Let’s talk about Antifa.

[z31maniac]

i'm telling you what i've seen happen in front of me, and you're saying i'm dishonest because "unpossible supreme court said so"?

you have a lot more faith in law enforcement's tendency to follow the rules than i do.

Keep up.

You mentioned the police being there to protect.

The Supreme Court has ruled that they are not bound to protect you from something happening to you, only to respond after.


Thank you for proving my point about you being dishonest and/or inept.


And if you're the voice of reason................well, you can tell by everyone's responses, especially after I took the 20 minutes to take your story and expose it for the bullshit it is.

[mrsleeve]

^
The cases your looking for are both SCOTUS, Warren Vs DC. and. Gonzales Vs Castle Rock. Both of which affirm that the police have no legal, or Constitutional duty to protect any one from anything or anyone, their job is to respond to a crime and investigate, collect evidence, and detain or arrest those that perpetrated the crime.

[decay]

And if you're the voice of reason................well, you can tell by everyone's responses, especially after I took the 20 minutes to take your story and expose it for the bullshit it is.

if that's what you think you've done, you have a massively over-inflated opinion of yourself.

[decay]

^
The cases your looking for are both SCOTUS, Warren Vs DC. and. Gonzales Vs Castle Rock. Both of which affirm that the police have no legal, or Constitutional duty to protect any one from anything or anyone, their job is to respond to a crime and investigate, collect evidence, and detain or arrest those that perpetrated the crime.

and doesn't that beg the question WHY they are protecting white supremacists and only arresting the people there to counter-protest them?

isn't "what the cops are actually doing" more relevant here than "what the supreme court says they are obligated to do"?

[mrsleeve]

The counter protesters are the ones threatening violence, they are the ones destroying property, and coming up and sucker punching and running away while a cohort is pepper spraying the punchee.....

And again its interesting to me how everyone to your group is a "white supremacist" or "nazi" when in many cases this is not the case, see my Washington post article from yesterday.

As has been pointed out speech you disagree with hateful or not is protected speech. As ardent supporters of the 1st amendment your should be protecting everyone's right to speak, not trying to silence view points you find issue with. People in general can spot stupid hateful speech and ignore it accordingly, we dont need the likes of your group to point it out let alone stop it.

FASCISM
You keep using that word, I dont think it means what you think it means

[decay]

he went with "dodge the question", cotton. bold strategy, let's see how it works out.

[z31maniac]

if that's what you think you've done, you have a massively over-inflated opinion of yourself.

Nice try at deflection while ignoring how your willfully ignorant.

We've already all gone over how your story didn't match up with multiple local accounts.

But keep your holding head high bro.

[decay]

Nice try at deflection while ignoring how your willfully ignorant.

We've already all gone over how your story didn't match up with multiple local accounts.

But keep your holding head high bro.

i love how people distrust the media until it fits their narrative.

do you think that maybe the reporters are keeping a safe distance and aren't seeing what's happening when three groups with different objectives are within feet of each other?

as much as you'd like to think so, you haven't disproven shit. of course everyone's subjective experience of such an event is going to be different. nobody can have eyes on everything when the area consists of city blocks.

[cale]

as much as you'd like to think so, you haven't disproven shit. of course everyone's subjective experience of such an event is going to be different. nobody can have eyes on everything when the area consists of city blocks.

And you haven't proven shit, you've only provided anecdotes. Even your own linked news source from Vice shows that the left is choosing to respond to provocation with violence, so yes, those people are going to be arrested. It's childish to approach someone or a group simply to illicit a response such as violence to portray them in a bad light, but that doesn't excuse that violence was the response they chose.

So beyond your own claims and media sources showing the left acting out violently, what do you have?

[Mediumrarechicken]

and doesn't that beg the question WHY they are protecting white supremacists and only arresting the people there to counter-protest them?

isn't "what the cops are actually doing" more relevant here than "what the supreme court says they are obligated to do"?

Where were the white supremacists at? Ive never seen a real one in my life

[rhE-30]

Where were the white supremacists at? Ive never seen a real one in my life

You are either stupid or playing stupid. But here you go. Learn something.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=white+supremacist+images

[Mediumrarechicken]

You are either stupid or playing stupid. But here you go. Learn something.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=white+supremacist+images

Hahaha, ok pal. As I said, ive never seen a white supremacist with my own eyes. Funny thing is I went to see my little cousin at her college and saw a conference room labeled non white conference room. I find that very ironic.....

[decay]

And you haven't proven shit, you've only provided anecdotes. Even your own linked news source from Vice shows that the left is choosing to respond to provocation with violence, so yes, those people are going to be arrested. It's childish to approach someone or a group simply to illicit a response such as violence to portray them in a bad light, but that doesn't excuse that violence was the response they chose.

So beyond your own claims and media sources showing the left acting out violently, what do you have?

i haven't been disproven as z31maniac claims, either. you're conveniently ignoring which side was geared up like they were ready for a riot, and which had a pear-shaped housewife on a microphone. ooh, anti-fascists are dangerous!

as for "what else"- how about this?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/09/california-police-white-supremacists-counter-protest

[Mediumrarechicken]

i haven't been disproven as z31maniac claims, either. you're conveniently ignoring which side was geared up like they were ready for a riot, and which had a pear-shaped housewife on a microphone. ooh, anti-fascists are dangerous!

as for "what else"- how about this?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ounter-protest

Yvette Felarca. That's where I stopped in the article, because if the article is quoting her then its complete bullshit. Shes a violent nutbag.


Prove to me that I'm wrong

[Ryan...]

i haven't been disproven as z31maniac claims, either. you're conveniently ignoring which side was geared up like they were ready for a riot, and which had a pear-shaped housewife on a microphone. ooh, anti-fascists are dangerous!

I'll ask this one again, before Antifa made it their business to violate the 1st amendment rights of those they disagree with, did any white nationalists show up to their rallies wearing their version of riot gear? Were they destroying property? Starting fights? Were they doing anything other than existing as their ignorant selves in public?

Tell you what, as vile as white nationalism is, I almost preferred their stupid protests because they sat there out in the open with their faces exposed to the world, so we could literally put a face to their stupidity and ignorance if we so chose.