Non Footy Chat Thread II

[Poupou Escobar]

Standing up to fascist thugs is not terrorism.

Then neither is standing up against communist thugs.

You've seen the videos. Both sides were there to fight and intimidate: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/08/charlottesville-attack-170813081045115.html

You are muddying the waters again.

Calling people you disagree with fascists to legitimise violence against them is dishonest and an attempt to intimidate. For political ends.

 

[Gronk]

Then neither is standing up against communist thugs.

You've seen the videos. Both sides were there to fight and intimidate: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/08/charlottesville-attack-170813081045115.html

Calling people you disagree with fascists to legitimise violence against them is dishonest and an attempt to intimidate. For political ends.

You are misinformed my friend. You need to look beyond your alt-right dark web forums and understand that the people of Charlottesville stood up to neo-nazis, rascists, white supremacists and KKK and told them they were not welcome. To suggest that their intentions were of a violent nature is ludicrous.

 

[Gary Gutful]

You are misinformed my friend. You need to look beyond your alt-right dark web forums and understand that the people of Charlottesville stood up to neo-nazis, rascists, white supremacists and KKK and told them they were not welcome. To suggest that their intentions were of a violent nature is ludicrous.

View attachment 16299 View attachment 16300

That's bullshit Gronk.

Why cant you just accept that some of them were violent? The videos are very clear that there was violence from both sides. You can do that and still maintain your view that white supremacists are complete f**kwits.

Pou is continually pointing out how narrow minded and hypocritical you are when all you have to do is concede that occasionally the alternative position he has put forward has merit. In most cases what he is suggesting is non controversial and doesn't actually mean that your own world view is wrong.

 

[Gronk]

That's bullshit Gronk.

Why cant you just accept that some of them were violent? The videos are very clear that there was violence from both sides. You can do that and still maintain your view that white supremacists are complete f**kwits.

Pou is continually pointing out how narrow minded and hypocritical you are when all you have to do is concede that occasionally the alternative position he has put forward has merit. In most cases what he is suggesting is non controversial and doesn't actually mean that your own world view is wrong.

I was challenging his statement that: "Both sides were there to fight and intimidate"

Clearly that is untrue.

Was there violence ? Yes, it was always going to happen at one of the "largest white supremacist events in recent US history". Shocking that it occurred, but if that rally was held in Sydney, I am sure that well minded people would also turn up to voice their disposal to the racists, neo-nazis, KKK who attended.

 

[Gary Gutful]

I was challenging his statement that: "Both sides were there to fight and intimidate"

Clearly that is untrue.

Was there violence ? Yes, it was always going to happen at one of the "largest white supremacist events in recent US history". Shocking that it occurred, but if that rally was held in Sydney, I am sure that well minded people would also turn up to voice their disposal to the racists, neo-nazis, KKK who attended.

So there was violence on both sides but both sides weren't there to fight and intimidate?

Do you even believe what you are saying?

 

[strider]

I was challenging his statement that: "Both sides were there to fight and intimidate"

Clearly that is untrue.

Was there violence ? Yes, it was always going to happen at one of the "largest white supremacist events in recent US history". Shocking that it occurred, but if that rally was held in Sydney, I am sure that well minded people would also turn up to voice their disposal to the racists, neo-nazis, KKK who attended.

But along with the well minded people there is always the rent-a-crowd element who are keen on a bit of intimidation

As gary said, admitting there are antagonists on both sides doesnt mean saying the f**kwits arent f**kwits - there are just more of them

 

[Gary Gutful]

Gronk might as well say "They started it".

 

[Gronk]

So there was violence on both sides but both sides weren't there to fight and intimidate?

Do you even believe what you are saying?

Gary.

Pou suggested that the public who stood on the footpaths to voice their disapproval of racism were there to fight and intimidate. That is an unacceptably broad statement based on the fact that there were mums and dads and grandparents and children lining the streets of Charlottesville sending a message that Nazis were not welcome in their city.

He also suggested that they were all communist thugs. Which is so ridiculous it's not even funny.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Gary.

Pou suggested that the public who stood on the footpaths to voice their disapproval of racism were there to fight and intimidate. That is an unacceptably broad statement based on the fact that there were mums and dads and grandparents and children lining the streets of Charlottesville sending a message that Nazis were not welcome in their city.

He also suggested that they were all communist thugs. Which is so ridiculous it's not even funny.

That's how you interpreted it because you are too busy pushing your own agendas.

If you disrupt a protest with your own protest I think that in itself is intimidation.

By the way I support what they are protesting but can concede that their methods contributed to what happened on that day.

It's not hard to be a little more open minded.

 

[Gronk]

That's how you interpreted it because you are too busy pushing your own agendas.

If you disrupt a protest with your own protest I think that in itself is intimidation.

By the way I support what they are protesting but can concede that their methods contributed to what happened on that day.

It's not hard to be a little more open minded.

And what is my agenda ? Spell it out for me.

 

[strider]

Gary.

Pou suggested that the public who stood on the footpaths to voice their disapproval of racism were there to fight and intimidate. That is an unacceptably broad statement based on the fact that there were mums and dads and grandparents and children lining the streets of Charlottesville sending a message that Nazis were not welcome in their city.

He also suggested that they were all communist thugs. Which is so ridiculous it's not even funny.

f**kwit nazis are mums and dads and grandparents too .... that doesn't excuse em

 

[Poupou Escobar]

You are misinformed my friend. You need to look beyond your alt-right dark web forums and understand that the people of Charlottesville stood up to neo-nazis, rascists, white supremacists and KKK and told them they were not welcome. To suggest that their intentions were of a violent nature is ludicrous.

View attachment 16299 View attachment 16300

The video I posted was from Al Jazeera, not f**king Storm Front. As you can see, the car was attacked with weapons as soon as it stopped. That means the people were holding weapons when they were attacked. Combatants.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

That's bullshit Gronk.

Why cant you just accept that some of them were violent? The videos are very clear that there was violence from both sides. You can do that and still maintain your view that white supremacists are complete f**kwits.

Pou is continually pointing out how narrow minded and hypocritical you are when all you have to do is concede that occasionally the alternative position he has put forward has merit. In most cases what he is suggesting is non controversial and doesn't actually mean that your own world view is wrong.

Gronk is a troll whose only tactic is to label others trolls.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Gary.

Pou suggested that the public who stood on the footpaths to voice their disapproval of racism were there to fight and intimidate. That is an unacceptably broad statement based on the fact that there were mums and dads and grandparents and children lining the streets of Charlottesville sending a message that Nazis were not welcome in their city.

He also suggested that they were all communist thugs. Which is so ridiculous it's not even funny.

I’m no more suggesting they were all Anarchist/Communist/Antifa thugs than you were suggesting the pro-free speech and pro-historical monument crowd were all Nazis and Klansmen.

 

[Gronk]

The video I posted was from Al Jazeera, not f**king Storm Front. As you can see, the car was attacked with weapons as soon as it stopped. That means the people were holding weapons when they were attacked. Combatants.

I never denied that there were merkins up for a fight when the Nazis arrived.

I was calling you out on you generalisation that "both sides were there to fight and intimidate" which is simply not true. It is clear as day that most people who lined the streets where in peaceful protest.

It is quite possible that some of the KKK merkins came in peace too, however I am unsure of the mindset of a neo-nazi KKK member TBH.

 

[Gronk]

Gronk is a troll whose only tactic is to label others trolls.

Calling you out on that too. In the 11 years that I have been a member of this forum, the only time(s) I have been pulled into line is for posting unsourced footy links and uncovered boobies. If you are offended then I suggest you report me.

If you think I am trolling right now - viz; deliberately attempting to disrupt, attack, offend or generally cause trouble then show me how.

Covered boobies, ner.

 

[Bazal]

Side note, "Nazi" has quickly become one of the most overused and meaningless words in the English language...

 

[Gronk]

Side note, "Nazi" has quickly become one of the most overused and meaningless words in the English language...

Yes I am sure that many people are called Nazis when they are actually something else. This guy from Charlottesville would be happy with it I reckon.

 

[strider]

Gronk is a troll whose only tactic is to label others trolls.

well you do like stirring the pot ffs

 

[84 Baby]

Why are you all still arguing? Or even talking FFS!