[Closed] Charlottesville

Yes, a right wing website with some odious visitors judging by the comments.
Ignoring your ridiculous strawman, I've just googled "masked antifa" and it didn't come up with one picture of masked anti-fascists being driven into by a nutter in a Dodge.

It did however come up with 312,000 results, as opposed to 2,650,000 for "masked neo nazi".

Now, when did you first use the term "Antifa"?

Actually answer the question and have a think about the above and you will see that your victim blaming premise is as ridiculous as it is distasteful.

I'm at a loss as to why I have to caveat every statement with the equivalent of "I'm not a Nazi because

Try reading all your comments in the context of the wake of an innocent young woman being murdered by a right wing extremist.

Strangely he didn't include some of the other images from that article showing those nice peaceful white supremacists and nazis

No, but he may not have noticed that the picture he did post almost certainly showed helmeted and tooled up right wingers, which I thought odd.

[url= https://s3.postimg.org/53eyn8ab7/Screenshot.pn g" target="_blank">https://s3.postimg.org/53eyn8ab7/Screenshot.pn g"/> [/img][/url]

Nigel Farage there, clearly regretting that he didn't devise a suitable UKIP salute. 😆

Cannot believe

Pleasantly surprised?

Let us remember that this is the man who aped nazi propaganda and was described by his own teacher as a fascist.

Yes, but even he has the media savvy to realise that slating Nazis is a slam dunk.

Perhaps it is meant to be read in a really excited voice? 😆

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/nigel-farage-nazi-tweet-charlottesville_uk_59901dbde4b0909642978b9b

some of the other images from that article showing those nice peaceful white supremacists and nazis:

isnt it terrible that lawful, peaceful marchers (with a court order confirming their right to hold the protest) should feel that they need to go armed in order to protect themselves from violent anti-fascists who had threatened to punch them in the face?

isnt it terrible that lawful, peaceful marchers (with a court order confirming their right to hold the protest) should feel that they need to go armed in order to protect themselves from violent anti-fascists who had threatened to punch them in the face?

Do you not understand the context of slavery, lynching, institutionalsed racism, police shooting of huge numbers of blacks and numerous other injustices that fall on US minorities?

isnt it terrible that lawful, peaceful marchers (with a court order confirming their right to hold the protest) should feel that they need to go armed in order to protect themselves from violent anti-fascists who had threatened to punch them in the face?

It might be if that were actually the case.

isnt it terrible that lawful, peaceful marchers (with a court order confirming their right to hold the protest) should feel that they need to go armed in order to protect themselves from violent anti-fascists who had threatened to punch them in the face?

Those poor delicate Nazis.

Lol this is just a chicken and egg scenario isn't it. Got proof that the right went armed in response to the left?

However, it's not like the far right have a history going to demonstrations armed - is it?

You're a Nazi ninfan who is obsessed with painting your enemy "the left" in a bad light at any cost.

isnt it terrible that lawful, peaceful marchers

Those lawful peaceful marchers beating that black kid (De’Andre Harris) on the ground with poles?

why is jimjam posting images of the black block at an anti g8 march in 2007 ?

Because...... erm ?

Nope. I've got nothing.

Fake news?

Do you not understand the context of slavery, lynching, institutionalsed racism, police shooting of huge numbers of blacks and numerous other injustices that fall on US minorities?

Right, so that makes it OK to punch people in the face does it?

Does it make it okay to run people over with cars?

😆

Does it make it okay to run people over with cars?

No, But then unlike you I'm happy to condem the use of violence on many sides remember... on many sides

Can you verify this yet Ninfan ?

So, stories coming out now that his car had been surrounded by antifa protesters attacking him and he was trying to get away. Unverified but seems like a realistic scenario.

And what makes you think I am not?

I've made a point of saying several times that [i]both[/i] sides were armed.

I'm happy to condem the use of violence on many sides remember... on many sides

You are Trumps speech writer and i claim my £5 finders fee.

Do you not understand the context of [b]slavery, lynching, institutionalsed racism, police shooting of huge numbers of blacks[/b] and numerous other injustices that fall on US minorities?

Right, so that makes it OK to punch people in the face does it?

No. Quite right. A punch does seem a little bit harsh compared to that really 🙄

Ffs. You couldn't make this shit up.

No, But then unlike you I'm happy to condem the use of violence on many sides remember... on many sides

Right. Because being a nazi and being a civil rights activist are more or less equivalent.

lawful, peaceful marchers (with a court order confirming their right to hold the protest)

Making Nazi salutes seems like a deliberately threatening and confrontational act. Why would peaceful marchers do that? Is it to protect themselves?

Can I be the first to admit that I would happily punch a Nazi. If that upsets ninfan's sensibilities, well, I guess that's just something I'll have to learn to live with.

Seriously, what's wrong with punching Nazis in the face?

They're ****ing Nazis!

They want to exterminate everyone that isn't a Nazi!

And some of you think that punching them in the face is a bit over the top?

I think it's the least you should do.

Personally I wouldn't.

I can understand why some might want to, but meeting violent protest with violent protest is unlikely to solve anything.

I know one thing, I might have Inglorious Basterds on in the background tonight while I'm typing up reports.

If I can shoot rabbits, then I can shoot fascists.
(Well you ain't ever shot a fascist and you ain't no friend of mine)

I [i]have[/i] punched nazis in the face, I hope not to be called on to do it again, I'm getting on a bit. I've never punched a rabbit though, it never really felt like the right moment

I've just caught up with this thread. two things:

RIP to Bernard Kenny, the pensioner who fought the man who murdered Jo Cox, and was himself stabbed. According to the BBC he died peacefully today.

Can I just say, thank you for this info. I'd no idea he'd died. What a shame.

I "perceive" Nazis to be "inherently bad" on account of the killing 6 million Jews thang. But hey, that's just me - judgemental.

Muslims, Christians, Hindu's, Communists and Mongol Hordes have all done much the same

Speaking as a militant atheist,

**** me gently with a chainsaw, are you seriously conflating those two situations as being equivalent? Have a word with yourself.

As for the freedom of speech thing,

As much as it pains me to say it, I broadly agree with ninfan; you either censor nothing, or you censor everything.

But.

There comes a limit where lines do have to be drawn. In the UK it's illegal to promote hate speech such as inciting racial hatred, for instance. Quelling someone from drumming up support for a war trumps any right to freedom of speech. Expressing unpopular or contentious opinions is fine, attempting to recruit a bunch of like-minded souls to kill all the ****s less so.

meeting violent protest with violent protest is unlikely to solve anything.

Sometimes , unfortunately, it is necessary to behave in such a manner to prevent the rise of such forces. ITs never a good thing but it may be a necessary thing.

I do find it amusing that those who wish to curtail human rights on racial grounds are all for human rights when someone wishes to curtail theirs.

If they wish to preserve all human rights then I will respect theirs. Tolerant of all but the intolerant essentially.

I don't think the state should censor anything or anybody. Freedom of speech should be a given, for everyone. However, I see nothing wrong with vigorously challenging extremism, be it on the streets or Twitter. Amy public assembly of Nazis should be met with an army to show them what we think of their views.

And I definitely don't think it should be a crime to punch a Nazi in the face.

In my world, you are free to be a Nazi, if that's what you want to be, but I am free to call you a **** and punch you in the face, because that is the consequence of being a Nazi.

you either censor nothing, or you censor everything.

Whilst I broadly agree with you i prefer to thing we all have line the only issue is where we place the line, fascism, ISIS propaganda or recruitment websites, Child pornography. Everyone has a line somewhere where they wish to curtail free speech. Its not at all if we censor one thing we have censored everything its not if we prevent stop ISIS we have become China.

Tolerant of all but the intolerant essentially.

Nah. Same answer as not torturing terrorists: what's the point of Human Rights if you only apply them when it is easy, to the good guys?

If there is not freedom of speech for all there is not freedom of speech. Some of the counter protesters were violent and should have been arrested.
There is a difference of degree though, one of the march organisers stated on video that his group was not non violent. He went to the demo with a rifle , 2 hand guns and a knife.

In my (very) humble opinion, the hatred expressed by some cops and the far-right towards coloured people is a manifestation of their inherent insecurity as regards their next incarnation.*

We all possess varying levels of pre-cognition and to me, these right wingers can sense on some level that, unless they decide to incarnate on another planet, then statistically they'll be more likely to incarnate in a non-white body, next time round.

Not as a punishment, but just to deepen their awareness, as were all drawn towards increasingly more demanding lives, even if this stimulates fear in our human bodies as we steel ourselves for the next 'step-down'.

Likewise, our aristocracy clings in the most febrile manner to 'their' estates as they know that they'll have to reincarnate in less glamorous lodgings someday. (Party's over!!!)

*or maybe they merely fear the c@ck

Agree it's all about insecurity, not the reincarnation, mind.

Did trump just say there were good people on both sides in Charlottesville ... Nazis are good people ?? http://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/15/politics/trump-charlottesville-latest/index.html

He's back to being Hitler again. !

Right, so that makes it OK to punch people in the face does it?

If a nazi was near me and he was suggesting lynching or slavery were appropriate then yes a swift smack in the mouth seems proportional to me.

As much as it pains me to say it, I broadly agree with ninfan; you either censor nothing, or you censor everything.

This idea got a lot of attention after Charlie Hebdo along with a lot of tosh about freedom of speech. There is no such thing as freedom of speech or the notion of censoring nothing or everything. We have legal, informal and cultural limitations on both for obvious reasons. We live with considerable restrictions on what we can and can't say and as we see here and in all areas of life there is unlikely to complete consistently of applications - what some deem worthy of censorship or freedom is very different from others. Again look ^

Odd that we seem to live in a parallel universe where this is forgotten. Do we just feel better for pretending that FoS exists or do we actually believe it?

Did trump just say there were good people on both sides in Charlottesville ... Nazis are good people ??

No, he specifically said excluded Nazis and white supremacists from that, saying they should be condemned... but I suppose you didn't bother actually watching and listening to that bit did you?

ff a nazi was near me and he was suggesting lynching or slavery were appropriate then yes a swift smack in the mouth seems proportional to me.

Funny that, because if you were near me and suggesting punching me in the face was appropriate then I'd run you over with my car to get away from you

Punching people isn't the solution. That's just vigilantism, and when people start taking the law into their own hands things don't end well. It also helps the alt right paint themselves (incorrectly) as martyrs.
There's no reason you can't deal with these people legally. Germany has well established laws which ban National Socialist organisations and prohibit Nazi salutes and the use of Nazi symbolism. Anyone behaving like the Charlottesville clowns in Germany would get the book thrown at them.

There's no reason you can't deal with these people legally. Germany has well established laws which ban National Socialist

Given that this did not occur in Germany what should the residents of Charlottesville have done?

Given that this did not occur in Germany what should the residents of Charlottesville have done?

Tolerate other people's lawful expression of free speech?

Funny that, because if you were near me and suggesting punching me in the face was appropriate then I'd run you over with my car to get away from you

Welll at least you're not threatening to sexually assault his mother.

Yet.

suggesting punching me in the face was appropriate then I'd run you over with my car.

You are just [i]so[/i] classy you my hero.

Seriously, are you ****ed in the head? Is there [i]no[/i] depth you wont stoop to in pursuit of whatever gets you a rise?

I'm definitely out.

No, he specifically said excluded Nazis and white supremacists from that

So non white supremacist & Nazis turn up to a rally run for & by white supremacist & Nazis!?

That'd be the same (not) Nazis complaining about pictures of them at said rally going viral then.

He's just pandering to his far right core, but we all knew that

Ah, right Metalheart, so it's OK to delibaretly punch people in the face cause you don't like them, but not ok to run them over on the same basis?

lefties do have [b]some[/b] standards after all then.

in all areas of life there is unlikely to complete consistently of application

I'd run you over with my car to get away from you

Good luck with that. If you werent a nazi you wouldnt need to worry.

I don't understand why ninfan isn't banned.

I don't understand why ninfan isn't banned

Freedom of speech, innit.

Ninfan still waiting for any evidence of your claim that the driver was trying to get away from the counter protesters.

Funny that, because if you were near me and suggesting punching me in the face was appropriate then I'd run you over with my car to get away from you

Let's see what comes out at court, eh?

Put up or shut up.

Let's see what comes out at court, eh?

I really need a shower now

Still no sign of this though "stories coming out now that his car had been surrounded by antifa protesters attacking him and he was trying to get away. Unverified but seems like a realistic scenario."

"Nothing makes us more proud at the KKK than we see white patriots such as James Fields Jr, age 20, taking his car and running over nine communist anti-fascist, killing one ****-lover named Heather Heyer. James Fields hail victory. It's men like you that have made the great white race strong and will be strong again."

I don't understand why ninfan isn't banned
Freedom of speech, innit.

Tough this FoS idea isn't it?

Let's see what comes out at court, eh?

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article167303682.html
Have found Ninfan's identity?

Let's see what comes out at court, eh?

I'll hold you to that, the next time you call terrorism on a bombing.

This was Ninfans response to the "Ban the Burqa" thread

Isn't equality about treating everyone the same?

He then posted pictures of no smoking cigarette and no helmet signs.

[b]*deadpan sarcastic monotone voice ON*[/b] He is clearly a man who believes in freedom of speech and religious expression.

Are we all agreed then, that Jambaliar and Ninfan are closet Fascists - who hide behind tenants of [i]Freedom of Speech[/i], albeit be they poorly understood on their part, when it suits them. So that they may attack and undermine their enemy "the left"? They are the types of people, who would like nothing more than to exploit the mechanisms of democracy at a time and place that suits them - and then once their political enemies have been destroyed, they would either seek to or support the destruction of democracy itself.

In short, they are traitors.

I'm having a lot of fun with you rank amateurs. **** me, judging by the boasts of some of you being "Oxbridge", I've woefully undersold myself. I should have become a ****ing PR goon for the Labour party.

Are we all agreed then, that Jambaliar and Ninfan are closet Fascists - who hide behind tenants of Freedom of Speech, albeit be they poorly understood on their part, when it suits them. So that they may attack and undermine their enemy "the left"? They are the types of people, who would like nothing more than to exploit the mechanisms of democracy at a time and place that suits them - and then once their political enemies have been destroyed, they would either seek to or support the destruction of democracy itself.

Nor is it backed up by data on political violence. Of at least 372 murders that were committed by domestic extremists between 2007 and 2016, according to a study by the Anti-Defamation League, 74 percent were committed by right-wing extremists. Muslim extremists were responsible for 24 percent of those killings, and the small remainder were committed by left-wing extremists, the study concluded.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/us/politics/theories-meaning-trump-many-sides-remark.html

Ninfan and Jambaliar are extremists, who adhere to a doctrine more dangerous than Islamism.

I think the Americans should consider banning the use of encryption by known alt-righters and start something akin to the PREVENT program to re-educate them.

If it's good enough for Islam, it's good enough for them.

[img] ?1296494117[/img]

I don't understand why ninfan isn't banned

On what grounds should we ban him?

As I said earlier, holding unpopular opinions isn't grounds for censorship. That's a bad precedence to be setting.

re-educate them

Ah, lefties and their fascination with re-education camps, plus ca change.

Cougar, obviously I should be banned for condemning violence, and incitement to violence, by both sides. Aparrently I'm supposed to only criticise violence by the Nazi's, because somehow Nazi violence is inherently worse than the righteous violence of the anti-Nazis, and only a Nazi would condemn all violence, or think that free speech applies to all.

Frankly, I think it's hilarious the number of people on here who hold themselves to be some sort of paragons of equality and tolerance, whose mask has slipped by condoning physical violence against people they don't like. The true double standards and hypocrisy of the 'tolerant left'

Do you really want me to dig up either yours or Jambaliars support for the PREVENT program.

I mean, do I really have to waste the energy or do eithet of you just want to come clean?

I know one of you does, but you two are so similar I sometimes mistake you for being the same poster.

ff a nazi was near me and he was suggesting lynching or slavery were appropriate then yes a swift smack in the mouth seems proportional to me.

Funny that, because if you were near me and suggesting punching me in the face was appropriate then I'd run you over with my car to get away from you

Am I misreading this? You're literally admitting to being a Nazi - you replied to: (if a nazi was near me... a swift smack in the mouth seems proportional | if you were near me and suggesting punching [b]me [/b]in the face was appropriate). And then in the context of this discussion where someone has been killed by a car you're positing running over someone for their difference of opinion?

Guys, Ninfans a victim now. Hes been..... OPPRESSED.
[img] [/img]

Cougar - Moderator

On what grounds should we ban him?

I think a lot of people believe he's only takes these positions to troll people, and that of course is against the rules.

Me, I think he's genuine- which is definitely worse, it's just not against the rules.

Cougar, obviously I should be banned for condemning violence, and incitement to violence, by both sides. Aparrently I'm supposed to only criticise violence by the Nazi's, because somehow Nazi violence is inherently worse than the righteous violence of the anti-Nazis, and only a Nazi would condemn all violence, or think that free speech applies to all.

As far as I can tell from the discussion here, no-one's suggesting that you should or shouldn't "only criticise violence by the Nazi's." Rather the criticism here is that that you probably shouldn't be making excuses for them.

I think a lot of people think he's only takes these positions to troll people, and that of course is against the rules.

Entirely possible, a lot of the old hands are so very very good at walking the line.

Me, I think he's genuine- which is definitely worse, it's just not against the rules.

Welcome to my world.

because somehow Nazi violence is inherently worse than the righteous violence of the anti-Nazis.

A fair summary of WW2

A fair summary of WW2

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre

Is that another whatabout?

I love how the best you could come up with, instead of say a robust denial of being a PREVENT supporter, is a random link to the Katyn massacre.

Imho, being a nazi is a beyond daft.
Hitler was wrong about everything and genetically they're painting themselves into a corner (much like our aristocracy).

Also, I wouldn't disagree with the 'fear of the next reincarnation' thing.

My theory is that beginner souls are given five or six lives before they get a chance to make any assessments or reflections on them, kind of crash-bang-wallop-bush-bash-bosh.

So your racist cop has been given an easy life to start with (badge and gun included!), but they're also ' peering into the abyss' of their future incarnations, so connected are they.

Or maybe it is just pe£is-envy!