On the use of violence against those peacefully expressing views with which one disagrees.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

England has gone completely off the deep end, more of a police state than even Canada, the security apparatus built to fight the PIRA is now out of control and running amok.

There is some rank stupidity prevalent in my home country at the moment.  I think we're just a little ahead of the game, is all.

[Argus]

29 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

If they don't have a headquarters and a membership card it's tough to see how one could do that. 

And yet they don't seem to have a problem organizing and showing up en masse at demonstrations. Someone is organizing them.

Edited August 18, 2019 by Argus

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. You do.  I'm asking you.

2. You are getting it.

Oh, well no then.  I personally put the bar at actual violence.  Show up wearing what you want, carrying whatever you want (pacards or symbols, not weapons) and go home afterwards, having made your point.  Both sides.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Argus said:

And yet they don't seem to have a problem organizing and showing up en masse at demonstrations. Someone is organizing them.

I don't see it.  It's like the football hooligan analogy I used.  Like minded people show up at an event.  Some of them are tossers.

[bush_cheney2004]

2 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

The problem with supporting freedom of speech is that people assume you support the right to set up AC/DC's sound system across the street from the offices of the NAACP and broadcast "I hate *******" 24 hours a day at 120 dB.

 

Who cares what they assume....free speech rights do include such things, subject to local noise and public disturbance ordinances.   Nothing special about the NAACP compared to any other group when it comes to rights and responsibilities.

I think that is part of the problem....most educated people know damn well what free speech means (in the U.S.), but many don't have the courage to defend that right for fear of being ostracized by others.  

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

There is some rank stupidity prevalent in my home country at the moment.  I think we're just a little ahead of the game, is all.

I'd say its more revolutionary upheaval inciting a counterrevolutionary crackdown.

[Argus]

Just now, bcsapper said:

I don't see it.  It's like the football hooligan analogy I used.  Like minded people show up at an event.  Some of them are tossers.

No. They're not just 'showing up'. They're showing up together in large numbers at specific events. They know each other. And there are a few known leaders - known mostly after multiple arrests.

[dialamah]

Just now, Argus said:

And yet they don't seem to have a problem organizing. Someone is organizing them.

They would only need to follow far-right activities to know where to show up.  It seems to be more organic than organized.   I think @bcsapper's football hooligan comparison is apt.  

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Who cares what they assume....free speech rights do include such things, subject to local noise and public disturbance ordinances.   Nothing special about the NAACP compared to any other group when it comes to rights and responsibilities.

I think that is part of the problem....most educated people know damn well what free speech means (in the U.S.), but many don't have the courage to defend that right for fear of being ostracized by others.  

That is exactly my point there.  The views and the expression are allowed.  The volume is disturbing the peace.

Edited August 18, 2019 by bcsapper

[Dougie93]

5 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

I think that is part of the problem....most educated people know damn well what free speech means (in the U.S.), but many don't have the courage to defend that right for fear of being ostracized by others.  

Yet unlike under the  Stamp Act, er I mean the Queen's Peace, you are still free to be a rugged individualist should you have the courage.

[scribblet]

6 minutes ago, Argus said:

No. They're not just 'showing up'. They're showing up together in large numbers at specific events. They know each other. And there are a few known leaders - known mostly after multiple arrests.

One of their leaders  https://www.kgw.com/article/news/crime/portland-anti-trump-activist-leader-indicted-for-sex-abuse/283-394582060

They have to have some organization as they have to apply for a permit,  they had one in Charlottesville and in Portland they knew ahead of time who was going to be there.

https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=250123&ec=1&ch=twitter

 

 

 

Edited August 18, 2019 by scribblet

[bush_cheney2004]

2 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

That is exactly my point there.  The views and the expression are allowed.  the volume is disturbing the peace.

 

But even that is often challenged...."NO JUSTICE...NO PEACE"....as a protest strategy.   

Conflict gets more media attention, which is the real goal for many of these "protests"....VIOLENT conflict gets even more attention.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Argus said:

No. They're not just 'showing up'. They're showing up together in large numbers at specific events. They know each other. And there are a few known leaders - known mostly after multiple arrests.

You were never a football hooligan, were you?

[dialamah]

Here is what ADL says about Antifa:

Antifa is not a unified group; it is loose collection of local/regional groups and individuals. Their presence at a protest is intended to intimidate and dissuade racists, but the use of violent measures by some antifa against their adversaries can create a vicious, self-defeating cycle of attacks, counter-attacks and blame. This is why most established civil rights organizations criticize antifa tactics as dangerous and counterproductive.

That said, it is important to reject attempts to claim equivalence between the antifa and the white supremacist groups they oppose. The antifa reject racism but use unacceptable tactics. White supremacists use even more extreme violence to spread their ideologies of hate, to intimidate ethnic minorities, and undermine democratic norms. Right-wing extremists have been one of the largest and most consistent sources of domestic terror incidents in the United States for many years; they have murdered hundreds of people in this country over the last ten years alone. 

 

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Here is what ADL says about Antifa:

Antifa is not a unified group; it is loose collection of local/regional groups and individuals. Their presence at a protest is intended to intimidate and dissuade racists, but the use of violent measures by some antifa against their adversaries can create a vicious, self-defeating cycle of attacks, counter-attacks and blame. This is why most established civil rights organizations criticize antifa tactics as dangerous and counterproductive.

That said, it is important to reject attempts to claim equivalence between the antifa and the white supremacist groups they oppose. The antifa reject racism but use unacceptable tactics. White supremacists use even more extreme violence to spread their ideologies of hate, to intimidate ethnic minorities, and undermine democratic norms. Right-wing extremists have been one of the largest and most consistent sources of domestic terror incidents in the United States for many years; they have murdered hundreds of people in this country over the last ten years alone. 

 

One can't claim equivalence between groups if one side is not a group.  The equivalence is between two sets of peacefully protesting people on a given day.  White supremacists have the same rights as anyone else not to be blamed for the actions of others with the same beliefs. 

[Shady]

13 hours ago, bcsapper said:

That's the nonsense.  No-one said there should not be counter protests.  You can go ahead and try and beat someone up for their views if you want.  I established what that makes you earlier in the thread.

I’ve learned to just ignore him.  Much of what he says makes absolutely no sense.  Violence is not permitted in our society depending on what people say.  That’s a road down anarchy and lawlessness.

[Shady]

10 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Here is what ADL says about Antifa:

Antifa is not a unified group; it is loose collection of local/regional groups and individuals. Their presence at a protest is intended to intimidate and dissuade racists, but the use of violent measures by some antifa against their adversaries can create a vicious, self-defeating cycle of attacks, counter-attacks and blame. This is why most established civil rights organizations criticize antifa tactics as dangerous and counterproductive.

That said, it is important to reject attempts to claim equivalence between the antifa and the white supremacist groups they oppose. The antifa reject racism but use unacceptable tactics. White supremacists use even more extreme violence to spread their ideologies of hate, to intimidate ethnic minorities, and undermine democratic norms. Right-wing extremists have been one of the largest and most consistent sources of domestic terror incidents in the United States for many years; they have murdered hundreds of people in this country over the last ten years alone. 

 

This fake news talking point about antifa not being organized etc needs to stop.  It’s a complete lie.

https://rosecityantifa.org/

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, Shady said:

I’ve learned to just ignore him.  Much of what he says makes absolutely no sense.  Violence is not permitted in our society depending on what people say.  That’s a road down anarchy and lawlessness.

Violence is permitted depending on what people say, the state in Canada simply seeks to maintain a monopoly on violence.

The Government of Canada is the source of anarchy and lawlessness, because the government operates above its own law, even publicly disavows its own law if the person breaking the law is an elite within the structure of the de facto one party state, such as the Prime Minister asserting that he can break the law as he pleases, if it is to pander to Quebec.

 

[Shady]

4 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Violence is permitted depending on what people say

 

No it isn’t, and should never be.

Edited August 18, 2019 by Shady

[Dougie93]

Just now, Shady said:

No it isn’t.

Obviously is, the police went around Toronto beating up and mass arresting peaceful protestors at gun point,  as well as people not even protesting at all, just attacking people at random because somebody had protested something which the government wanted silenced, so it was collective punishment, which is why they brought cops in from all over Canada to beat the shit out of Torontonians, knowing full well that the rest of Canada despises Toronto,  apparently completely acceptable because Canadians just shrugged and went back to obsessing on the Americans pathologically and the police went back to beating the Indians up around the Rez.

[Dougie93]

At one point I just walked up to one of these cops jumping out Ford Flexes and beating people up at random and said "what the hell are you doing, have you lost your mind?"

He had a wild look in his eyes, he was jacked up, he just stares at me for a moment, and then says "f*ck you!" and then he runs off.

He runs off because he knows he has been caught red handed committing a violent crime against peaceful people doing nothing at all but walking around in the vicinity of Queen's Park.

There's your anarchy right there, source; Government of Canada.

The anarchy in Canada flows from the racist apartheid Indian Act and militarized police state required to enforce it,  and the fact that the Government of Canada is above the law, public officials are committing crimes constantly, blatantly, contemptuously, yet none of them is ever held accountable in any meaningful way.

Beneath the veneer of debt financed consumption making it appear prosperous on the surface, Canada is a failed state banana republic with a rogue government run amok.

Edited August 18, 2019 by Dougie93

[Dougie93]

Realpolitik is that the RCMP senior brass actually have all the power, with a fundamentally criminalized political elite, the RCMP can pick and choose who they want to take down at any given moment, simply by  selectively choosing to stop looking the other way.  Hence the politicians don't mess with them and give them carte blanche.

Banana republic.  Police state.

When you serve as an armed agent for this state, you don't just get to see the dark side of the Janus Face, you quickly come to realize that you are the dark side of the Janus Face.

Look into the face of Clayton Matchee standing over Shidane Arone, that's the face of the darkside, he didn't come up with that on his own, the reason he thought he could get away with it, is because orders came down from on high.   That's why they cut the Somalia Inquiry short, so the real culprits would not be held responsible.

Used to be they only threw Corporals under the bus, now they are throwing Vice Admirals under the bus, so it's getting ever more anarchic all the time, as it does, they've started to eat their own.

I am not a revolutionary.  I am a counterrevolutionary, because it is in fact these political elites who are out to overthrow the British Crown in North America so they can fully entrench their banana republic with ostensibly no lawful authority at all to restrain them;  Post National State, the Queen is not the monarch, the Charter is a poison pill; so they can do anything they want and "f*ck you" if you don't like it.

Not only is this accepted in Canada,  the majority of Canadians now appear to rally around it, the American Reb Menace at the gates ever their excuse, which by the way, is exactly how it works with Putin in Russia.

It's called Illiberal Democracy, and it's how they run things in Russia, Brazil, Mexico, and every other banana republic on earth.

Edited August 18, 2019 by Dougie93

[Argus]

2 hours ago, bcsapper said:

You were never a football hooligan, were you?

Surprisingly not.

[Argus]

2 hours ago, dialamah said:

That said, it is important to reject attempts to claim equivalence between the antifa and the white supremacist groups they oppose.

Antifa almost never comes into contact with white supremacists. There simply aren't very man of them about. Almost all the Antifa violence is directed against people who are simply on the right side of the political spectrum and opposed to their violently leftist views.

[Army Guy]

1 hour ago, Shady said:

No it isn’t, and should never be.

While violence is never permitted under the law, it can be the expected response depending on what is said....you and your wife are having dinner, someone walks up to your wife and says nice boobs mind if I have a look...and if this was not enough that person continues to berate you and your wife...There is going to be a reaction. Most times it is going to be physical....