Charlottesville Car Crash Video

[uke2se]

@uke2se,

ST earlier posted a question that he loaded with literally several paragraphs of strawmen and false analogies, so much that the entire question had to be rejected as vily insencere and poisoned, as is par for the Nazi course.

However, the naked question was, IMO, fair, and it was this:


Suppose on that very same day, some non-violent Nazi swine had been killed by an armed and fighting antifa activist. You can pad this with details as you wish (weapon used...). The only detail I would insist on is that in the present situation, no one attacked the antifa person.

Consider that the antifa person came to Charlottsville because of some political view and intention, came to Charlottesville to express thatr political view and to fight against a political enemy. In short: Had political aims and goals.
And that antifa person killed some Nazi not in self defense.


--->>> Would you call that antifa person a "terrorist"? <<<---

Depends on the situation. Did he kill a single Nazi in a brawl? Did he use a motor vehicle to run into a crowd of Nazis?

None of it happened, of course. Nazis do this kind of thing. Antifa doesn't.

Remember the Google=Oxford definition - I copy what you copied:
"the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."
Surely, the use of violence would have been unlawful, the victim a civilian, and the antifa person in pursuit of political aims.

As I said, depends on the situation.

Now in reality, no antifa person actually killed a Nazi, but they did bring weapons, and did use weapons against Nazis, did they not? That's violence, unlawful, in pursuit of political aims, isn't it?

Self defense isn't unlawful.

So by your prefered dictionary definitions, what the militant antifa did on that day was terrorism.

Nope.

I reject this claim. I fully expect you however to agree to it without any ifs and buts.

Nope.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

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...

If you're being attacked by a crowd, you are entitled to defend yourself in anyway possible. The video shows he was clearly under attack.

 

[Oystein]

I had suggested that he got into his car to go home.
Now you:

It's not plausible at all, because the Nazis were at McIntyre park at this point. The road home for the Nazi terrorist doesn't lead to Water Street.

Mr. Field lives at McIntyre park, that is his home?? Are you serious??

He would also have seen Water Street blocked as he came down 4th streets at high speed, but instead of turning on East Main Street, which would have been easy to do, he barreled down 4th Street into the protesters on Water Street.

I fully agree, but what has this got to do at all with the proposition you seek, and fail, to disprove? The proposition was that he got into his car to go home.

Did he see the crowd blocking the street when he got into his car? Because, remember, you had claimed that he had already formed the intention to kill lefties when he got into his car. This was, I think we can agree on this, BEFORE he came down 4th streets at high speed, because he did not get into his car while it came down 4th streets at high speed - or did he, in your strange world?

 

[uke2se]

I had suggested that he got into his car to go home.
Now you:


Mr. Field lives at McIntyre park, that is his home?? Are you serious??

No. Read for comprehension, please. The Nazis at the rally, of which Fields was a part, had been moved to McIntyre park.

I fully agree, but what has this got to do at all with the proposition you seek, and fail, to disprove? The proposition was that he got into his car to go home.

Explain to me why he went to 4th Street if he was going home, please?

Did he see the crowd blocking the street when he got into his car?

He knew that's where the counter protesters were when he got into his car.

Because, remember, you had claimed that he had already formed the intention to kill lefties when he got into his car. This was, I think we can agree on this, BEFORE he came down 4th streets at high speed, because he did not get into his car while it came down 4th streets at high speed - or did he, in your strange world?

My strange world?

 

[Oystein]

Self defense isn't unlawful.

You grossly suck on reading comprehension. I had said: The only detail I would insist on is that in the present situation, no one attacked the antifa person.

Nope.

Your double standards are duly noted.

 

[uke2se]

You grossly suck on reading comprehension. I had said: The only detail I would insist on is that in the present situation, no one attacked the antifa person.

Are you asking me if in the hypothetical event that an Antifa person committed a terrorist attack per the definition I gave, would I consider that person a terrorist? The answer is yes. That, however, didn't happen, and wouldn't happen, because Antifa doesn't work that way. Nazis do.

Your double standards are duly noted.

What double standard?

 

[CaptainHowdy]

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.

Because with an ISIS attack, it's clear what happened. What happened here is that it clearly was NOT a terrorist attack.

 

[Oystein]

No. Read for comprehension, please. The Nazis at the rally, of which Fields was a part, had been moved to McIntyre park.

No, uke2se, YOU read for comprehension, PLEASE! I had suggested: "he got into his car to go home."
By that, you may be surprised, I actually meant: "he got into his car to go home."
Because I try to stay away from Doublespeak.

Explain to me why he went to 4th Street if he was going home, please?

Why would I need to? I do not have your psychic powers and do not know what he believed was his way home from where he got into his car.

He knew that's where the counter protesters were when he got into his car.

Again, you speak as if you believed you had psychic powers.

You cannot know what he knew when he got into his car! You are imagining this! Perhaps projecting what YOU would have done in his situation, but I am only guessing here, while you express complete faith and exactitude in your psychic abilities!

My strange world?

Yes.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

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.

It shows no signs of premeditation. And please share this "long history of Nazi terror attacks in the US"

 

[Oystein]

... because Antifa doesn't work that way. Nazis do.

What double standard?

Exactly that double standard.

You look the other way when antifa commit unprovoked acts of violence.

 

[uke2se]

No, uke2se, YOU read for comprehension, PLEASE! I had suggested: "he got into his car to go home."
By that, you may be surprised, I actually meant: "he got into his car to go home."
Because I try to stay away from Doublespeak.

I know you said that. I then informed you that he was at McIntyre park, nowhere near Water Street, and that the exits from the city do not lead to Water Street.

Why would I need to? I do not have your psychic powers and do not know what he believed was his way home from where he got into his car.

Because it's essential to your argument. You are saying that it is plausible that he was going home. I asked you why he would take the route through the city, congested with counter-protesters, when the route home was the other way.

Again, you speak as if you believed you had psychic powers.

No, I'm simply using my brain. I would recommend it.

You cannot know what he knew when he got into his car!

I can make a very educated guess, based on the timeline of the day.

You are imagining this!

As in, making it up, no.

Perhaps projecting what YOU would have done in his situation, but I am only guessing here, while you express complete faith and exactitude in your psychic abilities!

Are you claiming that I would have committed an act like this? Really?

Yes.

Tell me more of this strange world you imagine I'm in.

 

[uke2se]

Exactly that double standard.

You look the other way when antifa commit unprovoked acts of violence.

Where have I looked the other way when Antifa commit unprovoked acts of violence? I didn't even do that in your made up hypothetical. Stop lying.

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

I clipped all the items of your story that have no parallel to the actual incident or are irrelevant (such as what shirt the driver wore, as this could not be seen behind the shaded windows).

And you know this how?

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Yes. More ahead-of-time planning and preparation. I know this is a bit fuzzy yet. But you get the picture. Getting angry and mumbling "I gotta kill that bummer" five minutes before the act counts as premeditation for murder, but doesn't quite allow for "planning and preparation" the way a terrorist act is planned and prepared. I'd say there would have to be a temporal disconnect between a cool phase of planning and a hot phase of fighting.

I disagree. I see no reason why a person with a particular ideology can't see an opportunity to advance that ideology, take that opportunity right then and there, and it not be considered terrorism.

The shirt he was wearing can be seen when he was arrested. Please don't be so ignorant as to claim that maybe he changed his shirt after he narrowly escaped being beaten to death by the crowd but before he stopped.

Mr. Fields fled from the scene in his vehicle and was arrested elsewhere. Also, it's not clear from photos like this that his shirt would have been visible to the counter-protesters as he drove toward them.

If you're being attacked by a crowd, you are entitled to defend yourself in anyway possible. The video shows he was clearly under attack.

No, it doesn't. I've previously posted a link to a video showing two clips of the incident, and Elagabalus posted a link with additional photos. The only "attack" on Mr. Fields came from a kid who hit Mr. Fields' vehicle on the rear bumper with a handheld flag pole. Mr. Fields was already driving at speed toward the crowd when this occurred.

Your analysis is lacking in information, accuracy, and attention.

 

[Giordano]

They're obligated to stay off the street completely.

I've seen them smeared as communists, anarchists, and violent thugs, but my god, don't tell me that they were jaywalkers? Horror of horrors! Now we are talking not only justified homocide, but perhaps the driver being given an award.

You talk of demonstrators being in the street as if it was a violation of civilized conduct! Well, virtually all large public events I've ever seen have spilled into the streets at least to some extent. Permits or not. People coming or going. These have ranged from musical festivals to flea sales to political demonstrations. In Charlottesvile the demonstrations as a whole spilled into the streets: both sides. The police anticipate and plan for this and usually try to divert traffic in advance or in response. When it becomes a significant problem the police tell the people to get off the asphalt. It is that simple.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

What's all this talk about "Nazis?" There were antifa thugs committed to silencing any speech they didn't like with violence and there were people who wanted to preserve a statue.

 

[uke2se]

Your analysis is lacking in information, accuracy, and attention honesty.

Fixed that for you. You are talking to a Nazi.

 

[Giordano]

If you're being attacked by a crowd, you are entitled to defend yourself in anyway possible. The video shows he was clearly under attack.

Both lies.
The video shows him speeding toward the crowd well before his car bumper was dinged by a stick. He was not under any real attack by anyone, and especially not by the people in the crowd he drove into! One could more easily argue the person hitting the bumper was attempting to protect the crowd by warning the driver of the dangers of his speeding.

Even if under "attack" one is not entitled to defend oneself in anyway possible. If you are driving down a street and a kid hits your bumper with a stick you are not entitled to run over the crowd of people waiting for a bus half a block down. In fact you are not entitled to run over the kid holding the stick. If some people block your car and yell insults at you you are not entitled to pull out a shotgun and start blasting away. You reaction has to be proportional to the "attack."

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

On this page is video of Mr. Fields, in his vehicle and after the incident, fleeing down an unblocked street. You'll notice that the officers in view merely watch him go by without even reaching for their radios. Likely they were not even aware of the incident, which means this video was taken some distance away and (obviously) prior to Mr. Fields' arrest.

Mr. Fields was clearly out of harm's way at that point, with a number of officers in the area, yet he made no attempt to report his alleged near death at the hands of a blood-thirsty mob to authorities.

In fact, there's no indication that he at any point reported the incident himself. It seems he had to be tracked down.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

I've seen them smeared as communists, anarchists, and violent thugs, but my god, don't tell me that they were jaywalkers? Horror of horrors! Now we are talking not only justified homocide, but perhaps the driver being given an award.

You talk of demonstrators being in the street as if it was a violation of civilized conduct! Well, virtually all large public events I've ever seen have spilled into the streets at least to some extent. Permits or not. People coming or going. These have ranged from musical festivals to flea sales to political demonstrations. In Charlottesvile the demonstrations as a whole spilled into the streets: both sides. The police anticipate and plan for this and usually try to divert traffic in advance or in response. When it becomes a significant problem the police tell the people to get off the asphalt. It is that simple.

I was replying to the statement that pedestrians can walk in either direction down a one way street. They can....on the sidewalk.