See, I disagree with that.


The point about the flags is what they currently stand for. Why are they being waved today? The swastiksa stands for nazism. Original nazi ideology means white supremacy, others (notably Jews) were inferior and had to be destroyed as they threatened the arians.

And I think that runs through to the current white supremacists we're seeing. Even in their own self-proclaimed name. Others of a different skin colour are inferior and a threat.

Communist ideology is simply about common ownership, dissolution of classes and state etc. So to support this ideology is far, far different from supporting the actions of Stalin or Mao.

You do get that don't you? I mean, that's not too difficult.

Nazism is very different in this regard. Hitler was merely the ultimate proponent of the nazi ideology. Stalin, rather than dissolving the state, makes himself a dictator (as nazi ideology would support). Rather than give the means of production to the people, he takes it all from them. And then, obviously, come the years of terror and paranoia where millions are murdered or sent to the arctic circle.

Stalin's about as communist as Thatcher frankly in terms of adhering to the ideology.



So how exactly should the communist flag be triggering a person? Are rednecks ideologically opposed to collective means of production?


The confederate flag is somewhat similar to the swastika. The world knows the swastika was a hindu symbol originally but was adopted by the nazis and is now at the point where it almost has sole meaning for that. The confederate flag was the flag of the south in the civil war. It has been used since as a collective identity for the southern states, particularly in the two wars. No problem there. Good for people to identify behind something, especially in the vast US. But it's the fact it was then adopted by the KKK (and still is). It is the symbol for - again - white supremacy in the southern states. It has been linked time and again to racist murders in that area. It's a bit like our struggle with the St George's Cross of late. What should be a symbol of patriotism and pride in your country and its achievements has frequently been taken over by the right wing elements here and so, when you see it flown in front of houses or tattooed on burly men in Torremolinos, it's debatable whether the person is a proud patriot, maybe an ex-serviceman or maybe he's a frothing racist or football hooligan.

What I've seen here is a gradual move, as is usual of topic.

We start with;
Neo-Nazis have a protest and someone is killed. The KKK are there. It's a spurious reason to gather. They're armed and intimidating.
and we move on to;
The communists are as bad. It was the counter demonstrators too. They were being peaceful and had permission.

Many questions and salient points are conveniently ignored or selectively missed until we get to this point.
It happens nearly every time.

The supporters, who have the ability to write, of these idiots are a bit snidey.

The trouble is Dan a lot of these Crackers want to live in the past. The fight isn't really over a statue of General Lee. That is the excuse they use to parade themselves and say look at me. Are they just protesting about a statue? Why do they come with guns and shields and bats and flags and helmets?

It is meant to be incendiary and provacative. They want a cival war. They love hate. They are just the same as the Musso Terrorist's who want a war. We should send them to Iraq to duke it our with ISIS.

Personally I would let them stand by their Statue all day and would keep well away. If they didn't get a fight they would get bored very quickly and go back to drinking moonshine and fceking their sisters.

If they wanted to throw their weight around town like the bullies they are then that would be a different thing for me.

In the interest of balance/fairness shouldn't we devote some time to discussing the black Nazis.


Black Lives Matter leaders sued over Baton Rouge police shooting


An East Baton Rouge Sheriff vehicle is seen with bullet holes in its windows near the scene where police officers were shot, in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, U.S. July 17, 2016.
Jonathan Bachman
(Reuters) - A police officer wounded in a shooting rampage in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, last year that left three officers dead sued Black Lives Matter movement leaders on Friday, accusing them of inciting violence that spurred the attack.
The lawsuit filed in a U.S. district court in Louisiana named DeRay McKesson and four other Black Lives Matter leaders as defendants and sought at least $75,000 in damages.
It came on the one-year anniversary of one of the deadliest days in modern U.S. history for law enforcement. On July 7, 2016, a black man angered by what he saw as deadly racial bias in U.S. policing launched a downtown Dallas sniper attack, killing five officers deployed at a protest decrying police shootings of black men.
McKesson was not immediately available for comment and Black Lives Matter leaders have denied accusations that their movement promotes violence against police.
About 10 days after the Dallas shooting, a decorated ex-U.S. Marine sergeant opened fire on police in Baton Rouge, killing three officers.
Baton Rouge had been hit by waves of protests after two police officers earlier that month killed a black man, Alton Sterling, under questionable circumstances. The incident was caught on video and sparked national debate.
The officer wounded in Baton Rouge, who was not named in the lawsuit, was shot by "a person violently protesting against police, and which violence was caused or contributed to by the leaders of and by 'BLACK LIVES MATTER'," the filing said.
Gavin Long, the black gunman who killed the Baton Rouge officers and was later shot dead, identified himself as a member of an African-American offshoot of the anti-government, mostly white Sovereign Citizen Movement, documents showed.
Last year, McKesson and two other activists sued the Baton Rouge police department and other officials over the arrests of nearly 200 demonstrators during mostly peaceful protests over police killings.
Reporting by Jon Herskovitz in Austin, Texas and Bryn Stole in Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Editing by Andrew Hay

Good job the Betfair forum doesn't exist in the US WD. The term cracker has a racial connotation totally agree regarding the people involved. Sadly as for the weapons it's a part of their constitutional right to bare arms. The American constitution is something that needs to be looked at and modernised but I think you have a far bigger fight on your hands than the removal of one poxy statue

potlis- that's fair enough, but remember why BLM is relevant right now. You're seeing black kids being shot by police when unarmed in their cars and then turn on the news at the weekend and see hillbillies walking down the street with M16s while the cops look the other way. Whether or not you agree with their methods, it's hard not to agree that racial discrimination on a massive industrial scale is prevalent over there.

IT,

1. If the union jack had been co-opted by a bunch of ne'er do wells and had come to represent them in the majority of people's eyes rather than the UK then yes. But obviously it hasn't so your argument is weaker than my wife's tea.

2. Have you looked into why the local council voted to take down and sell the statue? Slightly more relevant to current events and the safety of its citizens than just p!ssing on ancient history.

3. Again, your confusing the communist ideology with dictatorial regimes (inherently anti-communist by nature) who were as far from that ideology as anything.

4. Bunch of hillbilly racists got tooled up and went looking for a fight. Being America, they found one.

The trouble is PP the old bill are not looking the other way regarding open weapon carrying, it's legal in many states so no laws were being broken ! Again I refer to the constitution needing to be looked at. And yes there are certainly many cases of excessive force used by the US Police but I'm sure they are far out way'd by the police who treat people in a decent and correct manner. Of cause that won't be filmed and put on YouTube. I would also add in fairness given the amount of guns in America I wouldn't fancy being a cop having to approach a car load of men on a deserted highway at 3am on your own.

there is no difference between a one party left wing nationalist state, and a one party right wing nationalist state.

it is better to have democracy, that is why the statue should remain.

PP there was a program recently either Stacey Dooley or Loui Theroux where that happened outside a mosque, it does happen. Again I refer to the American constitution

Mental Illness again in Paris  13 yo Girl Killed Car Rams Pizzera no mention of any names yet Perp Suicidal and On drugs... 

BBC appear to have swerved anyway ,wall to wall on the Incident in the states ,

how do they do that? ask them, don't lecture them.
that's democracy, they can only say yes or no
what`s wrong with that?

I don't disagree that it's allowed, it's a barnpot place.


I suppose the more pertinent question is why they still took them. They could go dressed as chickens, in drag, carrying pictures of Jan Molby etc etc. Why did they choose to get dressed either as Trump on the course or in military fatigues and carrying weapons. Yes, they're allowed but even the thickest of them realises the implied threat of deadly violence they were promoting.


LFC - the people, or at least their elected representatives, wanted it to be taken down. These clots travelled thousands of miles and will have seen it for probably the first and only time in their entire lives. If they love it so much, they can ask to buy it and erect it in their trailer park.

of course it may be offensive to some, but I am sure they can live with it.
lets put it this way, some people might be offended by the sight of a mosque in Britain.
but they have to put up with it.
should they be offended? I don't know.

It's not about being offended. The people of Charlottesville elected their local council. The council had a vote about what to do with the statue and the park. They voted to remove and sell it. That's all. It has literally nothing to do with Cleatus from Alabama or poor little rich kid from the Universtity of Mississippi. It is thousands of miles from where they live. Almost certainly they never even knew it existed before one of their online instructors told them that they needed to be upset by it.

But it's not a national monument. It's a local one in a local park. Maybe if you're so keen on people from thousands of miles away deciding things, you'd be quite happy for Europeans to have a say on our matters.