• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

On Deck: 2022

Recognizing the patterns of past violent escalation in current times is not misplaced.
It's a well established pattern that as fever pitch escalates among extremist groups, the ones who initiate such claims tend to be accusing the mirror.
Extremist groups exist on both sides. And they can both be violent. You leftists are not innocent here. #BLM/Antifa violent riots, but before then, in the 70s especially, there was a lot of violence from left-wing extremist groups like Weather Underground or Black Panthers/BLA.
Example:
weather-underground-explosion-ap700306088.jpg

However, that violence has been many orders of magnitude less than ...
Yes. Rwanda.
So that is quite a bit of hysterical doomposting.
In the Rwanda genocide, ~1/4-1/3 of the Tutsi population was killed.
Give me a fucking break!

We can all see it as MTG repeats it in front of their crowds.
MTG is non-binary now? Lmao.

Note that the liberals would as soon see people liberated from their ignorance,
Liberals are different than the so-called progressives and other far-left movements.

not their lives, through compulsory education
You mean reeducation camps?
rather than compulsory lead.
Tell that to such allies of your revolution as Che Guevara, who murdered many of his political opponents. Or those who killed people in the name of Black Panthers and Weather Underground.
 
Extremist groups exist on both sides
Extremist groups do exist on both sides. One side they exist in percentages to be negligible, and on the other side they exist in numbers sufficient to invade Congress and attempt to disrupt the peaceful transition of power.

On one side they're about common enough such that the FBI isn't really concerned about that at the moment and on the other side there is an active investigation against widespread support of such a group among members of Congress, and a previous president and their cabinet.

For some reason though, you want to pretend like the side that exists in such low numbers that every attempt to point them out includes people who haven't been active since the 80's is in fact common enough to stand Rwanda style in front of large crowds and claim that these oh-so-parsely populated crazies are more concerning than the throngs who are there using that vanishing minority to become exactly what they claim they hate.

Let's note that even the most extreme leftist suggestions around here generally involve a single execution and only that because there's nothing else that can be done with such a piece of toxic waste.
 
#BLM/Antifa violent riots
There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Derec, than are dreamt of in Fox News. As far as I can tell, all the looting and property destruction was done by opportunists.
but before then, in the 70s especially, there was a lot of violence from left-wing extremist groups like Weather Underground or Black Panthers/BLA.
Yes, there were some revolutionary terrorists back then. But they never accomplished very much.
 
Extremist groups do exist on both sides. One side they exist in percentages to be negligible, and on the other side they exist in numbers sufficient to invade Congress and attempt to disrupt the peaceful transition of power.
The rioters that invaded the Capitol were relatively small in number too. Far fewer than the numbers of 2020 rioters.
I am sure that, had Trump won in 2020, there would have been similar rioting to January 6th.

ABC12 said:
“What are you going to do if we don’t win [the 2020 presidential election]?”
[Former PBS lawyer Michael Beller responds: “Go to the White House and throw Molotov cocktails.”
PBS attorney resigns after saying Trump voters' children should face 're-education camps'

On one side they're about common enough such that the FBI isn't really concerned about that
One side is getting sweetheart deals for firebombing police vehicles and setting deadly arson you mean?

For some reason though, you want to pretend like the side that exists in such low numbers that every attempt to point them out includes people who haven't been active since the 80's
Your side loves to harp on things like the Tulsa Massacre of 1920. At least many of the people I mention are still alive (and often in positions of authority in academia). And of course, the 2020 riots were much more recent than 80s. And the #BLMers love to invoke cop killers like Joanna Chesimard as a role model though.

is in fact common enough to stand Rwanda style
Rwanda-style is not going to happen. At most we get a repeat of unrests from 1960s-80s. Or 1920s, if you prefer those.

Let's note that even the most extreme leftist suggestions around here generally involve a single execution and only that because there's nothing else that can be done with such a piece of toxic waste.
"Around here" perhaps. But not in the wider leftosphere.
 
There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Derec, than are dreamt of in Fox News. As far as I can tell, all the looting and property destruction was done by opportunists.
That is just a blatant attempt to dismiss the connection. Since 2014 there have been widespread riots linked with #BLM and Antifa.
In 2020 Montez Lee set a pawn shop on fire and killed somebody. During his federal trial, one of Garland's prosecutors (acting more like a defense attorney would) argued for leniency pointing specifically to the supposedly righteous cause of #BLM "protests" that were going on.
You can't dismiss what has been going on as mere opportunist violence. Sure, some of the looting for valuables has been opportunist, but violence like this is politically motivated:
atlanta-protest-mo_hpMain_20200529-213817_16x9_992.jpg


By the way, I do not even watch Fox. And surely, there are more things in Heaven and Earth, lpetrich, than are dreamt of at MSNBC or The Intercept.

Yes, there were some revolutionary terrorists back then. But they never accomplished very much.
Not for lack of trying. Kathy Boudin et al wanted to bomb a NCO dance at Fort Dix. Instead, the bomb went off while they were building it, probably saving many soldiers' lives.
 
The rioters that invaded the Capitol were relatively small in number too. Far fewer than the numbers of 2020 rioters.
I am sure that, had Trump won in 2020, there would have been similar rioting to January 6th.

This is either very disingenuous or else very stupid. Was there rioting similar to J6 when Trump won in 2016? Or when Bush won in 2000? How many Democratic Governors or Congressmen have actively supported sedition or insurrection?

No. There are no counterparts on the left TODAY comparable to the Oath Keepers, MTG, and other scumbags who commit insurrection. Times change; 50 years or 100 years ago the outlook might have been different. But this discussion is about TODAY.

The whine "Same-same" when the crimes of Trump-suckers and other Trump enablers are detailed exposes the whiner as useless and uninformed. Especially confused or stupid are the Trumpists and Trump enablers who reach back to the 1970's to find examples of leftists to compare with TODAY's Neo-Nazis, Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, etc. Times change.


Derec writes of "Your side." To be compared with "Derec's side"? Let's see:

Your side loves to harp on things like the Tulsa Massacre of 1920.

Apparently you're unaware that the Board has a Search function. It quickly disposes of this whine. Here are the two most recent mentions of "Tulsa":
(Neither seems like a "harping;" perhaps Derec can point to the "harping" posts if these aren't they.)

Oblivious to US History, former President Donald Trump suggests, on the Hugh Hewitt Show, that an indictment against him could lead to "problems in this country the likes of which perhaps we’ve never seen before."

Civil War, backlashes against Unions, Nat Turner [Slave] Revolt, Shay's Rebellion, Kent State, Harper's Ferry, Bleeding Kansas, Tulsa Race Riots...

...we've seen violence in this country before. Just not because of a orange painted baboon. January 6th was unprecedented not because people died.

Nat Turner's Slave Revolt and the Tulsa Massacre had opposite racial alignment, and opposite civil stance: Tulsans wanted to destroy black property, while Nat Turner wanted to regain possession of his own person.

Ergo Mr. Higgins's examples were not of the "Me Good, You Bad" ilk we see from the anti-rationalists. Given this, it might be amusing to hear how Derec defines "Your side."

The other recent post mentioning Tulsa was by Swammi myself. But it was NOT used as accusation against present-day insurrectionists. It was in a thread discussing how a new Civil War might play out. There is a real possibility that incidents similar to the Tulsa Massacre might play out concurrently in multiple cities. My intent was to give a possible model for massive violence in America. While sapient Americans realize that the larger threat TODAY comes from "the Right," note that the model is workable whether blacks take up arms against whites, or vice versa, or both.

Consider the Tulsa Massacre of 1921, where white lynch mobs operated with the help of city officials. Do you think such a thing cannot happen again?
. . .
But the Trumpist mobs will mostly target blacks and obvious "foreigners", e.g. Muslims. Not only will these victims be easy to identify — and overwhelmingly vote for "Bidenist Fascism" — but white Bidenists will offer less resistance if they are not personally targeted.
. . .
Prominent white liberals will get death threats, as well as FBI agents, etc. whose names Trump maliciously leaks to his soldiers. Anyone with Biden bumper-stickers or who is otherwise an obvious "liberal" will be in fear. But the majority of violence will be directed at blacks and certain immigrant groups. The Trumpists won't seek large-scale genocide; they'll be satisfied with the certainty of political hegemony. Don't forget that if ONLY whites could vote, the Trumpists would win every election in a landslide.

I HOPE I'm wrong about all this, but the danger is very real. Hatred, ignorance and lying have been common throughout history, but the amplification of hatred and lies by social media and malicious magnates like Rupert Murdoch is something new. The future will be very bleak even if civil war is averted.
 
I am sure that, had Trump won in 2020, there would have been similar rioting to January 6th
So what you're sure of is that:

•A democrat would hold a rally next to the capital
•they would encourage folks to show up armed
•they would prevent security from disarming them, or figure out ways to keep.the armed ones from needing to get past a security checkpoint to be nearby
•they would tell the crowd to march on the capital and fight like hell.

Because that is the bar, the goalpost for "similar to".

It's not moved.

It's been there all this time.

We can discuss other methodologies of assembling an armed crowd within range of the capital, but those methodologies are all fungible.

Given the fact that you lead with such a grossly idiotic claim, I can't imagine I'll find anything of worth deeper in. Sorry.
 
#BLM/Antifa violent riots
There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Derec, than are dreamt of in Fox News. As far as I can tell, all the looting and property destruction was done by opportunists.

Steve Mylett, the police chief in Bellevue, Washington, couldn’t believe what he was seeing, even after intelligence officers warned of social media posts calling for an attack.

On the afternoon of Sunday, May 31, a handful of demonstrators carrying signs gathered at a major intersection in the Seattle suburb. The crowd quickly grew to 40. Then, after two men got on cellphones, 300 more showed up, then 1,000 white, Black and brown.

“It was a tsunami of people, and they just started running,” Mylett said. “I didn’t hear George Floyd’s name once. I didn’t hear, ‘Police reform!’ They just scattered throughout the city. … They used tactics we’ve never seen before.”

Mylett said faux protesters, many dressed in black with hoodies, gloves and COVID-19 masks, ransacked shops and caused millions of dollars in losses. Some ran from one business to the next, trailed by vehicles that stopped outside high-end stores, loaded up, and moved on.

“It’s so unfortunate that peaceful protests got hijacked by criminal networks using them for cover," Mylett said. "How do you ignore that this tactic was being used from coast to coast, north to south?”
 
“They see me as a big threat, and I know that and I knew it when I got into this race. But they don’t realize that I think they came for the wrong one. They energized me,” Walker said. “They energized me, because I know how they really want to try to keep this seat.”

The anonymous woman said that defense sounded ridiculous.

“Sure, I was stunned, but I guess it also doesn’t shock me, that maybe there are just so many of us that he truly doesn’t remember,” she said. “But then again, if he really forgot about it, that says something, too.”

The woman, a registered Democrat whose years-long relationship with Walker continued after the abortion, told The Daily Beast that her chief concern with revealing her name was because she is the mother of one of Walker’s own children and she wanted to protect her family’s privacy as best she could while also coming forward with the truth. (Walker has publicly acknowledged the child as his own, and the woman proved she is the child’s mother and provided credible evidence of a long-term relationship with Walker.)

The Walker campaign declined to comment for this story.
 
Back
Top Bottom