Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

At least 10 hurt at chaotic, bloody neo-Nazi rally at Capitol

A rally by a small group of neo-Nazi demonstrators at the state Capitol on Sunday erupted into a violent clash with protesters that left at least 10 people injured – five of them stabbed – and closed down streets as more than 100 police in riot gear and on horseback intervened to halt the mayhem.

Demonstrators battled with sticks, protest signs and other weapons as the Traditionalist Worker Party group – which said it wanted to assist supporters of presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump – began setting up for a scheduled noon rally on the west steps of the Capitol.

Even before the event began, clashes broke out at numerous locations around the Capitol grounds among the 400 people gathered for and against the rally, which had been heavily promoted – and denounced – in recent days on various websites. Injuries were reported on both sides of the altercation.

So the Nazis got a permit and were holding a legal rally?
Interesting.

Militant leftists show up with sticks and shit vowing to quash the free speech rights of the Nazis. Along the way, they confront a TV news crew, tell them to go away, and that cameras aren't allowed.

Leave it to the progressive left to make the Nazis and Skinheads look sympathetic.

You can't make this shit up.

Bernie may be a pussy but I here his supporters are violent!

kalm wrote:Bernie may be a pussy but I here his supporters are violent!

Yes, I've hear that too.

Those poor Nazi's.

Skjellyfetti wrote:Those poor Nazi's.

Yep. Free speech only applies when they agree with you. Amirite?

AZGrizFan wrote: Yep. Free speech only applies when they agree with you. Amirite?

Free speech is about the government. It's not about citizens allowing anyone to speak.

The protesters were cunts, though. I'm not defending them.

But, the neo-Nazis are as well. Certainly doesn't bother me that they were shut down. And, no free speech rights were violated.

I'm certainly not going to get worked up about neo-Nazi's getting the shit kicked out of them.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote: Yep. Free speech only applies when they agree with you. Amirite?

Free speech is about the government. It's not about citizens allowing anyone to speak.

The protesters were cunts, though.

And, the neo-Nazis are as well. Certainly doesn't bother me that they were shut down. And, no free speech rights were violated.

Really? People went to the hospital. I'm guessing their rally didn't quite go off as planned. Typical leftist BS...."no free speech rights were violated....nothing to see here....move along!"

If Neo-Nazis did this to a group of Bernie supporters it'd be on the front page of every media website in America and moveon.org would be shouting from the rooftops.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote: Yep. Free speech only applies when they agree with you. Amirite?

Free speech is about the government. It's not about citizens allowing anyone to speak.

The protesters were cunts, though. I'm not defending them.

But, the neo-Nazis are as well. Certainly doesn't bother me that they were shut down. And, no free speech rights were violated.

I'm certainly not going to get worked up about neo-Nazi's getting the shit kicked out of them.

Amen! Fuck tolerance.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:
Free speech is about the government. It's not about citizens allowing anyone to speak.

The protesters were cunts, though.

And, the neo-Nazis are as well. Certainly doesn't bother me that they were shut down. And, no free speech rights were violated.

Really? People went to the hospital. I'm guessing their rally didn't quite go off as planned. Typical leftist BS...."no free speech rights were violated....nothing to see here....move along!"

If Neo-Nazis did this to a group of Bernie supporters it'd be on the front page of every media website in America and moveon.org would be shouting from the rooftops.

Political POTY nominee! Analjelly gets boned again.

The socialists had the a permit

Socialists Vs Commies...a win win

They had a permit, they had a right to the rally. No matter how twisted the message may be. Out yelling them is okay, but that was bullshit.

Of course it could have turned out worse.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oxh5-hq6mc[/youtube]

People like Analjelly watch, while silently supporting, the beating of people who don't have similar values.

And we wonder why more Muslins don't openly protest the actions of their (so called) radical members?

The Left...tolerance...too funny.

I love the media narrative of this story as being "extremists" versus "counter protestors".

Pay no attention to the large mobs who want to shut down free speech, the real threat are the 20,000 skinheads across the country.

From what I saw the leftists are clearly the more dangerous group in this case. I say that because that woman they were interviewing was talking about accomplishing what they want to accomplish by any means necessary including violence. They went there with the intent of physically attacking the other group.

If a group gets a permit to hold a demonstration and some other group shows up and physically attacks them in a premeditated way that is a problem.

JohnStOnge wrote:From what I saw the leftists are clearly the more dangerous group in this case. I say that because that woman they were interviewing was talking about accomplishing what they want to accomplish by any means necessary including violence.

Sounds very much like you.

Lie, cheat, steal...you don't care how it is accomplished, you don't want Trump. You'll throw the rule of law away just to defeat Trump.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote: Yep. Free speech only applies when they agree with you. Amirite?

Free speech is about the government. It's not about citizens allowing anyone to speak.

The protesters were cunts, though. I'm not defending them.

But, the neo-Nazis are as well. Certainly doesn't bother me that they were shut down. And, no free speech rights were violated.

I'm certainly not going to get worked up about neo-Nazi's getting the **** kicked out of them.

Your lack of logic has once again taken you down the asshat road


Let's carry that out to its full conclusion then... if public violence against people you don't agree with is okey dokey, then violence in defense of your beliefs must also be 10-4, right?

The message here (and Nazis will be sure to have heard it) is that you cannot rely on the government to protect your unpopular views so you had better come armed so you can protect them yourself.

This reminds me of how far we have come since Reuben Greenberg and CPD protected the Klan as they marched down King Street in Charleston. Greenberg made it clear to all of us that if we allowed the Klan's march to be disrupted or if they were injured by protesters we would rightfully be sued by the ACLU. Fast forward to today- doubtful the ACLU will make noise, and no lawsuit for negligence will be heard against the city for failure to adequately safeguard the rights of legal protesters against illegal ones.


BTW speaking of Nazis, the plural of Nazi is not Nazi's, you second grade midget.

CID1990 wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:
Free speech is about the government. It's not about citizens allowing anyone to speak.

The protesters were cunts, though. I'm not defending them.

But, the neo-Nazis are as well. Certainly doesn't bother me that they were shut down. And, no free speech rights were violated.

I'm certainly not going to get worked up about neo-Nazi's getting the **** kicked out of them.

Your lack of logic has once again taken you down the asshat road


Let's carry that out to its full conclusion then... if public violence against people you don't agree with is okey dokey, then violence in defense of your beliefs must also be 10-4, right?

The message here (and Nazis will be sure to have heard it) is that you cannot rely on the government to protect your unpopular views so you had better come armed so you can protect them yourself.

This reminds me of how far we have come since Reuben Greenberg and CPD protected the Klan as they marched down King Street in Charleston. Greenberg made it clear to all of us that if we allowed the Klan's march to be disrupted or if they were injured by protesters we would rightfully be sued by the ACLU. Fast forward to today- doubtful the ACLU will make noise, and no lawsuit for negligence will be heard against the city for failure to adequately safeguard the rights of legal protesters against illegal ones.


BTW speaking of Nazis, the plural of Nazi is not Nazi's, you second grade midget.

I remember that rally.

I also remember a couple of Nazis throwing stones and bottles at us because we were sitting on the steps of the Knights of Columbus hall.

Ibanez wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
Your lack of logic has once again taken you down the asshat road


Let's carry that out to its full conclusion then... if public violence against people you don't agree with is okey dokey, then violence in defense of your beliefs must also be 10-4, right?

The message here (and Nazis will be sure to have heard it) is that you cannot rely on the government to protect your unpopular views so you had better come armed so you can protect them yourself.

This reminds me of how far we have come since Reuben Greenberg and CPD protected the Klan as they marched down King Street in Charleston. Greenberg made it clear to all of us that if we allowed the Klan's march to be disrupted or if they were injured by protesters we would rightfully be sued by the ACLU. Fast forward to today- doubtful the ACLU will make noise, and no lawsuit for negligence will be heard against the city for failure to adequately safeguard the rights of legal protesters against illegal ones.


BTW speaking of Nazis, the plural of Nazi is not Nazi's, you second grade midget.

I remember that rally.

I also remember a couple of Nazis throwing stones and bottles at us because we were sitting on the steps of the Knights of Columbus hall.

They weren't Nazis, they were St Andrews HS students, and they threw rocks at you because you were wearing bowties and those ghey green pants

CID1990 wrote:

Ibanez wrote: I remember that rally.

I also remember a couple of Nazis throwing stones and bottles at us because we were sitting on the steps of the Knights of Columbus hall.

They weren't Nazis, they were St Andrews HS students, and they threw rocks at you because you were wearing bowties and those ghey green pants

Yeah...ok.

St. Andrews HS students were some of the dumbest people I've met. Seriously, I'm friends with 3 grads that were in "honors" classes. Every single one of them had to take 1-2 remedial courses at Clemson and USC. Only 1 graduated.

Ibanez wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
They weren't Nazis, they were St Andrews HS students, and they threw rocks at you because you were wearing bowties and those ghey green pants

Yeah...ok.

St. Andrews HS students were some of the dumbest people I've met. Seriously, I'm friends with 3 grads that were in "honors" classes. Every single one of them had to take 1-2 remedial courses at Clemson and USC. Only 1 graduated.

I never said West of the Ashtray had a deep gene pool


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CID1990 wrote:

Ibanez wrote: Yeah...ok.

St. Andrews HS students were some of the dumbest people I've met. Seriously, I'm friends with 3 grads that were in "honors" classes. Every single one of them had to take 1-2 remedial courses at Clemson and USC. Only 1 graduated.

I never said West of the Ashtray had a deep gene pool


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

oOOH. Thems fighting words. I grew up in Northbridge. Then again, I attended BEHS>