• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump's press conference: You be the judge

HenryChinaski said:
Who the **** shows up to "peacefully protest" wearing body armor, riot gear Brandishing assault rifles and Tiki torches? They're clearly using intimidation tactics. I Knew a neo Nazi who serving a stretch in prison for shoving an elderly Asian man into Lake Michigan to his death because he thought it was" funny". **** those people. I don't condone any violence but all of those loser white trash Nazis need to be beaten with belts by their parents for being idiotic douche bags.
Click to expand...

Um you would have to have literally ignored every instance of antifa prior to make that assumption. The antifa groups have used violence and in some cases shown up with firearms themselves as was seen in arizona earlier this year.

They show up in riot gear because antifa follows them, anywhere they hold a rally, antifa promises to attack them, and after attack after attack, why would they go unprepared, all of their armor like masks and helmets seems to be in response to prior antifa attacks. If you actually watch the videos going back from 2015 to now you will see the groups attacked by antifa don more defensive gear each rally, as any time they hold any rally antifa plans an attack, yet the attacking group must be non violent and the group defending themselve must be the violent ones, yeah sure.
 
ecofarm said:
Downplaying of damage done by white supremacists aside, who says Antifa is a terrorist organization. I'm actually willing to consider evidence. I will not draw false equivalence, but I'm open to throwing Antifa under the bus.
Click to expand...

New jersey, the fbi also has labelled bamn the large antifa group in berkely a terrorist org, as well as redneck revolt another antifa org has been handing out pamplets on political assassination and other terrorist acts.

To add to that they meet the strictest definition of terrorism,ter·ror·ism
ˈterəˌrizəm/Submit
noun
the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

For you not to see that you either must be blindly ignorant to the subject or partisan blinders allow you to view a terrorist group as anything but because they are attacking those you disagree with.
 
beerftw said:
Dangerous? ideology is not action, this is a free country where actions are punished and not thoughts. The reason antifa hits that list is because they tend to use actions to silence thoughts, and very few especially on the left defend them. For the neo nazis I think mst would agree they are idiots of the highest caliber and deserve ridicule, however ridicule is not violence, and violence against them because of their political beliefs is textbook definition terrorism.
Click to expand...

OMG. I am not saying they should be arrested for their thoughts or punished for their thoughts. I am saying their ideology should be condemned as dangerous. You do comprehend that, don't you? You do understand that some types of political ideology can be dangerous.
 
beerftw said:
New jersey, the fbi also has labelled bamn the large antifa group in berkely a terrorist org, as well as redneck revolt another antifa org has been handing out pamplets on political assassination and other terrorist acts.

To add to that they meet the strictest definition of terrorism,ter·ror·ism
ˈterəˌrizəm/Submit
noun
the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

For you not to see that you either must be blindly ignorant to the subject or partisan blinders allow you to view a terrorist group as anything but because they are attacking those you disagree with.
Click to expand...

The definition of terrorism is not evidence. How silly.

Cite someone calling them terrorists. That's a start.
 
beerftw said:
Um you would have to have literally ignored every instance of antifa prior to make that assumption. The antifa groups have used violence and in some cases shown up with firearms themselves as was seen in arizona earlier this year.

They show up in riot gear because antifa follows them, anywhere they hold a rally, antifa promises to attack them, and after attack after attack, why would they go unprepared, all of their armor like masks and helmets seems to be in response to prior antifa attacks. If you actually watch the videos going back from 2015 to now you will see the groups attacked by antifa don more defensive gear each rally, as any time they hold any rally antifa plans an attack, yet the attacking group must be non violent and the group defending themselve must be the violent ones, yeah sure.
Click to expand...
You condemn violence of a group and you dislike but not the guys you support. It's good to know where you stand and what side you're on.
 
SheWolf said:
OMG. I am not saying they should be arrested for their thoughts or punished for their thoughts. I am saying their ideology should be condemned as dangerous. You do comprehend that, don't you? You do understand that some types of political ideology can be dangerous.
Click to expand...

Condemned is fine, punishing them otherwise is not, as part of free speech people can hate others viewpoints all day long, it just becomes an issue when people not only allow violence against others but support it. I would be calling out the neo nazis too if they acted just like antifa, if they had the political protection antifa did they probably would act the same. The reason they do not is no one politically protects them anymore, they are insignificant nobodies who are still protected by the fist amendment but most americans will shrug off and laugh at.
 
ecofarm said:
The definition of terrorism is not evidence. How silly.

Cite someone calling them terrorists. That's a start.
Click to expand...

For one new jersey did however it saddens me I could not find a msm news source eve fox who covered that news, hence my belief the media is shielding them, but nearly everything antifa has been hidden by msm and only reported by non msm no matter how much evidence exists.
Antifa 'Domestic Terrorism': New Je | The Daily Caller

That is just one link, again there are many as antifa riots have not been few, and there name known well for anyone except those who exclusevely foollow msm sources. If you like I can link spam you to oblivion and back, but at this point it seems more like willfull ignorance than a debate, you come more off as the guy trying to tell a mechanic how to rebuild an engine yet you don't know how to open the hood or why oil changes are needed, or to be specific highly uneducated on the topic, and a quick google search could shore you up.
 
beerftw said:
Um you would have to have literally ignored every instance of antifa prior to make that assumption. The antifa groups have used violence and in some cases shown up with firearms themselves as was seen in arizona earlier this year.

They show up in riot gear because antifa follows them, anywhere they hold a rally, antifa promises to attack them, and after attack after attack, why would they go unprepared, all of their armor like masks and helmets seems to be in response to prior antifa attacks. If you actually watch the videos going back from 2015 to now you will see the groups attacked by antifa don more defensive gear each rally, as any time they hold any rally antifa plans an attack, yet the attacking group must be non violent and the group defending themselve must be the violent ones, yeah sure.
Click to expand...

Look at these peaceful guys, defending themselves against a Charlottesville special education teacher.

Heroes.

http://www.wral.com/news/national_world/national/video/16878407/
 
beerftw said:
For one new jersey did however it saddens me I could not find a msm news source eve fox who covered that news, hence my belief the media is shielding them, but nearly everything antifa has been hidden by msm and only reported by non msm no matter how much evidence exists.
Antifa 'Domestic Terrorism': New Je | The Daily Caller

That is just one link, again there are many as antifa riots have not been few, and there name known well for anyone except those who exclusevely foollow msm sources. If you like I can link spam you to oblivion and back, but at this point it seems more like willfull ignorance than a debate, you come more off as the guy trying to tell a mechanic how to rebuild an engine yet you don't know how to open the hood or why oil changes are needed, or to be specific highly uneducated on the topic, and a quick google search could shore you up.
Click to expand...

1. The website cites itself, and I had to block something. Is the Daily Caller legit? Do I need to look that up, I'm guessing it's crap.

2. I clicked the link to the NJ website. It does not call the group terrorists, I searched for the word terrorist. It lists 4 incidents: a hacking, a "small fight", 25 nazis being attacked at an event and another with injuries.

Is there any evidence of a leadership condoning such actions?
 
Last edited:
Threegoofs said:
Look at these peaceful guys, defending themselves against a Charlottesville special education teacher.

Heroes.

'My blood's all over here': Charlottesville victim recounts violence :: WRAL.com
Click to expand...

If I remember correct they were being prosecuted and their names uncovered, what seperates them from antifa they have individuals committing violence in a fraction of what antifa does combined with the various antifas doctrines of using violence to suppress anyone they deem a fascist.

You should actually research it, I have been following these events since the milo riots, and by far antifa has been the most violent and nearly all incidences save a tiny few have been started by them, you could try google, and actually google antifa violence, at the current rate they would need to do attacks like that 5 times a month for the next year to probably reach half of what antifa groups have done in the last six months, but hey violence and terrorism is ok as long as it against someone you dislike, and if someone calls you out one it, pull out the rare few examples to defend the ultra violent guys because words are violents and beating them with weapons is self defense against violent words or something.
 
beerftw said:
If I remember correct they were being prosecuted and their names uncovered, what seperates them from antifa they have individuals committing violence in a fraction of what antifa does combined with the various antifas doctrines of using violence to suppress anyone they deem a fascist.

You should actually research it, I have been following these events since the milo riots, and by far antifa has been the most violent and nearly all incidences save a tiny few have been started by them, you could try google, and actually google antifa violence, at the current rate they would need to do attacks like that 5 times a month for the next year to probably reach half of what antifa groups have done in the last six months, but hey violence and terrorism is ok as long as it against someone you dislike, and if someone calls you out one it, pull out the rare few examples to defend the ultra violent guys because words are violents and beating them with weapons is self defense against violent words or something.
Click to expand...

Yeah.. well, when you lead with evidence from the Daily Caller..... I think I'll wait for a more respectable source.

And using the Daily Caller is good evidence that you don't really have a good handle on this.

I'd recommend this article from The Atlantic-

The Rise of Antifa - The Atlantic

Basically, it's a bunch of anarchists. Not quite the threat as white supremacists, I'd say.
 
Last edited:
ecofarm said:
1. The website cites itself, and I had to block something. Is the Daily Caller legit? Do I need to look that up, I'm guessing it's crap.

2. I clicked the link to the NJ website. It does not call the group terrorists, I searched for the word terrorist. It lists 4 incidents: a hacking, a "small fight", 25 nazis being attacked at an event and another with injuries.

Is there any evidence of a leadership condoning such actions?
Click to expand...

Actually you may be right they are listing them as anarchist extremists, and went everywhere but the literall terrorist definition.

Regardless terrorism does not need an absolute state endorsement to be true, they meet every definition of. btw bamn was labelled by the fbi as low level terrorists, which the aclu tried to fight

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAMN

There have also been numerous incidences of violence specifically caused by them, many are notable and the earliest notable one was in 2016 when antifa attacked neo nazies with knives and bricks in which they lost because the neo nazis had knives cuz seriously who did not see neo nazis having knives and using them when you attack them with knives, and them being surprisingly efficient at using them. That same rally recently got one of their leaders yvette felarca arrested, a year later, she posted bail and is awaiting court, she was one of the few unmasked who could be identified, and police reports show antifa started that fight not the neo nazis.
 
beerftw said:
Actually you may be right they are listing them as anarchist extremists, and went everywhere but the literall terrorist definition.

Regardless terrorism does not need an absolute state endorsement to be true, they meet every definition of. btw bamn was labelled by the fbi as low level terrorists, which the aclu tried to fight

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAMN

There have also been numerous incidences of violence specifically caused by them, many are notable and the earliest notable one was in 2016 when antifa attacked neo nazies with knives and bricks in which they lost because the neo nazis had knives cuz seriously who did not see neo nazis having knives and using them when you attack them with knives, and them being surprisingly efficient at using them. That same rally recently got one of their leaders yvette felarca arrested, a year later, she posted bail and is awaiting court, she was one of the few unmasked who could be identified, and police reports show antifa started that fight not the neo nazis.
Click to expand...

I already tried the daily caller and read the citation, DC cited itself and lied to me about the link (no terrorist). I'm not reading all that.

I'll give you BAMN are terrorists and they call themselves antifa. How many people are in BAMN?
 
Threegoofs said:
Yeah.. well, when you lead with evidence from the Daily Caller..... I think I'll wait for a more respectable source.

And using the Daily Caller is good evidence that you don't really have a good handle on this.

I'd recommend this article from The Atlantic-

The Rise of Antifa - The Atlantic

Basically, it's a bunch of anarchists. Not quite the threat as white supremacists, I'd say.
Click to expand...

well given the number of white supremecist attacks vs antifa, the numbers show antifa is by far the more violent group.

Oh and fyi if you attacked the source you committed an ad hominem which by debate standards is equivilent to admitting you lost and have no rebuttal, since you could not adress the argument instead.


How much link spam would you want, just give me a number the number of antifa violence is not in short supply by any ,means whil I think you pretty much exhausted any recent white supremecist attacks minus roof and shown zero coordinated ones by a group, while antifa has shown time and time again to be organized as a group in their attacks with a doctrine supporting it.
 
Since Russia didn't pan out....gotta find something new.
 
ecofarm said:
I already tried the daily caller and read the citation, DC cited itself and lied to me about the link (no terrorist). I'm not reading all that.

I'll give you BAMN are terrorists and they call themselves antifa. How many people are in BAMN?
Click to expand...

They were responsible for the milo and ann coulter riots, and sacremento stabbings, and most within the state of california and many in michigan, they are probably the largest and most infuential of the antifa groups.

The dc cited department of homeland security new jersey which I admitted listed a fraction of the acts they committed but fell short of calling them terrorists.
 
beerftw said:
well given the number of white supremecist attacks vs antifa, the numbers show antifa is by far the more violent group.

Oh and fyi if you attacked the source you committed an ad hominem which by debate standards is equivilent to admitting you lost and have no rebuttal, since you could not adress the argument instead.


How much link spam would you want, just give me a number the number of antifa violence is not in short supply by any ,means whil I think you pretty much exhausted any recent white supremecist attacks minus roof and shown zero coordinated ones by a group, while antifa has shown time and time again to be organized as a group in their attacks with a doctrine supporting it.
Click to expand...

Sorry...when you use ****ty sources it's legitimate to point out that all you can point to are ****ty sources.

And I didnt use an ad hominem argument at all. In fact, I could claim you used the fallacy of false attribution, since the Daily Caller is considered reputable in approximately ZERO respectable circles.
 
Last edited:
beerftw said:
They were responsible for the milo and ann coulter riots,
Click to expand...

Riots? I'm trying not to laugh. Before I do, was anyone killed or seriously wounded?

and sacremento stabbings, and most within the state of california and many in michigan, they are probably the largest and most infuential of the antifa groups.
Click to expand...

So college crap and some stabbings (which I'd need details on, but are reasonably an insignificant criminal element).

The dc cited department of homeland security new jersey which I admitted listed a fraction of the acts they committed but fell short of calling them terrorists.
Click to expand...

And DC cited itself. That's a very big red flag. Not really tolerable.

I'm not convinced Antifa is a terrorist organization. I expected it'd have criminal elements. How about something from its leaders?
 
KevinKohler said:
Since Russia didn't pan out....gotta find something new.
Click to expand...

Funny that...

Buried in the Nazi news today was a story that Trump has some very suspicious financial dealings with Khszskhstan, which is close to Putin.

The noose is tightening.
 
ecofarm said:
Riots? I'm trying not to laugh. Before I do, was anyone killed or seriously wounded?



So college crap and some stabbings (which I'd need details on, but are reasonably an insignificant criminal element).



And DC cited itself. That's a very big red flag. Not really tolerable.

I'm not convinced Antifa is a terrorist organization. I expected it'd have criminal elements. How about something from its leaders?
Click to expand...

For one violence to be terrorism does not require someone being killed, that is not anywhere in it's definition, it requires violence, by the definition someone beating people with clubs and pipes over politics and someone shooting someone over politics are both terrorism, demanding a serious injury or death is demanding the definition be twisted to your ideology rather than be used as it is written, which is a poor defense.

Some college crap, buildings burned, people stabbed, a guy shot, bricks thrown at police officers, other buildings destroyed, a foiled attempt to poor acid on trump supporters to permenently disfigure them for life, pepper spraying people, like I have said before they is plenty I can cite on the subject.

For the last they also cited the njdepartment of homeland security, seriously it is the daily caller, if they cite themselves also no one cares we know they suck, if you are that butthurt you can refute it or I can link the usefull cite directly, but to the rest there are endless cites on antifa, they are not a small phenomenon, I am going to bed tonight but just name the number of cites you want on their violence, how many youtube videos you want, they are easy to find and if you refuse to do any research and let partisan blinders prevent you I have no issue finding them for you.
 
beerftw said:
For one violence to be terrorism does not require someone being killed, that is not anywhere in it's definition, it requires violence, by the definition someone beating people with clubs and pipes over politics and someone shooting someone over politics are both terrorism, demanding a serious injury or death is demanding the definition be twisted to your ideology rather than be used as it is written, which is a poor defense.

Some college crap, buildings burned, people stabbed, a guy shot, bricks thrown at police officers, other buildings destroyed, a foiled attempt to poor acid on trump supporters to permenently disfigure them for life, pepper spraying people, like I have said before they is plenty I can cite on the subject.

For the last they also cited the njdepartment of homeland security, seriously it is the daily caller, if they cite themselves also no one cares we know they suck, if you are that butthurt you can refute it or I can link the usefull cite directly, but to the rest there are endless cites on antifa, they are not a small phenomenon, I am going to bed tonight but just name the number of cites you want on their violence, how many youtube videos you want, they are easy to find and if you refuse to do any research and let partisan blinders prevent you I have no issue finding them for you.
Click to expand...

Ok, so no one has called them terrorist, except a gang claiming antifa is presumably terrorist.

Do they have a website or something? Is it bigoted or inciting violence? I bet it condemns violence.
 
JamesBY said:
Chief of Staff John Kelly looked as if he wanted to be anywhere else than the debacle of Trump going mentally boinkers.
Click to expand...

A picture says a thousabd words and not one of those words spells confidence. Kelly was not the only staffer looking like they would rather be any where else.
DHTBq5WXcAE_oTm.jpg
 
ecofarm said:
1. The website cites itself, and I had to block something. Is the Daily Caller legit? Do I need to look that up, I'm guessing it's crap.

2. I clicked the link to the NJ website. It does not call the group terrorists, I searched for the word terrorist. It lists 4 incidents: a hacking, a "small fight", 25 nazis being attacked at an event and another with injuries.

Is there any evidence of a leadership condoning such actions?
Click to expand...

Wiki:
The Daily Caller is an American news and opinion website based in Washington, D.C. It was founded by Tucker Carlson, a libertarian conservative political pundit, and Neil Patel, former adviser to former Vice President Dick Cheney. The site's coverage includes politics, business, world news, entertainment, sports, education, technology, outdoors, and energy.

The Daily Caller launched on January 11, 2010 as a more politically conservative news and commentary outlet and alternative to the liberal The Huffington Post, similarly featuring sections in broad range of subjects beyond politics. By late 2012, The New York Times reported that the site had quadrupled its page view and total audience and had become profitable without ever buying an advertisement for itself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Caller

I looked at New Jersey's Homeland Security page too, and here are the title and subtitle:
Anarchist Extremists: Antifa

June 12, 2017 ● Counterterrorism, Domestic

https://www.njhomelandsecurity.gov/analysis/anarchist-extremists-antifa
 
nota bene said:
Wiki:
The Daily Caller is an American news and opinion website based in Washington, D.C. It was founded by Tucker Carlson, a libertarian conservative political pundit, and Neil Patel, former adviser to former Vice President Dick Cheney. The site's coverage includes politics, business, world news, entertainment, sports, education, technology, outdoors, and energy.

The Daily Caller launched on January 11, 2010 as a more politically conservative news and commentary outlet and alternative to the liberal The Huffington Post, similarly featuring sections in broad range of subjects beyond politics. By late 2012, The New York Times reported that the site had quadrupled its page view and total audience and had become profitable without ever buying an advertisement for itself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Caller

I looked at New Jersey's Homeland Security page too, and here are the title and subtitle:
Anarchist Extremists: Antifa

June 12, 2017 ● Counterterrorism, Domestic

https://www.njhomelandsecurity.gov/analysis/anarchist-extremists-antifa
Click to expand...

Terrorist elements. They can join the club. We don't paint an organization according to terrorist/criminal elements. Does their leadership endorse violence? If so, under the bus they go.
 
Trump was being Trump. Which, imo, is not a very good leader for the USA.

I also wonder why the press never attacked President Obama like they have President Trump. Obama had his share of civil unrest to deal with. I don't recall the press playing such hard ball with him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom