was rigged and "stolen" from him, and - importantly - something needed to be done about it. Under US law this constitutes "incitement."

 

[wayneL]

Trump has an obligation to uphold the Constitution, above all others. That includes respecting all laws and facilitating a smooth transition from office.
Instead, Trump fomented post-election supporter outrage and actively encouraged the falsehood that the election was rigged and "stolen" from him, and - importantly - something needed to be done about it. Under US law this constitutes "incitement."

"Something needed to be done" does not explicitly imply anything, much less violence.

Once again, some pretty dodgy mental gymnastics to try to imply incitement.

Additionally you have not answered my call to analyse statements from the democratic side which were clearly explicit incitement to violence, most notably Maxine Waters.

There are actually dozens of other examples of implicit incitements from the democratic side. Why are you not concerned about them?

 

[rederob]

"Something needed to be done" does not explicitly imply anything, much less violence.

Once again, some pretty dodgy mental gymnastics to try to imply incitement.

Additionally you have not answered my call to analyse statements from the democratic side which were clearly explicit incitement to violence, most notably Maxine Waters.

There are actually dozens of other examples of implicit incitements from the democratic side. Why are you not concerned about them?

Trump incited actions. They included those matters outlined in the attached Articles of Impeachment. To suggest "mental gymnastics" is needed to work out what was going on for the past 2 months is somewhat far fetched. All intelligence agencies knew what could play out on 6 January, and it is inconceivable that the Commander in Chief was not briefed. Given what he knew, he had a duty of Office to prevent it. Instead he and his enablers at the Ellipse encouraged via comments such as "if you don’t fight like hell, " his supporters to act in a manner which was foreseeable.

 

[wayneL]

You can interpret to your own ends all you like, but where is the *explicit* incitement @rederob ?

You know, like Maxine Waters did?

Until then, you have nothing.

 

[rederob]

You can interpret to your own ends all you like, but where is the *explicit* incitement @rederob ?

You know, like Maxine Waters did?

Until then, you have nothing.

You need to acquaint yourself with what words mean, as "explicit" is redundant.

 

[wayneL]

IOW, you got nothing bro.

But FYI


explicit
[ ik-splis-it ]SHOW IPA

See synonyms for: explicit / explicitly / explicitness on Thesaurus.com
adjective
fully and clearly expressed or demonstrated; leaving nothing merely implied; unequivocal:
explicit instructions; an explicit act of violence; explicit language.

clearly developed or formulated:
explicit knowledge; explicit belief.
definite and unreserved in expression; outspoken:
He was quite explicit as to what he expected us to do for him.

(Non applicable meaning deleted)

 

[SirRumpole]

"



Re: ****ASF Breaking News****

What a crock if shyte, pixel.

I we (or lunatics like bandt) praise such actions, then that legitimizes any and every group of protesters with a faux grievance, tree huggers, anti immigration groups, PETA, the pro gun lobby, legalize marijuana groups, the list goes on and on.

What then? Parliament ceases to function because of riff raff and wasters glueing themselves to the furniture.


Think about what you are saying, man. That's just ludicrous.

This really belongd in the lunatic left thread.




Slowly we inch....
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Post #4 in this thread.

Thanks H.

 

[wayneL]

"



Re: ****ASF Breaking News****

What a crock if shyte, pixel.

I we (or lunatics like bandt) praise such actions, then that legitimizes any and every group of protesters with a faux grievance, tree huggers, anti immigration groups, PETA, the pro gun lobby, legalize marijuana groups, the list goes on and on.

What then? Parliament ceases to function because of riff raff and wasters glueing themselves to the furniture.


Think about what you are saying, man. That's just ludicrous.

This really belongd in the lunatic left thread.




Slowly we inch....
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Post #4 in this thread.

Thanks H.

Not the point at all.

Clearly violence should be disavowed, and I do so in the strongest terms!

What we are talking about is Trump's purported incitement to violence.

Where is it?