Stop calling Antifa fascists...

a reply to: introvert

Now, this is just wonderful. Labeling a foreign member of ATS, as bias and partisan. What? That usual BS does not work on me, so better get some facts instead.

People who ATTACK others CANNOT own a gun. Violent people CANNOT own a gun. It's pretty simple How is it that I know more about your constitution than yourself?

And since we've seen Antifa members acting all violent time and time again, how can they own a gun? More important question is, why do you want them to have guns? Are you aware of what would happen, if you give guns to a bunch of confused, brainwashed children?

Jesus.

a reply to: introvert

Unless you advocate taking people's rights without due process. In that case, that would be fascist.

And that's just the way they roll. Interesting, I didn't think this would be so easy.

#TooEasy

a reply to: introvert

Yup. He openly advocates for someone who has not been found unfit to be denied their 2nd amendment right. But this is par for the course with Neo. He often advocates for constitutional rights, unless he doesn't like them. Then all bets are off.

Still making snip up i see.

Anyone that disagrees with ANTIFA is a 'fascist'.

When they openly run around with banners like this.



And this.



Seeing them run around playing GI JOE.

Would give any SANE,RATIONAL person pause.

a reply to: Nikola014

Now, this is just wonderful. Labeling a foreign member of ATS, as bias and partisan. What? That usual BS does not work on me, so better get some facts instead.

I know you are not from the US and my statement still stands. Are you implying you cant be bias or partisan because you do not live in the US?



You don't make sense.

People who ATTACK others CANNOT own a gun. Violent people CANNOT own a gun. It's pretty simple How is it that I know more about your constitution than yourself?

People that have been convicted of certain crimes cannot own a firearm. Get it straight. Obviously, you don't know much about our laws if I have to clarify that for you.

And since we've seen Antifa members acting all violent time and time again, how can they own a gun?

Because if they have not been convicted of certain crimes, they still have that right.

You don't get to take away people's rights just because of what you see on TV or the internet.

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: introvert

Unless you advocate taking people's rights without due process. In that case, that would be fascist.

And that's just the way they roll. Interesting, I didn't think this would be so easy.

#TooEasy

Surprisingly easy.

Quite concerning on how they just want people's rights to be taken away without due process.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: introvert

Yup. He openly advocates for someone who has not been found unfit to be denied their 2nd amendment right. But this is par for the course with Neo. He often advocates for constitutional rights, unless he doesn't like them. Then all bets are off.

Still making snip up i see.

Anyone that disagrees with ANTIFA is a 'fascist'.

When they openly run around with banners like this.

And this.

Seeing them run around playing GI JOE.

Would give any SANE,RATIONAL person pause.

Had to do a double take on those pics. Thought you posted pics of ISIS!

a reply to: neo96

Oh no! Not banners!

The humanity!

My point stands. They have rights, just as you do.

To deny them those rights without due process is wrong and unconstitutional.

a reply to: introvert

They don't have ANY rights to arm themselves to start a war in this country, and try to replace FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT agencies.

That's the people that deal with 'nazis' and has been since the days of J Edgar.

Mob justice has no place in this country.

And if you want to talk about constitutional RIGHTS.

What about the 'fascists' RIGHTS to due process, and THEIR crimes be proven in courts of LAW.

a reply to: introvert

And you're absolutely on spot pointing that out.

Kinda funny to see them coming up with Intifada banners now, "harmlessly" trying to sway the court of public opinion again, adding further proof to this fascist method by definition: exclusion.

a reply to: neo96

They don't have ANY rights to arm themselves to start a war in this country, and try to replace FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT agencies.

Individuals have the right to arm themselves. If there is reason to think they are going to use that right to start a war, the authorities will take care of it.

And if you want to talk about constitutional RIGHTS. What about the 'fascists' RIGHTS to due process, and THEIR crimes be proven in courts of LAW.

They have rights right along with the rest of us. No one has claimed they do not.

a reply to: introvert

They have rights right along with the rest of us. No one has claimed they do not.

Except when it comes to them 'nazis'.

They have no RIGHTS to speech or assemble, or their days in courts of law in front of juries of their peers, and their 'crimes' proven beyond ALL reasonable doubt.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: introvert

They have rights right along with the rest of us. No one has claimed they do not.

Except when it comes to them 'nazis'.

They have no RIGHTS to speech or assemble, or their days in courts of law in front of juries of their peers, and their 'crimes' proven beyond ALL reasonable doubt.

Give me one example where a person was charged with a crime and found guilty without their day in court.

a reply to: neo96

They have no RIGHTS to speech or assemble, or their days in courts of law in front of juries of their peers, and their 'crimes' proven beyond ALL reasonable doubt.

Did Introvert make that claim somewhere? Genuine question, because if they did then I missed it. If so, then I would strenuously disagree with that position.

If not, it's a strawman deflection, and it's a deflection coming from the person who sees no problem not allowing some folks to walk around armed because they scare him but doesn't see any issue allowing other folks who exhibit the same behaviors to walk around armed.

Curious.

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: introvert

Yup. He openly advocates for someone who has not been found unfit to be denied their 2nd amendment right. But this is par for the course with Neo. He often advocates for constitutional rights, unless he doesn't like them. Then all bets are off.

Still making snip up i see.

Anyone that disagrees with ANTIFA is a 'fascist'.

When they openly run around with banners like this.

And this.

Seeing them run around playing GI JOE.

Would give any SANE,RATIONAL person pause.

Had to do a double take on those pics. Thought you posted pics of ISIS!

I had to laugh on the first photo. You see the guy in the middle that's in the spider man mask. I'm guessing he didn't get the memo on the black thing or mom wouldn't buy him a new mask because she just bought that one. Lol

a reply to: introvert

No one has claimed they do not.

To break a rightwingers lance: the Antifa trys to do that all the time, messing up neo-nazi parades while refusing to tolerate intolerance. Which boils down to essentially deny them their right of free (hate-) speech.
Just like the strive for socialism and equality means to deny free capitalist necrocons the right to pillage and plunder whatever they desire. Free markets aint free either, we ought to know that by now as well.

None of all that fits the definition of fascism though, but I enjoy the hysteric hyperbole in all that. I'd like to know how old people in this thread are, this alleged clash of cultures is probably just history repeating itself in another clash of generations.

*said Mr Gen X*

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: introvert

They have rights right along with the rest of us. No one has claimed they do not.

Except when it comes to them 'nazis'.

They have no RIGHTS to speech or assemble, or their days in courts of law in front of juries of their peers, and their 'crimes' proven beyond ALL reasonable doubt.

Give me one example where a person was charged with a crime and found guilty without their day in court.

The existence of antifa is the example.

They already tried, and convicted them evil nazis and formed a posse to go lynch the evil doers.

a reply to: PublicOpinion

I don't think they are denying their right to free speech. The 1st amendment is a control on the government. Unfortunately, free speech means that others can use their right to shout you down.

Certainly not very good thing to do in my opinion, but rights are rights.

originally posted by: intrptr

Whoops looks like I stepped me in another race baiting hate monger thread.

Bails, pulls rip cord.

Edit: By the away, Republic is a lost idea, whats supplanted it is neither Representative of the 'Public' nor democratic.

In other words:

Whoops looks like my argument ran out of steam and its time to bail

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: introvert

They have rights right along with the rest of us. No one has claimed they do not.

Except when it comes to them 'nazis'.

They have no RIGHTS to speech or assemble, or their days in courts of law in front of juries of their peers, and their 'crimes' proven beyond ALL reasonable doubt.

Give me one example where a person was charged with a crime and found guilty without their day in court.

The existence of antifa is the example.

They already tried, and convicted them evil nazis and formed a posse to go lynch the evil doers.

So you just made that up then. You do not have an example of what you claim.

Ok, Neo. I'll leave you be now.

There is only so much I can take of you in one sitting.

I could care less what label is put on Antifa. All I know is they're a hate group plain and simple. Just like the KKK and BLM. Any group who uses violence in an attempt to silence their opposition fits the description.