Chat Forum
It is currently Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:29 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 856 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 ... 22  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 5:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2015 4:12 pm
Posts: 292
Santa wrote:
munch wrote:
Dumbledore wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
It's almost impossible to find anyone who doesn't think dear old Moldylocks didn't deserve a good nudge on the chops.

However. I am inclined to a few thoughts:

A) this women was convinced Nazis exist. Then fck me she drives 10 hours to go to Berkeley to get socked on the chops by as close to a real Nazi as she is likely to find. One of about 100 in the entire country.
B) she sort of had it coming
C) I feel sorry for her
D) she is brave as feck because she still took a swing at the Nazi
E) if she shaved and showered she'd be quite nice looking.

There's a broader suggestion that antifa women, not just that particular one, should be punched in the face en masse.


Is there a broader consensus? Are those calling for protests advocating violence against women, or any violence?

I don't feel sorry for the woman. She was bullish enough to post that she wanted the scalps of patriots, and when she gets punched she plays the victim. If anyone places themselves on the front-line of violent confrontation, they should expect physical injury. This woman set up a fund me page for medical care she didn't need, and scammed thousands of dollars for herself. She is a bare face lying scam artist.


I don't know about broader. Wasn't it 1 guy?


I don't know, santa. I have read a few comments from idiots on both sides, but put it down to keyboard warrior type trolls. Kids acting tough. On one site some were complaining they lost their battle with the patriots, and advocating bringing guns the next time they counter a patriot/T rump rally. I'm sure the FBI will be keen to meet with these morons.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 5:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10731
Location: Indiana
Dumbledore wrote:
DAC2016 wrote:
Dumbledore wrote:
Wilson's Toffee wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKydKJKTixo


Guy advocating Antifa women to be punched.

Maybe they are deserving bitches. Deserving of the attention they now get ...

You have some fairly serious issues with women to work through.


I don't think he does. She's a militant feminist, , she helped organised an event were violence was a stated fact, she bragged of talking 100 scalps, she went for him first, she got punched.

Zero sympathy.

You've got a neckbeard standing there saying 'Just punch antifa women in the face, and I really encourage that behaviour. For this one simple reason: antifa, on purpose, uses women as human shields. because they know there's stigma in society to punch women...I'm going to say to all my viewers out there who are probably going to the Ann Coulter Berkeley protest... If you're going to that event I encourage you to punch antifa women in the face, break their lines, because they're meatshields for antifa because they're cowards.' It's quite a performance. And then of course having implored his followers to beat up women to break the protesters lines, he follows up with 'I'm not encouraging rioting, and I'm not encouraging degenerate behaviour' :lol:

If you can sit through that and think he doesn't have a fair bit to work through, we're living on a different planet.


They could just recruit women to throw punches for them. Gets rid of the martyr issue because you can't spin that into a news story. I've known a few woman rugby players that'd be up for it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 1359
Conservative Eddie wrote:
munch wrote:
Dumbledore wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
It's almost impossible to find anyone who doesn't think dear old Moldylocks didn't deserve a good nudge on the chops.

However. I am inclined to a few thoughts:

A) this women was convinced Nazis exist. Then fck me she drives 10 hours to go to Berkeley to get socked on the chops by as close to a real Nazi as she is likely to find. One of about 100 in the entire country.
B) she sort of had it coming
C) I feel sorry for her
D) she is brave as feck because she still took a swing at the Nazi
E) if she shaved and showered she'd be quite nice looking.

There's a broader suggestion that antifa women, not just that particular one, should be punched in the face en masse.


Is there a broader consensus? Are those calling for protests advocating violence against women, or any violence?

I don't feel sorry for the woman. She was bullish enough to post that she wanted the scalps of patriots, and when she gets punched she plays the victim. If anyone places themselves on the front-line of violent confrontation, they should expect physical injury. This woman set up a fund me page for medical care she didn't need, and scammed thousands of dollars for herself. She is a bare face lying scam artist.


I have neither the time nor inclination to look into this and verify what you've written, but are you saying that speech - aggressive, obnoxious speech - and a freedom to associate and protest, can be met with violence? It's OK to knock around someone who says something distasteful?


You might want to read up a little on how antifa has behaved in the past and how they behaved on the day.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2015 4:12 pm
Posts: 292
Conservative Eddie wrote:
munch wrote:
Dumbledore wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
It's almost impossible to find anyone who doesn't think dear old Moldylocks didn't deserve a good nudge on the chops.

However. I am inclined to a few thoughts:

A) this women was convinced Nazis exist. Then fck me she drives 10 hours to go to Berkeley to get socked on the chops by as close to a real Nazi as she is likely to find. One of about 100 in the entire country.
B) she sort of had it coming
C) I feel sorry for her
D) she is brave as feck because she still took a swing at the Nazi
E) if she shaved and showered she'd be quite nice looking.

There's a broader suggestion that antifa women, not just that particular one, should be punched in the face en masse.


Is there a broader consensus? Are those calling for protests advocating violence against women, or any violence?

I don't feel sorry for the woman. She was bullish enough to post that she wanted the scalps of patriots, and when she gets punched she plays the victim. If anyone places themselves on the front-line of violent confrontation, they should expect physical injury. This woman set up a fund me page for medical care she didn't need, and scammed thousands of dollars for herself. She is a bare face lying scam artist.


I have neither the time nor inclination to look into this and verify what you've written, but are you saying that speech - aggressive, obnoxious speech - and a freedom to associate and protest, can be met with violence? It's OK to knock around someone who says something distasteful?


Obnoxious to who? Who gets to decide what should be considered free speech?

No, I'm not saying it's ok to physically attack a counter protest. I am saying if anyone goes to a protest with the aim of violently attacking any particular group, then they should be prepared to be injured themselves, and not cry victim when someone decides to fight back.

I don't see too many antifa or liberals protesting about their own thuggish behaviour at these rallies. They scream hypocrisy.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2214
Right.

So, violence can be excused, justified, explained away, when it happens to someone on the front-line of a demonstration. Someone who earlier said nasty, obnoxious things, and whom holds viewpoints we disagree with.

Punch 'em in the face.

And this is from the side protesting in defence of "free speech".

Interesting.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 1359
munch wrote:
Santa wrote:
munch wrote:
Dumbledore wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
It's almost impossible to find anyone who doesn't think dear old Moldylocks didn't deserve a good nudge on the chops.

However. I am inclined to a few thoughts:

A) this women was convinced Nazis exist. Then fck me she drives 10 hours to go to Berkeley to get socked on the chops by as close to a real Nazi as she is likely to find. One of about 100 in the entire country.
B) she sort of had it coming
C) I feel sorry for her
D) she is brave as feck because she still took a swing at the Nazi
E) if she shaved and showered she'd be quite nice looking.

There's a broader suggestion that antifa women, not just that particular one, should be punched in the face en masse.


Is there a broader consensus? Are those calling for protests advocating violence against women, or any violence?

I don't feel sorry for the woman. She was bullish enough to post that she wanted the scalps of patriots, and when she gets punched she plays the victim. If anyone places themselves on the front-line of violent confrontation, they should expect physical injury. This woman set up a fund me page for medical care she didn't need, and scammed thousands of dollars for herself. She is a bare face lying scam artist.


I don't know about broader. Wasn't it 1 guy?


I don't know, santa. I have read a few comments from idiots on both sides, but put it down to keyboard warrior type trolls. Kids acting tough. On one site some were complaining they lost their battle with the patriots, and advocating bringing guns the next time they counter a patriot/T rump rally. I'm sure the FBI will be keen to meet with these morons.


There is a lot of noise around this. I read that site. Idiots. They'll be at the harmless end though. The real mofos will bend much smarter about it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2015 4:12 pm
Posts: 292
Conservative Eddie wrote:
Right.

So, violence can be excused, justified, explained away, when it happens to someone on the front-line of a demonstration. Someone who earlier said nasty, obnoxious things, and whom holds viewpoints we disagree with.

Punch 'em in the face.

And this is from the side protesting in defence of "free speech".

Interesting.


Comprehension isn't your strong suit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 1359
Conservative Eddie wrote:
Right.

So, violence can be excused, justified, explained away, when it happens to someone on the front-line of a demonstration. Someone who earlier said nasty, obnoxious things, and whom holds viewpoints we disagree with.

Punch 'em in the face.

And this is from the side protesting in defence of "free speech".

Interesting.


Come on CE you're a smart guy. You must be aware of the use of mace the beatings and the arson from previous antifa gatherings. And you must be aware of the violence meted out by antifa themselves.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2214
munch wrote:
Conservative Eddie wrote:
munch wrote:
Dumbledore wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
It's almost impossible to find anyone who doesn't think dear old Moldylocks didn't deserve a good nudge on the chops.

However. I am inclined to a few thoughts:

A) this women was convinced Nazis exist. Then fck me she drives 10 hours to go to Berkeley to get socked on the chops by as close to a real Nazi as she is likely to find. One of about 100 in the entire country.
B) she sort of had it coming
C) I feel sorry for her
D) she is brave as feck because she still took a swing at the Nazi
E) if she shaved and showered she'd be quite nice looking.

There's a broader suggestion that antifa women, not just that particular one, should be punched in the face en masse.


Is there a broader consensus? Are those calling for protests advocating violence against women, or any violence?

I don't feel sorry for the woman. She was bullish enough to post that she wanted the scalps of patriots, and when she gets punched she plays the victim. If anyone places themselves on the front-line of violent confrontation, they should expect physical injury. This woman set up a fund me page for medical care she didn't need, and scammed thousands of dollars for herself. She is a bare face lying scam artist.


I have neither the time nor inclination to look into this and verify what you've written, but are you saying that speech - aggressive, obnoxious speech - and a freedom to associate and protest, can be met with violence? It's OK to knock around someone who says something distasteful?


Obnoxious to who? Who gets to decide what should be considered free speech?

No, I'm not saying it's ok to physically attack a counter protest. I am saying if anyone goes to a protest with the aim of violently attacking any particular group, then they should be prepared to be injured themselves, and not cry victim when someone decides to fight back.

I don't see too many antifa or liberals protesting about their own thuggish behaviour at these rallies. They scream hypocrisy.


You appear to be excusing the violence meted out to her, due, in part, to her obnoxious opinions uttered prior to the protest. And her presence at the forefront of the demonstration.

She, well ya know, had it coming.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2015 4:12 pm
Posts: 292
Santa wrote:
munch wrote:
Santa wrote:
munch wrote:
Dumbledore wrote:
There's a broader suggestion that antifa women, not just that particular one, should be punched in the face en masse.


Is there a broader consensus? Are those calling for protests advocating violence against women, or any violence?

I don't feel sorry for the woman. She was bullish enough to post that she wanted the scalps of patriots, and when she gets punched she plays the victim. If anyone places themselves on the front-line of violent confrontation, they should expect physical injury. This woman set up a fund me page for medical care she didn't need, and scammed thousands of dollars for herself. She is a bare face lying scam artist.


I don't know about broader. Wasn't it 1 guy?


I don't know, santa. I have read a few comments from idiots on both sides, but put it down to keyboard warrior type trolls. Kids acting tough. On one site some were complaining they lost their battle with the patriots, and advocating bringing guns the next time they counter a patriot/T rump rally. I'm sure the FBI will be keen to meet with these morons.


There is a lot of noise around this. I read that site. Idiots. They'll be at the harmless end though. The real mofos will bend much smarter about it.


I agree. I think it's just tough talk, but talk that will land them in the courts. No doubt there are much smarter people behind some of the actions, and things could escalate into serious physical violence.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2214
munch wrote:
Conservative Eddie wrote:
Right.

So, violence can be excused, justified, explained away, when it happens to someone on the front-line of a demonstration. Someone who earlier said nasty, obnoxious things, and whom holds viewpoints we disagree with.

Punch 'em in the face.

And this is from the side protesting in defence of "free speech".

Interesting.


Comprehension isn't your strong suit.


Quote:
I don't feel sorry for the woman. She was bullish enough to post that she wanted the scalps of patriots, and when she gets punched she plays the victim.


They're your words.

And she is a victim. People we don't like can be victims too.

Quote:
If anyone places themselves on the front-line of violent confrontation, they should expect physical injury. This woman set up a fund me page for medical care she didn't need, and scammed thousands of dollars for herself. She is a bare face lying scam artist.


Again, your words.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 1359
Apparently there's a picture that purports to show her getting socked by the same guy on a different occasion on the day. She was armed with a bottle in that one.

It's starting to feel more like two props scrummaging hard with one clear winner. A battle within the battle if you like.

Might be bollocks mind.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2015 4:12 pm
Posts: 292
Conservative Eddie wrote:
munch wrote:
Conservative Eddie wrote:
munch wrote:
Dumbledore wrote:
There's a broader suggestion that antifa women, not just that particular one, should be punched in the face en masse.


Is there a broader consensus? Are those calling for protests advocating violence against women, or any violence?

I don't feel sorry for the woman. She was bullish enough to post that she wanted the scalps of patriots, and when she gets punched she plays the victim. If anyone places themselves on the front-line of violent confrontation, they should expect physical injury. This woman set up a fund me page for medical care she didn't need, and scammed thousands of dollars for herself. She is a bare face lying scam artist.


I have neither the time nor inclination to look into this and verify what you've written, but are you saying that speech - aggressive, obnoxious speech - and a freedom to associate and protest, can be met with violence? It's OK to knock around someone who says something distasteful?


Obnoxious to who? Who gets to decide what should be considered free speech?

No, I'm not saying it's ok to physically attack a counter protest. I am saying if anyone goes to a protest with the aim of violently attacking any particular group, then they should be prepared to be injured themselves, and not cry victim when someone decides to fight back.

I don't see too many antifa or liberals protesting about their own thuggish behaviour at these rallies. They scream hypocrisy.


You appear to be excusing the violence meted out to her, due, in part, to her obnoxious opinions uttered prior to the protest. And her presence at the forefront of the demonstration.

She, well ya know, had it coming.


I'm saying if you intend to commit a violent act, be prepared to get hurt. I'm also saying that I've no sympathy for anyone who intends physical harm on another, in these protests. Live by the sword ..... don't bitch if you get hurt.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2015 4:12 pm
Posts: 292
Santa wrote:
Apparently there's a picture that purports to show her getting socked by the same guy on a different occasion on the day. She was armed with a bottle in that one.

It's starting to feel more like two props scrummaging hard with one clear winner. A battle within the battle if you like.

Might be bollocks mind.


I did see the pic with her holding the bottle, but couldn't tie it to when she got punched. I wasn't aware of a second encounter, but it makes sense.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2214
Santa wrote:
Conservative Eddie wrote:
Right.

So, violence can be excused, justified, explained away, when it happens to someone on the front-line of a demonstration. Someone who earlier said nasty, obnoxious things, and whom holds viewpoints we disagree with.

Punch 'em in the face.

And this is from the side protesting in defence of "free speech".

Interesting.


Come on CE you're a smart guy. You must be aware of the use of mace the beatings and the arson from previous antifa gatherings. And you must be aware of the violence meted out by antifa themselves.


Actually I'm not, aware of any of that. It's Friday and I've skim-read this thread and I'm being argumentative.

Look, without knowing much about that group, I'll accept that they're unpleasant rabble-rousers. I'll take your word for it.

It's just interesting how some people will seek to trivialise a bit of violence when they think the victim "had it coming".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:21 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3277
It was an ugly sight seeing her getting punched but from what I gather the antifa types were fixing to do the same to Lauren Southern before they realised she came protected. There's a poster I've seen.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 1359
Man In Black wrote:
It was an ugly sight seeing her getting punched but from what I gather the antifa types were fixing to do the same to Lauren Southern before they realised she came protected. There's a poster I've seen.


Lauren Southern did get socked by a mask wearing female crusty who was going on about fighting a white bitch.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:33 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3277
Santa wrote:
Man In Black wrote:
It was an ugly sight seeing her getting punched but from what I gather the antifa types were fixing to do the same to Lauren Southern before they realised she came protected. There's a poster I've seen.


Lauren Southern did get socked by a mask wearing female crusty who was going on about fighting a white bitch.


Actually now I think about it didn't she get piss thrown at her at a previous rally?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 7:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8726
Location: Kingsburgh, KZN
Man In Black wrote:
Santa wrote:
Man In Black wrote:
It was an ugly sight seeing her getting punched but from what I gather the antifa types were fixing to do the same to Lauren Southern before they realised she came protected. There's a poster I've seen.


Lauren Southern did get socked by a mask wearing female crusty who was going on about fighting a white bitch.


Actually now I think about it didn't she get piss thrown at her at a previous rally?



Jeez. Will you guys please stop with your sexism and stuff.

Are you guys even aware that Lauren Southern is a man? Seriously, look it up if you don't believe me.


*triggered*


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 7:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19820
The claimed hilarity of the alt right ladies and gentlemen.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2392
Quote:
And she is a victim. People we don't like can be victims too.


This contribution, combined with the declaration that the contributor refuses to find out what actually happened, says a great deal about the times we live in. People have taken sides, and the facts no longer matter.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1753
Some very clear footage of teacher Eric Clanton hitting a Trump supporter in the head with a bike lock:

The police are following up on this one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qKCl9NL1Cg


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10731
Location: Indiana
Sonny Blount wrote:
Some very clear footage of teacher Eric Clanton hitting a bubblefart supporter in the head with a bike lock:

The police are following up on this one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qKCl9NL1Cg


Ultimately that's what should be done on these things to clamp down. Everyone has a freedom of speech, great. There's no such things as freedom from consequences or an automatic right to anonymity. So remove masks, identify individuals, and have multiple cameras on an area that record everything. Then it's time for the legal system to do its thing.

4chan people are good for something. :lol: Google search the guy's name, the amount of evidence they found figuring out who the guy was is pretty heavy, admittedly all circumstantial.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 1:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5289
fraz wrote:
Man In Black wrote:
Why the wilful lack of accepting nuance these days?

There probably were white supremacists there, but it doesn't mean that everyone there was a white supremacist.


I find the reluctance of the pro bubblefart fans on here to acknowledge that men doing nazi salutes might possibly be nazis to be quite unsettling.


There maybe some, there also maybe some shit stirrers trying to wind up the snow flake warriors.

What does amuse me is that the lazy screaming out of "facists" at the Trump supporters, a group who for many years were laughed for hoarding guns to protect themselves from a facist takeover, no irony there.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 1:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4491
Location: Straya cunt
pontifex wrote:
Quote:
And she is a victim. People we don't like can be victims too.


This contribution, combined with the declaration that the contributor refuses to find out what actually happened, says a great deal about the times we live in. People have taken sides, and the facts no longer matter.


Exactly my complaint about the kind of discussion going on here :thumbup:

I would characterise my views as left wing (and I mean actual left wing; not neoliberal - but that's a discussion for another time), but if you show me an image of somebody waving a hammer and sickle flag and wearing one of those silly maoist green hats, my response would not be "oh he's just trying to stir up the right wingers", "boys will be boys" or "So? It's not illegal (anymore) to be a communist". I can look at an image of somebody who clearly self-identifies as a communist and say "that's a communist". I accept that he/she and I would share some of our ideology, and would differ on other points. I don't - however - feel any deep camaraderie or shared identity with that person so am not moved to defend him/her.

What eludes me is that - when so many posters on here see somebody doing a hitler salute in an anti-anti-fascism rally - they are at such pains to avoid admitting that a person who self-identifies as a nazi is more than likely a nazi. What would it take for somebody to be considered a nazi, when a public display of allegiance to nazi ideology can be explained away as "he's just trying to stir up the other side"?

I completely agree with the argument that our society is far too loose with the application of the term. Surely an acceptable counter to this movement would be to ensure that it is only accepted when applied appropriately, not that the term is made extinct by a belligerent unwillingness to accept that it is ever appropriate, rendering actual nazis unidentifiable as such. The only reason to seek that outcome, would be to protect genuine neo-nazis from appropriate scrutiny and I don't know why any reasonable person would want that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 1:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1753
fraz wrote:
pontifex wrote:
Quote:
And she is a victim. People we don't like can be victims too.


This contribution, combined with the declaration that the contributor refuses to find out what actually happened, says a great deal about the times we live in. People have taken sides, and the facts no longer matter.


Exactly my complaint about the kind of discussion going on here :thumbup:

I would characterise my views as left wing (and I mean actual left wing; not neoliberal - but that's a discussion for another time), but if you show me an image of somebody waving a hammer and sickle flag and wearing one of those silly maoist green hats, my response would not be "oh he's just trying to stir up the right wingers", "boys will be boys" or "So? It's not illegal (anymore) to be a communist". I can look at an image of somebody who clearly self-identifies as a communist and say "that's a communist". I accept that he/she and I would share some of our ideology, and would differ on other points. I don't - however - feel any deep camaraderie or shared identity with that person so am not moved to defend him/her.

What eludes me is that - when so many posters on here see somebody doing a hitler salute in an anti-anti-fascism rally - they are at such pains to avoid admitting that a person who self-identifies as a nazi is more than likely a nazi. What would it take for somebody to be considered a nazi, when a public display of allegiance to nazi ideology can be explained away as "he's just trying to stir up the other side"?

I completely agree with the argument that our society is far too loose with the application of the term. Surely an acceptable counter to this movement would be to ensure that it is only accepted when applied appropriately, not that the term is made extinct by a belligerent unwillingness to accept that it is ever appropriate, rendering actual nazis unidentifiable as such. The only reason to seek that outcome, would be to protect genuine neo-nazis from appropriate scrutiny and I don't know why any reasonable person would want that.



A neo nazi would be someone waving a nazi flag or displaying a swastika. Almost anyone can be photographed giving a 'nazi salute' if caught at the right time.

Hammers and Sickles or Che Geuvaras can be spotted 10,000 times for any swastika you find.

It is unfathomble that any decent human being would proudly display the symbols of ideologies that have killed 100 million people. Fix that problem first because it is by far the more common one.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 1:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5289
Dumbledore wrote:
DAC2016 wrote:
Quote:
Both. If you watch that video and think he's making a pretty reasonable point, then I really don't know what to say


I haven't watched the video, your remarks were made against the poster as far I can tell as you referred directly to him.

Jesus. Wilson's Toffee, having watched the video, suggested that maybe they (Antifa women) are deserving of being punched in the face.


It is interesting to see a meme reversed, not a few weeks ago many were cheering Spencer being sucker punched pronouncing how great it was to hit a Nazi, when the same approach is used by others we have attempted moral indignation


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2214
pontifex wrote:
Quote:
And she is a victim. People we don't like can be victims too.


This contribution, combined with the declaration that the contributor refuses to find out what actually happened, says a great deal about the times we live in. People have taken sides, and the facts no longer matter.


I don't think I've taken any side. That quote refers to a specific issue I took with a particular post.

The woman in question appears to be the victim of assault. She also appears to be unpleasant and perhaps unhinged. Hence that remark.

I guess I'm guilty of being fastidiously narrow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4491
Location: Straya cunt
Sonny Blount wrote:
It is unfathomble that any decent human being would proudly display the symbols of ideologies that have killed 100 million people. Fix that problem first because it is by far the more common one.


How fortunate, then, that there isn't a recognised universal symbol for capitalism.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1753
Conservative Eddie wrote:
pontifex wrote:
Quote:
And she is a victim. People we don't like can be victims too.


This contribution, combined with the declaration that the contributor refuses to find out what actually happened, says a great deal about the times we live in. People have taken sides, and the facts no longer matter.


I don't think I've taken any side. That quote refers to a specific issue I took with a particular post.

The woman in question appears to be the victim of assault. She also appears to be unpleasant and perhaps unhinged. Hence that remark.

I guess I'm guilty of being fastidiously narrow.


I agree with you, with the caveat that self defence or retaliation ameliorates some incidents.

But please provide a link to your comments about Richard Spencer when he was sucker punched.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1753
fraz wrote:
Sonny Blount wrote:
It is unfathomble that any decent human being would proudly display the symbols of ideologies that have killed 100 million people. Fix that problem first because it is by far the more common one.


How fortunate, then, that there isn't a recognised universal symbol for capitalism.



Image


Last edited by Sonny Blount on Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4491
Location: Straya cunt
_fatprop wrote:
Dumbledore wrote:
DAC2016 wrote:
Quote:
Both. If you watch that video and think he's making a pretty reasonable point, then I really don't know what to say


I haven't watched the video, your remarks were made against the poster as far I can tell as you referred directly to him.

Jesus. Wilson's Toffee, having watched the video, suggested that maybe they (Antifa women) are deserving of being punched in the face.


It is interesting to see a meme reversed, not a few weeks ago many were cheering Spencer being sucker punched pronouncing how great it was to hit a Nazi, when the same approach is used by others we have attempted moral indignation


There are those among us who don't consider a man punching a man and a man punching a woman to be the same. Perhaps that's old fashioned.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4491
Location: Straya cunt
Sonny Blount wrote:
Almost anyone can be photographed giving a 'nazi salute' if caught at the right time.


Is it your contention that this is what is happening here?

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1753
.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2214
Sonny Blount wrote:
Conservative Eddie wrote:
pontifex wrote:
Quote:
And she is a victim. People we don't like can be victims too.


This contribution, combined with the declaration that the contributor refuses to find out what actually happened, says a great deal about the times we live in. People have taken sides, and the facts no longer matter.


I don't think I've taken any side. That quote refers to a specific issue I took with a particular post.

The woman in question appears to be the victim of assault. She also appears to be unpleasant and perhaps unhinged. Hence that remark.

I guess I'm guilty of being fastidiously narrow.


I agree with you, with the caveat that self defence or retaliation ameliorates some incidents.

But please provide a link to your comments about Richard Spencer when he was sucker punched.


Your caveat doesn't seem to make any sense. Do you mean 'mitigate'? If that's what you mean then I don't think it's relevant.

I don't remember posting about Richard Spencer. Again, I'm failing to see the relevance of that sentence.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4491
Location: Straya cunt
Sonny Blount wrote:
fraz wrote:
Sonny Blount wrote:
It is unfathomble that any decent human being would proudly display the symbols of ideologies that have killed 100 million people. Fix that problem first because it is by far the more common one.


How fortunate, then, that there isn't a recognised universal symbol for capitalism.



Image


My apologies. I made the mistake of thinking I was debating with an adult. I shall leave you to it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1753
fraz wrote:
Sonny Blount wrote:
Almost anyone can be photographed giving a 'nazi salute' if caught at the right time.


Is it your contention that this is what is happening here?

Image


Is that what happened here:

Image


When the person is wearing or displayed a swastika I will be sure he is an arsehole.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1753
fraz wrote:
Sonny Blount wrote:
fraz wrote:
Sonny Blount wrote:
It is unfathomble that any decent human being would proudly display the symbols of ideologies that have killed 100 million people. Fix that problem first because it is by far the more common one.


How fortunate, then, that there isn't a recognised universal symbol for capitalism.



Spoiler: show
Image


My apologies. I made the mistake of thinking I was debating with an adult. I shall leave you to it.


Apologising for Communism is infantile.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 3:38 pm
Posts: 4496
fraz wrote:
Sonny Blount wrote:
fraz wrote:
Sonny Blount wrote:
It is unfathomble that any decent human being would proudly display the symbols of ideologies that have killed 100 million people. Fix that problem first because it is by far the more common one.


How fortunate, then, that there isn't a recognised universal symbol for capitalism.



Image


My apologies. I made the mistake of thinking I was debating with an adult. I shall leave you to it.


You're a moron.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Battle of Berkeley
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 2:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2214
This is fun.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 856 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 ... 22  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: backrow, Bing [Bot], Chuckles1188, Clive Simms, DOB, DragonKhan, dr dre2, eldanielfire, feckwanker, FravBront, Google Adsense [Bot], Leinster in London, Man In Black, mr bungle, paneer, P in VG, Red Revolution, Risteard, saffer13, Saint, Silver, Stevus55, The Man Without Fear, waguser, Wilson's Toffee, Yourmother, ZappaMan and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group