“This is what tolerance looks like at UC Berkeley”

[Thermal]

Source please.

How about the Reuters link from your own post #1805 and it's lovely portfolio of masked pro-Trumpers?

 

[Thermal]

And yet... we've repeatedly seen rabid action on the part of anti-Trump folks. It gets justified as being against the "rabid mentality" of Trump fans... but it seems to be the anti-Trump people actually taking action.

They've been taking physical action against perceived belief.

I'm not okay with that.

Do you agree that based on the available reporting, the marchers appear to be the aggressors at the Orange County march? What with abundant video footage of them assaulting, battering, and otherwise menacing the protesters? Before you say anything about the pepper spraying, watch the video from OCWeekly, linked upthread. The protester (as much to my surprise as anyone's) is plainly defending himself and a photographer from an attack by a Trump supporter.

 

[Jules Galen]

Uh...Orange County is infamous for white supremacy (regardless of what it's actually like - I've heard of it here on the east coast, but have no experience there). More likely, it's simply not their territory.

Well, whatever. Militant Trumpists versus Antifa is like a reverse Aliens vs. Predator. No matter who loses, we win.

You may have a point. I remember living a year there during 1997-1998 and I do not remember ever meeting a black person in Huntington Beach (where I was staying). Not ever. Period.

Damn...I can not believe I remembered such a thing until it was mentioned.

Thanks for your post.

 

[Thermal]

Are you certain it's not confirmation bias?

Yes.

 

[Thermal]

Just about everything you wrote was utterly wrong.

Talk is cheap Prove it. I produced evidence for my position. Your turn.

The fact that the black bloc scum wall was a fiasco of historic proportions does not mean the scum bags did not commit a battery on the lawful, legal protesters.

The ball is up...it's going in...but NO, TBD has moved the goalposts!


You said the wall was a battery. In the cold light of the Cali Penal Code linked above, standing by that or no?

The journalist was not acting as a journalist, he assaulted a protester.

It is legal to assault one person in defense of another. Need a cite for that or should I just assume another handwaving?

Plus that's twice in a row you called them protesters, are you sure you aren't referring to the marchers?

The asshat with the megaphone who took the beating was another "journalist."

FFS, he was in black with a hood and mask, he was a protestor.

Take the blinders off and watch the video. One of the scum stuck the chemical weapon right in the woman's face.

What a coward.

Watch. The. Video. The guy in the grey shirt starts whaling on the guy with the camera around his neck (let's call him 'a photographer'). The protester steps in and sprays, to stop him from beating up the photographer. Several people get hit, including the woman you speak of.

I was originally being Devil's Advocate in supporting the protesters. You have actually convinced me that the marchers were the entire problem.

 

[Thermal]

And Starbuck's, cars, windows, the rule of law, etc. ...

...and that paperboy is looking more like capitalist swine every day...

 

[Thermal]

You may be right here but it makes you wonder why they even bothered to announce to the media that they were showing up in the first place.

Good point. Pretty sure that the Berkeley rioters were more...seasoned... at what they do than the Orange County ones. Different groups with different levels of commitment/ideology, and different objectives, it's too tempting to lump them all into one pile and treat them all the same.

 

[The Big Dog]

Talk is cheap Prove it. I produced evidence for my position. Your turn.



The ball is up...it's going in...but NO, TBD has moved the goalposts!


You said the wall was a battery. In the cold light of the Cali Penal Code linked above, standing by that or no?



It is legal to assault one person in defense of another. Need a cite for that or should I just assume another handwaving?

Plus that's twice in a row you called them protesters, are you sure you aren't referring to the marchers?



FFS, he was in black with a hood and mask, he was a protestor.



Watch. The. Video. The guy in the grey shirt starts whaling on the guy with the camera around his neck (let's call him 'a photographer'). The protester steps in and sprays, to stop him from beating up the photographer. Several people get hit, including the woman you speak of.

I was originally being Devil's Advocate in supporting the protesters. You have actually convinced me that the marchers were the entire problem.

I got to the point where you proved that you did not understand what moving the goalposts is and chuckled.

Explain to everyone your concept of a symbolic wall for the assembled group. How did they stop the march (well try to) without physically touching the lawful legal protesters?

Say, thanks for the definition from the penal code. Now here is a bit of legal analysis of it for ya.

https://www.avvo.com/legal-guides/ugc/a-guide-to-california-assault-and-battery-laws

 

[Stout]

If there were no antifa, there would have been no violence, right ?

OK maybe the OC weekly guys may have got some grief. It appears they don't like Orange County very much.

 

[Stout]

Good point. Pretty sure that the Berkeley rioters were more...seasoned... at what they do than the Orange County ones. Different groups with different levels of commitment/ideology, and different objectives, it's too tempting to lump them all into one pile and treat them all the same.

The Orange County ones were pros. I'll let you do your own research on the guy mentioned in this article.

"This guy assaulted him too with a flag like that," said Naui Huitzilopochitli, a Trump protestor, referring to a man who allegedly hit a protestor with a Make America Great Again flag pole. "That's why his face is bloody. I saw white supremacists there. These guys were yelling 'white power' while they were hitting him."

 

[Thermal]

I got to the point where you proved that you did not understand what moving the goalposts is and chuckled.

Perhaps I misunderstood you. I thought you were abandoning the wall battery claim and moving the goalposts to other claims of battery. But no...you are standing by this? Ok, see below.

Explain to everyone your concept of a symbolic wall for the assembled group. How did they stop the march (well try to) without physically touching the lawful legal protesters?

Step by step for ya:

1. A wall is a stationary object. The protesters formed a human wall to block the march. It was not a 'flying anarchist rush' or whatever you are theorizing. A wall is still, and blocks progress.

2. The marchers are reported in the Mercury News and elsewhere as having pushed through the protesters. The human wall was not reported anywhere to have made any moves towards the marchers.

3. The marchers were the only people guilty of a battery, as they walked up to the stationary human wall and willingly used force against other people.

Say, thanks for the definition from the penal code. Now here is a bit of legal analysis of it for ya.

https://www.avvo.com/legal-guides/ugc/a-guide-to-california-assault-and-battery-laws

I just read it in it's entirety. You...uh...do understand that it says absolutely nothing to support your odd views on battery and fully supports mine? You didn't actually read it, did you?

Please cite exactly what in that analysis you believe supports your view on battery. Or just handwave it all away again.

 

[Jules Galen]

Perhaps I misunderstood you. I thought you were abandoning the wall battery claim and moving the goalposts to other claims of battery. But no...you are standing by this? Ok, see below.



Step by step for ya:

1. A wall is a stationary object. The protesters formed a human wall to block the march. It was not a 'flying anarchist rush' or whatever you are theorizing. A wall is still, and blocks progress.

2. The marchers are reported in the Mercury News and elsewhere as having pushed through the protesters. The human wall was not reported anywhere to have made any moves towards the marchers.

3. The marchers were the only people guilty of a battery, as they walked up to the stationary human wall and willingly used force against other people.



I just read it in it's entirety. You...uh...do understand that it says absolutely nothing to support your odd views on battery and fully supports mine? You didn't actually read it, did you?

Please cite exactly what in that analysis you believe supports your view on battery. Or just handwave it all away again.

Bro...violence broke out, and it was stupid.

That is not good.

 

[Thermal]

Bro...violence broke out, and it was stupid.

That is not good.

Truth. But consider the subtext of some of the posts here. They willfully ignore the reported events in favor of a predetermined narrative. Sound good to you?

 

[Jules Galen]

Truth. But consider the subtext of some of the posts here. They willfully ignore the reported events in favor of a predetermined narrative. Sound good to you?

No....it sucks. Nevertheless, violence has limits. Stop at those limits. Apply something else.

 

[Thermal]

No....it sucks. Nevertheless, violence has limits. Stop at those limits. Apply something else.

Are you under the misconception that I support the rioters? No way. But I support truth, warts and all. People see what happened in Orange County and assume it is the bad old anarchists being evil. They don't see the reporting that is right in front of their eyes, that the marchers were unabashedly aggressive. Pretty soon, it becomes any protest is 'those bad old anarchists' again...gently sliding towards 'those bad old Leftists' again. The goodthink scares me more than any anarchist.

 

[caveman1917]

The protester (as much to my surprise as anyone's) is plainly defending himself and a photographer from an attack by a Trump supporter.

There is nothing surprising about that.

 

[caveman1917]

This continued violence by the Liberals, while interesting, is starting to become counter-productive.

What liberals? What continued violence?

 

[Thermal]

The Orange County ones were pros. I'll let you do your own research on the guy mentioned in this article.

A quick search of Naui H's name came up with nothing but links to the interview.

 

[Thermal]

There is nothing surprising about that.

I think there was, that the protester was so clearly in the legal right by defending the photographer being attacked by the marcher. Rarely do you get video evidence of such a clear-cut case of using force to defend another, and then get beaten and arrested. I have a feeling charges will be dropped after police review the footage.

 

[The Big Dog]

Step by step for ya:

1. A wall is a stationary object. The protesters formed a human wall to block the march. It was not a 'flying anarchist rush' or whatever you are theorizing. A wall is still, and blocks progress.

.

and they were mortared in place like the ancients of old, a bulwark against the rising tide of legal marchers.

How utterly ridiculous.

Those guys in the Stationary Human Wall of Impressiveness must have world champion "I'm not touching you" players in their youth:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgXDYiHhp5Y