Two Senators want Antifa labled domestic terrorists

[Highever]

Now you are being deliberately naive. Considering that those who speak out against Trump are consistently called out as "libtards", "democraps", "snowflakes" and all of those other oh so creative nicknames?

Right that's fair. You made a good point.

Another good point is how the hell can you be against Antifa for political violence and attacking people they disagree with when you hypocritically state that you are for free speech and yet will react with violence against anyone who speaks out against America. There is no consistency to be had.

[Highever]

from what I've read fascism came out of Rome (though that's still an unclear blanket description). Is it a battle for the mind between Rome and Jerusalem? Was Moses Hess influential in the formulation in Communist/antifascist ideology?

The only thing fascist that came out of Rome was the etymology, stemming from the word fasces, which became the symbol of Mussolini and fascism in general. I do not even know what is being said with the whole Rome and Jerusalem thing.

[Nakena]

from what I've read fascism came out of Rome (though that's still an unclear blanket description). Is it a battle for the mind between Rome and Jerusalem? Was Moses Hess influential in the formulation in Communist/antifascist ideology?

I doubt people catch that drift here.

I do not even know what is being said with the whole Rome and Jerusalem thing.

You will

[Grimmsland]

actually.. What exactly is Fascism? Seems to be disagreed upon.

Not exactly the best way to ride that striped cat in my opinion.

Other than that it is very much up to debate.

It has become a buzzword for sure, fittingly applied to whatever group that has been declared an acceptable target.

that's the problem. It should be clearly identified.

[Nakena]

Not exactly the best way to ride that striped cat in my opinion.

Other than that it is very much up to debate.

It has become a buzzword for sure, fittingly applied to whatever group that has been declared an acceptable target.

that's the problem. It should be clearly identified.

The problem is that some "Antifa" groups have rather their own and arbitary definitions. Sometimes the entire system is declared fascist. Which of courses exceptionally increases the range of what is considered acceptable targets. Most prominently this has been shown in Hamburg, Germany during the G7 summit where they burned down and plundered parts of the city.

[Israeli Commonwealth]

Right that's fair. You made a good point.

Another good point is how the hell can you be against Antifa for political violence and attacking people they disagree with when you hypocritically state that you are for free speech and yet will react with violence against anyone who speaks out against America. There is no consistency to be had.

Perhaps I was not clear. You may say whatever you want. But if you blatantly hate the United States you should not be a citizen of her.

[Grimmsland]

actually.. What exactly is Fascism? Seems to be disagreed upon.

Not exactly the best way to ride that striped cat in my opinion.

Other than that it is very much up to debate.

It has become a buzzword for sure, fittingly applied to whatever group that has been declared an acceptable target.

and I agree.. at this point I regret that I'm not _chasing pigs_ through the yet undiscovered dark, gloomy forests.

[Eastkilty]

I know that anti-fascists use violence. I don't care, because I don't tell myself silly things like "violence isn't okay". Sometimes violence is good actually, and I'm positive that you actually agree with that, even if you're about to say that you condemn all violence.



Well, I don't hate all violence. The whole violence is notta okayh didn't mean all violence, merely violence that Antifa carries out on those that disagree with them, or violence at protests. I do agree with violence for the sake of self-defence, or defence of your home nation.


Antifa isn't an organisation.

Mistake on my part, but I did mention before people tend to generalise Antifa, when they actually mean its militant groups. That is what I meant, but still, my mistake.

There is no such thing as a member of antifa.

You can be part of a group that is associated with Antifa, like the Rose City Antifa.

That's right, I didn't, because as I said, I don't care. I know that anti-fascists use violence. You don't need to convince me of that.

I updated my original post to tell you why the citations were important. I said, that you ignored Antifa's violence in your 1st post, and the fact the senators want to crush this violence, not because they have opposite views. So, no, not 'crushing dissent'. I was pointing out the reasons why they wanted to crush them, which is because of violence against those they disagree with. I don't care that you don't care, they are relevant points to combat your 1st post.

I know you didn't. I'm not saying you did. I am saying that this resolution being put to the Senate is part of an effort by the GOP to quash dissent against their president by letting them label all protesters as "members of the terror group antifa". I'm not saying anything about you or your precious citations at all.

It seemed like you were.
Also, citations that prove they want to crackdown on anti-Trump protests via Antifa?
It doesn't seem to me like they are.
Many anti-Trump demonstrations are quite majorly headed by Antifa, so there might be generalisation on the GOP's part. But I don't think they want to crush anti-Trump protests, considering the fact I don't hear police or government forces stopping anti-Trump protests unless they get violent. Yes, the GOP won't like anti-Trump demonstrations, but until the day they label a peaceful anti-Trump protest as terroristic, I still will believe that they don't want to do the things you accuse them of doing.

[Highever]

Another good point is how the hell can you be against Antifa for political violence and attacking people they disagree with when you hypocritically state that you are for free speech and yet will react with violence against anyone who speaks out against America. There is no consistency to be had.

Perhaps I was not clear. You may say whatever you want. But if you blatantly hate the United States you should not be a citizen of her.

Evidently you cannot since you will evidently assault them for their beliefs that go against your own. How is this any different than what you say Antifa does? And what do you classify as "hate"? Criticism? Denunciation of certain actions?

[Nakena]

I think most people wouldn have a problem with Antifa if they would, like they used to do, focus on actual racist shitheads like the KKK and friends.

[Eastkilty]

I think most people wouldn have a problem with Antifa if they would, like they used to do, focus on actual racist shitheads like the KKK and friends.

Most people have a problem with Antifa because of how they use violence against those they disagree with, not because they don't target 'actual racist shitheads'.

While the KKK is deplorable, you still can't go beat up a Klansman for being a Klansman. That's not right, to attack people because of an opinion. If they were to try to attack you, there is nothing wrong with defending yourself. But walking up to a Klansman, or any racist, and then beating them up, when they aren't causing any physical harm to anyone, and are just trying to get on with life, is wrong.


So, it is a matter of using violence, not whom they target.

[Nakena]

I think most people wouldn have a problem with Antifa if they would, like they used to do, focus on actual racist shitheads like the KKK and friends.

Most people have a problem with Antifa because of how they use violence against those they disagree with, not because they don't target 'actual racist shitheads'.

While the KKK is deplorable, you still can't go beat up a Klansman for being a Klansman. That's not right, to attack people because of an opinion. If they were to try to attack you, there is nothing wrong with defending yourself. But walking up to a Klansman, or any racist, and then beating them up, when they aren't causing any physical harm to anyone, and are just trying to get on with life, is wrong.


So, it is a matter of using violence, not whom they target.

I am against beating people up. Its not a good behaviour.

[Eastkilty]

Most people have a problem with Antifa because of how they use violence against those they disagree with, not because they don't target 'actual racist shitheads'.

While the KKK is deplorable, you still can't go beat up a Klansman for being a Klansman. That's not right, to attack people because of an opinion. If they were to try to attack you, there is nothing wrong with defending yourself. But walking up to a Klansman, or any racist, and then beating them up, when they aren't causing any physical harm to anyone, and are just trying to get on with life, is wrong.


So, it is a matter of using violence, not whom they target.

I am against beating people up. Its not a good behaviour.

Glad we agree. But, my point just meant people still would dislike Antifa, even if they did target hardline, real racists like the KKK, because they beat people up, and use violence in un-justifiable situations.

[Ifreann]

I updated my original post to tell you why the citations were important.

I'm not going to constantly go back to check old posts to see if they're edited, no one is.

I said, that you ignored Antifa's violence in your 1st post, and the fact the senators want to crush this violence, not the group. So, no, not 'crushing dissent'. I was pointing out the reasons why they wanted to crush them, which is because of violence against those they disagree with. I don't care that you don't care, they are relevant points to combat your 1st post.

And as I said, this resolution serves no useful law enforcement purpose.

It seemed like you were.
Also, citations that prove they want to crackdown on anti-Trump protests via Antifa?
It doesn't seem to me like they are.
Many anti-Trump demonstrations are quite majorly headed by Antifa, so there might be generalisation on the GOP's part. But I don't think they want to crush anti-Trump protests, considering the fact I don't hear police or government forces stopping anti-Trump protests unless they get violent. Yes, the GOP won't like anti-Trump demonstrations, but until the day they label a peaceful anti-Trump protest as terroristic, I still will believe that they don't want to do the things you accuse them of doing.

Have a read about the protests on Trump's inauguration day. Hundreds of people were arrested. None were convicted. Because the grounds for their arrest was stupid shit like "was at a protest" and "was wearing black".

Also, this thing with the purple text is obnoxious. Just use the quote tags.

[The Alma Mater]

I am against beating people up. Its not a good behaviour.

Glad we agree. But, my point just meant people still would dislike Antifa, even if they did target hardline, real racists like the KKK, because they beat people up, and use violence in un-justifiable situations.

Would they ? Usually people cheer if heros beat up bad guys. They even pay good money to see movies about that.

[Nakena]

Glad we agree. But, my point just meant people still would dislike Antifa, even if they did target hardline, real racists like the KKK, because they beat people up, and use violence in un-justifiable situations.

Would they ? Usually people cheer if heros beat up bad guys. They even pay good money to see movies about that.

Well we can re-introduce the Colosseum and have some real pit fights. What could possibly go wrong?

[Eastkilty]

I updated my original post to tell you why the citations were important.

I'm not going to constantly go back to check old posts to see if they're edited, no one is.

Okay, wow, good for you. But it still helped further boost my argument. Besides, I knew you weren't going to check, which is why I gave that mini-overview.

And as I said, this resolution serves no useful law enforcement purpose.
So, protecting citizens from being viciously attacked just on the basis of having an opinion (like that old man, or Ngo, who had his serious brain injuries), instead of letting antifascists go open season on them, isn't law enforcement?

Have a read about the protests on Trump's inauguration day. Hundreds of people were arrested. None were convicted. Because the grounds for their arrest was stupid shit like "was at a protest" and "was wearing black".

Dozens of protesters — some self-described "anarchists" dressed in black and wearing masks — damaged businesses at 10:30 a.m. ET just before Trump's swearing-in ceremony got underway, Metropolitan police said.
Authorities arrested 95 people — some charged with rioting — in the Franklin Park area and acting Police Chief Peter Newsham said there was "significant damage" to at least four businesses. Two police officers suffered minor injuries as protesters flung bricks, trash cans and other objects, and ignited small fires.

"I saw one guy, he was like pushing a cop, kind of antagonizing him, and the cop with the riot shield was banging him back," Johnny Silvercloud, a freelance journalist who was photographing protesters, told NBC News.

One man was accidentally knocked over by protesters, a law enforcement officer told NBC News. He was bleeding from the back of his skull as paramedics helped him onto a stretcher.

They were arrested for violence, and violence towards members of police. They were also close to blocking the inauguration parade route.
So, I wouldn't say without proper basis.

And, my precious citation: https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/inaug ... -d-n709321

Also, this thing with the purple text is obnoxious. Just use the quote tags.
I'm not going to stop. It's easier, and makes uploading faster and more convient. And less frustrating for me when there are technical issues. Sorry if it annoys you. Just ignore it.

[Ifreann]

Just ignore it.

You got it.

[Eastkilty]

Glad we agree. But, my point just meant people still would dislike Antifa, even if they did target hardline, real racists like the KKK, because they beat people up, and use violence in un-justifiable situations.

Would they ? Usually people cheer if heros beat up bad guys. They even pay good money to see movies about that.

Beating up someone on the basis of having an opinion (even if a degenerate, scary opinion) is never right. If they were causing violence, you could try to stop that person, but it is better to not ignite the situation further with violence, unless absolutely needed.

You are acting like the bad guy for beating up someone who wasn't causing harm, because they have opposing views, or are part of an organisation like the KKK.

[Eastkilty]

Just ignore it.

You got it.

You got it dude.

-Michelle Tanner.

[Nakena]

Also, this thing with the purple text is obnoxious. Just use the quote tags.
I'm not going to stop. It's easier, and makes uploading faster and more convient. And less frustrating for me when there are technical issues. Sorry if it annoys you. Just ignore it.

Use the bold text. Its much better. Are the buttons non reactive to you? Might want to allow scripts on NS.

[Eastkilty]

Also, this thing with the purple text is obnoxious. Just use the quote tags.
I'm not going to stop. It's easier, and makes uploading faster and more convient. And less frustrating for me when there are technical issues. Sorry if it annoys you. Just ignore it.

Use the bold text. Its much better. Are the buttons non reactive to you? Might want to allow scripts on NS.

Bold text? I'll try, thanks.


The buttons will work at times, but sometimes it won't quote certain things, and I waste time trying to fix it, instead of getting my points across.


I can do quoting when it is one thing to quote, but when I have to quote individual sentences, it's hard.

[Gormwood]

Given that there is no centralized, unifying Antifa organization in charge of all the cells this legislation is nothing more than invoking Commie Mutant Traitor spook stories to rile up the base and have a bukkakke party over how Antifa are easily beaten effeminate soyboys and brutal murderous supersoldiers at the same time.

[Vassenor]

Given that there is no centralized, unifying Antifa organization in charge of all the cells this legislation is nothing more than invoking Commie Mutant Traitor spook stories to rile up the base and have a bukkakke party over how Antifa are easily beaten effeminate soyboys and brutal murderous supersoldiers at the same time.

And use "they're totally Antifa" as justification for rounding up people who protest against Trump using whatever force they want because terrorists.

[Israeli Commonwealth]

Would they ? Usually people cheer if heros beat up bad guys. They even pay good money to see movies about that.

Beating up someone on the basis of having an opinion (even if a degenerate, scary opinion) is never right. If they were causing violence, you could try to stop that person, but it is better to not ignite the situation further with violence, unless absolutely needed.

You are acting like the bad guy for beating up someone who wasn't causing harm, because they have opposing views, or are part of an organisation like the KKK.

You are a good comprimise m8