Antifada Girl Punched Out At Berkley Protest is a Hairy Porn Star

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Not just the left. I've seen way too much gloating anticipation of Civil War 2 over on TOS to declare the Right innocent of the same dreams.

No argument there -- I saw the same thing.  But at least so far, those right wing groups haven't manifested in the form of disrupting leftist political rallies.  But I truly believe that's the path down which we're headed if we can't protect the right of both sides to peacefully assemble and rally.  And I absolutely don't want that, which is why I favor actions that will force he government to do its damned job.

[r9etb]

Facts not in evidence.  You claim the existence of "a basically functional civil order."  When the police will not respond to or intervene in physical violence perpetrated by the left against anyone they wish (and you know that's what has been happening in Berkeley and other cities around the country) your "basically functional civil order" is in fact no such thing.  Major Bill has it right--if the only way to get the police to take an active role is to fight back, then you fight back.  That is the responsibility of the people.

It's a bit ironic that you should make a statement like that after saying "facts not in existence." 

For your statement to be true, or even moderately convincing, it would have to be the case that law enforcement generally fails to deal properly with such activities, at all times and in all places.

But that is obviously untrue.  This melee is getting publicity precisely because it is unusual. 

In general these things go off peacefully; and when they're not peaceful, the police generally respond appropriately.

It is alarming that Berkley is among those places where the authorities seem unwilling or unable to deal with incidents like this, and it is alarming that the left in particular seem willing to countenance it.  People ought to be held accountable for such things.  But even in Berkley these incidents are not the common state of affairs.

Hyperventilating helps nobody except those whose entire purpose is to entice you into behaving irrationally.

[Doug Loss]

It's a bit ironic that you should make a statement like that after saying "facts not in existence." 

For your statement to be true, or even moderately convincing, it would have to be the case that law enforcement generally fails to deal properly with such activities, at all times and in all places.

But that is obviously untrue.  This melee is getting publicity precisely because it is unusual. 

In general these things go off peacefully; and when they're not peaceful, the police generally respond appropriately.

It is alarming that Berkley is among those places where the authorities seem unwilling or unable to deal with incidents like this, and it is alarming that the left in particular seem willing to countenance it.  People ought to be held accountable for such things.  But even in Berkley these incidents are not the common state of affairs.

Hyperventilating helps nobody except those whose entire purpose is to entice you into behaving irrationally.

You're setting up a straw man.  I never said anything like "law enforcement generally fails to deal properly with such activities, at all times and in all places."  However, in Berkeley, that is what has been happening.  If you want to refute me, try actually refuting what I say, not claiming I said something else and refuting that.  You're not arguing fairly.

[r9etb]

No argument there -- I saw the same thing.  But at least so far, those right wing groups haven't manifested in the form of disrupting leftist political rallies.  But I truly believe that's the path down which we're headed if we can't protect the right of both sides to peacefully assemble and rally.  And I absolutely don't want that, which is why I favor actions that will force the government to do its damned job.

It really does seem that you're suggesting a bit of right-wing counter-violence would be just the thing for forcing the authorities to do their job.

Problem is, that sort of thing hardly ever ends up working the way you expected or wanted...

[INVAR]

The Left dreams of everyone else's blood running in the streets.  And that's only the hardcore left.  A lot of the rest of them are just stupid/naïve young people who believe their views are so universally accepted that there can't possibly be an real objection to them silencing their opposition.

The classic -- and most effective -- response to a bully is to fight back.  And leaving aside the issue of that woman, it still sounds to me like some of you guys are advocating the opposite.  Don't fight back.

Not at all.  I'm all for beating up bullies and thugs to the point they cry home to mama and suck their thumbs for a few weeks while in traction.  I draw the line at hitting women in the face like we saw.  I draw the line at accepting justifications for hitting women in the face like we saw.

If we started running around and beheading women and children and putting their heads on pikes to demoralize the Islamic enemy - we are no different than those we claim to fight.

Likewise, when we start acting like the Commie-Thugs and make no discretion about who it is we bloody - then we are no different than they are and our moral justification for self defense is lost.

 

And I'm honestly struggling to see how you'd expect that to improve anything.

I no longer think that is possible.  We let the leavening go unchallenged until it has leavened the entire lump, mind, body and soul of half the population and nearly all the colleges in the country.  We refused to put the thugs and bullies in their place when the cost was minimal, to the point that attempting to do so now is going to cost more than we will be able to bear.

My parents were mistaken in thinking that the 60's were just a 'fad' and letting the hippies do their thing without rebuke or correction would result in their 'maturing' on their own.  They did not understand the nature of what it was they were witnessing.  Now that entire mindset and belief runs the country and has permeated every single facet of culture and society.

Now that mindset thinks it is entitled to rule without opposition or challenge, and they have become self aware to the point in numbers that they are willing to resort to violence and bloodshed to see that their rule is imposed by any means possible.  You cannot negotiate with that.  You cannot co-exist with that.

So, the consequences are going to be visited whether we want them to or not.   How that will be handled will determine whether we go off the cliff in total 1790's French Terror style/ 1917 Bolshevik style - or we work a 30 years slow grind to oblivion or a slow painful grind to restoration.  That remains to be seen in terms of how full our cup of iniquity is before Providence.

Because we waited too long to address these issues when the cost was minimal - it will now cost us dearly to address them.  What remains is how much this people are willing to pay, or how much they are willing to trade for the promise of bread, peace and safety.

[Doug Loss]

It really does seem that you're suggesting a bit of right-wing counter-violence would be just the thing for forcing the authorities to do their job.

Problem is, that sort of thing hardly ever ends up working the way you expected or wanted...

And you seem to be suggesting that passive acceptance and acquiescence to violence perpetrated against you and those you stand with is the only acceptable position.  We disagree, and will not accept that any longer.

[r9etb]

You're setting up a straw man.  I never said anything like "law enforcement generally fails to deal properly with such activities, at all times and in all places."  However, in Berkeley, that is what has been happening.  If you want to refute me, try actually refuting what I say, not claiming I said something else and refuting that.  You're not arguing fairly.

To the contrary, that's precisely what you said:

You claim the existence of "a basically functional civil order."  When the police will not respond to or intervene in physical violence perpetrated by the left against anyone they wish (and you know that's what has been happening in Berkeley and other cities around the country) your "basically functional civil order" is in fact no such thing.

That highlighted part -- you said it.  I just pointed out the illogic of your statement.

For your comment to be true, what's happening in Berkley must be happening everywhere, all the time.  But it's not. 

For all your impressive talk about strawmen and "facts not in evidence," you're the one who seems to be guilty on both counts.

[Doug Loss]

To the contrary, that's precisely what you said:

That highlighted part -- you said it.  I just pointed out the illogic of your statement.

For your comment to be true, what's happening in Berkley must be happening everywhere, all the time.  But it's not. 

For all your impressive talk about strawmen and "facts not in evidence," you're the one who seems to be guilty on both counts.

And you completely ignored the qualifying statement in parentheses just in front of that section.  Sorry, you're still the one setting up strawmen.

[r9etb]

And you seem to be suggesting that passive acceptance and acquiescence to violence perpetrated against you and those you stand with is the only acceptable position.  We disagree, and will not accept that any longer.

Did you strike An Heroic Pose when you typed that?  Jutting chin, manly posture, steely glare out to the far horizon?

[r9etb]

And you completely ignored the qualifying statement in parentheses just in front of that section.  Sorry, you're still the one setting up strawmen.

Nope.  You said what you said.  You can't now claim the right to run away from the logic -- or rather, illogic -- of what you said.

[mirraflake]

I just viewed a 8 minute video of the fight.  I had to chuckle over what the people are wearing. One guy was wearing MotoCross chest and shin protectors, another a 1950's style football helmet.  It's right out of Mad Max.

Saw a couple of guys as  corpsman  wearing the red cross emblem on their sleeves tending to the injured in the thick of the 'battle"

BTW the innocent girl was interviewed before her being punched out and she was speaking FOR violent overthrow and revolution.

[Doug Loss]

Did you strike An Heroic Pose when you typed that?  Jutting chin, manly posture, steely glare out to the far horizon?

You have something against people being willing to stand up for their rights?

[Doug Loss]

Nope.  You said what you said.  You can't now claim the right to run away from the logic -- or rather, illogic -- of what you said.

Exactly.  I said what I said.  Not what you claim I said.  The right to run away from what I said?  No, the right to not have you misrepresent what I said.  It's not hard to understand; give it a try sometime.

[r9etb]

You have something against people being willing to stand up for their rights?

I have something against manly posturing on an internet forum.

[Mod2]

I see the 6 page rule is still in effect. The six page rule states "Any thread longer than six pages will inevitably turn to bickering between two to four posters."

Gentlemen, let us not do that.

[r9etb]

Exactly.  I said what I said.  Not what you claim I said.  The right to run away from what I said?  No, the right to not have you misrepresent what I said.  It's not hard to understand; give it a try sometime.

What you said was that "your 'basically functional civil order' is in fact no such thing."

OK ... where is it "no such thing?"  Your implication is that it is "no such thing" pretty much anywhere. 

What you said may actually be true in certain places.  However, it is not generally true.  In most places across the US, the established civil order is still basically functional.  So if anybody is dealing with "facts not in evidence," it's you. 

Hell, what you said is not even generally true in Berkley, although they let a lot of things go that they shouldn't.

[r9etb]

I see the 6 page rule is still in effect. The six page rule states "Any thread longer than six pages will inevitably turn to bickering between two to four posters."

Gentlemen, let us not do that.

OK.

[Doug Loss]

I see the 6 page rule is still in effect. The six page rule states "Any thread longer than six pages will inevitably turn to bickering between two to four posters."

Gentlemen, let us not do that.

I will no longer respond to the provocations I'm receiving.

[Smokin Joe]

Golly.  The guy who hit her looks like a Nazi poster-boy, and the message on the yellow jacket suggests these are Westboro Baptist types. 

Not saying that she's blameless, but seriously: are you quite sure you want to be approving of this sort of behavior?

Interesting the guy in the "Jesus will Judge You" jacket is putting the boots to someone (watch his right leg).

I approve of self defense, but this did not appear to be quite at that level. He had reach on her, and a push should have been plenty.

[r9etb]

I will no longer respond to the provocations I'm receiving.

OK, then I won't provoke you.

But the question of whether or not our civil institutions are basically functional, is key to this discussion.  Violence, threats of violence, or dark hints of revolution don't help if the structure is salvageable.  Those sorts of things just increase the tension and erode the common ground necessary to deal with provocations as a civilized society should.

If our institutions are generally functional in the US, even if strained, the proper focus of our efforts should be on ensuring accountability within those structures.  If the police or mayor of Berkley behave inappropriately to these things, then they should be held accountable for it -- and publicity, peaceable assembly, and ultimately the ballot box are the proper way to do it.

Revolutions almost never end up the way one expects -- our own was the notable exception, and it wouldn't happen again here.  They shouldn't even be contemplated unless and until the alternatives have been exhausted.

Which they have not been.

[Smokin Joe]

Westboro doesn't get physical.   Their goal is to enrage others to get violent so they can sue.

Being religious doesn't make one a Westboro type.

Wearing a jacket with Jesus' name on it doesn't make one religious, either.  That guy was putting the boots to someone.

[skeeter]

Wearing a jacket with Jesus' name on it doesn't make one religious, either.  That guy was putting the boots to someone.

There was something very Monte Pythonish about that particular slice of life.

[Smokin Joe]

Yep they can all choose their sides but I can guarantee I won't be on theirs. Those who rub themselves raw with excitement for a new civil war and their assured glorious victory are headed for disappointment. I will always side with reason even if its reasonable people who I disagree with. Reasonable people don't go off half cocked and burn their homes to the ground out of blind unthinking rage.

The simple fact is that both sides are exactly like the geniuses who burned Ferguson and Baltimore to the ground.

There are a lot of angry people out there on both sides. Part of Trump's populist wave was just pissed off people, frustrated with years of Obama Liberalism and crap economy, not to mention the constant liberal assault on the straight white male, just for being a straight white male.
Liberals have a two-fer in that Hillary/Bernie didn't win, and that Trump did. So they are all geared up to fight, but need a 'dance' partner.
Angry people do stupid things.

[r9etb]

There was something very Monte Pythonish about that particular slice of life.

As in "no one expects the Spanish Inquisition?"

Speaking for myself only, when I see a guy in a Jesus jacket kicking the crap out of somebody, I see a guy who's doing a lot of damage to Christianity. 

[INVAR]

Angry people do stupid things.

Especially in groups.


Which is why I always steer clear of masses and mass movements.