Boston ‘Free Speech Rally’

**PerpetuallyBored74** · 08-20-2017, 03:04 AM

Originally Posted by boller4president

You left out the rest of the chant. It was Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho, free speech has got to go. What a bunch of clowns.

Amazingly, they don't seem to realize that without free speech they wouldn't be free to chant that it has to go.

(of course, if it was gone, then I guess they'd have no reason to chant for it to go)

**callahan09** · 08-20-2017, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by PerpetuallyBored74

Amazingly, they don't seem to realize that without free speech they wouldn't be free to chant that it has to go.

(of course, if it was gone, then I guess they'd have no reason to chant for it to go)

I can't find any source for that. I see various sources like Newsweek, Washington Post, Heavy.com and even the Baltimore City Paper saying they were chanting "hey hey, ho ho, white supremacy has got to go" but nothing indicating the "free speech has got to go" chant. Sounds made up to me.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

**Dirt1** · 08-20-2017, 02:49 PM

I actually thought that the way things went down in Boston represented what America is all about. Two groups peacefully expressing their opposing views.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**boller4president** · 08-20-2017, 03:33 PM

dbl post

**boller4president** · 08-20-2017, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by Dirt1

I actually thought that the way things went down in Boston represented what America is all about. Two groups peacefully expressing their opposing views.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Really?

The free speech protest was peaceful (unlike Darb I won't speak on equivocal terms on who attended or what their background was all I could tell from the coverage was that it was peaceful).

The counter rally on the other-hand was shutdown because it violent and the protestors started charging police trying to get at the free speech rally. This isn't what America is about at all. We don't have protected thought. Anyone who wants to hold a peaceful rally should be able to do so regardless of their views.

What needs to happen is these groups should to sue the local and federal governments for failing to protect their first amendment rights.

**Dirt1** · 08-20-2017, 07:16 PM

Originally Posted by boller4president

Really?

The free speech protest was peaceful (unlike Darb I won't speak on equivocal terms on who attended or what their background was all I could tell from the coverage was that it was peaceful).

The counter rally on the other-hand was shutdown because it violent and the protestors started charging police trying to get at the free speech rally. This isn't what America is about at all. We don't have protected thought. Anyone who wants to hold a peaceful rally should be able to do so regardless of their views.

What needs to happen is these groups should to sue the local and federal governments for failing to protect their first amendment rights.

Both sides that were demonstrating in Boston had a right to be there. I have never condoned violence to make a political point on either side.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**NCRAVEN** · 08-20-2017, 10:54 PM

Originally Posted by callahan09

I can't find any source for that. I see various sources like Newsweek, Washington Post, Heavy.com and even the Baltimore City Paper saying they were chanting "hey hey, ho ho, white supremacy has got to go" but nothing indicating the "free speech has got to go" chant. Sounds made up to me.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

While this is not proof, it makes it much more believable when you see them burning signs that say free speech and saying anyone who supports the constitution is not welcome.

https://m.facebook.com/BostonAntifa/...pe=3&source=48

**PerpetuallyBored74** · 08-21-2017, 03:00 AM

Originally Posted by NCRAVEN

While this is not proof, it makes it much more believable when you see them burning signs that say free speech and saying anyone who supports the constitution is not welcome.

https://m.facebook.com/BostonAntifa/...pe=3&source=48

So, no room for any Americans then.
Love how they think of it as their city, and how WE MUST LEAVE.

Yeah, let's just get rid of the US constitution.
Especially that deplorable Civil Rights Act, really what where we thinking when we ratified that. We must have all been on a bender or something.

**boller4president** · 08-21-2017, 03:15 AM

Originally Posted by Dirt1

Both sides that were demonstrating in Boston had a right to be there. I have never condoned violence to make a political point on either side.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think when your express purpose for protesting is to shutdown someone else expressing their first amendment rights then I have a problem with that regardless of what their views are.

Earlier, I was on the side of a Nazi exception but I see now how a slippery slope that is. The left is attempting to label any dangerous speech to their agenda as hate speech and effectively trying to silence it.

They frame every issue on good vs evil and moral vs immoral terms. It's explicitly designed so anyone with the slightest bit of nuance is thrown in with the rest of evil doers they of course are on the side of the moral and just...always without exception. We saw that in Charles where those who condemned violence on both sides but also condemned the hate, bigotry of the Nazis were somehow drawing equivalencies.

I think the only way it ends is if the court steps in, otherwise free speech is effectively dead. If you can round up enough protestors to shut down an event then it's not free speech it's mob rule.

**PerpetuallyBored74** · 08-21-2017, 03:42 AM

Originally Posted by boller4president

I think when your express purpose for protesting is to shutdown someone else expressing their first amendment rights then I have a problem with that regardless of what their views are.

Earlier, I was on the side of a Nazi exception but I see now how a slippery slope that is. The left is attempting to label any dangerous speech to their agenda as hate speech and effectively trying to silence it.

They frame every issue on good vs evil and moral vs immoral terms. It's explicitly designed so anyone with the slightest bit of nuance is thrown in with the rest of evil doers they of course are on the side of the moral and just...always without exception. We saw that in Charles where those who condemned violence on both sides but also condemned the hate, bigotry of the Nazis were somehow drawing equivalencies.

I think the only way it ends is if the court steps in, otherwise free speech is effectively dead. If you can round up enough protestors to shut down an event then it's not free speech it's mob rule.

Eliminating criticism and dissension means you eliminate any checks and balances against authoritarianism. You also eliminate any hope of continued progress, as no one is ever allowed to question your "truth".
It goes without saying that this goes against human nature--we are curious and explorative by nature, always seeking more of the truth, so that may gain a greater understanding.
Of Everything.
Including ourselves.

Is there anything more dangerous than someone who has already decided that they already know everything.

Fascism is not compatible with freedom.

**steelerhater** · 08-21-2017, 03:47 PM

Originally Posted by boller4president

I think when your express purpose for protesting is to shutdown someone else expressing their first amendment rights then I have a problem with that regardless of what their views are.

Earlier, I was on the side of a Nazi exception but I see now how a slippery slope that is. The left is attempting to label any dangerous speech to their agenda as hate speech and effectively trying to silence it.

They frame every issue on good vs evil and moral vs immoral terms. It's explicitly designed so anyone with the slightest bit of nuance is thrown in with the rest of evil doers they of course are on the side of the moral and just...always without exception. We saw that in Charles where those who condemned violence on both sides but also condemned the hate, bigotry of the Nazis were somehow drawing equivalencies.

I think the only way it ends is if the court steps in, otherwise free speech is effectively dead. If you can round up enough protestors to shut down an event then it's not free speech it's mob rule.

It is a slippery slope. So if people against abortion protest, is it ok if they get beat up by counter-protesters?

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk

**steelerhater** · 08-21-2017, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by PerpetuallyBored74

Eliminating criticism and dissension means you eliminate any checks and balances against authoritarianism. You also eliminate any hope of continued progress, as no one is ever allowed to question your "truth".
It goes without saying that this goes against human nature--we are curious and explorative by nature, always seeking more of the truth, so that may gain a greater understanding.
Of Everything.
Including ourselves.

Is there anything more dangerous than someone who has already decided that they already know everything.

Fascism is not compatible with freedom.

We're not talking about critisism & dissension. We're talking about violence. Criticize & dissent all you want on CNN & MSN. These counter-protesters show up for one reason - to fight.

Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk