What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Antifa: Left Wing Militants on the Rise (2 Viewers)

Shula-holic said:
This has become pretty obvious.  Same reason the Klan started with it.  Cowardly and to hide your identity for your crimes.
Click to expand...
Or not wanting anyone to see who you truly are as you are an imposter.

 
Shula-holic said:
[scooter] said:
:shrug:

The video shows him standing right in the middle of a group of yelling protesters.
Click to expand...
So then by that logic it would have been ok for protesters at Trump rallies to be assaulted?  Come on.
Click to expand...
I never said it was OK.

But there's a sliding scale of culpability and victimhood.

For example, on one end would be a person who is clearly identified as a journalist by their press credentials, who maintains a safe distance from an altercation, and observes the altercation without appearing to participate in it.

On the other end would be a person who is not clearly identified as a journalist, who positions themselves right in the middle of an altercation, and who appears to participate in it.

From what I have seen of the Portland incident, Ngo's involvement did not fit the first description. Can he still be considered a victim? Sure. But if he was deliberately positioning himself right in the middle of the fracas, and not identifying himself as a journalist, then I'm not going to put his victim status on the same level as I'd place an innocent bystander.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Do some people think he was filming the counter-protest just for his own personal consumption?
Click to expand...
They think he was participating with the Proud Boys and their sympathizers. 

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
According to his Wikipedia page, he’s written mostly for The Wall Street Journal and Quillette. If you’re interested in which specific articles he’s authored, I haven’t done the relevant googling to provide an answer.
Click to expand...
The Wall Street Journal thing is an opinion piece. I can write an opinion piece for the Wall Street Journal as well, you basically just need an email. 

 
Summer Wheat said:
Hey I am liberal as you, but why do the counter protests not want any coverage?  Everyone at a protest is fair game to be covered.  And why do they wear hoods and masks?  None of us should approve of this.
Click to expand...
There are different reasons for this.  One is historical.  

Antifa actually began as an anti-fascist movement in a time of textbook fascism.  They wore hoods and masks to keep from being identified by fascist governments that would arrest them and either send them to work camps or execute them. 

More recently it’s allegedly to keep them from being found later by elements they accuse of fascism, for personal safety.  I would imagine it is also to keep from being identified and doxxed to jobs and friends. 

 
Henry Ford said:
There are different reasons for this.  One is historical.  

Antifa actually began as an anti-fascist movement in a time of textbook fascism.  They wore hoods and masks to keep from being identified by fascist governments that would arrest them and either send them to work camps or execute them. 

More recently it’s allegedly to keep them from being found later by elements they accuse of fascism, for personal safety.  I would imagine it is also to keep from being identified and doxxed to jobs and friends. 
Click to expand...
Watched some interviews, not sure they are really liberal either.

 
[scooter] said:
I never said it was OK.

But there's a sliding scale of culpability and victimhood.

For example, on one end would be a person who is clearly identified as a journalist by their press credentials, who maintains a safe distance from an altercation, and observes the altercation without appearing to participate in it.

On the other end would be a person who is not clearly identified as a journalist, who positions themselves right in the middle of an altercation, and who appears to participate in it.

From what I have seen of the Portland incident, Ngo's involvement did not fit the first description. Can he still be considered a victim? Sure. But if he was deliberately positioning himself right in the middle of the fracas, and not identifying himself as a journalist, then I'm not going to put his victim status on the same level as I'd place an innocent bystander.
Click to expand...
I understand your point and yes being at a distance versus being in close would be safer, but to me this should be a zero tolerance issue.  Someone is going to get killed soon I fear.  I know personally if I were going to be in the proximity of an Antifa demonstration, be it outside of my office or on my route to work, I'd be carrying a pistol for my protection.  I read some of what BigSteel was saying above and initially disagreeing.  But the more I considered it, I'd feel the same way from the other side of the spectrum.  I think being put in a position we see as in peril, especially from someone who both parties know is of the opposite political view and that other party has shown a propensity for violence, of course people are going to defend themselves or their family.  Self defense is totally different from instigating an assault.  However, violence is becoming less the exception today and it's a very slippery slope.  We shouldn't tolerate it anywhere.  We joke here back and forth on this "both sides" thing.  Well, it is pretty obvious no matter which "side" is an aggressor, someone, somewhere, is going to use that for their justification to do something as bad or worse.  

 
Summer Wheat said:
Watched some interviews, not sure they are really liberal either.
Click to expand...
It’s certainly a different organization now than then. I don’t disagree with meeting fascist violence with violent disruption, but of course it has to be actually facing fascist violence. 

 
Max Power said:
I'm interested in reading these findings. Where are they posted?
Click to expand...
I dont have any handy links. But recall in the Oakland BLM movement, Antifa came to counter-counter-protest those against BLM, and some were exposed as being right-wing and just trying to get violence rolling.  Recall them running being pictured with handlers before the event.

That's one of the reasons I have no use for organized Antifa, as long as the masks are there -- I consider them bullcrap.

 
Shula-holic said:
[scooter] said:
I never said it was OK.

But there's a sliding scale of culpability and victimhood.

For example, on one end would be a person who is clearly identified as a journalist by their press credentials, who maintains a safe distance from an altercation, and observes the altercation without appearing to participate in it.

On the other end would be a person who is not clearly identified as a journalist, who positions themselves right in the middle of an altercation, and who appears to participate in it.

From what I have seen of the Portland incident, Ngo's involvement did not fit the first description. Can he still be considered a victim? Sure. But if he was deliberately positioning himself right in the middle of the fracas, and not identifying himself as a journalist, then I'm not going to put his victim status on the same level as I'd place an innocent bystander.
Click to expand...
I understand your point and yes being at a distance versus being in close would be safer, but to me this should be a zero tolerance issue.  Someone is going to get killed soon I fear.  I know personally if I were going to be in the proximity of an Antifa demonstration, be it outside of my office or on my route to work, I'd be carrying a pistol for my protection.  I read some of what BigSteel was saying above and initially disagreeing.  But the more I considered it, I'd feel the same way from the other side of the spectrum.  I think being put in a position we see as in peril, especially from someone who both parties know is of the opposite political view and that other party has shown a propensity for violence, of course people are going to defend themselves or their family.  Self defense is totally different from instigating an assault.  However, violence is becoming less the exception today and it's a very slippery slope.  We shouldn't tolerate it anywhere.  We joke here back and forth on this "both sides" thing.  Well, it is pretty obvious no matter which "side" is an aggressor, someone, somewhere, is going to use that for their justification to do something as bad or worse.  
Click to expand...
Yeah. Welcome to August 2017.

 
[scooter] said:
Yeah. Welcome to August 2017.
Click to expand...
And the guy shooting Republican legislators happened June 2017. So what?  They are separate incidents carried out by cowards and people we should despise and give no cover to.  If you want to go below that bar to feel your side is better somehow then have at it.  

 
Shula-holic said:
[scooter] said:
Yeah. Welcome to August 2017.
Click to expand...
And the guy shooting Republican legislators happened June 2017. So what?  They are separate incidents carried out by cowards and people we should despise and give no cover to.  If you want to go below that bar to feel your side is better somehow then have at it.  
Click to expand...
My "side"? Ugh. I thought we were having a thoughtful engagement here.

I'm not on Antifa's side. Nor am I on the side of the Proud Boys (or whoever the right wing protesters were).

My point is that "someone getting killed at a standoff between protest groups" already happened. It seemed odd for you to bring up the idea as if it hadn't happened before.

If you meant something different by "Someone is going to get killed soon", then I apologize.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
[scooter] said:
My "side"? Ugh. I thought we were having a thoughtful engagement here.

I'm not on Antifa's side. Nor am I on the side of the Proud Boys (or whoever the right wing protesters were).

My point is that "someone getting killed at a standoff between protest groups" already happened. It seemed odd for you to bring it up the idea as if it hadn't happened before.

If you meant something different by "Someone is going to get killed soon", then I apologize.
Click to expand...
Something happening soon doesn't infer to me that it hasn't happened in the past.  However, more specifically It was meant in regards to these increasingly violent Antifa protests.  There's not many more ways for it to end up IMO.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The only way to stop Antifa is to give them what they want. We should elect a radical leftist to run this country, maybe somebody like Louis Farrakhan. Otherwise there will be a civil war and the Communists will win. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maurile Tremblay said:
According to his Wikipedia page, he’s written mostly for The Wall Street Journal and Quillette. If you’re interested in which specific articles he’s authored, I haven’t done the relevant googling to provide an answer.
Click to expand...
I went through his stories at Quillette.  Every story is slanted right. Nothing wrong with that for sure.  He may be a “journalist” but from what I’ve seen it’s more commentary than reporting.

 
It doesn't make any difference whether this guy writes straight news or opinion columns, where his work is published, whether he was filming anybody or not, or whether he was wearing a fedora with an old-timey card that says PRESS stuck in the brim.  Violence against peaceful observers is wrong.  Those of you who are getting hung up on side issues and dodging that simple point should stop and ask yourself why.

 
timschochet said:
The only way to stop Antifa is to give them what they want. We should elect a radical leftist to run this country, maybe somebody like Louis Farrakhan. Otherwise there will be a civil war and the Communists will win. 
Click to expand...
Can you unpack this for me?

 
I have no idea why people are defending Antifa either. They remind me of those anti-skinhead kids that listened to hardcore music and formed groups to beat up skinheads when the skinheads got violent but then morphed into gangs themselves.

Short version: they remind me of Boston's FSU gangs.

 
Serious comment now: 99% of Americans don’t like these groups, whether they’re  from left or right,  and never will. The main reason these incidents get attention is in order create the impression that the other side condones them or approves of them. In this particular case it’s part of a specific plan to paint the Democratic Party as extremist in preparation for the upcoming election- but in general the Democrats are willing to play this same sort of card against the Republicans every bit as often. 

 
timschochet said:
Serious comment now: 99% of Americans don’t like these groups, whether they’re  from left or right,  and never will. The main reason these incidents get attention is in order create the impression that the other side condones them or approves of them. In this particular case it’s part of a specific plan to paint the Democratic Party as extremist in preparation for the upcoming election- but in general the Democrats are willing to play this same sort of card against the Republicans every bit as often. 
Click to expand...
Correct. See posts above.  

 
Max Power said:
Antifa has hit the textbook definition of a terrorist group.  There is no debate about it.  They are terrorists. 
Click to expand...
what's the definition of a terrorist group for you? what are other examples of terrorist groups operating within our borders?

 
saintfool said:
what's the definition of a terrorist group for you? what are other examples of terrorist groups operating within our borders?
Click to expand...
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/terrorism

terrorism

[ ter-uh-riz-uh m ]

noun

the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.

the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.

a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

Other examples would be the KKK, the Aryan Brotherhood and others in that mold.

 
These people, and any other violent group, need to be taken out.  Send the National Guard on them next time they want to get violent.  

 
IvanKaramazov said:
It doesn't make any difference whether this guy writes straight news or opinion columns, where his work is published, whether he was filming anybody or not, or whether he was wearing a fedora with an old-timey card that says PRESS stuck in the brim.  Violence against peaceful observers is wrong.  Those of you who are getting hung up on side issues and dodging that simple point should stop and ask yourself why.
Click to expand...
Dear self,

Why?

Sincerely,

Me

 
bananafish said:
I've been too busy to follow this closely and had just assumed this was more of the usual right/left back and forth. Then I heard Sam Harris rant about it on his podcast: https://samharris.org/podcasts/162-medical-intelligence/

His podcast isn't really political per se, but he's certainly a liberal and vociferous Trump critic (and his podcast is one of the best around). I share his alarm that this incident is largely being justified or minimized by the left which is absolutely nauseating. Attacking a journalist who is armed with nothing but a camera is appalling no matter who he works for, and going through mental loop-de-loops to rationalize it or explain it away like he had it coming is just as bad if not worse than anything Trump supporters have done. It's worse because we've had the "luxury" of seeing what he's done to the Republican Party and you'd think we'd be especially wary of the same thing happening to our own. We have to be better than this. You can't call out Trump for calling the press "the enemy of the people" and then turn around beat reporters. It's gross and totally and unequivocally un-American. Or at least I thought it was. Maybe this is who we are now.

Kudos to @tommyGunZ for calling it out right off the bat, but most of the other responses from people I usually agree with are shocking. I guess I don't know them as well as I thought I did.

We are in for some scary times ahead if everybody is willing to just throw ethics and morality out the window to support their side. Yes, I know Trump supporters do it, but does that make it okay for the left to do it too?

What did this old dude do to deserve getting hit with a crowbar? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwRYYvuupq4

I don't care if he's a card-carrying member of Stormfront, this behavior is so obviously unjustified and grotesque that anything other than universal condemnation HAS to be condemned.  Otherwise we're done for.
Click to expand...
Rogan had a guy on shortly after the Portland attacks on Ngo to semi defend Antifa.  His view was that anyone and everyone that goes to a rally is fair game.  Including the press.  That they advertise these events enough that "normal" people know to avoid these places on those days. 

He likened Antifa to the left wing's version of a vigilante.  Standing up for the people who either can't stand up for themselves or "have too much to lose" (his words) by participating in these attacks.  It makes people feel good to go to sleep knowing that the bullies can't just push them around with no repercussions. 

I wish I had the guy's name handy.  I didn't agree with much of what he said, but he laid out his thoughts in a way where I could see how others would justify Antifa. 

 
Max Power said:
Antifa has hit the textbook definition of a terrorist group.  There is no debate about it.  They are terrorists. 
Click to expand...
Saw this coming after Charlottesville.  Any questioning of the role that antifa played was justified by many here as the fight against the Nazis, as if the Third Reich had been reassembled.    Buffoons throwing around the phrase "false equivalence"  and insisting that any anti-antifa stance was pro-Nazi.  An absolutely bizarre "if you're not with us, you're against us" herd mentality that was and, still is, both scary and embarrassing to me as an American.

 
DropKick said:
Saw this coming after Charlottesville.  Any questioning of the role that antifa played was justified by many here as the fight against the Nazis, as if the Third Reich had been reassembled.    Buffoons throwing around the phrase "false equivalence"  and insisting that any anti-antifa stance was pro-Nazi.  An absolutely bizarre "if you're not with us, you're against us" herd mentality that was and, still is, both scary and embarrassing to me as an American.
Click to expand...
Who justified antifa and any use of violence here?  Or that anything anti antifa was pro nazi?  You made an awful large accusation against posters here.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ignatiusjreilly
George Soros and anti-Semitism
2 3
Replies
120
Views
3K
parasaurolophus
parasaurolophus
massraider
IRS launches safety review after right-wing threats
Replies
21
Views
558
The Commish
The Commish
rockaction
Do We Really Believe That The BLM/Antifa Riots Happened Like A Line Change In Hockey?
2
Replies
59
Views
1K
wikkidpissah
wikkidpissah

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top