Posts Tagged ‘Antifa’

LA Times FINALLY Acknowledges Violent Left-Wing Hate Groups Such As ‘Antifa’ – Then Says Free Speech Should Be Taken Away From Right

August 30, 2017

Well, it was an amazing thing.  After YEARS of unrelenting violent hatred being poured out on supporters of our current president, the Los Angeles Times FINALLY had an article specifically mentioning that there are left wing violent groups.

Mind you, as you read it, you already see the “Lost Cause” theory that the LA Times takes in covering their asses from the violence organized and perpetrated by their side:

Of the dozens of organizations that turned out for Sunday’s mass protest against racism here, one group was impossible to miss.

Its members dressed head to toe in black, with masked faces and some bearing pastel-painted riot shields that read “no hate.” These 100 or so militants billed themselves as a security force for progressive counter-protesters, vowing to protect them from far-right agitators.

But as the protest got underway, some of those in masks would resort to mob violence, attacking a small showing of supporters of President Trump and others they accused, sometimes inaccurately, of being white supremacists or Nazis.

The graphic videos of those attacks have spurred soul-searching within the leftist activist movement in the Bay Area and beyond. Emotions remain raw in the wake of this month’s white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va., which left one woman dead and dozens injured.

You see, on the “Lost Cause” theory, it wasn’t about slavery, or hate, or intolerance that motivated the Confederacy; no it was something NOBLE taking the form of an honorable struggle to protect the Southern way of life.  And in the same way, these groups like the Antifa aren’t inherently fascist entities that are trying to violently shut down the free speech of their opponents by showing up at virtually every single conservative rally; no, they are “protesting against racism.”  And I mean, that’s good, right?  Just as it is obviously good to wage “an honorable struggle for the Southern way of life.”  I mean, you’ve really got to pardon the violence because the noble cause is just so darn JUST.

But the YEARS of intentional ignorance and misrepresentation may finally be catching up to the left, it’s political party, it’s politicians, and its media organizations that have participated in the cover-up of their hate.

I mean, oh my goodness, the leftist violence is now so rabidly out of control that even Nancy Pelosi was forced to distance herself from it:

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Tuesday condemned the ‘antifa’ protesters who clashed with President Trump supporters in Berkeley, Calif. Sunday.

“Our democracy has no room for inciting violence or endangering the public, no matter the ideology of those who commit such acts,” Pelosi said in a statement. “The violent actions of people calling themselves antifa in Berkeley this weekend deserve unequivocal condemnation, and the perpetrators should be arrested and prosecuted.”

Pelosi’s statements follow clashes on Sunday between supporters of Trump and counterprotesters clashed in Berkeley, Sunday.

Arrests, pepper spray and smoke bombs were reportedly used on Sunday after violence broke out among a handful of protesters. More than 1,000 people had turned out on Sunday, and most protesters were peaceful.

Reports indicate 14 people were arrested during the rally. Several of those targeted for violence were known for pro-Trump or far-right views, according to the Los Angeles Times and SFGate.

The reason there is a [slightly] different framing of the leftist hate groups is that it is beyond obvious as you watch the scenes from conservative rallies from all over the country being violently broken up by masked leftists clad in black surrounding and viciously beating conservatives they are able to separate from their group that it’s only a matter of time before these liberal hate groups murder someone in a way that cannot be ignored or denied.  This has now already HAPPENED, mind you, but the avalanche or reality is becoming too overwhelming to ignore.  So they have to begin to distance themselves from it in foresight of what these groups are very obviously building toward.

I prefer this Washington Post headline:

Black-clad antifa members attack peaceful right-wing demonstrators in Berkeley

Because that’s what happened, without any nuance by simple factual, objective reporting.  And this has been happening over and over again throughout the entire presidential campaign.

Mind you, it was San Fran Nan who had actually called upon these same Antifa people she is now somewhat hypocritically – BUT FINALLY!!! – decrying when she called a conservative group Patriot Prayer’s Freedom Rally “a white supremacist rally” which literally BAITED the left to come to violently disrupt it “By Any Means Necessary.”

CBS Local in San Franscisco wrote (and asked) even prior to the rally:

Pelosi Dubs Patriot Prayer In San Francisco A ‘White Supremacist’ Rally
August 22, 2017 6:49 PM By Melissa Caen

SAN FRANCISCO (KPIX 5) — The group Patriot Prayer could get its permit any time now for Saturday’s planned rally at Crissy Field.

Patriot Prayer says they should officially get their permit for Saturday’s Freedom Rally sometime on Tuesday. Organizers have publicly distanced themselves from neo-Nazis, the KKK and violence.

But Nancy Pelosi and other leaders have denounced the event as a planned “white supremacist” rally.

Terms like neo-Nazi, white supremacist, white nationalist, alt-right, alt-left, fascist, Marxist, are loaded terms that are being used daily.

Pelosi had an event in San Francisco Tuesday and KPIX 5 political reporter Melissa Caen asked her about the labels, and asked her to explain her choice of words.

Conservative speakers say their free speech is being lumped together with bigoted and racist speech.

But Pelosi said Crissy Field is a special place.

“And now they’re going to give it as a venue to Nazis and white nationalists,” Pelosi said.

We looked at the Patriot Prayer group. Some of them are Trump supporters, but does that make them extremists?

So it’s kind of funny that the same Nancy Pelosi whose inciting “crying-fire-in-a-crowded-movie-theater” rhetoric brought these vicious thugs to come beat “white supremacists” would turn around and decry them doing what she incited them to do.

Here’s the truth reported by KTVU News San Francisco:

[Patriot Prayer organizer Joey] Gibson says he’s absolutely not a white supremacist. “I’m Japanese. We have three black speakers, a couple Hispanic, an atheist, a transsexual. We’re extremely diverse. It’s really irresponsible for the leaders to call me a white supremacist. It’s completely unfounded.”

But of course you only qualify as “black” if you live on the ideologically slave plantation of the liberal activists who ardently love the political party that kept their ancestors in slavery, who fought a vicious Civil War to keep their ancestors in the bondage of slavery, who organized the Ku Klux Klan after being defeated by the Republican Party to continue to the racist fight into the next century.  If you are “guilty” of free thought, these haters will come after you and attack you worse than they attack the whites they rabidly hate.

Joey Gibson is then asked, “So why do people make that claim, not only against you, but also those that are part of your group?”  He says, “I don’t know if she’s trying to stir up a riot, I’m not sure why she made that claim…  At the end of the day, you need specific examples of why anyone would say that I’m a white supremacist, because the things that I talk about, the things that I preach, has nothing to do with skin color, it has to do with what’s on the inside.”

Gibson is right claiming that Nancy Pelosi wanted a riot.  But this goes farther: the left that she is very much a part of is openly attempting to frame the narrative such that support for Donald Trump – the 45th President of the United States of America – IS an act of extremism and white supremacy and terrorism and every other hateful charge they can make.  Even that Trump is HITLER and “literally tried to kill our communities” in an act of GENOCIDE according to the racist organization “Black Lives Matter.”

And of course BLM has the video of Donald Trump with the death squads and standing over the mass graves.  Except, oh wait, these people are all whackjob evil psychotic demented demon-possessed and the only thing they are capable of seeing is their own racist hate.

The left and the “journalists” who are among its minions keeps calling “white supremacist” and “Nazi” groups “right-wing” because their intellectuals are following the exact same labelling approach the communists followed in the Nazi vs. Stalinist era:

“The influence of Marxist scholarship has severely distorted our understanding of fascism.  Communism and fascism were rival brands of socialism.  Whereas Marxist socialism is predicated on an international class struggle, fascist national socialism promoted a socialism centered in national unity.  [And in fact, Both movements were “revolutionary socialist ideologies.”  Going on,] Both communists and fascists opposed the bourgeoisie.  Both attacked the conservatives.  Both were mass movements, which had special appeal for the intelligentsia, students, and artists, as well as workers.  Both favored strong centralized governments and rejected the free economy and the ideals of individual liberty.  [And finally,] Fascists saw themselves as being neither of the right nor the left.  They believed that they constituted a third force synthesizing the best of both extremes” [Gene Edward Veith, Jr., Modern Fascism: Liquidating the Judeo-Christian Worldview, p. 26].

Liberals like to parse “communism” as “Marxism” and then say that there’s a difference, and that “true communism” is somehow good, you should smell the dead rat that is their collectivist brain: because EVERY SINGLE TIME COMMUNISM HAS EVER BEEN TRIED, IT HAS BEEN TOTALITARIAN AND CRUSHED THE HUMAN SPIRIT.  EVERY SINGLE TIME.  But the left keeps trying to manufacture this “noble version of communism” and then contrast it to “Nazism.”  When by any practical historical realistic standard the two movements were virtually IDENTICAL: They were BOTH totalitarian; they were BOTH socialist; they were BOTH militaristic; they BOTH denied the basic freedoms of their peoples and had secret police to terrorize any kind of dissent; they were BOTH therefore determined to take all guns away from their subject peoples so they could not rise up; they were even BOTH anti-union in the sense that BOTH pursued the identical same policy of abolishing all unions and then creating one union that they had total control over.  They were BOTH the SAME.  The Nazis were, if anything, the “right-wing” of the very rabidly far radical LEFT.  And to the extent that communism was ”

The professors and academics who claim otherwise are MARXISTS.  They are merely following the exact same paradigm of the Marxist scholars of the past.  Even to the extent that the phrase “Workers of the world, unite!” reflected some false semblance of “proletarian internationalism,” Stalin proved that his communism was every bit as capable of being “nationalistic” as Hitler’s brand of socialism when he began to talk about the urgent need of his people to rise up to defend “Mother Russia.”

“Nazi” stood for “National Socialist German Workers Party.”  If there was a “National Socialist American Workers Party” – and I submit that is the TRUE name of the Democratic Party today – it would be LIBERALS.  The ONLY meaningful difference between the two brands of socialism amounts to a still-meaningless distinction between communism confiscating all the means of production “in the name of the proletariat” but of course NEVER ACTUALLY SHARING ANYTHING WITH THE PEOPLE THEY OPPRESS versus Nazi fascism which allowed private ownership of industry on a self-serving basis but dictated what they would be required to produce.  Such that the State still held complete control of all the means of production in a government-controlled totalitarian society.

Did the communists hate the fascist and did the fascist hate the communist?  Yes.  But from what I see, the Bloods hate the Crips and the Crips hate the Bloods and there isn’t a dimes’ worth of difference between these vicious gangs (or how about the Mongols vs. the Outlaws or the Hells Angels vs. the Vagos or for that matter Barbie vs. Bratz dolls or Coke vs. Pepsi.  The fact that communists have always fought fascists doesn’t mean the two are opposite: it’s actually more proof that they are very nearly identical and compete for the same type of rabid haters.

In the same way, there is NOTHING racist about the “right-wing” versus the “left-wing.”  Both have their racists and if anything the left has a FAR MORE DOCUMENTED HISTORY OF RACISM THAN THE RIGHT EVER HAS OR EVER WILL HAVE.  Not when I can document that the Civil War was essentially a war over slavery between anti-slavery Republicans and pro-slavery Democrats.  Not when I can document that after the Civil War, the Ku Klux Klan was formed to terrorize and intimidate blacks and white Republicans alikeNot when I can document that even a full sixty years after the Civil War, the Klan was so embedded into the Democratic Party machine that the 1924 Democratic National Convention was infamously called “Klanbake.”   Not when I can document that THE most infamously racist governors and officials in America such as George Wallace in the 1970s and Bull Conner were DEMOCRATS.  Not when I can document the self-acknowledged racist history of the unions that are at the forefront of Democratic Party machineNot when I can document that unions are STILL “fucking rabidly racist” today according to even senior-level union officials.  This slanderous tactic is again nothing but the product of communist scholarship falsely attributing whatever is “evil” with one’s ideological opponents even when it very clearly applies more to themselves than those they’re demonizing.

The history is overwhelming in establishing which party is “the party of hate and racism,” but Democrats are now actively destroying history – much the same way ISIS did in areas it controlled in their caliphate they were allowed to create in the Obama years – so that they can rewrite it.

So whatever is deemed to be evil or bad or wrong, Marxist scholars immediately claim ITS THE OTHER GUYS who are purely responsible for all of it.  And the left-wing mainstream-media gulps it down the way goldfish eagerly and immediately gulp down the spit of mean kids.

And so we see these charges of “hate” and “hate groups” being screamed by the left at the right WHEN THEY ARE THE HATERS AND THEY HAVE FAR AND AWAY THE MOST VICIOUS HATE GROUPS.  But again, going to the Los Angeles Times (just to keep shining a spotlight on how dishonest and hypocritical these perverters of genuine news truly are), from an article titled “Violence isn’t part of free speech – it’s a threat to it” on p. B-1 from August 22, 2017:

How do we protect ourselves from neo-Nazis armed with clubs, knives and shields?

Well, we can start by stripping them of their clubs, knives and shields. Plus helmets, pepper spray and any guns.

And take away the masks some wear to hide their identity from prosecutors.

The 1st Amendment does guarantee “freedom of speech” and “the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

Note a key operative word: “peaceably.” I’m no constitutional lawyer, but it does seem that anyone armed with a club, knife and shield isn’t intending to “peaceably” assemble.

In fact, since the deadly violence at a Charlottesville, Va., white supremacist rally, California affiliates of the American Civil Liberties Union have issued a strong statement qualifying their traditional defense of the 1st Amendment.

“The 1st Amendment does not protect people who incite or engage in violence,” the ACLU statement reads. “If white supremacists march into our towns armed to the teeth and with the intent to harm people, they are not engaging in activity protected by the United States Constitution.”

At no time does the leftist author of this bird-liner ever once acknowledge that there are ANY left wing hate groups.  And we now know for a FACT even from LA Times’ OWN REPORTING that the people wearing masks, who are pepper-spraying their opponents an yes, who are coming to events armed with shields, knives, clubs, bike locks, bottles of urine, rocks, incendiary devices, and yes even guns are almost ECLUSIVELY ALL FROM THE LEFT.  And again, I can document that even from the slanted LA Time’s OWN REPORTING now.  As Redneck Revolt puts it: “You know, if you keep going further left, eventually, you go left enough to get your guns back.”  Not that the damn LA Times would ever report that little factoid.

But what do these dishonest “perverters” (because that’s what journalists are these days, people who pervert the truth) “report”???  They blame the side that are largely the VICTIMS of their side’s violence.  Which by the way was a very successful Nazi tactic.  George Skelton is a Nazi.  The LA Times is a Nazi newspaper.  They are not reporters but perverters.  They “report” fake news because they dishonestly “report” only those “facts” that are cherry-picked to support their agenda.  Okay?

We need to understand how the progressive left thinks in purely pragmatic rather than moral terms.  A piece from the LA Times on the ACLU sheds much light:

The American Civil Liberties Union has been much scrutinized since its decision to represent white supremacists in their quest to march in Charlottesville, Va. Board members have resigned and allies have declared that the ACLU, at long last, has gone too far. In the aftermath, the ACLU of California issued an equivocal statement, endorsed by the national ACLU, clarifying that the 1st Amendment “does not protect people who incite or engage in violence” but reiterating the organization’s complete support for “freedom of speech and expression.

Commentators have rightly observed that the ACLU has defended far-right speech since its founding, despite fierce criticism. But there is a common and mistaken premise in this analysis. It assumes that the organization has always believed, as it does today, that “freedom of expression is an end in itself.” In reality, the early ACLU viewed free speech as a tool of social justice, suited to particular purposes under particular conditions.

To correct the prevailing misconception, we need to look back to the 1930s, when economic desperation was fueling a battle between reactionary impulses and radical aspirations, and Nazis first appeared on American streets. Even as American fascists appealed to anti-Semitism and white privilege, the ACLU fought for their right to hold rallies. Although it did not oppose regulations against armed marches, it insisted that “the right to parade,” even “in brown shirts with swastikas,” should “never be denied.”

Why did the ACLU defend Nazis when they were terrorizing Germany and their virulence was painfully apparent? As the organization acknowledged in its pamphlet on Nazi speech, it was a “practical tactic” as much as an “abstract principle.”

A core contingent of the ACLU leadership hoped that an expansive interpretation of the 1st Amendment could pave the way to fundamental economic change, above all through the movement to organize America’s workers. The organization’s founders described themselves as “partisans of labor.” And they understood that the courts, which historically were hostile to unions, were disinclined to distinguish between the intimidation posed by Nazis marching in uniform and the intimidation posed by workers on a picket line.

You can readily see how rabidly biased the people “scrutinizing” the ACLU truly are given the fact that they never “scrutinized” them for thousands of OTHER incredibly vile policies and actions that have oppressed Christians and conservatives in mostly small towns that couldn’t afford to fight these lawthugs.  But here we get to a more important point: why did the ACLU support free speech that was openly hostile to freedom on the part of Nazis?  Because they knew that their own SIDE was every bit as vile and obnoxious as the Nazis and reasonable people would immediately comprehend that union thug violence and Nazi thug violence beat and battered and bruised equally the same.  And since union thug violence was at the very core of the ACLU mission, well, they sided with the violent to protect and promote their own brand of violence.

So it’s important to understand that this “support for free speech” was NEVER something the left actually believed in.  NEVER!!!  These fascists always exploited it as a means to an end with their end being the taking away of free speech for anyone who disagreed with them.  FACT.  And you’ll see that below, again, reported by the “esteemed newspaper” the LA Times.

The left has always been violent.  The Civil War was an act of Democratic Party violence.  The Ku Klux Klan that emerged after the Democrats lost the Civil War was an act of Democratic Party violence.  Just as the unions have been the violent thug arms of the Democratic Party machine until the Occupy Wall Street Movement, Black Lives Matter and now violent leftist groups such as Antifa, the anarchists, Redneck Revolt, By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) and many others are carrying out the same legacy of hate from the same rabid species of leftism.

Given the hate rhetoric like this that comes from the left at the very highest Democratic Party levels and is espoused by organizations such as BLM that are accorded legitimacy by both the Democratic Party and the mainstream media that serves as their propaganda wing, you shouldn’t be surprised one bit when leftists start thinking in terms of “By Any Means Necessary” to violently attack the people their leaders decry as Hitler-evil mass-murderers

“White nationalists” of course were attacked for a man driving his car into a crowd and killing one woman at an event to protest the removal of Confederate statues.  The mainstream media conveniently failed to remember the avowed black nationalist who participated in a Black Lives Matter event (you know, the kind where the mob masses are organized to chant, “What do we want?” “Dead cops!”  When do we want it?  “NOW!” over and over and over again) and assassinated five police officers and specifically attempted to target white police officers.

They also chanted stuff like “Whose streets? OUR streets!”  “No justice, no peace, no racist police!”  “How to you spell racist? N-Y-P-D!”  Obama didn’t decry it.  Not at all.

The assassination killing of NYPD officers Raphael Ramos and Wenjian Liu took place only days after this BLM chant was caught on tape at a BLM-organized event.  The assassination murders of the five police in Dallas followed.

Obama didn’t call out black hate before or after the Dallas racist massacre of police officers; Obama didn’t even MENTION black hate or leftwing hate groups or the leftwing violence those leftwing hate groups were continually committing.  Obama decried the liberal bogeyman of guns in a blatantly partisan and biased statement that the media refused to criticize at the time or remember afterward when they were attacking Donald Trump with far less grounds to do so.

No, the left spouted crap like this:

They speak to a raw anger at a system those activists want changed. But they can’t be called an endorsement for killing cops.

And they said stuff like “The hateful outrage of a few does not represent the views of the vast majority of sincere demonstrators.”  That sort of thing.

I call it “crap” because they refuse to give the other side anything even close to the same generous assumption that deep down, they’re just good folk who want good things for their families.  Rather it’s “Our haters are wonderful but your haters are evil and you’re evil for tolerating your haters even though we’re obviously not evil for tolerating our haters.”

At the Charlottesville rally where we had the car-ramming incident – which for the record I decry as a “terrorist attack” because unlike the left I am capable of seeing reality – the left had shown up and for TWO HOURS were assaulting and beating the so-called “right-wing” demonstrators.  And I simply point out that it is highly likely that the car-ramming was not a planned attack, but rather a reaction against the violence that the driver saw being unleashed against his side while the police stood by and did nothing to protect them.  The police – under the control of a very leftist mayor – literally facilitated the climate for violence and basically lit the match when they actually funneled the white nationalists directly into the left wing mobs which were shockingly in positions they were specifically supposed to be banned from holding.  And then after it was totally out of control and a violent leftist mob was all around, this:

Attendees began attempting to leave via exits 1 & 2 and were set upon by antifa as they attempted to do so.

They weren’t even allowed to leave without having to go through a gauntlet of physical beating with masked thugs armed with sticks and shields.

It looks like the left was hoping for what happened.

That isn’t “free speech.”  And we’re seeing it again and again and again: the police are casually stepping back and allowing masked goons to attack people.

The left wants to make this so damn confusing, but two things are crystal clear:

#1. Anyone wearing any kind of mask at a public demonstration ought to be immediately cited and/or arrested.  I don’t care if they are KKK or Antifa or Barney the Dinosaur.  The ONLY reason you are wearing a mask to a public demonstration is because you are planning to do something that you don’t want to be recognized and prosecuted for having done.  And frankly the fact that the police are not arresting people for wearing masks BEFORE the violence amounts to proof that the leftist police in leftist cities are collaborating before the fact with the violent antifa thugs.  Because any fool ought to know what these people are planning to do the moment they show up.

#2.  If one group – irregardless of their political/social views – obtains a legal permit to hold a demonstration or rally, and another group representing a different view shows up without a permit to confront that group, then the group without the permit is to be held responsible for the ensuing violence.  There should be no such thing as the “counterprotestor,” but rather any and all protests and demonstrations – “counter-” or otherwise – should be required to obtain permits and demonstrate solely within the confines of their permitted area.  And any “demonstrator” who goes outside his/her permitted area to confront demonstrators within their own permitted area is to be immediately arrested for fomenting or inciting riot.

These two principles would apply to all demonstrators and to all demonstrations from all groups representing all sides.  It would be fair to all.  But we don’t have that.

If you just accept these two commonsense principles, it is then beyond-obvious that the LEFT is ENTIRELY responsible for ALL the violence that we are seeing.  Because no, it is NOT the so-called “rightwing” that is showing up at leftist demonstrations and rallies; it is always the OTHER WAY AROUND with violent leftists showing up armed with shields, weapons and masks to attack the other side.

We see that in every single case, liberals are so rabidly intolerant of the 1st Amendment and the free speech that it guarantees, that they are determined to shut it down “By Any Means Necessary” which clearly includes violence.

Instead, what do we see?

We see this kind of crap which the print edition of the Los Angeles Times (p. B-1 for Wednesday, August 30, 2017) titled, “Free speech at what cost?:  After ‘antifa’ violence in Berkeley, city debates whether conservative firebrands are welcome“:

Violence over this weekend by left-wing “antifa” activists in Berkeley has opened another chapter in the debate at the birthplace of the Free Speech Movement over UC Berkeley’s plan to host several conservative firebrands next month.

University officials have vowed to allow speakers, including conservative provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos, to come even under the threat of violence, which has occurred at Berkeley and other universities earlier this year.

Some city leaders are becoming increasingly wary, fearing a repeat of Sunday’s clashes in which the protesters, wearing black with their faces covered, attacked a small showing of supporters of President Trump and others they accused, sometimes inaccurately, of being white supremacists or Nazis.

“We don’t want the moral, psychological and fiscal expense of having these agents of hate coming to our town,” said Berkeley City Councilman Ben Bartlett. “We know the contest of ideas is at the very heart of freedom, but at the same time when the ideas are certain to cause bloodshed I’m inclined to err on the side of protecting the population, and I say that with a heavy heart.”

Councilwoman Cheryl Davila also opposed the appearance by the conservative speakers, adding: “I don’t appreciate that there are racists coming to UC Berkeley to spew hate.”

Yep.  The ACLU project to “protect free speech” can be cancelled now.  Only the left should have the freedom to speak.  And the freedom to violently riot, of course.  And we’ll just blame everything we do on the other side.  Because if they didn’t speak, we liberals would bash them in the face.  It’s really entirely their fault we beat them.

Ah, Nazi thought is so alive and so well in liberalism.

Now, I have already shown you above that this event was marred by violent leftists attacking peaceful conservatives.  I have already shown you how Democrats have repeatedly slandered conservatives by falsely labelling them as “white supremacist” or “Nazi” when they had nothing whatsoever to do with either label.

And so here is the logic flow: “Liberals are so sick, so demented, so psychologically-unhinged, so depraved and so evil that if conservatives are allowed to exercise their constitutionally guaranteed free speech and free-assembly rights, the demons screaming in the collectivist souls of the left will force them to commit violent mayhem.  And so we must banish conservative speech that evil may triumph.”

When liberals threaten violence or commit violence, they should be ARRESTED AND PROSECUTED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT OF THE LAW.  Or there IS no law.

And I state this as a categorical fact: if you are a Democrat, YOU are the Nazi.  Because when Hitler was rising to power, his homosexual-filled SA Brownshirt thugs (and see also here because the mindset is just as true now as it was in the 1930s) did EXACTLY WHAT YOUR SIDE IS VIOLENTLY DOING NOW ON A DAILY BASIS.  If you are a Democrat, YOU are a Nazi, because when Hitler assumed power, he banned the “other side” from having any right to any kind of protest to his totalitarian power EXACTLY AS YOUR PARTY’S OFFICIALS AND BUREAUCRATS ARE TRYING TO DO NOW.

 

 

 

 

Advertisements