Cloudflare Removes Neo-Nazi Site From DDoS Mitigation Service

[sykozis]

Something I thought about last night. People, including moderators, keep going on about DailyStormers' right to free speech and how CloudFlare is supposedly censoring them....but, users on every forum get censored in some way. So, why is it fine to censor forum users but not hate groups? Come on moderators, explain that to me? Your stance is a bit illogical. Censorship on the internet started well before CloudFlare dumped DailyStormer.

 

[Virtual_Singularity]

I can't believe how many people are actually defending Dailystormer.... I get that everyone has a right to freedom of speech, but allowing groups like the KKK to spread hatred doesn't advance society. I applaud CloudFlare for dumping DailyStormer.

The stance from some moderators that CloudFlare exercising their right to choose who they do business with is wrong makes me wonder what those moderators do when they're not monitoring our posts. CloudFlare deciding not to do business with the DailyStormer in no way impacts their right to free speech. They're still free to spread their hate. The ability to choose who a company does business with, actually helps protect companies. There are a lot of people that look at who the President is and how they conduct business, and try to mimic them. Since "45" took office, the company I work for has seen a dramatic increase in customers making unrealistic demands and threatening lawsuits when their demands aren't met. If the company I work for wasn't allowed to choose who we do business with, we'd have to put out a lot more money on legal expenses, resulting in eventual bankruptcy. So, it's really not a difficult choice. The right of businesses to choose who they do business with, or the right of a hate group to spread their idiotic ideology that every other race is inferior. I'll take business rights and employment. To support an ideology rooted in hate and superiority is chosen unlike race, gender, nationality, genealogy or sexual orientation. If you choose to support an ideology rooted in hate and superiority, you have no right to whine and cry when reasonable people don't want to deal with you.

AntiFa is short for "Anti-Fascist Movement".... From what I've read, it's not an organized group like the KKK or BLM. Based on statements from the head of the BLM, they're really no better than the KKK.... It's time for the US Gov't to declare both the KKK and BLM as terrorist organizations.

ANTIFA are made up of mostly HYPER-VIOLENT paid schills, merely one incarnation of many branches of the same group. They should be branded a terrorist organization because that's precisely what they are. The petition to the White House to declare them as such has nearly reached 300,000 signatures within an incredibly short time, just fyi. They're very well funded, well staffed, though with many members who know/care nothing for its agenda, there only for the money. Don't believe it? Do a bit of basic research & see for yourself.

Some act as violent anarchists, some as violent communists, some have helped "color revolutions" succeed, so on and so forth. The same trademarks are always there: hyper violence, and the MSM obscuring your ability to clearly see them for the real, actual, fascists they truly are.

And by the way. You can thank the likes of billionaires e.g. Mr Soros and their many NGO's, for funding POS organizations like ANTIFA (he's very proud & made no secret of giving money he's "earned" by nearly bankrupting nation states via currency speculation, to such movements). In fact, all those "movements" you mention above, and more, were & are funded by him and his close pals.

Once again: There's NO IDEA that should be off limits for honest debate in our society. If you have reached the point where you actually believe in hate speech, that civil discourse on certain topics should be criminalized or looked down on, then you're as far gone and lost as the rest of the drones.

The most disgusting pornography, along with other nauseating, evil, perverse, unnatural sites exist on the net without any hassle or bother whatsoever. But when the PC Cult "Ministry of Truth" says peaceful, "far right" or whatever they deem forbidden isn't allowed, that's somehow ok? And SCREW how businesses work. This is basic right and wrong, it's about common sense, not whether "private companies have the right to allow or ban any site they choose". Open your eyes already. The irony is beyond palpable...

P.S. This was edited a few times because the site's spell checker isn't helping keep words that are spelled correctly stay that way once the post is updated, just fwiw.

 

[bit_user]

AntiFa is short for "Anti-Fascist Movement".... From what I've read, it's not an organized group like the KKK or BLM. Based on statements from the head of the BLM, they're really no better than the KKK.... It's time for the US Gov't to declare both the KKK and BLM as terrorist organizations.

I think it's a mistake to characterize groups based on the most extreme things said of any of their members. I'm not defending AntiFa - the general principle applies to most groups, especially larger ones.

the MSM obscuring your ability to clearly see

Before dismissing all information that doesn't comport with your world view, you might give a bit of thought to how suicide cults form.

And by the way. You can thank the likes of billionaires e.g. Mr Soros and their many NGO's

Are you only bothered about who is pulling the strings? If your problem is with people being manipulated by ideologues, take a good look in your own rear view.

The more self-assured a group is that it has found the shocking truth and that everyone on the outside is either enemies or drones, the more skeptical I would become.


Taking a step back... As I alluded in my first message, this story is really about rights, politics, and public policy. You can't discuss it without going there. Sure, it involves tech, but then so does just about every facet of modern life. The story had plenty of coverage in non-tech news. So, unless the site is expanding its purview, then the editors would be well-advised to stick to the aspects of the story that are actually tech, such as how DDoS mitigation services actually work.

 

[Virtual_Singularity]

Are you only bothered about who is pulling the strings? If your problem is with people being manipulated by ideologues, take a good look in your own rear view.

The more self-assured a group is that it has found the shocking truth and that everyone on the outside is either enemies or drones, the more skeptical I would become.


Taking a step back... As I alluded in my first message, this story is really about rights, politics, and public policy. You can't discuss it without going there. Sure, it involves tech, but then so does just about every facet of modern life. The story had plenty of coverage in non-tech news. So, unless the site is expanding its purview, then the editors would be well-advised to stick to the aspects of the story that are actually tech, such as how DDoS mitigation services actually work.

Regardless if it was deliberate or not, you misquoted me. But since you mention it, I've no love for either group. What I DO have appreciation & respect for is the US constitution, which guarantees free speech via the First Amendment. Well funded AntiFa, a violent group which specifically states they're against both free speech they disagree with, as well as the U.S. Constitution. Worse yet, have time & again attempted to violently suppress free speech during various peaceful demonstrations in the US, much of Europe, & elsewhere. Proving without a doubt who the true "fascists" are, too many times to mention.

You said: "I think it's a mistake to characterize groups based on the most extreme things said of any of their members. I'm not defending AntiFa..." What would you call it then? Being an apologist for them? By making false assumptions about extreme things others have said about their members, rather than actually looking into their factual modern history of violence, stated missions, and where their funding comes from, thus confirming if what was said about them is true or false?

I'm not "only bothered about who is pulling the strings", it's something anyone concerned about the world or their own countries should be outraged about. Your comment regarding social media (agreed, just the same), using "how suicide cults form" as an example has nothing to do with the topic at hand or, as you imply, any world view. Your suggestion regarding who or what others' ideologues are is attributed to your own hasty assumptions & subtle personal attacks, rather than sticking to factual, honest dialogue. You're confusing actual facts obtained by research with what you apparently falsely assume is opinion.

In regards to your last paragraph, agreed.

 

[shrapnel_indie]

What I DO have appreciation & respect for is the US constitution, which guarantees free speech via the First Amendment.

In the name of facts that are not being passed on like they should be: The U.S. Constitution does not guarantee any right. The sole exisistance of The Bill of Rights is to PROTECT natural, God given (if you accept that part,) pre-existing rights. The Bill of Rights exist to tell government not to touch, interfere, or infringe on those rights which, in the now ignored views of the founding fathers of this nation, pre-existed ANY government, be it local, State/Province, or Country/Nation. (or for those that believe it isn't just a tin-foil hat conspiracy, a one world government in which the illusion of rights exist and is controlled by a select few.)

 

[Virtual_Singularity]

What I DO have appreciation & respect for is the US constitution, which guarantees free speech via the First Amendment.

In the name of facts that are not being passed on like they should be: The U.S. Constitution does not guarantee any right. The sole exisistance of The Bill of Rights is to PROTECT natural, God given (if you accept that part,) pre-existing rights. The Bill of Rights exist to tell government not to touch, interfere, or infringe on those rights which, in the now ignored views of the founding fathers of this nation, pre-existed ANY government, be it local, State/Province, or Country/Nation. (or for those that believe it isn't just a tin-foil hat conspiracy, a one world government in which the illusion of rights exist and is controlled by a select few.)

Ya, thanks for that explanation that several people have made in one way or another already, minus what you put into parentheses, (give yourself a pat on the back for that, btw, you've earned it. I'm sure G Carlin, the last real comedian we had, would have been as unmoved by it as I was, as well). What's been made plain is this article shouldn't have been posted. My apologies for my attempt at honest discourse on the matter, rest assured I won't be bothering to do so ever again. Don't worry, be happy, so on & so forth.

 

[RomeoReject]

Ya, thanks for that explanation that several people have made in one way or another already, minus what you put into parentheses, (give yourself a pat on the back for that, btw, you've earned it. I'm sure G Carlin, the last real comedian we had, would have been as unmoved by it as I was, as well). What's been made plain is this article shouldn't have been posted. My apologies for my attempt at honest discourse on the matter, rest assured I won't be bothering to do so ever again. Don't worry, be happy, so on & so forth.

It's weird that people are being abrasive, what with you being insufferable and all. Can't understand it at all.

 

[shrapnel_indie]

What I DO have appreciation & respect for is the US constitution, which guarantees free speech via the First Amendment.

In the name of facts that are not being passed on like they should be: The U.S. Constitution does not guarantee any right. The sole exisistance of The Bill of Rights is to PROTECT natural, God given (if you accept that part,) pre-existing rights. The Bill of Rights exist to tell government not to touch, interfere, or infringe on those rights which, in the now ignored views of the founding fathers of this nation, pre-existed ANY government, be it local, State/Province, or Country/Nation. (or for those that believe it isn't just a tin-foil hat conspiracy, a one world government in which the illusion of rights exist and is controlled by a select few.)

Ya, thanks for that explanation that several people have made in one way or another already, minus what you put into parentheses, (give yourself a pat on the back for that, btw, you've earned it. I'm sure G Carlin, the last real comedian we had, would have been as unmoved by it as I was, as well). What's been made plain is this article shouldn't have been posted. My apologies for my attempt at honest discourse on the matter, rest assured I won't be bothering to do so ever again. Don't worry, be happy, so on & so forth.

I didn't mean to suck the powdered sugar off your doughnuts. For that I apologize as I wasn't trying to drive/coax anyone out of the conversation. Honest discourse is good and honest factual discourse is something lacking by many in this world today. (You can tell the ones reasoning by emotion compared to those who reason with facts easily enough.)

I'm with you though on the string pulling. It as important, if not more so, as the ones doing the footwork/dirty work/etc. The goal is clear enough, and its been around even longer that this Nation: Divide and conquer. Get us distracted, fighting among ourselves so we aren't paying attention, set up shop... then put an end to the fighting they funded/instigated/etc. and look like our savior that we essentially surrender to their rules forsaking our rights for the illusion of safety.

Now, do I support AntiFa, the Klan, BLM? No, definitely not their terroristic actions. No, not their views/rhetoric/hate/propaganda.

[edit] I should state that some of the founding ideas of BLM are honorable... who wants to be shot by cops? Unfortunately there are those whose actions in any community, that perpetuate fears through their actions as much as those who have excuses for bad actions. I don't trust main stream media to offer us an unedited and honest view of events either.

 

[Virtual_Singularity]

What I DO have appreciation & respect for is the US constitution, which guarantees free speech via the First Amendment.

In the name of facts that are not being passed on like they should be: The U.S. Constitution does not guarantee any right. The sole exisistance of The Bill of Rights is to PROTECT natural, God given (if you accept that part,) pre-existing rights. The Bill of Rights exist to tell government not to touch, interfere, or infringe on those rights which, in the now ignored views of the founding fathers of this nation, pre-existed ANY government, be it local, State/Province, or Country/Nation. (or for those that believe it isn't just a tin-foil hat conspiracy, a one world government in which the illusion of rights exist and is controlled by a select few.)

Ya, thanks for that explanation that several people have made in one way or another already, minus what you put into parentheses, (give yourself a pat on the back for that, btw, you've earned it. I'm sure G Carlin, the last real comedian we had, would have been as unmoved by it as I was, as well). What's been made plain is this article shouldn't have been posted. My apologies for my attempt at honest discourse on the matter, rest assured I won't be bothering to do so ever again. Don't worry, be happy, so on & so forth.

I didn't mean to suck the powdered sugar off your doughnuts. For that I apologize as I wasn't trying to drive/coax anyone out of the conversation. Honest discourse is good and honest factual discourse is something lacking by many in this world today. (You can tell the ones reasoning by emotion compared to those who reason with facts easily enough.)

I'm with you though on the string pulling. It as important, if not more so, as the ones doing the footwork/dirty work/etc. The goal is clear enough, and its been around even longer that this Nation: Divide and conquer. Get us distracted, fighting among ourselves so we aren't paying attention, set up shop... then put an end to the fighting they funded/instigated/etc. and look like our savior that we essentially surrender to their rules forsaking our rights for the illusion of safety.

Now, do I support AntiFa, the Klan, BLM? No, definitely not their terroristic actions. No, not their views/rhetoric/hate/propaganda.

[edit] I should state that some of the founding ideas of BLM are honorable... who wants to be shot by cops? Unfortunately there are those whose actions in any community, that perpetuate fears through their actions as much as those who have excuses for bad actions. I don't trust main stream media to offer us an unedited and honest view of events either.

Tbh, what you've stated in this post qualifies as at least some honest discourse on the issue, that goes beyond a shallow comment. Thanks for that. But alas, this place still isn't an appropriate forum for the issue. The majority of the replies this article has inspired has plainly proved that much, sadly. Also, fwiw, all lives matter. Peace.

 

[bit_user]

Well funded AntiFa, a violent group which specifically states they're against both free speech they disagree with, as well as the U.S. Constitution. Worse yet, have time & again attempted to violently suppress free speech during various peaceful demonstrations in the US, much of Europe, & elsewhere.

This fear of AntiFa strikes me as irrational. There just aren't that many violent people, period. Much less, on the left. But there are a lot of left & mainstream people upset with the US President. Lumping most of them together with the most fringe members is clearly a mistake.

If people on either side are violent, they're arrested and prosecuted. Simple as that. No need to be irrational about it (and FWIW, I think the same goes for fear over most groups on the right).

Your comment regarding social media (agreed, just the same), using "how suicide cults form" as an example has nothing to do with the topic at hand or, as you imply, any world view.

I did not articulate that point very well, but the point was if you reject everything from MSM out-of-hand, it's an extreme example of where that sort of mindset can lead. MSM has its faults, but it's not part of a conspiracy. The fact that the press is specifically protected by the Constitution should give its detractors pause.

 

[Virtual_Singularity]

Well funded AntiFa, a violent group which specifically states they're against both free speech they disagree with, as well as the U.S. Constitution. Worse yet, have time & again attempted to violently suppress free speech during various peaceful demonstrations in the US, much of Europe, & elsewhere.

This fear of AntiFa strikes me as irrational. There just aren't that many violent people, period. Much less, on the left. But there are a lot of left & mainstream people upset with the US President. Lumping most of them together with the most fringe members is clearly a mistake.

If people on either side are violent, they're arrested and prosecuted. Simple as that. No need to be irrational about it (and FWIW, I think the same goes for fear over most groups on the right).

Your comment regarding social media (agreed, just the same), using "how suicide cults form" as an example has nothing to do with the topic at hand or, as you imply, any world view.

I did not articulate that point very well, but the point was if you reject everything from MSM out-of-hand, it's an extreme example of where that sort of mindset can lead. MSM has its faults, but it's not part of a conspiracy. The fact that the press is specifically protected by the Constitution should give its detractors pause.

I don't reject all the MSM says out of hand, actually I read/watch them frequently enough. You're bringing up the constitution? Spare me, please. I think you use it as a mere punchline in all but litigation. In reality I'd bet you reject its spirit outright. And a free press?? Ha. We've not had one in decades. We've an illusory left/right divide promoted by MSM networks owned by some of the world's richest globalists who are actually close friends in real life.

Done talking this article or AntiFa. Arguing with an AntiFa apologist as they ignore their factual history & damage they've done around the world, e.g. deliberately turning peaceful protests violent, suppressing free speech w/ violence, intimidation, tricks & atrocities, is pointless. They're the "real fascists" (but not for long if their paymasters stopped paying them). You evade factional info & resort to misleading supposition. You provide testament to that "extreme example of where that sort of mindset can lead" you mentioned. Thanks, but no thanks. Done taking the bait. Nuff said, (by my anyhow).

 

[Reynod]

Something I thought about last night. People, including moderators, keep going on about DailyStormers' right to free speech and how CloudFlare is supposedly censoring them....but, users on every forum get censored in some way. So, why is it fine to censor forum users but not hate groups? Come on moderators, explain that to me? Your stance is a bit illogical. Censorship on the internet started well before CloudFlare dumped DailyStormer.

I agree some of the people posting in this thread are sympathetic ... and I think the "freedom of speech" disguise is wearing thin. Whilst you have a far right wing President I guess all of the loonies are free to roam.

 

[Someone Somewhere]

I do not consider myself in the least bit right or alt-right.

 

[bit_user]

Done talking this article or AntiFa. Arguing with an AntiFa apologist as they ignore their factual history & damage they've done around the world, e.g. deliberately turning peaceful protests violent, suppressing free speech w/ violence, intimidation, tricks & atrocities, is pointless. They're the "real fascists" (but not for long if their paymasters stopped paying them).

I hope you're not calling me an AntiFa apologist. I was just challenging you on the numbers of people who are really that extreme.

I don't support the idea of censorship. Neither by by authorities nor mob rule. Though, I think the current legal standard of not inciting violence is a pretty good place to put the boundary.

I think the combination of ideas that "my group has the one, true way" and "that other group is the real enemy" is the sort of thinking that brings out the worst in humanity. The internet echo chamber has a tendency to cherry-pick and even invent facts to demonize the other, but we know this type of tribal division is probably as old as humanity. So, it's best to focus on ideas, like what freedom of speech actually means, rather than on opposing specific groups that seem to disagree, to some extent.

We have a good constitution and system of laws. It's far more productive to put your energy into support it and the interpretations you agree with, than to demonize groups you don't like - which ultimately (but not necessarily) leads to going outside the legal system to take some action against them.

I don't care about AntiFa. I probably don't agree with a lot of their positions (do you know which or how many of their stated positions you disagree with?). What I do disagree with is singling-out, targeting, and scare-mongering against them or any other group. If they're as bad as you say they are, they'll get locked up and shut down pretty quickly. In either case, the "fight" should be one of ideas and should be conducted through discourse, the courts, and the ballot box.

 

[Virtual_Singularity]

I do not consider myself in the least bit right or alt-right.

Nor do I. The petty & divisive left/right labels & isms people have been duped into using to define/attack & quarrel among themselves with have done nothing to bring social cohesion to the US. Just the opposite.

Reynod said:
I agree some of the people posting in this thread are sympathetic ... and I think the "freedom of speech" disguise is wearing thin. Whilst you have a far right wing President I guess all of the loonies are free to roam.

Your sentence says it all in regards to any human who values basic freedoms, liberties & the right to never have honest debate on any issue or idea infringed upon. Just fyi, there's plenty of labels that'd accurately describe your commentary. "Unprofessional" for example, being extremely polite one. The idea we've a "far right wing President" is laughable. Guessing "all of the loonies are free to roam" is a blatant insult & yet another extremely unprofessional comment on your part, amply demonstrating your own extreme view toward Americans & freedom of speech in general. You have my condolences. Speaking in a way which assumes those in disagreement with you are in the vast minority, calling them "abrasive, insufferable, loonies", etc, only reflects your opinion. It has nothing to do with actual facts.

bit_user said:
I think the combination of ideas that "my group has the one, true way" and "that other group is the real enemy" is the sort of thinking that brings out the worst in humanity.

And I think your apparent application of that statement to others, again, when they've made it clear they don't support either group, brings out the worst in you, when you attack & refuse to actually listen to another person's position on any given matter, such as the one in this article.

bit_user said:
I hope you're not calling me an AntiFa apologist. I was just challenging you on the numbers of people who are really that extreme.

Intentionally or not, that's kinda' what you made yourself out to be. I actually listened to your words & position, I made it clear that what I had to say about them wasn't opinion, but fact that can be easily confirmed by any willing to do basic research on them. You continued to ignore & assume, despite attempts to inform you of facts on both groups, despite attempts of trying to hint at what actually took place the other day.

bit_user said:
I don't care about AntiFa. I probably don't agree with a lot of their positions (do you know which or how many of their stated positions you disagree with?). What I do disagree with is singling-out, targeting, and scare-mongering against them or any other group. If they're as bad as you say they are, they'll get locked up and shut down pretty quickly. In either case, the "fight" should be one of ideas and should be conducted through discourse, the courts, and the ballot box.

Ya, that's our main problem, not caring about stuff we should. We're all guilty of it to some extent. And more or less yes on your question. As for the rest of your comment.. If only it were that simple. Do point out any industrialized nation where politics works in the way you mentioned on a daily basis, never mind here in the US. Any honest examples are few & far between, though it'd be nice to be reminded of them.

When the wealthiest, most influential people with the same agenda use their wealth, foundations, influence, along with unconventional methods, (what essentially amounts to assymetrical warfare against the state, in their favor or that of whomever they're actually representing), there's generally nothing to ever stop them. There are many powerful individuals, lobbies foreign & domestic, etc that prove this point beyond question. The astoundingly huge list of names involved with the military industrial complex as well as the number of overt/covert conflicts, regime change ops, economic hits all over the world throughout our history, provide more than enough factual evidence on the issue. The Koch bros are often used as a prime example, despite the fact they've little to nothing on the aforementioned.

Any who went to the tragedy @ Charlottesville the other day & bothered to ask either side to define their ideals, would've been faced by mostly paid actors clueless re wth they were asked. Many "AntiFa activists", brandishing their weps & masks, wouldn't have known where to start re communism, its tenets, the bourgeoisie, proletariat (or even capitalism for that matter), much less anything about Marx, Hegel, the dialectic, associated symbolism, etc. Same regarding many of the alleged "white supremacists", most likely clueless re Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Mussolini, Hitler, their philosophies, much less Nazism or symbolism eg bundled fasces or even the roots of the swastika. The one thing both might've had in common was possibly overlapping trips for both camps with the same rent a crowd agency...

 

[shrapnel_indie]

Any who went to the tragedy @ Charlottesville the other day & bothered to ask either side to define their ideals, would've been faced by mostly paid actors clueless re wth they were asked. Many "AntiFa activists", brandishing their weps & masks, wouldn't have known where to start re communism, its tenets, the bourgeoisie, proletariat (or even capitalism for that matter), much less anything about Marx, Hegel, the dialectic, associated symbolism, etc. Same regarding many of the alleged "white supremacists", most likely clueless re Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Mussolini, Hitler, their philosophies, much less Nazism or symbolism eg bundled fasces or even the roots of the swastika. The one thing both might've had in common was possibly overlapping trips for both camps with the same rent a crowd agency...

I haven't heard much more about it, but there are stories going about that put Charlottesville leadership as part of the problem too. Knowing full well conflict was supposed to, or could (if you don't believe their proximity was intentional and the fact both came armed and armored looking for a fight) break out, ordering police to stand down even before things escalated. I would love for this to be just a story, fake news if you will, however I suspect there is some truth to it.

To add to your information on the ignorance of these people fighting for these causes... It was reported back in the occupy wall-street protest that there were many who were interviewed and had no clue as to the cause they were protesting for.... not to mention its leadership couldn't tell people the same reason(s) as to why they were protesting. They left a horrendous mess behind too. Which brings up the pipeline protests... saying no to the oil pipeline in the name of the environmental harm it could potentially cause, and then leaving a horrendous mess behind that was a guaranteed environmental harm until cleaned up. I say all this to point out the lemmings and paid instigators who either know nothing about the "cause" or just see it as an excuse to misbehave without a real reason.

 

[bit_user]

The petty & divisive left/right labels & isms people have been duped into using to define/attack & quarrel among themselves with have done nothing to bring social cohesion to the US. Just the opposite.

Yes. Agreed.

Any who went to the tragedy @ Charlottesville the other day & bothered to ask either side to define their ideals, would've been faced by mostly paid actors clueless re wth they were asked. Many "AntiFa activists", brandishing their weps & masks,

No way. Very few (if any) of the people at these protests are either paid or violent. By trying to paint one group as "the enemy", you're being reductive in exactly the way you denounced, above.

Violence, at protests has (thankfully) been very limited. It is a probably for law-enforcement to deal with, and they (mostly) have.

Yes, wealthy & powerful individuals, corporations, and special interest groups all try to bend government to their will. No, I'm not okay with that. But it sounds like you're using that as an excuse to demonize a particular group, and I think that's actually counter-productive. When more people get caught up in the left/right divide, it's easier for special interests to push through their agenda. Attacking AntiFa won't help anything. What we actually need from government is more transparency and accountability.

 

[bit_user]

It was reported back in the occupy wall-street protest that there were many who were interviewed and had no clue as to the cause they were protesting for.... not to mention its leadership couldn't tell people the same reason(s) as to why they were protesting.

Meh, there are a lot of people at sporting events that barely know anything about the teams and sometimes even the sport. Some people are just joiners. Some people like to "stick it to the man", because they're unhappy with their current situation and need somewhere/something to blame. It doesn't mean an entire protest is pointless, or that nothing good can possibly come of it.

BTW, it's scary to contemplate how these folks vote.

 

[Virtual_Singularity]

The petty & divisive left/right labels & isms people have been duped into using to define/attack & quarrel among themselves with have done nothing to bring social cohesion to the US. Just the opposite.

Yes. Agreed.

Any who went to the tragedy @ Charlottesville the other day & bothered to ask either side to define their ideals, would've been faced by mostly paid actors clueless re wth they were asked. Many "AntiFa activists", brandishing their weps & masks,

No way. Very few (if any) of the people at these protests are either paid or violent. By trying to paint one group as "the enemy", you're being reductive in exactly the way you denounced, above.

Violence, at protests has (thankfully) been very limited. It is a probably for law-enforcement to deal with, and they (mostly) have.

Yes, wealthy & powerful individuals, corporations, and special interest groups all try to bend government to their will. No, I'm not okay with that. But it sounds like you're using that as an excuse to demonize a particular group, and I think that's actually counter-productive. When more people get caught up in the left/right divide, it's easier for special interests to push through their agenda. Attacking AntiFa won't help anything. What we actually need from government is more transparency and accountability.

Actually, you've got that backwards. it's defending them that won't help anything. You say "No way, few if any are paid or violent". Mhmm, I so wish that were the truth. What you're disputing in regards to Charlottesville (& likely the same for any other protests they've been involved in, whether under the name AntiFa or something else, based entirely on your own assumption, no less), is pointless. The same pattern follows them time & again, plenty of people have grown sick & tired of it. I'd gladly name one of the rent a crowd companies in LA that handled much of the logistics for them for Charlottesville if it mattered to you.

But hey, its still a "free" country, right? We're all entitled to our opinions, even if some of the world's most wealthy, influential people fund a group like AntiFa, imposing their views on others when they show up to "counter-demonstrate" with violence & intimidation, while silencing any they disagree with & somehow continually getting away with it while getting worse every year...

It's not like its anyone's civic duty to condemn them & see them disbanded (due their stated mission & proven record of violence & intimidation in suppressing free speech at protests in the US & around the world, right)? Oh, wait... my bad, I guess I have that backwards also. When you say you "aren't ok" with wealthy special interests, corporations, individuals, etc, bending govt to their will, yet defend their actions all the same by sticking up for the very group they fund & have used to suppress dissent & free speech at protests the world over, all I can think is "Does not compute". Ugh. We'll have to agree to disagree on that, I guess.

 

[shrapnel_indie]

It was reported back in the occupy wall-street protest that there were many who were interviewed and had no clue as to the cause they were protesting for.... not to mention its leadership couldn't tell people the same reason(s) as to why they were protesting.

Meh, there are a lot of people at sporting events that barely know anything about the teams and sometimes even the sport. Some people are just joiners. Some people like to "stick it to the man", because they're unhappy with their current situation and need somewhere/something to blame. It doesn't mean an entire protest is pointless, or that nothing good can possibly come of it.

BTW, it's scary to contemplate how these folks vote.

Not being very knowledgeable about the sport you just paid crazy money for to go see is one thing. You, however, did hit on the crux of the whole problem there too: Some people are just joiners, Some like to "stick it to the man". Issue is its very very very easy to become a lemming in that situation, to adopt the mob mentality. When you get corrupt[ed] people leading such things, these lemming follow along blindly and jump off the proverbial cliff, which usually leads from bad to worse, especially when a protest is a cover or an excuse for other things. I have nothing against legit protests, its just that it seems a lot of these protests are done in the name of something lately seem to actually have ulterior motives outside the "reason" for the protest. With AntiFa, it seems to be more about intimidation than about the advertised reason. With the Klan, Panthers, Nazis, and to an extent, neo-nazis, we at least have a clear picture where they stand. BLM, makes the argument about black people being shot by cops (Who does want to be shot by cops? Best thing you can do is make slow deliberate movements that are non-threatening to anybody and comply.) BLM gets their panties in a bunch if you try to expand it to ALL lives matter (in which they do, but BLM only cares about black people, the rest can drop dead. Black on black violence is also ignored.) AntiFa makes certain claims, yet their actions support something outside of that.

I do agree about how scary it is to contemplate how they (the lemmings) vote.

 

[g-unit1111]

Actually, you've got that backwards. it's defending them that won't help anything. You say "No way, few if any are paid or violent". Mhmm, I so wish that were the truth. What you're disputing in regards to Charlottesville (& likely the same for any other protests they've been involved in, whether under the name AntiFa or something else, based entirely on your own assumption, no less), is pointless. The same pattern follows them time & again, plenty of people have grown sick & tired of it. I'd gladly name one of the rent a crowd companies in LA that handled much of the logistics for them for Charlottesville if it mattered to you.

Wait - you really think people get paid for this? I've yet to see one paycheck, and most of the liberals I know have yet to see one paycheck. Show me one protestor driving around in a luxury car, living in a high rise apartment and wearing Rolexes off his / her protest money. You can't, can you?

But hey, its still a "free" country, right? We're all entitled to our opinions, even if some of the world's most wealthy, influential people fund a group like AntiFa, imposing their views on others when they show up to "counter-demonstrate" with violence & intimidation, while silencing any they disagree with & somehow continually getting away with it while getting worse every year...

Except they don't. Whereas we know that Infowars sponsored a "CNN Is ISIS" contest that actually did pay protestors: http://www.salon.com/2017/06/03/infowars-launches-200000-contest-to-pay-fans-wearing-cnn-is-isis-t-shirts-on-tv/

That's the first and only instance I've seen with actual evidence of protestors getting paid.

 

[bit_user]

It's not like its anyone's civic duty to condemn them & see them disbanded (due their stated mission & proven record of violence & intimidation in suppressing free speech at protests in the US & around the world, right)?

It's the duty of public officials to enable people to hold peaceful assemblies and be heard. It's the duty of law enforcement to arrest & prosecute individuals who are being violent. And if anyone is paying them to be violent that should definitely be prosecuted. It's your civic duty to hold these officials to account, if they're not doing their jobs.

Oh, wait... my bad, I guess I have that backwards also. When you say you "aren't ok" with wealthy special interests, corporations, individuals, etc, bending govt to their will, yet defend their actions all the same by sticking up for the very group they fund & have used to suppress dissent & free speech at protests the world over, all I can think is "Does not compute".

It's like you're grouping anyone who tries to talk you away from the ledge with "the enemy".

What's literally the best-case scenario for getting AntiFa broken up? The way I see it, the problems with government being too controlled by elites & special interests is still there. I think you just can't see the forest for the trees.

 

[logainofhades]

Wait - you really think people get paid for this? I've yet to see one paycheck, and most of the liberals I know have yet to see one paycheck. Show me one protestor driving around in a luxury car, living in a high rise apartment and wearing Rolexes off his / her protest money. You can't, can you?

Frankly I firmly believe that there are very rich individual funding groups both far left and far right, to keep us fighting among ourselves.

 

[bit_user]

Frankly I firmly believe that there are very rich individual funding groups both far left and far right, to keep us fighting among ourselves.

I don't buy the conspiracy angle, but I agree that elites & special interests are happy to see the country mired in a left/right divide, since it (normally) makes it easier for them to push through their agenda. But, at this point, Congress and the Executive branch are so dysfunctional that I'm not even sure that's going to plan.

 

[g-unit1111]

Frankly I firmly believe that there are very rich individual funding groups both far left and far right, to keep us fighting among ourselves.

I've been to lots of rallies and I've never been paid once. I feel cheated. :lol: