10-30-2020, 02:28 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-31-2020, 05:21 AM by Bob Butler 54.)
The account I read of the incident had the police initiating violence without trying to escalate. The problem with various news organizations creating different version of reality may have something to do with it. At any rate, shooting a black man without an attempt to deescalate is a problem. These police are definitely violent in that they discharged their weapons. The racist label is assumed as this has been a persistent nationwide problem, a much wider problem than one incident, and the red attempt to justify a continuation of the policy.
Going from a rural to a urban area with both paint and real guns and attempting to instigate trouble counts as instigation. The opposite doing similar things as well, but I cannot think of that happening. The blue do not instigate violence. If you consider this acceptable, your bias is showing. I do not consider it acceptable.
Antifa is an anti fascist organization. Originally they opposed the KKK and the Neo Nazi. The violence involving those three are equally the fault of red and blue, somewhat encouraged by Trump who thinks there are fine people on both sides, rejected by a lot of blues. Recently, we had the one person defending against a knife wielding Proud Boy as well. I will reject all this as thoroughly as you, but the ability to wield arms in self defense and defense of the community is real in the US.
Various Boogaloo Bois, looters, tourists seeking to camp out and others have been misidentified as Antifa by assorted reds. If you wish to not pay attention to the stated motives and majority motives, that is your problem. Antifa is a diverse group. There are people who use the name without adhering to the original vigilante prime motivation. That is, the core action is to defend against red fascist violence.
I would assume this should stop. For the most part is has. The KKK and Neo Nazis have faded from the scene lately. The Proud Boys lost one knife wielder then ceased their provocations. As long as there is no red instigation, the pure Antifa motivation would compel they watch only.
I would prefer that it all stop, but a lot of young folk think violence is some sort of sick fun game. But the red keep assuming actions by other organizations are Antifa acting. I cannot stop their gung ho assumptions and propaganda.
The teargassing of peaceful protesters so Trump could have a photo op holding up a Bible in front of a church is well documented. That you could have missed that incident only indicates how much of a bubble you live in.
The violence will continue as long as the red continue to instigate it. The pure Antifa motivation of vigilante defense against those who use violence is sorta justified. The red labeling of other organizations Antifa is not justified. Using the Antifa name when you have another motivation proves nothing.
I am of the urban progressive motivation, the heirs of the roundheads, those that immigrated to New England during the English Civil War rather than the Cavaliers of the rural conservative settling in the South. See the Cousin’s Wars for details. The two parties switched affiliation on racial issues with LBJ going after the black vote, and the Republicans going with the southern strategy. Thus, your characterization of me is entirely wrong. Hating and oppressing minorities is much more a red thing today.
To the degree that the Trump Access Hollywood tapes encouraged treating women like dirt, he may have encourage others to treat women like dirt. To some degree he could well have instigated the division and contempt. It is just his style. I can’t prove any one incident could be blamed on Trump, or use the fact that one is a rabid Republican in a rape trial, but the policy of treating women and minorities with contempt is a Republican tendency. Not all of them, but some. The way you characterize me, you are one of them.
Going from a rural to a urban area with both paint and real guns and attempting to instigate trouble counts as instigation. The opposite doing similar things as well, but I cannot think of that happening. The blue do not instigate violence. If you consider this acceptable, your bias is showing. I do not consider it acceptable.
Antifa is an anti fascist organization. Originally they opposed the KKK and the Neo Nazi. The violence involving those three are equally the fault of red and blue, somewhat encouraged by Trump who thinks there are fine people on both sides, rejected by a lot of blues. Recently, we had the one person defending against a knife wielding Proud Boy as well. I will reject all this as thoroughly as you, but the ability to wield arms in self defense and defense of the community is real in the US.
Various Boogaloo Bois, looters, tourists seeking to camp out and others have been misidentified as Antifa by assorted reds. If you wish to not pay attention to the stated motives and majority motives, that is your problem. Antifa is a diverse group. There are people who use the name without adhering to the original vigilante prime motivation. That is, the core action is to defend against red fascist violence.
I would assume this should stop. For the most part is has. The KKK and Neo Nazis have faded from the scene lately. The Proud Boys lost one knife wielder then ceased their provocations. As long as there is no red instigation, the pure Antifa motivation would compel they watch only.
I would prefer that it all stop, but a lot of young folk think violence is some sort of sick fun game. But the red keep assuming actions by other organizations are Antifa acting. I cannot stop their gung ho assumptions and propaganda.
The teargassing of peaceful protesters so Trump could have a photo op holding up a Bible in front of a church is well documented. That you could have missed that incident only indicates how much of a bubble you live in.
The violence will continue as long as the red continue to instigate it. The pure Antifa motivation of vigilante defense against those who use violence is sorta justified. The red labeling of other organizations Antifa is not justified. Using the Antifa name when you have another motivation proves nothing.
I am of the urban progressive motivation, the heirs of the roundheads, those that immigrated to New England during the English Civil War rather than the Cavaliers of the rural conservative settling in the South. See the Cousin’s Wars for details. The two parties switched affiliation on racial issues with LBJ going after the black vote, and the Republicans going with the southern strategy. Thus, your characterization of me is entirely wrong. Hating and oppressing minorities is much more a red thing today.
To the degree that the Trump Access Hollywood tapes encouraged treating women like dirt, he may have encourage others to treat women like dirt. To some degree he could well have instigated the division and contempt. It is just his style. I can’t prove any one incident could be blamed on Trump, or use the fact that one is a rabid Republican in a rape trial, but the policy of treating women and minorities with contempt is a Republican tendency. Not all of them, but some. The way you characterize me, you are one of them.
That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.
