Richard Spencer punched in the face at protest

[EnglishPete]

Frankly I think it was extremely foolish of Spencer to go wandering around an area which had a large number of anarchist and other far leftist protesters. Being surprised and outraged that one of these people got violent is like being outraged at a bear sh**tting in the woods. Its just their nature.

Remember extreme left violence was one of the main reasons for the Nazis coming to power in Germany.  People often wonder how an educated and cultured nation like the Germans could vote for a group af anti-semitic cranks like the nazi party. Well one of the most important and indeed crucial reasons was far left violence in Weimar Germany. Communists and other far leftists were engaged in all kinds of street violence and attacks on their political opponents. People looked at the Soviet Union and naturally reacted in terror at the prospect of living under Communist rule. Crucially the German authorities failed to control this violence. Some people saw the Nazis responding to the communists with their own street violence and their promises to crack down on the reds and those votes made the crucial difference for Hitler and enabled him to come to power.

It wasn't obvious until after they came to power and in particular during the war that the nazis were just as bad as the communists, but by then it was too late. If it hadn't been for far left violence and the Weimar authorities failure to control it then World War Two and all its horrors could have been avoided.

[EnglishPete]

It wasn't obvious until after they came to power and in particular during the war that the nazis were just as bad as the communists, but by then it was too late.

And for those who might respond to this point by saying 'OMG how can you say that? Surely it was always clear that the nazis were just as bad, if not worse, than the communists'. I would point out the example of the South Africa-Mozambique border in the 1980s. At that time you had a stream of illegal immigrants crossing from communist Mozambique to Apartheid South Africa to look for a better life.

Think about that for a second. Black people were willing to sneak through the barbed wire border fence, cross Kruger National Park which is inhabited by lions, elephants, hyenas and other dangerous as  animals. They were willing to take those risks because they wanted a better life living as illegal immigrants in a country that was ruled by apartheid. That's how bad communism is.

That's why some voters in Germany were willing to make desperate choices in a situation where they thought that the authorities had lost control of this threat. The result was the deaths of 50 million people in World war Two. That's a major reason (though not the only reason) why its so vitally important for the government to keep these far leftist thugs in check.

[EnglishPete]

This is a classic example of "I don't approve, but I sure did enjoy".

I'm afraid that rhetoric like yours results in tragedies like the one we just saw outside the Milo talk at the University of Washington. A crowd of unhinged far leftists and anarchists, no doubt encouraged by rhetoric like yours, were chimping out and generally threatening people outside the talk. One member of the public was so threatened by one protester that he felt compelled to shoot him in self defense. its all very well you coming out with this kind of rhetoric but do consider the effect that it has on unstable people like this poor protester who is now in the hospital fighting for his life as well as the effect on the poor member of the public now feeling terrible for having to shoot another human being.

Words have consequences so whilst you have the right to free speech you should also consider the effect your words have.

[EnglishPete]

reminds me why people shouldn't be allowed to take guns to such places.

As I said in the other thread I think Seattle police have blood on their hands here. By their own account they said that the far leftist crowd was getting violent, throwing bricks and fireworks and generally being threatening. And yet the police did nothing to stop it and admitted that they didn't arrest anyone.

Now you can say its the leftists' fault for threatening members of the public to the point where one feels he has to use lethal force to defend himself.  However whilst that's true on one level on another communists and anarchists can't really help behaving like this. When they get into these kind of mobs they can't really help themselves from acting like this. Its the job of the police to dampen them down and prevent them from chimping out too much.

The police are responsible for the results of letting this get out of hand in the same way that a zookeeper would be responsible for any bloodshed caused by leaving the gate to a bear enclosure open. No one would have felt that they had to use a firearm to defend themselves if the police had maintained control of the situation, which is what they're paid to do.

[EnglishPete]

reminds me why people shouldn't be allowed to take guns to such places.

As I said in the other thread I think Seattle police have blood on their hands here. By their own account they said that the far leftist crowd was getting violent, throwing bricks and fireworks and generally being threatening. And yet the police did nothing to stop it and admitted that they didn't arrest anyone.

Now you can say its the leftists' fault for threatening members of the public to the point where one feels he has to use lethal force to defend himself.  However whilst that's true on one level on another communists and anarchists can't really help behaving like this. When they get into these kind of mobs they can't really help themselves from acting like this. Its the job of the police to dampen them down and prevent them from chimping out too much.

The police are responsible for the results of letting this get out of hand in the same way that a zookeeper would be responsible for any bloodshed caused by leaving the gate to a bear enclosure open. No one would have felt that they had to use a firearm to defend themselves if the police had maintained control of the situation, which is what they're paid to do.

/pol/ sighted.

Well can you think of a more polite expression for referring to the kind of violent freakouts that the leftists were having outside the Milo UW speech the other day?

[EnglishPete]

reminds me why people shouldn't be allowed to take guns to such places.

As I said in the other thread I think Seattle police have blood on their hands here. By their own account they said that the far leftist crowd was getting violent, throwing bricks and fireworks and generally being threatening. And yet the police did nothing to stop it and admitted that they didn't arrest anyone.

Now you can say its the leftists' fault for threatening members of the public to the point where one feels he has to use lethal force to defend himself.  However whilst that's true on one level on another communists and anarchists can't really help behaving like this. When they get into these kind of mobs they can't really help themselves from acting like this. Its the job of the police to dampen them down and prevent them from chimping out too much.

The police are responsible for the results of letting this get out of hand in the same way that a zookeeper would be responsible for any bloodshed caused by leaving the gate to a bear enclosure open. No one would have felt that they had to use a firearm to defend themselves if the police had maintained control of the situation, which is what they're paid to do.

/pol/ sighted.

Well can you think of a more polite expression for referring to the kind of violent freakouts that the leftists were having outside the Milo UW speech the other day?

An expression that doesn't have connotations of racism? Shouldn't be too hard.

I would have thought the fact the UW lefty demonstrators were mostly very white looking would have made it clear that the expression was being used purely to describe their behaviour and not making any reference to their complexion. I would have avoided using that expression if they had been darker in hue precisely to avoid any such confusion but it seems some are determined to look for offence in every expression.

And I would add that you are another one whose rhetoric is of exactly the sort that contributed to this week's UW tragedy

[EnglishPete]

reminds me why people shouldn't be allowed to take guns to such places.

As I said in the other thread I think Seattle police have blood on their hands here. By their own account they said that the far leftist crowd was getting violent, throwing bricks and fireworks and generally being threatening. And yet the police did nothing to stop it and admitted that they didn't arrest anyone.

Now you can say its the leftists' fault for threatening members of the public to the point where one feels he has to use lethal force to defend himself.  However whilst that's true on one level on another communists and anarchists can't really help behaving like this. When they get into these kind of mobs they can't really help themselves from acting like this. Its the job of the police to dampen them down and prevent them from chimping out too much.

The police are responsible for the results of letting this get out of hand in the same way that a zookeeper would be responsible for any bloodshed caused by leaving the gate to a bear enclosure open. No one would have felt that they had to use a firearm to defend themselves if the police had maintained control of the situation, which is what they're paid to do.

/pol/ sighted.

Well can you think of a more polite expression for referring to the kind of violent freakouts that the leftists were having outside the Milo UW speech the other day?

An expression that doesn't have connotations of racism? Shouldn't be too hard.

I would have thought the fact the UW lefty demonstrators were mostly very white looking would have made it clear that the expression was being used purely to describe their behaviour and not making any reference to their complexion. I would have avoided using that expression if they had been darker in hue precisely to avoid any such confusion but it seems some are determined to look for offence in every expression.

And I would add that you are another one whose rhetoric is of exactly the sort that contributed to this week's UW tragedy

If only I had stayed silent and only open my mouth to suck MAGA c**k.

Good grief. You forget to take your meds today or something?

[EnglishPete]

reminds me why people shouldn't be allowed to take guns to such places.

As I said in the other thread I think Seattle police have blood on their hands here. By their own account they said that the far leftist crowd was getting violent, throwing bricks and fireworks and generally being threatening. And yet the police did nothing to stop it and admitted that they didn't arrest anyone.

Now you can say its the leftists' fault for threatening members of the public to the point where one feels he has to use lethal force to defend himself.  However whilst that's true on one level on another communists and anarchists can't really help behaving like this. When they get into these kind of mobs they can't really help themselves from acting like this. Its the job of the police to dampen them down and prevent them from chimping out too much.

The police are responsible for the results of letting this get out of hand in the same way that a zookeeper would be responsible for any bloodshed caused by leaving the gate to a bear enclosure open. No one would have felt that they had to use a firearm to defend themselves if the police had maintained control of the situation, which is what they're paid to do.

/pol/ sighted.

Well can you think of a more polite expression for referring to the kind of violent freakouts that the leftists were having outside the Milo UW speech the other day?

An expression that doesn't have connotations of racism? Shouldn't be too hard.

I would have thought the fact the UW lefty demonstrators were mostly very white looking would have made it clear that the expression was being used purely to describe their behaviour and not making any reference to their complexion. I would have avoided using that expression if they had been darker in hue precisely to avoid any such confusion but it seems some are determined to look for offence in every expression.

And I would add that you are another one whose rhetoric is of exactly the sort that contributed to this week's UW tragedy

If only I had stayed silent and only open my mouth to suck MAGA c**k.

Good grief. You forget to take your meds today or something?

I mean, he's not the one taking great pains to defend an attempted murderer on an online politics forum, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Its beej confrmed that the shooter at UW turned himself in saying that he was acting in self defense. The police themselves and other witnesses have confirmed that members of the crowd were behaving in a violent and threatening way. Now if one of the crowd had behaved in a violent and threatening way towards this particular member of the public then obviously that could have caused him to have a reasonable belief that he was in immediate physical danger. If that had been the case then obviously he had the right to act in self defense.

Now you're claiming that the shooter was 'an attempted murderer' I.e. that he wasn't acting in self defense I.e. that it was not reasonable for him to think that the other individual was an immediate physical threat. Now given the documented violence and threats from the crowd what makes you so sure that the individual in question wasn't acting in a way that was physically threatening to the shooter? Because given the evidence available it seems highly likely that that's exactly what happened.

[EnglishPete]

reminds me why people shouldn't be allowed to take guns to such places.

As I said in the other thread I think Seattle police have blood on their hands here. By their own account they said that the far leftist crowd was getting violent, throwing bricks and fireworks and generally being threatening. And yet the police did nothing to stop it and admitted that they didn't arrest anyone.

Now you can say its the leftists' fault for threatening members of the public to the point where one feels he has to use lethal force to defend himself.  However whilst that's true on one level on another communists and anarchists can't really help behaving like this. When they get into these kind of mobs they can't really help themselves from acting like this. Its the job of the police to dampen them down and prevent them from chimping out too much.

The police are responsible for the results of letting this get out of hand in the same way that a zookeeper would be responsible for any bloodshed caused by leaving the gate to a bear enclosure open. No one would have felt that they had to use a firearm to defend themselves if the police had maintained control of the situation, which is what they're paid to do.

/pol/ sighted.

Well can you think of a more polite expression for referring to the kind of violent freakouts that the leftists were having outside the Milo UW speech the other day?

An expression that doesn't have connotations of racism? Shouldn't be too hard.

I would have thought the fact the UW lefty demonstrators were mostly very white looking would have made it clear that the expression was being used purely to describe their behaviour and not making any reference to their complexion. I would have avoided using that expression if they had been darker in hue precisely to avoid any such confusion but it seems some are determined to look for offence in every expression.

And I would add that you are another one whose rhetoric is of exactly the sort that contributed to this week's UW tragedy

If only I had stayed silent and only open my mouth to suck MAGA c**k.

Good grief. You forget to take your meds today or something?

I mean, he's not the one taking great pains to defend an attempted murderer on an online politics forum, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The shooter at UW turned himself in saying that he was acting in self defense. That much has been confirmed. The police themselves and other witnesses have confirmed that members of the crowd were behaving in a violent and threatening way. Now if one of the crowd had behaved in a violent and threatening way towards this particular member of the public then obviously that could have caused him to have a reasonable belief that he was in immediate physical danger. If that had been the case then obviously he had the right to act in self defense.

Now you're claiming that the shooter was 'an attempted murderer' I.e. that he wasn't acting in self defense I.e. that it was not reasonable for him to think that the other individual was an immediate physical threat. Now given the documented violence and threats from the crowd what makes you so sure that the individual in question wasn't acting in a way that was physically threatening to the shooter? Because given the evidence available it seems highly likely that that's exactly what happened.

[EnglishPete]

I have to say that I do like the fact that Milo continued with his talk after he had been informed of the  shooting. That takes a certain amount of guts and shows that he's not willing to be derailed by far left disruption no matter how far they push it.

[EnglishPete]

I mean, he's not the one taking great pains to defend an attempted murderer on an online politics forum, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Here's a video of the shooting.

https://vid.me/V3JL

Now its quite fast moving so its difficult to see every detail but it looks very much to me as though the shooter (in the yellow hat) was being assaulted by antifa at the point of the shooting. Which would fit in with the shooter's account of what happened and which would make the shooting self defense not attempted murder as you claim.

[EnglishPete]

Yellow hat better not get charged with anything.  He probably shouldn't have brought a gun, if he was worried for his safety he should probably just stay home.  But we live in a free country and he was in public minding his own business when an asshole violently assaulted him, he should (and does) have a right to defend himself.

[EnglishPete]

Hilarious tweet from Mister Metokur

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[EnglishPete]

Update of the Seattle shooting story

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/police-release-man-arrested-in-uw-shooting/

Article features a picture of a surprised looking anarchist idiot just after he got shot

[EnglishPete]

comparisons with hitler are usually not about having hitler's power but his worldview.

The differences in power are important in how to deal with them.

If you could travel back in time to kill 27-year-old Hitler, would you?

If you could go back in time to kill 27 year old Stalin or 27 year old Mao or 27 year old Kim Il Sung or 27 year old Nicolae Ceausescu or 27 year old Enver Hoxha or 27 year old Pol Pot,  would you?

[EnglishPete]

A great talk here from Stefan Molyneux on the recent leftist violence. A thoughtful analysis of what's been happening, what's a sharp and well deserved rebuke to the #neverTrump Republicans who would have allowed this violence to get worse

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1Y7V2fQKTU

[EnglishPete]

great talk

You must be logged in to read this quote.

pick one.

[EnglishPete]

Reports stating that most of the 230 arrested in the DC riot on Friday will be charged with Felony rioting by Federal Prosecutors. The penalty for is up to 25,000 dolar fine and up to 10 years in prison. One of Jeff Session's first jobs will be to ensure that these people receive substantial prison sentences. It's clear that the leadership of the left wing in the US has done nothing to discourage or disavow this behaviour and many people will feel that they can engage in this kind of behavior with little or no legal repercussions for themselves.

Of course there is a hardcore who will want to riot no matter what the potential consequences, but there will also be a larger group who will join in opportunistically if they think its relatively safe for them to do so. The prospect of spending several years in prison should be enough to discourage most of this latter group. This effect will work even better if a significant proportion of the 'hardcore' are not there to encourage them due to being in prison for the duration of Trump's presidency.

Let's hope Jeff Sessions is up to the job.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4144360/Anti-Trump-protesters-face-10-years-prison.html

[EnglishPete]

It wasn't obvious until after they came to power and in particular during the war that the nazis were just as bad as the communists, but by then it was too late. If it hadn't been for far left violence and the Weimar authorities failure to control it then World War Two and all its horrors could have been avoided.

No, chucklefu#*. it was really REALLY obvious to most non-cretins that Hitler was going to be as bad as he was. That is to most non-cretins who rightfully put RIGHT wing violence as the pre-eminent reason Hitler came to power.

I'll go back to the point I made earlier. Now of course we all know how bad things were for black African people under Apartheid. Bear that in mind whilst considering the case of the South Africa-Mozambique border in the 1980s. At that time you had a stream of illegal immigrants crossing from communist Mozambique to Apartheid South Africa to look for a better life.

Think about that for a second. Black people were willing to sneak through the barbed wire border fence, cross Kruger National Park which is inhabited by lions, elephants, hyenas and other dangerous as hell animals. They were willing to take those risks because they wanted a better life living as illegal immigrants in a country that was ruled by apartheid.

It was always obvious to most non-cretins how bad life would be for them living as black African people under Apartheid. And yet life for them under communism was significantly worse. That's how bad communism is.

[EnglishPete]

It wasn't obvious until after they came to power and in particular during the war that the nazis were just as bad as the communists, but by then it was too late. If it hadn't been for far left violence and the Weimar authorities failure to control it then World War Two and all its horrors could have been avoided.

No, chucklefu#*. it was really REALLY obvious to most non-cretins that Hitler was going to be as bad as he was. That is to most non-cretins who rightfully put RIGHT wing violence as the pre-eminent reason Hitler came to power.

I'll go back to the point I made earlier. Now of course we all know how bad things were for black African people under Apartheid. Bear that in mind whilst considering the case of the South Africa-Mozambique border in the 1980s. At that time you had a stream of illegal immigrants crossing from communist Mozambique to Apartheid South Africa to look for a better life.

Think about that for a second. Black people were willing to sneak through the barbed wire border fence, cross Kruger National Park which is inhabited by lions, elephants, hyenas and other dangerous as hell animals. They were willing to take those risks because they wanted a better life living as illegal immigrants in a country that was ruled by apartheid.

It was always obvious to most non-cretins how bad life would be for them living as black African people under Apartheid. And yet life for them under communism was significantly worse. That's how bad communism is.

Stupidity at it's finest.

[EnglishPete]

This weekend again was the proof that left-wing thinking is simply a form of mental illness. These are the most violent People on earth, they do the exact opposite of what they think they would stand for, simply unbelieveable how stupid they are. Wow.

[EnglishPete]

It wasn't obvious until after they came to power and in particular during the war that the nazis were just as bad as the communists, but by then it was too late. If it hadn't been for far left violence and the Weimar authorities failure to control it then World War Two and all its horrors could have been avoided.

No, chucklefu#*. it was really REALLY obvious to most non-cretins that Hitler was going to be as bad as he was. That is to most non-cretins who rightfully put RIGHT wing violence as the pre-eminent reason Hitler came to power.

I'll go back to the point I made earlier. Now of course we all know how bad things were for black African people under Apartheid. Bear that in mind whilst considering the case of the South Africa-Mozambique border in the 1980s. At that time you had a stream of illegal immigrants crossing from communist Mozambique to Apartheid South Africa to look for a better life.

Think about that for a second. Black people were willing to sneak through the barbed wire border fence, cross Kruger National Park which is inhabited by lions, elephants, hyenas and other dangerous as hell animals. They were willing to take those risks because they wanted a better life living as illegal immigrants in a country that was ruled by apartheid.

It was always obvious to most non-cretins how bad life would be for them living as black African people under Apartheid. And yet life for them under communism was significantly worse. That's how bad communism is.

Yeah, it's not like they were fleeing a civil war (one egged on the the apartheid government, incidentally) or anything.

Life in Mozambique got quite a lot better once the Communists won that civil war.

It was actually the communists who egged on the civil war (as in Angola) by being so vicious and repressive that it proved a rebellion. the government there was also supporting guerillas from Rhodesia and South Africa so unsurprisingly those countries supported the rebellion. And life didn't get that much better. I would also point out that 25 years after the war ended Mozambique is still one of the most poverty stricken holes in the world, you going to find excuses for that.

Lets put it this way. Imagine a world where the most powerful country in the world was a China with a right wing nationalist government who had conquered the UK and were ruling over it under a system of legal racial privilege where non-ethnic Chinese, including white British, were second class citizens. If I had the choice between living in that society and living in a communist dictatorship ruled by white British communists I would chose the former in a heartbeat.

[EnglishPete]

Millions of refugees have fled from Afghanistan to Pakistan, so clearly the best possible form of government is a corrupt dictatorship where terrorists are tolerated and the army controls much of the economy.

I don't know if you normally have problems with reading comprehension but "less awful" is not the same thing as "best possible".

[EnglishPete]

It wasn't obvious until after they came to power and in particular during the war that the nazis were just as bad as the communists, but by then it was too late. If it hadn't been for far left violence and the Weimar authorities failure to control it then World War Two and all its horrors could have been avoided.

No, chucklefu#*. it was really REALLY obvious to most non-cretins that Hitler was going to be as bad as he was. That is to most non-cretins who rightfully put RIGHT wing violence as the pre-eminent reason Hitler came to power.

I'll go back to the point I made earlier. Now of course we all know how bad things were for black African people under Apartheid. Bear that in mind whilst considering the case of the South Africa-Mozambique border in the 1980s. At that time you had a stream of illegal immigrants crossing from communist Mozambique to Apartheid South Africa to look for a better life.

Think about that for a second. Black people were willing to sneak through the barbed wire border fence, cross Kruger National Park which is inhabited by lions, elephants, hyenas and other dangerous as hell animals. They were willing to take those risks because they wanted a better life living as illegal immigrants in a country that was ruled by apartheid.

It was always obvious to most non-cretins how bad life would be for them living as black African people under Apartheid. And yet life for them under communism was significantly worse. That's how bad communism is.

Yeah, it's not like they were fleeing a civil war (one egged on the the apartheid government, incidentally) or anything.

Life in Mozambique got quite a lot better once the Communists won that civil war.

It was actually the communists who egged on the civil war (as in Angola) by being so vicious and repressive that it proved a rebellion. the government there was also supporting guerillas from Rhodesia and South Africa so unsurprisingly those countries supported the rebellion. And life didn't get that much better. I would also point out that 25 years after the war ended Mozambique is still one of the most poverty stricken holes in the world, you going to find excuses for that.

Lets put it this way. Imagine a world where the most powerful country in the world was a China with a right wing nationalist government who had conquered the UK and were ruling over it under a system of legal racial privilege where non-ethnic Chinese, including white British, were second class citizens. If I had the choice between living in that society and living in a communist dictatorship ruled by white British communists I would chose the former in a heartbeat.

Stupidity at its very finest.

[EnglishPete]

Violence is never the answer.

WWII.

It would be a good point, through this is more Communist in the late Weimar Republic than the Allies in WWII. Remind me about the great success of the Communist stopping Hitler from gaining power.

Well in that case reality must have a liberal bias, because the violence created by the German communist was major factor in Hitler gaining power.

This is the thing pathetic wannabe thugs like you fail to understand in your smug and ignorant self-righteousness. thug like you are part of the problem, the way you beat violent thugs like you and fascists mirror of you, which you pretend to oppose, are a state with a strong monopoly of force. The victors of WWI had ensured that the Weimar Republic didn't have that, and violent idiots like you ensured that the Right consolidated behind the best organised Right-Wing party.