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

[DynaLo]

These are biden's words. Please find the word ANTIFA

Charlottesville is also home to a defining moment for this nation in the last few years. It was there on August of 2017 we saw Klansmen and white supremacists and neo-Nazis come out in the open, their crazed faces illuminated by torches, veins bulging, and bearing the fangs of racism. Chanting the same anti-Semitic bile heard across Europe in the ‘30s. And they were met by a courageous group of Americans, and a violent clash ensued and a brave young woman lost her life.

Please elaborate on who exactly you believe he was referring to.

Feel free to use the enormous amount of videos taken that day to find and identify the "courageous group of Americans" that violently clashed with the for brains neo's and their equally ignorant pals.

 

[Mick]

None of which would have happened had the "courageous group" of Antifa not gone to counter protest.

Had it just been the angry white people and they had been left alone to have their protest, it would have been an uneventful afternoon that most people wouldn't have known was happening.

You get a bunch of people having a tiki torch rally at a confederate statue, someone is going to take a picture or video and post it online. They are in public to draw attention to their cause, otherwise they would be at home spreading hate from behind a computer.

 

[Weezer]

I know you guys will pan this because it's Vox, but this is really a good read about the deeper undercurrents underlying the Ngo attack and how both sides are manipulating it.

The assault on conservative journalist Andy Ngo, explained

First, I think if roles were reversed and it was the right attacking someone, you'd quickly pan a right slanted publication, so it's funny for you to take this stance.

Second, even if instigated, what justifies such an attack? What even counts as instigation? If someone on the right takes a swing at a leftist protester for being in their face, would that be justified?

Ultimately, I think you're asking for consideration you yourself would not give.

 

[ETV]

I know you guys will pan this because it's Vox, but this is really a good read about the deeper undercurrents underlying the Ngo attack and how both sides are manipulating it.

The assault on conservative journalist Andy Ngo, explained

Taking the article into account, it still does not justify the actions of the malicious and out of control left wing mob known as antifa. Whether the journalist is pro conservative or not.

What happened to the left's stance of "freedom of the press no matter what" whenever it involves Trump? Somehow since the journalist is employed by another outlet besides MSM networks that lean hard left, its seen as well, he had it coming or he provoked Antifa to beat him. Seriously?

You can't have it both ways.

 

[nuclearjunky]

You get a bunch of people having a tiki torch rally at a confederate statue, someone is going to take a picture or video and post it online. They are in public to draw attention to their cause, otherwise they would be at home spreading hate from behind a computer.

I’ve seen one or two tiki torch protest videos across the MSM in the last year. I’ve seen 20-30 Antifa “protest” videos in the MSM in the last year. So your saying the only time Antifa shows up is to protest white supremicist groups that have gathered to spew hate?

 

[joevol33]

So about those quotes....

I took it as he admits that he’s lying, but rejects any criticism of his lies because I didn’t call out other people when he has lied about them being liars.

Maybe I’m misreading it.

I'm still waiting on pj to post anything Trump said racist, and again. I not once said someone came out and said anything, but you can tell in their refusal to condemn it that they enjoy these stories.

 

[evillawyer]

Taking the article into account, it still does not justify the actions of the malicious and out of control left wing mob known as antifa. Whether the journalist is pro conservative or not.

What happened to the left's stance of "freedom of the press no matter what" whenever it involves Trump? Somehow since the journalist is employed by another outlet besides MSM networks that lean hard left, its seen as well, he had it coming or he provoked Antifa to beat him. Seriously?

You can't have it both ways.

The article made clear that it was not condoning the attack.

 

[Mick]

I’ve seen one or two tiki torch protest videos across the MSM in the last year. I’ve seen 20-30 Antifa “protest” videos in the MSM in the last year. So your saying the only time Antifa shows up is to protest white supremicist groups that have gathered to spew hate?

I say you have a "tiki torch" protest at a symbol some see as racist, it's going to make the news. You have someone killed by said White Supremacist and it's going to make the news. I didn't think you watched the MSM much less want to run with the "left tolerates antifa" while saying you have seen 20 - 30 antifa videos while only seeing one "tiki torch" protest on the liberal MSM.

 

[Weezer]

The article made clear that it was not condoning the attack.

But it did attempt to paint Antifa in a more sympathetic light by casting doubt on the person who was physically beaten. They didn't condone it, but they tried to paint a picture of maybe he deserved it.

 

[nuclearjunky]

I say you have a "tiki torch" protest at a symbol some see as racist, it's going to make the news. You have someone killed by said White Supremacist and it's going to make the news. I didn't think you watched the MSM much less want to run with the "left tolerates antifa" while saying you have seen 20 - 30 antifa videos while only seeing one "tiki torch" protest on the liberal MSM.

So no BLM fanatics have murdered random police officers ever in the last two years. I think the body count right now leans towards the left and their so called protest groups. Some dipshit in Virginia is all we keep hearing about as a counter argument.

 

[evillawyer]

But it did attempt to paint Antifa in a more sympathetic light by casting doubt on the person who was physically beaten. They didn't condone it, but they tried to paint a picture of maybe he deserved it.

What do you mean "casting doubt" on Ngo? They explained why ANTIFA targeted him (it wasn't a random, "hey, here's a journalist, let's whip his ass" situation), but that's what anyone would do in trying to explain an assault. That's not condoning at all. And certainly they didn't say he deserved it.

 

[Mick]

So no BLM fanatics have murdered random police officers ever in the last two years. I think the body count right now leans towards the left and their so called protest groups. Some dipshit in Virginia is all we keep hearing about as a counter argument.

So now it BLM fanatics murdering cops in cold blood. Is there a legitimate case of that happening?

 

[DynaLo]

Of course both sides are going to spin it to benefit their stance, that should be expected. Hate has always been weaponized. We just have more access to seeing that weaponization on a large stage now with the internet.

Antifa in the US, under its previous name of Anti Racist Action , has been around since the 1980's where they basically followed punk rock bands around and got into confrontations with the idiot neo's and their pals. They were fairly dormant after the late 90's early 2000's.

Was their nothing to protest from 2000 until 2016?

They only resurfaced once Trump entered the presidential race and they became actively know as Antifa. Interesting name choice...

Wouldn't the original name have been more understandable to the masses concerning their cause? Was the name change an intentional political maneuver? Who financed them to make a resurgence at that particular time?

Neo's and their pals were already around way before Trump entered the political scene and had been relegated to their rightful place at the kid's table as morons. Of course they used his bravado and hyperbole to hitch their cart to in order to try and regain some relevance.

The Proud Boys and Patriot Prayers were both created in 2016, it appears as a response to Antifa. What is their actual purpose beyond some idiots just like to brawl? Are they showing up to stop free speech when it's a liberal speaker they disagree with?

Looking at both sides, it seems Antifa may be a political weapon of fear and intimidation since they have a such a fondness for anyone that doesn't agree with their views.

Personally, I think both violent sides of it are swimming in the shallow end of the gene pool.

 

[nuclearjunky]

So now it BLM fanatics murdering cops in cold blood. Is there a legitimate case of that happening?

Are you serious?

Five Dallas Officers Were Killed as Payback, Police Chief Says

https://nypost.com/2016/12/11/2016-was-a-deadly-year-for-cops-and-blm-may-be-to-blame/

Louisiana Police Officer Sues Black Lives Matter Leaders Over Baton Rouge Shooting

 

[Mick]

Are you serious?

Five Dallas Officers Were Killed as Payback, Police Chief Says

https://nypost.com/2016/12/11/2016-was-a-deadly-year-for-cops-and-blm-may-be-to-blame/

Louisiana Police Officer Sues Black Lives Matter Leaders Over Baton Rouge Shooting

I didn't see where he was in BLM but I did see where he was a military veteran that turned a peaceful march into a white cop killing rampage. Go bump that thread if you want to talk about it.

 

[ETV]

The article made clear that it was not condoning the attack.

Clear as mud maybe. From their point of view when writing about those on the left, describing the Antifa group and to quote :

Meanwhile, there’s a hunger among some parts of the left for a more radical and aggressive politics beyond the ballot box — a sense that the surge in racism and bigotry is so threatening that there’s no choice but to take to the streets and physically confront the pro-Trump right.

Really? They might as well just say that Antifa is just misguided and if it wasn't for Trump, Antifa would disband and have no further purpose.

Then there's this quote :

Ngo’s coverage of left-wing protesters is similarly ideological. He views left-wing activists, like Muslim immigrants to the West, as a threat to free and open societies. His reporting plays up acts of vandalism, violence, and hostility to free speech without a comparable focus on the much more frequent and deadly actions of right-wing extremists.

The played up part I had to laugh at. Since when does Antifa NOT cause vandalism, acts of violence and hostility towards any one opposing their view? Vox may not outright condone the assault, but they did their best to discredit the man and make it appear as if he had it coming.

 

[TheDeeble]

You get a bunch of people having a tiki torch rally at a confederate statue, someone is going to take a picture or video and post it online. They are in public to draw attention to their cause, otherwise they would be at home spreading hate from behind a computer.

Sure they want to draw attention. Anyone that protests in public likely has that goal. But had nobody shown up to fight with them, it would have gone over like any other white supremacist protest. Covered by the local news and mostly likely ignored by everyone else since it was nothing important.

 

[Orangeslice13]

Sure they want to draw attention. Anyone that protests in public likely has that goal. But had nobody shown up to fight with them, it would have gone over like any other white supremacist protest. Covered by the local news and mostly likely ignored by everyone else since it was nothing important.

Likely not covered by local news.
They’re completely irrelevant.


Or they were till a bunch of children needed an excuse to act like dips#its in the streets

 

[ETV]

Here's a paragraph from a fox news article posted 2 days ago after Portland's mayor has repeatedly stated he has ordered no stand down to officers regarding protests turning violent.

The head of the city's police union said in a statement posted to Facebook that officers worked to ensure the community "can peacefully protest without fear of violence" -- before adding "but right now our hands are tied.

Someone is not being truthful here.

 

[RockyTop85]

I think he just misspoke. The first few pages of the thread was like pulling teeth to get a liberal poster to actually condemn the actions. Why? They never have trouble with their condemnation when someone on the right does something stupid. They condemn Trump every day for actions far less disgusting.

Both sides have crazies who do stupid things. No one should hesitate to condemn such violent actions.

Why do people who have done nothing to suggest any affiliation with this group or any propensity towards violent behavior need to make statements condemning actions that are objectively wrong?

You’re just demanding virtue signaling.

If it seems like somebody is in favor of it, then it’s worth questioning, but otherwise you just sound like phony liberal twitter.

 

[RockyTop85]

I'm still waiting on pj to post anything Trump said racist, and again. I not once said someone came out and said anything, but you can tell in their refusal to condemn it that they enjoy these stories.

If you can’t provide a link/quote, it’s a lie. Those were your words.

Nobody was giddy. Nobody supports violence here. You know they don’t. You’re being a child.

 

[joevol33]

If you can’t provide a link/quote, it’s a lie. Those were your words.

Nobody was giddy. Nobody supports violence here. You know they don’t. You’re being a child.

I hope you're right, sincerely. There's just a hige difference in comments in this thread, as compared to say the white nationalist thread. You see certain people condemning their protests, but not this. I'm sorry, it makes me wonder. Glad to see you agree that if ypu can't provide proof that It's a lie though.

 

[Bigun]

The article made clear that it was not condoning the attack.

This is like Chris Rock's joke about OJ Simpson. "I'm not saying he should have killed his wife. But I'm saying I understand."

 

[TheDeeble]

But it did attempt to paint Antifa in a more sympathetic light by casting doubt on the person who was physically beaten. They didn't condone it, but they tried to paint a picture of maybe he deserved it.

The article reminds me of someone trying to defend a guy raping a girl by saying she was asking for it by the way she was dressed, and flirted with him, and grinded on him on the dance floor.

And then at the end tosses in a "but I'm not saying it was acceptable for that to happen".

 

[Weezer]

Why do people who have done nothing to suggest any affiliation with this group or any propensity towards violent behavior need to make statements condemning actions that are objectively wrong?

You’re just demanding virtue signaling.

If it seems like somebody is in favor of it, then it’s worth questioning, but otherwise you just sound like phony liberal twitter.

Maybe it is virtue signaling, but why do the same people so quick to denounce and decry violence from the right pause when it's violence from the left? Should their condemnation not go both ways?