With Rise of Far-Right Extremists, N.Y.P.D. Creates Special Unit

[Yoshingo]

Well kudos to the first response to this thread saying it would get trolled to hell.

A regular Nostradamus, ya are.

Conservatives will take any opportunity to distract from the fact that their movement in the US is the one being infiltrated (Or maybe just exposed for what they'e always been) by fringe racists like the KKK and Neo Nazis.

Its rather cute that some posters that roundly partake in such actions on MMO-Champion are now feigning outrage over some made up "far left" that somehow is doing something equally as bad with no evidence.

[Orbitus]

Pretty interesting development. Going to be fun to see the reaction from the alt-right, Trump, and other full-blown wackaloons.

Calling it before it happens; this thread is going to be trolled/sealioned to hell.

You were right, and the guy with the Nazi avatar, was in on the first page.

[Zython]

This seems like creating a team of foxes to guard hen houses.

[Machismo]

Yes very good. It's just you forgot to mention everyone in your prior post.

Never said that about Hitler. I was talking about what policy ideas would be okay if they were held by Hitler vs Mother Teresa. Also that's a point about me as a person which is ad hominem.

Excpet it's not... it was a conversation you and I had. You said you were willing to ignore any past transgressions, so long as the candidate had a current platform that you agreed with. Hitler happened to be my example, and you agreed. it's not an ad hominem, it was a counter to your stance.

- - - Updated - - -

Is retaliation "just as bad" as being the aggressor?

it depends on what you are retaliating against, and how far you go with your retaliation. Considering you have called for political violence against non-violent people... I'd have a huge problem with that.

[Shadowferal]

It's not any more or less wrong than non-white groups wanting to gain group power and lip service, any grouping not based on an 'idea' is tribalistic and invalid. All or none.

That explains why the GOP want disenfranchise so many other non-white groups.

[Machismo]

Have I?

I've definitely never called for violence? I'm not sure why you think me understanding political violence, why it occurs and what it achieves is me condoning all violence or the use of violence.

I would like an example of me earnestly calling for violence against non-violent people.

Yep, I distinctly remember the conversation I had with you. You called for using violence against people with authoritarian or fascist beliefs. Mind you, you called for using violence FIRST.

It's when I called you out, that you admitted to never actually wanting to be the one to do it, you wanted others to do it, because you didn't want to get your hands dirty.

[Machismo]

Yeah so what I said before.

Pretty sure when you asked if conflict did break out would I fight and I said I couldn't because i physically can't and then you twisted my disability into this idea that I wanted others to do my dirty work.

You have this very warped idea of "political violence", you cling to this very loaded term so you can ignore context and basically use it to try shut down any nuanced discussion about violence and its place in society.

Great, then you agree with my statement, and I was correct in my assessment of you.

Thanks for admitting it.

[Machismo]

See what the fuck are you even doing, I say one thing then you make some absurd jump in logic and say it means I advocate for something else.

I expect so much better from you. You're not stupid.

You advocated for political violence. No thanks.

[Endus]

Its the far left that has issues with jews. They hate Israel and love Palestine.

A> Not universally true to begin with.
B> Has literally nothing to do with Israel being a largely Jewish state. That you can't think of any other reason, though . . .

Yes its funny that same lie that they are just "anti zionists" is used by both right and left. When Omar was talking about jews having "dual loyalty" and accused them of "allegiance to a foreign country" it was also just a "disagreement with the actions of the Israel", right ?

That's not what she was talking about. You're lying.

She was referring to American politicians and lobbyists who expect American politicians to blindly support Israel; that is the "dual loyalty" she was calling out, and how some American politicians were expected to have an "allegiance to a foreign country".

If you can't make your case without lying this badly, you don't have a case.

[Endus]

Violence has ZERO place in society, anyone who says otherwise has never experienced it, and must be destroyed by any civilization hoping to enjoy quality of life on this floating rock in space. Go back to the jungles and rivers and hunt for food if thats what you want but stop trying to take the rest of us back in there with you. We found something better.

To play devil's advocate, violence is the necessary response to violence. If you can't accept that, you're saying that a mass shooter should be allowed to continue shooting people until he gets tired or runs out of ammo, because using violence to stop him is "wrong". While I can understand that as a personal ethic (though I'd disagree with it), it doesn't make any sense at all as a national ethic. It's just allowing villains to engage in violence without prevention.

Would it be nice if we didn't need to use violence, because violent criminals didn't exist? Sure. Is that the reality we live in? Unfortunately, no. Until we reach a point where no one is initiating violence, violence in defense of self or others has to be justifiable.

At a bare minimum.

Once you acknowledge that, you've opened the door to a more nuanced discussion on the subject.

[Machismo]

Yeah fuck civil rights. They're not worth fighting for.

One should fight for civil rights... including the right to not be attacked when you are not being violent.

[Machismo]

No they shouldn't that's political violence.

"When you are not being violent" is such a non-specific thing to say. Are generals in war not being violent? Are people helping people plan shootings "not being violent"? When and where do you draw the line when it comes to someone's complicity in a violent act? It is not as black and white as you want it to be.

I'd love more than anyone for society to get better without anymore bloodshed, but the reality is that the people ruining the world wont stop without a fight. They won't stop if you ask nicely either and they already use violence to hold on to what they have and acquire more. So what do you propose we do? Sit back and watch the world burn while the people with resources and wealth laugh?

We've had this conversation before, you clearly love political violence.

Thanks for admitting it.

[Machismo]

What makes you think I love it? Accepting the fact we live in a brutal reality isnt really loving anything.

The presumption I find any joy in this is weird.

Instead of making weird assumptions about how you feel and what you believe I'm going to ask you, what exactly should we do to minimize the suffering in the world?

You seem very critical of everyone but you dont really offer any suggestions.

Once again, we've already had this conversation. have a swell day.

[Zython]

Yes very good. It's just you forgot to mention everyone in your prior post.

Never said that about Hitler. I was talking about what policy ideas would be okay if they were held by Hitler vs Mother Teresa. Also that's a point about me as a person which is ad hominem.

You say that as though Mother Teresa was a good person.

[Machismo]

You're going to avoid the question yet again? I'm pretty sure this is how this conversation always ends and why it keeps happening.

I really dont want to have to believe that you dont give a shit, because you're in a comfortable enough position in the current status quo and would rather be complacent than rock the boat.

I stopped reading your comments, because we've had this conversation before.

Your support of political violence is noted, and thanks for admitting I was right.

[Endus]

Ill answer, and this goes to Endus post as well. Violence is only ever acceptable to stop immediate acts of violence. Period. Not over abortion rights, not over LGBT or civil rights, not over high taxes, not over immigration, not over oil, or money, or land, not over love or hate, nothing else. Literally nothing else. Violence is the worst thing, none of those things are as bad as violence. So the math is simple. Its just one of these: Violence < every other bad thing. So its only to be employed to stop its use. Your questioning my use of the word "destroyed" is disingenuous as the destruction would only be needed to stop violence, which is its only ethical application.

So police shouldn't be allowed to arrest people plotting a terrorist attack, unless they can show the attack is "immediate" rather than at some time in the future?

Police can't arrest a serial killer unless he's about to attack a new victim?

Your position doesn't seem to stand up to even a basic level of scrutiny.

[Endus]

This is what happens to people who never see violence. You lack perspective.

A> You know fuck-all about what others here have been through in their lives.
B> If anything, what you're describing is a pathological over-reaction you make because of past trauma. That trauma doesn't justify the over-reaction.

[Orbitus]

They are both violent and extreme, one merely can google the name to witness countless videos of them committing violence and destruction, it is absolutely no secret and has also been featured on National TV such as CNN as well as a terrorist classification. I have never heard of this cult you mentioned, but if they engage in violence they should absolutely be arrested, of course.

Yeah, sorry, this both sides bullshit is exactly that, bullshit. No body count for Antifa, but we have literally dozens from Right wingers like the Tree of Life Synagogue shooter, and the El Paso shooter, in just the last year. Then you have the dumbass in the Trump van that mailed what? 3 dozen bombs that weren't exactly working, but still lethal if they right thing happened.

[TexasRules]

I notice they are doing nothing about the antisemitism that is running rampart in their area. I am sure they think it is all alt right and nothing more. Like in New Jersey lol

[Endus]

Those arrests prevent violence. Immediate was not meant as an indication of time, perhaps imminent would have been better phrasing.

In neither case I described was there an imminent threat, by design.

Also, you've already moved your goalposts from "stopping violence" to "preventing violence". This is the point; your position is absolutist and extreme and doesn't hold up.

and just to get you next part of the argument out of the way so we can skip a few steps, I consider acts like theft and rape to be violence as well.

Well, rape, sure, but for theft, you're now trying to redefine "violence" as convenient for you.

So again, those goalposts shift because you know you can't back up your original assertions.

So you can skip that one and just get to the point after, which I haven't fully predicate yet, but I have some ideas and am oh so excited to watch you slowly try to inch the conversation to the point where you say "and this is why we should water board people who misgender others on twitter".

And now you're baiting me with bullshit I have neither said not even remotely approached in anything I have ever posted in any of my 60,000+ posts here.