Riot caused by protests to Neo Nazis

French Ninja

Newbie
Joined
Jan 8, 2005
Messages
2,177
Reaction score
2
http://www.foxnews.com/images/180363/1_21_101505_ToledoRiots1.jpg

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,172379,00.html
TOLEDO, Ohio — A crowd that gathered to protest a white supremacists' march Saturday turned violent, throwing baseball-sized rocks at police and vandalizing vehicles.

Six people were arrested and police, fire and media vehicles were damaged, Police Chief Mike Navarre said.

At least two dozen members of the Roanoke, Va.-based National Socialist Movement (search), which calls itself "America's Nazi Party," gathered at a city park to march under police protection. Organizers said they were demonstrating against black gangs that were harassing white residents.

The march was canceled, and the violence broke out about a quarter mile away from the park along the planned route.

Keith White, a black resident, criticized city officials for initially allowing the march.

"They let them come here and expect this not to happen?" said White, 29.

Two hours after authorities called off the march, 150 officers in helicopters and cruisers and on foot, bicycles and horses continued to chase bands of youths.
When I see these pictures of these scumbags outside of department stores in huddled masses, I don't see Americans. Hell, I don't even see humans. I see animals; zombies and leeches. I wouldn't care if any of these gangbangers get whats coming to them. There is no reason to be breaking into people's houses in that city.
 
mhm strange becuz they are "racist" they are animals 2 you......
 
Spicy Tuna said:
mhm strange becuz they are "racist" they are animals 2 you......
Both are animals in my mind; the Neo Nazis and these "people".
 
all the violence started when the neonazis where gone....
 
Keith White, a black resident says...

That made me laugh hah!
 
Spicy Tuna said:
all the violence started when the neonazis where gone....
Wow just realized this reading through the article again (or at least it started kinda far from them)

That's pretty sad. Sounds like a pretty nasty area, gang violence up the ass and rising neo nazis. Which is essentially acting as another rival force to make it even worse.
 
Sigh, if you saw the police esorting Nazis you'd want to kick there ass too.
 
um.... those "people" in " DA HOOD" where terring down fences etc.....
 
Solaris said:
Sigh, if you saw the police esorting Nazis you'd want to kick there ass too.
I could care less what happens to a Nazi, but their response is pretty ****ing stupid. Someone else put it well in reference to this incident.

"OH NO, THEY'RE MARCHING IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. LET'S LOOT OUR OWN BUILDINGS."
 
I hate white supremecists, and I hate gangs. Both are equally as bad of a stain in this country.
 
sounds like the white supremecists were doing the right thing for once. not looting, just protesting as every group in this nation has the right to do. i dont agree with them but they should sure as **** be allowed to say it. i hope those gangbangers get ****ed up by some po'.
 
gh0st said:
sounds like the white supremecists were doing the right thing for once. not looting, just protesting as every group in this nation has the right to do. i dont agree with them but they should sure as **** be allowed to say it. i hope those gangbangers get ****ed up by some po'.
You know, I agree with you. Neo-nazis are scum, but these idiots that started rioting in response to their presence pretty much proved whatever point the skinheads were trying to make. All of them are douchebags.
 
Contraceptive bomb.

Yeah, both sides in this situation were in the wrong.
 
gh0st said:
sounds like the white supremecists were doing the right thing for once. not looting, just protesting as every group in this nation has the right to do. i dont agree with them but they should sure as **** be allowed to say it. i hope those gangbangers get ****ed up by some po'.
I don't. I fully support thoose people who anti-march them, and throw things at them. Allowing them to march un challeneged makes them seem more legitimate.

Look what happened, now.
The racists came to town and there was riots, hell thats better PR than any counter demonstration.
 
Solaris read the it first -_- the neo nazis where already gone when those "people" started trashing houses, fences etc.....
 
So they say.

Edit: Source is fox news, trying to portray anti-nazis as troubles makers.

I expected no better.
 
its progen that the police escorted the "nazis" out before it all started and I SAW ITY ON TV
 
"They let them march here and expect this not to happen?"

That pretty much somes up my view.
 
"ey Nazis >where< here lets tear down our own houses and fences"
 
Protesting is done to voice your opinion.
people do not riot cause of dissatisfaction nor to voice their anger, they riot because they see they have an excuse to steal things, to vandalize and get away with it.
The neonazis were right, and as far as I'm concerned there were no anti-neonazis, if they wanted to voice their opinion they would not have drowned it in violance. they saw an excuse to riot, and should be treated like criminals.
 
Grey Fox said:
Protesting is done to voice your opinion.
people do not riot cause of dissatisfaction nor to voice their anger, they riot because they see they have an excuse to steal things, to vandalize and get away with it.
The neonazis were right, and as far as I'm concerned there were no anti-neonazis, if they wanted to voice their opinion they would not have drowned it in violance. they saw an excuse to riot, and should be treated like criminals.

True, but people also riot when theyre really really angry and nobody is listening to them. These rioters however = assholes.
 
Solaris said:
I don't. I fully support thoose people who anti-march them, and throw things at them. Allowing them to march un challeneged makes them seem more legitimate.

Look what happened, now.
The racists came to town and there was riots, hell thats better PR than any counter demonstration.
the racists come to town and peacefully demostrate while the very people they are protesting against riot and throw shit at ambulences. "seem more legitimate"? all voices in a democracy are legitimate even if they hate black people or mexicans. the racists come to town and the gang bangers break houses and emergency vehicles. you are a backwards ass person solaris.
 
Racist marchers ->angry people -> riot

The problem? The marchers.
 
Solaris said:
I don't. I fully support thoose people who anti-march them, and throw things at them. Allowing them to march un challeneged makes them seem more legitimate.

Look what happened, now.
The racists came to town and there was riots, hell thats better PR than any counter demonstration.
Yeah I fully support anyone who marches against them too. Getting violent though just furthers their cause.

And what's worse though, is that they didn't get violent against the nazis. The Nazis cancelled the march, then the 'counter marchers' attacked police then set fire to their a building and started looting a bar and gas station. All that does is ruin their neighborhood and give positive PR to the nazis which is a very very bad thing.

Thing that's been said is that these weren't really counter marchers at all much and the mayor stated they were gang members out in full colors just using the event as a catalyst. There probably were a few anti nazi demonstrators there but the gang bangers took over and ended up making the nazis look better.
 
I drove through it because I live about an hour away from Toledo and wanted to go to the headshop 632 Main. I was suprised to see, downtown, they were burning bars and conveinence stores and whatnot, but they had no problem with me going to a headshop, go figure. Crazy gangbangers!
 
You want democracy and freedom? Then you better respect the consequences. The only fools are the ones who decided that it was wrong for neo-nazis to protest because of the problems that they may indirectly cause.

If you don't want national socialists to gain power then you better not make them seem correct by being violent and you sure as hell better not turn them into the victims.
 
The black counter-protestors/rioters only managed to help prove the neo-nazi's point, quite frankly.

"Neo-Nazi vs. Ghetto thugs: Whoever wins, we lose"
 
I love how a community of blacks doing wrong automatically equates to labeling them all thugs. :dozey: I wonder why Fred Phelps is never labeled a thug, why Kenneth Lay is never labeled a thug, why white people that riot after a football game are never labeled thugs; but as soon as you get black people involved then they are those no good, son of a bitch thugs.

This was a fully black community, that permit to allow those nazis to assamble there should have never been given out. Before you try to say they have a right to do this they don't. Laws prohibit a permit to be given out if there is a great risk for violance; any idiot could have seen that allowing something like this would lead to violance. This is the fault of the idiots in the city government that allowed those permits to be given out.
 
I love how a community of blacks doing wrong automatically equates to labeling them all thugs. I wonder why Fred Phelps is never labeled a thug, why Kenneth Lay is never labeled a thug, why white people that riot after a football game are never labeled thugs
Were we discussing any of the above? That's what I thought. But anyway, I'll play along:
"OMG RAAACCCCCCCIIIIIIIISSSSMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!"
This was a fully black community, that permit to allow those nazis to assamble there should have never been given out. Before you try to say they have a right to do this they don't. Laws prohibit a permit to be given out if there is a great risk for violance; any idiot could have seen that allowing something like this would lead to violance. This is the fault of the idiots in the city government that allowed those permits to be given out.
Sources for all of the above please. Last I checked they were marching down a white neighborhood but I could be wrong. o.0
 
MiccyNarc said:
Were we discussing any of the above? That's what I thought. But anyway, I'll play along:
"OMG RAAACCCCCCCIIIIIIIISSSSMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!"
No, we were discussing a community being outraged by nazis given a permit to assamble in their back yards; you were the ones that labeled these people thugs simply because that community just happened to be black.
Sources for all of the above please. Last I checked they were marching down a white neighborhood but I could be wrong. o.0
Sources for what? The neighborhood they marched on was black. To march there they needed a permit. City officials gave them that permit which is what lead to this. Any idiot could have seen something like this happening, that permit should never have been given.
 
No Limit said:
I love how a community of blacks doing wrong automatically equates to labeling them all thugs. :dozey: I wonder why Fred Phelps is never labeled a thug, why Kenneth Lay is never labeled a thug, why white people that riot after a football game are never labeled thugs; but as soon as you get black people involved then they are those no good, son of a bitch thugs.

This was a fully black community, that permit to allow those nazis to assamble there should have never been given out. Before you try to say they have a right to do this they don't. Laws prohibit a permit to be given out if there is a great risk for violance; any idiot could have seen that allowing something like this would lead to violance. This is the fault of the idiots in the city government that allowed those permits to be given out.
Sorry, but they were thugs, the real counter protest to the issue was very small, read the statements by officials, most of the rioters were gang members out in full colors. And yes, anyone who riots and commits those crimes is a thug. Why you're trying to make any criticism of this as racism I don't know, but that's despicable. They should be allowed to assemble and any 'violence' that might occur would need to be suppressed by the police. Same for any group anywhere else.
 
RakuraiTenjin said:
Sorry, but they were thugs, the real counter protest to the issue was very small, read the statements by officials, most of the rioters were gang members out in full colors. And yes, anyone who riots and commits those crimes is a thug. Why you're trying to make any criticism of this as racism I don't know, but that's despicable.
The point is any time you have a black community involved and something happens they are thugs. This case just a bunch of thugs, New orleans gets flooded; the people looking for food are thugs, Lay gets arrested its a white collar crime.
They should be allowed to assemble and any 'violence' that might occur would need to be suppressed by the police. Same for any group anywhere else.
No, you need to get your facts straight. The law says that they have the right to get a permit only if the risk of violance is small; any idiot with half a brain knew how this would turn out.
 
No Limit said:
The point is any time you have a black community involved and something happens they are thugs. This case just a bunch of thugs, New orleans gets flooded; the people looking for food are thugs, Lay gets arrested its a white collar crime.
The looters were thugs, the people looking for food were not. The only reason it appeared that more looters were black was because of literal proportion and math. 70% of the city's population is black, so by that logic 7/10 of the looters would probably be black too. It's a numbers game.

Thug usually refers to violent, personal crime, too. Gangbangers and such. The neo nazis are thugs just the same because (although not in this specific scenerio) they usually do violence and such. The ghetto gangbangers who turned violent here and set fire to buildings are thugs and need to be locked up. White collar crime doesn't make it any less despicable or criminal, it's just a destinguishing factor between violent physical crime and financial or fraud, etc. People who do that should be locked up the same but I'm probably not going to be extremely worried about them being in the vicinity of my children as I would be about a neo nazi or a gangbanger being nearby.

No Limit said:
No, you need to get your facts straight. The law says that they have the right to get a permit only if the risk of violance is small; any idiot with half a brain knew how this would turn out.
There's no way that is predictable. Who could have known thugs would go crazy and burn down buildings? By that logic then they could never ever march and many things in the future could be stopped simply because large populations find them offensive. I can understand denying it if there was a specific threat at that time to that spot, that's a KNOWN security precaution.

What's more is they DID cancel the march. The police told them to leave after they saw what was ahead. The march was cancelled and the thugs STILL did this. So your arguement of not allowing it is satisfied either way.
 
We aren't calling them thugs because they are black. We are calling them thugs because they looted and attacked their neighbors for a stupid excuse. It just so happens that they(the looters) are largely black.
Stop playing the race card.
 
The looters were thugs, the people looking for food were not. The only reason it appeared that more looters were black was because of literal proportion and math. 70% of the city's population is black, so by that logic 7/10 of the looters would probably be black too. It's a numbers game.

Thug usually refers to violent, personal crime, too. Gangbangers and such. The neo nazis are thugs just the same because (although not in this specific scenerio) they usually do violence and such. The ghetto gangbangers who turned violent here and set fire to buildings are thugs and need to be locked up. White collar crime doesn't make it any less despicable or criminal, it's just a destinguishing factor between violent physical crime and financial or fraud, etc. People who do that should be locked up the same but I'm probably not going to be extremely worried about them being in the vicinity of my children as I would be about a neo nazi or a gangbanger being nearby.
We are kind of going off on this way too much. Admit it, when blacks are involved you get the thug label involved. Do you not agree with this? I am not excusing what they did but after hearing many on the right label the people in New Orleans thugs I got a little sick of it.

There's no way that is predictable. Who could have known thugs would go crazy and burn down buildings? By that logic then they could never ever march and many things in the future could be stopped simply because large populations find them offensive. I can understand denying it if there was a specific threat at that time to that spot, that's a KNOWN security precaution.

What's more is they DID cancel the march. The police told them to leave after they saw what was ahead. The march was cancelled and the thugs STILL did this. So your arguement of not allowing it is satisfied either way.
Come on, lets be real just for a second. The city gave a bunch of neonazis permission to go protest blacks in a black neighborhood surrounded by crime. You honestly don't think anyone could have seen this coming? The law states that when you do have a large propability for a riot to break out you deny the permit which should have been done.
 
the neo nazi protesters werent granted a permit by the city, no limit. they werent marching through the streets. theres no law or city ordinance required to walk on the citys streets. sounds like its you rwho needs to get their facts straight, K? bitch.
 
Back
Top