Some of your friendly peaceful protestors

[woodchip]

https://pjmedia.com/columns/kevindowney ... n-n1542342

So TC you keep saying it was nasty right wing infiltrator doing all the bad things so you see that that is not true. Also you commented on Rittenhouse being a crybaby, how do you like the antifa guy shedding tears. The other guy looks like he belongs in a insane asylum, as he looks worse than Charlie Mansom.

[TigerRaptor]

Yikes, those mugs. The dad must be their uncle and the mother is their great grandmother.

[Top Gun]

Ahahahaha he reads PJ Media. But remember guys, it's our sources that are biased!

[Tunnelcat]

https://pjmedia.com/columns/kevindowney ... n-n1542342

So TC you keep saying it was nasty right wing infiltrator doing all the bad things so you see that that is not true. Also you commented on Rittenhouse being a crybaby, how do you like the antifa guy shedding tears. The other guy looks like he belongs in a insane asylum, as he looks worse than Charlie Mansom.

What ARE you goading me about? I've already stated that I'd love to see those Antifa destructive rioters go to prison, especially in Portland. I'd even like to turn the key. Crying when finally caught, GOOD. Besides, a lot of criminals cry like babies when they're caught, period. Rittenhouse acted macho with his gun, but wept in court because he was an immature adult. But even some of those adult male (and female) "insurrectionists", and THAT'S what they were, stormed the Capital like macho men thumping their chests and beating and spraying police officers with clubs and bear spray eventually folded like paper and cried like a child in court before a judge.

https://bipartisanreport.com/2021/10/05 ... t-hearing/

https://www.ifiberone.com/news/national ... 7a165.html

And seriously, If PJ Media is one of your "reliable" news sources, you ain't even close to "reliable" or "unbiased". I'm sure some of mine aren't either, but I've read the same news in other places most of the time and I have to find something easy to post here. If I'm wrong about a posting, I'll fess up.

[Ferno]

TC: They weren't antifa. they were provocateurs from proud boys et al.

Best way to make an organization look like a violent group is to smash as much as you can and write 'antifa/blm' everywhere that's been destroyed. It's a physical way of poisoning the well and it's how you turn public opinion against them. It happened during the civil rights movement, and it's happening now.

[Tunnelcat]

In Portland and Seattle, it's BOTH. Whenever Antifa comes out and riots in Portland or Seattle, the other side comes out in force armed to kick butt just to start a fight. Sometimes the Fascists come out first just to goad on "Antifa" and get them to come out for rumble. It's no longer about any kind of political stance. It's just plain old hate and whoever is king of the hill. I still say we should round up all the gang bangers, leftie Antifa bozos, Proud Boys, Patriot Prayer and Boogaloo Boys, throw them into some large arena together with whatever weapons they choose (except guns, don't want the audience shot during the melee) and let them go at each other Roman Gladiator style. I'd bring popcorn and beer.

[Ferno]

In Portland and Seattle, it's BOTH. Whenever Antifa comes out and riots in Portland or Seattle, the other side comes out in force armed to kick butt just to start a fight. Sometimes the Fascists come out first just to goad on "Antifa" and get them to come out for rumble. It's no longer about any kind of political stance. It's just plain old hate and whoever is king of the hill. I still say we should round up all the gang bangers, leftie Antifa bozos, Proud Boys, Patriot Prayer and Boogaloo Boys, throw them into some large arena together with whatever weapons they choose (except guns, don't want the audience shot during the melee) and let them go at each other Roman Gladiator style. I'd bring popcorn and beer.

Not both.

Two reasons: One, it's not in antifa/BLM's interest to cause such violence - it works against what they're trying to achieve: public perception and forward movement. Two, because someone from the far-right actually admitted to being a provocateur. https://www.mprnews.org/story/2021/09/3 ... uring-riot

In Billy May's voice But wait, there's more!

[LightWolf]

Keep in mind the point of agitators is to get otherwise peaceful people to join in these violent actions. Even if the agitators were from an extremist group trying to frame BLM or Antifa, once a significant amount of people from these groups get involved, it doesn't really matter - the groups got involved. It doesn't help their case when you have people like Nikole Hannah-Jones (one of the people behind the 1619 project) saying things like "Destroying property which can be replaced is not violence" and "any reasonable person would say 'we shouldn't be destroying other people's property', but these are not reasonable times."


Once this happens, it doesn't matter who started it, because BLM (or at least some of its prominent supporters) had taken the ball and ran with it instead of stopping it.

[Vander]

I'd be pissed if I helped wreck that police precinct in Minneapolis, and then some wingnut gets the credit.

[vision]

It doesn't help their case when you have people like Nikole Hannah-Jones (one of the people behind the 1619 project) saying things like "Destroying property which can be replaced is not violence"...

Careful of your definitions and double standards here. There is physical harm and economic harm, and sometimes the economic harm causes physical harm. This is how countries wage war "non-violently" through the use of sanctions, blockades, embargoes, etc. We don't think of them as violent but people die from them. Just want to point out that a lot of what is considered violent is based on somewhat subjective perception. For the record, I don't have a hot take on Hannah-Jones' comment and can't say she's right or wrong because, again, subjectivity.

[Tunnelcat]

Keep in mind the point of agitators is to get otherwise peaceful people to join in these violent actions. Even if the agitators were from an extremist group trying to frame BLM or Antifa, once a significant amount of people from these groups get involved, it doesn't really matter - the groups got involved. It doesn't help their case when you have people like Nikole Hannah-Jones (one of the people behind the 1619 project) saying things like "Destroying property which can be replaced is not violence" and "any reasonable person would say 'we shouldn't be destroying other people's property', but these are not reasonable times."

Once this happens, it doesn't matter who started it, because BLM (or at least some of its prominent supporters) had taken the ball and ran with it instead of stopping it.

I grew up in the 1960's. These very same comments and complaints were brought up about violent protesting during the Vietnam War and the Civil Rights protests. It's an age old human condition. In both of these situations there were people who resorted to violence to vent their rage and there always will be in the future, because we're human. Even the government resorted to violence during the Kent State National Guard shootings to get it's point across, which failed miserably for the government. The police in the South using violence on live TV against Black protesters also brought nationwide revulsion and change. The takeaway is that if a group of people feel aggrieved about righting a perceived wrong, some of them will get angry and take things to the final level of violence and destruction to get their point across. Then mob mentality naturally kicks in and people who wouldn't normally perform violent acts will get caught up in the melee and join the group. Unfortunately, sometimes this violence gets results and change. The Vietnam War was eventually ended and the Civil Rights Act was passed in Congress, partially due to the violence. Violence can never be justified and I abhor it, nor does it always work, but there's just enough change being made after swells of public violence that it keeps reoccurring during any protest movement over and over. Then add in people with ulterior motives (people who cared less about the movement and more about violence), the already primed fuse gets lit and violence erupts. The same thing happened on the Capital riots woody and don't deny it. Normally peaceful people, mostly right wing Trump followers, got caught up in the moment at their leader's behest by the way, then became aggressive and violent and attacked law enforcement and destroyed property in a wild mob rage. And yes, there were people mixed in from both political sides in BOTH protests, because opposites will attract if only to settle scores or amp things up for the pure hell of it.

Where woody fails miserably is that he can't see that political affiliation makes no distinction as to who will partake in that violence once things escalate to that point. During most large protests, it only takes a small act to rile up the crowd and get things violent. All he likes to do is point out how "bad" the left is, but then fails to point out that people on the right are just as human and can end up just as bad, so they are NOT exempt from the exact same behaviors. People in both political affiliations love to "tribe up" (also a human failing) and stand firm like sticks in the mud, blaming the "other" and never truly sitting down to discuss things in a civil matter to get things resolved. It's always "my way or the highway" and both political parties right now are standing firm in their positions. It's also been building for decades. Progressives want what they want do matter what and conservatives want what they want to hell or high water and both sides are flipping the bird at each other like a bunch of children. Compromise is now a dirty word. No one, especially those on the left, seem to see that the fuse has now been lit for the next violent political revolution. Some are wising up from some of the letters in my local paper, but not nearly enough to stop this time bomb from going off and destroying our democracy. Currently, it's those on the right that have the perceived might, plus a crazy megalomaniac autocrat leading them in order to pull it off, either through voting subterfuge, manipulation or violence. No, the 2020 election wasn't stolen from Trump, but it WILL BE stolen FOR Trump or a Republican Trumpian surrogate in 2024 one way or another. I'm sorry I keep repeating this, but the left needs to ★■◆●ing wake up and smell the gunpowder in the air!