Antifa [Mod Warning on post #1 - updated 08/08/19]

Bonniedog

nullzero wrote: »

I hadn't heard of this until I read it here. He was very active with the pro choice movement here as well, these people can hide in plain sight I suppose. I read an article online detailing similar issues in Antifa in Russia and the United States where leading figures in the organisation ended up being convicted paedophiles.
Do we assume Antifa is some sort of hotbed of paedophilia? Hardly, but they have a pretty chequered reputation already and these cases certainly don't help with improving it.

I would be more curious about fact that he was not sent to prison which suggests a certain relationship with the polis!

He was also an indymedia editor which gave him access to vast amounts of info on the far left here.

In its original guise, AFA/Red Action tried to get close to Dublin Provos who rejected them as they didnt trust them. Some of other originals are still around. Pot bellied Bohs casuals in large part.

As danzy said, extremist groups, especially ones whose activity is almost totally online, attracts inadequate creatures for whom Hitler and Jews or fantasizing about beating the "fash" is compensation for general uselessness.

Same sort of characters are attracted to porn which provides the illusion of power over an object. Not saying all antifa are obviously!

Snake Plisken

Brian? wrote: »

Ah now, I don’t think that’s fair. Jack is an awful human being who’s spouted some horrible crap, but I don’t think he’s a fascist.

Jack sums your view pretty well here Brian

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1277305869114519552?s=19

Brian?

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Jack sums your view pretty well here Brian

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1277305869114519552?s=19

Jack makes a living out of telling lies. Do you consider him a trustworthy source?

CtevenSrowder

Brian? wrote: »

Jack makes a living out of telling lies. Do you consider him a trustworthy source?

Yes the usual response. Ngo, this Jack lad, anyone who shows anti-fa for what they are liars.

You've basically just proved his tweet correct.

Brian?

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

Yes the usual response. Ngo, this Jack lad, anyone who shows anti-fa for what they are liars.

You've basically just proved his tweet correct.

Believe what you want. But “Jack the lad” is a troll who makes money form peddling lies like Pizzagate. His tweets prove nothing. He’s a scumbag of the highest order and I have zero respect for anything he says.

Using his tweets to try to prove a point is laughable.

CtevenSrowder

Brian? wrote: »

Believe what you want. But “Jack the lad” is a troll who makes money form peddling lies like Pizzagate. His tweets prove nothing. He’s a scumbag of the highest order and I have zero respect for anything he says.

Using his tweets to try to prove a point is laughable.

We can't provide any evidence as you just dismiss all of it. You attack the source, when the source is more reasonable suddenly anti-fa isn't a group so it can't be anti-fa. When it clearly is anti-fa suddenly it's the far-right masquerading as antifa and around we go.

Brian?

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

We can't provide any evidence as you just dismiss all of it. You attack the source, when the source is more reasonable suddenly anti-fa isn't a group so it can't be anti-fa. When it clearly is anti-fa suddenly it's the far-right masquerading as antifa and around we go.

In fairness, I didn't say the people in that video weren't Antifa. And I never said Antifa didn't exist or that they weren't a group. They exist as a loose coalition, you can call that a group if you like, I think you're mixing me up with someone else.

I don't agree with what's going on in that video. I should have said that earlier.

Having said all of the above. "Jack the lad" is a first class cnut

Tea drinker

Danzy wrote: »

Disturbed people and weirdos gravitate to groups like these, right or left.

There is a fellowship of oddballs and a vehicle to make people suffer.

There can be real reasons why people like to virtue signal, and one can be to reclaim self esteem they lost elsewhere, and hurting kids is probably bad for self esteem. As I said before, was the same in the old church, lads shouting out prayers were the biggest assholes behind it all.

Brian?

Tea drinker wrote: »

There can be real reasons why people like to virtue signal, and one can be to reclaim self esteem they lost elsewhere, and hurting kids is probably bad for self esteem. As I said before, was the same in the old church, lads shouting out prayers were the biggest assholes behind it all.

So people call it virtue signalling. Others call it being tolerant.

Tea drinker

Brian? wrote: »

So people call it virtue signalling. Others call it being tolerant.

We've all been more than tolerant of d1ckheads online calling us racist bigot etc.
Inventing new rules for social behaviour, inventing genders and pronouns all while sowing dissent and division as if they have borderline personality disorder.
These people are compensating for something.... that's human nature.

Snake Plisken

The state of some of these Antifa Morons. They all seem to look mentally ill with dead looking eyes

https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1278770404622884864?s=19

Bonniedog

Snake Plisken wrote: »

The state of some of these Antifa Morons. They all seem to look mentally ill with dead looking eyes

https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1278770404622884864?s=19

You can see why he empathised with a meth head!

They are thugs. Goebbels said that best stormtroopers the Nazis had were former reds.

When Nazis started to look like they would win, whole groups of Redfront abandoned the Communist Party and joined the SA.

Antifa are cut from same cloth. Sort of characters who join soccer firms in England. There's no real outlet for that in States so it is good choice if you are looking for a ruck, especially one that involves 50 people beating on one.

Danzy

Brian? wrote: »

So people call it virtue signalling. Others call it being tolerant.

Tolerant?

Brian?

Danzy wrote: »

Tolerant?

When it comes to accusations of "virtue signalling", yes.

Brian?

Tea drinker wrote: »

We've all been more than tolerant of d1ckheads online calling us racist bigot etc.

In 25 years of using the internet, no one has ever called me a bigot or a racist. It's pretty easy to avoid actually.

Inventing new rules for social behaviour, inventing genders and pronouns all while sowing dissent and division as if they have borderline personality disorder.
These people are compensating for something.... that's human nature.

Quite the rant. Apart from online, where has any of this ever effected you in real life? Has any of this every disturbed your life in any way?

mynamejeff

Brian? wrote: »

In 25 years of using the internet, no one has ever called me a bigot or a racist. It's pretty easy to avoid actually.



Quite the rant. Apart from online, where has any of this ever effected you in real life? Has any of this every disturbed your life in any way?

and how many people have you abused in that way to make yourself feel like a liberal warrior for the under trodden ?

Brian?

mynamejeff wrote: »

and how many people have you abused in that way to make yourself feel like a liberal warrior for the under trodden ?

Zero.


I am not now, nor ever have been a "liberal".

mynamejeff

Brian? wrote: »

Zero.


I am not now, nor ever have been a "liberal".

your a lot of things brian , but your not worth getting banned for

Tea drinker

Brian? wrote: »

In 25 years of using the internet, no one has ever called me a bigot or a racist. It's pretty easy to avoid actually.



Quite the rant. Apart from online, where has any of this ever effected you in real life? Has any of this every disturbed your life in any way?

Been online donkeys years myself, and the current tranche of users are a lot less forgiving and more aggressive. Twitter is a violent cesspool.
Maybe you agree with the crowd and so don't get sh1t from the now toxic online brigade that I get when I disagree. TBH it's even becoming more frequent for boardsies to resort to ism and ists as a form of argument.

Sorry just saw this now:

Brian? wrote: »

So people call it virtue signalling. Others call it being tolerant.

Just to be clear, I wasn't accusing *you* of virtue signalling, but I disagree strongly on your state,emt. It has nothing to do with being tolerant.I know what tolerant means and the people I talk about are the opposite, incredibly intolerant, raging and sometimes violent.
It is a lie, sometimes with very bad consequences.
Here's some nasty girl, looking to cash in her online virtue signalling points for kudos. Talking about stabbing people.
Up until it loses her internship with Deloitte, and now suddenly she is all tearful and empathetic again - with herself and her own situation of course.
https://torontosun.com/news/world/asian-karen-threatens-to-stab-anyone-who-says-all-lives-matter
This is intolerant virtue signalling, this coward thought she had the power to say horrible stuff and get away with it.
This power is very attractive to the very people you don't want to have power, similar to the negative selection in the priesthood.
Actually I think it's an example of borderline personality disorder I previously mentioned.

Brian?

Brian? wrote: »

In 25 years of using the internet, no one has ever called me a bigot or a racist. It's pretty easy to avoid actually.



Quite the rant. Apart from online, where has any of this ever effected you in real life? Has any of this every disturbed your life in any way?

Intolerant of others views? You've never been accused of that? Doubt that Brian.

2u2me

Brian? wrote: »

In 25 years of using the internet, no one has ever called me a bigot or a racist. It's pretty easy to avoid actually.

Have you ever given your opinion in the Rowling or Linehan thread? Or is that the trick, not actually voicing whatever your opinion is?

Brian?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Intolerant of others views? You've never been accused of that? Doubt that Brian.

I’m extremely intolerant of people being bigots. I’m intolerant of people expressing stupid views, but sometimes it’s not their own fault that they’ve been misled.

Why do I have to be tolerant of every view? No one else is.

Brian?

2u2me wrote: »

Have you ever given your opinion in the Rowling or Linehan thread? Or is that the trick, not actually voicing whatever your opinion is?

Why would I? I’ve no interest in it really. Do I have to comment on every thread to meet some sort of metric? Some fella getting banned from Twitter for being a twat, I don’t even know why there’s a thread about it.

I voice my opinion pretty regularly. What a weird accusation

Brian?

Tea drinker wrote: »

Been online donkeys years myself, and the current tranche of users are a lot less forgiving and more aggressive. Twitter is a violent cesspool.
Maybe you agree with the crowd and so don't get sh1t from the now toxic online brigade that I get when I disagree. TBH it's even becoming more frequent for boardsies to resort to ism and ists as a form of argument.

Sorry just saw this now:


Just to be clear, I wasn't accusing *you* of virtue signalling, but I disagree strongly on your state,emt. It has nothing to do with being tolerant.I know what tolerant means and the people I talk about are the opposite, incredibly intolerant, raging and sometimes violent.
It is a lie, sometimes with very bad consequences.
Here's some nasty girl, looking to cash in her online virtue signalling points for kudos. Talking about stabbing people.
Up until it loses her internship with Deloitte, and now suddenly she is all tearful and empathetic again - with herself and her own situation of course.
https://torontosun.com/news/world/asian-karen-threatens-to-stab-anyone-who-says-all-lives-matter
This is intolerant virtue signalling, this coward thought she had the power to say horrible stuff and get away with it.
This power is very attractive to the very people you don't want to have power, similar to the negative selection in the priesthood.
Actually I think it's an example of borderline personality disorder I previously mentioned.

I really think we have very different definitions of virtue signalling. I’m not sure it’s worth getting into it. You didn’t accuse me of it, so fine. Thanks.

Bonniedog

Tea drinker wrote: »

Been online donkeys years myself, and the current tranche of users are a lot less forgiving and more aggressive. Twitter is a violent cesspool.
Maybe you agree with the crowd and so don't get sh1t from the now toxic online brigade that I get when I disagree. TBH it's even becoming more frequent for boardsies to resort to ism and ists as a form of argument.

Sorry just saw this now:


Just to be clear, I wasn't accusing *you* of virtue signalling, but I disagree strongly on your state,emt. It has nothing to do with being tolerant.I know what tolerant means and the people I talk about are the opposite, incredibly intolerant, raging and sometimes violent.
It is a lie, sometimes with very bad consequences.
Here's some nasty girl, looking to cash in her online virtue signalling points for kudos. Talking about stabbing people.
Up until it loses her internship with Deloitte, and now suddenly she is all tearful and empathetic again - with herself and her own situation of course.
https://torontosun.com/news/world/asian-karen-threatens-to-stab-anyone-who-says-all-lives-matter
This is intolerant virtue signalling, this coward thought she had the power to say horrible stuff and get away with it.
This power is very attractive to the very people you don't want to have power, similar to the negative selection in the priesthood.
Actually I think it's an example of borderline personality disorder I previously mentioned.

And she's a psychology graduate

Worst ideological lunatics of a similar period of nihilism in states 1967 - 74 were also generally university middle class whites with California of course punching above its weight, especially in Berkeley.

Weather Underground - founded by future Obama mentors Dohrn and Ayers - celebrated the Manson killings at their founding conference in Flint. Micheal Moore missed that connection

Brian?

Brian? wrote: »

I’m extremely intolerant of people being bigots. I’m intolerant of people expressing stupid views, but sometimes it’s not their own fault that they’ve been misled.

Why do I have to be tolerant of every view? No one else is.

You mentioned that you managed to avoid being called a racist and a bigot in your 25 years on the internet and that it was easy to avoid.

It isn't. Racist means nothing anymore due to over use and bigot, as you mentioned, is absolutely impossible to avoid being as it's a catch 22. You don't tolerate bigots or what YOU consider as stupid views. That's bigoted in and of itself.

There was more than a little hint of a condescending attitude with your post, which somewhat alluded to the fact that because others get called racist and bigoted, it was their fault as you manage never to get called either.

But to break your duck, you do hold bigoted views and if you believe in the myth that white privilege exists, you are a racist.

Bonniedog

I see the socialist republic of Seattle has collapsed.

Antifa all went home to their mammies after they realised that there were very bold boys in the liberated zone.

They really ought to change their name. None of the actual anti fascists of Stalingrad or Omaha Beach or the Warsaw ghetto gave up because their socks were wet or the sandwiches were soggy.

Then again, they were fighting real fascists not imaginary ones or old people who voted differently.

Brian?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You mentioned that you managed to avoid being called a racist and a bigot in your 25 years on the internet and that it was easy to avoid.

It isn't. Racist means nothing anymore due to over use and bigot, as you mentioned, is absolutely impossible to avoid being as it's a catch 22. You don't tolerate bigots or what YOU consider as stupid views. That's bigoted in and of itself.

There was more than a little hint of a condescending attitude with your post, which somewhat alluded to the fact that because others get called racist and bigoted, it was their fault as you manage never to get called either.

But to break your duck, you do hold bigoted views and if you believe in the myth that white privilege exists, you are a racist.

Why do you continuously make up opinions I don't hold? Every time I bet away one of your points, some of which are pure nonsense, you build a new Straw man to burn.

This idea that I'm a bigot because I won't tolerate bigotry or stupidity is the biggest pile of nonsense yet.

Brian?

Brian? wrote: »

Why do you continuously make up opinions I don't hold? Every time I bet away one of your points, some of which are pure nonsense, you build a new Straw man to burn.

This idea that I'm a bigot because I won't tolerate bigotry or stupidity is the biggest pile of nonsense yet.

The paradox of intolerance might be too complex a topic for the people in this thread tbh.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

The paradox of intolerance might be too complex a topic for the people in this thread tbh.

Oh absolutely Mike. I'm assuming you are referring to the tolerance paradox or is there another one I'm too stupid to understand the complexities of?

You are incredibly intelligent I'm sure and you know that the general plebs don't realise you need be intolerant of intolerance... It's just that you need to be able to clearly define what intolerance is.

Antifa and the like claim it would be proud boys et al who are the intolerant ones, whereas I say that antifa are absolute ****s that shouldn't be tolerated.

It is my opinion from brians postings on this thread, that Brian deems my opinion either stupid or false and would be tolerant of antifa.

I believe him to be bigoted. That's not necessarily an insult. I admit I am intolerant to a lot of bull**** too. It's just all dependant on one person's views on what constitutes bull****.

I know it's a different thread but we have people on other threads screaming bigot at the people who only believe in two sexes. Would that be included in your paradox of "intolerance"?