Why is Antifa tolerated? Because they're left wing?

I find it interesting that Twitter has taken all the videos down. Hmmm..

I find it interesting that these attacks are carried out in gun free zones or where the likelihood of encountering armed resistance is very low.

I find it interesting that all the resident Libs always have the mentality of the ends justify the means.

I find it interesting that the resident Libs always have the "but Trump" as their go to.
Great post.
 
I'm sure plenty of posters in this thread thought it was hi-larious when a GOP congressman body-slammed a reporter....and those same posters are now outraged by this event.

I'm interested to see if Trump will comment on it after referring to the congressman as a "stand up guy."

There's an inconsistency here, one that confirms my belief that most human beings are extremely stupid (it really didn't need any more confirmation).

I'd never try to rationalize either of these events.

Lol. But you would play the what-about card. Kudos.
 
Why would I do two stupid things? Knock yourself out when they meet up in a non gun free zone.
So it's ok for antifa to spew their communist manifesto unabated but heaven forbid anyone oppose them and then defend themselves from attack against a gang. Glad we know where you stand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Franklin Pierce
So it's ok for antifa to spew their communist manifesto unabated but heaven forbid anyone oppose them and then defend themselves from attack against a gang. Glad we know where you stand.
I think if you go to a rabid fascist protest which has a history of attracting emotionally unstable people who are violent to counterprotest while carrying a firearm, your own judgment should be questioned thoroughly.
 
I'm getting "called out" because they didn't read and don't understand the point I was making, which was that violence has cropped up on both sides and neither side is willing to acknowledge what their extremists are doing.

You get to be lumped in with stupid people like WTN orange blood, Joevol33, and Orangeslice now...congrats.
I read the entire thing and understood your point. You clarified your point to be that it was whataboutism, while claiming it wasn't actually whataboutism.

Hint: "There's a problem on both sides" is the definition of whataboutism. You tried to hide the whataboutism behind something to the effect of "how could anyone try to rationalize the bad behavior on either side", but that too is whataboutism in a thread about antifa/left.

You can't hide whataboutism behind whataboutism and then treat us like supposed idiots for saying, "Hey, that's whataboutism hiding behind whataboutism."


For the record, unless it was in physical self defense, body slamming a journalist was plain wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matt2496 and DC_Vol
I think if you go to a rabid fascist protest which has a history of attracting emotionally unstable people who are violent to counterprotest while carrying a firearm, your own judgment should be questioned thoroughly.
But if it's your job to cover those things should you not be able to defend yourself? You obviously can't rely on the police for your protection. The firearm is at least a deterrent.
 
But if it's your job to cover those things should you not be able to defend yourself? You obviously can't rely on the police for your protection. The firearm is at least a deterrent.
I absolutely agree with this. If i were assigned to cover the protest as a media member, i would make sure i have a way to defend myself.
Otoh, if i weren't required, i wouldnt go (but that's bc i avoid high risk events)
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigOrangeD
And you couldn't do that on your page one post?

I was just answering LG's question about whether the guy was a journalist by providing links showing he was a journalist. If I recall (I could be wrong), I don't think I posted anything about the Montana congressman body slamming the reporter.

I know you guys wish it weren't the case, but none of the liberals on this board support ANTIFA. And no liberal politician is identifying with ANTIFA or condoning their actions. In fact, I've seen lots of flaming libs condemning the attack on Ngo.

Now, on the other hand, numerous GOP politicians and advisors (Stone, Gaetz, the Miami chairman of the GOP) have cuddled up with the Proud Boys (against whom ANTIFA was marching). Moreover, the foremost GOP politician has actively encouraged hostility against the press. And remember Trump said zilch when one of his MAGAnistas sent pipe bombs to numerous members of the media.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RockyTop85
I absolutely agree with this. If i were assigned to cover the protest as a media member, i would make sure i have a way to defend myself.
Otoh, if i weren't required, i wouldnt go (but that's bc i avoid high risk events)
I'm not advancing the idea to go looking for trouble but I think one should be able to voice opposition to a political ideaology without the fear of being physically assaulted. If the police would do their dam job and keep these scum under control then this wouldn't be an issue.

My original point was if the scum thought there was a decent chance that they'd get their brains blown out from attacking an innocent bystander they might not be so quick to assault someone.
 
I think if you go to a rabid fascist protest which has a history of attracting emotionally unstable people who are violent to counterprotest while carrying a firearm, your own judgment should be questioned thoroughly.
You must use a good hunting rifle zeroed at 300 yards to get your trophy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad

VN Store



Back
Top