Oh Oh! A Nazi Rally in Downtown Detroit

[Jimaz]

where are these horrible people based out of?

Here's SPLC's Hate Map.

[nailhed]

I don't buy this explanation for a second:
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/ne...nt/1410945001/
All DPD had to do was tell the Nazis that permission for their demonstration was denied and that if they appeared on the street they would be arrested for harassment, etc.--not protected while they disturb the peace, threaten / intimidate people, try to incite a riot, and urinate in public [[all of which is against the law). I call BS, and this is a sacrilege to have happened in the Arsenal of Democracy of all places...our grandparents are spinning in their graves. Hitler couldnt beat us, but apparently the police of the once mighty city of Detroit are willing to bow to the pressure of a few neo-Nazis? NAZISM DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION because advocating genocide and inciting riots is not a legitimate political discourse that would fall under 1st Amendment protections. There is no innocuous way to frame Nazism. We wouldn't give police protection to an ISIS march, so why the Nazis? We need to stop fooling ourselves into thinking we have to give every extremist group a platform--not everything is protected by free speech! All it takes is a little backbone.

The 1st Amendment protects “peaceable assembly”…they were not being peaceable, and in fact I have never seen a Nazi march where they were not spoiling for a fight.

[Richard]

^ You make it a habit to attend nazi rallies and conclude that they are all itching for a fight? I am with you on that one,let’s also grow a spine and ban women marches where they march with women parts on thier head,I am not gay so there is really no need to march for pride,climate change is a monetary hoax so let’s stop allowing those marches also.

Mounds of trash are left after anti Trump rallies,and anti fafa rallies break windows and destroy property,people after sports games form groups and destroy stuff also.

Lets grow a backbone and stop all of this and pick a few that we prefer to give the abilities to voice thier views,just as long as we agree with them,but then again in a country of 325 million it is going to tuff to get everybody to agree on the same thing.

Unless of course we all become nazis and force everybody to agree with what we choose,and use the police force to inforce it.

But wait a minute,would that not make us nazis? The very thing we appose?

[archfan]

...
Lets grow a backbone and stop all of this and pick a few that we prefer to give the abilities to voice thier views,just as long as we agree with them,but then again in a country of 325 million it is going to tuff to get everybody to agree on the same thing.

Unless of course we all become nazis and force everybody to agree with what we choose,and use the police force to inforce it. ...

You know, I'm okay with just banning the Nazis. Maybe pedophiles, too, but they don't seem to march much. I can stop after that.

[JBMcB]

You know, I'm okay with just banning the Nazis. Maybe pedophiles, too, but they don't seem to march much. I can stop after that.

The underlying problem, and has been the problem throughout history, is once you give the government the power to ban one thing, you give it the power to ban *anything* There is no "stopping after that." It either has the power to suppress free speech or it doesn't.

For an excellent example of this, check out what is happening in England. The police are investigating people for tweeting rude things. There are videos of the police showing up at people's doorsteps asking "Did you say xyz in a tweet last week?" Not threats, nor using what could be considered hate speech. Just being rude. Unsurprisingly, several of these instances involve politicians.

[jcole]

You can't deny people the right to peaceful assembly and as long as ALL they do is march or stand around in a group, you can't stop them. It's the symbols and clothing that can be denied. Google: Skokie

[Richard]

^ getting the jist of it without watching the movie it reminds me of a almost suburb size section outside of Orlando that was established by New York Jews.

If you were of color,Hispanic,single mother with children or even a single white guy that had a girl friend that occasionally spent the night you were discouraged from living there,community of around 3000.

It was not until the 2000s that a single mother won the Supreme Court battle after they took her there in order to prevent her from living there.

I do not agree with the nazis but also do not feel that one needs to wear offensive clothing in order to be offensive.

Recent school clothing banning is amusing at best,ban somebody for wearing a Trump shirt but yet it is okay for a 12 yo to wear a skirt so short you can see her bottom.

Offensive is subjective to individual feelings.

People say that Germany banned anything Hitler in order to wipe that part of history out but yet there are many remaining symbols and tourist attractions,the flac towers that protected Berlin during the war are condos.

[SammyS]

^ You make it a habit to attend nazi rallies and conclude that they are all itching for a fight? I am with you on that one,let’s also grow a spine and ban women marches where they march with women parts on thier head,I am not gay so there is really no need to march for pride,climate change is a monetary hoax so let’s stop allowing those marches also.

Mounds of trash are left after anti Trump rallies,and anti fafa rallies break windows and destroy property,people after sports games form groups and destroy stuff also.

Lets grow a backbone and stop all of this and pick a few that we prefer to give the abilities to voice thier views,just as long as we agree with them,but then again in a country of 325 million it is going to tuff to get everybody to agree on the same thing.

Unless of course we all become nazis and force everybody to agree with what we choose,and use the police force to inforce it.

But wait a minute,would that not make us nazis? The very thing we appose?

Totally correct especially how antiifa gets a free media pass with their violence and intolerance against conservative Trump supporters. Let’s not forget the Leftist encouragement of violence and assault against conservatives on alternative media such as YouTube.

[Zacha341]

Hah! The pedophiles will eventually be given their own 'protected' status... no protesting that!!

You know, I'm okay with just banning the Nazis. Maybe pedophiles, too, but they don't seem to march much. I can stop after that.

[Zacha341]

Too often we become [[with justification) that which we protest!

Totally correct especially how antiifa gets a free media pass with their violence and intolerance against conservative Trump supporters. Let’s not forget the Leftist encouragement of violence and assault against conservatives on alternative media such as YouTube.

[night-timer]

Offensive is subjective to individual feelings.

People say that Germany banned anything Hitler in order to wipe that part of history out but yet there are many remaining symbols and tourist attractions,the flac towers that protected Berlin during the war are condos.

Yes, 'OFFENSIVE' is legally considered subjective and hence there is no legislation or court of law that can mess with it. It's just more bogus legal/police/political double-speak. But nobody told you that.

And, while we're at it, since this thread has had so many responses, what exactly offensive was said at this "MI Nazi" protest? What exactly were they protesting? All I saw [[at the top of the thread) was two cam-phone photos, probably taken from a car window.

How do you 'be' a Nazi? They have no nation, no leader and no war to fight. Not for ages.

What's their complaint? Israel, or Jews? Israel has bigger problems and enemies than swastika armbands.

'Opinions' are everywhere. I no longer trust or believe pretty much anyone... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9HmkRYlVZw

[Meddle]

What exactly were they protesting?

They're just supporting their leader, His Orangeness.

[nailhed]

I wasnt suggesting banning anyone from anything, muting anyone's free speech, or denying anyone the right to peaceable assembly.

The Nazis in question were NOT being peaceable, so I don't understand why the Detroit Police allowed them to march. All they did Saturday was hurl insults, disturb the peace, and even urinate in public, all with the express purpose of inciting violence--a motive that the DPD seems to have been aware of from the beginning. All DPD really had to do was show up and tell these goons that they must disperse or be arrested. Nothing I am proposing goes against any laws or violates anyone's rights, since the Nazis in question did not qualify for 1st Amendment protections to begin with, due to their behavior. They could have also been ticketed at the very least, for urinating in public and disturbing the peace.

And here comes the chorus of "ButWhatAbout-isms"...

[Richard]

Yes, 'OFFENSIVE' is legally considered subjective and hence there is no legislation or court of law that can mess with it. It's just more bogus legal/police/political double-speak. But nobody told you that.

And, while we're at it, since this thread has had so many responses, what exactly offensive was said at this "MI Nazi" protest? What exactly were they protesting? All I saw [[at the top of the thread) was two cam-phone photos, probably taken from a car window.

How do you 'be' a Nazi? They have no nation, no leader and no war to fight. Not for ages.

What's their complaint? Israel, or Jews? Israel has bigger problems and enemies than swastika armbands.

'Opinions' are everywhere. I no longer trust or believe pretty much anyone... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9HmkRYlVZw

First time I have seen that,going to have to see if there is more then one resource clarify that,who knows it may be true or a way to spread negativity towards Muslims.

Also on youtube is another video from a different perspective of what really happened during WW2,that view shows how Hitler was drawn into the war and Russia actually wanted to hang back and wait until Germany was exhausted from defeating the rest of the world then swoop in for the kill,which was why Hitler went after Russia while they were strongest,because they viewed them as the real enemy.

They are not protesting,they are exercising thier right under the freedom of speech AND assembly.

So they assemble and by thier mere presence protesters come and protest against them,in turn exercising their right to also.

We really do not have to agree with anybody no matter how horrible we view them but we need to agree on letting them have thier day.

When you think about it our founding fathers came from a time when every possible scenario had already played out through decades of wars,revolutions and kings and they kinda took all the worst possible scenarios and condensed it down to a bill of rights as a protective measure,that is what we fight for because that is what protects and preserves our way of life and there will always be somebody there testing and trying to eliminate that.

[Honky Tonk]

@ least they weren't hiding their faces under black balaclavas and breaking out McDonald's windows. As far as urinating in public, I showed up for jury duty one day and some guy took a dump on the 36th District Court steps. Let them play Nazi Guys, march around waving their little flags, and go home. Whether I like it or not, they have rights too. This is after all America, not the Chinese Republic.

[stasu1213]

I'm not sure ignoring things EVER is a good answer. The worst thing to ever do in a bad situation is "nothing".

I agree. I had heard blacks on certain radio stations saying that people should stay at homes inside if and when the Nazis come marching down their hoods. I would not stay inside of my house for any protestors or intruders are marching down my street. I would want to be outside keeping an eye on them in case they will get brazen enough to go on properties or attack a neighbor on a street.

[gvidas]

Yes, 'OFFENSIVE' is legally considered subjective and hence there is no legislation or court of law that can mess with it. It's just more bogus legal/police/political double-speak. But nobody told you that.

And, while we're at it, since this thread has had so many responses, what exactly offensive was said at this "MI Nazi" protest? What exactly were they protesting? All I saw [[at the top of the thread) was two cam-phone photos, probably taken from a car window.

There's video out there if you want it. About 11 people in Nazi regalia marching down Jefferson, several armed with long guns and many of the rest openly carrying handguns. One of them has a megaphone and is chanting "fuck you faggots, white power."

It's a threat, and if you don't perceive how that is threatening either you're sympathetic to their views or oblivious to the harm done.

I'm reminded that the famous photo of Nazis burning books in the street shows them while they destroyed the archives of the Institute of Sex Research, a leading LGBTQ health/research nonprofit.

Our laws already set limits on "free speech" when it causes harm. What we're failing to do here is recognize the violence and the harm because they're wrapping it in the thinnest of lies.

[archfan]

What exactly were they protesting?

Obviously, they were there to be provocative during the Pride gathering. Their dearest hope was that a fight would break out, so they could get publicity [[and play victim). That's why I thought DPD handled it well. They were stuck with a valid permit, so they made the best of the situation by making sure no one granted the jerks their wish.

[archfan]

You can't deny people the right to peaceful assembly and as long as ALL they do is march or stand around in a group, you can't stop them. It's the symbols and clothing that can be denied. Google: Skokie

NSPA v Skokie. And even banning the symbols just leads to the same people using frogs and tiki torches as substitute symbols.

I'm mostly joking about banning protests, but it is frustrating when people are happily defending the jerks as if they were just another group of fellas wanting to get out in the fresh air, instead of people representing personified evil.

[jcole]

NSPA v Skokie. And even banning the symbols just leads to the same people using frogs and tiki torches as substitute symbols.

I'm mostly joking about banning protests, but it is frustrating when people are happily defending the jerks as if they were just another group of fellas wanting to get out in the fresh air, instead of people representing personified evil.

I'm dead set against them being able to even exist, but constitutionally they have a right to assemble. I'll take anything that can be done to limit their exposure down to and including telling them they can't wear a swatika. I'd prefer if they made them wear pink tutu's, stand in one spot and shut the hell up, but I don't see that happening

[Maof]

why the need to open carry at a "peaceful" protest. two long guns and three handguns? i'm guessing to show their manhood.

[Zacha341]

I've never much cared for open carry in a practical personal sense.

I think the advantage is in NOT letting an assailant KNOW you are armed. Not advertise such.

Nazi's and their guns? That's a different issue.

[jcole]

You mean the manhood they wish they had. It's substitution.,

why the need to open carry at a "peaceful" protest. two long guns and three handguns? i'm guessing to show their manhood.

[Richard]

There's video out there if you want it. About 11 people in Nazi regalia marching down Jefferson, several armed with long guns and many of the rest openly carrying handguns. One of them has a megaphone and is chanting "fuck you faggots, white power."

It's a threat, and if you don't perceive how that is threatening either you're sympathetic to their views or oblivious to the harm done.

I'm reminded that the famous photo of Nazis burning books in the street shows them while they destroyed the archives of the Institute of Sex Research, a leading LGBTQ health/research nonprofit.

Our laws already set limits on "free speech" when it causes harm. What we're failing to do here is recognize the violence and the harm because they're wrapping it in the thinnest of lies.

Your link from 1939 from the famous photo of Nazis burning the books from the bookstore.

Are you aware that in this country and at that time,that bookstore would not have been allowed to exist.

Even up into the 1950s homosexuality was considered illegal in the US and you could not work for the government.

No different then in the UK or even Canada,people support immigration from countries where the price of being gay is death,they do not lose that mindset with a change of geography and people protest in the street in support of thier entry.

That’s why the rest of the world did not intervene at that time,because Jews and homosexuality were not exactly on the list of most desirable, anywhere.

To say supporting the rights of 12 people marching down the street is the same as supporting thier cause is exactly the same mindset as they have.

Lock up the women and children and break out the M60s,12 Nazis have invaded the city and it is WW2 all over again.

They were there to intimidate,how about just not not being intimidated by them?

There used to be a long lost saying that children used to chant,

Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.

Now it is,I am offended by that word,let’s make it illegal.

[Honky Tonk]

What would have been cool is if someone found their cars and put "Gay and Proud" bumper stickers on them. Welcome to Detroit MF'er.