The Tolerant Left at it again

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2019, 08:20 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Maybe they are protesting a civil war. You know. The one the clown holding the rally recently threatened us with.

Nah, it's the Anti-War Committee. They are definitely opposed to foreign policy IRT war. 
http://antiwarcommittee.org/about/

I think it was more a case of this:





No need letting a perfectly good lit torch go to waste

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2019, 08:23 PM)treee Wrote: Further into the article it says they've sent 14000 personnel since May, not including the recent SA authorization.

Perhaps, but we damn sure know it didn't include his recent pledge to pull Troops from the ME and stop "senseless" wars over there.

"Pro war" folks should have been rioting, but that's not their MO

[treee]

(10-11-2019, 08:30 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Perhaps, but we damn sure know it didn't include his recent pledge to pull Troops from the ME and stop "senseless" wars over there.

"Pro war" folks should have been rioting, but that's not their MO

Who is pro war? Arms manufacturers?

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2019, 08:45 PM)treee Wrote: Who is pro war? Arms manufacturers?

I've heard them described as folks in favor of occupation in the ME. That why I put the term in parentheses. 

[SunsetBengal]

(10-11-2019, 07:30 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: This is a terribly pathetic display by these people but by no means is this equivalent to Charlottesville. That cheapens the tragedy that occurred there.

So, if you agree that what happened last night was terrible, why qualify it with a caveat?

And, you're right, the two situations are kind of like an apples to oranges comparison.  Even though both situations involved political violence, they are in no way alike.  It was my mistake for lumping them together.

The Charlottesville scene was two groups that both knew in advance of a conflict, kind of like two rival gangs squaring off.  This situation last night was different, as it was simply citizens being attacked after attending an event.  Each situation is equally awful, with one ending in the loss of life, and the full effects of the other yet to be determined.  Both situations involve citizen's rights being stepped on, by other citizens.  Personally, I see a significant difference in the two events.  The first event, I would have not put myself into.  That was two groups that expected trouble from the other.  However, attending an event, I would expect to be able to leave safely.

What happened last night is no different than if 50K Christian mothers would have stood outside of an Ozzy Osbourn concert 40 years ago, and started beating concert goes across the heads with Bibles as they were exiting the event.  Even though some may not agree with the message of the show, those people still had a right to attend and exit peacefully.  

[treee]

(10-11-2019, 08:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I've heard them described as folks in favor of occupation in the ME. That why I put the term in parentheses. 

Well when you have bad actors like Russia trying to gain a foothold in the ME, you do generally want to project some power there. That's not pro war, that's common sense. 

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/46560/dulce-et-decorum-est

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2019, 08:55 PM)treee Wrote: Well when you have bad actors like Russia trying to gain a foothold in the ME, you do generally want to project some power there. That's not pro war, that's common sense. 

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/46560/dulce-et-decorum-est

I agree. That's kinda why I found it funny that you posted the article about us sending defense forces to SA as a defense for these Anti-War Committee folks. If trying to defend their presence was not your purpose and you agree with my assessment they were ignorant then I apologize for using the term "defense"

[BmorePat87]

(10-11-2019, 08:49 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: So, if you agree that what happened last night was terrible, why qualify it with a caveat?

You're the one who qualified it by saying it was equivalent to Charlottesville, I simply disagreed with your statement. 

Quote:And, you're right, the two situations are kind of like an apples to oranges comparison.  Even though both situations involved political violence, they are in no way alike.  It was my mistake for lumping them together.


The Charlottesville scene was two groups that both knew in advance of a conflict, kind of like two rival gangs squaring off.  This situation last night was different, as it was simply citizens being attacked after attending an event.  Each situation is equally awful, with one ending in the loss of life, and the full effects of the other yet to be determined.  Both situations involve citizen's rights being stepped on, by other citizens.  Personally, I see a significant difference in the two events.  The first event, I would have not put myself into.  That was two groups that expected trouble from the other.  However, attending an event, I would expect to be able to leave safely.

What happened last night is no different than if 50K Christian mothers would have stood outside of an Ozzy Osbourn concert 40 years ago, and started beating concert goes across the heads with Bibles as they were exiting the event.  Even though some may not agree with the message of the show, those people still had a right to attend and exit peacefully.  

I disagree with your seemingly inconsistent message here where you say a few times that they're nothing alike and then call them "equally awful". I think you understanding of Charlottesville is very misinformed. 

[Belsnickel]

I found this to be a pretty fair write up about the event: https://triblive.com/news/world/police-protests-clash-on-minneapolis-streets-outside-trump-rally/

Seems like fringe folks doing their thing and most people just exercising their rights.

[treee]

(10-11-2019, 09:05 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I agree. That's kinda why I found it funny that you posted the article about us sending defense forces to SA as a defense for these Anti-War Committee folks. If trying to defend their presence was not your purpose and you agree with my assessment they were ignorant then I apologize for using the term "defense"

I had just heard about the SA troops earlier today so when I saw your post about reducing ME presence I typed in SA Trump and posted the first link that seemed legit. Was meant to be informative more than making an argument for or against.

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2019, 09:22 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I found this to be a pretty fair write up about the event: https://triblive.com/news/world/police-protests-clash-on-minneapolis-streets-outside-trump-rally/

Seems like fringe folks doing their thing and most people just exercising their rights.

Very fair. Especially when they say this given videos of Trump supports being assaulted and spat on:

Quote:As some Trump supporters began to leave the arena before the president wrapped up, they were surrounded by protesters. Although no physical skirmishes broke out, at least one Trump supporter’s hat was snatched of his head, and others needed a police escort.

But they describe Trump folks like this:

Quote:Police employed pepper spray in an effort to quell one disturbance, and members of a pro-Trump militia-style group a few blocks away were confronted by police as they left their hotel.

[CJD]

(10-11-2019, 09:33 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Very fair. Especially when they say this given videos of Trump supports being assaulted and spat on:


But they describe Trump folks like this:

They call themselves the Oath Keepers. They go to Trump events to protect attendees from things like what happened in this scenario. They were briefly detained because some members had guns.

Is Pro Trump Militia style group an inaccurate description of them?

[SunsetBengal]

(10-11-2019, 09:19 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: You're the one who qualified it by saying it was equivalent to Charlottesville, I simply disagreed with your statement. 




I disagree with your seemingly inconsistent message here where you say a few times that they're nothing alike and then call them "equally awful". I think you understanding of Charlottesville is very misinformed. 

So, two different events can't be dissimilar, yet equally awful?

A person gets hit by a train = awful, another person gets struck by lightning = awful,  yet both completely different scenarios.

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2019, 09:42 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: They call themselves the Oath Keepers. They go to Trump events to protect attendees from things like what happened in this scenario. They were briefly detained because some members had guns.

Is Pro Trump Militia style group an inaccurate description of them?

Yep, they have nothing to do with Military action. 

Is saying there was no violence by the protesters accurate? 

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2019, 09:19 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: You're the one who qualified it by saying it was equivalent to Charlottesville, I simply disagreed with your statement. 




I disagree with your seemingly inconsistent message here where you say a few times that they're nothing alike and then call them "equally awful". I think you understanding of Charlottesville is very misinformed. 

You did more than "disagree" you called it pathetic and questioned his ability to be a mod because he had a different POV.

The actions by the fringe actors in each incidence are similar.  WTS, I'm sure there were good people on both sides. 

[BmorePat87]

(10-11-2019, 09:51 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You did more than "disagree" you called it pathetic and questioned his ability to be a mod because he had a different POV.

The actions by the fringe actors in each incidence are similar.  WTS, I'm sure there were good people on both sides. 

I actually made that comment in response to his dishonest claim that I was saying that violence is ok if it does not end in murder. 

Speaking of dishonesty...

[BmorePat87]

(10-11-2019, 09:44 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: So, two different events can't be dissimilar, yet equally awful?

A person gets hit by a train = awful, another person gets struck by lightning = awful,  yet both completely different scenarios.

A fatality is not equally as awful as one injury no matter how many times you repeat it. I'm not really interested in repeating that. 

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2019, 10:00 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I actually made that comment in response to his dishonest claim that I was saying that violence is ok if it does not end in murder. 

Speaking of dishonesty...

Nah, we both know what post I was referring to, but magically your post and my response to it have been deleted. 

WTS, not important. I think the bigger point is a correlation to Charlottesville and Minnesota can be made and that was Sunset's assertion in his OP. 

[BmorePat87]

(10-11-2019, 10:05 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Nah, we both know what post I was referring to, but magically your post and my response to it have been deleted. 

WTS, no important. I think the bigger point is a correlation to Charlottesville and Minnesota can be made and that was Sunset's assertion in his OP. 

I'm not denying that I posted it and then deleted it because the post was not becoming of me. I mean, I literally acknowledged that I said that... lol?

I am calling you dishonest for claiming that my comments were because he had a different point of view. They were because he said "Ok, so then political violence is fine, so long as no one runs a car into a crowd, gotcha. "

[NATI BENGALS]

Its about time. Im just glad some people are finally able to put 2 and 2 together and see the similarities between a trump rally and a white supremacist rally.