#lets see if antifa gets violent or not | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

lesbiansandgayssupporttheminers · 1 year

Text

Now that the dust has settled a little bit on the arrests around the coronation, I want to talk a little bit about what this means for the future of protest and policing in England and Wales.

Firstly, I want to caveat this by saying the police have always hated protests. Getting arrested at a protest has always been a risk. Getting beaten up by the police as they try to provoke violence has always been a risk. At a recent anti-fascist counter protest I attended, two arrests were made. One of these later turned out to be “mistaken identity” (neither person was charged), but this is what we’ve always been dealing with.

However, I do think this idea of arrest for conspiracy to cause a public nuisance is dangerous. It’s essentially a thought crime. We think you might do something criminal, therefore we are going to arrest you. It has the power to significantly disrupt all sorts of actions, and we do need to be wary of it. The fact you can be arrested whilst walking to a protest, carrying a sign or a megaphone, and that this arrest *may* be legal (I hope some of those involved today try to sue for wrongful arrest, but we will see) means potentially some actions will never get started, and that is not good for the future of protest in this country.

I would never blame someone for their arrest- their arrest is the fault of the police and the police alone. That said, we know Republic were talking to cops about their plans. This did not protect them, and may have made it easier for the police to locate and arrest them. I think, on here, we all know talking to cops is a bad idea, but let’s say it again, louder for those at the back “DON’T TALK TO COPS”.

Now, the police say that the coronation is a once in a lifetime event, hence their response- blah blah- the police hate protest. If they get away with this, they will do it again, they will push things as far as they can to try and shut down protest they don’t agree with. This means we do need to be careful around OpSec etc. I also know people who don’t understand why e.g. antifa groups conceal their identity. But this is yet another good reason to do so. Black bloc, grey bloc, staying anonymous online, secure communications all of this is increasingly important- whilst also obviously trying to ensure good turn outs.

If the police are going to arrest you for walking to a protest with a megaphone, then what’s stopping us from being more violent/aggressive in our protest? I know some people are ideologically wedded to peaceful protest, but these actions are now potentially illegal too. So what’s stopping us? What is actually holding us back? If holding a sign is too much for them, if that’s on the level of smashing a window now, then what’s to stop us smashing windows?

Finally, I want to talk to the organisers of peaceful protests about police monitoring and post arrest support. In the past, many groups have felt this wasn’t needed. But now, it could be. If you’re organizing a protest of any kind, I strongly encourage you to get in touch with the Green and Black Cross for advice, and to arrange legal observers. Print out bust cards and distribute them. I’d also strongly encourage you to set up some post arrest support. It’s far better to have it, and not need it, than need it and not have it. If you’re concerned about police behaviour, you could also contact NetPol for advice.

Green and Black Cross: https://greenandblackcross.org/

NetPol: https://netpol.org/

#uk politics #coronation #protest #right to protest #fuck the police #fuck the king #not my king #pcsc bill #kill the bill #peaceful protest

1K notes · View notes

cat-boy-tits · 2 years

Note

Hey bro, idk your politics (and I'm not asking don't worry! None of my business!) so maybe you already know this, in which case you can just ignore this ask.

But I thought you might wanna know that on that post about the FBI robbing a bank, the inital tweet is from a far-right comics artist. The main post 'explaining' how bad it is was also by a hard right blog. Elizabisme's sly aside at the end about 'everything else the fbi is investigating' is a reference to the FBI investigation of stolen classified documents recovered from Trump's place, which Elizab believes is a sham secret trial that the FBI (who she thinks are violent leftist antifa rioters) are faking to sabatoge the American right.

I did a little digging bc I didn't feel right saying anything without having any other info, and it looks like the raid on the safe deposit boxes did happen. The Beverly Hills company that was raided has since pled guilty to money laundering, but idk whats up with the boxes. Anyway, point is that the post itself is far-right propaganda.

I'm letting you know bc I would want to know, and I suspect based on what I know of you might want to too. I don't expect you to post this or reply. I'm not trying to get you to do anything, and I don't plan to follow up or anything. Zero pressure, 100% just for your information.

thank you anon friend!

i am not immune to propaganda.

i will try to find the post and delete it. hopefully everyone else who got it from me will see this ask.

thank you again.

come off anon in my dms, if you want. i really appreciate this.

2 notes · View notes

johnnyrobish · 2 years

Text

Republican Heads Spinning As Biden Calls MAGA Thugs ‘Semi-Fascist’

Prominent Republicans like Ted Cruz and others are acting completely shocked and angry after President Biden referred to Trump’s private cadre of MAGA insurrectionists as “semi-fascist.” In fact, Sen. Ted Cruz responded to President Biden by tweeting “The communists have always called their enemies fascists,” while Sen. Lindsey Graham threatened violence in the streets if the US Justice Department moves forward and decides to prosecute former President Donald Trump.

Well, I strongly object to the term “semi-fascist" being applied to Trump supporters also. Come on now, President Biden! What’s up with the "semi" tag, anyway? Republicans like Ted Cruz claim when Biden called MAGAs “semi-fascist,” he was just tossing “red meat” to his left-wing base, which is total BS. Hell, everyone knows if Biden tossed any “meat” to his base, it would’ve been a “plant-based meat substitute,” like a “Beyond Meat” patty.

Republicans are saying, “It’s just not fair. All we did was try and overthrow the government - and they call you fascist!” Well, here’s an idea, if you seriously don’t like being called “fascist,” how about stop acting like one? Hell, a good start might be to support democracy, or stop threatening women and their doctors with the death penalty for seeking medical services, or trying to send teachers to prison for using school textbooks you don’t happen to agree with. Just a thought.

Not to mention, it doesn’t help when you continue defending a former president who tried to violently overthrow the United States, then stole top secret documents, which he hid somewhere in the basement of his Florida brothel, or when the GOP refuses to rein in two sitting members of congress, who had to be stripped of their committee assignments for making death threats against Democrats. Are you getting my drift?

Frankly, it’s rather interesting Republicans are so “deeply offended” about being called “semi-fascists.” Especially, when you consider they’ve been blaming nearly every single thing that’s ever happened in this country over the past 7 years - from sunspots to your neighbor’s dog coming down with sarcoptic mange - on Antifa. Now, all Antifa stands for is “anti-fascism.” Why if MAGAs aren’t fascists, what would be their problem with Antifa?

You see, “fascism” is defined as an “authoritarian, ultranationalist, right-wing political movement, controlled by an absolute dictator, who exalts nation and race over the individual, and forcibly suppresses any opposition.” Gee, is it just me, or does that sound exactly like todays Republican Party? Oh well, I guess cockroaches have always hated having a light shined on them. Hey, let’s make a deal; Joe Biden apologizes for calling MAGAs “semi-fascist,” as soon as Republicans apologize for Ted Cruz. Deal?

If you’ve enjoyed what you’ve just read, please consider joining me at:

#Fascism #Politics #News #Joe Biden #Ted Cruz #tucker carlson #comedy #humor #satire #jokes #donald trump #current events #progressives

3 notes · View notes

gold2558 · 2 years

Text

ALL THESE SHOOTERS COME FROM DEMOCRAT SUPPORT OF VIOLENT GROUPS LIKE (BLM & ANTIFA/ and other groups) supported by “leftist prosecutors”who they see let them get away with the crimes they commit destroying business, shooting people while burning cities, killing police, prosecuting police & not the criminals, not jailing them, not prosecuting them as a example CHICAGO/PORTLAND/SEATTLE/Califagnia & Seattle Homeless liberal DA’S like Gascon & the New York DA. These criminals see this so they start shooting/robbing/killing there is no Police & no penalties for their action brought all on by Leftist Democrats & their support even the DOJ IS THOROUGHLY USELESS GUNS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM, THE ABOVE IS PLUS THE DEMOCRATS

0 notes

antifainternational · 3 years

Note

I really hope that you’ll give this a listen. I’ve considered myself an antifaschist for awhile now, but I’m starting to think that our approach is off. I was never able to put it into words until now. https://youtu.be/LCiAfD2EDvY

The interviewer is longtime leftist, organizer, and folk singer David Rovics. He can absolutely be trusted.

The tldr is that physically fighting fash, while useful in the short term to protect our communities, leads to escalation and further radicalization over the long term and makes things more dangerous for everyone involved. We need to be primarily focused on community outreach (largely done), building dual power, and deradicalizing the far right. In the end they are pissed off at the system for many of the same reasons that we are; they’re being misled and focusing on the wrong enemy. It’s a result of the divide and conquer tactic that the ruling class seems all too happy to employ.

It is entirely possible that one day there will be no more fash, no more proud boys or white nationalists- but it won’t be because they were beaten into submission. That’s never worked. It will be because enough people gave a thought about and then did something about the material and ideological circumstances that created them. Problems must be solved at the source.

We were going to take this seriously, Anon, until we saw that the youtube link you posted is of a TWO-HOUR interview with MATTHEW FUCKING HEIMBACH! FFS. So first let’s deal with the very notion that Heimbach is somehow a “reformed white supremacist” that anti-fascists should listen to. Heimbach’s claims to be a “former” white nationalist are dubious at best. His credentials as such appear to come solely from “Light Upon Light,” That’s a fake anti-racist/de-radicalization project set up by a former Al Qeada propagandist, whose main achievements have been to deliver paycheques to notorious white supremacist leaders like Heimbach and Jeff Schoep and provide platforms to current fascist grifter/troll Andy Ngo. They’ve also been very prone to horseshoe theory “both sidesism,” echoing Shoep’s labeling of antifa as “violent extremists” who are “just as bad” as the far right. They are closely-tied to well-known Islamophobes. This, Anon, is the only “anti-hate” group we know of that believes that Heimbach is a reformed white supremacist. Has Heimbach publicly posted the membership list of the hate groups he ran or belonged to? No. Has Heimbach done anything to bring the members of his organization that stabbed nine people in Sacramento in 2016 to justice? No. Heimbach has done anything to make anyone believe he’s reformed besides a pretending to be in order to make some fast $$$ and dupe people like you into taking his advice about what antifa should be doing?

But OK, aside from that, here are some other things you seem to be wrong about: 1) Antifa = Violence, violence, violence. The reality, Anon, is that 99% of antifascist work is non-violent. You don’t get to see that because the media & youtubers are incentivized to focus only on the violence. Anyone with even a cursory involvement in the antifascist movement would know this. 2) Physical community self-defence, de-radicalization, community outreach, and “dual power,” aren’t mutually exclusive. Again, Anon, 99% of our work focuses on the middle two. Physical community self-defence (or “violence” as you might describe it) doesn’t actually come up that often, tbh. The Leninist/Maoist concept of “dual power” is not one accepted by all or even a majority of antifascists, because anti-fascism is a broad-based movement of people with all sorts of political ideologies, who tend to set their ideological differences aside while we try to stop fascists from murdering people. 3) Fighting fascists doesn’t help long-term and only radicalizes them further. The truth of the matter is that physically opposing fascists (which is self-defence by definition), raises the membership stakes of fascism and is as likely to force fascists to reconsider their choices as it is to further radicalize them. The 100-year history of anti-fascism bears this out. The experience of every credible anti-fascist crew we know bears this out. The personal experiences of members of our own anti-fascist collective - some of whom have been doing this work for over three decades now - bears this out. Also: how can you make this claim while simultaneously supporting the idea that Matt Heimbach - who we fought many times in many locations - is now a “reformed” white supremacist? Your example contradicts your point. Also: can we talk about how privileged your position is? Last year, we documented 372 people being murdered by fascists. Only a person that doesn’t face an existential threat from fascism would make the argument that standing up to fascist aggression is counter-productive. 4) Fighting fascists has never worked. Dude, have you read 20th century history? Come on now.

5) We must prioritize dealing with the source of all society’s ills instead of defending our communities against physical attack by fascists. There is no consensus in the anti-fascist movmenet about “the source” of all problems. Anti-fascism is a non-sectarian, broad-based movement of people, many of whom will disagree with you about your perceived source of societal ills. We put those differences aside because fighting back against fascism is a priority than political debate right now. Because people are being murdered. We can’t leave this without noting your galling timing with this. A few days ago, armed fascists attacked the US capitol. They built a gallows outside. They chanted “Hang Mike Pence!” They said they planned to put “heads on spikes.” They planted IEDs. They came equipped with zip tie restraints and tried to capture elected representatives. They trampled one of their own to death. They beat a cop to death with a fire extinguisher and injured 56 other cops. And now you want to claim that we shouldn’t oppose these fascists in the streets? That they should just be left unopposed out there or that the cops can deal with them while anti-fascists focus on “the material and ideological circumstances that created them?”

1K notes · View notes

comrade-meow · 3 years

Link

The male-centered progressive left has successfully made woman-hating trendy.

Today, yet another “Karen” video went viral online. This time, it seems a woman flipped off a male driver, one Karlos Dillard, who then followed her home and filmed her as she melted down into hysterics, posting the video online, which included her home address and license plate. Over eight million views later (sure to be more by the time you read this), and Dillard is selling t-shirts based on the incident.

It seems this is a hobby for Dillard, who has posted other similarly antagonistic videos, accusing women of “racism” (despite no evidence of racism) in an attempt turn Karen virality into profit. Other t-shirts for sale on his Instagram profile include one with the words, “Karen… Are you OK?” and another reading, “Keep that same energy, Karen.”

The Karen meme has been misogynist from the getgo, originating from an anonymous male Reddit user, Fuck_You_Karen, who was angry at his ex-wife, named Karen, for taking custody of his children. In 2017, his misogynist rants became a subreddit, r/FuckYouKaren.

Recently, the meaning of “Karen” was said to refer specifically to middle class, middle aged white women who are so entitled they ask to speak to the manager when perturbed, but has since morphed into a specifically racist white woman, who “weaponizes” white, female fragility against largely black men. This connects to sexist tropes that claim women use their emotions, vulnerability, and tears to manipulate men.

What began as a joke has become more than that, and has moved into explicitly misogynist (and, in my opinion, dangerous) territory.

“Becky,” which originated as a means to refer to basic white women — the Uggs-wearing, Starbucks-buying, pumpkin spice-loving kind — probably young, probably blonde, probably not working class. Like “Karen,” I never found this to be particularly offensive, as I had little desire to defend boring people who love Starbucks, but what was once a joke has become something much more egregious.Following someone to their home, doxxing, filming, and harassing them because they gave you the finger is unhinged. People are going to act like assholes in this world, and you need to learn to deal with that. Moreover, these viral videos, like the Amy Cooper/Christian Cooper bird watching/dog-off-the-leash incident, are always decontextualized. No one really knows what happened preceding the video, nor do they know why either party reacted as they did. We all know social media leaves little room for nuance, and far too many people enjoy a rage reaction over asking questions or considering they may not know the full story. The truth is that, today, people’s lives can be destroyed in an instant, via a viral post. And our culture is wielding that power with very little care.

While those participating in the mobs targeting the subjects of these currently popular Karen videos claim some form of racial justice, this is not an accurate representation.

This has little to do with race, and everything to do with a progressive left that has adopted woman-hating as political virtue signalling.

Last week, journalist and editor Jonathan Kay tweeted a “Wanted” poster he’d come across in Toronto, depicting a young, blonde, white woman. The text below her face mocked her as a “Basic Bitch” — privileged, entitled, and unwoke. The image and text presents “Becky” as dangerous — the new enemy. The A.C.A.B. (All Cops Are Bastards) logo on the poster implies it likely was produced and distributed by young anarchist men. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they were white men, considering the face of groups (or non-groups, depending on who you ask) like Antifa.

The trend of presenting women as a threat extends beyond Becky and Karen. In recent years, Antifa, anarchists, trans activists, and leftists have targeted feminists who question the impact of gender identity ideology on women’s rights as dangerous — even more so than male predators. Rhetoric that claims “TERFs kill” intentionally erases the fact that it is men who are overwhelmingly responsible for violence against both women and men (including trans-identified males). As a result, reversing this claim to say “Kill TERFs” or to show up at events discussing gender identity with cardboard guillotines with the words “TERFs and SWERFs step right up” written on them has become an acceptable form of “activism.”

This has all happened within a left that has consistently ignored and even defended the misogyny, racism, and violence of prostitution and pornography, painting women who fight the sex trade as “whorephobic” and as causing harm to “sex workers.” Everyone knows who is responsible for the abuse that happens to women in porn and prostitution. We can see it on PornHub or we can read about it in the news. Yet the left consistently fails to hold those men accountable for the harm they cause. No, no. The real problem is women. Terms like “TERF” (which means “trans exclusionary radical feminist,” but, in practice, is used to smear anyone who questions gender identity legislation or ideology) and “SWERF” (which means “sex worker exclusionary radical feminist,” but is used to smear women — even women who have worked in the sex trade — who wish to stop the universal violence and exploitation inherent to prostitution) exist to misrepresent, vilify, and end conversation. One cannot defend a “TERF” or “SWERF” any more than one can defend a “Karen” or “Becky,” unless they would like to be pilloried as unwoke and bigoted themselves.

A few years ago, trans activists and their progressive allies adopted the term “cis” to refer to those whose “gender identity matches their sex.” Putting aside the fact that no one’s “gender identity” matches their sex, as whether or not a person is male or female has nothing to do with whether or not they identify with a list of sexist gender stereotypes, the term “cis” is said to denote “privilege.” This means that a woman who understands she is female is, as per trans ideology, “privileged” over a man who desires to be viewed as a woman or who does not feel connected to masculine stereotypes. This is ridiculous, of course, as women are impacted by sexism on account of being born female, and are vulnerable to male violence regardless of how they identify. Understanding one is female does not make a woman “privileged,” it makes her a sane human being. In other words, “cis” or “cisprivilege” completely erases the reality of sexism and male violence against women. Suddenly, we are to believe women pose a threat to males who identify as transgender. Just as we are now to believe “Becky” and “Karen” are so dangerous they deserve to be hated, harassed, and destroyed. Maybe punched. Maybe worse.

This is, I’m afraid, woman-hating. And it is dangerous. The popularity of the Karen meme has led people to seek out and invent Karens in order to gain followers and profit, as evidenced by Dillard’s racket. And rhetoric that positions feminists as dangerous, harmful “TERFs” has led to the acceptance of open violent threats against women, simply for speaking out in defence of women’s rights and spaces. Karen, Becky, SWERF, and TERF are nothing more than excuses to hate women. And I am tired of people participating and defending this misogyny simply because it is on trend, and because it results in applause from the male centred left.

Yes, women can be assholes. Yes, women can be racist. No, women are not all innocent victims. But this has become about much more than calling out annoying, racist, or entitled behaviour. And, in fact, I think it was always about more than that. Let’s stop this before someone gets (literally) hurt.

#Anglo.txt

25 notes · View notes

brokenlegs · 2 years

Text

Anyone else started to get concerned about just how far gone the left is at this point? One example is how Kyle Rittenhouse was massively misrepresented by left leaning media, the raw court footage made it more than clear that it was self defense. His mother should be on trial for letting her kid with a gun at a large violent protest but the kid himself was in the right. BLM protests are just starting to look like excuses to loot, vandalize and riot while attacking anyone and everyone who has the audacity to disagree. Antifa borders on just being a straight up terrorist group. I am not conservative but what is happening on the left has disturbingly started to make the right seem like the more reasonable option. You know your political party is burning itself to the ground when the fucking proud boys seem more reasonable. Dear god im gay and I am starting to side with people who would see me deprived of an ensemble of rights. For fuck sake guys what is wrong with you? Im unaffiliated with any party but always considered myself closer to the left than right by a good margin. There is such clownage at this point Im starting to reconsider that. Please stop trying to prove the retarded shit that Prageru and Ben Shapiro say right. What happened to moderate opinions and clowning on the religous wackjobs freaking out over pop music and video games?

#kyle rittenhouse #liberalism #conservative #politics

3 notes · View notes

pumpacti0n · 3 years

Text

I’m a pacifist, but being dogmatic about non-violence is a very bourgeois take and its proof that the training by our corporate masters to be passive and fearful is complete.

morally speaking I’d argue self defense is exempt from being at odds with pacifist ideals given that you cant be peaceful if you’re fucking dead. there will be no peace as long as the wealthy white warlords (and #girlboss warlords/warlords of color) and their schemes go unchallenged.

every conscious living creature that’s aware of a threat will attempt to defend themselves and avoid harm if possible, so why should we expect otherwise for ourselves and fellow humans? liberals love to fret about antifa and rioters and anarchists and whatnot but the alternative to direct action is laying down and dying. and no one has earned that sacrifice from us.

it’s too big of a price to pay to let fascists live in “peace” while they’re destroying everything in their path. I think we must get past this purely fictitious delusion that we can love our enemies to death and by inflicting violence on them we degrade ourselves. this isn’t the same as a scorched earth policy and wanton execution of everyone deemed “counterrevolutionary” or whatever in an endless quest for vengeance.

appeals to non-violent dogmatism has been weaponized to stifle socially progressive movements and justify even more violence directed at the people who challenge authorities. to me, “revolutions are always violent” doesn’t mean that we seek out conflict (because that’s not strategic and guerilla warfare is the only legitimate method of defeating the forces in question,) but only recognizes that the current state of the world is already violent to begin with, and the owner class will reflexively increase the violence whenever the process of exploitation is threatened (or believed to be threatened).

The reason why the state doesn’t (often) deploy legions of stormtroopers and tanks to attack legal protests and voters is because they don’t constitute a major threat to the hegemony and the power structure. if you’re marching with cops and resist only in the approved methods by following the law to the letter, you can bet that you aren’t effectively challenging their supremacy in any meaningful way... it’s purely spectacle!

non-violence presumes that there is a possibility to create peace, but if the conditions aren’t there, then it’s simply waiting to die. you can’t have a nice dinner party in the middle of an active war zone unless you’re fully insulated from the terror that war brings. and this is class war. that’s why you’ll only find this kind of rhetoric coming from people more invested in preserving the already violent status quo and Not people who live the violent conditions daily.

You’d have no love lost for the destruction of an oppressive system unless you benefit from that system or find it more preferable to surrender fully than to resist. there’s no way that a violent system will allow for a peaceful resolution especially as the violence it inflicts is uninterrupted, and the perpetrators or their defenders show no interest in relenting for even a moment.

The Black Panthers wrote “on self defense” back in 1969 and they made many keen observations about the hypocrisy of so-called “peacekeepers” and their assertion that fascists have more of a right to safety than we do. It’s so wild how the talking points haven’t changed much, still lacking substance, still appealing to broken ethical standards and relying on the same bunk ass eye-for-an-eye fallacy that’s been thoroughly dissected and read for filth almost a century ago

keep this all in mind next time you see people conflating the next series of riots with terrorism and perpetuating this myth of anarchists causing trouble because they just want to drink the blood of innocents and burn down your grandmothers house while the victims of drone strikes and ICE and economic genocide are swept under the rug.

when they ask: “but must they be so violent?” you might answer: “because “kaboom!” is understood universally, but “stop killing us” apparently isn’t.”

#non violence #pacifism #fascism #anti capitalism #black panther party #self defense #direct action

6 notes · View notes

schooltrashers · 3 years

Text

The 5 pics above contains proof and comparisons showing how similar the Left are to the KKK and Nazis. In fact both the KKK and Nazis are still left-wing, no matter how much this Anarchist Social Justice Incel wants to deny it in the 2 screenshots below. Everything he just said is false and I'll tell you why that is.

See unlike him, I can back up my claims with various sources. BLM/Antifa did kill innocent black people such as 8-year-old Secoreia Turner because she was at a CHOP zone where Rayshard Brooks died. Then of course they/them(Antifa/BLM) killed Horace Lorenzo Anderson Jr who died at a CHOP zone in Seattle, Washington.

Let's not forget that during a riot they/them killed David Dorn, a retired black police officer who is married to a white woman. And we all know how angry racist white people with small dick energy hate interracial relationships. Yes Antifa/BLM are comprised of mostly angry white leftists with small dick energy.

So yes police should use deadly force against violent domestic terrorists who riot on the streets & murder innocent people. This is why I oppose anarchists groups like Antifa and BLM. Their evil actions and lack of moral values is what I oppose. The lies and deception of this anarchist clearly shows.

He does not give a shit about the victims I just mention or any truth that I posted in my previous post about "Anti-Extremism" where I condemn extremist groups and ideologies because anti-extremism is both ANTI-NAZI and ANTI-COMMIE. But he doesn't get that because he's a moron thinking his views are the "right one".

So rather than agree with me on anything I've said, he just says "you're a liar" and "you're a nazi". Even though both those things are untrue. See when it comes to the Left, they always lie and accuse you of something you're not. I prefer peace, I'm against murderers, I'm against riots, and I'm against liars.

As far as WWII goes, yes it was the conservatives who went into war and fought against Nazis. We're the ones who often join the military while the Democrats such as the KKK were the ones supporting the Nazis and terrorizing innocent black people in the U.S. like the cowards they are. Antifa & BLM are doing the same things now, that the KKK was doing back then. Also, the Republican Party was originally created to help black people, hence why they freed the slaves and fought for their rights.

The parties obviously never switched, the Democrats just switched their methods in order to deceive blacks into voting for them. The parties switching never happened, hence why Joe Biden and Robert Byrd(the KKK Grand Wizard) are pictured holding hands together. Here's a source that proves the parties never switching... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiprVX4os2Y

Furthermore, I've been anti-Nazi long before supporting Donald Trump in 2020. I use to be an anti-Trumper, believing in the lies told about Trump & his supporters. My past videos on YouTube are proof of that. Because you see, back in 2016 I didn't vote for either Trump or Hillary, I voted for Jill Stein. I've been against Nazis and extremists in general for so long, that I've made a video against MGTOW and FemiNAZIS (look at the thumbnail)... https://youtu.be/GZn5FK0deJ4

As well as calling out racists like Hulk Hogan and Mark Fuhrman for using the N-Word. Mark Fuhrman by the way is a Nazi and a corrupt cop. Here's the video proving what I just said. https://youtu.be/IsiDuyiYvK0

(This comment is directed to the Anarchist only). So before you make an ass of yourself by lying about me and making up shit, better make sure you got sources and proof to back up your claim ya Extremist Nazi Commie Scumbag.

9 notes · View notes

taramaclaywasaterf · 3 years

Text

Just walked out to grab iced tea from the fridge and saw my dad sitting slackjawed on the couch watching Fox like he does every night, and was just in time to hear fucking Tucker Carlson literally compare wearing MASKS to A MAN FLASHING HIS PENIS IN PUBLIC. I wish I was joking. Like. I’m actually fucking nauseous.

I usually bite my tongue nowadays when it comes to the shit I overhear from Fox, but even my dad knew this shit was so bad that he paused the TV, knowing I wouldn’t be able to let that comment slide without saying anything.

So I just flat out said “how the hell do you watch him?”

And he said “because nearly everything he says is spot on.”

So I said “are you joking? Did you just hear him? He literally just compared wearing a mask that prevents the spread of an airborne virus to a man flashing his dick in public.”

My dad just fucking rolled his eyes and did that awful grunt/huff thing that men do when they’re angry, and he said “I don’t want to talk about him.”

I was just like “seriously?”

And this man- this grown ass fucking 60 year old man- PLUGS HIS FINGERS IN HIS FUCKING EARS LIKE A GODDAMN CHILD THROWING A TEMPER TANTRUM and screams “I just told you I don’t want to talk about him!”

I was just like “Jesus fucking christ” and walked away, because I’m just so fucking tired of this shit.

Like...I can’t fucking deal with it anymore. I don’t understand how anyone can watch Fox in general, but especially Tucker, and especially after his full blown mask-off racist segment where he quite literally openly spewed nazi shit, and the way he acted after the Chauvin trial. Like, my dad literally records this piece of shit’s “news” show every single night so he never misses it, even though he KNOWS it’s not even fucking news, and that Tucker literally went into court and flat out admitted no one with a brain would ever agree with or believe a word out of his mouth.

I’m so fucking tired and it’s infuriating and depressing and exhausting watching my own father spiral downward more and more into this evil black hole. I thought he was beginning to see how awful all this stuff was after the capital insurrection, but he had like a day of hope then just dug his heels in even deeper. He never used to be like this before Trump. Yeah, he was conservative, and yeah, we’d get into some pretty brutal fights over politics before all this, some that even lead to him kicking me out of the house even when I was a teenager...but now, it’s like he’s a completely different person. He’s just angry all the time. All he does is watch Fox and scroll on his stupid fucking racist Facebook groups and post memes about how dumb AOC is and talk about how wonderful and special and super duper talented Trump is and how Biden is the devil.

I can’t fucking deal with this shit anymore. And I don’t know what to do. I’ve tried everything. I’ve tried talking to him. I’ve begged him. I’ve showed him practically every piece of evidence proving that Fox is nothing but a propaganda machine that he’s willingly letting control him, that Trump was a horrific president and an embarrassment to the country and destroyed countless lives. I’ve shown him that the capital wasn’t raided by ~antifa~ and that BLM protests are overwhelmingly peaceful until police brutality turn them violent. I’ve shown him proof time and time again that the election wasn’t fucking stolen, that Trump lost because the country fucking hates him. I’ve showed him interviews by experts, articles by historians, firsthand witness accounts, everything you can possibly imagine from every unbiased, trustworthy source you can think of, all disproving every single one of his stupid fucking right ring lies. But it doesn’t change his mind. None of it. Nothing fucking matters. He doesn’t care. Trump still won. George Floyd still died of an overdose. Covid is still “not that bad.” Hilary and Obama are still apart of some ~cabal.~ Climate change is still a hoax. Biden is still a Chinese puppet, and he’s ready to step down any day now so that Harris can take over to fulfill some sort of super evil master plan.... It’s like he would believe the ocean is made of the blood of murdered children and that the existence of Canada is a hoax if fucking Tucker Carlson told him so. And I can’t fucking deal with it anymore, because it’s infuriating trying to talk to someone who exists in an entirely separate reality that they’ve concocted where everything is some grand conspiracy. I’m just so fucking tired.

7 notes · View notes

gold2558 · 2 years

Text

0 notes

antifainternational · 4 years

Note

Whenever I get invited to a "leftist" space I'm almost immediately kicked out for advocating violence against nazis. I've just become completely hopless as of late. I'm not sure anyone's gonna bother fighting back anymore and I have no idea what to do.

It looks like wherever you are, people are spelling “liberal” wrong, Anon. First, some memes to cheer you up:

Now, here are a couple of essays that underscore the huuuuge position of privilege it requires to be able to sip tea and politely debate the philosophical merits of stopping racists bent on genocide and murder: -”My ‘Nonviolent’ Stance Was Met With Heavily Armed Men” by Luke Rimmel -”Antifascist Practice and Impossible Non-Violence” by Natasha Lennard Not the essay-reading type? Dr. Cornell West on his experience of nearly being lynched in Charlottesville in 2017 summarizes it succinctly:

Don’t feel like reading @ all? Watch Philosophy Tube’s breakdown of “antifa + violence” (from the 20:47 mark of this video, but the entire video is faaaantastic!):

youtube

Three final thoughts for you, Anon: -Maybe the problem is how you’re phrasing things. Antifa do not actually want violence and are not very keen to employ violence. But we do believe that antifa reserve the right to defend their communities from fascists and because fascists are violent by definition, this can mean sometimes having to physically defend their communities. “Community self-defense” = a far more accurate way to describe what antifascists do than “violence.” -If the liberals you’re running into know a better way of dealing with fascists, ask them what it is. WE’D LOVE TO KNOW!!! Is it “we should win debates with fascists so everyone can see how bankrupt their ideology is?” The historical record disproves this, as Holocaust survivor Frank Frison would tell you. To quote Frank, “If fascism could be defeated in debate, I assure you that it would never have happened, neither in Germany, nor in Italy, nor anywhere else. Those who recognised its threat at the time and tried to stop it were, I assume, also called “a mob”. Regrettably too many “fair-minded” people didn’t either try, or want to stop it, and, as I witnessed myself during the war, accommodated themselves when it took over … People who witnessed fascism at its height are dying out, but the ideology is still here, and its apologists are working hard at a comeback. Past experience should teach us that fascism must be stopped before it takes hold again of too many minds, and becomes useful once again to some powerful interests.” Maybe liberals think we should just ignore the fascists and they’ll go away if we don’t give them the attention they’re seeking? Again, the historical record shows that an unopposed/”ignored” fascist force quickly moving on to pogroms and mass murder. The only thing that works to stop fascism is stopping them by any means necessary. We don’t usually quote Adolf Hitler, but here’s what he said in 1933 about stopping the nazis: "Only one thing could have stopped our movement - if our adversaries had understood its principle and from the first day smashed with the utmost brutality the nucleus of our new movement." So really, if the liberals you’re running into don’t think it’s appropriate to physically defend their community from fascists, ask them what they think the correct approach is. Should we hug it out with them, maybe? Turn the other cheek and let them slaughter us? Their responses will at least be entertainingly naïve. Here’s a bingo card for you to use while you’re having those conversations:

-You should probably accept that some/most liberals are simply never going to accept that fascists can’t be debated away or ignored away or made your BFFs. Fuck ‘em, then! We know that fascists pose a very real threat to the lives of people they target for violence (a quick glance at our list of the 578 bigoted & fascist attacks on people so far this year - attacks which have killed 372 people and injured over 1100 others - attest to this fact) and must be stopped by any means necessary before they hurt people. Move on and find some people that have a more realistic understanding of the threat posed by fascists and what is required to stop them. -Finally: antifascism isn’t all about violence. In fact, it rarely is. 99% of anti-fascist activities don’t involve violence at all. Here’s our list of 30 antifa things you could probably do where you live that even liberals would approve of; here’s Pop Mob’s list of 40 street legal ways to fight fascists that again liberals are going to have a hard time arguing against. Pick some stuff you think you can pull off, maybe grab a couple of friends, and do the things! And let us know how it goes!

824 notes · View notes

uncloseted · 3 years

Note

my mom keeps badgering me about the capital event bc i really hated it but i support the blm protests and she says it’s hypocritical of me bc the protests were just as “violent” as the capital and “caused lots of deaths”. i never really have anything to say back to justify what went down, do you have any info i could use to explain myself? i know they were for completely different causes and one actually matters, but i don’t know how to justify the “violence” (i personally don’t think a majority of them were violent, all the ones where i lived were routinely peaceful and i think the extreme ones were sensationalized for the news). anyway sorry if it’s dumb i’m 14 and just trying to get into politics and stuff so i’m not super well informed and just trying to learn.

I’m sorry this has taken me a few days to get to. What happened at the Capitol is complicated, and I want to make sure I give you as full of an answer as possible. I also want to just quickly say that it’s awesome you’re getting involved in politics at such a young age and trying to help your parents understand these issues. I would love to answer any questions you have about politics or social issues (or just kind of anything in general, I’m not picky). Last thing and then I’ll get into the meat of this post- I’m a huge supporter of the BLM and police abolition movements and was a protestor over the summer, so I’m maybe a little bit biased. This situation makes me really angry on a personal level, but I’ll try to stick to just the facts as much as possible in this post and let you know when I’m showing my own opinions.

So the first thing I want to talk about is language. The Black Lives Matter protests were protests- a public expression of objection, disapproval or dissent towards a political idea or action, usually with the intention of influencing government policy. In the US, protesting is a constitutional right protected by the First Amendment. The storming of the Capitol was not a protest, and it wasn’t intended to be. It was planned several weeks in advance with the explicit intention of disrupting the counting of Electoral College ballots. Their stated goal was to overturn Donald Trump’s defeat in the presidential election, an election that is widely considered to be the freest, fairest, and safest election in US history (ironically, in part due to Trump’s insistence that there was voter fraud in the 2016 election). Storming a public building is not a form of protest protected by the US Constitution. Further, an attempt to overturn a democratic election is an attempt to carry out a coup. The Capitol rioters will likely be charged with sedition (conduct that incites rebellion against the established order) and/or insurrection (a violent uprising against an authority or government). The Black Lives Matter protestors were not attempting to carry out a coup against the US government, and none have been charged with offenses as big as those.

Next, I want to touch on motivation. The Black Lives Matter protesters were protesting against police brutality towards minorities, particularly Black people. There has long been a documented history of police misconduct and fatal use of force by law enforcement officers against Black people in the US. Many protests in the past have been a response to police violence, including the 1965 Watts riots, the 1992 Los Angeles riots, and the 2014 and 2015 Black Lives Matter protests in response to the murders of Michael Brown, Eric Garner, and Freddie Gray. By contrast, the Capitol rioters were not motivated by fact. They were called to action by the President of the United States, Donald Trump. They were told that the election had been “stolen” from Trump, and were encouraged to march over to the Capitol to “take back our country”. The idea that the election was stolen from the president is demonstrably false. They weren’t motivated by a social issue, a concern for their own lives, facts, or even really principle. “Our president wants us here...we wait to take orders from our president,” was what motivated them. The affiliations of those rioters are varied, but many of them are affiliated with either the far-right, anti-government Boogaloo Boys, the explicitly neofascist Proud Boys, the self-proclaimed militia The Oath Keepers, or the far-right militia group Three Percenters. Many are also on the record as being QAnon followers (followers of a disproven far-right conspiracy that started off as a 4chan troll, which states that an anonymous government official, “Q”, is providing information about a cabal of Satan-worshiping, cannibalistic pedophiles in the Democratic party who are running a child sex trafficking ring and plotting against Trump. Yes, really).

The intentions of BLM were largely peaceful. BLM protest documents encouraged protesters to be peaceful even in the face of police violence, because the BLM protesters knew what the price of being violent would be. We were encouraged not to bring weapons or anything that could be misconstrued as a weapon. Even non-violent protests were met with tear gas, rubber bullets, and riot gear. A reported 96.3% of 7,305 BLM protests were entirely peaceful (no injuries, no property damage). The 292 “violent incidents” in question were mainly the toppling of statues of “colonial figures, slave owners, and Confederate leaders”. There were also several instances of right wing, paramilitary style militia movements discharging firearms into crowds of protesters, and 136 confirmed incidences of right-wing participation at the protests (including members of the aforementioned Boogaloo Boys, Three Percenters, Oath Keepers, and Proud Boys). It was also rumored that off-duty police were inciting violence (although to my knowledge, that is unconfirmed). There is no evidence that “antifa” (a decentralized, left-wing, anti-racist and anti-fascist group) played a role in instigating the protests or violence, or even that they had a significant role in the protests at all. People who were involved in crimes were not ideologically organized, and were largely opportunists taking advantage of the chaos for personal gain.

By contrast, the “Storm the Capitol” documents were largely violent; messages like, “pack a crowbar,” and “does anyone know if the windows on the second floor are reinforced” were common on far-right social media platforms. One message on 8kun (formerly 8chan, a website linked to white supremacy, neo-Nazism, the alt-right, etc) stated, "you can go to Washington on Jan 6 and help storm the Capitol....As many Patriots as can be. We will storm the government buildings, kill cops, kill security guards, kill federal employees and agents, and demand a recount." The speakers at the Trump rally encouraged attendees to see themselves as foot soldiers fighting to save the country, and to be ready to “bleed for freedom”. The Capitol rioters were mostly armed; rioters were reportedly seen firing pepper spray at police officers, and pipe bombs, molotov cocktails, and guns (including illegal assault rifles) were found on the protesters. One protester was filmed saying, “believe me, we are well armed if we need to be.” Some protesters arrived in paramilitary regalia, including camo and Kevlar vests.

I quickly want to touch on scale. The George Floyd BLM protests are thought to be the largest protests in US history, with between 15 and 26 million (largely young, sometimes children, minority) people attending a protest in over 2000 cities in 60 countries. There were around 14,000 arrests, most being low-level offenses such as violating curfews or blocking roadways. 19 deaths have been reported, largely at the hands of police. Only one death is known to have been a law enforcement officer. The number of people who stormed the Capitol is still somewhat unclear, but it seems to be between 2,000 and 8,000 (largely older white, cis, straight, Christian men) people. 80+ people have been arrested for federal crimes, including 25+ who are being charged with domestic terrorism (something nobody associated with BLM is being accused of). There have been five deaths reported. One was a police officer, and the other four were rioters. Of those deaths, one was a police related shooting (a female Air Force veteran). The other three died of unrelated medical emergencies. One reportedly had a history of high blood pressure and suffered a heart attack from the excitement.

Now I want to look at government response. During the BLM protests, there was a huge response from law enforcement. 200 cities imposed curfews, 30 states and Washington DC activated over 96,000 National Guard, State Guard, 82nd Airborne, and 3rd Infantry Regiment service members. The deployment was the largest military operation other than war in US history, and it was in response to protests concerning, in part, the militarization of police forces. The police were outfitted in riot gear. They used physical force against BLM protesters, including batons, tear gas, pepper spray, and rubber bullets, “often without warning or seemingly unprovoked,” per the New York Times. Anecdotally, everyone I know now knows how to neutralize pepper spray, treat rubber bullet wounds, build shields out of household items, how to prevent cellphones from being tracked, and how to confuse facial recognition technology to prevent being identified (as six men connected to the Ferguson protests mysteriously turned up dead afterwards, and the police were using cellphone tracking technology). Amnesty International issued a press release calling for police to end excessive militarized response to the protests. There were 66 incidents of vehicles being driven into crowds of protesters, 7 of which explicitly involved police officers, the rest of which were by far-right groups. Over 20 people were partially blinded after being struck with police projectiles. When the BLM protests were happening, Trump said that, “when the looting starts, the shooting starts.”

In contrast, the response to the Capitol protesters was relatively tame, especially given that the US Capitol’s last breach was over 200 years ago (when British troops set fire to the building during the war of 1812) and the rioters weren’t being shy about their aspirations to conduct an armed insurrection incited by the sitting president. There was (widely available, able to be found through a Google search, everyone saw it) prior intelligence that far-right, extremist groups were planning on (violently) Storming the Capitol on January 6th, with the intention of interrupting the Electoral College ballot counting and holding lawmakers hostage. However, the US Capitol Police insisted that a National Guard presence would not be necessary for the protests, and Pentagon officials reportedly restricted DC guard troop from being deployed except as a measure of last resort, and restricted them from receiving ammunition or riot gear. They were instructed to engage with rioters only in self-defense, and were banned from using surveillance equipment. Despite prior knowledge of the “protests”, Capitol Police staffing levels mirrored that of a normal day, and no riot control equipment was prepared. The Capitol Police weren’t in paramilitary gear the way they were for the BLM protests. The mob walked in to the Capitol with little resistance. Some scaled walls, some broke down barricades, some smashed windows, and one video even seems to show Capitol Police opening a gate for the mob. Rioters traipsed around the Capitol (one of the most important government buildings in the country) with little resistance, looting and vandalizing offices of Congress members. Some rioters felt safe enough to give their names to media outlets, livestream their exploits, and take selfies with police officers. One man was (ironically) carrying a Confederate flag, a symbol of a secession attempt on the part of the South (and of racism). It took 50 minutes for FBI tactical teams to arrive at the scene, and the National Guard were initially directed by Trump not to intervene. Pence later overturned that ruling and approved the National Guard. Police used finally used riot gear, shields, smoke grenades, and batons to retake control of the Capitol, but notably no tear gas or rubber bullets. Video showed rioters being escorted away without handcuffs. Trump’s response to the riot was, "we love you. You're very special ... but you have to go home."

This is where I’m going to get a little editorial, but I think it’s important to say. If the people storming the Capitol Building were Black, they would have been met with a large, pre-coordinated military presence, violent restraint, arrests, and quite possibly would have been shot. They wouldn’t have made it inside the Capitol, much less been given free rein to wander around without immediate consequence. Hundreds of people during the George Floyd protests were arrested for just being present- 127 protesters were arrested for violating curfew on June 2nd in Detroit alone, twice the number of arrests made during the storming of the US Capitol. It turns out that the police do know how to use restraint, after all. What an absolute shock. It’s almost like they’re a corrupt and racist institution we should get rid off...

The last big thing I want to talk about is the outcome. The BLM protests were meaningful, but the outcome from them has been tame. Nobody has been accused of domestic terrorism. State and local governments evaluated their police department policies and made some changes, like banning chokeholds, partially defunding some departments, and passing regulations that departments must recruit in part from the communities they patrol. Only one city, Minneapolis, pledged to dismantle their police force. The response has largely been localized. I think the biggest impact it’s had is introducing people to the concept of police abolition and getting more people involved in the movement. By contrast, the Capitol riots have resulted in over 25 people being accused of domestic terrorism and the second attempt to impeach Donald Trump, something that has never happened before in the history of the US.

But what really concerns me is the precedent this sets. Donald Trump is an idiot, and he’s gotten this far. We can’t count on the guy who takes his place to be an idiot, too. The next guy could be clever, strategic, well-spoken, well-mannered... not to invoke Godwin’s law here, but people liked Hitler. He was a persuasive speaker and capitalized on conspiracy theories about World War 1 to gain support. His 1923 attempt to overthrow the Bavarian government failed, but sympathy for his aims grew. He painted himself as a good, moral man who loved dogs and children and was trying to do right by his country (by, among other things, arresting communists and leftists, and then eventually all minorities). Trump isn’t Hitler. He’s not even a Hitler analogue. But Trump has already done this much damage to the fabric of our society. He’s worn down our relationship with the media, with one another, with democracy, with morality, and with truth itself. We have to be prepared for the idea that the next guy might be a much better politician. Getting rid of Trump isn’t the end; it’s the beginning of a fight against fascism that’s only going to grow from here.

There are other differences you could point to. BLM protesters wore masks to prevent the spread of COVID (and indeed, researchers have reported that the protests did not drive an increase in virus transmission), for example, while the rioters were largely unmasked. But I think the bottom line is that the millions of BLM protesters were doing their best to be responsible citizens fighting peacefully for an evidence-based, human rights cause, even though they knew that as a primarily minority group of people, they would be met with violence. The thousands of far-right, white, Capitol insurrectionists were doing their best to overturn a free, fair, safe, and democratic election because of a call to action by Trump and a stringent belief in disproven conspiracy theories, which they knew would be met with minimal resistance despite the severity of their actions. The insurrectionists are fascists, full stop, and we should call them what they are. The BLM protesters were by and large just people, of all different political views and motivations, who wanted to fight against something they saw as unjust.

I’m sorry that this is such a long post. This topic has been on my mind all week, and I wanted to give it the nuance it deserves. All we can do from here is to keep fighting- for justice, for truth, and, hopefully, for peace.

#Anonymous #effys-closet #effys closet

10 notes · View notes

artielu · 4 years

Text

"September 9, 2020 (Wednesday)

Back in April, when America had reached the unthinkable level of 50,000 dead from Covid-19, news broke that Trump had been briefed way back in January on how deadly the coronavirus was but had not acted on that information. Trump defended his lack of action by saying he had been misled by the CIA briefer, who had, he tweeted, “only spoke of the Virus in a very non-threatening, or matter of fact, manner….”

Trump lied. He knew.

On January 28, at a top secret intelligence briefing, National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien told Trump that the coronavirus would be the “biggest national security threat” of his presidency. It registered. Trump’s head popped up as O’Brien’s deputy, Matt Pottinger, told Trump it could be as bad as the 1918 pandemic, and that it was spread fast by people who showed no symptoms.

On February 7, just two days after his acquittal in the Senate on the charges of impeachment, Trump picked up the phone and called journalist Bob Woodward, who was surprised to hear the president talk not about the acquittal, but about the new virus. Trump told Woodward: “This is deadly stuff.” He explained that the virus is transmitted by air, and that it was five times more dangerous than “even your strenuous flus.”

And yet, on February 2, Trump had said in a Fox News Channel interview before the Super Bowl that “we pretty much shut it down coming in from China.” Trump continued to hold large indoor rallies where he insisted the coronavirus was similar to the flu and that it would soon disappear. Twenty days after his call to Woodward, he was still telling Americans not to worry and he refused to prepare for the coming crisis. Trump told Woodward that he was not telling Americans the truth because he didn’t want “to create a panic.”

By March 19, Trump told Woodward that Covid-19 was killing young people as well as older folks, although throughout the summer he continued to insist that children should go back to school because they were “almost immune” from the virus. On April 3, Trump said at a briefing: “I said it was going away and it is going away.” On April 5, he told Woodward “It’s a horrible thing. It’s unbelievable.” On April 13, as he dismissed the need for masks, the president told Woodward “It’s so easily transmissible, you wouldn’t even believe it.”

Over the course of 18 interviews, Trump spoke for nine hours to journalist Bob Woodward. He had apparently been angry at his aides for shielding him from Woodward before the journalist published his book Fury in 2018, thinking he could charm Woodward into presenting him in a better light, as he had shaped coverage of himself in the tabloids in New York City in the 1980s and 1990s. Trump also urged senior staff and officials to talk to Woodward, who ended up getting interviews with senior adviser Jared Kushner, national security adviser Robert O’Brien, deputy national security adviser Matthew Pottinger, and former chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, among others.

Apparently, White House aides warned Trump against talking to Woodward, but not only did he do so, he permitted Woodward to record the conversations. So when White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany today tried to say that Trump had never tried to downplay the virus, a reporter retorted: “It’s on tape, Kayleigh.”

When this story broke, Trump immediately tried to reassure his base by releasing yet more names of people he would consider for any new Supreme Court seats (the list is now more than 40 people long), and told reporters that perhaps he had misled Americans because he is “a cheerleader for this country.” Trump defenders were left trying to find someone to blame for the recorded interviews. Apparently, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham helped to persuade Trump to talk to the famous journalist and tonight, Fox News Channel personality Tucker Carlson blamed Graham for the debacle, implying he had deliberately undercut the president.

In his final interview with Woodward on July 21, Trump told him, “The virus has nothing to do with me…. It's not my fault. It's — China let the damn virus out."

The book has other stunning information as well. Among other things:

Trump’s former top national security officials do not support him. Former Defense Secretary James Mattis told Woodward that Trump is “dangerous” and “unfit” to be commander in chief. Trump’s former Director of National Intelligence, former Indiana Senator Dan Coates, who is a conservative Republican, told Woodward that he suspected Putin had something on Trump. According to Woodward, Coats “continued to harbor the secret belief, one that had grown rather than lessened, although unsupported by intelligence proof, that Putin had something on Trump.” Woodward wrote: “How else to explain the president’s behavior? Coats could see no other explanation.”

Trump allegedly said “my f***ing generals are a bunch of p*****s” because they prioritized alliances over trade deals.

Trump dropped the information that his administration has developed a “nuclear… weapons system that nobody’s ever had in this country before. We have stuff that you haven’t even seen or heard about. We have stuff that Putin and Xi have never heard about before. There’s nobody—what we have is incredible.” Other sources confirmed to Woodward that the American military has developed a new weapons system. They would not talk about it, and were surprised that Trump had told Woodward about it.

On CNN, Carl Bernstein said that Woodward’s Trump tapes were worse than the Nixon tapes. The last line of Woodward's book reads: “Trump is the wrong man for the job.”

Stunningly, there was a second story today at least as big as the information in the Woodward book. Trump told Woodward that he was not telling Americans the truth because he didn’t want “to create a panic.” But he has, of course, spent the last several months explicitly trying to do just that: create a panic by claiming that dangerous anarchists are attacking our cities. It turns out he and his staff are trying to manipulate our national intelligence assessments to justify his argument.

Representative Adam Schiff, the chair of the House Intelligence Committee, today released a whistleblower complaint alleging that senior Trump officials politicized, manipulated, and censored intelligence to benefit Trump. Brian Murphy was the Acting Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis in the Department of Homeland Security. He claims that between March 2018 and August 2020, he repeatedly complained that security leaders were undercutting intelligence that showed Russia was working to undermine the United States.

That attempt to hide Russian attacks on America escalated this May. At the time, Chad Wolf was serving as the acting Secretary of Homeland Security, although the Government Accountability Office, Congress’s nonpartisan watchdog, says he was appointed to that office illegally. The complaint says that Wolf “instructed Mr. Murphy to cease providing intelligence assessments on the threat of Russian interference in the United States, and instead start reporting on interference activities by China and Iran. Mr. Wolf stated that these instructions specifically originated from White House National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien. Mr. Murphy informed Mr. Wolf he would not comply with these instructions, as doing so would put the country in substantial and specific danger.”

The complaint also concerns the DHS Threat Assessment leaked yesterday to Politico. Wolf and his deputy Ken Cuccinelli—also appointed illegally, according to the GAO—prohibited the release of the threat assessment because it discussed both the threat of white supremacists and of Russian influence in the United States. This, they said, would reflect badly on the president. “Mr. Cuccinelli stated that Mr. Murphy needed to specifically modify the section on White Supremacy in a manner that made the threat appear less severe, as well as include information on the prominence of violent ‘left-wing’ groups.” Wolf wanted to add information about the ongoing unrest in Portland, Oregon.

Murphy refused to sign off on their alteration of the intelligence report, warning that it was “an abuse of authority and improper administration of an intelligence program. Wolf ordered it revised anyway. Murphy warned that the final version of the threat assessment would “more closely resemble a policy document with references to ANTIFA and ‘anarchist’ groups than an intelligence document.” This is the document leaked in draft form to Politico yesterday.

That document was representative of a systemic effort to change intelligence reports, swinging them away from information on white supremacists and toward the language of the president. Murphy claims that Wolf and Cuccinelli repeatedly told him “to modify intelligence assessments to ensure they matched up with the public comments by President Trump on the subject of ANTIFA and ‘anarchist’ groups.”

Murphy also charges that administration officials, including then-Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen, lied to Congress, when she knowingly provided “inaccurate and highly inflated claims of known or suspected terrorists entering the United States through the southwest border.”

Schiff has asked Murphy to testify before the House Intelligence Committee on Monday, September 21, at 10:00 am.

Former Director of National Security Daniel Coats, who continues to insist that Russia is attacking the 2020 election process, also spoke up today to demand that the intelligence community resume its in-person briefings to Congress about election security. “[Russian] President [Vladimir] Putin ought to be very happy with the way this is turning out,” Coats said. “He can only view his efforts as successful.”

There is a third major story today. Wildfires driven by winds are burning across California, Oregon, and Washington. California alone has lost more than 2.5 million acres this year, and Washington has lost almost a half a million this week alone. Oregon has lost 300,000. At least 7 people have died. The region is blanketed with smoke and an eerie orange haze, and in places, ash falls like rain."

#read the whole thing #fuck trump #covid 19 #it's on tape ffs #vote blue

19 notes · View notes

hadenodom · 3 years

Text

On Last Week’s Incident in the Capitol

It isn’t often that I write a long, detailed opinion piece, but I feel like this time in particular is a time in which it is my patriotic duty to speak up.

Sometime late in 2019, I remember coming across an op-ed by a political commentator whose name I cannot remember. This opinion piece highlighted the growth of extreme movements within the United States - namely AntiFa and The Proud Boys and related groups on both sides of the political spectrum - and how they’d become more bold in their violence in recent years. It then dug back into the kind of messaging that was being boosted by Russian and other foreign intelligence agencies on social media during the 2016 election - and in this piece, the author discussed something that is often overlooked: the social media messaging portion of Russia’s efforts during that election weren’t focused on boosting a single candidate’s campaign or even with reaching on side of the political aisle. The messages they were boosting were, across the board, pushing rhetoric to inflame and provoke the extreme elements of both sides of our political divide and to widen that gap. The author finished the op-ed by offering his analysis that these efforts had been effective, and that our country was in the process of being torn apart by divisive and hateful rhetoric - that Americans had been turned against Americans, and that this was going to have a destructive effect on our democracy.

I remember reading that op-ed and being skeptical. Sure, things had reached a fever pitch in 2016, but in 2019 it seemed like everything was calming down. The economy was doing alright, there hadn’t been as much chaos or violence in the news, and the doomsday of Americans turning on each other over political differences seemed far-fetched. I came away thinking that the Russians’ efforts to divide us had been in vain, and that our country was past the pains of that particularly fraught period. We would elect someone other than Trump in 2020, and our troubles would pass.

I didn’t have 2020 vision. I didn’t forsee the economy tanking due to a virus, streets erupting in protests over racial disparities once again, AntiFa and Anarchist elements openly looting and rioting in the unrest, and then, following a chaotic election, Trump’s supporters taking to the streets and getting violent, and then eventually descending on the capitol, fully invested in a conspiracy theory that the election had been rigged. I didn’t forsee QAnon getting an outsize following and inserting themselves into this whole storyline. I didn’t forsee a large portion of our society swallowing an outright lie about election fraud and refusing to believe that our democratic system worked. I didn’t forsee any of this, and I feel like I’ve awakened in the midst of a national nightmare.

Put simply, the situation is dire. The potential consequences are dire. Our nation’s population has large factions that actively believe that their opponents are *Un*-American. The diehard Trump supporters believe that Democrats do not have the best interests of the country at heart, and most Democrats (and most Independents that aren’t leaning right) believe that Trump supporters are fascists, Nazis, traitors, and bigots. The political rhetoric coming from both the White House and from those with large media followings has stoked these tensions and gotten them to where they are today - with a little help from Russian Social Media operations way back in 2016, which seems like a distant memory now.

Making matters worse, these factions seem to have adopted separate realities with separate sets of facts- in one reality, the election was rigged: Covid-19 was either fake or not a serious threat: there’s a cabal of pedophiles orchestrating our government, and some guy named Q is an inside guy telling us the truth when the media won’t; Trump is either not a racist, or is only as racist as their lovely grandparents and their grandparents can’t be *that* bad. In the other reality, the election was thoroughly secured, had a verifiable paper trail, and has been investigated to death -- and Joe Biden won by a large margin; Covid had the capacity to overwhelm hospitals and cause hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths if we didn’t take the proposed measures seriously; A Pedophile ring running our government is as patently ridiculous as the day is long; And Q is an obvious bullshitter who moves the goalposts every time his predictions and ‘insights’ fall flat; and finally, that Donald Trump is demonstrably racist and bigoted.

Working on these separate sets of facts, both of these factions have come to believe that the other is everything wrong with their country - that their opponents (including everyday working-class people who support their opponents) are not patriots, are against what America stands for, and are worth lashing out at violently in the streets.

These factions aren’t leaving with Trump, and they proved it in the Capitol last week. They threatened for weeks to unleash violence on the Capitol. They posted detailed plans about how they were going to intimidate our representatives - our elected voice in Congress - with violence, well in advance. They repeatedly used phrases on social media before the attack, and shouted these kinds of phrases during the attack: “We will not go quietly” - phrases that all but indicated that they weren’t done just because pesky Democracy had denied their candidate a victory.

What, then, is our course as a country as Trump leaves office in a couple of short weeks? How will our leaders unite us? Personally, after much reflection, I believe our elected leaders do have a duty to attempt to unite us - or to at least refrain from provoking these tensions - but I believe the real duty is upon all of us.

It is incumbent upon all of us to remember that our fellow Americans are not our enemies - they are our neighbors, and most of us all share the same kinds problems and burdens in life. We all look to some political philosophy that tries to meet these challenges and address them, and seek political leaders who espouse these pet philosophies. If someone’s going through the same struggles as you and has a different idea of how to fix those problems for his or her country, they are not your enemy. Sure, certain things aren’t up for good-natured debate - racism, xenophobia, and bigotry can be excluded. But we should be able to discuss our problems as a country with our neighbors, and discuss differing ideas of how to solve them, without descending into vitriol and animosity. We should be able to understand each other. I feel that the only way to fix that is to make the effort to reach out and talk to those we disagree with. I have neighbors, family members, and coworkers who hold vastly different political ideologies from me, and for too long, when I hear them discussing politics, I shy away from joining the conversation, because I feel like I’d be inviting that kind of vitriol and bickering into my life. It can be uncomfortable and awkward to arrive at that stage of a conversation, where someone things you a radical leftist or a bigot simply because you dared to offer a slightly differing opinion from theirs. Social media amplifies this, because that’s the kind of response it has conditioned us to expect - the kind of response that would come from anonymous shitpostsers on the other side of a keyboard. But I’ve found that when I do, in good faith, step in and have those difficult conversations - and really have a conversation, rather then try to insert my opinion over their - when I sit down and listen to my friends, family, coworkers, or neighbors tell me about their issues and what they care about politically, and I then carefully consider their ideas and offer my own - I’ve found that experience vastly rewarding. I’ve found myself able to identify with people who I’d otherwise completely disagree with, and I’ve even found that those conversations can end with a mutual understanding and even a slight change of heart on one side or the other, or simply a mutual respect. It turns out, we’re all (the vast majority of us) interested in seeing our country and all of its people flourish and thrive, safe and secure, and passing on a better country to the next generation of Americans.

Therefore I’m making an effort to get out of my shell and have those awkward conversations again. We’ve all allowed ourselves to wallow in echo chambers, neither exposing ourselves to differing opinions or exposing our opinions to others. This pandemic, combined with social media’s tendency to be a “build-your-own-echo-chamber” kit, has amplified this in 2020. But in 2021, let’s all resolve to have those difficult conversations and to really listen to each other. If you do it for no other reason, do it to save our Republic from being destroyed from within.

I’ll finish this opinion piece with a quote you may be familiar with, one that I heard repeated on the radio recently and that has resounded infinitely with my soul in recent days:

“We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battle-field, and patriot grave, to every living heart and hearthstone, all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature”

-- Abraham Lincoln

That is from Lincoln’s inaugural address in 1861. We, as a country, failed to listen to Lincoln then. The Civil War occurred, and it took our country centuries to recover. You might argue that it was necessary to eradicate the institution of slavery and that slavery, as an institution, could not have been eradicated as quickly without the civil war. I will not disagree. But I will disagree on the idea that a coming civil war is necessary or beneficial - if we come to that point now, History will remember us as violent and shortsighted fools who destroyed their country, the global bastion of liberty and human rights, from the inside out.

3 notes · View notes