Let's talk about Charlottesville.
First off, what happened.
A group of white nationalists congregated at
the University of Virginia's campus on Friday night.
They chanted slogans, some more hateful than others.
For example, "You will not replace us" and "White lives matter".
The Friday night rally was a peaceful protest,
aside from a minor scuffle near the end.
Then came Saturday.
The day that the Unite the Right protest and
counter protest were scheduled to take place.
The counter protesters arrived earlier than when the
Unite the Right protest was scheduled to take place.
They marched up to McGuffey Park, where they had a permit to protest.
They arrived and set up in McGuffey park.
The white supremacists set up on the only street which
was open for people to enter and leave McGuffey park.
The white supremacists then began throwing tear gas,
balloons filled with urine, using pepper spray and tasering people
The police then came into McGuffey park and pushed the counter
protesters into the street, and into the white supremacists.
The counter protesters had to walk through the crowd
of white nationalists who were yelling things like,
"I believe that we will win",
"Get the F*k out of here"
and "Appreciate the bat"
So, the white supremacists were verbally aggressive
and provoking the counter protesters.
The obvious then happened.
Some counter protesters snapped.
They fought, and people got seriously hurt.
Then later on, as the counter protesters were trying to leave in their vehicles,
one of the white supremacists hit the car of a counter protester with a bat,
because the counter protester was driving
recklessly through a crowd of white supremacists.
The counter protester drove into the crowd
and a group of about half a dozen white supremacists,
descended on the car with bats and clubs.
The counter protester seemed to panic and drove in reverse
into the club wielding white supremacists.
That sounds really bad on the side of the white supremacists right?
It really sounds like they were violent.
But, wait. I told you the story in reverse.
It was the white supremacists who were kicked out of Emancipation Park,
and pushed into the hands of Antifa and BLM (What really happened in Charlottesville).
It was the white supremacists who were told to
"Get the F*K out of there", and "Appreciate the bat".
It was the white supremacists who were tasered,
pepper sprayed, had balloons of urine and tear gas cannisters thrown at them
(Footage of C-P Violence).
It was some of the white supremacists who snapped and fought the counter protesters.
It was a counter protester who began to beat an elderly white man
for no apparent reason (AltRight Parking Garage Battle).
The counter protesters were also the ones waving
bats and clubs at the white supremacists, trying to
get the white supremacists to fight back. (AltRight Parking Garage Battle).
Let me run you through the video evidence and the location of the two sides.
This is a video of the Friday night march through the University of Virginia campus.
In this picture you can see the distance
between Emancipation park and McGuffey park.
Emancipation park is where the statue was and where
the white supremacists had a permit to protest.
McGufey park is where the counter protesters had a permit to protest.
They are separated by 1 block.
This is the parts that were closed off by police.
And these are the two exits through which White Supremacists were pushed out.
This is where AntiFa and BLM where positioned.
Here you can see the tear gas being used by Antifa
(Footage of C-P Violence).
Here you can see counter protesters and white supremacists fighting
(Street War: Charlottesville).
In this video, you can actually see the white supremacists
being pushed into the crowd of counter protesters
(Footage of C-P violence).
Here are some videos showing the white supremacists
walking through AntiFa and BLM.
Also shows the aggressiveness of AntiFa and BLM (Moral Equivalence).
Here you can see an elderly white man being attacked by
what seems to be a member of AntiFa (AltRight Parking Garage Battle).
Here you can see footage of the car that killed Heather Heyer (Moral Equivalence).
Now that you know what happened, we need to talk about 2 things.
These 2 things are completely unrelated.
The first is, the behaviour of both sides.
The second is, what each of the two sides stands for, and who is right.
First of, the behaviour of both sides.
As you can see in this video clip,
the counter protesters were verbally and physically aggressive.
You can also see that the white supremacists
were also verbally and physically aggressive.
The only cases in which violence can be tolerated,
and to a certain extent, are in a war and self-defense.
Neither side in the Charlottesville protest was in a literal war.
There were some cases, however,
of self defense in the Charlottesvillle protest.
But, each and every one of these cases were instigated by an aggressor.
Aggressors came from both sides,
white supremacists and counter protesters.
It is in light of this fact that both sides are guilty of unjust violence,
and thereby, both sides carry blame in this tragedy.
Like President Trump says,
"We condemn in the strongest possible terms, this egregious display of hatred,
bigotry and violence on many sides"
(President Trump Statement on Charlottesville Saturday).
This discussion on the behaviour of both sides should have ended here.
But, the media made it clear that they do not agree that blame lies on both sides.
So, let me explain.
It is illegal to violently attack another individual,
and all the media, especially those who are critizizing President Trump,
would be outraged if the sides had been reversed,
like what I said when I started this video.
They would be condemning the actions of this member of Antifa,
had he been a White Supremacist (AltRight Parking Garage Battle).
They would be condemning the actions of these
counter protesters beating this White Supremacist,
had he been a counter protester (AltRight Parking Garage Battle).
And in fact, some media did.
Here is Deandre Harris, a hip-hop artist
who was beaten in the same fight as the aforementioned white supremacist.
You can see him in the blue hood with the backpack.
Deandre Harris was said to be a victim of this fight.
Suffering a blow to the head.
The media say he is an innocent bystander
who was unjustly beaten by aggressive white supremacists.
But, the counter protesters were the ones
who were aggressive and instigated the fight.
In fact, the first blow in the fight came from Deandre Harris.
Let me walk you through some more footage showing you how the fight began.
Please note that I had to use 3 videos as none of them show the full fight.
Only disjoint parts.
Here are the white supremacists walking down the street.
Note how the white supremacists are peacefully walking down the street,
and it is the counter protesters who are verbally aggressive.
If you go through this video, you will see the man in the red shirt
hit a white supremacists with his stick, which is assault felony.
Assault felony is, "striking or threatening to strike a person
with a weapon or dangerous object" (CriminalDefenseLawyer.com).
Then a counter protester attempts to take the flag of one
of the white supremacists. and they begin a tug of war.
The counter protesters actions, attempt to
take the white supremacist's flag, is theft.
For a case of theft to be proven, it must be shown that the acussed
intended to take a person's property without their permission permanently.
Even in the case where the accused was not succesful.
For example, trying to walk out of a store with some merchandise hidden
in your jacket, and getting caught before succesfully walking out.
Here is video evidence showing that the counter
protester trying to take the flag is part
of Deandre's group of friends there, and that
they did steal another flag and burned it.
Meaning that although he was not succesfull in this
attempt, he still intended to steal the flag permanently.
It is a controversial flag, but that doesn't matter.
It is not his property and is therefore theft.
Please see the find law.com reference explaining theft for more information.
Back to where we left off.
At this point, the man in the red shirt is not engaged in a fight.
Deandre Harris is behind him, although you can't really see him.
In this next video you will see the man in the red shirt still not engaged,
tug of war going on and Deandre Harris behind the man in the red shirt.
Now you see Deandre Harris step in and hit the guy trying to keep his flag.
This is the first blow that we see in this footage and is clearly not in self defence.
The only thing that we see happening before this blow is a tug
of war between a white supremacist and a counter protester.
This act falls in the felony category of crimes.
As it is, "striking or threatening to strike a person
with a weapon or dangerous object" (CriminalDefenseLawyer.com).
Here we have a small gap, as when YouTuber, DuerstTheWuerst turns around,
the man in the red shirt appears engaged.
The man in the red shirt is then pepper sprayed and he runs backwards into Deandre,
knocking Deandre and the white supremacist with the white helmet over.
The supremacist with the white helmet then hits Deandre.
This is assault felony as well, as Deandre was not threatening anyone at that point.
Then he immediately starts running as some counter protesters converge on him.
At this point, it is clear that he is no longer a threat because he
is running from the counter protesters that are coming towards him.
The counter protester in the grey shirt hits him over the head with his bat.
Which is felony as the supremacist was not threatening anyone at that point.
A group of counter protesters then begin beating
the supremacist who is down on the ground.
Again assault felony because he isn't threatening anyone.
Some supremacists then come in and push the counter
protesters off the supremacist who is on the ground.
It is unclear at this point how aware the supremacists
were that Deandre was not a threat, as people
are being hit and falling over from both sides,
and they also know that Deandre has hit someone.
This man walking accross lets you know that there is no gap between these 2 videos.
Deandre is initially beat and then allowed to leave, being told, "Get out of here".
So, Deandre Harris was beaten.
Unclear how aware his attackers were that he was no threat.
Deandre Harris beat someone.
He was aware that his victim posed no threat.
Deandre's friends and the counter protesters there beat a supremacist.
They were aware that he was no threat.
The supremacist beat Deandre. He was aware that Deandre was no threat.
The narrative, that the counter protesters were innocent here and
the white supremacists bear the full blame is clearly false.
Both sides committed assault felony.
To make it clearer, what I am saying is, if it is
wrong for Deandre Harris to be beaten like this.
Then it is also wrong for this white supremacist and
this elderly man to be beaten in the same fashion.
Moreover, here is footage of the Friday night march.
The media hated on this display saying that it is impossible
for any innocent person to be in that crowd, because
"if you are a good person, and you are in a rally,
and people start marching 'Jews will not replace
us', and you stay there, you are not a good person"
(Did Good People Attend Charlottesville).
First off, the counter protesters like BLM and Antifa here are chanting,
If you agree with the Fox News specialist said,
then you would have to agree that if you are in
a crowd with people yelling things like this,
and you stay there, then you are a bad person.
Like Deandre Harris who is right there.
But as you can see, not everyone in both crowds were
partaking in the violence (AltRight Parking Garage Battle).
Secondly, the chant "Jews will not replace us" is either the FOX news
mishearing what the protesters were saying, or a deliberate miscaption.
You can clearly hear it here, the White Supremacists are chanting
"You will not replace us" (Unite the Right torch rally Charlottesville).
I agree, this is still racist,
but the reason this ticks me off, is that the misinformation does not end here.
Many media networks have declared that the White Supremacists
bear the full blame of the rally,
and President Trump's declaration that both sides were guilty,
a 50-50 blame, is a win for White Supremacists.
But, I would argue that it is win for neither side.
As you can see in the Friday night march,
the White Supremacists were peacefully protesting.
There was a minor scruffle near the end with the Alt-left.
What they said was racist, but they weren't physically attacking anyone
(Unite the Right torch rally).
On Saturday, you had members of AntiFa and BLM tasering, pepper spraying
and throwing bags of urine and tear gas cannisters at white supremacists.
The White Supremacists were forced out of their protest zone,
and through this violence.
The White Supremacists fought back (AltRight Parking Garage Battle).
For more information on the white supremacists and
counter protester exhibiting the same behaviour,
please see ShortFatOtaku's video in the description.
The point is that both sides were violent, and
therefore both sides carry blame for the injuries.
The form of this argument is: Premises:
Violently attacking someone is bad behaviour.
Protesters and counter protesters violently attacked each other.
Conclusion: Therefore, both sides partook in bad behaviour.
The form is: Premises:
X is Y. A and B did X.
Conclusion: Therefore, A and B did Y
Now, let's analyze the second point of this event.
What does each side stand for and who is right.
Like I said, this point has nothing to do with the
previous point on the behaviour of both sides,
because anyone can be violent for a 'cause'
(ie. IS, and the shooter at the church in Charleston).
So, what do the protesters (White Supremacists, KKK, etc) stand for?
They are against the removal of confederate statues and monuments.
What do the counter protesters stand for?
They are for the removal of confederate statues and monuments.
Who is right?
Well, what is a statue or a monument?
They are 3D representations of either a person, persons or event.
Why do we have statues?
They are to remember someone for a specific act that they did,
or an event for what it signified.
For example, a statue of George Washington
might be erected to remember him for his indispensable help in defeating the British
and allowing the USA to come into existence.
The statue of George Washington in this case would have nothing to do with his
being a slave owner, and should not be taken down because he was a slave owner.
The reasoning behind this is that the statue does
not promote or glorify his being a slave owner,
rather his work in defeating the British.
If the statue was erected to remember him as a slave owner,
then it should be taken down. As in that case it glorifies slavery.
As an argument, this is: Premises:
The purpose of a statue is to remember someone for a specific act that they did,
or an event for what it signified.
If the specific act, or significance of the event
remembered by the statue is forbidden by law or statute.
Conclusion:
Then that statue is forbidden by law or statute.
The form is: Premises:
A is B If B is C
Conclusion: Then A is C
That's it. Until next time.
For more infomation >> 🔴LIVE Fortnite Noob goes wild - Ep. 1 - Base Building Fortnite Gameplay - Duration: 1:19:36. 
For more infomation >> Police chief: No involvement in city manager's firing - Duration: 2:48. 
For more infomation >> Fallen officers' names added to memorial - Duration: 1:43. 
For more infomation >> Vigil honors domestic violence victims - Duration: 1:51. 
For more infomation >> Man accused of firing at officers appears in court - Duration: 1:24. 
For more infomation >> Qualquer Zed Faz «by Celler» - Duration: 2:14. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét