Trump Declares AntiFA a Terrorist Organization. - Page 16 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15104864
Pants-of-dog wrote:@maz

Do those videos have an argument? Did you watch them?


Yes. The argument is that these protestors which appear to be a mix of antifa and BLM, are not peaceful. They attack innocent people in order and use violence for political purposes. If protesters are going to block traffic in order, and in most cases, attempt to attack a driver in their car, the driver appears to be well within their right to plow through the crowd in order to get to safety.
#15104894
It doesn't surprise me that you won't address the two instances of protesters attack cars and then in one instance, the driver had a gun pulled on them, and in the other, the driver was actually shot by the protesters. You've been condoning left wing violence since Charlottesville.
#15105139
Yes I was directing comments at you.



It is a shame that we don't have any elected officials to to make it illegal to shut down streets and highway as it is obviously both a danger to protesters and drivers alike. I guess they really don't care about people's lives at all except when they catch coronavirus or are killed by a white man.

#15105141
maz wrote:It is a shame that we don't have any elected officials to to make it illegal to shut down streets and highway


Do you think the state legislature should introduce a new law, making highway protesting illegal? Perhaps an executive order from Trump declaring all highways and roads the rightful through-ways for automobiles, where protesting is strictly forbidden.

Is this what you want Maz?

Or is it just a ruse for what you rally want.
#15105143
Donna wrote:Do you think the state legislature should introduce a new law, making highway protesting illegal? Perhaps an executive order from Trump declaring all highways and roads the rightful through-ways for automobiles, where protesting is strictly forbidden.

Is this what you want Maz?

Or is it just a ruse for what you rally want.


Like with masks during an epidemic, safety should be a concern, to protect motorists and protestors alike. Or is your concern a ruse for what you really want?
#15105164
Donna wrote:My concern for what?


Your concern for protestors. I figure nothing will come of this particular incident in the Liberal media; the motorist is male but non-white, while the protestors are female but white. Sickening....
#15105178
annatar1914 wrote:Your concern for protestors. I figure nothing will come of this particular incident in the Liberal media; the motorist is male but non-white, while the protestors are female but white. Sickening....


I'd say the media is simply having trouble keeping up with the amount of people trying to run down protesters.
#15105244
Donna wrote:I'd say the media is simply having trouble keeping up with the amount of people trying to run down protesters.


As politically correct as American culture has become, the racial and sexual politics is a consideration every time the media decides to cover-or not cover-a particular story. I don't think you'll see this story of a black male motorist running over two white female protestors leading the front page, and it'll be down the memory hole in about a week I figure, or less.
#15105250
annatar1914 wrote:As politically correct as American culture has become, the racial and sexual politics is a consideration every time the media decides to cover-or not cover-a particular story.

I don't think you'll see this story of a black male motorist running over two white female protestors leading the front page, and it'll be down the memory hole in about a week I figure, or less.


There is no doubt that such an act is not a desirable one and the doer should bear whatever consequences as written in a particular law.

However, many would find a (supposedly) privileged group of people doing it on their opponents more deplorable. They would expect that the ones already having privilege (especially unfair privilege) would know that they are already in a superior position and do not have to resort to this.
#15105253
Patrickov wrote:There is no doubt that such an act is not a desirable one and the doer should bear whatever consequences as written in a particular law.

However, many would find a (supposedly) privileged group of people doing it on their opponents more deplorable. They would expect that the ones already having privilege (especially unfair privilege) would know that they are already in a superior position and do not have to resort to this.


Problem is, in a hyper-individualistic society like America has increasingly become, personal responsibility for individual wrongdoing is vigorously denied and vehemently fought against, it's far easier to blame groups as a whole (even one's own group if need be) in order to avoid moral and ethical guilt. And I said ''guilt'', because today's America has very little of that or even public Shame (which is a different but overlapping concept in relation to guilt, remorse is not repentance after all...)
#15105260
annatar1914 wrote:Problem is, in a hyper-individualistic society like America has increasingly become, personal responsibility for individual wrongdoing is vigorously denied and vehemently fought against, it's far easier to blame groups as a whole (even one's own group if need be) in order to avoid moral and ethical guilt.


It is hard to say what's right and wrong in this phenomenon, considering that a lot of groups have power figures who constantly hijack members' opinion in their favour. Sometimes the group in concern is in effect as guilty as the (powerful) individual who committed the said wrongdoing.
#15105262
Patrickov wrote:It is hard to say what's right and wrong in this phenomenon, considering that a lot of groups have power figures who constantly hijack members' opinion in their favour. Sometimes the group in concern is in effect as guilty as the (powerful) individual who committed the said wrongdoing.


This is true also to an extent. But, responsibility is something that has to be determined in any case, and few of us are so objective and just when it concerns us that we can render an objective and fully just accounting of our own actions in all situations. This requires both self-reflection and also higher impartial and objective authority over us.
#15105264
annatar1914 wrote:This is true also to an extent. But, responsibility is something that has to be determined in any case, and few of us are so objective and just when it concerns us that we can render an objective and fully just accounting of our own actions in all situations. This requires both self-reflection and also higher impartial and objective authority over us.


That, and also the fact that "bystanders see things more clearly / objectively" (yet another old Chinese teaching).
#15105549
skinster wrote:No justice, no peace. 8)

No peace, no investment. No investment, no jobs. Basically, that's the long-range outcome of riots. It ruins the communities that tolerate them.

skinster wrote:Racist rightwingers learning about protest tactics makes them turn into babies. :lol:

When protests are about cops killing black people and disproportionately arresting them, it's kind of odd that the tactics of CHOP "security" ended up among other things leading to a young black man getting shot by the non-police "security" forces of CHOP, or that a black man was arrested for vehicular assault for running over two white women, killing one of them.

maz wrote:Here is video of a working class black man trying to get to work when he was blocked by idiots who want to complain irrationally to him about white privilege or something.

There is no end to the irony: white people protesting that black lives matter preventing a black man from going to work. It's really amazing to me.

maz wrote:It is a shame that we don't have any elected officials to to make it illegal to shut down streets and highway as it is obviously both a danger to protesters and drivers alike.

It's already illegal to even be a pedestrian on a freeway. On roads, assembling is lawful with a permit and notice and comment to the affected property owners and the public at large. Parades are an example.

Donna wrote:Do you think the state legislature should introduce a new law, making highway protesting illegal?

It's already illegal, and frankly dangerous and stupid too.

Donna wrote:Perhaps an executive order from Trump declaring all highways and roads the rightful through-ways for automobiles, where protesting is strictly forbidden.

Trump should withhold federal highway funds to states and municipalities that allow unlawful assemblies on interstate highways.

annatar1914 wrote:As politically correct as American culture has become, the racial and sexual politics is a consideration every time the media decides to cover-or not cover-a particular story. I don't think you'll see this story of a black male motorist running over two white female protestors leading the front page, and it'll be down the memory hole in about a week I figure, or less.

I wonder if they will still put the kid up on trial. The government of Seattle has clearly failed in their duty to uphold the law, and the proximate cause of the accident was allowing rioters to shut down an interstate highway.

SpecialOlympian wrote:Hey maz how much nazi cum is in your ass right now?

What do you think of a black guy being arrested and denied bail for running over white female BLM protesters? Even when liberals are demonstrating on behalf of black people, they still seem to end up putting black people in jail. White liberals are very dangerous to black people, wouldn't you agree?
#15105551
blackjack21 wrote:

I wonder if they will still put the kid up on trial. The government of Seattle has clearly failed in their duty to uphold the law, and the proximate cause of the accident was allowing rioters to shut down an interstate highway.


I wonder that too. It's going to be a (needlessly) difficult decision given the contradictory ideological logjam it would present to any local Liberal politician; who's more important in their overall scheme of things?
  • 1
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
First 2020 Debate Thread

We shall see. A little more than a month of waiti[…]

To correlate skin color with how a person votes s[…]

What is Fascism

@Julian658 is once again trying to take this thr[…]

CDC survivability numbers (age 0-19: 99.997%, 20-[…]