wait but why did he put antifa in the post? that's totally irrelevant to this poor girl.

It's hilarious that Zmaj is complaining about being made fun of, when his very first contribution to this thread was to make an irrelevant reference to Grenfell Tower, and his second post was to tell DO to "Shut up, bitch."

Much lol.

well this murder went from tragedy to politicized to nonsensical insults in less than a few minutes.

glad to see we're finally streamlining the modern political process

@JY nice.

@Orathaic: Sure, and I would like to have a serious discussion as well. I withdraw the comment I made. Westboro Baptist Church is an organization that can have hateful rhetoric and does terrible things like protest during military funerals. However, when I say terrible that is just my personal moral judgement on them. From what I know about them (protest and rhetoric) I don’t see how they are breaking the law. They have a right to assembly, speech, and protest, right? Or have they actually committed acts of violence?
I think the U.S. federal government would have an obligation to step in and shut down/nationalize/take over/whatever a media firm or religious organization (Westboro Church, example) if they posed a credible threat to the public or the government. During reconstruction for example, Grant used powers to shut down elements of the KKK which was inciting violence and publishing materials that incited violence. There was a tangential relationship.. actual acts of violence and a named group perpetrating those acts of violence. I don’t see how any modern media firm or religious organization meets that criteria, but if you have one in mind I would be willing to discuss it with you. Sure you may have small fringe groups like violent Communist groups or Neo-Nazis that fit this criteria, but for major and modern institutions? I can’t think of any.

didn't read the article dont care too. way too much atrocity in the world. this is just another disgusting act of violence in a world filled with violence.

im commenting because no one, and i mean no one. talks to my love DO like that.

so Zmaj if you thought DO was background noise ill show you back ground noise.

Zmaj is silenced.

No opinion on the silence but it sounds a bit sketchy when you say he was "silenced" like is he just not allowed to post or is he at a ranch "upstate"??

He's on an extended vacation.

I guess now is as good a time as any to explain why I used "anti-fa" instead of any other word.

Short version, I was trolling.

Longer version, there are people here who have indicated that they would support a brutal crackdown on protesters in the streets. While I don't think it is hard to distinguish between protesters with fascist tendencies and those with anti-fascist tendencies, some people do. In my experience, most of those who can't figure it out are conservative or right-leaning.

So, I wanted to see who would have a visceral and quite possibly *positive* reaction to seeing a headline that an anti-fa was beaten and killed. When when the reveal showed it to be the opposite, a teen-aged Muslim girl beaten by a couple adult men with baseball bats, that whiplash effect might cause some to rethink their positions.

Yeah, there are tons of people here who do the same thing time and again. And heck, I was even nice enough to put a link to the article rather than leaving it entirely as a tabula rasa for one's outrage.

I guess the lesson is:

WORDS MATTER

Ooohhhhh, so you capitalized on the death of a young Muslim girl for the sake of teaching a political lesson. I guess that makes it less disrespectful.

I've seen people in comment threads assert that the Finsbury Park attack was self defense, but we needed to hear a lesson about how to view protestors.

Yeah except antifa aren't protesters in the streets. They are a violent extremist group that should be labeled a domestic terrorist organization.

I just want to thank TrPrado for being an adult.

I hope that somehow this country finds a way back from the chasm of civil violence we've approached.

Short of that, I'll settle for this family finding peace somehow.

@ND, so i don't know about Westboro, i brought them up as they are contraversial, and because i think their behaviour wouldn't be tolerated in the UK - under hate soeech laws.

For comparison, i think the woman recently charged with bullying her boyfriend to commit suicide. There is clearly a limit to first amendment rights. And Westboro climb awefully close to that limit if you ask me.

Incitement to violence is one thing, and hard to prove. Meanwhile Westboro don't actually encourage people to kill themselves, but they encourage hatred and bullying, which is suspect could be traced to the suicide of some people... Assuming i could find a homophobe who had been inspired by westboro's tactics and bullied a local kid into commiting suicide (i don't have such an example, but it don't think this hypothetical is so far from the truth). Would that be grounds for taking action against the church?

Yes, they are a controversial organization, but I don't have any specifics. Take the Branch Davidians for example (Waco Siege).

The ATF and Feds suspected that they were stockpiling illegal firearms. The ATF attempted to raid the compound and was met with resistance from the Branch Davidians. The FBI got involved and they initiated a siege of the compound.

The Branch Davidians would not allow the compound to be searched, they fired back against the ATF and FBI, and they were under siege for 3 months. They were a religious organization (cult) that resisted federal forces and had illegal firearms. The Federal government was obligated to protect the public safety by removing these weapons. The ATF/FBI attempted to do their jobs and were met with hostile acts.

The case you provided with Westboro or a Westboro like organization promoting bullying, harassment, hatred which could lead to suicide is more tricky in my book. However, if the FBI or whatever can make a case and bring it to a Federal Prosecutor then charges could be filed. Or if a family wants to sue this organization for psychological trauma there is civil court. But yeah, I mean the FBI or appropriate local/state police forces have a responsibility to protect public safety. If an entire organization is complicit in inciting violent acts and it presents a unique and dangerous threat to the public then the President would be obligated to use powers to protect the public (similar to what Grant did by dismantling the KKK during reconstruction).

Just put him on trial and if he is convicted then he can explain it all to his 'boyfriend' in prison