The Left's Willingness to Tolerate Violence Should Frighten All Americans

[Doc7505]

The Left's Willingness to Tolerate Violence Should Frighten All Americans

The Left's Willingness to Tolerate Violence Should Frighten All Americans

"Mostly peaceful."So goes the characterization of demonstrations that have routinely turned into looting and rioting for months on end, from Portland to Seattle to New York to Los Angeles. "Protesters

townhall.com

29 Jul 2020 ~~ By Ben Shapiro

"Mostly peaceful."
So goes the characterization of demonstrations that have routinely turned into looting and rioting for months on end, from Portland to Seattle to New York to Los Angeles. "Protesters in California set fire to a courthouse, damaged a police station and assaulted officers after a peaceful demonstration intensified," read one recent ABC News tweet. CNN called protests in Portland "mostly peaceful," adding that "they have at times devolved into violence, vandalism, and arson." During riots in Los Angeles in June, as the entire county locked down, the Los Angeles Times noted, "The third night of countywide curfews followed days of massive, mostly peaceful protests ... Nearly 1,200 people were arrested Sunday after police officers clashed with demonstrators and looters shattered windows and emptied stores in Santa Monica and Long Beach."
The phrase "mostly peaceful," then, is rather fungible. Consider that during the tea party protests of 2011, then-Vice President Joe Biden reportedly likened tea partiers to "terrorists" -- and those protests were notable mostly for people cleaning up their own litter. When anti-lockdown protesters descended on the Michigan state capitol, a columnist for The New York Times labeled them "armed rebels," despite a complete lack of violence. When three white supremacists were arrested for plotting violence at a pro-gun rally, GQ's Talia Lavin headlined, "That Pro-Gun Rally in Virginia Wasn't Exactly 'Peaceful'" -- even though the rally saw no violence.
In truth, the category of "mostly peaceful" is a brand-new invention meant to obscure the simple fact that many of our cultural elites are fine with violence so long as those who engage in such violence have the proper goals. Nikole Hannah-Jones, creator of the pseudo-historical 1619 Project, celebrated when critics labeled rioting and looting "the 1619 riots"; she added that destruction of property was "not violence." This week, Democrats grilling Attorney General Bill Barr could not be bothered to condemn violence, prompting Barr to rant, "What makes me concerned for the country is this is the first time in my memory the leaders of one of our great two political parties, the Democratic Party, are not coming out and condemning mob violence and the attack on federal courts." This should come as little surprise, given that those same cultural elites have cheered on massive protests in a time of a deadly pandemic, explaining that sometimes politics is just too important to stop a raging disease.
~~Snip~~
With Democrats and those in the media willing to run cover for violent leftists, the thin veneer of civilization disintegrates. When violence is excused as speech and speech by the opposition labeled violence, democracies die. With each passing day of silence by those who should know better -- or worse, those propagandizing on behalf of those who engage in criminal activity -- America draws closer to the brink.


Comment:
Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrat leftists are not "frightened" by the violence - they relish it and actively promote it.
Democrats both in the hall of congrss and on the street have now made it clear that they are no longer Democrats. Even in the bad old days of the '60's you didn't have Democrat elected officials cheering for the rioters. Now you do.
When a society reaches the point where a major political party (in this case the one that staffs most of government, controls the media, the education system, most of corporate America, and the courts) condones violence in order to get its way, you are left with a choice; let them have their way, or fight them.
It has always amazed me how violent these women can get to protect their right to kill an innocent child. But what is even more amazing is in Seattle and Portland, the Democrat mayors have lost control of their paid protesters. In Seattle, one council woman has given out the home addresses of the mayor and two other council members she doesn’t like to Antifa, and those private homes have been attacked and the families threatened. This is nothing different than what ISIS and the Taliban do. The press has just yawned and said “mostly peaceful”.

 

[Darkwind]

The Left's Willingness to Tolerate Violence Should Frighten All Americans

The Left's Willingness to Tolerate Violence Should Frighten All Americans

"Mostly peaceful."So goes the characterization of demonstrations that have routinely turned into looting and rioting for months on end, from Portland to Seattle to New York to Los Angeles. "Protesters

townhall.com

29 Jul 2020 ~~ By Ben Shapiro

"Mostly peaceful."
So goes the characterization of demonstrations that have routinely turned into looting and rioting for months on end, from Portland to Seattle to New York to Los Angeles. "Protesters in California set fire to a courthouse, damaged a police station and assaulted officers after a peaceful demonstration intensified," read one recent ABC News tweet. CNN called protests in Portland "mostly peaceful," adding that "they have at times devolved into violence, vandalism, and arson." During riots in Los Angeles in June, as the entire county locked down, the Los Angeles Times noted, "The third night of countywide curfews followed days of massive, mostly peaceful protests ... Nearly 1,200 people were arrested Sunday after police officers clashed with demonstrators and looters shattered windows and emptied stores in Santa Monica and Long Beach."
The phrase "mostly peaceful," then, is rather fungible. Consider that during the tea party protests of 2011, then-Vice President Joe Biden reportedly likened tea partiers to "terrorists" -- and those protests were notable mostly for people cleaning up their own litter. When anti-lockdown protesters descended on the Michigan state capitol, a columnist for The New York Times labeled them "armed rebels," despite a complete lack of violence. When three white supremacists were arrested for plotting violence at a pro-gun rally, GQ's Talia Lavin headlined, "That Pro-Gun Rally in Virginia Wasn't Exactly 'Peaceful'" -- even though the rally saw no violence.
In truth, the category of "mostly peaceful" is a brand-new invention meant to obscure the simple fact that many of our cultural elites are fine with violence so long as those who engage in such violence have the proper goals. Nikole Hannah-Jones, creator of the pseudo-historical 1619 Project, celebrated when critics labeled rioting and looting "the 1619 riots"; she added that destruction of property was "not violence." This week, Democrats grilling Attorney General Bill Barr could not be bothered to condemn violence, prompting Barr to rant, "What makes me concerned for the country is this is the first time in my memory the leaders of one of our great two political parties, the Democratic Party, are not coming out and condemning mob violence and the attack on federal courts." This should come as little surprise, given that those same cultural elites have cheered on massive protests in a time of a deadly pandemic, explaining that sometimes politics is just too important to stop a raging disease.
~~Snip~~
With Democrats and those in the media willing to run cover for violent leftists, the thin veneer of civilization disintegrates. When violence is excused as speech and speech by the opposition labeled violence, democracies die. With each passing day of silence by those who should know better -- or worse, those propagandizing on behalf of those who engage in criminal activity -- America draws closer to the brink.


Comment:
Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrat leftists are not "frightened" by the violence - they relish it and actively promote it.
Democrats both in the hall of congrss and on the street have now made it clear that they are no longer Democrats. Even in the bad old days of the '60's you didn't have Democrat elected officials cheering for the rioters. Now you do.
When a society reaches the point where a major political party (in this case the one that staffs most of government, controls the media, the education system, most of corporate America, and the courts) condones violence in order to get its way, you are left with a choice; let them have their way, or fight them.
It has always amazed me how violent these women can get to protect their right to kill an innocent child. But what is even more amazing is in Seattle and Portland, the Democrat mayors have lost control of their paid protesters. In Seattle, one council woman has given out the home addresses of the mayor and two other council members she doesn’t like to Antifa, and those private homes have been attacked and the families threatened. This is nothing different than what ISIS and the Taliban do. The press has just yawned and said “mostly peaceful”.

Take a look at the videos on Youtube on the violence by the left.

Even when they are burning cop cars, the headlines read, "Violent Protesters". Not rioters, not anarchists. They have to use the word, "protester". It is part of the indoctrination and excuse making.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

The Left's Willingness to Tolerate Violence Should Frighten All Americans

The Left's Willingness to Tolerate Violence Should Frighten All Americans

"Mostly peaceful."So goes the characterization of demonstrations that have routinely turned into looting and rioting for months on end, from Portland to Seattle to New York to Los Angeles. "Protesters

townhall.com

29 Jul 2020 ~~ By Ben Shapiro

"Mostly peaceful."
So goes the characterization of demonstrations that have routinely turned into looting and rioting for months on end, from Portland to Seattle to New York to Los Angeles. "Protesters in California set fire to a courthouse, damaged a police station and assaulted officers after a peaceful demonstration intensified," read one recent ABC News tweet. CNN called protests in Portland "mostly peaceful," adding that "they have at times devolved into violence, vandalism, and arson." During riots in Los Angeles in June, as the entire county locked down, the Los Angeles Times noted, "The third night of countywide curfews followed days of massive, mostly peaceful protests ... Nearly 1,200 people were arrested Sunday after police officers clashed with demonstrators and looters shattered windows and emptied stores in Santa Monica and Long Beach."
The phrase "mostly peaceful," then, is rather fungible. Consider that during the tea party protests of 2011, then-Vice President Joe Biden reportedly likened tea partiers to "terrorists" -- and those protests were notable mostly for people cleaning up their own litter. When anti-lockdown protesters descended on the Michigan state capitol, a columnist for The New York Times labeled them "armed rebels," despite a complete lack of violence. When three white supremacists were arrested for plotting violence at a pro-gun rally, GQ's Talia Lavin headlined, "That Pro-Gun Rally in Virginia Wasn't Exactly 'Peaceful'" -- even though the rally saw no violence.
In truth, the category of "mostly peaceful" is a brand-new invention meant to obscure the simple fact that many of our cultural elites are fine with violence so long as those who engage in such violence have the proper goals. Nikole Hannah-Jones, creator of the pseudo-historical 1619 Project, celebrated when critics labeled rioting and looting "the 1619 riots"; she added that destruction of property was "not violence." This week, Democrats grilling Attorney General Bill Barr could not be bothered to condemn violence, prompting Barr to rant, "What makes me concerned for the country is this is the first time in my memory the leaders of one of our great two political parties, the Democratic Party, are not coming out and condemning mob violence and the attack on federal courts." This should come as little surprise, given that those same cultural elites have cheered on massive protests in a time of a deadly pandemic, explaining that sometimes politics is just too important to stop a raging disease.
~~Snip~~
With Democrats and those in the media willing to run cover for violent leftists, the thin veneer of civilization disintegrates. When violence is excused as speech and speech by the opposition labeled violence, democracies die. With each passing day of silence by those who should know better -- or worse, those propagandizing on behalf of those who engage in criminal activity -- America draws closer to the brink.


Comment:
Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrat leftists are not "frightened" by the violence - they relish it and actively promote it.
Democrats both in the hall of congrss and on the street have now made it clear that they are no longer Democrats. Even in the bad old days of the '60's you didn't have Democrat elected officials cheering for the rioters. Now you do.
When a society reaches the point where a major political party (in this case the one that staffs most of government, controls the media, the education system, most of corporate America, and the courts) condones violence in order to get its way, you are left with a choice; let them have their way, or fight them.
It has always amazed me how violent these women can get to protect their right to kill an innocent child. But what is even more amazing is in Seattle and Portland, the Democrat mayors have lost control of their paid protesters. In Seattle, one council woman has given out the home addresses of the mayor and two other council members she doesn’t like to Antifa, and those private homes have been attacked and the families threatened. This is nothing different than what ISIS and the Taliban do. The press has just yawned and said “mostly peaceful”.

Yeah, I love this "mostly peaceful" rhetoric.

By the logic they're putting forward, Charlottesville was mostly peaceful. Demonstrators and counterdemonstrators numbered in the thousands, and only one person died in an event that went on overnight and well into the next afternoon but only saw a couple of hours worth of scattered skirmishes.

Yet, after that mostly peaceful demonstration, the left threw into everybody's face how the person (singular) who died in the right wing violence proved that white supremacist ideology was the single greatest existential threat to the nation, and there was a weeks long crusade of finding the particular conservative rhetoric that the MSM insisted was responsible for this violence and seeking to root it out of public forums.

30 deaths in the George Floyd protests so far, but nobody in that same MSM is talking about the potential excesses of the ideas of folks like Ibram Kendi or Robin DiAngelo. Nobody's trying to cancel Cenk Uygur or Charlamagne tha God, or calling out the violent rhetoric of the black power movement.

Let's face it: Terry Crews is late to the party on the left. Black Lives Better is already the meaning of the mantra for far too many of these demonstrators.

 

[JustAGuy1]

You're right. it should. The Left laughs when we talk about being prepred, but millions of us are. In every way possible.

 

[night_son]

You're right. it should. The Left laughs when we talk about being prepred, but millions of us are. In every way possible.

And getting more prepared by the minute.

 

[occupied]

Apply your feelings about the second amendment to the first amendment and you will have your explanation.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

We're not frightened by the violence either. We relish in it and await justifiable use of force, but they are all chicken shits who will not dare do this shit in a suburb or in rural parts of the country, only in Dem-controlled shit holes where people (men, women, and other) get menstrual cramps at the very sight of a firearm.

 

[Doc7505]

The Left's Willingness to Tolerate Violence Should Frighten All Americans

The Left's Willingness to Tolerate Violence Should Frighten All Americans

"Mostly peaceful."So goes the characterization of demonstrations that have routinely turned into looting and rioting for months on end, from Portland to Seattle to New York to Los Angeles. "Protesters

townhall.com

29 Jul 2020 ~~ By Ben Shapiro

"Mostly peaceful."
So goes the characterization of demonstrations that have routinely turned into looting and rioting for months on end, from Portland to Seattle to New York to Los Angeles. "Protesters in California set fire to a courthouse, damaged a police station and assaulted officers after a peaceful demonstration intensified," read one recent ABC News tweet. CNN called protests in Portland "mostly peaceful," adding that "they have at times devolved into violence, vandalism, and arson." During riots in Los Angeles in June, as the entire county locked down, the Los Angeles Times noted, "The third night of countywide curfews followed days of massive, mostly peaceful protests ... Nearly 1,200 people were arrested Sunday after police officers clashed with demonstrators and looters shattered windows and emptied stores in Santa Monica and Long Beach."
The phrase "mostly peaceful," then, is rather fungible. Consider that during the tea party protests of 2011, then-Vice President Joe Biden reportedly likened tea partiers to "terrorists" -- and those protests were notable mostly for people cleaning up their own litter. When anti-lockdown protesters descended on the Michigan state capitol, a columnist for The New York Times labeled them "armed rebels," despite a complete lack of violence. When three white supremacists were arrested for plotting violence at a pro-gun rally, GQ's Talia Lavin headlined, "That Pro-Gun Rally in Virginia Wasn't Exactly 'Peaceful'" -- even though the rally saw no violence.
In truth, the category of "mostly peaceful" is a brand-new invention meant to obscure the simple fact that many of our cultural elites are fine with violence so long as those who engage in such violence have the proper goals. Nikole Hannah-Jones, creator of the pseudo-historical 1619 Project, celebrated when critics labeled rioting and looting "the 1619 riots"; she added that destruction of property was "not violence." This week, Democrats grilling Attorney General Bill Barr could not be bothered to condemn violence, prompting Barr to rant, "What makes me concerned for the country is this is the first time in my memory the leaders of one of our great two political parties, the Democratic Party, are not coming out and condemning mob violence and the attack on federal courts." This should come as little surprise, given that those same cultural elites have cheered on massive protests in a time of a deadly pandemic, explaining that sometimes politics is just too important to stop a raging disease.
~~Snip~~
With Democrats and those in the media willing to run cover for violent leftists, the thin veneer of civilization disintegrates. When violence is excused as speech and speech by the opposition labeled violence, democracies die. With each passing day of silence by those who should know better -- or worse, those propagandizing on behalf of those who engage in criminal activity -- America draws closer to the brink.


Comment:
Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrat leftists are not "frightened" by the violence - they relish it and actively promote it.
Democrats both in the hall of congrss and on the street have now made it clear that they are no longer Democrats. Even in the bad old days of the '60's you didn't have Democrat elected officials cheering for the rioters. Now you do.
When a society reaches the point where a major political party (in this case the one that staffs most of government, controls the media, the education system, most of corporate America, and the courts) condones violence in order to get its way, you are left with a choice; let them have their way, or fight them.
It has always amazed me how violent these women can get to protect their right to kill an innocent child. But what is even more amazing is in Seattle and Portland, the Democrat mayors have lost control of their paid protesters. In Seattle, one council woman has given out the home addresses of the mayor and two other council members she doesn’t like to Antifa, and those private homes have been attacked and the families threatened. This is nothing different than what ISIS and the Taliban do. The press has just yawned and said “mostly peaceful”.

Yeah, I love this "mostly peaceful" rhetoric.

By the logic they're putting forward, Charlottesville was mostly peaceful. Demonstrators and counterdemonstrators numbered in the thousands, and only one person died in an event that went on overnight and well into the next afternoon but only saw a couple of hours worth of scattered skirmishes.

Yet, after that mostly peaceful demonstration, the left threw into everybody's face how the person (singular) who died in the right wing violence proved that white supremacist ideology was the single greatest existential threat to the nation, and there was a weeks long crusade of finding the particular conservative rhetoric that the MSM insisted was responsible for this violence and seeking to root it out of public forums.

30 deaths in the George Floyd protests so far, but nobody in that same MSM is talking about the potential excesses of the ideas of folks like Ibram Kendi or Robin DiAngelo. Nobody's trying to cancel Cenk Uygur or Charlamagne tha God, or calling out the violent rhetoric of the black power movement.

Let's face it: Terry Crews is late to the party on the left. Black Lives Better is already the meaning of the mantra for far too many of these demonstrators.

I agree with you, what was omitted is the hundreds of police that have been injured (some permanently). But yeah, it's supposedly "mostly peaceful", excpt for the arson, murder, and destruction of businesses.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Apply your feelings about the second amendment to the first amendment and you will have your explanation.

Violence is not free speech.

Now, apply your feelings about the first to the second.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Apply your feelings about the second amendment to the first amendment and you will have your explanation.

LMFAO! I don't want to hear about the First Amendment from people in a movement that believes "hate speech" should be outlawed. If this was the '90's, I'd be willing to listen to you about the evangelicals who wanna ban Marilyn Manson. Here, now, twenty-thirty years past that old paradigm, on the other hand, no. The mainstream right hasn't pushed against the 1st Amendment since the millennium rolled over. Nope, if you want to find mainstream efforts to legally restrict speech in the current decade, the one before it, or the one before that, you're going to have to look left and not right.

What the modern right wing has a problem with is the conflation of "protester" with "rioter" that keeps happening in left wing media and, apparently, in your posts. We don't want to see the cops shut down the people holding signs and yelling. We want to see the cops shut down the people throwing the mortars. This isn't hard to understand.

 

[konradv]

We're not frightened by the violence either. We relish in it and await justifiable use of force, but they are all chicken shits who will not dare do this shit in a suburb or in rural parts of the country, only in Dem-controlled shit holes where people (men, women, and other) get menstrual cramps at the very sight of a firearm.

At least we've got someone here who's honest about the right's willingness to incite violence. They WANT a civil war are doing everything they can in hopes that it will happen. What they don't realize is that the military isn't going to back them up. They hate what they have to deal with on foreign battlefields and aren't going to tolerate those who deliberately put their families in danger by inflaming the situation.

 

[occupied]

Apply your feelings about the second amendment to the first amendment and you will have your explanation.

Violence is not free speech.

Now, apply your feelings about the first to the second.

LOL Arming up for some glorious politically motivated battle against other Americans is not responsible gun ownership.

 

[tycho1572]

I’m looking forward to the day when it’s legal to hunt leftist like other vermin.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

We're not frightened by the violence either. We relish in it and await justifiable use of force, but they are all chicken shits who will not dare do this shit in a suburb or in rural parts of the country, only in Dem-controlled shit holes where people (men, women, and other) get menstrual cramps at the very sight of a firearm.

At least we've got someone here who's honest about the right's willingness to incite violence. They WANT a civil war are doing everything they can in hopes that it will happen. What they don't realize is that the military isn't going to back them up. They hate what they have to deal with on foreign battlefields and aren't going to tolerate those who deliberately put their families in danger by inflaming the situation.

Willingness to incite violence? When have we incited violence?

Doing everything we can in the hopes that it will happen? Like what? Getting ready? Buying ammo?

What do you mean?

What you don't realize is that military people are voters too. If you think you have the military, you will be sadly disappointed.

But even if you do, that's what, less than 500,000 boots on the ground compared to at least 10 million?

I just want these commie motherfuckers to come try their shit in my 'hood so I have a justified excuse to kill a commie for mommy. What's wrong with that?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Apply your feelings about the second amendment to the first amendment and you will have your explanation.

Violence is not free speech.

Now, apply your feelings about the first to the second.

LOL Arming up for some glorious politically motivated battle against other Americans is not responsible gun ownership.

Arming up to stop a communist revolution is not only responsible gun ownership, it is the DUTY of all Americans.

Kill a commie for mommy.

 

[konradv]

We're not frightened by the violence either. We relish in it and await justifiable use of force, but they are all chicken shits who will not dare do this shit in a suburb or in rural parts of the country, only in Dem-controlled shit holes where people (men, women, and other) get menstrual cramps at the very sight of a firearm.

At least we've got someone here who's honest about the right's willingness to incite violence. They WANT a civil war are doing everything they can in hopes that it will happen. What they don't realize is that the military isn't going to back them up. They hate what they have to deal with on foreign battlefields and aren't going to tolerate those who deliberately put their families in danger by inflaming the situation.

Willingness to incite violence? When have we incited violence?

Doing everything we can in the hopes that it will happen? Like what? Getting ready? Buying ammo?

What do you mean?

What you don't realize is that military people are voters too. If you think you have the military, you will be sadly disappointed.

But even if you do, that's what, less than 500,000 boots on the ground compared to at least 10 million?

I just want these motherfuckers to come try their shit in my 'hood so I have a justified excuse to kill a commie for mommy. What's wrong with that?

You do with your every word. Who on the right has tried to bring the sides together? They don't; they throw gas on the fire and Trump is the chief arsonist.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

We're not frightened by the violence either. We relish in it and await justifiable use of force, but they are all chicken shits who will not dare do this shit in a suburb or in rural parts of the country, only in Dem-controlled shit holes where people (men, women, and other) get menstrual cramps at the very sight of a firearm.

At least we've got someone here who's honest about the right's willingness to incite violence. They WANT a civil war are doing everything they can in hopes that it will happen. What they don't realize is that the military isn't going to back them up. They hate what they have to deal with on foreign battlefields and aren't going to tolerate those who deliberately put their families in danger by inflaming the situation.

Willingness to incite violence? When have we incited violence?

Doing everything we can in the hopes that it will happen? Like what? Getting ready? Buying ammo?

What do you mean?

What you don't realize is that military people are voters too. If you think you have the military, you will be sadly disappointed.

But even if you do, that's what, less than 500,000 boots on the ground compared to at least 10 million?

I just want these motherfuckers to come try their shit in my 'hood so I have a justified excuse to kill a commie for mommy. What's wrong with that?

You do with your every word. Who on the right has tried to bring the sides together? They don't; they throw gas on the fire and Trump is the chief arsonist.

Name ONE SINGLE LEFTIST who has tried to bring people together, motherfucker. NAME ONE!!!

Misery and divide is what Biden's campaign is praying will work.

 

[Meathead]

The Left's Willingness to Tolerate Violence Should Frighten All Americans

The Left's Willingness to Tolerate Violence Should Frighten All Americans

"Mostly peaceful."So goes the characterization of demonstrations that have routinely turned into looting and rioting for months on end, from Portland to Seattle to New York to Los Angeles. "Protesters

townhall.com

29 Jul 2020 ~~ By Ben Shapiro

"Mostly peaceful."
So goes the characterization of demonstrations that have routinely turned into looting and rioting for months on end, from Portland to Seattle to New York to Los Angeles. "Protesters in California set fire to a courthouse, damaged a police station and assaulted officers after a peaceful demonstration intensified," read one recent ABC News tweet. CNN called protests in Portland "mostly peaceful," adding that "they have at times devolved into violence, vandalism, and arson." During riots in Los Angeles in June, as the entire county locked down, the Los Angeles Times noted, "The third night of countywide curfews followed days of massive, mostly peaceful protests ... Nearly 1,200 people were arrested Sunday after police officers clashed with demonstrators and looters shattered windows and emptied stores in Santa Monica and Long Beach."
The phrase "mostly peaceful," then, is rather fungible. Consider that during the tea party protests of 2011, then-Vice President Joe Biden reportedly likened tea partiers to "terrorists" -- and those protests were notable mostly for people cleaning up their own litter. When anti-lockdown protesters descended on the Michigan state capitol, a columnist for The New York Times labeled them "armed rebels," despite a complete lack of violence. When three white supremacists were arrested for plotting violence at a pro-gun rally, GQ's Talia Lavin headlined, "That Pro-Gun Rally in Virginia Wasn't Exactly 'Peaceful'" -- even though the rally saw no violence.
In truth, the category of "mostly peaceful" is a brand-new invention meant to obscure the simple fact that many of our cultural elites are fine with violence so long as those who engage in such violence have the proper goals. Nikole Hannah-Jones, creator of the pseudo-historical 1619 Project, celebrated when critics labeled rioting and looting "the 1619 riots"; she added that destruction of property was "not violence." This week, Democrats grilling Attorney General Bill Barr could not be bothered to condemn violence, prompting Barr to rant, "What makes me concerned for the country is this is the first time in my memory the leaders of one of our great two political parties, the Democratic Party, are not coming out and condemning mob violence and the attack on federal courts." This should come as little surprise, given that those same cultural elites have cheered on massive protests in a time of a deadly pandemic, explaining that sometimes politics is just too important to stop a raging disease.
~~Snip~~
With Democrats and those in the media willing to run cover for violent leftists, the thin veneer of civilization disintegrates. When violence is excused as speech and speech by the opposition labeled violence, democracies die. With each passing day of silence by those who should know better -- or worse, those propagandizing on behalf of those who engage in criminal activity -- America draws closer to the brink.


Comment:
Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrat leftists are not "frightened" by the violence - they relish it and actively promote it.
Democrats both in the hall of congrss and on the street have now made it clear that they are no longer Democrats. Even in the bad old days of the '60's you didn't have Democrat elected officials cheering for the rioters. Now you do.
When a society reaches the point where a major political party (in this case the one that staffs most of government, controls the media, the education system, most of corporate America, and the courts) condones violence in order to get its way, you are left with a choice; let them have their way, or fight them.
It has always amazed me how violent these women can get to protect their right to kill an innocent child. But what is even more amazing is in Seattle and Portland, the Democrat mayors have lost control of their paid protesters. In Seattle, one council woman has given out the home addresses of the mayor and two other council members she doesn’t like to Antifa, and those private homes have been attacked and the families threatened. This is nothing different than what ISIS and the Taliban do. The press has just yawned and said “mostly peaceful”.

It scares the hell out of me, and I don't even live in America.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Apply your feelings about the second amendment to the first amendment and you will have your explanation.

Violence is not free speech.

Now, apply your feelings about the first to the second.

LOL Arming up for some glorious politically motivated battle against other Americans is not responsible gun ownership.

Arming up for a battle against politically motivated people who have already armed up and proceeded to throw bricks and explosives at police in an attempt to achieve their political goals through the threat of force, on the other hand, is precisely what responsible gun ownership means in an American context.

 

[JustAGuy1]

Apply your feelings about the second amendment to the first amendment and you will have your explanation.

Sorry, burning and stealing are not "Free Speech".