[Closed] Charlottesville

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!

Feel a bit naughty for jumping in without reading every post. But seeing as am travelling around the area at the mo here's a few thoughts:
There was a programme like prevent but for Nazis. Only one of Trump's mates wife's shut it down.
People in this part of the world are lovely. But many of them are deeply misinformed. Some of them are Nazis (no, not alt-right, Nazis).
There is lots of misinformation, obfuscation, and opinion. There is less communication of fact and reason. Even my lefty Jewish father in law is sounding like a Trump supporter.
Trump is a lieing toe rag who refuses to condemn the Nazis. Even the Nazis agree with this statement.
Jeremy Corbyn has f all relevance to what's happening here.
Trump manages to make everything about him.
The what - about - ery on here is funny.
But:
Antifa is not the same but a different side of the coin from Nazis.
In very simple terms for the hard of thinking:
Nazis bad (even if they're just standing there silent).
Antifascists good.
Richard Spencer = Nazi, bad
Driving a car into people = terrorism, bad
Trying to excuse Trump, Spencer or terrorists = uhm, no

Yeah, just to be clear.
Violence by Nazis is not the same as violence against Nazis. There is a clear moral distinction.

Violence by Nazis is not the same as violence against Nazis. There is a clear moral distinction.

Its when you the definition of Nazis gets a bit blurred is when the body count goes up.

Not advocating Nazis, or fascists in general but when its generally accepted that you can 'punch a nazi' I would feel a bit uneasy about the direction that society is heading.
Lets do what the Germans do and just make that stuff illegal and let the law deal with it?

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.

As far as I'm aware there's no law or principle that obliges stw to provide a platform for hatred. Freedom of speech isn't the same as the right to be published wherever you wish.

Tough this FoS idea isn't it?

Maybe but it's not relevant. His right to speech is clear but nobody is obliged to publish what he says.

I think the only crime ninfan is guilty of is pouring it on a bit thick.

I engage with him the same way I do with Chekwk.

Which is the same way I do a dog with a bucket on it's head.

Bit harsh Jamie. Those dogs don't put the buckets on their own heads you know.

Just some light morning viewing...

https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/paapb7/watch-vice-news-film-from-the-front-lines-in-charlottesville

[img] [/img]

Some anti fascist protesters, heading out to commit violence against nazis who were just minding their own business.

Fantastic set of tweets from the 82nd airborne division that i saw last night. One of the neo-nazi demonstraters had an 82nd airborne hat on, so the proceeded to give a history lesson around what they did during the liberation of Europe and that any idiot can buy a hat

Jamie - Member
I think the only crime ninfan is guilty of is pouring it on a bit thick.

He's pushing the Devil's Advocate stance as far as possible to make a point and to seek attention.

We get the point.
It's up to us how much attention we wish to give.

Violence by Nazis is not the same as violence against Nazis. There is a clear moral distinction.

😯 I hope that you are not a lawyer.

How many other categories could you substitute for [nazis] ?

Doc, no need to labour the point. What you want is very clear, the early morning posts are a give away

It's up to us how much attention we wish to give.

Very well said....and the evidence is extraordinary, isn't it.....almost obsessive 😉

teamhurtmore - Member
Violence by Nazis is not the same as violence against Nazis. There is a clear moral distinction.
I hope that you are not a lawyer.

How many other categories could you substitute for [nazis] ?

Doc, no need to labour the point. What you want is very clear, the early morning posts are a give away

I hope that you are not a lawyer.

How many other categories could you substitute for [nazis] ? Other groups seeking to segregate society, expel people from their homes, eliminate races and religious groups, those proposing the existence of a master race?

THM! no need to labour the point. What you want is very clear, the posts are a give away

Eliminate religious groups - how apt 😉

Doc, no need to labour the point. What you want is very clear

Gosh. An economist AND a mind reader!! It's almost like the Village People together in the same body!!

No don't ban ninfan. He's not breaking the rules and censoring people because you don't like what they say is a form of fascism itself.

I'm interested though ninfan. Do you agree with the President's statement that:

"... no matter the color of our skin, we all live under the same laws. We all salute the same great flag, and we are all made by the same almighty God. We must love each other, show affection for each other and unite together in condemnation of hatred, bigotry and violence. We must rediscover the bonds of love and loyalty that bring us together as Americans.

[b]Racism is evil, and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans[/b]. We are a nation founded on the truth that all of us are created equal. We are equal in the eyes of our creator, we are equal under the law and we are equal under our constitution. Those who spread violence in the name of bigotry, strike at the very core of America."

that was yesterday. keep up.

when its generally accepted that you can 'punch a nazi' I would feel a bit uneasy about the direction that society is heading.

Hasn't it always been pretty much acceptable to punch Nazis? For me, the worrying trend is that it seems to be getting [i]less[/i] acceptable to punch them, which makes me worry about the direction that society is heading.

Other groups seeking to segregate society, expel people from their homes, eliminate races and religious groups, those proposing the existence of a master race

Replace 'race' with 'cult' and that describes Islamism perfectly, which despite continued denials is the REAL fascist threat we face, rather than a fringe bunch of rednecks waving flags.

Princess Diana is dead too

By Islamism, are you referring to the dangerous group of terrorists misrepresenting the teachings of a legitimate, mostly peaceful religion for their own violent ends?
Because I'll agree that they are as Fascist as any Nazi, I mean, they use the same tactics and seem to want pretty much the same thing (the extermination of all "others").

If it makes you feel better, I'll pledge to also punch Islamist extremists in the face too, in the interests of balance.

If it makes you feel better, I'll pledge to also punch [s]Islamist[/s] any extremists in the face too, in the interests of balance.

This.

that was yesterday. keep up.

Yes but there is some question on here over whether he is a nazi sympathiser or if he just likes to play Devil's Advocate to wind up "the lefties".

On the Trump thread there is a very similar theme: it is unclear if he actually likes Trump and thinks he is doing a good job or if he just likes winding up lefties.

So here is an interesting opportunity. The president he 'supports' has said that the groups he 'supports' are repugnant, unconstitutional, un-American and un-Godly.

Does ninfan agree?

rather than a fringe bunch of rednecks waving flags.

That's was the case until they got their man in the Whitehouse....

Very well said....and the evidence is extraordinary, isn't it.....almost obsessive

Slightly ironic from someone who left vowing never to return, but yes.
🙂

Personal opinion - ninfan has issues.
If trolling on here makes him feel better, so be it.
It's pointless trying to debate with him as he's not here for that, he just enjoys the conflict.

Ignore him and he'll seek attention somewhere else.

kimbers

That's was the case until they got their man in the Whitehouse....

So just to clarify, Republicans are Nazis?

Graham I would not ban Ninfan either i would encourage him to post what he actually believes

Of course typing things that are not true that you do not believe and are factually false just to get a reaction is not a breach of STW rules- though personally attacking a person who does this is.

Its not something so noble I would wheel out free speech to defend it
If he meant what he said you may well have a point.

YMMV

So just to clarify, Republicans are Nazis?

Yes. That's exactly what they meant.

No need to be glib Jamie. I think it's worthwhile to try and establish a distinction. Or connection.