So, mods, are you going to let this thread stand?
It doesn’t advocate for terrorism remotely and if that gets closed for advocating violence then so should any thread that ever has a single pro-military post.
Doesn’t look good that you’re peddling falsehoods about a thread you want closed.
It’s an interesting thread with no advocacy that I can see, unless any mention of violence counts as advocacy for you. I hope that’s not the standard the mods choose to follow.
The guy is proudly describing how his organization uses violence as a political tool.
First, that isn’t advocacy. If he were encouraging others to to use violence, that would be advocacy.
Second, he does not say it is used as a political tool. He says they use it to fight fascists against those fascists. You can agree or disagree with that approach, but it is not terrorism.
Al Queda can use your same argument.
so can the Allied Forces.
I’m talking about the posts in the antifa thread. I haven’t seen posts by Al Queda on this message board describing their activities, so I have no idea how their argument might play out. If you feel the actions in the thread describe terrorism, then make your argument. Don’t rely on poor comparisons to other groups.
Which includes Stalin. There’s a wide range of ideologies and tactics that can be used in a battle. They are not all equivalent.
He is talking about burning government buildings and about violent revolution. Guy is a domestic terrorist.
As if there isnt a difference between government and private violence. You antifa supporters undermine the fight against KKK violence because its not politically inspired violence you oppose but only violence from those groups you disagree with.
(bolding mine) Does this indicate you’re backing off on the argument that it’s advocacy? Because I’d think making an argument in the thread on whether these acts constitute terrorism would be an interesting addition. But I disagree strongly that the thread should be closed.
Anyone can use any argument they please. If you think it’s a bad one, feel free to argue against it.
You support privately motivated violence to push an agenda you agree with. So does Al Queda or the Unabomber or the KKK. Either you oppose political violence to push an agenda or you dont.
I don’t know what arguments you are reading. I am arguing that the thread should remain open.
I’m sure you can find someone in that thread who will argue with you about supporting “privately motivated violence to push an agenda.” That person isn’t me, and that place isn’t here.
So was George Washington, by your standards.
FTR I’m against all violence. It’s when you categorize violence as some good and some bad that you undermine your own humanity.
to the OP: I am a lifelong pacifist who believes that ALL violence is wrong and am no friend of antifa, but that thread seeks to explain why they use it among other tactics. It does not advocate it.
mc
Apologies then. I also think it should stay open but I also think violent political protest is terror whether its coming from the left or the right.
Hopefully you’ll catch a warning for namecalling in that thread, but other than that, it’s an interesting thread that helps people understand an important issue at the forefront of national discussion. If you’re banned from the thread for your personal attacks, it can continue in an interesting manner.
No, it doesn’t. The terrorist is obviously proud of his terrorist organization.