Charlottesville Car Crash Video

[Porpoise of Life]

Great to see so many posters defend the driver while claiming that his victims were the real terrorists who had it coming.

Informs me who to stay away from...

 

[Childlike Empress]

Great to see so many posters defend the driver while claiming that his victims were the real terrorists who had it coming.

Informs me who to stay away from...

Please do.

 

[bluesjnr]

Great to see so many posters defend the driver while claiming that his victims were the real terrorists who had it coming.

Informs me who to stay away from...

How would you describe those who formed the group that the victims were in and what do you think were the intentions of this group on that particular day?

 

[Oystein]

...No thoughts until BOOM.

The brief moment he did apply the breaks, as the one still photo shows, seems proof that he DID see he was going into obstacles (other word for "living people in the flesh and blood"). So he clearly was not blind.

Also, with the insistence that he wasn't going truly madly fast, there is no thought needed to just break and not run into what clearly is not a passable street.

What difference does it make if the protest was guarded or unguarded? What difference does it make if they walked against the direction of the one-way-street?
In a day of protests, isn't a street protest maybe the first thing you'd expect on the road?
Are you suggesting he was navigating by road map and the words of city permits, and thus justified to expect to find the road clear?

What utter utter nonsense is that?


I'd grant that this piece of **** Nazi ******* was all riled up and emotionally in distress. Still, he drove into a crowd with no intention to stop. He drove into an unpassable road, pedestrians blocking his way, on very obvious purpose. The only thing that may be called an "accident" is crashing into cars, as he may not have seen them when they were blocked by all the HUMANS!


He employed his muscle car as a weapon.
The most benign interpretation would be that maybe, perhaps, conceivable (though you Nazi enablers are speculating here with zero evidence, to apologize for this Nazi scum) he merely meant to use his deadly weapon to scare the crowd out of the street. But using a weapon against people, and ending up killing 1 and injuring 19, is homicide - most clearly NOT an accident.

Imagine him running at the crowd while shooting round after round out of an assault rifle. Aiming just over the head of the people he wants to FORCE out of the way. And ends up killing one and injuring 19 with his goddamned assault rifle.

Accident?

What utter, vile bollocks!

 

[snoop_doxie]

No doubt the Jews orchestrated this!

Or, George Soros paying for this entire act.
Yep, Soros did it.

 

[Oystein]

...the small irregular demonstration and that it would come across that corner, the wrong way up a one way street, at that time.

Of what relevance is the direction of the one-way street? Pedestrians are not obliged to heed that sign, it's for wheeled traffic!

 

[bluesjnr]

The brief moment he did apply the breaks, as the one still photo shows, seems proof that he DID see he was going into obstacles (other word for "living people in the flesh and blood"). So he clearly was not blind.

Also, with the insistence that he wasn't going truly madly fast, there is no thought needed to just break and not run into what clearly is not a passable street.

What difference does it make if the protest was guarded or unguarded? What difference does it make if they walked against the direction of the one-way-street?
In a day of protests, isn't a street protest maybe the first thing you'd expect on the road?
Are you suggesting he was navigating by road map and the words of city permits, and thus justified to expect to find the road clear?

What utter utter nonsense is that?


I'd grant that this piece of **** Nazi ******* was all riled up and emotionally in distress. Still, he drove into a crowd with no intention to stop. He drove into an unpassable road, pedestrians blocking his way, on very obvious purpose. The only thing that may be called an "accident" is crashing into cars, as he may not have seen them when they were blocked by all the HUMANS!


He employed his muscle car as a weapon.
The most benign interpretation would be that maybe, perhaps, conceivable (though you Nazi enablers are speculating here with zero evidence, to apologize for this Nazi scum) he merely meant to use his deadly weapon to scare the crowd out of the street. But using a weapon against people, and ending up killing 1 and injuring 19, is homicide - most clearly NOT an accident.

Imagine him running at the crowd while shooting round after round out of an assault rifle. Aiming just over the head of the people he wants to FORCE out of the way. And ends up killing one and injuring 19 with his goddamned assault rifle.

Accident?

What utter, vile bollocks!

Very, very small point.......... they are brakes not breaks.

 

[Porpoise of Life]

How would you describe those who formed the group that the victims were in and what do you think were the intentions of this group on that particular day?

I don't see how the intentions of a crowd justify ramming into them with a speeding car.
Unless someone would like to argue that this was the only way to prevent greater harm...

 

[Oystein]

...
Those who want to come up with a better scenario must first of all explain how he did know of the small irregular demonstration and that it would come across that corner, the wrong way up a one way street, at that time.

For FSM's sake how about by looking straight ahead while driving?!? Isnt that how every motorist is suppose to act?? It's not like it was foggy or the guy was coming around a corner or as if the crowd suddenly, magically materialized out of clear air!

 

[bluesjnr]

I don't see how the intention of a crowd justifies ramming into them with a speeding car.

I'm not making that case, would you be willing to answer the question I put to you? I'm interested to know, from you, what label you would use to describe those who formed the group that the victims were in, and what you think were the intentions of this group on that particular day?

 

[Hlafordlaes]

Or the driver, after being assaulted by a member of the crowd, speeds away in fear, and incidentally defends himself from the crowd with the best defensive weapon at hand- his car.

Not entirely wrong. Fascist bullies are indeed thumb-sucking cowards who panic easily, true. Their "bravery" also depends on unfair advantage, such as attacking the unaware from behind, true. Sissies through and through, moving in mobs for safety.

I understand the swastika really represents a broken or missing spine, four times over. Must be why their only topics are filth and dirt. Poor things!

 

[Porpoise of Life]

I'm not making that case, would you be willing to answer the question I put to you? I'm interested to know, from you, what label you would use to describe those who formed the group that the victims were in, and what you think were the intentions of this group on that particular day?

As I said, it's irrelevant. You don't plough a car into a crowd of people. If someone had rammed a crowd of Nazi protesters, my reaction would be the same.

 

[uke2se]

> C) There are some who wish to apply critical thinking in an attempt to unravel what may or may not have went down and to discuss it with other likeminded people, some of whom are participating here.

To offer either "avowed white supremacists" or "hardass conservatives in the thread who will accept any mealy-mouthed explanation for anything negative that anyone on the right does etc. etc." as the only explanations for anybody questioning the official story and public trail without jury of the driver, James Alex Fields Jr is somewhat limiting.

Has this kind of "critical thinking" been applied at any time to an ISIS car attack?

No. We never get page after page of people going "maybe he was just scared" or "maybe his car was attacked first". And rightly so.

 

[bluesjnr]

Has this kind of "critical thinking" been applied at any time to an ISIS car attack?

No. We never get page after page of people going "maybe he was just scared" or "maybe his car was attacked first". And rightly so.

Since all ISIS attacks are premeditated, are often followed up by direct attacks on unsuspecting members of the public, have never been carried out at a public protest, have been self admitted to be the responsibility of a recognised terrorist group with a clear agenda of terror you seem to be comparing apples with oranges.

That or you are a despicable ISIS apologist.

(no I don't think you are I'm just applying your logic here).

 

[uke2se]

Since all ISIS attacks are premeditated, are often followed up by direct attacks on unsuspecting members of the public, have never been carried out at a public protest, have been self admitted to be the responsibility of a recognised terrorist group with a clear agenda of terror you seem to be comparing apples with oranges.

That or you are a despicable ISIS apologist.

(no I don't think you are I'm just applying your logic here).

My logic says I'm an ISIS apologist when I clearly say it's right to not give the extremist the benefit of doubt?

This attack was just as premeditated as an ISIS attack, and Nazis have a long history of terror attacks in the US, as well as the rest of the world.

 

[Mumbles]

Has this kind of "critical thinking" been applied at any time to an ISIS car attack?

No. We never get page after page of people going "maybe he was just scared" or "maybe his car was attacked first". And rightly so.

If anything, it strikes me as the sort of garbage "analysis" that led people to conclude that, for example, Philando Castile was a known criminal who had his gun in his lap when he was killed. In the end, we have a car that clearly plowed into an easily visible group of people, and police have apparently identified him as one of the mob whop was filmed shoving police, screaming racial slurs, and some of who were recorded beating a random black guy with metal poles out of pure racial hatred. A trial for murder, among many other charges, is fully justified.

 

[bluesjnr]

As I said, it's irrelevant. You don't plough a car into a crowd of people. If someone had rammed a crowd of Nazi protesters, my reaction would be the same.

I didn't read the word irrelevant in your response, I'm trying to get at your reasons for stating

Informs me who to stay away from...

It looked a little like virtue signalling, so I wanted to find out your motivation for saying it and how you viewed the group that the victims came from you stated that people had called them the "real terrorists who had it coming", I couldn't find anybody who wrote that.

That you don't wish to elaborate is perfectly OK as I can't compel you to.

 

[bluesjnr]

My logic says I'm an ISIS apologist when I clearly say it's right to not give the extremist the benefit of doubt?

Yes, you are of the opinion that to question the accepted narrative of this event makes one a Nazi apologist. That's what I took from the statement,

Despicable Nazi terrorist apologetics in this thread.

This attack was just as premeditated as an ISIS attack

Are you claiming this individual was working as part of a cell, had worked out in advance where his targets were, had completed intel and surveillance, had rehearsed the attack, had considered escape and exploitation and was taking orders from someone higher up in the organisation?

I can't be sure but it looks very much to me like it was one POS who acted alone, on a spur of the moment urge without remotely considering the potential repercussions.

To suggest that it was part of a pre-planned operation is ridiculous.

and Nazis have a long history of terror attacks in the US, as well as the rest of the world.

Quite, but this wasn't one of them.

 

[Porpoise of Life]

I didn't read the word irrelevant in your response, I'm trying to get at your reasons for stating



It looked a little like virtue signalling, so I wanted to find out your motivation for saying it and how you viewed the group that the victims came from (you stated that people had called them the "real terrorists who had it coming", I couldn't find anybody who wrote that.

That you don't wish to elaborate is perfectly OK as I can't compel you to.

Oh, so you're playing a game of 'gotcha' taking an overly literal reading of my post and trying to catch me on an inconsistency, because you assume I have a certain ideological position? Well, it's a forum tradition I suppose.

I've certainly seen people in this thread make excuses for the driver, and I have seen people imply the protesters were violent thugs who should have expected something like that. I'd prefer not to derail the thread into some kind of navelgazing meta discussion where we dissect posts in order to score points.
If you haven't seen the excuses or accusations I talked about, fair enough.

Now, back to the Nazi protester speeding downhill into a mob of hippies and anarchists.
I don't think he could have ploughed into them by accident. And I think that's bad, even if the people he was trying to murder weren't very nice either.

 

[Oystein]

Did you take the ride down the hill with Google StreetView (just go straight forward a couple of blocks)?...

This makes the situation EVEN CLEARER.

There is a STOP sign at the intersection with Jefferson St.
Which means car is supposed to stop there. If he is running the STOP sign at elevated speed, he is on a criminal course of action already.

From that STOP sign, he as a clear, unobstructed view down to where he ended up chosing to become a murderer.

This, or he was driving blind.
But no, the fact that he braked and swerved for an ever so brief moment shows he saw that he was speeding into a crowd. Releasing the brakes immediately means he had resolved at that point to murder.