Jump to content

President Trump asked the Proud Boys to 'stand by.' Who are they?


webfact

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, simon43 said:

Where does it say that they are a white supremacy group?  The article says "Group members tend to adhere to an ideology that rejects overt white supremacy but embraces chauvinism, according to the ADL."

Do you not understand the word "overt" or are you simply pretending not to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, simon43 said:

Where does it say that they are a white supremacy group?  The article says "Group members tend to adhere to an ideology that rejects overt white supremacy but embraces chauvinism, according to the ADL."

"Oregon's Governor Brown criticized the Proud Boys in a tweet on Wednesday. "Let's be clear: The Proud Boys are white supremacists," she said."

 

From the article. The ADL say they're not white supremacists; but the Democrat Governor of Oregon says they are.

 

Who do you believe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Baerboxer said:

"Oregon's Governor Brown criticized the Proud Boys in a tweet on Wednesday. "Let's be clear: The Proud Boys are white supremacists," she said."

 

From the article. The ADL say they're not white supremacists; but the Democrat Governor of Oregon says they are.

 

Who do you believe?

Looking at the many claims on here of people who claim not to be racists when their posting history shows otherwise, looking at the claims and actions of the Proud Boys, I would trust the governor of Oregon in this, Democrat or Republican.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

Do you also believe it when you get an email from Barrister Bosco Ndjamena telling you there's a debit card in your name with the sum of $7,136,628 (seven million one hundred thirty six thousand six hundred twenty eight dollars) at the airport in customs?

 

No, there is no org called antifa, and no place for Soros, the Gates or Clintons to send money even if they were so inclined. Your post is utter addled-brain moonbat nonsense and should be removed.

 

Given the undoubted vast amounts of politically motivated fake news, false websites, deliberately misleading and fake MSM news reports etc - how do you know who to believe and who not too?

 

How do you know his belief his wrong and yours is right?

 

Without any silly extreme analogies please. 

  • Confused 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Given the undoubted vast amounts of politically motivated fake news, false websites, deliberately misleading and fake MSM news reports etc - how do you know who to believe and who not too?

 

How do you know his belief his wrong and yours is right?

 

Without any silly extreme analogies please. 

Right, fake and politically motivated sites like Jones and Breitbart, so you don't know who to believe. Trust the MSM. They do make mistakes, but correct when wrong. But I'm sure you'll be able to find a few instances where that was not the case.

Edited by stevenl
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stevenl said:

Right, fake and politically motivated sites like Jones and Breitbart, so you don't know who to believe. Trust the MSM. They do make mistakes, but correct when wrong. But I'm sure you'll be able to find a few instances where that was not the cvase.

 

Like the Washington Post and New York Times? 

 

MSM is largely owned by media moguls who want to lean, sometimes very heavily, to their own political agendas and views. And may switch sides when it suits. Mr. Murdoch springs too mind.

 

False reporting of "facts" that support a desired agenda, with little real evidence, seems to have replaced journalistic integrity and professionalism.

 

Given that a free, and unbiased, press is an important component of a free democracy, as is a non politicized independent judiciary, things don't bode well for the future of traditional Western democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Like the Washington Post and New York Times? 

 

MSM is largely owned by media moguls who want to lean, sometimes very heavily, to their own political agendas and views. And may switch sides when it suits. Mr. Murdoch springs too mind.

 

False reporting of "facts" that support a desired agenda, with little real evidence, seems to have replaced journalistic integrity and professionalism.

 

Given that a free, and unbiased, press is an important component of a free democracy, as is a non politicized independent judiciary, things don't bode well for the future of traditional Western democracy.

I'm disappointed, not even examples of "They do make mistakes, but correct when wrong. But I'm sure you'll be able to find a few instances where that was not the case.". Only empty rhetoric, even confusing US politics with tradition and with western democracies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, stevenl said:

I'm disappointed, not even examples of "They do make mistakes, but correct when wrong. But I'm sure you'll be able to find a few instances where that was not the case.". Only empty rhetoric, even confusing US politics with tradition and with western democracies.

 

Deny and Gobbledegook. The refuge of the left.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Are you attempting to claim people who post here are racist? If so, man up and say so. Or is it you support the the left wing tactic of accusing any and all who dare challenge their agenda and rhetoric as being "racist, neo Nazi fascists"? Because the reality is that's a denouncement tactic favored by Stalinists, Maoists, and other extreme left totalitarian regime supporters. 

But never extreme right wing regimes, right? Like, Hitler never used "denouncement tactics" at all, is that correct?

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Many examples or racist posts, but no, naming posters here would be against forum rules.

Why would this be against rules? Most people believe their race is superior in some aspects than others. 

Other people are terrified of being called a racist, probably as they don't know what it means.

 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, simple1 said:

Great group for trump to express support. Member convicted for street violence, self-admitted chauvinists. Members (vigilantes) often clad... in black and yellow polo shirts, wear body armour, and carry weapons, including firearms, paintball guns and baseball bats; excellent example of the American people - not.

.....but they are not racists. Sly attempt by dim-wit Biden's people to bring racism into the debate. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bendejo said:

There is a whole subculture in the US of this kind of stuff.  The groups with names are one thing, but a lot of these guys read the junk on the net (there used to be newsletters and mailing lists) and "self-recruit," just like with young fellows around the world who say they're part of ISIS.  No difference.

Look up:

Charleston church shooting

Look up Oklahoma City bombing.

(I don't want to post names)

 

 

Fits the psychological profiles of the reasons for inner-city males joining gangs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Mick501 said:

He was asked by both Wallace and Biden whether he would condemwhite supreiscists and immediately replied, "Sure."  The rest of his answer sought to direct the conversation towards the far more dangerous threats of far left Antifa, who Biden would not condemn.

 

Left media have deliberatley falsified his response.

 

Trump was asked if he would. He said "sure". Alright.

 

Now, let's try and recall some other things Trump said he would do - Build the Wall, Reveal Financial Info, Drain the Swamp, Win the Trade War, Declare Antifa A Terrorist Organization - and which failed to happen.

 

This in mind, having him commit and immediately act on it was fine.

 

That you do not like the President blowing it doesn't change things.

 

  • Confused 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Paul Henry said:

The simple answer and probably the action both parties will take is to use the 25th amendment to oust Trump after he looses the election and before he can stir up the white supremacy groups. The leaders of the Republican party have already stated there will be a peaceful and orderly transfer of power.From the final result announcement until the 20 January 2021 Trump will do all he can to wreck the country. He has no loyalty or love for the USA only for himself and his selfish own gain.

I fear the only way to secure this is with an en masse rejection of The Donald and his ilk. Any, “close election” and it will not matter to me, ?I will have lost my country.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, wwest5829 said:

I fear the only way to secure this is with an en masse rejection of The Donald and his ilk. Any, “close election” and it will not matter to me, ?I will have lost my country.

Never give up the ship brother the only way trump remains in power is fraud he’s toast I suggest you wax up the old long board there’s a blue wave building looks to be a big one!!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...