Protests, vandals and the broad brush of the dishonest right wing

[Yarddog]

SF Chron. Sat. Feb. 18:

"UC Berkeley police have released 21 photos of people suspected of committing “serious acts of violence and vandalism” during a protest this month that shut down the scheduled talk by Milo Yiannopoulos at the student union.

"On Feb. 1, vandals infiltrated the protest against the appearance of the right-wing provocateur, breaking windows and setting police equipment on fire. They caused $100,000 in damage on campus, university officials said. About half a dozen injuries were reported.

"Although many of the suspects are masked, several faces are visible in the photos released."

Once again the facts prove those self defined conservatives and haters of all things liberal blamed liberals, progressives and Democrats for the violence on Campus. Without lies and distortions these robble-rousers would have nothing to offer on this and similar events; without a doubt the fools will respond below with the claim that the Chron. is not credible, they've been told all news sources are lies and truth reside solely in the words of trump, limbaugh, hannity and Alt. Right agent provocateurs.

Yes the Chronicle is a credible source of Bird Cage lining though they have reduced the physical size of the paper itself in the last several years, I guess to combat global warming.

Nice deflection though. It's amazing the spin the left is trying to put on this now to deny their violent tendencies. You had that school teacher out there screaming that Milo needed to be silenced at all costs, you had a girl pepper sprayed in the face for speaking. If the berkeley protestors were infiltrated, it was just by more radical left wing anarchists.

 

[MarathonMike]

Do you condemn the actions of the mob that shutdown Milo's appearance at UC Berkeley? Yes or No? Do you believe that the mob is NOT affiliated with Liberals in any way or NOT funded by powerful Liberals? Yes or No? Let's see if you are capable of responding with two simple clear responses either Yes or No.

Simple yes or no questions are the meat in which lawyers obfuscate the truth. I won't play that game.

A peaceful protest is not a mob, and to define any large group at CAL as a mob of liberals is ignorance on steroids (or a comment by a brainwashed person). CAL, as is much of the Bay Area is diverse, no singular political attribute can be attached to the thousands of students and alums who attended the U.

liberals, progressives and conservatives abhor hate speech; a protest is an exercise of free speech and free expression. CAL did not cancel the speech, Campus and Berkeley Police did, when violence became a concern and the authorities felt the need to protect the protesters, the police and property.

Your claim that "powerful Liberals" may have funded the protest is foolish. If anything 'funded' the protest it was the Republican Students who invited a known agent provocateur to speak, and word of mouth advertised the protest. No pre-printed signs were in evidence, and no large banners proclaimed a desire for censor.

I made no claims whatsoever. I asked you two very clear questions. How does asking clear direct questions obfuscate the truth? I appreciate that you did not respond with a string epithets, but you also did not answer the questions.

 

[theHawk]

What is the argument here ?

That the vandals were not leftists ?

That only a few committed violence ?

The arguement is that the OP is trying to absolve the entire left of wrongdoing. He's unwilling to see the obvious truth that the much of the left are a bunch of fascist assholes that hate freedom of speech and are perfectly willing to show up to any rightwing event with the intentions of fully shutting it down. They are very open about their intentions of banning and preventing "hate speech", which they conveniently get to define.

 

[theHawk]

Do you condemn the actions of the mob that shutdown Milo's appearance at UC Berkeley? Yes or No? Do you believe that the mob is NOT affiliated with Liberals in any way or NOT funded by powerful Liberals? Yes or No? Let's see if you are capable of responding with two simple clear responses either Yes or No.

Simple yes or no questions are the meat in which lawyers obfuscate the truth. I won't play that game.

A peaceful protest is not a mob, and to define any large group at CAL as a mob of liberals is ignorance on steroids (or a comment by a brainwashed person). CAL, as is much of the Bay Area is diverse, no singular political attribute can be attached to the thousands of students and alums who attended the U.

liberals, progressives and conservatives abhor hate speech; a protest is an exercise of free speech and free expression. CAL did not cancel the speech, Campus and Berkeley Police did, when violence became a concern and the authorities felt the need to protect the protesters, the police and property.

Your claim that "powerful Liberals" may have funded the protest is foolish. If anything 'funded' the protest it was the Republican Students who invited a known agent provocateur to speak, and word of mouth advertised the protest. No pre-printed signs were in evidence, and no large banners proclaimed a desire for censor.

I made no claims whatsoever. I asked you two very clear questions. How does asking clear direct questions obfuscate the truth? I appreciate that you did not respond with a string epithets, but you also did not answer the questions.

A progressive subvert be honest? That will be the day.

 

[Godboy]

SF Chron. Sat. Feb. 18:

"UC Berkeley police have released 21 photos of people suspected of committing “serious acts of violence and vandalism” during a protest this month that shut down the scheduled talk by Milo Yiannopoulos at the student union.

"On Feb. 1, vandals infiltrated the protest against the appearance of the right-wing provocateur, breaking windows and setting police equipment on fire. They caused $100,000 in damage on campus, university officials said. About half a dozen injuries were reported.

"Although many of the suspects are masked, several faces are visible in the photos released."

Once again the facts prove those self defined conservatives and haters of all things liberal blamed liberals, progressives and Democrats for the violence on Campus. Without lies and distortions these robble-rousers would have nothing to offer on this and similar events; without a doubt the fools will respond below with the claim that the Chron. is not credible, they've been told all news sources are lies and truth reside solely in the words of trump, limbaugh, hannity and Alt. Right agent provocateurs.

Uhuh, now explain why vandals ONLY "infiltrate" democrat protests? It doesnt happen at republican protests, does it. The fact is, democrats think its ok to attack someone after theyve determined they are in the KKK, based solely on the Trump hat they wear. Democrats are violent. Every protest, every counter protest, theres always violence with you fucking people.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Do you condemn the actions of the mob that shutdown Milo's appearance at UC Berkeley? Yes or No? Do you believe that the mob is NOT affiliated with Liberals in any way or NOT funded by powerful Liberals? Yes or No? Let's see if you are capable of responding with two simple clear responses either Yes or No.

Simple yes or no questions are the meat in which lawyers obfuscate the truth. I won't play that game.

A peaceful protest is not a mob, and to define any large group at CAL as a mob of liberals is ignorance on steroids (or a comment by a brainwashed person). CAL, as is much of the Bay Area is diverse, no singular political attribute can be attached to the thousands of students and alums who attended the U.

liberals, progressives and conservatives abhor hate speech; a protest is an exercise of free speech and free expression. CAL did not cancel the speech, Campus and Berkeley Police did, when violence became a concern and the authorities felt the need to protect the protesters, the police and property.

Your claim that "powerful Liberals" may have funded the protest is foolish. If anything 'funded' the protest it was the Republican Students who invited a known agent provocateur to speak, and word of mouth advertised the protest. No pre-printed signs were in evidence, and no large banners proclaimed a desire for censor.

I made no claims whatsoever. I asked you two very clear questions. How does asking clear direct questions obfuscate the truth? I appreciate that you did not respond with a string epithets, but you also did not answer the questions.

I stated why: "Simple yes or no questions are the meat in which lawyers obfuscate the truth. I won't play that game."

I condemn the violence, but not the protesters - they are different demographics, not a singular "mob".

The protest was against hate speech, your question presupposes that only liberals engaged in protesting. That's not a reasoned conclusion.

A better question is this: Why did the Republican Students at CAL invite this specific Speaker? Did all of the R's have the same agenda? Or was there a hidden one which played out? Food for thought.

 

[Wry Catcher]

SF Chron. Sat. Feb. 18:

"UC Berkeley police have released 21 photos of people suspected of committing “serious acts of violence and vandalism” during a protest this month that shut down the scheduled talk by Milo Yiannopoulos at the student union.

"On Feb. 1, vandals infiltrated the protest against the appearance of the right-wing provocateur, breaking windows and setting police equipment on fire. They caused $100,000 in damage on campus, university officials said. About half a dozen injuries were reported.

"Although many of the suspects are masked, several faces are visible in the photos released."

Once again the facts prove those self defined conservatives and haters of all things liberal blamed liberals, progressives and Democrats for the violence on Campus. Without lies and distortions these robble-rousers would have nothing to offer on this and similar events; without a doubt the fools will respond below with the claim that the Chron. is not credible, they've been told all news sources are lies and truth reside solely in the words of trump, limbaugh, hannity and Alt. Right agent provocateurs.

Uhuh, now explain why vandals ONLY "infiltrate" democrat protests? It doesnt happen at republican protests, does it. The fact is, democrats think its ok to attack someone after theyve determined they are in the KKK, based solely on the Trump hat they wear. Democrats are violent. Every protest, every counter protest, theres always violence with you fucking people.

Don't put words on the page I didn't write. Your question, "now explain why vandals ONLY "infiltrate" democrat protests" makes the unmistakable inference that is something I posted, and it is not true.

We are speaking in terms of one incident, see the OP for reference. The fact is not all Democrats think and act in the same way, to brand millions as all the same does not make your case. And, calling all Democrats ("you fucking people") while hiding behind your keyboard is both cowardly, stupid and violent, in terms of fighting words.

 

[Godboy]

Do you condemn the actions of the mob that shutdown Milo's appearance at UC Berkeley? Yes or No? Do you believe that the mob is NOT affiliated with Liberals in any way or NOT funded by powerful Liberals? Yes or No? Let's see if you are capable of responding with two simple clear responses either Yes or No.

Simple yes or no questions are the meat in which lawyers obfuscate the truth. I won't play that game.

A peaceful protest is not a mob, and to define any large group at CAL as a mob of liberals is ignorance on steroids (or a comment by a brainwashed person). CAL, as is much of the Bay Area is diverse, no singular political attribute can be attached to the thousands of students and alums who attended the U.

liberals, progressives and conservatives abhor hate speech; a protest is an exercise of free speech and free expression. CAL did not cancel the speech, Campus and Berkeley Police did, when violence became a concern and the authorities felt the need to protect the protesters, the police and property.

Your claim that "powerful Liberals" may have funded the protest is foolish. If anything 'funded' the protest it was the Republican Students who invited a known agent provocateur to speak, and word of mouth advertised the protest. No pre-printed signs were in evidence, and no large banners proclaimed a desire for censor.

I made no claims whatsoever. I asked you two very clear questions. How does asking clear direct questions obfuscate the truth? I appreciate that you did not respond with a string epithets, but you also did not answer the questions.

I stated why: "Simple yes or no questions are the meat in which lawyers obfuscate the truth. I won't play that game."

I condemn the violence, but not the protesters - they are different demographics, not a singular "mob".

The protest was against hate speech, your question presupposes that only liberals engaged in protesting. That's not a reasoned conclusion.

A better question is this: Why did the Republican Students at CAL invite this specific Speaker? Did all of the R's have the same agenda? Or was there a hidden one which played out? Food for thought.

Democrat moderates feed the extremists their hate. Youre the ones convincing people that Trump supporters are white supremacists. You all share responsibility for your violence.

 

[Godboy]

SF Chron. Sat. Feb. 18:

"UC Berkeley police have released 21 photos of people suspected of committing “serious acts of violence and vandalism” during a protest this month that shut down the scheduled talk by Milo Yiannopoulos at the student union.

"On Feb. 1, vandals infiltrated the protest against the appearance of the right-wing provocateur, breaking windows and setting police equipment on fire. They caused $100,000 in damage on campus, university officials said. About half a dozen injuries were reported.

"Although many of the suspects are masked, several faces are visible in the photos released."

Once again the facts prove those self defined conservatives and haters of all things liberal blamed liberals, progressives and Democrats for the violence on Campus. Without lies and distortions these robble-rousers would have nothing to offer on this and similar events; without a doubt the fools will respond below with the claim that the Chron. is not credible, they've been told all news sources are lies and truth reside solely in the words of trump, limbaugh, hannity and Alt. Right agent provocateurs.

Uhuh, now explain why vandals ONLY "infiltrate" democrat protests? It doesnt happen at republican protests, does it. The fact is, democrats think its ok to attack someone after theyve determined they are in the KKK, based solely on the Trump hat they wear. Democrats are violent. Every protest, every counter protest, theres always violence with you fucking people.

Don't put words on the page I didn't write. Your question, "now explain why vandals ONLY "infiltrate" democrat protests" makes the unmistakable inference that is something I posted, and it is not true.

We are speaking in terms of one incident, see the OP for reference. The fact is not all Democrats think and act in the same way, to brand millions as all the same does not make your case. And, calling all Democrats ("you fucking people") while hiding behind your keyboard is both cowardly, stupid and violent, in terms of fighting words.

Name 5 republican protests that devolved into riots and violence. Can you name even 1? You guys are the violent vandals, not us.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

What is the argument here ?

That the vandals were not leftists ?

That only a few committed violence ?

There is no argument, the facts speak for themselves.

• The protest was a response to an extremist who uses the first amendment to yell fire in a crowd;
• (I hope that 's not too abstract for some of you to comprehend).
• The vandals for want of a label are anarchists, criminals on the far, far left, aka the idiot fringe;
• A counter argument to the lies and distortions of those on the far far right, aka, the idiot fringe who echo each other ad nausea.
• Most protests are non violent, it is analogous to noting that many people shop in retail stores, but a few go to retail stores to steal. It's really not too difficult a concept to comprehend.

Left out is the above rant is reports that those "peaceful" protesters surrounding the beating of man yelling "beat his ass"

You're a helluva story teller, I'll give you that. But tell your stories elsewhere, here we pride ourselves in being able to root out the truth.

And of course, the left never posts pictures of the whackjobs that have stupid posters at rallys and then basically say ....these are all conservatives.

One person is one data point; a large crowd is hundreds or thousands times that point, and known as an outlier; a notable comment whose value is nil.

You may think you know the truth, I sure as hell don't; but my "story" was not proved fictional. it is an opinion based on my observations (empirical evidence) of credible news; however, I'm open to credible rebuttals, not echoes of meme's.

"the left never pictures of whackjobs that have stupid posters at rallys and then basically say ... these are all conservatives"?

My initial take on this is you've adopted the meme that the MSM is liberal, and therefore dishonest and not to be believed. Since this had been the litany of Limbaugh for decades, and has become a rallying cry at trump rallies, am I wrong to assume you are a dittohead and a trump supporter?

Making that comment does not make you a conservative, it makes you a sheep.

So let's take it one step at a time:

1. I am not sure what you are referencing. A little more explanation would be good.
2. "Truth" is strange thing, but I don't recall calling your story fictional. I guess I was questioning what it is that you were arguing for to begin with. I said a few bad actors give the whole crew a bad name. Do you disagree that such a thing happens ? Now, you want this applied to the folks at Berkley. I understand. The trouble is that their behavior fit the narrative and so the narrative is going to thrive. Any effort to dissect it isn't going to go far. That happens on both side.

3 Your initial take on this is wrong. Regardless of how I feel about the MSM, I was referencing things like this board where folks on the left continually post pictures or make statements where they take some moron from the far right and apply their stupidity or extreme positions to everyone who calls themselves a conversative.

4. The right does it too.