Nazis showing up at places uninvited.

[AJ*]

4 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

 

Actually, violent anti-abortionists should be considered terrorists if they bomb clinics and/or kill people they ARE terrorists.

 

True, but my point is you can't lump a whole group of peaceful protesters together because some unstable person flies off the handle and commits violent acts or threatens violence. BLM was basically a bunch of diverse groups with (blacks, whites, latinos, asians, gay, straight, etc) coming together in a social media movement to protest police brutality. Trying to label them as a terrorist group would be as dumb as labeling average citizens marching against abortion a terrorist group. There could be peaceful marches of hundreds of thousands of people but the detractors will always find a way to focus on the few idiots that go overboard and cause trouble. 

[grego]

23 minutes ago, AJ* said:

 

True, but my point is you can't lump a whole group of peaceful protesters together because some unstable person flies off the handle and commits violent acts or threatens violence. BLM was basically a bunch of diverse groups with (blacks, whites, latinos, asians, gay, straight, etc) coming together in a social media movement to protest police brutality. Trying to label them as a terrorist group would be as dumb as labeling average citizens marching against abortion a terrorist group. There could be peaceful marches of hundreds of thousands of people but the detractors will always find a way to focus on the few idiots that go overboard and cause trouble. 

 

I don't know if I'd say blm is a terrorist group. The problem is they give the opposition too much ammo. Their spiritual leader is, literally, a terrorist. That's not good. And they haven't always denounced violent chants by the few idiots at the rallies. They've refused to denounce leaders who say racist, violent things. 

 

Its a bad look. It's also not great for those who are anti police brutality, anti racism and pro gay rights who otherwise might get behind the movement. 

[Gamebreaker]

11 minutes ago, grego said:

 

I don't know if I'd say blm is a terrorist group. The problem is they give the opposition too much ammo. Their spiritual leader is, literally, a terrorist. That's not good. And they haven't always denounced violent chants by the few idiots at the rallies. They've refused to denounce leaders who say racist, violent things. 

 

Its a bad look. It's also not great for those who are anti police brutality, anti racism and pro gay rights who otherwise might get behind the movement. 

 

I think you and I have discussed that spiritual leader before. I can't recall her name at the moment, but if she is the one that was convicted of murder, escaped prison and fled the country, don't you have some misgivings about how that case was handled and that she's always maintained her innocence of the crime? I agree about the racist comments she's made, but is she really a terrorist? I don't think so. 

[Destino]

4 hours ago, Predicto said:

Even though people have explained it to you, you don't acknowledge any difference between the thousands and thousands of non-violent and generally unorganized protesters who call themselves anti-fascists, and the much smaller group of "black box" anarchists who show up ostensibly to to protect the non-violent protesters FROM violence (and sometimes commit violence themselves).   

 

After all this time, several people in this thread don't seem to understand the basics of what they are talking about (or in the case of twa, they just don't care).   Antifa is getting smeared just the same way that Black Lives Matter got smeared a couple of years ago, and ACORN got smeared a few years before that.  The smearing is turning out to be just as effective now as it was then.   

 

I thought it was black bloc?  I'm not really sure.  Anyway, my understanding is that black bloc isn't a group name but a tactic.  They wear clothing to obscure their identity because they are specifically meaning to do violence not to show affiliation to anarchy.  Even if we do view them like a suspiciously cooperative but entirely separate group anarchists in black clothing, the violence hasn't been limited to them.  BAMN (By Any Means Necessary) for instance has been behind violence and they certainly aren't masked anarchists. 

 

Everyone that opposes fascism is not Antifa.  The vast majority of Americans oppose fascism, unless we've redefined the term.  Very few would call themselves Antifa.  And yes while many have "explained" it to me, I think those many might be wrong.  Ignoring right wing sources the vast majority of mainstream and left wing media seem to agree that Antifa is in any way opposed to violence.  The evidence seems to support my position that Antifa is a disjointed group with no centralized leadership that supports direct action, at the street level, even if that means violence.

 

Edit:  Separate point about BLM.  They don't belong in this discussion.  They are not a violent and have on hundreds of occasions made clear that they are opposed to violence. 

 

 

[grego]

17 minutes ago, Gamebreaker said:

 

I think you and I have discussed that spiritual leader before. I can't recall her name at the moment, but if she is the one that was convicted of murder, escaped prison and fled the country, don't you have some misgivings about how that case was handled and that she's always maintained her innocence of the crime? I agree about the racist comments she's made, but is she really a terrorist? I don't think so. 

 

I have heard varying accounts of the shooting that she was found guilty of. I haven't figured out yet where I stand on whether or not she pulled the trigger that day. 

 

At the end of the day, I feel the same way about her as I do Rasmeah Odeh (another woman convicted of terrorism who maintains her innocence) or the 'non white supremacists' who marched in Charlottesville - you are knowingly associating with a known terrorist group. 

 

The black liberation army killed 17 cops in the 70s and early 80s. And this wasn't the first police shooting she was allegedly involved in. 

 

 

 

Edited September 5, 2017 by grego

[grego]

1 hour ago, Destino said:

 

 

 

Edit:  Separate point about BLM.  They don't belong in this discussion.  They are not a violent and have on hundreds of occasions made clear that they are opposed to violence. 

 

 

 

Agree with the first part (that I edited out). 

 

Just a question /clarification about blm - I didn't bring them up. I responded after they were brought up by multiple posters that referred to their image being smeared as a terrorist group. 

 

The accusations of their acceptance of violence are not unfounded. 

[LD0506]

[Springfield]

Part of my point about this whole antifa are terrorists thing is that BLM is not far off, then Occupy Wall Street, then teacher unions.  Sure, most of the posters on this board can differentiate those groups.  This board is more intelligent than most of social media and (apparently) the voting populous.  To a majority of the rest antifa and teacher unions are interchangeable.

[tshile]

no, to majority of people antifa and teachers unions are not interchangeable.

 

the sean hannity's of the world will push that, but that is not majority of the people.

 

this is an absurd argument.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Well chalk this up on the list of things that are oh so predictable.

 

#1 North Carolina Clergy speaks out against the legacy racism, slavery, and the Confederacy.

#2 Clergy gets national attention because he's a descendant of Robert E. Lee.

#3 Church decides to take a vote on clergy's tenure as their pastor.

#4 Pastor resigns.

 

Way to go "church".

 

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/09/05/548708431/lee-relative-who-denounced-white-supremacy-resigns-as-pastor-of-n-c-church?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20170905

Edited September 6, 2017 by AsburySkinsFan

[LadySkinsFan]

Refusal to acknowledge that the South lost the Civil War, and slavery the economic engine was abolished. 

 

Blacks have been paying for this ever since. 

 

Poor whites are still poor, but don't blame the slavery system that depressed their wages, and still the Southern aristocracy still keeps them down, instead they blame Black people who don't have any control over their situation.

[Predicto]

18 hours ago, Destino said:

Anyway, my understanding is that black bloc isn't a group name but a tactic. 

 

 

 

Yes and no.  

 

Antifa is a large, loose, decentralized network of people who follow events on Twitter and Facebook, and show up to protest  against white supremacists and others they view as fascists.  They have virtually no leadership or organization.  They are drawn from the mainstream left, and include immigrants and clergy and veterans and socialists and African Americans and homeless advocates and Quakers and everything in between.  Pretty much anyone who might be labelled a "social justice warrior."  Antifa protests have exploded in size and frequency as a reaction to alt-right provocations and now, open white supremacy movements.    

 

Not surprisingly, any call to protest any social issue also attracts the most radical protesters like moths to a flame.   Black bloc protesters essentially are anarchists.  They are overwhelmingly young, white, and male, and and they constitute a small minority of the people who show up at otherwise peaceful leftist protests.  Unfortunately, they are the ones who show up intending to wreck ****.   Black bloc started in Germany in the 1980s, and they were showing up to break windows at banks and business during G-20 meetings and World Trade Organization summits in Seattle in 1999, before Facebook and Twitter were invented and when the word "Antifa" basically didn't exist.   

 

I have no doubt that all black bloc members currently consider themselves part of Antifa, just like they considered themselves part of the earlier G20 protests and the Occupy protests and so on.   But Antifa movement isn't based on anarchy, it didn't create the black bloc, and the overwhelming majority of the people who show up at Antifa protests are not using black bloc tactics. 

 

 

[The Evil Genius]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/09/06/republican-smart-white-traditional-a-mayoral-candidate-said-on-facebook-it-backfired/?utm_term=.0e6cdf6ab8ff

 

REPUBLICAN & SMART, WHITE, TRADITIONAL,’ a mayoral candidate said on Facebook. It backfired.

By Kristine Phillips 

 

A woman running for mayor of Charlotte is facing a backlash after appearing to advertise her race as one of her qualifications.

“Vote for me!” Kimberley Paige Barnette, a former county magistrate judge running for office for the first time, wrote on her Facebook profile.

Then, following two lines that included her name and “Mayor of Charlotte 2017” was a description of herself, in four capitalized words: “REPUBLICAN & SMART, WHITE, TRADITIONAL”

The description, which appeared at the top of her Facebook profile, quickly drew angry responses on social media, the Charlotte Observer reported. The North Carolina Republican Party also has distanced itself from the little-known candidate.

[LadySkinsFan]

Backfire! 

 

[The Evil Genius]

Read the entire article. She sounds like a real peach. 

 

I wonder (not really) if she voted for Trump. 

Edited September 6, 2017 by The Evil Genius

[LadySkinsFan]

I read the entire article.

 

Wow, is all I can say.

[tshile]

2 hours ago, Predicto said:

 

Yes and no.  

 

Antifa is a large, loose, decentralized network of people who follow events on Twitter and Facebook, and show up to protest  against white supremacists and others they view as fascists.  They have virtually no leadership or organization.  They are drawn from the mainstream left, and include immigrants and clergy and veterans and socialists and African Americans and homeless advocates and Quakers and everything in between.  Pretty much anyone who might be labelled a "social justice warrior."  Antifa protests have exploded in size and frequency as a reaction to alt-right provocations and now, open white supremacy movements.    

 

Not surprisingly, any call to protest any social issue also attracts the most radical protesters like moths to a flame.   Black bloc protesters essentially are anarchists.  They are overwhelmingly young, white, and male, and and they constitute a small minority of the people who show up at otherwise peaceful leftist protests.  Unfortunately, they are the ones who show up intending to wreck ****.   Black bloc started in Germany in the 1980s, and they were showing up to break windows at banks and business during G-20 meetings and World Trade Organization summits in Seattle in 1999, before Facebook and Twitter were invented and when the word "Antifa" basically didn't exist.   

 

I have no doubt that all black bloc members currently consider themselves part of Antifa, just like they considered themselves part of the earlier G20 protests and the Occupy protests and so on.   But Antifa movement isn't based on anarchy, it didn't create the black bloc, and the overwhelming majority of the people who show up at Antifa protests are not using black bloc tactics. 

 

 

This sounds good, the problem is Antifa (not specifically black bloc) is cited by quite a few sources as being violent itself. Hard right sources like, you know, the atlantic and the economist.

 

Words like  violent and militant seem to be among the most often used descriptors.

 

[Predicto]

34 minutes ago, tshile said:

This sounds good, the problem is Antifa (not specifically black bloc) is cited by quite a few sources as being violent itself. Hard right sources like, you know, the atlantic and the economist.

 

Words like  violent and militant seem to be among the most often used descriptors.

 

 

That's a problem of sloppy labeling.  Antifa is being used as a shorthand for black bloc, because it is too complicated to explain the nuances every time.  After all, the black bloc people identify themselves as part of Antifa.

 

As a result, white moderates become terrified of Antifa (and, eventually reject any leftist/social justice protests).  Its the same thing that happened to Black Lives Matter.  It happens every time.  The term Antifa is probably a permanently poisoned label now, with no chance to appeal to the big mushy middle that only pays attention to such issues at the most superficial level.  Not that the black bloc anarchists care about that.  And to be fair, even though most of Antifa is not black bloc, when it comes to guys on "their" side fighting with neo-nazis on the other side, they are going to be sympathetic of black block a lot of the time.     

 

I read both the Economist and the Atlantic, and it frustrates me when I see that sort of sloppiness.  But it is a common problem in journalism.  

 

Here's a short  clip from the LA Times about the difference.

 

 

Edited September 6, 2017 by Predicto

[visionary]

 

[Destino]

On 9/6/2017 at 5:19 PM, Predicto said:

 

That's a problem of sloppy labeling.  Antifa is being used as a shorthand for black bloc, because it is too complicated to explain the nuances every time.  After all, the black bloc people identify themselves as part of Antifa.

 

 

That's generous.  Extremely so.  The other problem is that none of these unaffiliated, incredibly peaceful groups, seem willing to vocally reject the violence.  They excuse it and sometimes call it self defense despite video evidence to the contrary.  You're no doubt aware of the organization and communication necessary to get very large crowd of people along with banners to locations in short time frames.  Antifa groups evidently do not lack structure... they're just decentralized and independent.  Any of them could announce that black bloc has no place with them and refuse to allow black bloc to march with them and use them as cover.  They could declare themselves peaceful and not celebrate "victories" when violence silenced an opponent.  

 

Other groups have.  Probably because violence is easily identifiable as wrong and they understand that being associated with violence works against them.  

 

I don't think this can all just be written off as sloppy reporting, but it's possible these groups are opposing violence and it's not being reported.  I'm open to the idea that I'm completely wrong.  It's just hard for me to believe that given the amount of left wing media sources saying that Antifa is ok with violence.

 

[Bozo the kKklown]

Antifa is literally short for Anti-Fascists. 

 

If that scares you moderate white person, then you are the problem.

[twa]

 

[grego]

12 hours ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

Antifa is literally short for Anti-Fascists. 

 

If that scares you moderate white person, then you are the problem.

 

race obsession aside, i would say most people are down with anti fascism. its the loose definition of 'fascist', combined with the loose definition of self defense (also employed by people like abortion clinic bombers/shooters as well as jihadists) which provides the justification for violence. 

[Bozo the kKklown]

6 minutes ago, grego said:

 

race obsession aside

The people openly questioning their tactics are moderate and shook liberal white people.

 

Call it obsession but it's what we have seen.

 

Call it obsession but it's what we have seen.

[The Evil Genius]

Fox News. Only the best people.

 

Compares monuments to 9/11 victims to monuments to Confederate soldiers.

 

SMH.

 

http://thehill.com/homenews/media/350032-fox-news-compares-9-11-memorial-to-confederate-statues