Bizarre, Criminal law, Politics

Four Arrested In Destruction Of Confederate Statue In North Carolina

Cfakepathmugshots212_20170816_180608There are now four protesters arrested for the destruction of a roughly century-old statue of a Confederate soldier in North Carolina.  The bold act of property destruction was carried out in front of news cameras in broad daylight.  As a history nut, it is painful to see old works of art destroyed in this fashion. The arrested include Takiyah Thompson, 22, Dante Strobino, 35, Ngoc Loan Tran, 24, and Peter Gilbert, 39.

These individuals were clearly unwilling to join the debate over the removal of confederacy images or figures.  Instead, they destroyed not just a piece of history but a piece of art that, if the community decided in favor of removal, could have been placed in a museum or alternative setting.

Thompson climbed the ladder to help pull down the statue, which was dedicated in 1924.  She is a student at black North Carolina Central University. The three men are affiliated with the Workers World Party, which helped organize the Durham protest in response to the protests in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Notably, police spotted Tran at the court hearing for Thompson when a deputy asked him to help identify two people . Tran refused and he was arrested.

Tran later tried to excuse his destruction of the statue as warranted due to the racist society in which he lives: “Monday night hundreds of people gathered in front of the statue, and it was the will of everyone there that that statue come down knowing that in the state of North Carolina there is no legal route for removing Confederate statues.”  Of course, there is a legal route through the legislature.  What Tran and his colleagues were not willing to do is to leave it to the legislative process and the collective judgment of the citizenry.  Instead, they simply imposed their will on the majority and destroyed a historical art piece.

They are charged with Disorderly conduct by injury to a statue (Class II misdemeanor), Damage to real property (statue as a fixture (Class I misdemeanor), 14-288.2(c) Participation in a riot with property damage in excess of $1,500 (Class H felony), and 14-288.2(e) inciting others to riot where there is property damage in excess of $1,500 (Class F felony).

454 thoughts on “Four Arrested In Destruction Of Confederate Statue In North Carolina”

  1. When are the statues of Woodrow Wilson coming down? Only kidding.

    Instead of removing the statues, a better idea would be to add artwork or a historical marker elaborating on the Civil War. For example, in border states, like mine, a statue of a Union soldier could be added next to the statue of the Confederate soldier to remind contemporaries that the state had divided loyalties. If pictures are worth a thousand words, statues may be worth a million.

    1. Exactly, as vile as the Confederate cause was it still represented America at a time; and still represents some of America today. When you have a disease you must sometimes use a poultice to bring it out. Plaques should be attached to further explain the statues. The education system throughout the country should include a full explanation of the times. History erased is history repeated. Leave the statue of Lee but add an explanation of who he really was and what he really stood for, right there large enough not to be missed. In any event the Constitution protects the privacy of one’s beliefs as long as they do no harm. The statues, if all else fails should be available to be moved to private locals and the vandals that destroy them should be prosecuted for vandalism.

      1. “When you have a disease you must sometimes use a poultice to bring it out. Plaques should be attached to further explain the statues.”
        ***************************

        Plaques you say? Ain’t no self-respecting, kicking-the-butt-of-the Man radical gonna accept no stinkin’ establishment worded plaque. It’s burn, baby, burn!

        As for Poultice, I thought you were more of a leech kinda guy or maybe trepanation. Trepanation is very liberating they say.

  2. I’m sure the British felt that George Washington and co. were traitorous to the British Crown. Maybe if we were more loyal to Great Britain we would be a different country today. We wouldn’t be a country today. At best we’d be part of the British Commonwealth.

    1. There is a town in eastern NC named “Kinston”. It is an old town founded before the American Revolution. The name until the Revolution was “Kingston”. The towns people (men) dropped the “g” so as to satisfy revolutionaries and the new America.
      But. And its a big but yet related to another aspect of anatomy. The women henceforth state “that they dropped the G spot”. The women in that town do not enjoy sex. Another aspect about the name has come to pass. Almost all families are very interrelated. It is common to hear from a Kinston native that they are married to a second cousin and even a sister. If you don’t have “kin” there then do not move into that town.

    1. Ubiquitous problem for every US citizen. No one has the right to commit crime because of momentary “groupthink” as described by Tran. Millenials and the generations after them expect society to change on a dime, and react with anger and violence when it does not. The bigger issue is that the mob here, like others across the country, are distracted by statuary, and not focused on the very real economic issues that affect them. Sloppy thinking all around.

      1. It’s called “situational ethic.” A hallmark of the undisciplined left thinking. Impulsiveness, no regard to others, etc. Maybe after a few more of these reports the wind will go out of the sails some. I’m all for anyone being able to protest and share their views, but this is unacceptable, and these people need to be made a swift and harsh example of lawlessness.

    2. Where I find fault with Turley’s article is the suggestion that an average citizen has any sway with the North Carolina State Legislature.

      Why do you find fault with the truth. JT’s suggestion is accurate; there is a lawful process. It’s designed for change; not change as a result of temper tantrums, but change as a result of a cultural shift.

      1. What’s lawful is determined by those who make the laws. Public input has become almost removed from the lawmaking process. Instead, we get A.L.E.C. et al making decisions behind closed doors.

        1. ALEC promotes template legislation. They’ve been around for about 4 decades. They make no decisions, just supply text and ideas to actual decision-makers. You need to read something other than MacCow talking points.

          1. ALEC meets in secret with Right wing legislatures and promotes laws like “Stand Your Ground” and Voter Suppression. If their work is so benign, why not do it in the open?
            I actually read quite a bit, your presumption of where I get information appears to be just a rationale to dismiss it.
            I googled, ALEC, Secret Meetings and this was the first thing that popped up. I was already familiar with others.
            https://act.represent.us/sign/reporter-police-escorted-out/

            1. ALEC meets in secret with Right wing legislatures and promotes laws like “Stand Your Ground” and Voter Suppression. If their work is so benign, why not do it in the open?

              Enigma, I have no clue why you got the idea that it’s sinister to have business meetings with people without broadcasting the meetings. I do not think you’re going to find an incorporated body which maintains a principle that their lobbying is limited to testimony at legislative committee hearings. If you’re meeting with your legislator, you’re probably not podcasting it.

              Again, ‘voter suppression’ is code for what’s known more properly as ‘ballot security’. That’s purging the rolls of people who haven’t voted in four years (bog standard when I was in local politics), purging people who appear in local obituaries (bog standard when I was in local politics), requiring identification, indelible ink on the thumbs, and limiting postal ballots to shut-ins, soldiers, civilian employees of the U.S. government abroad, college students, and dependents of U.S. government employees abroad. Partisan Democrats are babble about ‘voter suppression’ fall into two categories: those who wish to continue to draw votes from convicts, aliens, people who’ve moved away &c; and those who know nothing and just strike attitudes.

            2. and promotes laws like “Stand Your Ground”

              Stand Your Ground is a modest amendment to the defenses permitted in criminal law. Essentially, someone attacked in a public place does not have a duty to retreat. Justification is an affirmative defense as a rule, and the burden of proof is on the defense.

                1. Evidence in homicide cases is derived from forensics and witness statements. The latter has never included the person killed. You fancy this is exclusive to cases where the defense of justification is invoked?

                    1. History is written by the intelligentsia, who may be sympathetic with the winners or the losers. See the Spanish Civil War for an example of historiography dominated by partisans of the losers.

                      And, no, it’s not written through the ‘lens of the victor’ any more than any other justifiable homicide and any more than any homicide period. You’re reciting aphorisms without considering whether or not they make any sense.

                    3. Simply repeating an invalid argument does not improve the argument.

                2. I have investigated homicides. All good homicide investigators consider they have a sacred duty to speak for the dead.

                  1. I have no reason to doubt any part of your statement. In addition to the good homicide investigators, some of them are maybe not so good or even lazy. How much of whether or not believing a claim of standing one’s ground depends on the believability of the killer, how much of believability is wrapped up in the investigators own biases and ability to relate to the person telling the story? The law, in my opinion is being used to protect some never intended and in other cases to justify homicide.

            3. enigma – reporters are not invited in when lobbyists meet with Congress, what is the difference with a reporter and ALEC?

              1. The reporter that was a paid guest of the hotel was only in common areas and not in the room where secret votes took place on legislation. He was in hallways, the lobby and restaurant bars. Once given the signal by the ALEC spokesman, he was escorted out by uniformed off-duty State Troopers and forced to check out and escorted from the hotel.
                In Congress, despite Mitch McConnell’s short-lived attempt to keep the media out of the Senate hallways. Reporters do what this reporter was unable to do, all day.
                If you watched the video you would have seen the amount of “Scholarships” legislators were given to attend the events which sound exactly like payoff’s to me.

                1. There are no ‘secret votes on legislation’. All legislation with any effect is promulgated and the session law incorporated into the state code.

                  The rest is almost certainly fantasy as well.

                  1. There are “eyewitness reports” of secret votes as to which legislative agenda to prioritize and pursue which does require a vote by the actual legislature once already decided in the back rooms.

                    3. enigma – they still have to meet in public and raise their hand and vote yea or nay. The Democrats meet in their cloakroom for strategy, the Black Caucus meets to decide strategy and won’t let black Republicans in. What are they doing behind closed doors?

                    4. Coming up with as strategy among yourselves is different that having lobbyists pay you to consider legislation they’ve already written for you where one only needs to fill in the blanks. The “Black Caucus” would be no different than the “Freedom Caucus” or other internal groups. Are you saying ALEC is a good thing? What are they doing behind closed doors?

                    5. enigma – I think legislators should do their own work, however pragmatically I know they that the path of least resistance. Lobbyists are lobbyists. They get paid to convince the legislature of the goodness of their path of righteousness. People, you and I, enigma are also lobbyist. I call my congresspeople about once every 3 weeks depending on what is happening. Usually, because I have McCain and Flake, I leave scathing messages telling to get their act together. My current Representative is toeing the line and I usually just leave nice suggestions. 🙂

                      Jeffy Flake’s numbers are so low he might loss the primary. And McCain could be dead before that.

                    6. The lobbyists, if they are within the law are only doing what the legislators let them. In some states, it would appear to be a violation of “Sunshine Laws.” In all, it would seem an ethical breech.

                    7. enigma – they have to be acting on official business. For instance, a majority of my HOA board cannot meet, except in public and with prior announcement, but any number less than a majority may meet. If they are acting illegally, hang ’em. 🙂

                    8. Are you suggesting that the legislation presented them is not official business? It also seems that because ALEC is a “charity” and they are receiving “scholarships.” The income doesn’t have to be reported.

                    9. having lobbyists pay you to consider legislation they’ve already written for you where one only needs to fill in the blanks

                      Now you’ve shifted ground and elected to accuse them of bribery.

                      Earth to enigma: Rachel’s flogging this to fill her airtime and perform for her seals. It’s all rubbish.

                    11. Paul, everything that enigma brings up regarding this meeting tells us we need less government in our lives rather than more. My conservative / libertarian views tell me we need less government, but I think enigma’s Liberal views would call for more. He is feeding the people he wants stopped. He seems to have a lot of things backwards.

                      The only reasons lobbyists spend money lobbying in this fashion is because the political entity controls the people’s money and are willing to waste it.

                    13. You just had your chance to say what you want and think, but you didn’t. Why not? Why did you provide an empty response? That is your game. You are a pretender. My response to Paul must have hit the mark

                      This is not the first time you fled from having to choose a position. Last time you played a similar game you told me “Discrimination doesn’t mean what you think it does.” Let’s have an answer to the following responses.:

                      A green and a blue man are both applying to the same university whose requirements are high academic achievement because of the nature of the work. The green man has consistently been top in his class and top on the national scores.The blue man has been a relatively poor performer in both areas. The green man is rejected and the blue man gets his spot because he is blue.

                      Is that discrimination? If not explain why not.

                      Enigma also writes: “Everybody, however, is not in a position to be able to.”(discriminate)

                      That may be true, but as I think you said “discrimination requires power. ” To which I replied “That is a good point. Power can be local. Intimidation is a form of power.” Therefore, everybody has the potential to have the power and to discriminate especially in local situations.

                      If you believe otherwise explain.

                    14. Who exactly do you think you are that you can make all these demands of me? I happily engage in conversations, even with people I virulently disagree with. You’ve insulted me personally dozens of times. You have no desire to exchange ideas only attack. You give trolls a bad name. You’ve lied and when called out claimed in may be unprovable but was logical and tried to make it my responsibility to find the flaw in your logic. Feel free to ignore me and I will do the same.

                    15. Enigma writes: “Who exactly do you think you are that you can make all these demands of me?”

                      Demands? You are on a chat list where you feel free to call people racists that are not even here to answer your charges. You have the equal ability of anyone else to respond. You even had the audacity to tell me “Discrimination doesn’t mean what you think it does.” You say a lot of nonsense and complain a lot, but when it comes down to the definitions and the proof you run away and hide like a child.

                      Here is the question (and answer to your statement) once again: “A green and a blue man are both applying to the same university whose requirements are high academic achievement because of the nature of the work. The green man has consistently been top in his class and top on the national scores.The blue man has been a relatively poor performer in both areas. The green man is rejected and the blue man gets his spot because he is blue.

                      Is that discrimination? If not explain why not.”

                      You don’t answer because the answer reveals who and what you are.

                      As far as your accusations of me lying, that is made up BS. (Quote them. You can’t quote something that doesn’t exist.). I made one statement with good reasons why it was likely the case. When I couldn’t prove it, I immediately said so. That is a bit different than the way you handle things. When you can’t prove something you keep repeating it anyhow even though you are calling a dead man a racist. Then you compound this idiocy by using the same faulty proof for the son with part of the evidence being the father was a racist so the son must be as well.

                      Keep complaining enigma, and keep blaming the other guy for your problems as if you are the only one being forced to have to face the real world out there.

                2. enigma – do you really have any confidence in any reporter? I lost my faith in the pressitutes a long time ago. Really enigma, I have bigger things to worry about and I don’t like worrying.

                  1. What part of the report should I fail to have faith in. You could see from the tape (had you watched it) where he was. His discussion with the ALEC Spokesman was on tape as well as his removal by the State Troopers after indicating he was a paid guest. The trooper replied, “We’ll take care of that.”
                    I don’t have to believe only the account of the reporter. I was able to see what he said, including a legislator and lobbyist discussing their “scholarships” in the bar. Instead, I should believe Squeeky?
                    I would think this might be a thing that might worry you, that our laws are made in this manner. I guess as long as you don’t mind the results, the process doesn’t matter.

    3. enigma – where I have a problem with JT’s article is that he thought it was a work of art. 😉 Do we know who the original artist was? I think art is spreading the term broadly. However, I am horrified that these four and others took it upon themselves to take down a statue, regardless of who was or what it represented. And I hope they throw both books at them.

      1. Paul, There is a great deal of skill required to create a likeness of a person in 3 dimensions. So if you don’t like it as art, perhaps you will accept it as well done craft. Otoh, Jack Warner, movie mogul, insisted that Salvadore Dali paint a portrait of him. Dali resisted but finally gave in. It was not flattering. Dali painted Warner as he saw him. I doubt that Warner hung the portrait. Was it art? Oh, yes, it tells a story and evokes an emotion.

        1. bettykath – there are many definitions of what constitutes art. My personal favorite is from Frank Lloyd Wright, “If people buy it, it’s art.” However, personally, sometimes I think people get ripped off. 🙂

      2. I don’t find fault with the arrest and prosecution of those who took down the statue. I do wonder if any effort is being made to identify and arrest others that committed crimes of violence over the weekend, whoever they are?

        1. enigma – I hope they are getting as much video as possible and using it, but I have little hope. I think the fix is in.

          1. We might agree that “the fix is in.” We may or may not agree as to what the fix is and who is being protected. I suspect that those on the left have no sway with local and state law enforcement or the Justice Department. I wonder about those on the right?

            1. enigma – since the alt-left did not have a parade permit, I would say the fix was in for them.

              1. I don’t think any of the charges I had in mind depended on whether someone had a permit. I did see in Florida where two Klan members who were prison guards were arrested for conspiring to kill a black inmate after his release. Just when I didn’t think Florida cared.

                1. enigma – I am not a fan of either group or any of the groups involved. However, the Nazis did have a parade permit and when AntiFah arrived they backed off. They should never have been within rock throwing distance of each other. An audit of the Charlottesville PD will probably show they have all the riot gear they need. Presidents have been handing money to police departments for years.

                    1. enigma – it is not my job to call out anybody. I don’t read all the commentors. Sometimes when I get to my mail there might be 50-60 emails from the Turley blog stacked up. I have no idea that whether the person has already been handled or not.

                    3. enigma – my friend, you already know I think. I know what you think. 🙂 I don’t have to prove anything to you and you don’t have to prove anything to me.

                    4. Just when I think I know what you think, you salute a let us say, “highly questionable” poem. (People talk about me so bad when I use the correct word.)
                      “Squeeky – enjoyed your poem. Made a few pointed points. ”
                      I might think you agree, certainly no reason to think you don’t. I give her credit for being witty, it’s also something else.

                    5. enigma – my wife is Chinese. She sees discrimination where I see none. However, she never sees the racism of the Chinese community against whites that I have been dealing with since we have been married. It is all in the eye of the beholder. I have taught those students that Squeeky has in her poem and I worry about them today. Lately, I have been going on FB and catching up with old students to see how they were doing. It is a mixed bag, sadly. Some are doing well. Some are hanging in. A couple are dead.

                    6. We had the discussion and think we agreed that “discrimination” is about power. Has the Chinese community truly oppressed the whites you’ve been dealing with? Has it happened the other way around.? When you r wife shares with you what she sees, do you require the “raw data?”
                      Satire and harsh jokes have some basis in truth. Squeeky’s poem is stereotypical, exaggerated and yes racist. She openly states her beliefs that “whites are better workers” and disparages blacks openly. When you laugh along with her, can you understand why I say I don’t know what you think? Racism is perceived differently by the beholder.
                      Although I get accused by some of seeing racism “everywhere.” The reality is that most time you don’t really know if someone is racist until they establish a pattern. I suspect your wife recognizes the pattern more quickly than yourself because she’s seen it more.

                    7. enigma – here is the perception problem we are having. I never laughed with Squeeky, but I did like her poem and she made some points. Those points may hit closer to home than you like, but in the schools I taught in, they were right on target. That does not mean I did not have some really sharp black men and women that we were able to get into college, but the gangs and drugs held back most of them.

                      I had a very sharp black female I had great hopes for and she hooked up with some idiot and got herself pregnant and dropped out of school. It broke my heart. She had great potential. I hope she got her GED and went to community college and then on to college.

                      Most of the males were ganged up, so they were not going anywhere but juvie or prison. I had a student tell me he wanted to be in the state prison because that was where his father and two of his uncles were. How do you react to something like that? I just stood there with my mouth open.

                      Still, I took a gun away from a black student in the classroom, threw it in my briefcase and told him to go get the principal. He did. We suspended him for 6 weeks during which his mother had him weeding the garden on his hands and knees.
                      When he came back to school I gave him a hug and we started fresh. He graduated 18 months later and went on to college. I was very proud of him for getting the principal and coming back. That showed courage. And I owed him him respect when he returned. I gave him another hug when he graduated, he earned it. His mom gave me a hug, too. 🙂

                      enigma, if you have a problem with anything I say or do, just say and I will respond. P,ease don’t read things into what I write.

                    8. I explicitly didn’t read anything into it. It did give me cause to wonder what you think. Squeeky’s poem would not have resonated if there were not elements of truth that can be found in individuals. Her poem stereotypes an entire race and yes it’s also racist. Not one person that I saw managed to say that. Now there’s the possibility that the bar for racism has been raised so high that absolutely nothing qualifies? Or it has become so normalized that no one not affected by it cares, or worse yet agrees.

                    9. enigma – conservatives have been called racists for so long now that we don’t even respond to it. It is just part of a liberal word game of identifying conservatives. However, it is rolling off their backs now. It is no longer working. It works with liberals, not conservatives. It works with RINOs, not conservatives. It works with regular Republicans, not conservatives.

                      Racism is in the eye of the beholder as we have talked about before. You see it much differently than I do, but that does not mean yours is the ultimate truth. We do not agree that racism requires power, it only requires hatred. Now, I have neither power nor hatred. 🙂 Hate just wastes energy.

                    10. I never said racism requires power, anybody can do that. I said discrimination requires power. You’re right of course that the label of racist means nothing to Republicans. That doesn’t mean that some of their parties aren’t actually racist.

                    11. Paul, thank you for this comment. I could not agree more, particularly about the hatred not requiring power.
                      IMO, this country was leaving racism behind until the Dems made it their MO to bring it up constantly.
                      The Democratic party has no ideas WRT moving the country forward in a positive direction. Identity politics allows them to distract the plebs so they can continue to do nothing in DeeCee but pocket the $$ from their benefactors. The “me too” response of mayors across the country rushing to get rid of their local statues would be hysterical if it weren’t so jaw-dropping in its mendacity. The unrest will not stop even if you were to mothball every monument from the Revolutionary War onward, rename every town, get rid of every national historic park at a battle site, and omit uncomfortable chapters from every history book. Economic downturns notwithstanding, we have a greater standard of living than ever before, but it will never be enough. The True Believers are unhappy and they are easy targets for the politicos.

                    13. allan – type of teacher – excellent.
                      subjects: everything except math and science. I was hired gun. You wanted a class taught, I would teach. Never taught it before, no big deal. Just get me the book in advance.

                    14. Or is racism part of movements that engender even more racism. The mainstream left has been using racism and it is causing reactionary behavior.

                    15. I’d love to hear you explain that statement further. The mainstream left is not immune from racism but I would love to hear the context in which you think they use it?

                    16. “discrimination requires power. ”

                      That is a good point. Power can be local. Intimidation is a form of power.

                    17. Power does not equal discrimination. I am saying discrimination cannot take place without power. Power can be local, agreed. What is the intimidation you speak of and keep in mind among the subjects we’re discussing is a “Unite the Right” rally featuring the combination of robed Klan members, Neo-Nazis with swastikas and White Nationalists . Now what do you mean by intimidation?

                    18. I wans’t talking about Antifa intimidating the Nazi’s or the Nazi’s intimidating antifa. They are one and the same. An example, Sharphton has made a career out of intimidation.

                    19. While Antifa might have been trying to intimidate the Nazis (and let’s not forget the Klan, White Supremacists and any “very nice people” standing around amongst the robes and swastikas. The aforementioned groups weren’t looking to intimidate Antifa but the nation (any parts of the nation that object to them).
                      To your point though. Intimidation in the context you used it is not discrimination. A better example even than Sharpton to make your case would be Jesse Jackson who you could argue extorted major corporations and got them to fund Operation Push and the Rainbow Coalition in order not to highlight their hiring histories and possible discrimination. It may have been extortion, it may have been blackmail even, but not discrimination.
                      Now blackmail only works if there’s something to hide. Any of the targeted corporations could have said, “We stand on our record and go kiss my ass.” But they would have to have had a record that could stand up to public scrutiny. In addition to enriching himself and growing his organization, Jackson did get corporations to increase hiring and other things beneficial to the community he served and in a couple unrelated moves, brought home American hostages so there’s that.
                      A whole lot of things some people are calling discrimination is simply not that. I’m still looking for individuals to tell of their personal experience with “reverse discrimination.” I’ve heard some other things described and one case where more information might have convinced me. Anybody?

                    20. “While Antifa might have been trying to intimidate the Nazis… ”

                      You are missing the point. Firstly get rid of the idea of Antifa and the Nazis having anything to do with what I am talking about. They are both cr-p and belong in the same cage. I think Sharpton and Jackson are cr-p as well but I’ll leave that for some other thread.

                      Your statement: “discrimination requires power. ” That means any segment of society no matter how small can, with power, discriminate against another segment of society even if that segment seems to be dominant.

                      Intimidation can lead to power and intimidation has been used to that end. With power comes the ability to discriminate.

                      Sharpton and Jessie Jackson both use intimidation which creates power and leads to discrimination. We see quite a bit of that. PC attitudes cause discrimination and we see quite a bit of that as well. Therefore races can discriminate against other races.

                      Discrimination is not a oneway street.

                    21. Discrimination doesn’t mean what you think it does. If Sharpton and Jackson do everything you think it does it is not discrimination. I’m curious as to your theory that something “leads to discrimination.” It either is or it isn’t. There are no gateway drugs. If Jesse Jackson is able to blackmail Corporation X into funneling money into his cause and hire people they had no history of hiring previously. It’s not discrimination, it doesn’t lead to discrimination. The only power arises from the previous bad behavior of the company they don’t want to remain an issue. Discrimination is not by definition a one-way street. Everybody, however, is not in a position to be able to.

                    23. Enigma writed: “Discrimination doesn’t mean what you think it does.”

                      A green and a blue man are both applying to the same university whose requirements are high academic achievement because of the nature of the work. The green man has consistently been top in his class and top on the national scores.The blue man has been a relatively poor performer in both areas. The green man is rejected and the blue man gets his spot because he is blue.

                      Is that discrimination? If not explain why not.

                      “Everybody, however, is not in a position to be able to.”(discriminate)

                      That may be true, but as I think you said “discrimination requires power. ” To which I replied “That is a good point. Power can be local. Intimidation is a form of power.” Therefore, everybody has the potential to have the power and to discriminate especially in local situations.

                      If you believe otherwise explain.

                    24. “Btw, I didn’t miss your point at all, I responded directly to it. You brought up Nazis and Antifa and I responded to that first.”

                      It’s unimportant, but to correct confusion. If you look at the time stamps it doesn’t appear that way.

    4. If the Legislature is corrupt,sue in Federal Court.If not,work harder to win the next election.Much better than organized thuggery aka civil disobedience.

    5. “Where I find fault with Turley’s article is the suggestion that an average citizen has any sway with the North Carolina State Legislature.”
      *********************************

      Just some definitions: When the “average citizen” has “sway” with a legislature we usually call him a despot. When the majority of the “average citizens” have “sway” with a legislature well call that a democracy. When Leftist kooks intimidate legislatures with unfounded cries of “racism” and thwart the will of the majority of its people, we call that a Blue State. When the kooks have a chorus of encouraging chanters we call that the mainstream press. When a vocal minority of malcontents seek to overturn a legitimate national election by force and threats of force we have America circa 1861 and 2017.

      1. And when the majority is subject to minority rule we call it gerrymandering, redistricting and the Electoral College. You do realize the “will of the majority” has already been thwarted?
        BTW, and I’m only responding because you brought it up. Legislatures in most states have dabbled in racism whether Republican or Democrat controlled. Federal courts have said as much about the intent of North Carolina and Texas in their voter suppression campaigns.

        2. And when the majority is subject to minority rule we call it gerrymandering, redistricting and the Electoral College.

          The Republican candidates have won a plurality of popular ballots for the House of Representatives in 8 of the last 12 federal elections. You’re not losing because of ‘gerrymandering’ (which netted the Democrats many more seats a generation ago than it nets the Republicans today). You’re losing because (1) you get fewer votes and (2) your votes are inefficiently distributed. You roll up 10-1 margins in inner city precincts and then lose 5-4 in the suburbs.

          1. I don’t want to make a Dem ve Rep argument as I do want to make the case for Democracy. There are too many Americans who know in advance their vote won’t matter because of the way we select our representative government. Those in power approve of it, those out of power lament it. I think we give too much credit to the founding fathers for having created a nigh perfect system when in reality they were just “men” doing perhaps their best but also perpetuating some of the flaws in the new thing they created as existed in the old. If reasonable people created a new system today, knowing what we do now. It would likely differ greatly. I suspect we may not see another Constitutional Amendment in our lifetimes due to partisan rancor.

            1. I don’t want to make a Dem ve Rep argument as I do want to make the case for Democracy.

              Tough, you already did.

    6. They tried to remove most power from the newly elected Democrat Governor to make sure they could still pass bathroom bills and suppress votes.

      No, enigma, they cut the number of patronage appointees he had at his disposal. Legislative process did not change and follows a schema that is constitutionally determined, so they cannot pass legislation any more readily. (The votes they want ‘suppressed’, of course, are the absentee ballots Democratic Party spear carriers are filling out on behalf of voters who have moved away).

      While we’re at it, the North Carolina constitution provides for 11 elected statewide executive positions. Any governor is hemmed it. They just made it marginally worse for the occupant of the governor’s chair.

        1. No, just responding to your derivative cock-and-bull. MadCow and Kos and TPM and HuffPo are not your friends.

            1. enigma – I would forget Infowars for news, although they have it, sometimes they are over the edge. I monitor Drudge and Breitbart, plus I have several newsfeeds into my email.

              1. I monitor several feeds as well encompassing a wide range of views. I also watch Fox in stretches although I confess my tolerance for Hannity is almost nonexistent.

  4. One gets the sense that the mouth-breathers here are fiddling while the double-wide goes up in flames…

    2. One gets the sense here that you’re a typical partisan Democrat, and thus bad company for normal people.

  5. I say criminalize smoking in public unless it’s within 100 feet of any Confederate memorial.
    What prosperity has come from either of those two fruits of the South.
    Make these monuments pariah visitor viewing stations for people to refer to as warnings about what stupidity can bring to millions.

  7. ISIS justifies the destruction of historical artifacts because they disagree with the religion of the makers.

    It’s sad to destroy art or artifacts. This statue was almost a hundred years old. If the city decided to remove it, it could have gone to a museum or somewhere else.

    Slavery was a global reality for almost the entirety of human history. It was practiced by many Native American tribes, African tribes, Greeks, Romans…in essence, it sprang up conversantly all across the globe. Even the arts were not immune, as opera had its castrato, which was forced upon the victims. It’s sad. It still exists in the poor captured girls in Boko Haram and ISIS being raped daily, in the trafficked women here in America, in the Middle East. Those most susceptible to slavery are women.

    The US is not the only country that engaged in this tragic industry. It stretched across the globe and across time. If we are going to refute the works of anyone and everyone who does not pass the virtue test of a modern American in San Francisco, then we are basically starting with a blank slate. Most mathematical discoveries, philosophy, literature, art, in fact most of our intellectual and artistic crown jewels were created by people who had views typical for their times, abhorrent in ours. It is anachronistic to apply today’s judgement to yesterday’s people.

    There are certainly arguments to be made for and against the statue being displayed in the park. Such decisions should be made democratically by the residents of the city, not by mob rule. Not by vandalism. May I go to their house and smash their car because I think they are fascists for trying to control speech? Am I allowed to destroy something they like because I really feel strongly about it and I think I’m right?

    2. I think the difference between your examples and the Confederate shrines is that only the persons depicted in the Confederate shrines engaged in treason against the United States. Don’t lose sight of the ball here.

      This is to “but slavery was good for those types” karen

      1. Mark M., I agree, but . . . In The Kentucky Resolution, Thomas Jefferson claimed that any State could secede from The United States even by force of arms if their causes were of the intolerable sort listed in The Declaration of Independence. And, unless I’m mistaken, again, The British accused all of The Signers of the Declaration of Independence of treason and executed Patrick Henry, amongst others, on that count.

        Wait a second . . . Did Patrick Henry sign The Declaration of Independence? O bother. Never mind.

      2. Mark M – you speak of an argument against displaying the statues in the park. There are certainly many valid points to be brought to the democratic process of either retaining or removing them. It is the city’s decision and its residents.

        There is no argument to be made for destroying them by mob rule.

        And I don’t think, and never said, that slavery was good. It’s a blight on all of human history, and it boggles my mind that it still exists. My point is that if you remove the works of anyone associated with slavery, chauvinism, or any of the other practices eschewed by modern society, you have nothing left.

        I wish there was more impetus to help slaves suffering today.

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/10/17/this-map-shows-where-the-worlds-30-million-slaves-live-there-are-60000-in-the-u-s/?utm_term=.e74fc0e447de

        “The country where you are most likely to be enslaved is Mauritania. Although this vast West African nation has tried three times to outlaw slavery within its borders, it remains so common that it is nearly normal. The report estimates that four percent of Mauritania is enslaved – one out of every 25 people.”

        What does destroying a statue do to make anyone’s life better? Or how about all the Facebook memes? Do any of these actions help a single one of the real slaves suffering right this moment? Because it looks like puffery and vandalism disguised as virtue from here.

        Instead of vandalizing a statue and engaging in violence, which changes exactly zero peoples’ minds, it would have been more productive to have discussions on why the Confederate flag and Confederate heroes are still so popular in the South. I can recall from my time in the South as a child that many people did not associate the Confederate flag or Confederate heroes with slavery. I found the perspective of this article on that disconnect interesting, by an author who reversed his course on revering the Confederacy: http://www.salon.com/2015/07/15/lies_i_learned_as_a_southerner_racism_the_confederate_flag_and_why_so_many_white_southerners_revere_a_symbol_of_hatred/

        Over time we learned that after believing in Jesus Christ, our second most important moral and spiritual task was to uphold the honor of South Carolina and our native South. Be prepared to fight anyone if they insulted our heritage, most especially the Confederacy. Such insults were assaults on our honor as Southerners, something we are very touchy about.

        Why did the South of our youth imbue us with such false knowledge? Because the memory of the Confederate defeat shaped Southern culture then and now. C. Vann Woodward, one of the greatest historians of the South, wrote that after the war ended, the Southerners had to learn “…the un-American lesson of submission. For the South had undergone an experience that it could share with no other part of America…..the experience of military defeat, occupation, and reconstruction.”

        Because of this searing ordeal, Southerners had and continue to have a radically different historical narrative than the remainder of America. We have distorted our history to fit the Myth of the Lost Cause and it is this history which explains our obsession with the Civil War. Most Americans find both our narrative and our obsession with the war inexplicable. But it isn’t, really.

        What Americans outside the South don’t understand is the Confederate defeat was so devastating the impact reverberates to this day. And where the depredations were the greatest, the war is remembered even more strongly. How could it not be? Columbia, the capital of South Carolina? Burned. Charleston? Bombarded. Plantations close by the city burned to the ground. Those of us born and raised in the Deep South grow up in a history book. My birthplace, Mobile, Alabama? Seized and burned after years of off and on attacks. New Orleans where I went to college? Seized by Union troops early in the war cutting off Gulf South from its key port.

        1. What boggles my mind Karen is how those that want to eliminate evidence of our history ignore the fact that everything that exists today is a product of that history. What would our shared history look like if by erasing Thomas Jefferson from our history it removed him from ever existing? What would our world look like today if we could magically eliminate from existence all the people who didn’t rise to the level of virtue signaled by the Left today?

    4. Good post Karen. There are certainly arguments to be made for and against the statue being displayed in the park. However the fascists have decided you don’t get a voice. If you speak up, you’ll get beat down. They seem to believe its better to just erase all evidence of history and we’ll magically become all alike. These people are so intellectually shallow that they are a danger to others.

      1. “However the fascists have decided you don’t get a voice. If you speak up, you’ll get beat down.”

        Well said Olly, that’s the difference.

  8. They tore down Obama’s statue in Indonesia.

    I guess they wanted to hide his claim to be an Indonesian citizen on his high school application.

    What? An Indonesian citizen as President of the United States.

    It can’t happen here. It can never happen here!

    2. Methinks you’re on to something here. Further investigation is warranted, I’ll reckon. Let us know what you discover with your further sleuthing.

      This is to “inspector clouseau” georgie

    3. George, how are you? I figure you’ll probably know the answer to this question:

      Can a State, any State, secede from The United States and still claim protection for itself and its citizens under The Constitution of The United States?

      If so, could I avail myself of the terms and conditions of a contract that I had previously signed but had subsequently breached?

    1. Hillary’s Mentor Senator Byrd statue needs to be removed, he started a KKK
      Chapter and was voted in Grand Wizard.
      He filibustered the 1964 Civil Right Act and voted No.
      Then of course, our Lenin statue needs come down due to the mass murder of 60 million.
      And our beloved MLK statue, roads etc. must be taken away for his old fashion view of gay marriage.
      We will certainly find cause for all the arts and books.

      1. As Jonathan Turley said:

        “These individuals were clearly unwilling to join the debate over the removal of confederacy images or figures. Instead, they destroyed not just a piece of history but a piece of art that, if the community decided in favor of removal, could have been placed in a museum or alternative setting.”

    2. Of course you do, Elaine..of course you do. Baltimore is a beacon of light in how to run a city..INTO THE GROUND!

  10. I noticed Tran’s name in the aftermath, in press reports and did look him up, some sort of youth organizer… never made it as far as WWP. Good luck to him, I am guessing he might b descendant of Vietnamese who came here.

    I noticed the odious Joy Ann Reid last Sunday on meet the press close to screaming all the statuary must come down, that it has no historic value and “all” these installations date to the 60s. 1960s!

    That “no one cared before” about these traitors

    LOL where to begin with all of that. Laughable

  11. Quite the rogues gallery. Do all Leftist creeps get their hair done and clothes tattered at the same salon? I say let’s honor their outlandish opening of yet another front in the Diversity Wars by casting them in bronze and then mounting them with full AntiFa honors in the North Carolina Zoo aviary exhibit. I’d suggest “Freebird” by Skynyrd as the invocation song.

        1. All I used to head about Trump’s eldest children was how wonderful they are. At the time I had little information to disagree. Dozens of Neo-Nazi memes later along with public statements from the men, labor abuses in China from Ivanka, I can now make the case against them.

          1. Dozens of Neo-Nazi memes later along with public statements from the men, labor abuses in China from Ivanka, I can now make the case against them.

            That a smart ass manufactures an internet meme does not ‘make a case’ against any of Trump’s children.

            1. Except when they pass them along themselves as have Donald Jr, and Eric (and Donald) and Flynn’s son and Bannon, and Flynn, and Miller and Gorka…

      2. enigma – you know that the high and tight haircut is not a Swastika, right? It’s a really common haircut. In fact, some members of my own family have that close cropped look. It would be ludicrous if some racist somewhere got a haircut and then no one, no where in the US could have the same hair cut because suddenly it’s a symbol of solidarity with racists. That’s absurd, and it can lead to bullying people over hairstyles of all things.

        Geez, Brad Pitt has worn the high and tight.

        Who cares about the hair? What matters is what people say and how they act.

        1. Others who share this hairstyle include David Beckham, Jake Gyllenhaal, Ryan Reynolds, Channing Tatum, Ben Afleck…the list goes on but you get the idea.

          This style of haircut has a tough guy look because it has military aspects to it. In fact, some of my own family who wear it served in the military.

          Liberals will grasp onto something and push and push and push until they get to define it as evil. They’ve done this, for example, with “thug” a ubiquitous term for a violent criminal preying upon others. They may well succeed with a simple haircut. But if they do, then a lot of good, honest people are going to be branded as racist for nothing other than the way they look.

          1. Once a month I walk into my barber shop, and they cut my hair. Occasionally I’ll be asked how I would like it cut to which I reply “whatever you think looks nice.” I really don’t care so much about it. There are more important matters I need to deal with in my day.

            I had the same barber from my first haircut until I left for college. When I moved back to my home town, I continued with him until he retired. He was my dad’s barber for over forty years. There’s something to be said in consistency.

        2. Karen S–the leftists are students of Goebbel, so they don’t care that there is no foundation for their lies and smears.

          1. LOL! Brad Pitt was playing an American soldier from THE SOUTH, hunting and killing Nazi’s!!

        1. Squeeky – you are right and there is a logical solution. However, I don’t remember the problem or the solution. 🙁

  13. Okay, so I have to ask why “injury” and not “damage”?

    I typically think of injury as something that happens to people, or things that are live.
    I typically think of damage as something that happens to objects.

    Is “injury to a thing” a legal thing? Why not use the word “damage”?

    1. Linda,

      Different states codify definitions differently, most often to maintain consistency in their statutes and respect their common law. A good way to determine this is to look in the “definitions” area of a particular code or statute and look for meaning.

      In tort law, individuals can suffer damage which can include physical injury, loss of business revenue, etc.

      Another difference between states is where some define causing physical injury to another with criminal culpability a “Battery”, while others define it as an “Assault”. Others differentiate an assault as an attack against a person and the battery is the causing a physical injury.

      An odd example is Washington State. Washington does not use the words “Battery” in its assault statutes, (Such as assault in the fourth degree which formerly was titled Simple Assault in the 1980’s) but the Revised Code of Washington does not define “Assault” under its criminal code, just levels or types of assault. It relies on Common Law (Court decisions) for its definition of Assault.

      1. Also, a case from 2011 (State of Washington, Respondent, v. Karen JARVIS, Appellant) Division II of the court of appeals provides a few additional items under Section 7

        ¶ 7 RCW 9A.36.041 defines fourth degree assault. It provides: “A person is guilty of assault in the fourth degree if, under circumstances not amounting to assault in the first, second, or third degree, or custodial assault, he or she assaults another.” Because Washington’s criminal code does not define assault, the courts apply common law definitions. State v. Stevens, 158 Wn.2d 304, 310-11, 143 P.3d 817 (2006). In Washington, the common law definition of assault encompasses: “(1) an attempt, with unlawful force, to inflict bodily injury upon another; (2) an unlawful touching with criminal intent; [4 ] and (3) putting another in apprehension of harm whether or not the actor intends to inflict or is incapable of inflicting that harm.” State v. Walden, 67 Wn.App. 891, 893-94, 941 P.2d 81 (1992). “ ‘[A] touching may be unlawful because it was neither legally consented to nor otherwise privileged, and was either harmful or offensive.’ “ State v. Thomas, 98 Wn.App. 422, 424, 989 P.2d 612 (1999) (quoting State v. Garcia, 20 Wn.App. 401, 403, 579 P.2d 1034 (1978) (alteration in original)). This is a well settled common law definition. See, e.g., Garcia, 20 Wn.App. at 403.

    2. Linda Sarsour, I think I’m reading what you didn’t right. The left-wing lunatics caused damage to an inanimate object. The right wing-nut murdered a living human being. Have I read you wrongly, Linda?

  14. If the charges are proven the four should spent at least a year and a day in prison and be compelled to fully pay restitution.

    Misdemeanor or low sentencing will only serve to encourage more destruction of monuments.

    We can expect to see more extremism from the left when politicians and other persons who have wide audiences keep fanning the flames of discord.

    1. Come on Darrren she’s an impresionable stoodent, don’t you know. Maybe community service. And a term paper on the physics of desecrating a monument with footnoted references to Mao, Engels and Marx. Hell NCCU might give her credit for her prison stay.

    2. If they have no priors, they won’t get prison time for a property crime. Just restitution and probation.

    3. Darren, given a Hobson’s choice between extremist property-damage versus extremist murder . . . would the law still be asserting false equivalency?

  15. Recall the cliff carvings the Taliban destroyed. Time to use the Patriot Act rules on terrorism.

      1. Diane – Robert E. Lee was a man of great personal honor, he might be as close to the Buddha as we will get in this country.

  16. What the tearing down of that statue reminded me of was the similar destruction of the Saddam Hussein statue in Iraq in 2003 in Firdos Square in Baghdad. As I recall, US Marines helped pull it down. It tumbled much like the Confederate soldier statue in NC.

      1. Michael, it’s true. Our invasion of Iraq was multi-lateral; and at least some of The Iraqis assisted us.

    2. You know, at first I thought you were nutz, but the more I thought about it, maybe you’re right!

      Because Saddam’s form of government had just fallen, and maybe with all this Democratic Party sanctioning of thuggish violence and law breaking in our country, maybe our form of government is kaput, too. We are no longer a Republic, but some sort of Fascist State where Brown Shirt Thugs and A Main Stream Propaganda Ministry keep the Democrats in power.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      1. Uh, the Republicants have the Oval Office, both houses of Congress and lotsa state governors and legislators.

        Do try to join reality, Squeeky.

        1. I think Squeeky was referring to we are no longer a Republic with a nation of laws, but of Mob Rule and feelings. No matter which party is in power.

            1. Come on Ken, you can at least complete the capitalization of a name, and we’ll give you a pass on your less-than-topical insight.

          2. That’s the point, Ter ber. “No matter which party is in power.” Right now, Democrats are representing the deep state interests, and the cowardly Republicans are just kind of “hiding out” from the press storm. Local politics is a different animal, and it more reflects constituencies. Easy to look at national events and see why most working people are going with a Republican representative than some idealistic lunatic who does not in anyway represent the daily struggle of the people who still make up the backbone of the nation.

  17. We all saw this coming back when the hysteria was over the flag. I’d wager we can probably predict what’s next, too. Jefferson? Washington? Lincoln?

    1. We have some kook wing nutz spread through out the country who would cheerfully attack all three with Lincoln first.

      1. And they’ll get there, I have no doubt of it. Where it stops is the bigger question. The whole “1984” style re-writing of history is just a horrifying prospect.

    2. The finally goal for our Communist snowflakes is the shredding of our Constitution. Over half the signers were slave owners. And the snowflakes Communist mindset wants to determine what is Free Speech.

      Ignoring the Constitution through the courts and public schools is the same as shredding it.

      I’m sure they have a copy of Mao’s ready to go.

      1. The U. S. Constitution holds that neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall prevail in any of The States without due process of law. So what are you getting at now, Ter ber? The peculiar institution of due-process slavery? And your complaining about communist snowflakes. SNAFU, Ter ber. SNAFU.

        1. I know all of you left wingers think that landowning slave barons are waiting around to re-institute slavery, but I assure you that’s just not the case. Maybe what you can worry about the upcoming autonomous military aircraft that are functional. Your movement’s undisciplined response is working perfectly to hand over freedoms to the government. And I thought when it would come to this, Americans would be smarter. They aren’t, their arguments are just worded better. Silly humans, we just can’t escape the human condition.

  18. But, but, but, . . . the laws are sooo racist!

    I predict that Democrats will rally around these vandals, and call anybody who disagrees – – – racists. Because laws matter a whole lot less than votes!

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    1. True but then why worry about them. They broke the social contract and rejected citizenship. We did not eject them. But more importantly it was laughingly enough, their group who supported their leader in broadening the terrorist provisions of the Patriot Act.

      Supporting the act is the same as commiting the act and only ‘suspicion of’ is required in both cases Television provided the required suspicion and identifiction portion while itself commiting the act of ‘supporting.’

      Nor are any of them including congress exempt unless it’s in the classified portions – same as the rest of us.

      Obama didn’t think it through but he left the means of destruction of the entire left for the current administration to use perhaps thinking no way their faction would lose. Arrogance is a powerful tool.

      The best part is who would know? Answer: Only a few within, probably, DHS but not necessarily. They also left a great many people who wouldn’t care.

      I choose to beieve that would not happen and with a bit of luck and skill those provisions can be repealed but….i wouldn’t shed too many crocodiles if last weekends Taliban …disappeared. Objectively speaking.

      1. Michael, The Union took The Confederacy back and made their people whole again. Amnesty was granted. Any and all arguments to the contrary are instances of pathetic twerpery running amok in the world.

  19. The Left and the Tailiban are quite similar in their tactics and shared mindset.

Comments are closed.