Jump to content

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


webfact

Recommended Posts

 

@Logosone

 

No, not wrong. Founders and leaders can subscribe to a political philosophy - it does not follow that all the membership identifies with such views, understands them or is even aware of them. Further, other than saying so, one would have to demonstrate just how the organization upholds the tenets of said political philosophy. You have not.

 

As others pointed out, the topic isn't even about Antifa. You're just trying to make it so in order to deflect and derail. Pushing the same nonsense over and over again, regardless of what others post. In this, you exhibit the same 'debate' style showcased by Trump.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JemJem said:

They are obviously not white supremacists. 

 

But, they are definitely a fascist group. Fascism doesn't include only white supremacists.

 

Fascism is on the rise in the US. Let's not forget that the Proud Boys are not the only fascist group. There is a wide range of fascist militia. And, the KKK and Aryan Nation still very much exist. 

 

I fear things will get ugly after the election. Of course, the US is not the Middle East, and things won't get out of control, but, many innocent people might be killed or injured by fascists. 

Yes, but one only has to look where they sprang from. 'Proud Boys' weren't around in my day (mentioned in my other comments)...of course they've been around only a short time...but they have a rich violent 'heritage', Neo Nazi and the like. Now, I don't know if this is general but my experience was that far left extremist were rather 'quiet' and more secretive in their approach to a situation. The Nazi like groups were the exact opposite and were 'not shy in coming forward'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TKDfella said:

I am not American and have no axe to grind one way or the other but you obviously don't know the history of ANTIFA. It started in the early 1930's (some say 1920's) and was originally in Europe (generally speaking) Originally an anti fascist, largely a far left, movement. Some writers say it was born out of Resistance. After WWII it seemed to splinter and there was not really one specific group but various groups with similar ideals. This is why there speculation and doubt today. ANTIFA appeared in Britain later along side far right groups (hence my earlier post on this thread). When people tell you they are not real it is because they can't pin ANTIFA down to a particular HQ. There are historical books on the subject but beware there are also books that are, shall I say, 'questionable'. The other point is that groups with similar ideals have different names but end up with the same acronym ANTIFA. However, years ago, to my dismay, I found out yet another related group that were most definitely of the 'armed' (in fact 'armed' was their first word in their acronym) variety and their sole purpose is/was to further anarchy and communism. I am not suggesting anything about the riots in the USA but it would be difficult understand why the USA wouldn't have 'chapters', 'houses' etc. of ANTIFA.

I think what your post is based upon is when, 2019 and this year, contradictory remarks being made and that ANTIFA was an ideology not an organisation. Now that is true, up to a point. As I said above they are not an organisation with a definite HQ or centre (although they even had a congress in the early days) but they definitely exist.

 

 

First of all, thanks for the review. Not that I needed it, given that it (or other versions) made the rounds on this forum several times, plus there's quite a lot of resources available out there.

 

I think what you obviously did was respond to something which wasn't part of my post. Maybe you were trying to respond to someone else, maybe to another post I've made. No idea.

 

This is what I have posted:

 

Quote

 

Given that you (and other Trump supporters) often raise generalized complaints about the media, while at the same time failing to either clearly demonstrate them, or offer acceptable, viable alternatives does not make your point.

 

Let's start with this - is there such an Antifa webpage? Does it include the alleged information? Is there any credible source supporting such allegations? Something to confirm it?

 

The original post which led to this exchange alleged that several well-known donors (you can guess, it's the usual ones favored by right-wing conspiracy theorists) are Antifa 'benefactors'. It was further claimed that the information is available on Antifa's webpage. No support for this was offered.

 

The post I was replying to alleged that we cannot know what the truth is as there are too much 'fake news' about, and too many political interests represented. Or something like that.

 

My two points were , first regarding the effect that complaints by Trump supporters about the media are usually not supported by much, and that no alternative is offered. Second, that this doesn't apply to the original post - specific claims were made, and these (supposedly) could be supported or dismissed.

 

Nothing to do with what you've posted about. Sorry.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Numerous posts and replies to them have been removed, including:

 

--a series of unsupported and unsubstantiated posts making claims of responsibility against the BLM group and Antifa followers.

 

--two reports based on Breitbart.com posts, which are not considered a credible news source on this forum.

 

--bickering and off-topic posts.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TKDfella said:

The other point is that groups with similar ideals have different names but end up with the same acronym ANTIFA.

Antifa is not an acronym and shouldn't be written in block capitals. Its simply an abbreviation of "Anti fascist"

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

 

First of all, thanks for the review. Not that I needed it, given that it (or other versions) made the rounds on this forum several times, plus there's quite a lot of resources available out there.

 

I think what you obviously did was respond to something which wasn't part of my post. Maybe you were trying to respond to someone else, maybe to another post I've made. No idea.

 

This is what I have posted:

 

 

The original post which led to this exchange alleged that several well-known donors (you can guess, it's the usual ones favored by right-wing conspiracy theorists) are Antifa 'benefactors'. It was further claimed that the information is available on Antifa's webpage. No support for this was offered.

 

The post I was replying to alleged that we cannot know what the truth is as there are too much 'fake news' about, and too many political interests represented. Or something like that.

 

My two points were , first regarding the effect that complaints by Trump supporters about the media are usually not supported by much, and that no alternative is offered. Second, that this doesn't apply to the original post - specific claims were made, and these (supposedly) could be supported or dismissed.

 

Nothing to do with what you've posted about. Sorry.

Well, i did wonder because you wrote '... is there such an Antifa webpage?' There is an ANTIFA International, https://antifainternational.tumblr.com/ However, as mentioned I've no axe to grind so I haven't researched that page and may not be authentic. So, 'sorry', it did have have something to do with what you posted

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, polpott said:

Antifa is not an acronym and shouldn't be written in block capitals. Its simply an abbreviation of "Anti fascist"

Yes I did make a mistake writing Antifa in large type but with regard to acronyms, concerned 'other groups' having the same acronym. Although I do admit to the ambiguity in proximity.

 

Edited by onthedarkside
hidden post reply removed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TKDfella said:

Yes I did make a mistake writing Antifa in large type but with regard to acronyms, concerned 'other groups' having the same acronym. Although I do admit to the ambiguity in proximity.

Its not an acronym, its an abbreviation.

An acronym is made up of the first letter of several words and is usually written in block capitals. eg NATO, North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. An abbreviation is the shortening of one or more words.

 

If you think that its an acronym, please tell me what the letters ANTIFA stand for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

That is a webpage. Nowhere does it say it's an official or authoritative one. Not even specifically focused on the USA situation. And of course, none of that alleged donor information to be found.

 

In the USA alone, there are currently over 200 groups associated with Antifa. Some have webpages, some do not. Some are genuine, others not so much.

 

Far-right smear campaign against Antifa exposed by Bellingcat

https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-41036631

 

A Fake Antifa Account Was 'Busted' for Tweeting from Russia

https://www.vice.com/en/article/59dwed/a-fake-antifa-account-was-busted-for-tweeting-from-russia-vgtrn

 

How to Spot a Fake Antifa Account

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/08/how-to-spot-a-fake-antifa-account.html

 

Fake Boston Antifa group, which claimed credit for anti-racism banner at Red Sox game, is actually run by right wing trolls

https://www.masslive.com/news/2017/09/fake_boston_antifa_group_who_c.html

 

What you've posted 'have something to do' with that only in a very roundabout way.

Ha, you questioned whether there was a webpage and I gave you one. As far as the US is concerned I have no idea who funds them. You made a mistake and that's the end of it. Whether it suits you or not is of no concern to me.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TKDfella said:

Ha, you questioned whether there was a webpage and I gave you one. As far as the US is concerned I have no idea who funds them. You made a mistake and that's the end of it. Whether it suits you or not is of no concern to me.

 

No, you have missed the first part of the exchange, and misunderstood the summary included above. The reference was to a specific page, and there was a specific claim regarding content. I did not question that Antifa webpages exist, but whether the previously alleged one was real (or genuine). There was no mistake made, other than by yourself thinking you understood what was being discussed.

 

This topic isn't even about Antifa. But In as much as Antifa relates to the OP, it's more to do with Antifa groups in the USA, rather than internationally. The comment you responded to were about that, and also addressed claims regarding funding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Tug said:

I don’t know it might just be easier to stop following his orders paying his bills he will probably just wander away lol more likely he will sneak out in the dark of night to hide his shame of beeing the biggest failure of a president in our history 

He is shameless. This should be abundantly clear by now. 

Sociopaths have no empathy and feel no shame. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/1/2020 at 7:24 AM, Credo said:

I haven't gone to the next five pages yet, but I'm sure your posting a direct and irrefutable rebuttal to the straw man postulated by ironically-named EVENKEEL, will no doubt result in an acknowledgement of error and an apology for posting misleading information. Anyway, that's it for me on this one, I'm off to watch the flying pig migration.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It WAS a stupid thing to say and the libs are bound to be all over it and conveniently forget the stuttering Joe. I think there's a good chance Biden will win and i think he'll be a so-so President fighting off the left libs constantly. The virus cost Trump the election but what happened... happened. The last of the Dem dinosaurs will take the prize until 2024.

Edited by BobBKK
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

It WAS a stupid thing to say and the libs are bound to be all over it and conveniently forget the stuttering Joe. I think there's a good chance Biden will win and i think he'll be a so-so President fighting off the left libs constantly. The virus cost Trump the election but what happened... happened. The last of the Dem dinosaurs will take the prize until 2024.

Joe won't be able to fight off the left libs with what's her name at his side. I wouldn't mind ole joe at the helm but it's the far left that's scary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

It WAS a stupid thing to say and the libs are bound to be all over it and conveniently forget the stuttering Joe. I think there's a good chance Biden will win and i think he'll be a so-so President fighting off the left libs constantly. The virus cost Trump the election but what happened... happened. The last of the Dem dinosaurs will take the prize until 2024.

"The virus cost Trump the election" You can say that again.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, stevenl said:

"The virus cost Trump the election" You can say that again.

just released, both Trump and wifey have been tested to cv19............ should have been wearing a mask.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump typical comments, fact check contradictions, one has to laugh at his stupxxity 555

 

1st he says "Proud Boys, stand back and stand by, but I'll tell you what, somebody's gotta do something about antifa and the left,” Mr Trump said.

 

 and then he he says "I don’t know who Proud Boys are, but whoever they are, they have to stand down, let law enforcement do their work," Mr Trump said.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/m-not-chris-wallace-cnn-003449575.html

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EVENKEEL said:

Joe won't be able to fight off the left libs with what's her name at his side. I wouldn't mind ole joe at the helm but it's the far left that's scary.

 

There is no reason to believe she'll have more power than previous VP's held.

  • Like 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...