Saturday’s so-called ‘Boston Free Speech’ rally

There are more alt-right white supremacy rallies planned for this weekend around the nation, but the one that the media is focusing on is Saturday’s so-called  “Boston Free Speech” rally on Boston Common.

For those of you old enough to remember, the Boston Busing Riots over school desegregation in the 1970s demonstrated that violent white racism was not limited to the South, but was shared by white northerners in the supposedly “liberal” state of Massachusetts, a center of the abolitionist movement.

The Boston Globe reports Boston Common will be ground zero for rallies today:

The city plans to dispatch more than 500 police officers to patrol Saturday’s “Boston Free Speech” rally on Boston Common Saturday, and city officials vowed to shut it down if it turns violent, as they prepared for what is one of the first big demonstrations since the violence in Charlottesville, Va., last week.

Authorities fear white supremacists will attend, and two of the rally’s keynote speakers have ties to extremist elements — including one who attended the Charlottesville rally.

Rally organizers have maintained the event is open to all political views and not a forum for hate groups, and the permit issued by the city is for only 100 people. But tens of thousands of counterprotesters are expected to show up to denounce racism and anti-Semitism.

Boston officials said Friday that they will shut down the Saturday event if there are signs of violence.

Wonder Woman may be on hand  to protest Nazis in America.

WonderWomanStephen Lam/Reuters

25 Responses to Saturday’s so-called ‘Boston Free Speech’ rally

  1. For Sure Not Tom

  2. The Atlantic‏Verified account @TheAtlantic 5h5 hours ago

    Boston police commissioner estimates 40,000 people stood ‘against hatred and bigotry,’ @ckmarie reports http://theatln.tc/2wsh5L2

  3. Meanwhile, in the alt-universe…

    Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 3h3 hours ago

    I want to applaud the many protestors in Boston who are speaking out against bigotry and hate. Our country will soon come together as one!

    Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 3h3 hours ago

    Our great country has been divided for decades. Sometimes you need protest in order to heal, & we will heal, & be stronger than ever before!

    • For Sure Not Tom

      And an hour before that he was calling them anti-police agitators.

      JFC, GOP, at what point do you admit that you’ve made a terrible mistake?

  4. John Huppenthal

    When Alexander the Great established his great empire, he used an completely innovative technique for his time. Up until his arrival, conquerors had a philosophy of “woe to the vanquished.” Often times they would kill them all.

    For example, when Oxyartes surrendered to Alexander, not only did he not kill him and loot his territory, he made him ruler and he married Oxyartes’ daughter.

    When Lee surrendered to Grant, there was that same mutual respect of two great warriors. Things did not go perfectly in the healing of the union after the civil war, but they could have gone much, much worse.

    What we are seeing now is the immature scorch the earth policies of a philosophy that says only power counts.

    • Nathan Bedford Forrest apparently didn’t get the memo about being a great warrior.

      FORT PILLOW MASSACRE
      http://www.history.com/topics/american-civil-war/fort-pillow-massacre

    • Learn the history of your country, John. There is nothing to glorify about the Confederacy.

      • “There is nothing to glorify about the Confederacy.”

        That is not entirely true, Liza. There are things to admire about the Confederacy. The sheer tenacity with which they held on long after it was obvious they were losing. The skill with which their Officers and soldiers conducted the war so that they usually won on the battlefield. The toughness the people of the South displayed in enduring the hardships of the war. Unfortunately, there is a lot more not to admire about the Confederacy, most notably slavery, which sort of outweighs everything else. As it should.

        • Nope. It is true. The “Lost Cause” was invented to revise the truth which is that the South fought the Civil War to preserve an economic system dependent upon slavery. Glorifying people who fought for such an ignoble cause because they were tenacious, or good soldiers, or willing to endure hardship defies reason but is very much in alignment with the revisionism that has been taught to white America especially in the south.

          Lost Cause of the Confederacy
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Cause_of_the_Confederacy

        • Anyhow, Steve, I fully realize that if I say “black” you’ll say “white” and vice-versa. So let’s do it.

          Black.

          Now you say White and we’re done.

          • “I fully realize that if I say “black” you’ll say “white” and vice-versa.”

            That isn’t true, Liza. You seem to forget all the times I have agreed with you on a variety of subjects. And you have forgotten how you changed my opinion completely on voting for school funding. That was a big deal, too, because I was pretty much set in my ways on that subject, but you managed to change my mind by presenting your opinion and I found I couldn’t argue about it.

            Granted, we do disagree on more subjects than we agree, but it is not correct to say I always disagree with you. ;o)

          • Steve, I’m not the one who changed your mind on voting for school funding. I never have commented on that because I know absolutely nothing about school funding. That had to be someone else.

  5. hey everybody we get are chance tuesday! col. parker lexington green april 19 1775. ” if they mean to have war let it begin here!”

    • But who would fight whom, censored? There are at least 10 separate factions that are opposed to everyone else…

      • if the liberal community shows courage in force. their will be no fight from nazi/kkk scum.

        • “if the liberal community shows courage in force. their will be no fight from nazi/kkk scum.”

          Ah-h-h! Now in understand and I agree completely…

  6. Truth.

    Ruth H. Hopkins‏
    @RuthHHopkins

    Privilege is saving confederacy statues because they’re ‘historic’ but bulldozing through ancient sacred sites & artifacts for pipelines.
    6:14 PM – 18 Aug 2017

    • For Sure Not Tom

    • “Privilege is saving confederacy statues because they’re ‘historic’ but bulldozing through ancient sacred sites & artifacts for pipelines.”

      That a nice pithy little sound bite that, like many sound bites, doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

      The Conderate statues are here, they can be touched, seen, and everyone knows where they are. They can be discussed and, if it is decided, they can be removed, left in place, or moved somewhere else.

      On the other hand, sacred sites & artifacts are anywhere native Americans decide they are. They can’t be touched or seen and no one really knows where they are until you go to do something with the land and then, suddenly, there are cries of “sacred land!!”

      Historically, Native Americans have declared the earth sacred and all the land sacred. Today you can’t throw a rock that it won’t hit land that isn’t sacred to some native tribe or another. And as far as artifacts are concerned, a single pot shard is considered so important that any construction going on should be stopped at the whim of any Native American who wants it stopped.

      This gambit has paid off quite well for Native American tribes allowing many of them to exact compensation from many contractors to go away. Others have used the power it gave them to stop projects entirely because they didn’t like them. Unfortunately for them, the Courts today are starting to look a askance at the claims of sacred sites & artifacts and it is not working as good as it once did. Now we see Native Americans going on a PR campaign to try and get sympathy for their positions so they can once again make it work for them. Thus, pithy little sound bites like the one that Liza posted.

      • I had to look up “pithy”.

        pith·y
        adjective
        1.
        (of language or style) concise and forcefully expressive.
        2.
        (of a fruit or plant) containing much pith.

        • “I had to look up “pithy”.”

          It’s a useful word that you can use more often than you would think. ;o)

      • Your comment says a lot, Steve, mostly about you.

        • “Your comment says a lot, Steve, mostly about you.”

          I think that can be said about most us. If we care about what we write, it will always reflect something of ourselves in it. Now I realize that you meant that in a neagative sense, but I said what I meant so that is okay.

          P.S. – I am rarely “pithy” in my comments. Being concise and brief is so restrictive. ;o)