so just to be clear, did you post fake twitter news about the patriots visit to the whitehouse?

You seem to like using the word fascist as a pejorative.

Yep. Just to be clear, did you lie about me "arguing it wasn't fake news"? Because that's something you've repeatedly claimed happened, and it kinda seems like it didn't happen.

did you previously admit that you posted fake news about the patriots visit to the whitehouse? im asking because i didnt see it

Aww, not gonna answer my question?

See, juan, this is why we aren't the same. I owned up to my mistake; you, on the other hand, repeatedly lied about it and made claims about statements I made that were plainly false and that you have never once been able to back up. Even when I own up to my mistake, you're unwilling or unable to do the same.

I am honest. You are not.

The answers to all of this is complicated. Morality adds a complication. I don't think all Antifa violence is immoral, at least not automatically and especially not if you count property damage. Like some of this violence has clearly been consensual on both sides. Can people just agree to fight? Also, fighting for a good cause is perhaps possible, but I think one has to be fairly sure their violence will do more good than harm.

As far as policing, I think police should be far less military, mix more freely and peacefully with protestors generally and be very tolerant of everything except violence. I think that approach would result in the least violence on all sides. And I'm not that sympathetic to it being so dangerous to be a cop that they often default to riot gear and tactics. My job is more dangerous.

Lol. Microbet trying to justify violence to shut down free speech. And he calls us the fascists.

If it's Ok to kill terrorists about to commit an atrocity, it's Ok to disrupt people when they spread anti-democratic views.

The answers are not complicated in the least.

Violence is not justified political speech.

Property damage is not justified political speech.

And you guys don't get to choose who gets to exercise their rights.

hold on, did you previously admit to posting fake news or not? you didn't answer the question. if you didn't previously admit to posting the fake news after repeatedly being told you were refusing to admit you were posting fake news, that only means you admit to owning up to a mistake a week or so later after being confronted over and over. thats not the same thing. the facts didnt change. maybe the absurdity of your behavior became too embarrassing but that doesn't change what you did

its also not honest

nice try though

That's why I referenced Antifa shutting down non-violent free speech. I agree that if both sides show up and agree to fight, that is grey. I don't even know what to think, and I am not much interested in either party. But Antifa (and others on the left?) attacking non-violent supporters and shutting down free speech is a major problem, so I think the police should squash that.

You pose an interesting idea that police should mix with the crowd and be less militaristic. Maybe. Though I suspect we would have dead one-offs, of anonymous crowd members assaulting officers with deadly weapons if we adopted that, so I am skeptical. The problem is with anonymity, and crowd mentality. So I think the police should just show up in mass and stop the violence. And protect free speech.

There is a difference between protest and rebellion.

Violent protest is never justified.

If you truly believe that your protest required violent acts, then you are at the stage of rebellion, and you should expect to be treated as such should you lose.

Protest implies that you are working within the system to pursue your political goals.

There is no room for violence if you are trying to work within the system.

So you would be ok with me launching fire works into a big crowd of antifa then?

I definitely agree that police should be less militaristic in some instances. The problem is that they have got it backwards recently. They were very heave handed with peaceful protesters at standing rock and even water hosed them in sub zero temperatures and then they pretty much stood down at Berkeley and allowed a riot to ensue.

I suppose their policy will vary state to state though.

This is obtuse.

Police in the current climate seem to be more then willing to let protests go about their business prior to violence or property damage.

But even more, police are accountable to the chains of command. If you don't like how the police are acting, then you have a problem with the local government.

juan, I will answer your questions after you answer mine. This is what you posted, and this is what I have repeatedly called out as a lie, because it is a lie:

You're shifting goalposts (again, like always) to try to turn it into something else, but it's not. The quote above is a lie.

This is why we aren't the same. I owned up to my mistake; you, on the other hand, repeatedly lied about it and made claims about statements I made that were plainly false and that you have never once been able to back up. Even when I own up to my mistake, you're unwilling or unable to do the same.

I am honest. You are not.

That's not what I said and close to the opposite, but that's not relevant to fascism. You're a fascist because you want the state to intervene to suppress the liberties of individual citizens. Violent or not (and as I said I neither support Antifa's violence or even shouting down conservatives) I believe in individual liberty. For the police to put their hands on a citizen is a hell of a thing, carries a clearly implied threat of deadly violence if there isn't compliance and should require very solid justification. I don't care that much about two guys who get in a fight. The monsterous cowards who shot the protestor in Seattle, The Nazi who punched the girl (sexist, but tough), and yes the Antifa guy who pepper sprayed the girl are all scum bags. I also don't give a **** if someone breaks Well Fargo's windows.

that doesnt sound honest

i get that the mocking of your absurd behavior for weeks has finally helped you realize that slithering around the issue is embarrassing, but don't just go half way. own up to what you did. you posted fake news and have repeatedly ducked admitting it after being called out. its nice that you admit it now but that doesnt change the past. posting the fake news wasnt a big deal. it was an accident. failing to admit it and slithering around the issue is the problem

its ok though, your reputation is still the same. those that saw you as an obnoxious spammer who creates threads to brag about how much money they have didn't really lose any respect for you here. the majority of this forum probably thinks you're awesome and that hasnt changed either. so just relax and stop slithering around your mistakes

This silliness between goofy and juan started somewhere as a conversation (ok, argument) relating to free speech, but now it's not. Let's see who can let it go.

nobody needs to let it go. its just going to get deleted

Every cop is responsible for their own actions whether they are following orders or not.

Shutting down free speech through the use of violence, whether against property or people, is fascism and that's a fact. Just because the perpetrators are civilians doesn't change the fact.

Police arresting or detaining people for acts of violence is not suppressing their civil liberties ffs. That's just a ridiculous statement. And if you don't give a **** if someone breaks Wells fargo's windows then you condone the violence.

But "half way", even if that was accurate, is still halfway more than where you are, pathetically refusing to admit you lied! LOL even taking your attempt to insult me at face value, I'm still more honest than you.

So Juan, we're just moving on from your lol psychology ideas at this point, right?

So to whom do you go if an individual cop misbehaves?

So to whom do you go if the police have bad policies in effect?

Chain of command, and the local government.