ANTIFA Attacks Free Speech Rally

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: UKTruth

I suppose you can say bad people on both sides, but not good people on both sides because that allows that there might be good in your ideological opponent and the left cannot abide the idea of good people on the other side.

So true.

a reply to: ketsuko
You just said:

the left cannot abide the idea of good people on the other side.

Now you are backtracking.

I'm not on either side so there is no route for me to go down.

a reply to: daskakik

What do you mean backtracking?

I am saying that the left cannot allow that this is not a pure good v. evil fight. I have never said there aren't decent people on the left, but they aren't going to be the ones in the streets doing this.

If you say there are bad people on both sides though, it is easier for the left to accept. It feeds their "evil right". They could not go with Trump saying good people on both sides because that would mean allowing there are decent people on the right somewhere which goes against the "evil right" paradigm.

You think everyone out there sees this as pure Hegelian dialect? You'd be wrong.

When you take a leftist position, I argue against you for taking the leftist position. I could give an eff-all how you see yourself. If you argue for a position I am more allied then, then odds are, I'm not arguing against your position. It's that simple. I don't say, "Oh, there's dasksakik, the dirty leftist. I can't be on daskakik's side."

originally posted by: ketsuko
What do you mean backtracking?

You generalized and now you are saying you didn't mean "the left", just "the ones in the street doing this".

I've seen people who call themselves leftists denounce these types of acts, so I have to disagree with you.

They don't need you to say anything to form an opinion.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: ketsuko
What do you mean backtracking?

You generalized and now you are saying you didn't mean "the left", just "the ones in the street doing this".

I've seen people who call themselves leftists denounce these types of acts, so I have to disagree with you.

They don't need you to say anything to form an opinion.

And there are plenty of liberals who find this disturbing. Do you know why they aren't in the forefront more? Because the same Big Tech companies these people were attempting to protest tend to throttle opinions they don't like.

Seems to me this is a good reason to protest. Too bad a bunch of leftists decided those people didn't need to voice their opinions ... or keep their teeth.

a reply to: ketsuko
Now you are shifting the goalposts.

Nobody said that liberals don't find this disturbing or that they are not being vocal enough.

Like I said back on page 3, the group that was protesting was a conservative group and they were protesting for something that the attacking group stands against. I'm not surprised by what happened.

a reply to: Lumenari

This is an excerpt from an episode of Red Ice Radio where Palmgren interviews Dennis Wise, a man who denies the holocaust, is very sympathetic to Adolf Hitler, and created the documentary, "Adolf Hitler: The Greatest Story Never Told". During the course of the interview, Wise presents the Jews as a corrupting and dangerous influence, as troublemakers who got the U.S. into World War I, as part of a communist conspiracy to take over Germany - their internment is defended as anti-communism.

Read this and THEN tell me which side is creating the next Hitler.

Host: "You had a kind of world in Berlin that was filled with debauchery, promiscuity and prostitution. It was kind of a cesspool of immortality with all the drugs and everything else. It was something that was spread all over Germany. Do you believe that was a tactic to break down the German people? Where did all these influences come from and why did this center in Berlin?"

Dennis: "Well I think it's a tactic that's going on today. Certainly in Berlin at the time was the center of debauchery in Europe. People would come from all over Europe because it was so cheap. Ten American dollars could buy you anything. Anything in the perverted sex world. Pedophilia, child prostitution, bestiality. You name it. Berlin was the center of it all. Homosexuality, it was a haven. Munich was more of a national socialist right wing type of center. Where Berlin was left wing., more communist. Certainly Hitler said this. "As soon as I come to power, whats going on in Berlin, I will stop". And he did and this kind of drove a lot of people out. Mainly the Jewish people, the nightclub owners, etc. Actors and actresses who left for America. And if you want a comparison today, I suppose Hollywood is the place you'd compare it to. Where Satanism, drugs, prostitution, debauchery goes on in that place. And Hitler was against all that. He cleaned up Berlin and eventually cleaned up Germany. To the point where families could walk the streets of Berlin. Before it wasn't safe. These are not actions of an evil man. This is a man who loves his country and loves the people in his country."

Host: "Let's just tackle some of the other myths along the way as well. I've heard other stories. That Hitler was basically in on it, he was a Rothschild agent, his mom was really a Rothschild. There were things along the way here that occurred, yes, he was intent on helping to destroy Germany by bringing them into war. There's a number of versions and variations here. Again this stems from an idea that it's an impossibility to assume that he was genuine. So we need to reach for any other explanation we can to wrap our head around the mythology we've been given afterwords. I think that's something that occurs, when you get the false story and you try to fit reality into that false story, you have to start changing the objective to have it make sense. What would you say concerning those rumors and conspiracies?"

Dennis: "I've always said that actions speak louder than words. It doesn't matter what anybody says or what anybody proposed to believe to be done. The fact is, the actions taken and the actions that Hitler took a little bit earlier, were up to this point, to break the Versailles treaty. Everything he did was to break that demonic treaty. As far as the Rothschild's go, he was the only person ever to have jailed a Rothschild. When he entered Austria, I can't remember which Rothschild it was, he actually put him in jail. They ransomed him out at the end of it all. So where they're getting this thing about the Rothschild's, it's misinformation. It's similar to the occult thing you mentioned early on. Which I'm sure we'll be discussing a little bit later. But all these actions speak louder than any words than I can speak. Up to this point, you've got him changing the banking system, you've got him abolishing usury and once the Anschluss comes along, he arrests a Rothschild. What does that tell you?"

Host: "It tells you he's in deep doodoo with the rest of the world. Or those seeking to rule the world with an iron first, they're going to turn against Germany at that point, right?"

Dennis: "Exactltly. He's certainly not one of them."

Host: "Did he murder a lot of these people. Did they end up in jail? What happened to them?

Dennis: "Well, I haven't found any evidence of any mass murders. Certainly I can't denounce- Some mistreatment might have gone on, it would be naive not to think so. But at the end of the day, these are communists who wanted to take over the country and just like in any other prison, in any other country, they'll be kept under lock and key."

Host: "Yea it's a defensive, strategical approach basically. If you have a situation where you know some people want to overthrow your country and despite you saying "This is just my politics, leave me alone buddy" free speech, whatever. How long are you going to continue to allow that behavior until it poses a real threat to your nation and your people? What I'm getting at, and I'm not justifying everything of course, but you have to defend yourself in a situation like this. This is a warfare tactic, right?"

Dennis: "Yea because a lot of these people were instigators and certainly there would have been outside forces willing to help them overthrow the government. It's that simple. As goes on since then and even today."

Host: "Especially today. A lot of corrosive forces in the world. Look at the state of the world as well. After two world wars, after the immense fighting between the European peoples, primarily, look at what it has gotten us today. Look at where we are. Is this what we were fighting for? Is this the peaceful situation that we wanted to achieve in Europe? Where we're handing everything away and the multiculturalism is destroying our heritage and our culture. Is this what millions of people, if you want to look at it this way, were sacrificed for?"

a reply to: HighasAkite
Yeah, I seen that dude with a few thousand followers rampaging through a city just the other night. And before the evil orange man was hired on as fascist supreme, it was him and his followers rioting on campus to get people he don't like speeches canceled. Oh wait, no, that was lefty brown shirts. Actions > Words. Contrary to lefty mantra that words are violence, silence is violence, and riots are protests and just an idea, some of us live in the real world.

originally posted by: Mark08
I pray Donald Trump is re-elected. I believe he's going to go after the anti-American social media, MSM, and these left wing domestic terrorists. If not, real Americans are screwed.

You wanna hope that real Americans are smart enough to not get duped. Showing up to, and participating in riots is about as unAmerican as you get. I say that because there is no coherent goal. Ask anyone what they are mad about in the first place. Might be a start.

a reply to: TKDRL

Hitler would have you gassed for even suggesting he was a part of the modern left.

www.theguardian.com...

This edited interview of Adolf Hitler by George Sylvester Viereck took place in 1923. It was republished in Liberty magazine in July 1932

"Why," I asked Hitler, "do you call yourself a National Socialist, since your party programme is the very antithesis of that commonly accredited to socialism?"

"Socialism," he retorted, putting down his cup of tea, pugnaciously, "is the science of dealing with the common weal. Communism is not Socialism. Marxism is not Socialism. The Marxians have stolen the term and confused its meaning. I shall take Socialism away from the Socialists.

"Socialism is an ancient Aryan, Germanic institution. Our German ancestors held certain lands in common. They cultivated the idea of the common weal. Marxism has no right to disguise itself as socialism. Socialism, unlike Marxism, does not repudiate private property. Unlike Marxism, it involves no negation of personality, and unlike Marxism, it is patriotic.

"We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists.We are not internationalists. Our socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the state on the basis of race solidarity. To us state and race are one."

The slums," he added, "are responsible for nine-tenths, alcohol for one-tenth, of all human depravity. No healthy man is a Marxian. Healthy men recognise the value of personality. We contend against the forces of disaster and degeneration.

"We want a greater Germany uniting all German tribes. But our salvation can start in the smallest corner. Even if we had only 10 acres of land and were determined to defend them with our lives, the 10 acres would become the focus of regeneration. Our workers have two souls: one is German, the other is Marxian. We must arouse the German soul. We must uproot the canker of Marxism. Marxism and Germanism are antitheses.

"In my scheme of the German state, there will be no room for the alien, no use for the wastrel, for the usurer or speculator, or anyone incapable of productive work."

a reply to: HighasAkite

Enough with that blatant attempt to distance Antifa from Nazi's - it doesnt matter if it's marxism, socialism, communism - it's all 1 guy trying to control everyone as much as possible for the sake of power - the lie yhey tell first is irrelevant.

Its like saying you hate vanilla and someone giving you a bowl of french vanilla or vanilla bean ice cream and claiming it's not vanilla.

a reply to: circuitsports

Antifa is against free speech, that is a fact and should be obvious to everyone.

originally posted by: ketsuko
In San Fran.

A group calling themselves Team Save America organized the event to rally outside the offices of Big Tech, the ones censoring to hard on Twitter, YouTube, etc., this week.

They were led by a man named Philip Anderson.

Of course, ANTIFA could not allow this to proceed. They forced a counter protest against all the usual so-called right wing boogie men. They stormed the free speech movement and attacked people.

Mr. Anderson was sucker punched from behind and when he turned around was punched in the face. He lost teeth.

You know what they say - the racist, bigoted, white supremacist Nazis have it coming, right? Dude still took to the stage to try to warn people that this is where we are heading in a radical leftist America -- people getting attacked for merely trying to exercise their rights.

There is footage of the attack from two different angles. And it wasn't the only incident. Joe Biden's ideas proceeded to force the entire rally to shut down because it was just too dangerous to continue. I guess ANTIFA loves them some Big Tech censorship! Screw the 1st Amendment, amirite? You can also see plenty of symbolism at play too like the three arrows of the international ANTIFA movement.

What does a picture of a guy with a tooth missing really prove? If I lost a tooth I could take a picture of myself and go online and blame whoever I felt like for it and I suppose, like you, there'd be plenty of people dumb enough to believe whatever I said, provided it fitted in with their personal agenda.

Also, red state news is a conservative news site with extreme right wing views. So why should I believe a clearly biased media source either?

Fake News!!!

a reply to: jamespond



I invite you to go knock out some teeth to prove your point.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: jamespond

I invite you to go knock out some teeth to prove your point.

To prove my point…… to a bunch of stubbornly brainwashed conservatives!!

I think pissing into the wind might be a more productive use of my time.

a reply to: jamespond

You are the one who said if you ever knocked out some teeth you'd selfie it.

a reply to: ketsuko

ANTIFA and BLM are fascists. True nazis.

originally posted by: jamespond

originally posted by: ketsuko
In San Fran.

A group calling themselves Team Save America organized the event to rally outside the offices of Big Tech, the ones censoring to hard on Twitter, YouTube, etc., this week.

They were led by a man named Philip Anderson.

Of course, ANTIFA could not allow this to proceed. They forced a counter protest against all the usual so-called right wing boogie men. They stormed the free speech movement and attacked people.

Mr. Anderson was sucker punched from behind and when he turned around was punched in the face. He lost teeth.

You know what they say - the racist, bigoted, white supremacist Nazis have it coming, right? Dude still took to the stage to try to warn people that this is where we are heading in a radical leftist America -- people getting attacked for merely trying to exercise their rights.

There is footage of the attack from two different angles. And it wasn't the only incident. Joe Biden's ideas proceeded to force the entire rally to shut down because it was just too dangerous to continue. I guess ANTIFA loves them some Big Tech censorship! Screw the 1st Amendment, amirite? You can also see plenty of symbolism at play too like the three arrows of the international ANTIFA movement.

What does a picture of a guy with a tooth missing really prove? If I lost a tooth I could take a picture of myself and go online and blame whoever I felt like for it and I suppose, like you, there'd be plenty of people dumb enough to believe whatever I said, provided it fitted in with their personal agenda.

Also, red state news is a conservative news site with extreme right wing views. So why should I believe a clearly biased media source either?

Fake News!!!

So, YOUR stance is: aNtifa didn’t attack people who were attending a Free Speech rally?

Because you’re wrong. aNtifa opposes freedom of speech and they did in fact turn up in opposition to a Free Speech rally and attack people.

Black people.

Racist AND fascist, what a surprise

a reply to: ketsuko


Free Speech Protests are evil.
On some of the Conservative Forums I have been on, I have asked, why dont Conservatives have protests against the Federal Reserve?
How come Conservatives are not protesting all the free money going to prop up the stock market?
How come come Fiscal Conservatives are not protesting the debt we are piling up in this nation?

The response I got back from a few, I kid you not was, protesting is such a leftist tactic.


Notice how the author of the opening post is careful to call it a "Free Speech Rally" rather than a protest?

Protests and Demonstrations​—Can They Change the World?

“WE MUST Speak Out, We Must Take to the Streets.” So ran the headline over an editorial in the National Catholic Reporter, a Roman Catholic newspaper, just prior to the outbreak of the Persian Gulf war in 1991. Urging readers to participate in peace marches and demonstrations throughout the United States, the editorial continued: “It will take millions of people and a constant beating of the pipes of peace to penetrate this administration’s ignorance and arrogance. . . . The people have to take to the streets.”

Such calls to action are frequently heard today. With so many political, economic, and environmental crises threatening mankind’s welfare, people are feeling compelled to “take to the streets” in protests, vigils, and demonstrations. The issues range from stopping neighborhood crime to establishing world peace. Interestingly, a large number of these demonstrations carry the endorsement of church organizations and religious leaders.

However, is it proper for Christians to participate in such demonstrations? And can protests​—whether in the form of riotous marches or somber candlelight vigils—​really change the world for the better?

Demonstrations​—The Christian View

Demonstrations have been described by one sociologist as “a particularly effective mode of political expression . . . for prodding stalemated bureaucracies into taking necessary actions.” Yes, those who march in protests or who stage demonstrations usually do so in hopes that their concerted efforts can correct the injustices and corruption seen in the present social and political systems.

What model, though, did Jesus Christ leave for his followers? Jesus lived at a time when the Jewish people found themselves under the tyranny of the Roman Empire. Certainly, relief from the oppressive Roman yoke was greatly desired by the people. Yet, Jesus never encouraged his followers to stage a demonstration, march in protest, or become politically involved in any other way. On the contrary, he repeatedly said that his disciples were to be “no part of the world.”​—John 15:19; 17:16; see also John 6:15.

Similarly, when Jesus was unfairly taken into custody by government officials, he did not try to stir up a protest, although he could certainly have done so if he had chosen to. Instead, he told the Roman governor: “My kingdom is no part of this world. If my kingdom were part of this world, my attendants would have fought that I should not be delivered up to the Jews. But, as it is, my kingdom is not from this source.” (John 18:33-36) Faced with a controversy, Jesus refrained from any actions of protest, recognizing the need to remain no part of political affairs. And he urged his followers to do the same.

Participating in demonstrations, therefore, would violate the basic principle of Christian neutrality taught by Jesus. Beyond that, such participation could even lead to involvement in other unchristian conduct. In what way? Demonstrations staged with good intentions often take on a decidedly rebellious spirit, with participants becoming militant, verbally abusive, or violent. Engaging in illegal and obstructionist tactics may command attention, but it hardly harmonizes with the Bible’s admonition to “be in subjection to the superior authorities” and to “be peaceable with all men.” (Romans 12:18; 13:1) Rather than encouraging civil disobedience, the Bible urges Christians to maintain their conduct fine among the nations and to remain subject to human governments, even if those in authority are hard to please or are unreasonable.​—1 Peter 2:12, 13, 18.

‘But not all demonstrations are militant or violent,’ some may say. True, and some demonstrations do seem to produce good results. But can protests​—even if they are peaceful and held for a good cause—​really change the world for the better?

Can They Change the World?

Christians are deeply concerned about their neighbors and want to help them. But is participating in demonstrations really the best way to offer help? The book Demonstration Democracy states: “There is only so much that can be achieved by any tool of political expression.” Undeniably, eliminating the woes facing mankind requires changes that are beyond the scope of any protest or march.

Jesus made a similar point when discussing the centuries-old religious system of his day. Regarding that hypocritical system of worship practiced by the Pharisees, he said: “Nobody sews a patch of unshrunk cloth upon an old outer garment; for its full strength would pull from the outer garment and the tear would become worse.” (Matthew 9:16) What was Jesus’ point? That true Christianity would not conform to wicked and worn-out systems that were ready to be discarded. He recognized that patching up an unusable system would have been futile.

The same is true of the world system that has subjected mankind to centuries of injustice, cruelty, and oppression. Ecclesiastes 1:15 pointedly explains: “That which is made crooked cannot be made straight.” Yes, today’s world system cannot be made straight, despite the noblest efforts. Why not? Because, as 1 John 5:19 says, “the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one,” Satan the Devil. Jesus pointed to that one as “the ruler of this world.” (John 12:31) As long as this system operates under the influence of Satan, no amount of patching up will bring permanent relief.

This does not mean that Christians are apathetic to the world’s problems or unwilling to take positive action. Actually, Christians are told to be quite active, not in protest, but in the work of preaching and teaching the good news of God’s Kingdom​—the very Kingdom government for which Jesus taught his followers to pray. (Matthew 6:10; 24:14) The Bible shows that the Kingdom will not try to salvage this irreformable world; it will completely eliminate the wicked governments and social orders that now oppress mankind and will replace them with a system that can establish true justice and righteousness earth wide. (Daniel 2:44) Under such a system, nobody will have to march in protest because Jehovah God, who is “satisfying the desire of every living thing,” will see to it that all our needs are met completely.​—Psalm 145:16.



Coming back to the topic of “free expression” and whether or not your vote is really going to matter regarding these issues (with Antifa or the radical left, or Free Speech demonstrations and internet censorship by 'Big Tech', as some people put it). Here's a quotation from Ray Vasvari (American Civil Liberties Union) in the introduction of the video below: “There are periods during First Amendment history when you see a particular group really carrying the banner of free expression. You can say that they don't fight, you can say that they don't vote, but what they have done is litigate, and in a way they have contributed more to American democracy and the protection of American ideals than a lot of people have with their votes.”

First Amendment Champions (playlist)

“If, in fact, the good news we declare is veiled, it is veiled among those who are perishing, among whom the god of this system of things* [Or “this age.”] has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination* [Or “light.”] of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through.” (2 Cor 4:3,4)