# Assault during Leeds anti-deportation demo



## JonnyT (Sep 16, 2006)

Ey up,

today I was at a no borders/anti-deportation to Zimbabwe demo called by various migrant groups. before it started, two guys, at least one in leather jacket and according to vague reports one or both skinheads, approached the square at which we were meeting and attacked a man sitting on his own, leaving him with damaged (not sure if lost) teeth and massive amounts of blood flowing from his nose (he also seemed to be in shock).

I have heard various reports on this, some (the most likely to my mind) that they were Nazis, another that he was.

does anyone have any updates on this? the police were informed, showed up and got info but I have no idea where he went or what is happening now.

- Jonathan


----------



## JonnyT (Sep 18, 2006)

Hm...further info...

https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/09/350943.html

Turns out he was a Nazi, anti-fash beat the fuck out of him.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 20, 2006)

Yeah read that report, along with the purile comments posted by both fash and supposed anti-fash. How come they were so certain that he was a Nazi is what I would like to know, do they have databases or something? Yeah the Indymedia report did say he had Nazi symbols on his jacket but I don't take what Indymedia says as gospel anymore. I find the fact that someone just "sitting on their own" was suddenly beaten up without any provoacation disturbing, but then I am a liberal hippie scumbag


----------



## stevepinker (Sep 20, 2006)

Beating people up for there views is fun


----------



## Tom A (Sep 20, 2006)

It's the thin end for the wedge IMO. What next, ALF hospitalising someone for eating a Big Mac?


----------



## stevepinker (Sep 20, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> It's the thin end for the wedge IMO. What next, ALF hospitalising someone for eating a Big Mac?



Going to be great fun when they start kicking the crap out of the extremist islam groups


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 20, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> Yeah read that report, along with the purile comments posted by both fash and supposed anti-fash. How come they were so certain that he was a Nazi is what I would like to know, do they have databases or something?


Oh aye.






The poor lad was obviously balancing an invisible pencil on his finger tips here 

Active antifascists are somewhat likely to know local fascists, for bloody obvious reasons.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 20, 2006)

So... No better than Redwatch listing people who attend UAF demos for fash to go and harass.


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 20, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> So... No better than Redwatch listing people who attend UAF demos for fash to go and harass.


Out of curiosity, what do you think this dickhead was doing on an anti-deportation demo?

He was out for trouble and he found it.  No sympathy for the cunt from me.


----------



## stevepinker (Sep 20, 2006)

I've been to a anti animal testing march to show my support for the scientist
So the marchers would have had a right to beat me up just for being there


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 20, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> I've been to a anti animal testing march to show my support for the scientist
> So the marchers would have had a right to beat me up just for being there


No, though I'd have been tempted to give you a clip round the ear for directing your apolitical mewling at people defending a march from fash.

I suppose you'd have preferred it if he'd been left to kick off?

It clearly could have been handled better, mind.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 20, 2006)

But from what I have gathered on this post it wasn't even a case of self-defence. IMO anyone who deliberately targets people with violence are as bad as each other, someone who beats up people precived to be belonging to one group of enemies (ie Nazis) will eventually end up beating up people precived as being the enemy (precieved Nazis - ie "liberals"/people to the left of Bakunin). Then you have a Stalinist nightmare on your hands.

Oh, and to finish, here is a delightful comment from one supposed "anti-fascist"



> ref: https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/09/350943.html?c=on#c156712
> 
> "If you really want to fight fascism then first get yourself checked out so a doctor can examine your homicidal tendancies."
> 
> So in your opinion mug, the Jews who rose up against the Nazis in the Warsaw ghetto, the World Two partisans, the antifascists of Barcelona and Cable St were just 'nutters'? You speak for nobody but yourself scum. If I ever find out who you are you'll have more than a bleeding heart.



No wonder I cannot be arsed with Indy these days when people of that calibre post there.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 20, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> I suppose you'd have preferred it if he'd been left to kick off?
> 
> It clearly could have been handled better, mind.


One person, outnumbered by several anti-deportation activsts was hardly likely to "kick off". But yes, it could have been handled better, they could have tried to politely tell him to move on BEFORE they went in with the fists.


----------



## stevepinker (Sep 20, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> No, though I'd have been tempted to give you a clip round the ear for directing your apolitical mewling at people defending a march from fash.
> 
> I suppose you'd have preferred it if he'd been left to kick off?
> 
> It clearly could have been handled better, mind.



So you would hit me for defending my believes,Thats sad Nice to see that free speech is dead on both sides


----------



## Nixon (Sep 20, 2006)

He was there clad in Nazi gear at an anti-deportation demo.It sounds like he was out for trouble.Addmitedly one to however many activists isn't cool,but why turn up wearing that crap,if your not doing it to really rub people up the wrong way.No sympathy here either


----------



## Tom A (Sep 20, 2006)

I am more disturbed by the rabid hatred expoused by the supposed "anti-fascists" towards people who criticised the beating than the actual beating itself. Yeah, if you go to an anti-deportation demo clad in swastikas you are a moron, and a suicidal one at that (in fact going *anywhere *clad in swastikas is moronic IMO) but I don't see how leaving such people in a puddle of blood is going to stop the rise of fascism.

It's the close-mindedness of those who demonise with vitrol those with views different to thieir own that gets me, I often wonder that in a hypothetical revolutionary situation if "Antifa" would take on the role of a secret police force/Maoist "Red Guards" that attacks anyone who detracts from the revolutionary "concensus".


----------



## stevepinker (Sep 20, 2006)

I always thought violence was wrong , But it seems its cool as long as you feel your in the right or the other person is asking for it by the way they dress

Good news for those of us who can fight


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 20, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> I am more disturbed by the rabid hatred expoused by the supposed "anti-fascists" towards people who criticised the beating than the actual beating itself. Yeah, if you go to an anti-deportation demo clad in swastikas you are a moron, and a suicidal one at that (in fact going *anywhere *clad in swastikas is moronic IMO) but I don't see how leaving such people in a puddle of blood is going to stop the rise of fascism.


Again, *what the fuck do you think he was there for*?



> It's the close-mindedness of those who demonise with vitrol those with views different to thieir own that gets me, I often wonder that in a hypothetical revolutionary situation if "Antifa" would take on the role of a secret police force/Maoist "Red Guards" that attacks anyone who detracts from the revolutionary "concensus".


Oh aye, that's a reasonable conclusion to draw from a few comments on indymedia


----------



## Tom A (Sep 20, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Again, *what the fuck do you think he was there for*?


Various reasons, probably shit-stirring, maybe even get some fresh material for Redwatch even (although if it was the latter advertising your Nazi-ness is a pretty dumb plan). However beating the crap out of him makes him a martyr in the eyes of his fellow fash.


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 20, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> Various reasons, probably shit-stirring, maybe even get some fresh material for Redwatch even (although if it was the latter advertising your Nazi-ness is a pretty dumb plan).


So it would have been preferable to let him get away with that sort of shit?



> However beating the crap out of him makes him a martyr in the eyes of his fellow fash.


And we should care about this because?

Nobody is going to start crying their heart out over some huge fucking bonehead who showed up looking for trouble at a demo except other fascists.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 20, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> So it would have been preferable to let him get away with that sort of shit?


No, but several anti-fash beating up a lone fash (and I am not sure exactly what he was supposed to have *done* apart from being a fascist and being there) seems somewhat cowardly from someone who things that people should lead by example and not beat the crap out of people left right and centre.



> And we should care about this because?
> 
> Nobody is going to start crying their heart out over some huge fucking bonehead who showed up looking for trouble at a demo except other fascists.


Don't forget the liberals, who are just as bad as the fascists, and deserve the same treatment, the filthy class-traitor scumbags.


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 20, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> No, but several anti-fash beating up a lone fash (and I am not sure exactly what he was supposed to have *done* apart from being a fascist and being there) seems somewhat cowardly from someone who things that people should lead by example and not beat the crap out of people left right and centre.


Maybe they should have engaged him one and one and fought with duelling pistols at twenty paces?

Grow up, eh?



> Don't forget the liberals, who are just as bad as the fascists, and deserve the same treatment, the filthy class-traitor scumbags.


Would you kindly show me somewhere where antifa have systematically attacked liberals, or anybody but fascists, come to that?  Either that or take back what is actually a pretty serious fucking slur.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 20, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Maybe they should have engaged him one and one and fought with duelling pistols at twenty paces?


As I said, nine posts earlier:


> it could have been handled better, they could have tried to politely tell him to move on BEFORE they went in with the fists.





> Would you kindly show me somewhere where antifa have systematically attacked liberals


Something tells me, being people who don't tow the anarchist line, that they would be next to be attacked as people who have incompatable views, they would be the "capitalist roaders", the "counter-revolutionaries", the bogeymen who present an ever-present threat to the anarchist utopia (see also post 16, and the original Indymedia post which is full of "anti-fascists" simply baying for liberal blood).


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 20, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> Something tells me, being people who don't tow the anarchist line, that they would be next to be attacked as people who have incompatable views, they would be the "capitalist roaders", the "counter-revolutionaries", the bogeymen who present an ever-present threat to the anarchist utopia (see also post 16, and the original Indymedia post which is full of "anti-fascists" simply baying for liberal blood).


Give me one historical example of anarchist anti-fascists doing anything of the kind.  They've certainly had plenty of opportunities.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 20, 2006)

Anarchism has never really taken hold for long enough for it to have a chance to do this, but the history of China under Mao and the USSR under Stalin (both a product of revolutions), include a lot of purging of "counter revolutionaries", and all it would take is a group of charismatic individuals with an ulterior motive to sway the concensus and launch an all out war on those that are deemed to be conspiring to re-instate capitalism. Particulaly since a lot of "anarchists" have a very dodgy defination of "fascism", often meaning anyone who doesn't agree with him/her (such as the afformentioned liberal-haters on Indy).


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 20, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> Anarchism has never really taken hold for long enough for it to have a chance to do this, but the history of China under Mao and the USSR under Stalin (both a product of revolutions), include a lot of purging of "counter revolutionaries", and all it would take is a group of charismatic individuals with an ulterior motive to sway the concensus and launch an all out war on those that are deemed to be conspiring to re-instate capitalism. Particulaly since a lot of "anarchists" have a very dodgy defination of "fascism", often meaning anyone who doesn't agree with him/her (such as the afformentioned liberal-haters on Indy).


Spain 1936-39.

Many liberals murdered for no good reason by anarchists then?


----------



## SuburbanCasual (Sep 20, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> Yeah read that report, along with the purile comments posted by both fash and supposed anti-fash. How come they were so certain that he was a Nazi is what I would like to know, do they have databases or something? Yeah the Indymedia report did say he had Nazi symbols on his jacket but I don't take what Indymedia says as gospel anymore. I find the fact that someone just "sitting on their own" was suddenly beaten up without any provoacation disturbing, but then I am a liberal hippie scumbag



Stupid cunt, he was a nazi - yes Antifa do actually have files on well known nazis, and why not?


----------



## Tom A (Sep 20, 2006)

SuburbanCasual said:
			
		

> Stupid cunt, he was a nazi - yes Antifa do actually have files on well known nazis, and why not?


For the same reasons that Redwatch shouldn't be allowed to post details of the whereabouts of anti-fascists. 




			
				In Bloom said:
			
		

> Spain 1936-39.


The fascists eventually won that one. I don't consider three years of anarchism (all of which at war) a successful revolution.


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 21, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> For the same reasons that Redwatch shouldn't be allowed to post details of the whereabouts of anti-fascists.


Meanwhile, in the real world, Redwatch do have those details up and fascists continue to be a bunch of violent, racist, potentially dangerous cunts.


----------



## SuburbanCasual (Sep 21, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> For the same reasons that Redwatch shouldn't be allowed to post details of the whereabouts of anti-fascists.
> 
> .



The details aren't posted to the general public they are used by antifascists who are known and trusted to get it right.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 21, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Meanwhile, in the real world, Redwatch do have those details up and fascists continue to be a bunch of violent, racist, potentially dangerous cunts.


OK, racism is wrong. But just because someone holds fascist views (which can just mean he/she says he supports, or is a member of the BNP), it doesn't mean that he/she is going to attack the next black person that crosses his/her path. I do say that this person is misguided, but it doesn't warrant being hospitalised for what is essentially a thoughtcrime. Also, isn't racially motivated violence against the law, in which case there is a judicary system there that should, in an ideal world, approiately deal with such hoodlums? Oh and yes I know as anarchists you think that the police and government are evil, but that's your opinion.

So really the main issue facing this self-confessed liberal is that I am not keen on vigilantism, it makes me think of angry mobs gathered around the homes of people who have been (often wrongly) accused of being peadophiles during the aftermath of the murder of Sarah Payne. Also if some innocent person was to be subject to a fash-bashing even though he wasn't remotely fascist because of mistaken identity, if would be a very huge own goal for your cause. But unless that actually happens, or if the time comes when the millitant anti-fascist movement mutates into the neo-Stalinist nightmare that I depicted earlier (and hopefully it never will although I have my fears) I am happy to let this matter drop and agree to disagree.


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 21, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> OK, racism is wrong. But just because someone holds fascist views (which can just mean he/she says he supports, or is a member of the BNP), it doesn't mean that he/she is going to attack the next black person that crosses his/her path. I do say that this person is misguided, but it doesn't warrant being hospitalised for what is essentially a thoughtcrime.


For the last time, *why do you think he was at the march*?



> Also, isn't racially motivated violence against the law, in which case there is a judicary system there that should, in an ideal world, approiately deal with such hoodlums?


When we live in an ideal world, let me know.



> So really the main issue facing this self-confessed liberal is that I am not keen on vigilantism, it makes me think of angry mobs gathered around the homes of people who have been (often wrongly) accused of being peadophiles during the aftermath of the murder of Sarah Payne.


That was a myth, it never happened.



> Also if some innocent person was to be subject to a fash-bashing even though he wasn't remotely fascist because of mistaken identity, if would be a very huge own goal for your cause. But unless that actually happens, or if the time comes when the millitant anti-fascist movement mutates into the neo-Stalinist nightmare that I depicted earlier (and hopefully it never will although I have my fears) I am happy to let this matter drop and agree to disagree.


So what you're saying is that unless antifa do something they have *NEVER* done before and has *NEVER* occurred in the entire history of the tradition which they are a part of, you'll drop it?  Any particular time frame on this?  Or am I supposed to prove that your entirely hypothetical anarchist dystopia will definately absolutely never happen?


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 21, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> The fascists eventually won that one. I don't consider three years of anarchism (all of which at war) a successful revolution.


You're just shifting goal posts now.

Or don't you think that three years of de facto control over large sections of Spain is enough time and space for the massive anarchist, anti-fascist millitias that existed to off a few liberals?


----------



## bluestreak (Sep 21, 2006)

i find it very difficult to care.  however i do think that the hit and run style has done antifa no good here, because it was clearly uncertain who they were and why they were doing it.  they should have at least left a few leaflets explaining that they were slapping a nazi scumbag so that the wanker wasn't helped out by the others.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 21, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> For the last time, *why do you think he was at the march*?


I doubt I will ever know the exact truth of why he was there, as one person I doubt he would have been able to do much harm, one fash versus many non/anti-fash would be a very short battle.




> When we live in an ideal world, let me know.


Will do.



> That was a myth, it never happened.


Several news reports around the time disagree with you.



> So what you're saying is that unless antifa do something they have *NEVER* done before and has *NEVER* occurred in the entire history of the tradition which they are a part of, you'll drop it?


 Yes. 





> Any particular time frame on this?


 No. It hasn't happened so there isn't any point in continuing this at this time. 





> Or am I supposed to prove that your entirely hypothetical anarchist dystopia will definately absolutely never happen?


That's for history to decide.

Edit to add: Another reason why I am going to drop it is cause even an argumentitave fuckwit like me realises that life is too short to be always arguing and confronting people.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 21, 2006)

Comment deleted as I can't be arsed.


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 21, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> Comment deleted as I can't come up with a decent answer


Edited for the purposes of accuracy


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 21, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> I doubt I will ever know the exact truth of why he was there, as one person I doubt he would have been able to do much harm, one fash versus many non/anti-fash would be a very short battle.


Make up your mind.  Is violent self-defence acceptable, yes or no?



> Several news reports around the time disagree with you.


Several news reports which just couldn't quite manage to agree about the details and all later turned out to be a mixture of lies, exagerations and distortions.


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 21, 2006)

bluestreak said:
			
		

> i find it very difficult to care.  however i do think that the hit and run style has done antifa no good here, because it was clearly uncertain who they were and why they were doing it.  they should have at least left a few leaflets explaining that they were slapping a nazi scumbag so that the wanker wasn't helped out by the others.


This is true, like I say, clearly very badly handled.  Though you can't blame some antifa people for getting frustrated with liberal twats like this Tom A cretin, going round comparing them to Stalinist Secret Police for legitimate acts of self defence.


----------



## audiotech (Sep 21, 2006)

It seems likely that Tom A wasn't around in the late 70's when these ingrates were beating people up with impunity. Including the likes of Tom A no doubt, or just anyone who disagreed with their fantasist, hitlerite, hate fuelled claptrap.

Never fucking again.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 21, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Make up your mind. Is violent self-defence acceptable, yes or no?


Self-DEFENCE (violent or otherwise) is always acceptable, what else are you going to do, let them walk over and stamp on you? However from my interperation of the OP it seems the "anti-fash" struck first this time.



> Several news reports which just couldn't quite manage to agree about the details and all later turned out to be a mixture of lies, exagerations and distortions.


So it's an urban legend that the News Of The World ran a campaign to name and shame peadophiles, which didn't then lead to mass hysteria and several incidents of angry mobs gathering around the houses of supposed peadophiles?




			
				In Bloom said:
			
		

> This is true, like I say, clearly very badly handled.


Cheers for acknowleging that.  





> Though you can't blame some antifa people for getting frustrated with liberal twats like this Tom A cretin, going round comparing them to Stalinist Secret Police for *legitimate acts of self defence.*



Lets look at the original post:



> before it started, two guys, at least one in leather jacket and according to vague reports one or both skinheads, approached the square at which we were meeting and attacked a man sitting on his own, leaving him with damaged (not sure if lost) teeth and massive amounts of blood flowing from his nose (he also seemed to be in shock).


Self defence, huh? 



> It seems likely that Tom A wasn't around in the late 70's when these ingrates were beating people up with impunity.


Do you have links to prove that fascists were beating people up on any wide scale? Yes, the NF was big in the 1970s (although not as big as the BNP today), but you don't have to be a fascist to participate in racially-motivated violence. Attitudes have changed, racism isn't socially acceptble anymore. The way it's supposed to work is this: you attack someone (racially motivated or otherwise), you get arrested and then prosecuted. Oh and yes I bloody know that it doesn't work like that in practice, thanks to corruption and other issues.

Oh and before you go on about how the anfi-fash smashed them up and chased them off the streets, the real reason for the demise of the NF can all be attributed to a Mrs M. Thatcher appealing to the morons who would have supported the NF. Credit where credit is due, "bash the fash" didn't become "bash the Tories".


----------



## SuburbanCasual (Sep 21, 2006)

bluestreak said:
			
		

> they should have at least left a few leaflets explaining that they were slapping a nazi scumbag so that the wanker wasn't helped out by the others.



I agree.


----------



## audiotech (Sep 21, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> Do you have links to prove that fascists were beating people up on any wide scale? Yes, the NF was big in the 1970s (although not as big as the BNP today), but you don't have to be a fascist to participate in racially-motivated violence. Attitudes have changed, racism isn't socially acceptble anymore. The way it's supposed to work is this: you attack someone (racially motivated or otherwise), you get arrested and then prosecuted. Oh and yes I bloody know that it doesn't work like that in practice, thanks to corruption and other issues.



I can't be arsed giving any links. Have a search yourself if you don't believe that fascist violence wasn't part of the NF's strategy at the time. All I'll say on that point is that in the city where I live the violence was so bad that it was featured in a 'World in Action' special. I knew many people who were beaten up (a pregnant woman on one occasion). Windows were smashed, meetings attacked, swastikas daubed etc.

The NF were bigger than the BNP have ever been. At their height they had 17,000 members and had numerous branches throughout the country. They were also able to stand over 300 candidates in a general election. Racism has not gone away despite your naive belief that it has.



> Oh and before you go on about how the anfi-fash smashed them up and chased them off the streets, the real reason for the demise of the NF can all be attributed to a Mrs M. Thatcher appealing to the morons who would have supported the NF. Credit where credit is due, "bash the fash" didn't become "bash the Tories".



It was significant events in Lewisham and sustained activity organised by anti-fascists that saw off the NF. Thatcher and her "swamp speech" was political opportunism at it's worst and your talk of "morons" voting NF is typical of those who haven't got a clue what their talking about.


----------



## stevepinker (Sep 21, 2006)

You know I've never heard anyone complain in this country that day2day Fascist are ruining there life, Are these brave Fascist hunters around to help the community in ways the community might actually want 

Cleaning up estates of general mess and dirty
Bring old people food and helping around the house 
Cleaning up estates of drug dealers (hey you might even get to hit people)
Opening Youth clubs,So the far right can't get a grip

Or does the usefulness of the anti-fascist only extend to shouting at brain dead racists and now and again maybe giving one a kicking 

So if your community needs another group of people in the area threating violence then the anti-fascist might be what your area needs


----------



## Tom A (Sep 21, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> I can't be arsed giving any links. Have a search yourself if you don't believe that fascist violence wasn't part of the NF's strategy at the time. All I'll say on that point is that in the city where I live the violence was so bad that it was featured in a 'World in Action' special. I knew many people who were beaten up (a pregnant woman on one occasion). Windows were smashed, meetings attacked, swastikas daubed etc.


I confess I was actually born in 1983 and so cannot have any first-hand info regarding that. So yes, OK, I'll shut up about that one until if/when I can be arsed to read up on fascism in the 70s.



> The NF were bigger than the BNP have ever been. At their height they had 17,000 members and had numerous branches throughout the country. They were also able to stand over 300 candidates in a general election. Racism has not gone away despite your naive belief that it has.


The NF one had one councillor elected in a by-election in NI (so says wiki), unlike today's BNP which has a few more. Although according to wiki the BNP only have a meagre 6,502 members (in comparison with the NF of it's height). Also I never said that racism had "gone away", only that you are more likey to have people object to being racist.



> It was significant events in Lewisham and sustained activity organised by anti-fascists that saw off the NF. Thatcher and her "swamp speech" was political opportunism at it's worst and your talk of "morons" voting NF is typical of those who haven't got a clue what their talking about.


Maybe not morons (although racism is moronic) but misguided in their support for the fash. However the opportunism of Thacher worked in that it got people who would have voted NF to vote Tory instead.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 21, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> You know I've never heard anyone complain in this country that day2day Fascist are ruining there life, Are these brave Fascist hunters around to help the community in ways the community might actually want
> 
> Cleaning up estates of general mess and dirty
> Bring old people food and helping around the house
> ...


Totally agree. It is well documented that many people turn to the far right not because their are intrinsically evil, nasty, racist scumbags, but they are bloody pissed off with their current state of affairs, and the gutter press (particualy the Scum and HateMail) fuel prejudices against vunlerable sections of the society that become the scapegoat for these problems, which leads to people turning to reactionary, far right groups as a result. The way to deal with this is though reason, logic, and education, while taking proactive measures to tacke the problems that fuel the far right. Must be said that beating up someone for being a misguided disgruntled member of the working class is a very un-anarchist thing to do (not that anyone posting here would condone that of course, anarchists or otherwise).

Blame the film American History X. It made me think of fash as human beings, rather than evil monsters.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Sep 21, 2006)

JonnyT said:
			
		

> Hm...further info...
> 
> https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/09/350943.html
> 
> Turns out he was a Nazi, anti-fash beat the fuck out of him.



Good for them!


----------



## stevepinker (Sep 21, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> Totally agree. It is well documented that many people turn to the far right not because their are intrinsically evil, nasty, racist scumbags, but they are bloody pissed off with their current state of affairs, and the gutter press (particualy the Scum and HateMail) fuel prejudices against vunlerable sections of the society that become the scapegoat for these problems, which leads to people turning to reactionary, far right groups as a result. The way to deal with this is though reason, logic, and education, while taking proactive measures to tacke the problems that fuel the far right. Must be said that beating up someone for being a misguided disgruntled member of the working class is a very un-anarchist thing to do (not that anyone posting here would condone that of course, anarchists or otherwise).



The guy who got the kicking, Was a moron full stop, Do anti-Fascists alsos give kickings to the extreme Islamic hate groups i've seen in finsbury park 
Cause i would still find it out of order for a self chosen group of people to go around beating people up for the views they hold


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 21, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> Totally agree. It is well documented that many people turn to the far right not because their are intrinsically evil, nasty, racist scumbags, but they are bloody pissed off with their current state of affairs


No, really? 

Fucking hell, if you expect this to be a revelation to anybody, you can't be too bright yourself.


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 21, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> Self-DEFENCE (violent or otherwise) is always acceptable, what else are you going to do, let them walk over and stamp on you? However from my interperation of the OP it seems the "anti-fash" struck first this time.


Because clearly the locally known member of a violent fascist organisation was at an anti-deportation demo to hand out sweets.



> So it's an urban legend that the News Of The World ran a campaign to name and shame peadophiles, which didn't then lead to mass hysteria and several incidents of angry mobs gathering around the houses of supposed peadophiles?


The "mass hysteria" and "angry mobs" are an urban myth, yes.


----------



## TeeJay (Sep 21, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> That was a myth, it never happened.


O Rly?

What about this then: 

Tabloid sets vigilante terror on innocent man 

or this:

Doctor driven out of home by vigilantes

more here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,416081,00.html

_"...The News of the World's editor, Rebekah Wade, called for "vigilance not vigilantism". The vigilante attacks, of course, began within hours. In Manchester, a 300-strong mob surrounded the home of Ian Armstrong, who was mistaken for a paedophile because he shared a surname with a man named by the News of the World. They backed a six-year-old boy down his garden path and shouted, "Do you want this one?"

Once the misunderstanding had been cleared up, the News of the World scored a bizarre victory by parading Armstrong at a press conference. "I support the News of the World's campaign to name and shame paedophiles," he quivered.

The residents of the Paulsgrove estate in Portsmouth drew up a "mental list" of the 20 most likely paedophiles in their neighbourhood. They set about attacking the homes of those on the list. They admitted to suspecting one man because he lived alone and talked about how much he loved his mother. A 17-year-old boy was included because his girlfriend was 15. The protesters paraded their children for the cameras. A three-year-old held up a sign as if she was supporting her village fete. It read: "Kill Paedophiles!" Five innocent families fled the estate, terrified of their neighbours. The campaign's self-proclaimed leader, Katrina Kessell, declared that if they felt compelled to run away because of guilty thoughts then it was their own fault. It was during one of her many TV interviews that Kessell's three-year-old son was found wandering near a busy road half-a-mile from their home. Social services was alerted..."_


----------



## Tom A (Sep 21, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Because clearly the locally known member of a violent fascist organisation was at an anti-deportation demo to hand out sweets.


OK, will take your word for it, if I was there maybe I would be more inclined to agree. Still sickened by the "death to the liberals" brigade on Indymedia who like to visciously attack any criticism of anti-fascist tactics, which makes me think along the lines of this: if the militant anti-fascists cannot take criticsm without resorting to childish keyboard-warrior tactics, it doesn't give their view much crediblity, does it? However I am prepared to accept that the genuine Antifa activists (whoever they may be) are a world away from the Indymedia keyboard warriors.



> The "mass hysteria" and "angry mobs" are an urban myth, yes.



From http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/848737.stm



> An innocent man who was mistaken for one of the 49 paedophiles named and shamed in a national newspaper has told of his fear following an attack on his home.
> 
> Iain Armstrong, 49, from Greater Manchester, was confronted by locals in the street after vigilantes thought he was a child abuser named in The News of the World.


So the BBC have now started publishing urban myths as fact? I actually know of one incident invloving a suspected peadophile on the very estate I used to live in about five years ago, so now I am told that my memory is an urban myth too, then?


----------



## TeeJay (Sep 21, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Nobody is going to start crying their heart out over some huge fucking bonehead who showed up looking for trouble at a demo except other fascists.


Some people don't like violence of any sort, even if the people getting beaten shitless hold views they disagree with. I disagree with your views on lots of things but I wouldn't settle that by having you beaten shitless. The "crying your heart out" is simply objecting to pointless, unnecessary and/or excessive/disproportionate violence.


----------



## Cobbles (Sep 21, 2006)

Nixon said:
			
		

> He was there clad in Nazi gear at an anti-deportation demo.It sounds like he was out for trouble.Addmitedly one to however many activists isn't cool,but why turn up wearing that crap,if your not doing it to really rub people up the wrong way.No sympathy here either



Based on this kind of logic, then the police are presumably justified to wade in and discourage (with fists) anyone daring to turn up at Westminster with any form of banners or clothing that might annoy the Government who are gathered there.


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 21, 2006)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4719364.stm


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 21, 2006)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> Some people don't like violence of any sort, even if the people getting beaten shitless hold views they disagree with. I disagree with your views on lots of things but I wouldn't settle that by having you beaten shitless. The "crying your heart out" is simply objecting to pointless, unnecessary and/or excessive/disproportionate violence.


As hard as it might be for some people to understand, anti-fascism is categorically *not* about beating people up for the opinions they hold.

Ideologically committed fascists are dangerous people with a propensity for violence and intimidation.


----------



## TeeJay (Sep 21, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Ideologically committed fascists are dangerous people with a propensity for violence and intimidation.


Looks like some anti-fascists are as well.


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 21, 2006)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> Looks like some anti-fascists are as well.


They started it


----------



## TonkaToy (Sep 21, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Out of curiosity, what do you think this dickhead was doing on an anti-deportation demo?
> 
> He was out for trouble and he found it.  No sympathy for the cunt from me.



Lovely. So if a Socialist Worker or ANLer is found to be protesting at a Nash gathering, that "cunt" is fair game as well?


----------



## TeeJay (Sep 21, 2006)

In Bloom, it sounds like you need some excitement in your life.

Why don't you take your skateboard down the town centre like all your mates do and stop fantasising about being a "hard man".

Either that or join the army.


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 21, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Lovely. So if a Socialist Worker or ANLer is found to be protesting at a Nash gathering, that "cunt" is fair game as well?


Nah, though I'd find it hard to have much sympathy for somebody who showed up completely on their own with the sole intention of getting into a needless ruck.


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 21, 2006)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> In Bloom, it sounds like you need some excitement in your life.
> 
> Why don't you take your skateboard down the town centre like all your mates do and stop fantasising about being a "hard man".
> 
> Either that or join the army.


Yawn.

I happen to have a lot of respect for what antifa do (even if I have some problems with the way they do it on occaission), partly because in some situations, it's extremely important and dangerous work that I probably couldn't do myself.  Quite what that has to do with being a "hard man" mystifies me.


----------



## Nixon (Sep 22, 2006)

Cobbles said:
			
		

> Based on this kind of logic, then the police are presumably justified to wade in and discourage (with fists) anyone daring to turn up at Westminster with any form of banners or clothing that might annoy the Government who are gathered there.



Anyone that's walking around wearing insignia that is blatantly prejudiced needs a slap.People can believe and hate who they want because they always will,but walking around brazen as day almost advertising your extreme 
views on your clothing and expecting people to just ignore it and to not react 
to it in some way is slightly naiive.Especailly in an environment like that.Especially from a member of Wolf Hook's White Brotherhood"  .

Protesters don't turn up with banners anything that will really piss off the government because when they do something extreme they get arrested or dealt with.Nazi's however don't seem to get arrested for flying their flags of WP on their clothing.Id say that's your difference.


----------



## Cobbles (Sep 22, 2006)

Nixon said:
			
		

> Anyone that's walking around wearing insignia that is blatantly prejudiced needs a slap.



Why not just report them to the police - if there's that many people steamed up about their insignia, then they're conmmitting a public order offence.

Thuggery is simply repellent Anti-Fascist thugs are exactly the same as Fascist thugs, although you have to admit that it took a certain amount of cojones (as well as stupidity) for the Fascist to turn up , the cretins who beat him up simply showed their true colour as cowards.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 22, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Nah, though I'd find it hard to have much sympathy for somebody who showed up completely on their own with the sole intention of getting into a needless ruck.


Assuming that he WAS there to "cause a needless ruck". I STILL don't see anything in the OP to suggest that.

(Cue yet another "well why was he here then?" reply)


----------



## Tom A (Sep 22, 2006)

Cobbles said:
			
		

> Why not just report them to the police - if there's that many people steamed up about their insignia, then they're conmmitting a public order offence.


Cause, being anarchists, the idea of getting the police and State to fight their battles for them is hypocrtical, hence why they feel like they have to resort to what is essentially vigilantism against the "enemy", whoever that may be.


----------



## Cobbles (Sep 22, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> Cause, being anarchists, the idea of getting the police and State to fight their battles for them is hypocrtical, hence why they feel like they have to resort to what is essentially vigilantism against the "enemy", whoever that may be.



What you meant to say was: "Cause, being muppets, they haven't got the intelligence to realise that without the organs of state maintaining justice, it all just devolves to the level of whichever bunch of boot boys has got better baseball bats being "right".


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 22, 2006)

Cobbles said:
			
		

> What you meant to say was: "Cause, being muppets, they haven't got the intelligence to realise that without the organs of state maintaining justice, it all just devolves to the level of whichever bunch of boot boys has got better baseball bats being "right".


Or alternatively "Cause, having some sense of context, they don't feel the need to conflate all forms of violence as if they're exactly identical"


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 22, 2006)

Cobbles said:
			
		

> Why not just report them to the police - if there's that many people steamed up about their insignia, then they're conmmitting a public order offence.


Never works.

I remember when Condoleeza Rice visited Liverpool, some dickhead started chucking bottles at a few of the people rallying in town during the day, so a few people called the police.  I suppose they thought that considering that the entire town was absolutely crawling with filth and none of the protestors were actually doing anything illegal at the time, the police would rush to their aid.  Nope.

In any case, if somebody would like to explain what a known member of a violent fascist organisation was doing there if _not_ to kick off, I'd be very grateful.


----------



## Cobbles (Sep 22, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Or alternatively "Cause, having some sense of context, they don't feel the need to conflate all forms of violence as if they're exactly identical"



So what's the difference between a couple of fascist goons beating up an anti fascist goon, versus a couple of anti fascist goons beating up a fascist goon - none.

It's all just gratuitous violence masquerading as politics - the politics of the kindergarten.

"_In any case, if somebody would like to explain what a known member of a violent fascist organisation was doing there if not to kick off, I'd be very grateful_."

Seeking publicity, obviously and it looks like he achieved his aim, with a bit of low level martyrdom thrown in as good measure.


----------



## Pigeon (Sep 22, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Lovely. So if a Socialist Worker or ANLer is found to be protesting at a Nash gathering, that "cunt" is fair game as well?



(Avoiding any obvious smartarse sectarian quips...)

Fact is, we appear to have a situation where a known fascist, apparnently 6'4" turned up at an anti deportation rally displaying fash insignia. Even if he wasn't intent on causing a ruck, he clearly intended to intimidate the people participating in a an action to defend some of the most reviled and marginalised people in the UK.

It backfired on him. Boo-hoo.

Like it or not, history does show that you don't deal with these scum by waving lolloypops at them.


----------



## TeeJay (Sep 22, 2006)

Any accounts of what he was in fact wearing and doing before he was attacked? If he was so obviously badged up and tryin to intimdate people (by himself?) why did so many bystanders not realise why he had been attacked?


----------



## Pigeon (Sep 22, 2006)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> Any accounts of what he was in fact wearing and doing before he was attacked?



Read the indymedia account: badges all over his MA1 and a full back-piece.


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 22, 2006)

Cobbles said:
			
		

> So what's the difference between a couple of fascist goons beating up an anti fascist goon, versus a couple of anti fascist goons beating up a fascist goon - none.


The clue is in the question.


----------



## Cobbles (Sep 22, 2006)

Pigeon said:
			
		

> Read the indymedia account: badges all over his MA1 and a full back-piece.


So if I turn up as an ASH gathering with "Rothmans" badges all over my jacket, they have an absolute right to beat me up?


----------



## Pigeon (Sep 22, 2006)

Cobbles said:
			
		

> So if I turn up as an ASH gathering with "Rothmans" badges all over my jacket, they have an absolute right to beat me up?



Turn it in mate.

Every post you contribute displays your ignorance of the phenomenon we're discussing. Fascists have no fear of using violence, in fact it's their principle tool.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 22, 2006)

Cobbles said:
			
		

> What you meant to say was: "Cause, being muppets, they haven't got the intelligence to realise that without the organs of state maintaining justice, it all just devolves to the level of whichever bunch of boot boys has got better baseball bats being "right".


I was merely highlighting why from an anarchist POV they would be unlikely to want to involve the police.


----------



## TeeJay (Sep 22, 2006)

Pigeon said:
			
		

> Read the indymedia account: badges all over his MA1 and a full back-piece.


I have read indymedia - there are contradictory accounts of what he looked like and was wearing.


----------



## JonnyT (Sep 22, 2006)

I was around pretty much immediately and he didn't seem to be wearing any obviously fascist insignia. someone on the Indy thread said he turned his jacket inside out which is (marginally) possible as I'd left for a moment.

There was nothing about this guy which screamed NAZI at me, tho things did seem a little "off" most of the time. He looked like a regular metal/punk kinda guy who had been sitting alone and got the shit beat out of him.

none of this is to deny he IS a Nazi, specially given the pics and some people pointing him out later, but being unaware of that is a completely honest mistake. none of the people involved were knowingly helping a Nazi, because it wasn't for some until that info became clear.

while I have no problem with physical anti-fascism and see it as completely necessary in certain circumstances, the posing, macho, harder-than-thou attitude shown in the Indy posts did piss me off something chronic.

- Jonathan


----------



## Cobbles (Sep 22, 2006)

Pigeon said:
			
		

> Turn it in mate.
> 
> Every post you contribute displays your ignorance of the phenomenon we're discussing. Fascists have no fear of using violence, in fact it's their principle tool.



What phenomenon - mob rule?

Anti fascists , too seem only to be ruled by the principle that violence is right "_wennever we finkso innit_"?


----------



## JonnyT (Sep 22, 2006)

_Anti fascists , too seem only to be ruled by the principle that violence is right "wennever we finkso innit"?_

Anti-fascists think violence is right....when they think it is right?

thanks for that


----------



## TeeJay (Sep 22, 2006)

JonnyT said:
			
		

> _Anti fascists , too seem only to be ruled by the principle that violence is right "wennever we finkso innit"?_
> 
> Anti-fascists think violence is right....when they think it is right?
> 
> thanks for that


Saying something is right "whenever we think so", is to say that the moral or ethical principle being used is simple a personal and arbitrary judgement instead of being based on any consistent or coherent principles. This isn't simply a tautology, it is a rejection of ethical thinking.


----------



## pk (Sep 22, 2006)

Surely nobody gives a fuck about some smashed-face nazi?


----------



## TeeJay (Sep 22, 2006)

Have you actually read the thread pk? Quite a few people have expressed concerns about what happened.


----------



## fanciful (Sep 22, 2006)

But the odd thing is why? 
Are people incapable of understanding the difference between people who want to gas black people, the disabled and communists in concentration camps and those who want to stop them?
In what sense is that a difficult distinction to make?


----------



## TeeJay (Sep 22, 2006)

The guy who got battered was involved with the holocaust? Bit young isn't he?  

How about you engage in a sensible debate, rather than drag in hysterical rubbish like that?

Do you believe in "thought-crime"? Do you believe in beating people up (or worse) on the basis of what they think, regardless of what they have actually done?


----------



## Tom A (Sep 22, 2006)

TeeJay said:
			
		

> Do you believe in "thought-crime"? Do you believe in beating people up (or worse) on the basis of what they think, regardless of what they have actually done?


I said something very similar a few pages ago. However it seems anything goes where anti-fasicsm is concerned.


----------



## stevepinker (Sep 22, 2006)

Seems some anti-fascist are no better than football thugs


----------



## Dissident Junk (Sep 22, 2006)

fanciful said:
			
		

> But the odd thing is why?
> Are people incapable of understanding the difference between people who want to gas black people, the disabled and communists in concentration camps and those who want to stop them?
> In what sense is that a difficult distinction to make?



Okay . . . a selection of statements:

This man wants to gas people in concentration camps (immoral thought).

Some people want to stop him (moral thought).

This man has not gassed anyone in a concentration camp (fact).

Those people have kicked the shit out of him (violent act).

Errr . . . . those people's 'moral thought' has led to a violent act; his 'immoral thought' hasn't. You're on pretty shaky ground.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 22, 2006)

Dissident Junk said:
			
		

> Okay . . . a selection of statements:
> 
> This man wants to gas people in concentration camps (immoral thought).


Also it's a bit of a dodgy assumption to make to decide that this man definately DOES want to gas blacks, Jews, etc, athough I doubt they could be arsed to ask him about his precise views. However some fascists (partcularly the more "moderate" BNP types) just want to send the blacks to "whence they came from", rather than extreminate them.

Oh, and yes, I am aware that initally the government of Nazi Germany only wanted to ship the Jews off to some places away from the Reich, Madagascar was one such proposed location. But then they discovered that this was impractical, so the "Final Solution" was born.

But still, people are being accused of crimes that have not yet committed (intention or no intention).


----------



## fanciful (Sep 22, 2006)

what's dodgy about morals?
It is moral to oppose someone who wants to repeat the holocaust. 
It is immoral to want to repeat the holocaust.
Is it a thought crime to organise and agitate for attacks on black people, communists and the disabled? To seek to establish a fascist dictatorship over Britain?
Yes it is.


----------



## TonkaToy (Sep 23, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Nah, though I'd find it hard to have much sympathy for somebody who showed up completely on their own with the sole intention of getting into a needless ruck.



Hold on a minute, so you are saying that in future, you would have no problem with a good few hundred NF types decending on an anti-deportation demo?


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (Sep 23, 2006)

Would the people who supported this guy getting the shit kicked out of him also support severe state corporal punishment/beatings for murderers and paedophiles/rapists?  If not, why not?  It's the same principal.

There are some very hipocritical and nasty views being voiced here, IMO.  People DO NOT deserve to be beaten just for their political viewpoint.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 23, 2006)

RenegadeDog said:
			
		

> Would the people who supported this guy getting the shit kicked out of him also support severe state corporal punishment/beatings for murderers and paedophiles/rapists?  If not, why not?  It's the same principal.
> 
> There are some very hipocritical and nasty views being voiced here, IMO.  People DO NOT deserve to be beaten just for their political viewpoint.


Hear, hear.


----------



## Cobbles (Sep 23, 2006)

fanciful said:
			
		

> It is moral to oppose someone who wants to repeat the holocaust.



There's opposition and then there's thuggery.

Stalin murdered millions more than Hitler did - was he a moral anti-nazi?


----------



## durruti02 (Sep 24, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> It was significant events in Lewisham and sustained activity organised by anti-fascists that saw off the NF. Thatcher and her "swamp speech" was political opportunism at it's worst and your talk of "morons" voting NF is typical of those who haven't got a clue what their talking about.



ok i was just around ( in anl in 1977?) though not 'active' but i do not believe your arguement to be right. i base this on what i saw at the time and conversations with many many people, on both sides at the time, since 

lewisham etc did NOT have a significant  effect .. it may have had a slight effect in highlighting that the nf were 'violent' but above all it was the Thatcher effect which destroyed the NF .. 

and worse, (and it is the same today),  the left became identified as being ANTI working class by many in the w/c effected by austerity at the time when they  felt abandonned ( as today) by Labour and therefore sympathetic to the NF if not to facism ..

before people say .. what would you do? .. i am not against 'action' .. but it HAS to be from community groups NOT as anti facism .. which almost always is seen as outsiders .. if you are not part of the community to be able to defend it then maybe you need to question what you are doing


----------



## durruti02 (Sep 24, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> You know I've never heard anyone complain in this country that day2day Fascist are ruining there life, Are these brave Fascist hunters around to help the community in ways the community might actually want
> 
> Cleaning up estates of general mess and dirty
> Bring old people food and helping around the house
> ...



spot on .. 

indeed the OP/thread shows up again what is wrong with our politics .. in a city where 10s of thousends voted BNP this year, we end up fking about with no borders demos and beating up nazis , who in this case are i suspect NOT community activists .. far more dangerous .. but just nutters


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 24, 2006)

RenegadeDog said:
			
		

> People DO NOT deserve to be beaten just for their political viewpoint.


When their political viewpoint means that they are highly likely to pose a physical danger to others (as in the case of a fucking Nazi, not just fash, but actual Nazi, showing up on an anti-deportation demo), then it's hardly surprising when they get beaten up.

Violent anti-fascism does have its limitations, but I can't see any sensible alternative when they show up on demos like this.


----------



## Tom A (Sep 24, 2006)

But pre-emptively attacking someone for crimes he has yet to committ sounds a little er... fascist.

(waits for the old "oh so you would have waited for black people to have been beaten up at his hands then" line)


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 24, 2006)

Tom A said:
			
		

> But pre-emptively attacking someone for crimes he has yet to committ sounds a little er... fascist.


That's because you don't know what "fascist" means


----------



## audiotech (Sep 24, 2006)

durruti02 said:
			
		

> ok i was just around ( in anl in 1977?) though not 'active' but i do not believe your arguement to be right.



Believe what you want. Even the then leaders of the NF, Webster and Tyndall, acknowledged the importance of anti-fascist acitivity at the time in undermining their support. But there again, as you freely admit you were "just around" and "not active".


----------



## Cobbles (Sep 24, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> When their political viewpoint means that they are highly likely to pose a physical danger to others.


Clearly a description of Anti-fascist thugs.

By this rationale, the police are clearly entitled to wade in to both poles of te lunatic fringe with full weaponry.


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 24, 2006)

The violence of anti-fascists is defensive in nature.  The difference is blindingly obvious, whether you agree with antifa or not.


----------



## stevepinker (Sep 24, 2006)

Defensive violence ..Pretty much all bored nutters who like a bit of shouting and a fight think there violence is defensive 

In fact I'm sure most people giving out racists beatings think there defending there race


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 24, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> Defensive violence ..Pretty much all bored nutters who like a bit of shouting and a fight think there violence is defensive
> 
> In fact I'm sure most people giving out racists beatings think there defending there race


Yeah, but screw them


----------



## stevepinker (Sep 24, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Yeah, but screw them



You make it sound like a game


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 24, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> You make it sound like a game


No, that'd be the liberals asking everybody to play nice and get along.

The truth is that fash are, on the whole, dangerous people who want to hurt us.  They are willing to use violence, so we have to be equally willing to do the same.


----------



## stevepinker (Sep 24, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> No, that'd be the liberals asking everybody to play nice and get along.
> 
> The truth is that fash are, on the whole, dangerous people who want to hurt us.  They are willing to use violence, so we have to be equally willing to do the same.




So your anti-liberal and believe you have the right to use violence to make people follow your views


----------



## audiotech (Sep 24, 2006)

Cobbles said:
			
		

> Stalin murdered millions more than Hitler did - was he a moral anti-nazi?



Have you any evidence for your assertion?

It's widely accepted that the Russians people lost 20 million lives during the war, never mind the hundreds of thousands who died fighting the Nazi's from other countries. Then there were six million who died during the holocaust.

When the secret archives of the USSR were ordered open by Gorbechev in 1990, a startling discovery was revealed, but little of it was made public.

Here's a taster:



> In this world we live in, who can avoid hearing the terrible stories of suspected death and murders in the gulag labour camps of the Soviet Union? Who can avoid the stories of the millions who starved to death and the millions of oppositionists executed in the Soviet Union during Stalin s time? In the capitalist world these stories are repeated over and over again in books, newspapers, on the radio and television, and in films, and the mythical numbers of millions of victims of socialism have increased by leaps and bounds in the last 50 years. But where in fact do these stories, and these figures, come from? Who is behind all this?



After studying the reports of the research in the archives of the Soviet Union, information was provided in the form of concrete data about the real number of prisoners, the years they spent in prison and the real number of those who died and of those who were condemned to death in Stalin s Soviet Union. The truth is quite different from the myth.

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Embassy/7213/lies.html


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 24, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> So your anti-liberal and believe you have the right to use violence to make people follow your views


No, I believe that I have the right to self-defence.  It's not about who does or doesn't follow my views.  You don't see me saying that it's okay to beat up Tories or swappies, do you?

Fascism by its very nature poses a threat to me, my loved ones and other working class people who they take a dislike to for whatever reason.  I see nothing wrong with employing violence as a means of self-defence in appropriate situations.


----------



## stevepinker (Sep 24, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> No, I believe that I have the right to self-defence.  It's not about who does or doesn't follow my views.  You don't see me saying that it's okay to beat up Tories or swappies, do you?
> 
> Fascism by its very nature poses a threat to me, my loved ones and other working class people who they take a dislike to for whatever reason.  I see nothing wrong with employing violence as a means of self-defence in appropriate situations.



How about beating up extremist Islamic nutters down finsbury park,cause i can't remember any of the working class people i know complaining about fascists
But boy do they seem worked up about Islam


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 24, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> How about beating up extremist Islamic nutters down finsbury park,cause i can't remember any of the working class people i know complaining about fascists
> But boy do they seem worked up about Islam


If those nutters posed a physical threat, I'd have no moral problem with it.

As it stands they're just relatively harmless nutters.  When Abu Ghurabaa (or whatever name they're going by now) start beating people up or holding public marches with the express intention of intimidating people, then it'd be worthwhile.  Whether it'd be helpful, I'm not so sure, it depends on the exact circumstances.


----------



## stevepinker (Sep 24, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> holding public marches with the express intention of intimidating people, then it'd be worthwhile.  .



Your right they would/have never done that


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 24, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> Your right they would/have never done that


When have they ever done that?

If they did do that in Merseyside, I'd be quite happy to organise a counter demo.


----------



## Cobbles (Sep 24, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> When the secret archives of the USSR were ordered open by Gorbechev in 1990, a startling discovery was revealed, but little of it was made public.
> 
> Here's a taster:
> 
> ...


Your author:
_The present arthor, Mario Sousa is a member of the Comunist Party in Sweden, KPML(r). The article was publicated in the Comunist Partys newspaper Proletären in April 1998._

There's nothing like unbiased opinion and this is nothing like unbiased opinion, never mind exhaustive research.

http://www.historyplace.com/worldhistory/genocide/stalin.htm

Estimated death toll - (just the Ukraine collectivisation ) 7 million (Malcolm Muggeridge witnessed it first hand and reported it in the Manchester Guardian).


----------



## Cobbles (Sep 24, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> The violence of anti-fascists is defensive in nature.  The difference is blindingly obvious, whether you agree with antifa or not.


Oh yes, rushing in to beat up someone doing absolutely nothing is "defensive".


----------



## JonnyT (Sep 25, 2006)

As has been pointed out several times in this thread, the guy was a well-known Nazi and member of a group which is known to use violence. There is therefore a reasonable chance that his presence on a No Borders demo would be likely to involve violence either directly (him attacking people) or indirectly (obtaining info e.g. for RedWatch). One could therefore argue that making him unable to follow either is a defensive act.

I do have a lot of misgivings about antifa-style actions (including this one) but most of the reasons given against them seem rather empty.


----------



## joer90 (Sep 25, 2006)

ANTIFA does not need permision from anyone to act on information on fascist activity and will carry on its work.The fact that the fascist in question was a redwatch photographer seems lost on some of the idiots who are compaining.Some of you realy have not got the brains you were born with


----------



## Cobbles (Sep 25, 2006)

joer90 said:
			
		

> ANTIFA does not need permision from anyone to act on information on fascist activity and will carry on its work.The fact that the fascist in question was a redwatch photographer seems lost on some of the idiots who are compaining.Some of you realy have not got the brains you were born with


Why not just remove the film/storage media from his camera (as opposed to gratuitously beating him up) - did the thugs on site get a camera? or is this just another puerile excuse for violence.

All together now:

The people's flag is deepest red, drenched with blood from any old ned.


----------



## audiotech (Sep 25, 2006)

Cobbles said:
			
		

> Your author:
> _The present arthor, Mario Sousa is a member of the Comunist Party in Sweden, KPML(r). The article was publicated in the Comunist Partys newspaper Proletären in April 1998._
> 
> There's nothing like unbiased opinion and this is nothing like unbiased opinion, never mind exhaustive research.
> ...



Unbiased? At least the author sourced some original documentation on the subject which can't be said for most of what is written about events in the Ukraine:



> The conquest of the Ukraine and other areas of the Soviet Union would necessitate war against the Soviet Union, and this war had to be prepared well in advance. To this end the Nazi propaganda ministry, headed by Goebbels, began a campaign around a supposed genocide committed by the Bolsheviks in the Ukraine, a dreadful period of catastrophic famine deliberately provoked by Stalin in order to force the peasantry to accept socialist policy. The purpose of the Nazi campaign was to prepare world public opinion for the ‘liberation’ of the Ukraine by German troops. Despite huge efforts and in spite of the fact that some of the German propaganda texts were published in the English press, the Nazi campaign around the supposed ‘genocide’ in the Ukraine was not very successful at the world level. It was clear that Hitler and Goebbels needed help in spreading their libellous rumours about the Soviet Union. That help they found in the USA.



You still haven't provided any concrete evidence to back up your assertion that "Stalin murdered millions more than Hitler did".

Rather than derail this thread anymore. Maybe you would like to start a new one on the subject?


----------



## Cobbles (Sep 25, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> You still haven't provided any concrete evidence to back up your assertion that "Stalin murdered millions more than Hitler did".



Apologies, I haven't found my shovel and had time to book a flight out to the Ukraine - where would you like the bones posted?


----------



## Tom A (Sep 25, 2006)

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust#Death_toll



> the following estimates are considered to be highly reliable. The estimates:
> 
> * 5.1–6.0 million Jews, including 3.0–3.5 million Polish Jews[9]
> * 1.8 –1.9 million non-Jewish Poles (includes all those killed in executions or those that died in prisons, labor, and concentration camps, as well as civilians killed in the 1939 invasion and the 1944 Warsaw Uprising)[10]
> ...



Giving a total of just over 10.5 million (adding the maximum number of each death toll).

And now for Stalin:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin#Number_of_victims



> the archives record that about 800,000 prisoners were executed... while another 1.7 million died of privation[citation needed] or other causes in the Gulags and some 389,000 perished during kulak resettlement - while another 1.7 million died of privation[citation needed] or other causes in the Gulags and some 389,000 perished during kulak resettlement - *a total of about 3 million victims.*
> 
> Regardless, it appears that a minimum of around 10 million surplus deaths (4 million by repression and 6 million from famine) are attributable to the regime, with a number of recent books suggesting a probable figure of somewhere between 15 to 20 million. Adding 6-8 million famine victims to Erlikman's estimates above, for example, would yield a figure of between 15 and 17 million victims



So, according to Wiki, at *best* (always assuming that millions of people dying is the "best" situation) Stalin was resonsible for *as much* death as Hitler, at worse, twice as much. Also note that Stalin was in control of the USSR for 31 years compared with Hitler's 12 year long reign of Nazi Germany.


----------



## STFC (Sep 25, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> If those nutters posed a physical threat, I'd have no moral problem with it.



Islamist nutters pose no physical threat? Try telling that to the 52 people who were killed in London on 7 July 2005. How many more might have been killed two weeks later but for the ineptitude of the wannabe "martyrs"?

Islamist nutters pose far more of a physical threat to all of us, regardless of our race, religion, class, political beliefs etc, than WP nutters.


----------



## durruti02 (Sep 25, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Believe what you want. Even the then leaders of the NF, Webster and Tyndall, acknowledged the importance of anti-fascist acitivity at the time in undermining their support. But there again, as you freely admit you were "just around" and "not active".



when anl were not active in many of the NFs west midlands strongholds explain to me how the anl defeated them? 

anl etc may have stopped the fasc from marching but as we see with the BNP that is only part of the picture


----------



## SuburbanCasual (Sep 25, 2006)

STFC said:
			
		

> Islamist nutters pose no physical threat? Try telling that to the 52 people who were killed in London on 7 July 2005. How many more might have been killed two weeks later but for the ineptitude of the wannabe "martyrs"?
> 
> Islamist nutters pose far more of a physical threat to all of us, regardless of our race, religion, class, political beliefs etc, than WP nutters.



You still in touch with you're 'non racist' UBA mates?


----------



## audiotech (Sep 25, 2006)

You missed out this bit:



> some archival researchers have posited the number of victims of Stalin's repressions to be no more than about 4 million in total



Also, it is estimated that 4 to 5 million died due to mortality rates related to the famine which ravaged the country.

Horrific enough, but less than Hitlers tally, whose regime differed in that there was a systematic plan to force people people into gas chambers. Others became no more than slaves.

An authoritative study concludes that much more serious work is needed before a more definitive answer is given on mortality rates and repressive measures in the Soviet Union under Stalin. But the author "hopes that we will be finally done with some of the most unrealistic figures that have so far haunted this subject."

http://sovietinfo.tripod.com/WCR-Scale_Repression.pdf


----------



## audiotech (Sep 25, 2006)

durruti02 said:
			
		

> when anl were not active in many of the NFs west midlands strongholds explain to me how the anl defeated them?



The ANL was active in the area. I was there at the time.


----------



## durruti02 (Sep 25, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Have you any evidence for your assertion?
> 
> It's widely accepted that the Russians people lost 20 million lives during the war, never mind the hundreds of thousands who died fighting the Nazi's from other countries. Then there were six million who died during the holocaust.
> 
> ...



my god mate .. thats the ravings of an apolologist .. i am suprised at you qouting him .. the gulags and repression were well known here before 1933! the ILP regularly reported it .. many of the camps are still around  abandonned .. maybe not millions died but hundreds of thousends ..

 the ukraine is differrent .. while there was mass repression i do not totally buy the idea that stalin 'murdered' milliuons .. you could equally say that collectivzation saved many from dying from poverty over the long run


----------



## durruti02 (Sep 25, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> The ANL was active in the area. I was there at the time.



rubbish .. what in tipton or walsall? they were nothing compared to what the nf had at their disposal .. yes better news management .. but the idea they drove the nf out of british politics is frankly ludicrous ..


----------



## durruti02 (Sep 25, 2006)

joer90 said:
			
		

> ANTIFA does not need permision from anyone to act on information on fascist activity and will carry on its work.
> 
> ???
> 
> The fact that the fascist in question was a redwatch photographer seems lost on some of the idiots who are compaining.Some of you realy have not got the brains you were born with



well why didn't you say!    .. seems fair game to me then ..


----------



## audiotech (Sep 25, 2006)

durruti02 said:
			
		

> my god mate .. thats the ravings of an apolologist .. i am suprised at you qouting him .. the gulags and repression were well known here before 1933! the ILP regularly reported it .. many of the camps are still around  abandonned .. maybe not millions died but hundreds of thousends ..



The Swedish Communist party argues for intellectually rigorous investigation on the subject, particularly now the cold war is over.


----------



## audiotech (Sep 25, 2006)

durruti02 said:
			
		

> rubbish .. what in tipton or walsall? they were nothing compared to what the nf had at their disposal .. yes better news management .. but the idea they drove the nf out of british politics is frankly ludicrous ..



I said it was sustained activity organised by anti-fascists that saw off the NF and it did.

I was in Leicester at the time.


----------



## durruti02 (Sep 25, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> The Swedish Communist party argues for intellectually rigorous investigation on the subject, particularly now the cold war is over.



you got me there mate!


----------



## durruti02 (Sep 25, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> I said it was sustained activity organised by anti-fascists that saw off the NF and it did.
> 
> I was in Leicester at the time.



how did it work .. i just do not see the process involved .. yes they stopped the big demos but that is a small part of the equation .. the nf operated in communities / areas the anl did not .. so how could they have affected them? i am sure the anl was strong in student and BME areas of both the west mids and leics .. but insignioficant outside and in white areas where the nf has much of their support .. 

in tottenham there was a riot over an nf meet .. but while maybe this activity drove them off the HIGH st .. it certainly did not drive them away .. that was both thatcher stealing their thunder and the thatcherite break up of w/c communities .. so we see BNP strongholds around .. no longer IN london


----------



## audiotech (Sep 25, 2006)

durruti02 said:
			
		

> how did it work .. i just do not see the process involved .. yes they stopped the big demos but that is a small part of the equation .. the nf operated in communities / areas the anl did not .. so how could they have affected them? i am sure the anl was strong in student and BME areas of both the west mids and leics .. but insignioficant outside and in white areas where the nf has much of their support ..



The SWP did go into areas where the NF had support and recruited white working class youth (as well as BME and students) into the anti-fascist cause. I know they did that as they recruited me at the time. I linked up with some very militant working class anti-fascists and the local NF found the going tough I can assure you.

The problem with your analysis is that it appears based on your own petty sectarianism towards the SWP?


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 26, 2006)

STFC said:
			
		

> Islamist nutters pose no physical threat? Try telling that to the 52 people who were killed in London on 7 July 2005. How many more might have been killed two weeks later but for the ineptitude of the wannabe "martyrs"?
> 
> Islamist nutters pose far more of a physical threat to all of us, regardless of our race, religion, class, political beliefs etc, than WP nutters.


I think you may have misunderstood me somewhat.

The point is that fash of the variety being discussed here have a tendancy towards violent confrontation and intimidation on the streets, you can't exactly defend yourself against a terrorist attack on the tube by beating up some elderly cleric in Finsbury Park, can you?

That Islamists are dangerous lunatics is fucking obvious, which is why I didn't bother to mention it 

Anywho, I've been screwing the tops on fabric softener bottles for the last 12 hours or so, so I'm off to bed for now.  More pointless rambling later


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 26, 2006)

*Couldn't resist responding to this bit of idiocy first...*




			
				Cobbles said:
			
		

> Why not just remove the film/storage media from his camera


And how would you suggest doing this without violence?


----------



## Cobbles (Sep 26, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> And how would you suggest doing this without violence?


Well, you wouldn't need to club someone to the ground so that they needed to be hospitalised. 

The assault was clearly just knuckle dragging vigilante style "there's more of us than them so let's teach them a lesson". That kind of mindless yobbism just leads to escalation.


----------



## STFC (Sep 26, 2006)

SuburbanCasual said:
			
		

> You still in touch with you're 'non racist' UBA mates?



I don't have any UBA mates. I think you may be getting me confused with someone else.


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 26, 2006)

Cobbles said:
			
		

> Well, you wouldn't need to club someone to the ground so that they needed to be hospitalised.
> 
> The assault was clearly just knuckle dragging vigilante style "there's more of us than them so let's teach them a lesson". That kind of mindless yobbism just leads to escalation.


You may have to point out this horrific escalation in racial tensions, because I'm having a hard time spotting it.


----------



## Cobbles (Sep 26, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> You may have to point out this horrific escalation in racial tensions, because I'm having a hard time spotting it.



Easy peasy, next time round the proto-nazis go out mob handed so that they can outnumber the anti fascists - after the anti fascists get a drubbing, the following time round they go out in a bigger group so that they can prevail - and so on.

Hopefully if this pitiful vigilantism reaches the sort of level where it's noticable then the police can deal with it in the same way that they deal with football hooligans (other proponents of mindless thuggery based on an asinine alliegance to neanderthal tribal values). Mass arrests and long prison sentences all round.


----------



## audiotech (Sep 26, 2006)

Anyone remember Stephen Brady? Apparently he's back as an activist in the BNP and using the name Steve Johnson.



> Describing the Italian Ordine Nuovo he said, “Basically neo-fascist urban guerrillas whose main activities are machine gunning Red marches, blowing up Red offices, car bombing of Reds, assassination of leading Reds and good clean fun of that sort.”
> 
> Brady also approved of Turkey’s murderous Grey Wolves because its main activity was killing Communists. The Grey Wolves were involved in the attempt to assassinate the last Pope. In the 1990s Brady was one of an elite group of fascists who attended a dinner in London for the French Front National leader, Jean Marie Le Pen.



http://82.69.12.18/lancasteruafblog/


----------



## stevepinker (Sep 26, 2006)

Anti-Fascist didn't stop the BNP,NF or racism, Most working class people i know just viewed them as middle class left wing crustys who cared for black people more than working class white people  

Urban music had a bigger impact on NF,BNP racism than anti fascist ever did


----------



## audiotech (Sep 26, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> Anti-Fascist didn't stop the BNP,NF or racism, Most working class people i know just viewed them as middle class left wing crustys who cared for black people more than working class white people
> 
> Urban music had a bigger impact on NF,BNP racism than anti fascist ever did



Oh yes, back in 1977 I remember all that Urban music - not.


----------



## stevepinker (Sep 26, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Oh yes, back in 1977 I remember all that Urban music - not.



So you stopped the BNP,NF in 1977, damn you should have told them in the 80s they must have forgot


----------



## audiotech (Sep 26, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> So you stopped the BNP,NF in 1977, damn you should have told them in the 80s they must have forgot



The NF split into a number of warring factions after their collapse and now has a tiny membership. The BNP, like your "urban music", didn't exist in the late 70's.


----------



## In Bloom (Sep 27, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> Urban music had a bigger impact on NF,BNP racism than anti fascist ever did


Oh deary tapdancing me, this would be classic if it wasn't so tragic 

"Urban music" brought down the National Front, did it?


----------



## TonkaToy (Sep 27, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Anyone remember Stephen Brady? Apparently he's back as an activist in the BNP and using the name Steve Johnson.
> 
> 
> 
> http://82.69.12.18/lancasteruafblog/



Thanks for the hot tip, shame it's got nothing to do with the topic at hand. So the bloke approves of violence, so what? In Bloom is no better than him then and neither are you for that matter.

Elite bunch of Fascists eat with Le Pen in London? pfffh. I bet you any fantasist wannabe Nazi could turn up at that dinner so long as they had £50.00 to spare.


----------



## STFC (Sep 27, 2006)

Cobbles said:
			
		

> Hopefully if this pitiful vigilantism reaches the sort of level where it's noticable then the police can deal with it in the same way that they deal with football hooligans (other proponents of mindless thuggery based on an asinine alliegance to neanderthal tribal values). Mass arrests and long prison sentences all round.



I seem to remember that in the book No Retreat, there was a bit about anti-fascist "operations" in Glasgow, whereby anyone who was dressed like a football casual, was attacked on the basis that they were probably Rangers fans, and therefore by definition, fascist. Great work. I got the distinct impression from reading the book that the AFA Squads were no different to lads who enjoy a ruck at football, except that they think they can legitimise their violence by putting a political slant on it.


----------



## Pigeon (Sep 27, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Thanks for the hot tip, shame it's got nothing to do with the topic at hand. So the bloke approves of violence, so what? In Bloom is no better than him then and neither are you for that matter.



Sorry, are you not the TonkaToy who's on the "what's wrong with immigration control" thread advocating strong borders to prevent unpleasant and unsightly poor people from entering the country?

How precisely do you imagine the tide of surplus humanity you appear to fear could be managed, other than by violence? Does a problem only arise when people are so vulgar as to actually engage in violent acts _themselves_, rather than paying a third party to carry them out in a detention centre?


----------



## audiotech (Sep 27, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Thanks for the hot tip, shame it's got nothing to do with the topic at hand. So the bloke approves of violence, so what? In Bloom is no better than him then and neither are you for that matter.



I'm a bit smarter than you give me credit TonksyToy. The anti-fascists that I knew despised more than anything slimy fascist cowards who used to skulk about in groups attacking women and mild mannered people who wouldn't say boo to a goose.

They were never "into violence" as you see it, but if any scumbag came anywhere near them they made it clear in no uncertain terms that their cowardly actions would not be tolerated.







With thanks to Woody Guthrie.


----------



## durruti02 (Sep 28, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> The SWP did go into areas where the NF had support and recruited white working class youth (as well as BME and students) into the anti-fascist cause. I know they did that as they recruited me at the time. I linked up with some very militant working class anti-fascists and the local NF found the going tough I can assure you.




tiny tiny numbers mate .. and i knew half of them! they pretty well all left or were expelled by the late 8ts .. though many in the name of squadism which while i am symapthetic to, i still feel that the IWCA turn from AFA is entirely right and should have come much much earlier and is the culmination of Red Actions initial pro w/c stance .. real anti facism is w/c community activism

yes they did make the NFs street activity difficult .. which is of course partly why the BNP  turned away from it in the early 9ts .. but they did NOT have a major effect on the w/c people and areas sympathetic to the NF ..

i ask again .. by what process / argument did they convert the swathes of the w/c that were sympathetic to the NF away from the NF??

 ..


----------



## durruti02 (Sep 28, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> Anti-Fascist didn't stop the BNP,NF or racism, Most working class people i know just viewed them as middle class left wing crustys who cared for black people more than working class white people
> 
> Urban music had a bigger impact on NF,BNP racism than anti fascist ever did



that rings true .. most w/c people did and do think of lefties as stevepinker says .. and it was as well as thatchers stealing of the NFs clothes, demographic and cultural changes that undercut the NF .. not just music .. er not heard of Two Tone MC??  and madness but within a few years kids were all doing 'e's together .. 

football as well .. i personally ( as i was a regular at the time) saw how while anti facists failed to drive the BNP out of the orient, when they had NO BME players and the kids were getting wound up by chingfords finest BNPtwat, and indeed helped the bnp activists solidify their support, it was the club recruiting 3 black players that destroyed their support .. one week they had the kids singing ' only white team in london' .. the next week teh kids were chanting for the balck players .. 

clearly this is not the only solution .. a club in e.g. a predominantly white areashould not have to import black players but the point is also teh anti facist strategy just simply back fired .. as it did in oldham and barking and aevery where else ..


----------



## audiotech (Sep 28, 2006)

durruti02 said:
			
		

> i ask again .. by what process / argument did they convert the swathes of the w/c that were sympathetic to the NF away from the NF??
> 
> ..



Ask again? That's the first time you've put the question.  

However, on the "convert the swathes of the working class away from the NF"?

There were no great swathes of the working class sympathetic to the NF. It was a tiny, tiny minority in fact. Most of their membership at the time was middle class. The leadership was overwhelmingly middle class. It was not "sympathy" for the NF, but rather a protest against the monetarist policies of the then Labour government, followed at the behest of the IMF.

The collapse in the NF vote in 1979 indicated that they were doomed electorally. After that electoral debacle they returned to the backwater of national socialism, with some turning to the politics of the "boot and fist".


----------



## audiotech (Sep 28, 2006)

durruti02 said:
			
		

> that rings true .. most w/c people did and do think of lefties as stevepinker says .. and it was as well as thatchers stealing of the NFs clothes, demographic and cultural changes that undercut the NF .. not just music .. er not heard of Two Tone MC??  and madness



Seen that picture of Sugsy with N**** C**** durutti? The ANL leafleted many a Madness concert where the NF used to have influence (the ANL hosted other larger ones with The Specials).



> football as well .. i personally ( as i was a regular at the time) saw how while anti facists failed to drive the BNP out of the orient, when they had NO BME players and the kids were getting wound up by chingfords finest BNPtwat, and indeed helped the bnp activists solidify their support, it was the club recruiting 3 black players that destroyed their support .. one week they had the kids singing ' only white team in london' .. the next week teh kids were chanting for the balck players ..



True at some grounds, but not all. Ask John Barnes. 



> clearly this is not the only solution .. a club in e.g. a predominantly white areashould not have to import black players but the point is also teh anti facist strategy just simply back fired .. as it did in oldham and barking and aevery where else ..



Sectarian hyperbole and complete nonsense to think that the anti-fascist strategy "backfired" in the late 70's.

Oldham and Barking is more present, with lessons learnt and it could have been a whole lot worse.


----------



## durruti02 (Sep 29, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Ask again? That's the first time you've put the question.
> 
> 
> *asked on 25th .. but not important*
> ...



absolutley .. but  i say again how did the street activities of the anl contribute to the nfs down fall


----------



## durruti02 (Sep 29, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Seen that picture of Sugsy with N**** C**** durutti? The ANL leafleted many a Madness concert where the NF used to have influence (the ANL hosted other larger ones with The Specials).
> 
> *sure suggs and madness were sort of in the middle ..as was sham etc BUT the two tone and madness end of things .. regardless of what suggs did  .. played a big part in bringing people together .. sometimes just to fight! but i think it was important*
> 
> ...




again how worse ..in these areas the BNP got more votes and cllrs than the NF EVER did .. against a backdrop of the ANL mark 3 or 4 UAF/SW putting in hundreds of thousends of leaflets and telling people to vote anything but BNP  .. do you honestly not think if that amount of effort had been put into grassroots work it would have been worse .. i think it would have been much much better 

 i have said before but if it were not for IWCA and HI in south islington and shoreditch the bnp would be active there


----------



## SuburbanCasual (Sep 29, 2006)

Something similier is needed round here, everyone in my local says they want the BNP, but when you tell them about the ideas of the IWCA, they say it sounds great. They are not really racist, they just want a pro working class party that can scare the local Labour/Libdem elite. But if the BNP manage to organise they could find a ready audience for fascist ideas.


----------



## audiotech (Sep 29, 2006)

durruti02 said:
			
		

> absolutley .. but  i say again how did the street activities of the anl contribute to the nfs down fall



A lot of information was pushed out to voters (including Tyndall in his para-military uniform and his nasty quotes). Their members and supporters became increasingly demoralised when they saw significant numbers coming out to oppose them wherever they were active. 'Rock against Racism' also drew youth into the anti-fascist orbit leading to more people getting involved and putting forward a progressive alternative to racism.

On the class make-up of the NF then:

In 1978, forty branches of the National Front were surveyed which was ‘assumed’ to be overwhelmingly working class in composition. Of the 40branches surveyed:

The membersip of the fascists was reported to contain manual workers in 34 cases; to contain white collar workers in 23 cases and to contain the classic petty bourgeois in 26 cases. In terms of the local leadership, there were ten cases of it containing manual workers, nine of it containing white-collar workers, and 13 of it containing the classic petty bourgeois (in only two cases are ‘capitalists’ reported as members).  

The conclusions of the survey then were; given that the middle classes are a small percentage of the total population, ‘their involvement in the fascists is quite out of proportion.’ The current leadership of the British National Party reflect a similar class composition, despite the origins of their foot soldiers.

durruti please can you not mess about with your quotes/fonts the way you do as it's difficult to quote from your text. ta.


----------



## audiotech (Sep 29, 2006)

durruti02 said:
			
		

> again how worse ..in these areas the BNP got more votes and cllrs than the NF EVER did .. against a backdrop of the ANL mark 3 or 4 UAF/SW putting in hundreds of thousends of leaflets and telling people to vote anything but BNP  .. do you honestly not think if that amount of effort had been put into grassroots work it would have been worse .. i think it would have been much much better
> 
> i have said before but if it were not for IWCA and HI in south islington and shoreditch the bnp would be active there



I remember Shoreditch being a fascist stronghold. The property I was ensconsed in was bricked by some knuckle draggers from the area. Fortunately, we had wire meshing attached at the time so no glaziers needed.  Not anymore. I thought the place had become very trendy now and populated by bohemians and young professionals innit? You're surely not claiming that a fascist free Shoreditch is all down to the IWCA are you?

As for Islington? Full of middle-class lefties the last time I visited, most of whom, as it turned out, attached themselves to New Labour.

The tactic in Barking was, as I've said before (do we continuously need to have these circular arguments durruti?), to get the anti-BNP vote out. The problem was that there was little anti-fascists could do, mainly due to the local Labour party becoming stagnant and comments by Margaret Hodge on the eve of the election.

As for Oldham, that is a different story. Despite previous gains for the BNP they are now in a position where they are declining in influence due to sustained anti-fascist campaigning in the area by local people.


----------



## audiotech (Sep 29, 2006)

durruti02 said:
			
		

> sure suggs and madness were sort of in the middle ..as was sham etc BUT the two tone and madness end of things .. regardless of what suggs did .. played a big part in bringing people together .. sometimes just to fight! but i think it was important



I don't know about Madness being "sort of in the middle". I recall Madness, unlike The Specials, being somewhat apolitical and naive at the time.

"Welcome to the House of Fun"?

It wasn't always.


----------



## durruti02 (Oct 6, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> I remember Shoreditch being a fascist stronghold. The property I was ensconsed in was bricked by some knuckle draggers from the area. Fortunately, we had wire meshing attached at the time so no glaziers needed.  Not anymore. I thought the place had become very trendy now and populated by bohemians and young professionals innit? You're surely not claiming that a fascist free Shoreditch is all down to the IWCA are you?
> 
> As for Islington? Full of middle-class lefties the last time I visited, most of whom, as it turned out, attached themselves to New Labour.
> 
> ...



yes clearly there are LARGE scale demographic changes in shoreditch BUT Ther is still a large old population .. including a fair number who have said/hinted they would vote bnp .. same for south islington .. the unseen w/c .. and yes i would claim it is , electorally and therefore more geneally, BNP free to a great extent cos of iwca/HI .. unlike in other areas someone is already operating on their turf .. and they know IF they decided to operate all hell would be let loose .. for very little electoral or other effect .. 

and fair play it is circular argument .. we all agree we need an alt .. i guess the debate is HOW negative vote labour campigns are in the long run 

would be very interested in a study re lancs of opinions and how they are changing .. i would be suprised if their local decline is related to the antis , but more to do with that the BNP are, as we know muppets and actually can NOT do what they have promised .. has Joseph rowntree done surveys over time?


----------



## durruti02 (Oct 6, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> I don't know about Madness being "sort of in the middle". I recall Madness, unlike The Specials, being somewhat apolitical and naive at the time.
> 
> "Welcome to the House of Fun"?
> 
> It wasn't always.



yeah their stance was interesting .. non political .. though they started off on Two Tone .. which sort of says something .. interesting qoute from one of them that said something like ' why stop nf kids coming to our gigs .. they have nothing else' .. actually thats very political


----------



## Luther Blissett (Oct 7, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> You're just shifting goal posts now.
> 
> Or don't you think that three years of de facto control over large sections of Spain is enough time and space for the massive anarchist, anti-fascist millitias that existed to off a few liberals?





> And as late as 1935 the prominent Spanish anarchist periodical Revista Blanca could still carry the following, typically homophobic, editorial response to the question “What is there to be said about those comrades who themselves are anarchists and who associate with inverts [sic]?”:
> 
> 
> > They cannot be viewed as men if that “associate” means anything apart from speaking to or saluting sexual degenerates. If you are an anarchist, that means that you are more morally upright and physically strong than the average man. And he who likes inverts is no real man, and is therefore no real anarchist.20


InBloom you refer back, over and over, to the Spanish Civil War like it was some utopic moment in Anarchist history. If you look deeper into the prevailant attitudes of the time, you can see it wasn't definitive or utopic, by any stretch of the imagination.  

I'm of the belief that no moment in history is more important that here and now, and the moments leading up to now!

Since the discussion is about militant-anti-fash bashing a fash-watching-anti-deportation-demo, what effect, other than the liklihood that bashing an onlooker-fash is likely to push his friends/associates into a more pro-deportation stance, regardless of the individual circumstances of the deportees, and likely to put off non-violent demonstrators from attending more anti-deportation demos just incase militant (and potentially unrelated) fash 'group' decide to use another demo as a platform/opportunity for revenge against militant anti-fa. 

What relevance does the Anarchists of the Spanish Civil War have to the Leeds anti-deportation demo and the ensuing assault on a watching known Leeds fascist? 

Can't see any good coming out of fash bashing myself...just more division and stagnation for the unwaged/'working' class society and a worsening of the effects of the class war that's being waged upon us from on high with little hope for progress.

The key to success was always to combine antifascist activism with community activism. I think that's why things turned around in Oldham (correct me if I'm wrong here). 

There seems very little point in bemoaning how the bnp/racialist groups are able to influence the few young voters they manage to recruit, without first getting out there and asking the kids who hang together on street corners after school if they'd rather be sat in a youth club playing pool and chatting with their mates OR preyed on by older youths selling them ket-laden drugs to endure their boredom OR be subject to dodgy racialist pseudo-politicians like the BNP telling them that they aren't going to get anywhere in this country cos 'asians/immigrants/asylum seekers are taking the housing, jobs, etc which should be theirs'.


----------



## pk (Oct 7, 2006)

Can't be bothered to read the undoubtedly revisionist bollocks in this thread - was the guy who got a beating in Leeds fash or what then?


----------



## refugee (Oct 8, 2006)

pk said:
			
		

> Can't be bothered to read the undoubtedly revisionist bollocks in this thread - was the guy who got a beating in Leeds fash or what then?


Didn't you ask him before laying in?


----------



## pk (Oct 8, 2006)

So nobody's knows for sure eh?

There's a surprise...


----------



## sam/phallocrat (Oct 8, 2006)

Nah he was fash


----------



## JonnyT (Oct 9, 2006)

pk said:
			
		

> Can't be bothered to read the undoubtedly revisionist bollocks in this thread - was the guy who got a beating in Leeds fash or what then?


Check out this Indymedia posting. He was a nazi, they were local anti-fash.


----------



## STFC (Oct 11, 2006)

durruti02 said:
			
		

> yeah their stance was interesting .. non political .. though they started off on Two Tone .. which sort of says something .. interesting qoute from one of them that said something like ' why stop nf kids coming to our gigs .. they have nothing else' .. actually thats very political



I don't think it was quite like that. Chas Smash, for I think it was he, didn't think that these youngsters were proper NF/BM - it was more a case of belonging to a gang and wearing badges they didn't know the meaning of.

From an unofficial history of Madness:



> Unfortunately, some of the fans who turned up to their early concerts were National Front members, probably attracted by the fact that unlike the other 2-Tone bands such as The Beat and The Selecter, they were all white, while their music was less overtly political than the deadly serious SPECIALS. Annoyed by this unwanted attention, the group included an anti-NF track on the Work Rest and Play EP which featured Night Boat To Cairo.



http://dag.wieers.com/madness/history.html


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Oct 13, 2006)

sam/phallocrat said:
			
		

> Nah he was fash


firebomb his pub 


ha ha ha


----------



## sam/phallocrat (Oct 13, 2006)

cheeky . . .


----------



## GeorgeEliotFan (Oct 15, 2006)

what a great way of promoting your message.... beating up people who have different views from you...    what a great bunch of guys


----------



## Luther Blissett (Oct 15, 2006)

Calm down dear. 

How many on this thread support what happened that day, both in principle and as a valid form of anti-fa action?


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 15, 2006)

Luther Blissett said:
			
		

> Calm down dear.
> 
> How many on this thread support what happened that day, both in principle and as a valid form of anti-fa action?



Too many.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Oct 16, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Too many.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 16, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Too many.



Not a rocket launcher in sight though.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 16, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Not a rocket launcher in sight though.



And?

Oh I feel so much safer with people like you about to protect the masses from rocket-weilding whitefashtrash.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 16, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> And?



Fascist violence is a reality and it will not be tolerated.


----------



## Cobbles (Oct 16, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Fascist violence is a reality and it will not be tolerated.



Indeed, that's why we have a Criminal Justice system, to pursue and punish all those who transgress, whatever their political caste and whether or not they feel that their transgression is "justified".


----------



## stevepinker (Oct 16, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Fascist violence is a reality and it will not be tolerated.




Do you go beating on muggers as well , I'm sure mugging and the fear of mugging affects the country a whole lot more than Fascist violence


----------



## audiotech (Oct 16, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> Do you go beating on muggers as well , I'm sure mugging and the fear of mugging affects the country a whole lot more than Fascist violence



If someone attempted to mug me then I would defend myself and beat them to a pulp - simple.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 16, 2006)

Cobbles said:
			
		

> Indeed, that's why we have a Criminal Justice system, to pursue and punish all those who transgress, whatever their political caste and whether or not they feel that their transgression is "justified".



How naive of you.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Oct 16, 2006)

Cobbles said:
			
		

> Indeed, that's why we have a Criminal Justice system, to pursue and punish all those who transgress, whatever their political caste and whether or not they feel that their transgression is "justified".


If the fascists got in they would also have a criminal justice system, probably an even bigger and better one. 

What does that tell us


----------



## GeorgeEliotFan (Oct 17, 2006)

perhaps I was being naive, but I dismissed the fascists as a spent force, like all those splinter Trotsky groups with 9 members who think they can change the world.

If they are genuinely perpetrating acts of violence then I guess that does change things a bit.

I just thought they tended to be weedy outcasts on the margins of society, but I cant say I have ever seen one.


----------



## GeorgeEliotFan (Oct 17, 2006)

after reading all the posts over lunch time today it seems to me as if both the Fash & the Anti Fash are both relics of another age, they both think they are important; but Id wager the vast majority of the population dont know or care about either of them in this day and age.  

yes we still have problems but the world has moved on a lot since the late 70s & early 80s

a lot of the posts are about as relevant as worrying about commies infiltrating the white house in 2006.


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Oct 18, 2006)

GeorgeEliotFan said:
			
		

> after reading all the posts over lunch time today it seems to me as if both the Fash & the Anti Fash are both relics of another age, they both think they are important; but Id wager the vast majority of the population dont know or care about either of them in this day and age.
> 
> yes we still have problems but the world has moved on a lot since the late 70s & early 80s
> 
> a lot of the posts are about as relevant as worrying about commies infiltrating the white house in 2006.


they are as irrelevant or relevant as your perspective allows.

The far right are not a spent force, they are doing better than they have in decades all across europe, including Britain.


----------



## In Bloom (Oct 18, 2006)

GeorgeEliotFan said:
			
		

> after reading all the posts over lunch time today it seems to me as if both the Fash & the Anti Fash are both relics of another age, they both think they are important; but Id wager the vast majority of the population dont know or care about either of them in this day and age.
> 
> yes we still have problems but the world has moved on a lot since the late 70s & early 80s
> 
> a lot of the posts are about as relevant as worrying about commies infiltrating the white house in 2006.


http://libcom.org/news/bnp-election-candidate-arrested-in-biggest-explosives-haul-ever-11102006

Still, good to know that if this lunatic had managed to blow a bunch of people up, it'd be completely irrelevant.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 18, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Fascist violence is a reality and it will not be tolerated.



Tell me again...WHO was it who got a kicking in Leeds and WHO was it that executed said kicking, then repeat that last sentence of yours while I yet again laugh at the irony and the hypocrasy being displayed on this thread.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 18, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> http://libcom.org/news/bnp-election-candidate-arrested-in-biggest-explosives-haul-ever-11102006
> 
> Still, good to know that if this lunatic had managed to blow a bunch of people up, it'd be completely irrelevant.



In Bloom. What you are posting is illogical.

*Devils advocate.*

In Bloom, it is only right that I smash your skull in, landing you in hospital, because you, being someone who advocates violence, fucking deserves it.

Do you see the irony, in that statement above?


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 18, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> If someone attempted to mug me then I would defend myself and beat them to a pulp - simple.



Yes, but do you go around bashing up known muggers, hard man?


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 18, 2006)

There's lots of brown skinned muggers in London you know MC5.....it might look you wacist you know....a *white* man beating up a *dark* skinned person. I thought I would emphasize the race bit because we know how much you like to racialize everything.


----------



## In Bloom (Oct 18, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> In Bloom. What you are posting is illogical.
> 
> *Devils advocate.*
> 
> ...


Where did I say that anybody who advocates violence deserves to have their skull smashed in?  Or that violence is always wrong?  The point I was making is that portraying fascists as harmless eccentrics is pretty silly, given the evidence.

Please, try to *think* before you say stupid things.

Everybody advocates violence of some kind to some extent, with the exception of a few halfwits who live in a fantasy world where violence is never necessary.  It's not about who's violent or who deserves to have violence inflicted on them, it's about fascists being dangerous nutters who are willing to physically attack people for no good reason.  That in itself is a good enough reason to crush their organisations by any means necessary and to defend ourselves against them whenever it is called for.  Some fascist taking photos of people at an anti-deportation demo clearly has violent intentions (whether at that particular moment in time or something in the future).


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 18, 2006)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> Where did I say that anybody who advocates violence deserves to have their skull smashed in?  Or that violence is always wrong?  The point I was making is that portraying fascists as harmless eccentrics is pretty silly, given the evidence.
> 
> Please, try to *think* before you say stupid things.
> 
> Everybody advocates violence of some kind to some extent, with the exception of a few halfwits who live in a fantasy world where violence is never necessary.  It's not about who's violent or who deserves to have violence inflicted on them, it's about fascists being dangerous nutters who are willing to physically attack people for no good reason.  That in itself is a good enough reason to crush their organisations by any means necessary and to defend ourselves against them whenever it is called for.  Some fascist taking photos of people at an anti-deportation demo clearly has violent intentions (whether at that particular moment in time or something in the future).



Sure. 

1) Are people who take photos of facists fair game then?

2) You don't have to be violent to be a fascist. I could make the same generalisations about the left and unfortunatly a fascist subset does make the same generalisations about the left in their justification for violence against the left - you and what you support is no different than the idiots behind redwatch. What's good enough a reason for YOU and the likes of Redwatch, isn't a good enough reason for the law abiding democratic majority of people. You're views stem from the criminal minority - you have no mandate for bashing the political opposition just because they take pictures of you. If a Searchlight agent got hospitalized for taking piccys of white nashes you would be the first to be posting up about how violent and dangerous ALL facists are. 

You're logic is no different than George Bushes for us or against bullshit. You think that your politics is the only absolute morally correct politics. You think that your own politics gives you absolute mandate to do what you want.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 18, 2006)

Liberal democracy is inadequate at dealing with fascism, which uses its rights and protections to further its own utterly malign and divisive agenda. Facism is not a 'rational' ideology - it is a romantic, emotive one (honour, glory, purity of your bloodline, a desire for some imagined racially pure utopia), therefore its is difficult to confront on a rational basis. 
Allowing the state to supress fascism opens the door for the state oppression of _all_ political movements the state sees as a threat (like environmentalists or anti-nuke campaigners or sundry religious nutters).

Far better to have grassroots organsisations confront them and disrupt their activites in any way that is effective. The use of violence always has to be considerred as an  option if other methods are proved ineffective - and direct confrontation has been shown to work repeatedly in the past (like cable street in 1936 or the atacks on NF marches in the 70s).  Having said that there is a danger of a macho fetishisation of anti-fash violence where more appropriate techniques get overlooked as they are not as spectacular - i.e directly engaging with the concerns of the communities where the far right are trying to recruit. 

As for the relevance of the far right today - well over the past 5 years they have had a whole string of electrol successss which shows no sign of ending any time soon. In the present climate, whilst they are a very long way from taking over the state, they are still are a growing threat who are already significently poisoning the political system and feeding devisiveness and segregation.    

Did anyone see Paxmans sad attempt to nail Griffin a couple of years ago? Griffin ran rings around him. Why do people have such faith in the poitical establishment to confront the far right? They dont - they either ignore them or try to accomodate them - and history can show us the  disastrous results of that.


----------



## GeorgeEliotFan (Oct 18, 2006)

fair point(s)

however I get the impression that their success in the poles is more down to peoples concerns changing rather than the BNP being any better at what they do.

in terms of a party they still seem to be the same rag-tag bunch of loons & goons

may be Im wrong, but I get the idea that people vote for the BNP as a way of voicing their concerns and trying to flag their annoyance rather than the the BNP have ever managed to make them selves any more electable or better presented.


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2006)

Race attackers and those who advocate it deserve everything they get. Well done for dealing with this guy, I say.


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2006)

duped post


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 18, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> Race attackers and those who advocate it deserve everything they get. Well done for dealing with this guy, I say.



Race attackers should be reported to the police.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 18, 2006)

Kaka Tim said:
			
		

> Liberal democracy is inadequate at dealing with fascism, which uses its rights and protections to further its own utterly malign and divisive agenda. Facism is not a 'rational' ideology - it is a romantic, emotive one (honour, glory, purity of your bloodline, a desire for some imagined racially pure utopia), therefore its is difficult to confront on a rational basis.
> Allowing the state to supress fascism opens the door for the state oppression of _all_ political movements the state sees as a threat (like environmentalists or anti-nuke campaigners or sundry religious nutters).
> 
> Far better to have grassroots organsisations confront them and disrupt their activites in any way that is effective. The use of violence always has to be considerred as an  option if other methods are proved ineffective - and direct confrontation has been shown to work repeatedly in the past (like cable street in 1936 or the atacks on NF marches in the 70s).  Having said that there is a danger of a macho fetishisation of anti-fash violence where more appropriate techniques get overlooked as they are not as spectacular - i.e directly engaging with the concerns of the communities where the far right are trying to recruit.
> ...



What the fuck are you on about? Really, seriously, what fucking planet are you on?

On case you haven't noticed, a fascist doesn't stand any chance of power, because the country doesn't want it. If the country wants it, then the country shall have it - that's democracy. Now if you don't like it, go and fuck off and live in some shit hole like Yemen.


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Race attackers should be reported to the police.



And what if the police are sympathetic or have actual links to the fascists/racists? Not hypothetical - a situation I have known to exist.


----------



## red_hippy (Oct 18, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Race attackers should be reported to the police.



Yeah, smart work; report one group of violently racist shitbags to another group of violently racist shitbags who won't investigate it.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 18, 2006)

red_hippy said:
			
		

> Yeah, smart work; report one group of violently racist shitbags to another group of violently racist shitbags who won't investigate it.



That's a very big generalisation about a lot of people.


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> That's a very big generalisation about a lot of people.



That's a very obvious way of avoiding the issue.


----------



## stevepinker (Oct 18, 2006)

what would the world do without middle class crusties


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> what would the world do without middle class crusties



sell more shampoo? Tho I've no idea what relevance this has to the thread?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 18, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> What the fuck are you on about? Really, seriously, what fucking planet are you on?
> 
> On case you haven't noticed, a fascist doesn't stand any chance of power, because the country doesn't want it. If the country wants it, then the country shall have it - that's democracy. Now if you don't like it, go and fuck off and live in some shit hole like Yemen.



Well I'm on a planet where people actually read what other people have posted - 


"In the present climate, whilst they are a very long way from taking over the state, they are still are a growing threat who are already significently poisoning the political system and feeding devisiveness and segregation."

And the far right are already 'in power' to a certain extent in a growing number of local councils throughout the country. 

The state and liberal democracy have repeatedly proved themselves incapable of confronting fascism. The far right are very capable of protecting themselves with the freedoms of liberal democracy whilst simaltaneously undermining it. Our politicans dont confront fascism - if anything they try to steal their clothes in order to capture the rascist/xenephobic vote.  

Attacks on and disruption of far right activity forces them to divert time and money into security, makes it more difficult and stressful for them to organise and is likely to deter their less committed followers from getting involved. 

I have far more faith in that approach working than mealy mouthed platitudes from the likes of Blair or Cameron.




> If the country wants it, then the country shall have it - that's democracy.



Actually thats Nazi Germany.


----------



## stevepinker (Oct 18, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> sell more shampoo? Tho I've no idea what relevance this has to the thread?



Most anti-fash are middle class ,cause the working class black or white don't give a fuck about a Nazi loser sitting at a demo


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 18, 2006)

GeorgeEliotFan said:
			
		

> fair point(s)
> 
> however I get the impression that their success in the poles is more down to peoples concerns changing rather than the BNP being any better at what they do.
> 
> ...



Well they may look like a bunch of saddos and knuckle draggers to you and I - but clearly not to a growing number of people who are prepared to vote for them. Also Griffin should not be underestimated - he is a smart and very capable politician - although he really is pretty unique in far right circles on that count. 

And yes - what  the BNP are saying is clearly chiming with a disturbingly high number of people who the mainstream parties have deserted. Griffin has got them into a position wher ethey can capitalise on that. Highlighting that they are racist party is not going to put off the people who are thinking about voting for them - they are seen as "a party who will stand up for the rights or ordinary white people against the government sponsored 'tide' of asylum seekers, polish potato pickers and evil mulism terrorists" a pespective reinforced by large elements of the media and many of our politicians.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 18, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> Most anti-fash are middle class ,cause the working class black or white don't give a fuck about a Nazi loser sitting at a demo



And you're basing this sweeping generalisation  on .... ?


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> Most anti-fash are middle class ,cause the working class black or white don't give a fuck about a Nazi loser sitting at a demo



Errr, yeah, and?


----------



## stevepinker (Oct 18, 2006)

Like I said thank god for the middle class for keeping us safe


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2006)

Yes, well thanks for your interesting contribution. You really got to the point there. Have a nice life.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 18, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> That's a very obvious way of avoiding the issue.



Dodgy coppers is always going to be an issue, it's no excuse for taking the law into your own hands. BTW, if bashing people up just because of their politics isnt' dodging issues, I don't know what is.


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Dodgy coppers is always going to be an issue, it's no excuse for taking the law into your own hands. BTW, if bashing people up just because of their politics isnt' dodging issues, I don't know what is.



Do you feel the law should never be broken?


----------



## stevepinker (Oct 18, 2006)

Thanks


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 18, 2006)

Kaka Tim said:
			
		

> Well I'm on a planet where people actually read what other people have posted -
> 
> 
> "In the present climate, whilst they are a very long way from taking over the state, they are still are a growing threat who are already significently poisoning the political system and feeding devisiveness and segregation."
> ...



Yes and if we let people like YOU have YOUR own way, then we'll end up with another Nazi Germany here in the UK.


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Yes and if we let people like YOU have YOUR own way, then we'll end up with another Nazi Germany here in the UK.



Eh, is Kaka Tim a Nazi? He seems to oppose them from what I see here. Why are you saying he's a Nazi and what's your evidence?


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 18, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> Do you feel the law should never be broken?



Depends under the circumstances under which the law was ratified rather than the actual law itself.

Furthermore, I don't believe in breaking the law, when there is absolutely no need to break the law. 

As people have asked many, many times, who the fuck decides who is a fascist?

What's to stop me bashing the living daylights out of you and then saying to everyone else, "Well he was a fascist racist cunt you know?"

By the way, going by what you have posted, I'm about 80% sure that you are indeed racist anyway.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 18, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> Eh, is Kaka Tim a Nazi? He seems to oppose them from what I see here. Why are you saying he's a Nazi and what's your evidence?



Nazis are violent people who apply different rules to different races.

Kaka Tim is not running around organising violence against radical Islamics who want to take power by violence, because these radical islamics are mostly brown not white. 

Kaki Tim will only ever resort to violence against white extremists because he's a racist left wing Nazi.

Happy now?


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> What's to stop me bashing the living daylights out of you and then saying to everyone else, "Well he was a fascist racist cunt you know?"


 Yeah, you could. But you'd have to justify yourself among your peers. You'd need to be able to come up with some kind of evidence




			
				TonkaToy said:
			
		

> By the way, going by what you have posted, I'm about 80% sure that you are indeed racist anyway.


 Oh really, how's that then? What have I posted that's racist?


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 18, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> Yeah, you could. But you'd have to justify yourself among your peers. You'd need to be able to come up with some kind of evidence
> 
> Oh really, how's that then? What have I posted that's racist?



It's your actions that are racist. I don't see post after post from you regarding the targetting of any other ethnic groups other than white. 

What does it take to get to mobilize a load of lefties over to Finsbury Park Mosque? The National Front turning up. For fucking years, that cunt hook hands spouted race hate, but no one, but no one ever went over there to give him aggro.

You wouldn't dream of laying a finger muslim extremists, because they is not white.

Also, I doubt that the organisers of redwatch have to justify their actions amongst their peers, so I wouldn't use that as a moral guide thankyouverymuch.


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Nazis are violent people who apply different rules to different races.


 That sounds like a definition for physical force racist to me. Fascists are characterised by their advocacy and use of physical force against not just ethnic minorities but also against the labour movement and 'left' organisations.




			
				TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Kaka Tim is not running around organising violence against radical Islamics who want to take power by violence, because these radical islamics are mostly brown not white.


 I can't speak for KT but Islamists to my knowledge have not in this country used mobs to attack their political enemies. If you know different then post a link. The use of bombs is something else, as it is done clandestinely. 




> Kaki Tim will only ever resort to violence against white extremists because he's a racist left wing Nazi.
> 
> Happy now?


 I don't see how someone can be a left wing nazi. Left wing and in favour of physical force, yes.


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> It's your actions that are racist. I don't see post after post from you regarding the targetting of any other ethnic groups other than white. .


 What, I haven't posted . . . no, you're not making sense





			
				TonkaToy said:
			
		

> What does it take to get to mobilize a load of lefties over to Finsbury Park Mosque? The National Front turning up. For fucking years, that cunt hook hands spouted race hate, but no one, but no one ever went over there to give him aggro.


 Why do you bring that up. What do you think should have been done?





			
				TonkaToy said:
			
		

> You wouldn't dream of laying a finger muslim extremists, because they is not white.


 How do you know that if I've never said it, much less thought it? If you want to put words into my mouth you can but you'll look like an idiot.




			
				TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Also, I doubt that the organisers of redwatch have to justify their actions amongst their peers, so I wouldn't use that as a moral guide thankyouverymuch.


 I think if one was going to use physical force you should be very sure about who you're doing it to and why.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 18, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Nazis are violent people who apply different rules to different races.
> 
> Kaka Tim is not running around organising violence against radical Islamics who want to take power by violence, because these radical islamics are mostly brown not white.
> 
> ...



I have not stated that I am doing anything of the sort. I am pointing out how and why physical force can be a valid and effective tactic against fascism - and there are many many examples from history to back this up. You may not like that - but you would have a hard job arguing that is doesn't work. (hint - google 'battle of cable street')

You have a more valid point about the jihadis - yes they are formenting violence and deviseiveness, but this is on religious rather than racial lines (although their is considerable blurring and confusion along these lines.) They are also hiding behind the skirts of liberal democracy to promegate their ideas.


But the point about militant anti-facism is that its done  - in the main  - by people from the same communities as the fascists. A group of tooled up anglo-pakistanis marching into a white housing estate looking to attack a BNP meeting in a pub is likely to be extremely counter productive in terms of inter community relations, as is a bunch of white anarchists attacking a radical mosque.  Both scenrios would be seen as one ethnic group attacking another. Additioanlly, in the case of the 'mulsim community' it is one that is already living in increasing fear in the face of an accelerating campagin of demonisation.

The confronatation against reactionary islam has to come from the muslim communites themselves. However elements of the left have, through a combination of cynicism and self delusion, ended up alongside some extremely reactioanry voices which is no help to those within muslim communites trying to confront homophobia and misogyny in particular.

In addition the Jihadis are not running in elections on a ticket of installing sharia law or persucuting the infidels. Reactionary Islamic extremism is not the same as fascism, although it is as equally resistant to reason. 

Finally - the decision to use physical force is not one that should be taken lightly or as a weapon of first resort. Careful thought should be given to the likely consequences and  effectiveness of any action. 

This doens't make me a 'leftwing nazi' - merely someone who recognises that direct action - including violence - is a historically inevtiable and sometimes necessary tactic in the fight for human rights and agasint oppression (from the suffregettes to nelson mandela to the brixton riots).


----------



## audiotech (Oct 18, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> There's lots of brown skinned muggers in London you know MC5.....it might look you wacist you know....a *white* man beating up a *dark* skinned person. I thought I would emphasize the race bit because we know how much you like to racialize everything.



The muggers I despise the most are those that beat up the elderly. If that makes me a "hard man" in your eyes then that's your problem. It's no difference to me what their skin colour is, but clearly it is to you.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 18, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Tell me again...WHO was it who got a kicking in Leeds and WHO was it that executed said kicking, then repeat that last sentence of yours while I yet again laugh at the irony and the hypocrasy being displayed on this thread.



It's spelt hypocrisy and some knuckle dragger (maybe a mugger in his spare time?) got a slap - tough.


----------



## Spion (Oct 18, 2006)

This Tonka Toy is on some kind of agenda, eh?


----------



## bluestreak (Oct 18, 2006)

what, you can see it, it's supposed to be hidden!


----------



## audiotech (Oct 18, 2006)

Rumour has it TonksyToy has attended BNP meetings. I seem to recall in another earlier thread that he was put off by the quality of their cadre.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 18, 2006)

stevepinker said:
			
		

> Most anti-fash are middle class ,cause the working class black or white don't give a fuck about a Nazi loser sitting at a demo



No there not. The most militant anti-fascists I've met have been working class.


----------



## GeorgeEliotFan (Oct 18, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> The muggers I despise the most are those that beat up the elderly. If that makes me a "hard man" in your eyes then that's your problem. It's no difference to me what their skin colour is, but clearly it is to you.



TBH. I still think you would be putting yourselves to better use beating up those types.  

Part of the reason I was surprised about this anti-fash thing still existing is that IMO the ethnic minorities are more than capable of defending themselves.  When I was at college the most feared and most troublesome people were the british-born-pakistanis followed by the Nigerians.  Obviously there are plenty of geeky ones too.    

(i know you think my posts are pointless crap but hey!)


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 18, 2006)

GeorgeEliotFan said:
			
		

> TBH. I still think you would be putting yourselves to better use beating up those types.
> 
> Part of the reason I was surprised about this anti-fash thing still existing is that IMO the ethnic minorities are more than capable of defending themselves.  When I was at college the most feared and most troublesome people were the british-born-pakistanis followed by the Nigerians.  Obviously there are plenty of geeky ones too.
> 
> (i know you think my posts are pointless crap but hey!)



But the fascists dont tend to pick fights with people who will hit back. In leeds (and many other parts of the country) those on the receiving end of the worst race hate attacks tend to be isolated families from refugee backgrounds living on predominantly white social housing estates where the BNP get around 30% of the vote. 
In adddition they dont tend to operate in areas with very mixed communties - more on the white enclaves nearby. It is there that their pernicious damage is done, if not by directly attacking non-aryans, then by helping foster an attitude of hatred and fear amongst the white population towards them.


----------



## GeorgeEliotFan (Oct 18, 2006)

Kaka Tim said:
			
		

> But the fascists dont tend to pick fights with people who will hit back. In leeds (and many other parts of the country) those on the receiving end of the worst race hate attacks tend to be isolated families from refugee backgrounds living on predominantly white social housing estates where the BNP get around 30% of the vote.
> In adddition they dont tend to operate in areas with very mixed communties - more on the white enclaves nearby. It is there that their pernicious damage is done, if not by directly attacking non-aryans, then by helping foster an attitude of hatred and fear amongst the white population towards them.




fair enough, im happy to admit Im wrong.  Just didnt know that kinda stuff was still going on.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 18, 2006)

GeorgeEliotFan said:
			
		

> (i know you think my posts are pointless crap but hey!)



The're improving slowly.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> The muggers I despise the most are those that beat up the elderly. If that makes me a "hard man" in your eyes then that's your problem. It's no difference to me what their skin colour is, but clearly it is to you.



Mr Bronson, I doubt very much that you organise a posse against muggers. I doubt very much, that elderly people in your area can sleep safe in the knowledge that there is some bloke, who magically neutralizes all the muggers in their area.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> It's spelt hypocrisy and some knuckle dragger (maybe a mugger in his spare time?) got a slap - tough.



Being some kind of knuckle dragger is not a crime. You do not have a mandate to act as judge, jury and executioner as to who deserves and shall receive a slap.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> This Tonka Toy is on some kind of agenda, eh?



It is very much clear what my agenda is. I dont like the idea of mobs running around on our streets, kicking the fuck out of those who they deem deserves it.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Rumour has it TonksyToy has attended BNP meetings. I seem to recall in another earlier thread that he was put off by the quality of their cadre.



Oh really? So now that you find that youre finding it impossible to defend your position you are trying to descredit me with jackonory?

Right. First off, it was ME who posted that I had been to ONE BNP meeting. It wasnt though a fellow urbanite ran some kind of expose on me. Further more, in the post that I said I had been to ONE BNP meeting, every fucking aspect of it was critical of the BNP - I was absolutely scathing. 

This is why people like you are so fucking dangerous when it comes to fighting racism in politics. You get emotional and then you lie and smear and lie some more. It does no one any favours.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Kaka Tim said:
			
		

> But the fascists dont tend to pick fights with people who will hit back. In leeds (and many other parts of the country) those on the receiving end of the worst race hate attacks tend to be isolated families from refugee backgrounds living on predominantly white social housing estates where the BNP get around 30% of the vote.
> In adddition they dont tend to operate in areas with very mixed communties - more on the white enclaves nearby. It is there that their pernicious damage is done, if not by directly attacking non-aryans, then by helping foster an attitude of hatred and fear amongst the white population towards them.



What about race attacks against white people in Brixton? What about my mates nephew who had to fight black kids EVERY OTHER FUCKING DAY to survive?

Wheres the mass movement of people to get non-white racists of the streets, or will you only show up when the fascists show up?


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Kaka Tim said:
			
		

> I have not stated that I am doing anything of the sort. I am pointing out how and why physical force can be a valid and effective tactic against fascism - and there are many many examples from history to back this up. You may not like that - but you would have a hard job arguing that is doesn't work. (hint - google 'battle of cable street')
> 
> You have a more valid point about the jihadis - yes they are formenting violence and deviseiveness, but this is on religious rather than racial lines (although their is considerable blurring and confusion along these lines.) They are also hiding behind the skirts of liberal democracy to promegate their ideas.
> 
> ...









It's OK Miss........at least you didn't get a kicking for being white.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Sir, I hope you will get better enough so that you can partipate in random violence against Nazis....they are a bigger threat than the Jihadis because they are racists....


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

I'm sorry, one can't stay long a victim of racism has just walked into A&E.


----------



## editor (Oct 19, 2006)

Wow. Eight posts in a row. Without interruption. That's almost a personal blog.

I think Tonkabout needs to brush up on how bulletin boards work. And act a little less unhinged too.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

editor said:
			
		

> Wow. Eight posts in a row. Without interruption. That's almost a personal blog.
> 
> I think Tonkabout needs to brush up on how bulletin boards work. And act a little less unhinged too.



Unhinged?

Hmmm. Unhinged is saying that violence is necessary against a bunch of amatuers, but then screaming racism when one of those brown muslims get's arressted without trial even though he belongs to a circle of people who thinks that terrorist attacks are cool.

For an "unhinged" person, my views are pretty fucking consistent. Whether you are a violent fash, violent left wing Nazi, or a fucking islamic fundy terrorist -  you belong in jail.

I think you would find that pretty reasonable, no?

Oh and it was 3 three posts that could have been consolodated into 1. I like to leave the unhinged people to simmer for a while, rather than speed post with them. It's hard enough for them to come up with a half decent debate as it is, without stupid petty trolling.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

editor said:
			
		

> Wow. Eight posts in a row. Without interruption. That's almost a personal blog.
> 
> I think Tonkabout needs to brush up on how bulletin boards work. And act a little less unhinged too.



You're not supposed to fuck about with peoples monikers, or do you make the rules up as you go along? Hmmmm?


----------



## Blagsta (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Right. First off, it was ME who posted that I had been to ONE BNP meeting.



You used to be a member of the BNP.


----------



## Spion (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Sir, I hope you will get better enough so that you can partipate in random violence against Nazis....they are a bigger threat than the Jihadis because they are racists....



The threats are quite different. The jihadis (members of a community that is max 2-3% of the population) attempt to carry out clandestine attacks in isolated cells, with occasionally spectacular results (well, just once in Britain) but will never threaten the body politic of this country. The fascists (members of the ethnic group that is 95% of the population) are working to build a mass movement. The first group can never do more than carry out the occasional outrage. The second has the potential to be infinitely more dangerous to the political character of this country (and has spawned its own bombers in any case, as the nail bombs and recent massive explosives haul in Colne has shown).


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> What about race attacks against white people in Brixton? What about my mates nephew who had to fight black kids EVERY OTHER FUCKING DAY to survive?
> 
> Wheres the mass movement of people to get non-white racists of the streets, or will you only show up when the fascists show up?[/QUOTE
> 
> ...


----------



## audiotech (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Right. First off, it was ME who posted that I had been to ONE BNP meeting.



Why would you choose to go to a BNP meet in the first place Tonksy?


----------



## audiotech (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Mr Bronson, I doubt very much that you organise a posse against muggers.



I never said I did?


----------



## audiotech (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Being some kind of knuckle dragger is not a crime. You do not have a mandate to act as judge, jury and executioner as to who deserves and shall receive a slap.



It depends.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Blagsta said:
			
		

> You used to be a member of the BNP.



It appears you've never known how to use a forum search button.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> The threats are quite different. The jihadis (members of a community that is max 2-3% of the population) attempt to carry out clandestine attacks in isolated cells, with occasionally spectacular results (well, just once in Britain) but will never threaten the body politic of this country. The fascists (members of the ethnic group that is 95% of the population) are working to build a mass movement. The first group can never do more than carry out the occasional outrage. The second has the potential to be infinitely more dangerous to the political character of this country (and has spawned its own bombers in any case, as the nail bombs and recent massive explosives haul in Colne has shown).



Are you saying that it's impossible for Islam to be politicalised? 

Because you are the very person that is making exactly that happen.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Kaka Tim said:
			
		

> TonkaToy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Planting bombs into pubs and shops is a criminal issue. If there are people who are conspiring to do that, it's a job for the security services.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Fuck me. The Democrats over in America say that we should treat terrorism as a criminal issue. 

The left over here write endless blogs about it.....it's a good idea....until the racist white hating left finds out that there are plots being carried out by extremist and racist whites.......then all over a sudden all logic and sanity goes out the window.

But when has a racist ever been logical?


----------



## Spion (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Fuck me. The Democrats over in America say that we should treat terrorism as a criminal issue.
> 
> The left over here write endless blogs about it.....it's a good idea....until the racist white hating left finds out that there are plots being carried out by extremist and racist whites.......then all over a sudden all logic and sanity goes out the window.
> 
> *But when has a racist ever been logical? *



Now, there's an irony.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> Now, there's an irony.



Well, you're illogicial, but I don't really have the urge to beat 7 grades of shit out of you.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> It depends.



If they are white or brown perhaps?


----------



## Spion (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Are you saying that it's impossible for Islam to be politicalised?
> 
> Because you are the very person that is making exactly that happen.



I didn't say Islamists weren't political. I assume the very term 'Islamists' to mean *political* Islamists.

Although they share a lot of characteristics with the fascists (promotion of an extreme 'patriotism', bomb-making etc) the Islamists' potential for mass politics in this country is negligible. All of which I've already said, but you chose not to answer it and accused me of the nonsense above instead.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> If they are white or brown perhaps?



There you go again with your racial categories.


----------



## Spion (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Well, you're illogicial


 Thank you, Mr Spock. That will be all for now. 

Nurse! Mr Toy's out of his bed again


----------



## Spion (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> *racist white hating left *



You are so BNP. Racist


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> You are so BNP. Racist



You're the racist. You're the one who refuses to believe that there is an element of the left that hates whites.

The racist left does not mess with the brown muslims. There are no brown muslims who live in fear of the left, despite those brown muslims hatching and executing plots to kill innocents.

You're the one who is denying that there is a racist left that exploits immigrants in vote chasing. 

Why do I keep mentioning "brown muslims" ? - well it was the left that endlessly banged on about any critisim of Islam being racist. 

Everytime Islam gets a bashing, there is a queue of people who are going on about the tabloids bashing muslims. 

Yes they do and what has that got to do with Islams shortcomings?

Do I have a problem with Islam? Erm no. I have a problem with Islamic radicals the same way I have a problem with Christian fundies. 

But getting back to YOUR racism. 

YOUR the one who proposes treading the radicals differently and a say it's because YOUR a racist.


----------



## Spion (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> You're the racist. You're the one who refuses to believe that there is an element of the left that hates whites.
> 
> The racist left does not mess with the brown muslims. There are no brown muslims who live in fear of the left, despite those brown muslims hatching and executing plots to kill innocents.
> 
> ...



I've already said why I think the fascists deserve to be treated differently to the Islamists. But clearly you can't be bothered to address the point I made. Instead you keep banging on like the nutjob you obviously are and just about everyone here's wise to where your twisted ideas come from.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> I've already said why I think the fascists deserve to be treated differently to the Islamists. But clearly you can't be bothered to address the point I made. Instead you keep banging on like the nutjob you obviously are and just about everyone here's wise to where your twisted ideas come from.



Because the fascists are white and the Islamists are brown.

When you give me the differences, they are differences that don't matter. I could spend the whole night duck-shooting away why those differences don't matter but you would just post up more differences that really don't matter.

You're all over the place and you're making it up as you go along. 

Someone (It might have been you but I don't really care tbh) said that it was the job of whites to thrwarte white radicals and muslims to thwarte muslim radicals - bullshit! Thats the view of a tribalist racist knuckle dragging buffon. 

It's EVERYONES repsonsibility. Like any of the people who are masturbating over anti-fash violence woudl stop an Asian from bashing a fascist! Dream on son.


----------



## Spion (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> When you give me the differences, they are differences that don't matter. I could spend the whole night duck-shooting away why those differences don't matter but you would just post up more differences that really don't matter.



You don't even seem to be able to deal with the one argument I've put to you. You are clearly convinced of your rightness and don't wish to actually discuss anything here. All you want to do is harangue people, like some raggedy-arsed prophet who can't understand why everyone else can't see the same demons as him. The only person you ever convince of anything is yourself. Good night.


----------



## Spion (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> *You're all over the place and you're making it up as you go along. *



Another one! Some cracking bits of irony on display this evening


----------



## GeorgeEliotFan (Oct 19, 2006)

I must confess that MC5 has convinced me there is still a need for such activity (provided its recipient is proven to have been dishing out the violence himself).  I certainly think its better that it comes from within the white community itself, if nothing else it shows that we dont all hate minorities.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> You don't even seem to be able to deal with the one argument I've put to you. You are clearly convinced of your rightness and don't wish to actually discuss anything here. All you want to do is harangue people, like some raggedy-arsed prophet who can't understand why everyone else can't see the same demons as him. The only person you ever convince of anything is yourself. Good night.



But I can see the same demons here. It's not a case of me not listening, I can't help it if you are incapable of putting up a logical argument for singling out fascists for violence, especially seeing as there are more than adequate laws for dealing with ALL forms of violence.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> Another one! Some cracking bits of irony on display this evening



Really? 

My argument is consistant and logical.

Whether you are a good bother muslim, christian or hindu fundy.
Whether you are a left wing nazi
Whether you a re a facist
Wehterh you are simoply fucking mentally ill

The law is adequate for handling violent people.

The law doesn't show fear or favour to peoples race, creed, colour or political opinions.

You sadly do.


----------



## Blagsta (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> It appears you've never known how to use a forum search button.



It appears you forgot what you told us all when you were posting here before.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Really?
> 
> My argument is consistant and logical.



BWAHAHA!



> The law doesn't show fear or favour to peoples race, creed, colour or political opinions.



Really? Then there's the added complexity of which particular old bill is doing the enforcing.


----------



## Spion (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> The law is adequate for handling violent people.



Ah, well, I don't agree that it's adequate to deal with fascists. One has to engage in pre-emptive self defence sometimes against those that want to wipe you out. So, we'll have to agree to disagree, old chap.


----------



## Spion (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Wehterh you are simoply fucking mentally ill



Hehe, I love that one  

Calm down, dear


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> But I can see the same demons here. It's not a case of me not listening, I can't help it if you are incapable of putting up a logical argument for singling out fascists for violence, especially seeing as there are more than adequate laws for dealing with ALL forms of violence.



He's put a very logical argument forwards - which you've chosen to ignore.

I think you need to move on - you're embarrassing yourself


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Divisive Cotton said:
			
		

> He's put a very logical argument forwards - which you've chosen to ignore.
> 
> I think you need to move on - you're embarrassing yourself



No he has not. He refers back to a time where the were laws but not enough people to uplhold them. Cable Street. Funny how people conviently forget to also tell us about how in those days, people used to sort out problems for themselves because the police were very inffective.

Saying that the police today are very inffective would be a legitimate argument, if most peopel were being forced into resorting to taking the law into their own hands for most situations. 

If people came along with racist placards to an area today, it would be a breach of the peace. 

However, in Leeds that was not was what was happening, was it?

Embarassing myself my arse. Why don't you PM a few more people to post up a bit of opposition? Why not ask 20? 

It doesn't make any difference to the fact that we have laws and the police for a reason.

If you are saying the law is not effective with dealing with racists, then let's hear it. You're not happy with laws, because laws are in print and are supposed to be impartial. You want to be heavier on one type of extremist than the other, no matter how bad the threat actually is. You want your hatred to take priority over democratic man made law.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> Ah, well, I don't agree that it's adequate to deal with fascists. One has to engage in pre-emptive self defence sometimes against those that want to wipe you out. So, we'll have to agree to disagree, old chap.



Muslim extremists want to wipe gays out, yet I don't see that type of people being ran from one side of London or Bradford to the other. You wouldn't dare lay a finger on them coz they is brown. Admit it. You have double standards against white extremists because you're racist.

I'm not defending white extremists I'm defending consistency and the fucking law!


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Embarassing myself my arse. Why don't you PM a few more people to post up a bit of opposition? Why not ask 20?



Are you saying that I'm orchestrating a campaign against you in this thread?


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> BWAHAHA!
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Then there's the added complexity of which particular old bill is doing the enforcing.



Please expand.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Divisive Cotton said:
			
		

> Are you saying that I'm orchestrating a campaign against you in this thread?



No. Who on Earth gave you that idea?


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

Divisive Cotton said:
			
		

> Are you saying that I'm orchestrating a campaign against you in this thread?



Oh and nice dodge to the actual points I raised in that post....


----------



## audiotech (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Please expand.



OK.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> OK.



What are you so afraid of MC5 ?


----------



## audiotech (Oct 19, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> What are you so afraid of MC5 ?



People in authority who abuse their power.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 19, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> People in authority who abuse their power.



Well, guess what? We ALL have the same problem matey, so what exactly is the point you are trying to make again?

If you want to sit here and say that you're an anarchist who believes that the police should not be used for any problems, then fair enough, we can give you your anarchist ticket and you can sit over there.....no...not there...but there. In the mean time, can you allow me to laugh at the irony of those who think it OK to go outside the law to use violence on a specific group of people....

Cheers.


----------



## Spion (Oct 20, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Muslim extremists want to wipe gays out, yet I don't see that type of people being ran from one side of London or Bradford to the other. You wouldn't dare lay a finger on them coz they is brown. Admit it. You have double standards against white extremists because you're racist.
> 
> I'm not defending white extremists I'm defending consistency and the fucking law!



If there were attacks against gays I'd support physical self defence against Islamists that perpetrated such acts.

Do I think action should be taken on the streets against any manifestation of Islamism as a movement? No. Because they form a tiny minority of a minority of the population they do not have the potential to become a mass movement that could fundamentally harm the labour movement/left/minorities or whatever. 

Do I think action should be taken on the streets against any manifestation of fascism as a movement? Yes. The fascists come from the majority of the  population - that's 95% - and have the possibility to organise on a mass scale and to some extent already are making the first steps in that direction. Whenever they organise in an area the number of race attacks shoots up.

I can't decide if you are a BNP sympathiser or are just a bit simple and can't understand what is quite a complex situation.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 20, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> If there were attacks against gays I'd support physical self defence against Islamists that perpetrated such acts.
> 
> <SNIP> LETS STOP RIGHT HERE..SEE BELOW.



The law has provisions for self defence. Are you saying these provisions for self defence are not adequate?


----------



## Spion (Oct 20, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> The law has provisions for self defence. Are you saying these provisions for self defence are not adequate?



I dunno. You tell me what they are and I'll tell you what I think of em


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 20, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> I dunno. You tell me what they are and I'll tell you what I think of em



I don't need to tell you what they are. You know full true well that running around bashing people up unless they are directly attacking you is against the law. It's you that is trying to justify working outside of the law, what's your justifcation for doing so? You say self defence, everyone and their dog knows that the law allows people to defend themselves.

Running around bashing people up on a pre-emptive basis is a very dangerous precedent to set, does that sound familiar to you? It should do, because most people around here have no time for pre-emptive violence, be it on a micro scale on the streets or on an international level.


----------



## Spion (Oct 20, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> I don't need to tell you what they are. You know full true well that running around bashing people up unless they are directly attacking you is against the law. It's you that is trying to justify working outside of the law, what's your justifcation for doing so? You say self defence, everyone and their dog knows that the law allows people to defend themselves.
> 
> Running around bashing people up on a pre-emptive basis is a very dangerous precedent to set, does that sound familiar to you? It should do, because most people around here have no time for pre-emptive violence, be it on a micro scale on the streets or on an international level.



As I say, I consider the law inadequate at dealing with fascists. Once you've had a petrol bomb through your window or you are on a life support machine is too late to say 'Oh, well, at least we found out how adequate the law is when it comes to fascists.'

Those who are committed to putting race hate and fascist politics into practice deserve everything they get.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 20, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> As I say, I consider the law inadequate at dealing with fascists. Once you've had a petrol bomb through your window or you are on a life support machine is too late to say 'Oh, well, at least we found out how adequate the law is when it comes to fascists.'
> 
> Those who are committed to putting race hate and fascist politics into practice deserve everything they get.



Devils advocate.

As I say, I consider the law inadequate at dealing with Islamist. Once you've had a you're legs blown off while on the tube or a bus, or you are on a life support machine is too late to say 'Oh, well, at least we found out how adequate the law is when it comes to Islamists.'

Indeed, Blair is making EXACTLY that argument.


----------



## Spion (Oct 20, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Devils advocate.
> 
> As I say, I consider the law inadequate at dealing with Islamist. Once you've had a you're legs blown off while on the tube or a bus, or you are on a life support machine is too late to say 'Oh, well, at least we found out how adequate the law is when it comes to Islamists.'
> 
> Indeed, Blair is making EXACTLY that argument.



Really, he is suggesting that all manifestations of political Islam should be physically suppressed? I must have missed that item on the news.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 20, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> Really, he is suggesting that all manifestations of political Islam should be physically suppressed? I must have missed that item on the news.



No that's not what I meant. He is trying to cut corners in human rights in order to go after Islamic terrorits. It seems you want to do the exact same thing to go after violent fascists even though the law adequatly makes provisions.


----------



## Spion (Oct 20, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> No that's not what I meant. He is trying to cut corners in human rights in order to go after Islamic terrorits. It seems you want to do the exact same thing to go after violent fascists even though the law adequatly makes provisions.



The law is useless against fascists. When they campaign in an area the incidence of race attacks goes up. There's nothing in the law to stop the campaigning that leads to such violence. Therefore they must be stopped opposed politically and physically on the streets.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 20, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> The law is useless against fascists. When they campaign in an area the incidence of race attacks goes up. There's nothing in the law to stop the campaigning that leads to such violence. Therefore they must be stopped opposed politically and physically on the streets.



They have a democratic right to campaign as long as that activity does not break the law. Your argument is clumsy as those who say MayDay protests should be banned because they attract violence. 

Just because violent people agree with causes, it does not mean that anyone else has to right to suffocate the rights of the innocent.


----------



## Spion (Oct 20, 2006)

I'm really bored of you promoting the right of people to campaign to stifle the rights of others and to encourage race hate. I'll leave it to someone else now. Bye


----------



## audiotech (Oct 20, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Well, guess what? We ALL have the same problem matey, so what exactly is the point you are trying to make again?



The police enforce the law and that some police officers are oblivious to the notion of the principles in law which you refer.




			
				TonkaToy said:
			
		

> If you want to sit here and say that you're an anarchist who believes that the police should not be used for any problems, then fair enough, we can give you your anarchist ticket and you can sit over there.....no...not there...but there. In the mean time, can you allow me to laugh at the irony of those who think it OK to go outside the law to use violence on a specific group of people....
> 
> Cheers.



I'm not an anarchist, but in my experience the the law is weighted in favour of those with wealth, power and influence.

There are certain groups of people (gangs really) whose sole aim is to bully, intimidate and violently attack anyone who disagrees with them. Now, if a group exists with these aims then it's likely that opposition groups will form to stop them.

Now, it would be seen as reasonable if you could debate with such a group (fascists in this example), but that is impossible, so the only option to halt their tactics of violence is to demonstrate that people will not be intimidated by said fascist violence. This should involve as many people as possible. If a demonstration, or meeting is disrupted and threatened with an attack, or likely to disrupted and attacked then people have every right to defend themselves.

Btw your "left-wing nazi" tag is a misnomer as lefties are internationalists in outlook. Also, the main anti-fascist group, that operated in the post-war period in this country was made up of ex-servicemen who actually fought the nazi's on the battlefields of Europe including here in the UK.

I'm also still waiting for you to answer this question: for what reasons did you attend a BNP meeting?


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 20, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> I'm really bored of you promoting the right of people to campaign to stifle the rights of others and to encourage race hate. I'll leave it to someone else now. Bye



There are laws that cover race hate. Are you saying that the current laws do not cover race hate well enough?


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 20, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> The police enforce the law and that some police officers are oblivious to the notion of the principles in law which you refer.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Ex-Servicemen come in ALL poltical shapes and sizes that cover the entire poltical spectrum. Nice try matey. 

ALL political violence is outlawed on case you haven't noticed, there is no need for people to take the law into their own hands when it comes to politics. 

As for you accusation that the law is weighted towards the rich...maybe...mabye not - but that is complete irrelevance considering that I doubt very much that the person who got a kicking in Leeds would have been anything other than working class.

Many people claim to be internationalists, includign those that are communists, it doesn't stop them from being unhinged Nazi fucks that are very quick to terrorize the very people they claim to represent.


----------



## SuburbanCasual (Oct 20, 2006)

Any rightwinger from tory to UKIP to BNP is fairgame to be on the recieving end of violence, fuck 'em they carry out violence against the international working class every fucking day. Or at least support it.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 20, 2006)

SuburbanCasual said:
			
		

> Any rightwinger from tory to UKIP to BNP is fairgame to be on the recieving end of violence, fuck 'em they carry out violence against the international working class every fucking day. Or at least support it.



 

Now you know why you've got no chance of getting anywhere near power, Nazi.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 20, 2006)

SuburbanCasual, you're just another middleclasser, who pretends they have the working classes interests at heart. My asperations as a working class bloke cannot be answered by the likes of you. People like you are perfect examples of why the left is doomed to failure.

Unless the white working classes comply with your politics, you're too happy to give us a bashing.

You're just as bad as the facists, you are a perfect example of a violent left wing Nazi thug.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 20, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Ex-Servicemen come in ALL poltical shapes and sizes that cover the entire poltical spectrum. Nice try matey.



Yes, but you deliberately missed the point that I was making. That your tag of "nazi" was complete bollocks.




			
				TonkaToy said:
			
		

> ALL political violence is outlawed on case you haven't noticed, there is no need for people to take the law into their own hands when it comes to politics.



People who are attacked by fascist goons are not going to lie down and do nothing.




			
				TonkaToy said:
			
		

> As for you accusation that the law is weighted towards the rich...maybe...mabye not - but that is complete irrelevance considering that I doubt very much that the person who got a kicking in Leeds would have been anything other than working class.



Lower middle-class is my guess.




			
				TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Many people claim to be internationalists, includign those that are communists, it doesn't stop them from being unhinged Nazi fucks that are very quick to terrorize the very people they claim to represent.



From someone who has attended a BNP meeting I find your reply somewhat disingenuous and again complete bollocks.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 20, 2006)

> > People who are attacked by fascist goons are not going to lie down and do nothing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 20, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Yes, but you deliberately missed the point that I was making. That your tag of "nazi" was complete bollocks.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I absolutely tore apart what the BNP was trying to preach at the meeting. I wasn't threatened with violence because I opposed them, now look at the disgraceful shite that has been posted up on this thread. 

You think that any "fascist" (The definition of which no doubt changes to suit your agenda) such the BNP are fair game because they are "violent" - yet someone has already posted up that even Tories and UKippers are fair game - yet you say nothing.

You say nothing, because you're an anti-white anti-working class activist. 

You're the one who has double standards. You ignore the muslim extremists because they is not white. You ignore the violent left because they is not right. 

You dictate your politics by violence because you know there is no way in the world the working class masses would buy into your shite.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 21, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> > Cool. The law makes provisions for people to defend themselves, now can you kindly tell me again, who was running around violently attacking people in Leeds?
> >
> > Of course people should be able to defend themselves. That doesn't give people the right to attack people on the pretext that they suspect they will be attacked.
> 
> ...


----------



## audiotech (Oct 21, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> I absolutely tore apart what the BNP was trying to preach at the meeting. I wasn't threatened with violence because I opposed them, now look at the disgraceful shite that has been posted up on this thread.
> 
> You think that any "fascist" (The definition of which no doubt changes to suit your agenda) such the BNP are fair game because they are "violent" - yet someone has already posted up that even Tories and UKippers are fair game - yet you say nothing.
> 
> ...



You still haven't stated your reasons for attending that meeting? I only have your word of what actually took place.

My description of fascist is clear and I specifically use the term to describe those that follow a fascist ideology.

As for your "anti-white anti-working class activist" bollocks? That is just something you've made up and has no basis whatsoever in anything I've posted on this thread, or anywhere else on this forum ever. Why this need to racialise all the time tonksy?

Muslim extremism is an anathema to my political beliefs full-stop. Unlike the BNP as it happens, who have courted extreme Muslim fundamentalists groups in their time.

Nowhere in this thread have I professed in any way the politics of violence and I take offence at your unsubstantiated drivel. You need to put up, or shut up tonskyboy.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 21, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> TonkaToy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 21, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> You still haven't stated your reasons for attending that meeting? I only have your word of what actually took place.
> 
> My description of fascist is clear and I specifically use the term to describe those that follow a fascist ideology.
> 
> ...



If working class people don't agree with you e.g. go for the BNP, your solution is to beat them up - therefore you are anti working class.

Everyone has different definitions of what fascism is, why do you think we have man made law? For the fun of it?


----------



## audiotech (Oct 21, 2006)

More jackonory drivel. ^ 

Pointless debating with a clown.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 21, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> More jackonory drivel. ^
> 
> Pointless debating with a clown.



You see, you just resort to insults. You have nothing to justify premeditated violence against fascists (or anyone else for that matter). 

We don't have laws for a laugh. I would understand and respect your position if there was a breakdown of law and order and the police were incapable of handling things but they are not. Posting examples of violent crime are not examples of the police not being able to handle things. Hint, a crime has to be committed before one can be arrested, that is a basic cornerstone of human rights. Many of us are trying to oppose one of the most authoratarian governments in generations and your attutudes and logic don't really help in all of that.


----------



## Spion (Oct 21, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Many of us are trying to oppose one of the most authoratarian governments in generations and your attutudes and logic don't really help in all of that.



Oh, yeah? Who is the 'many of us' you refer to?


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 21, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> Oh, yeah? Who is the 'many of us' you refer to?



Erh. Like most of the population.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 22, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> You see, you just resort to insults. You have nothing to justify premeditated violence against fascists (or anyone else for that matter).



Considering that he belongs to a street gang, with others who have a history and convictions for violence and thuggery, who have posted images, along with details of individuals on a website, with the message that: "...they'll all pay for their crimes" suggests, if there is any premeditation, then it is being organised by this fascist gang wouldn't you say?


----------



## Spion (Oct 22, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> You have nothing to justify premeditated violence against fascists (or anyone else for that matter).



Except that they're fascists. Hitler worshippers and the kind of people whose political goal is to take us to some race war hell. They make paedos look like well-adjusted pillars of the community. There's only one way to deal with them.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 22, 2006)

.....Thataway >>>>>>>>>>>>>


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 22, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Considering that he belongs to a street gang, with others who have a history and convictions for violence and thuggery, who have posted images, along with details of individuals on a website, with the message that: "...they'll all pay for their crimes" suggests, if there is any premeditation, then it is being organised by this fascist gang wouldn't you say?



Erm.....hold on a minute....there are laws already in place to deal with criminals who are an ongoing threat to society. We do not have the right to lock people up based on what an offshore website says, if we did then we would be rounding up a lot of people. 

I don't see how you  saying that religious violence is somehow more moral than racist violence. Both are a blight on society and both should be dealt with. However, people like you who have a lust for more violence are not helping.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 22, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> Except that they're fascists. Hitler worshippers and the kind of people whose political goal is to take us to some race war hell. They make paedos look like well-adjusted pillars of the community. There's only one way to deal with them.



Are you saying that the 7/7 bombers and their supporters are better, because that's what it looks like from here. Funny how there is a large chunk of the left that believes we should sit down and understand how young muslim radicals are drawn to terrorism, but when it's young white men those so called peaceful liberals froth at the mouth and then start masterbating over violence.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 22, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Erm.....hold on a minute....there are laws already in place to deal with criminals who are an ongoing threat to society. We do not have the right to lock people up based on what an offshore website says, if we did then we would be rounding up a lot of people.
> 
> I don't see how you  saying that religious violence is somehow more moral than racist violence. Both are a blight on society and both should be dealt with. However, people like you who have a lust for more violence are not helping.



Mmmmm, offshore website is it? You don't run it do you?

...and please point to where I said this?




			
				Tonksy the clown said:
			
		

> ..religious violence is somehow more moral than racist violence


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 22, 2006)

MC5OfRedWatch said:
			
		

> Mmmmm, offshore website is it? You don't run it do you?
> 
> ...and please point to where I said this?



What ever would give you the impression that I run it? 

Am I someone who believes in violence against political opponents?

It appears you have more in common with Redwatch than I do.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 22, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> What ever would give you the impression that I run it?
> 
> Am I someone who believes in violence against political opponents?
> 
> It appears you have more in common with Redwatch than I do.



Again you put words into my mouth (which you fail miserably on every occasion to substantiate with direct quotes).

Me on the other hand has no difficulty quoting direct from the clowns mouth.




			
				tonskytheclown said:
			
		

> We do not have the right to lock people up based on what an offshore website says,



The fascist gang who run this site are UK born and based. _Are_ you still going to argue (using the royal "we" I notice) that they are immune from prosecution?


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 22, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Again you put words into my mouth (which you fail miserably on every occasion to substantiate with direct quotes).
> 
> Me on the other hand has no difficulty quoting direct from the clowns mouth.



Please refrain from your name calling. 



> The fascist gang who run this site are UK born and based. _Are_ you still going to argue (using the royal "we" I notice) that they are immune from prosecution?



Still going to argue? I've never said they are or should be immune from UK law. You on the other hand, seem to think that you should be immune from UK law.

Interesting that you think that the fascists should be prosecuted for encouraging violence from a non UK based site, yet you feel that you should be free to use SOMEONE ELSES fucking UK based site to promote violence.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 22, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Please refrain from your name calling.
> 
> Still going to argue? I've never said they are or should be immune from UK law. You on the other hand, seem to think that you should be immune from UK law.
> 
> Interesting that you think that the fascists should be prosecuted for encouraging violence from a non UK based site, yet you feel that you should be free to use SOMEONE ELSES fucking UK based site to promote violence.



If I had "promoted violence" on this site, the editor would have banned me without a second look you fucking clown.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 22, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> If I had "promoted violence" on this site, the editor would have banned me without a second look you fucking clown.



Then why do you agree with fascists being bashed outside the law then?

If you don't agree that fascists should be assaulted outside of the law, why are you trying to argue with me?

Stop your insults please. If you can't hold a discussion in a civilised manner then don't participate.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 22, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Then why do you agree with fascists being bashed outside the law then?
> 
> If you don't agree that fascists should be assaulted outside of the law, why are you trying to argue with me?
> 
> Stop your insults please. If you can't hold a discussion in a civilised manner then don't participate.



Your unsubstantiated remarks are the height of ignorance about me and the politics I hold, so I don't need any lectures from you thanks.

I'll restate. I have no problem with people defending themselves against fascist violence. Furthermore, from Cable Street to Lewisham there's a proud history of such struggles.


----------



## editor (Oct 22, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Interesting that you think that the fascists should be prosecuted for encouraging violence from a non UK based site, yet you feel that you should be free to use SOMEONE ELSES fucking UK based site to promote violence.


Well, that sounds bad.

Could you highlight these posts where he _clearly and unequivocally_ "encourages violence" for me, please.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 22, 2006)

editor said:
			
		

> Well, that sounds bad.
> 
> Could you highlight these posts where he _clearly and unequivocally_ "encourages violence" for me, please.



I never said he "clearly" and "unquivocally" encourages violence.

I just said he encourages violence. Quite a reasonable thing to say, afterall I am only using the same "logic" process that MC5 is using.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 22, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Your unsubstantiated remarks are the height of ignorance about me and the politics I hold, so I don't need any lectures from you thanks.
> 
> I'll restate. I have no problem with people defending themselves against fascist violence. Furthermore, from Cable Street to Lewisham there's a proud history of such struggles.



Cable Street is a totally different situation in a totally different time.

I support the right for communities to mobilize and defend themselves when there is a break down of law and order. I am not aware of what happened in Lewisham, so I'm afraid you would have to post up some more details.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 23, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Cable Street is a totally different situation in a totally different time.



The mosque in Windsor and mosques elsewhere that have been torched recently? I would argue that the communities who frequent these places of worship have every right to defend themselves from such attacks? Just because you think it's a "totally different situation in a totally different time" means jackshit.


----------



## audiotech (Oct 23, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> I never said he "clearly" and "unquivocally" encourages violence.
> 
> I just said he encourages violence. Quite a reasonable thing to say, afterall I am only using the same "logic" process that MC5 is using.



You've come out with the some of the most illogical and ureasonable crap that I've ever had the misfortune to read.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 23, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> The mosque in Windsor and mosques elsewhere that have been torched recently? I would argue that the communities who frequent these places of worship have every right to defend themselves from such attacks? Just because you think it's a "totally different situation in a totally different time" means jackshit.



What are you on about?

You keep switching between bashing people up in a pre-meditated manner and communitities rightly defending themselves.

If someone is caught either attempting to torch a mosque or has been caught in the middle of organising such a criminal act, then citizens have the right to detain and use reasonable force against the perputrators until the police arrives. They do not have the right to use violence which would be considered by law as unreasonable.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 23, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> You've come out with the some of the most illogical and ureasonable crap that I've ever had the misfortune to read.



You are the one that's illogical. I'm posting up Vulcan like fucking logic based on what is already law.


----------



## pk (Oct 23, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> If someone is caught either attempting to torch a mosque or has been caught in the middle of organising such a criminal act, then citizens have the right to detain and use reasonable force against the perputrators until the police arrives. They do not have the right to use violence which would be considered by law as unreasonable.



I'd bash the pasty faced ugly white supremacist regardless of law.... the only good nazi is a dead one....


----------



## TopCat (Oct 23, 2006)

My only comment on this thread is that Tom A has a selection of piss poor methods of political debate, straw man arguements, smears, wank and turgid bollocks. What a toss.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 23, 2006)

pk said:
			
		

> I'd bash the pasty faced ugly white supremacist regardless of law.... the only good nazi is a dead one....



The only good unhinged nutter is a jailed one! Apart from that retort, try as I might, I really, really find it hard to give a fuck.


----------



## pk (Oct 23, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> The only good unhinged nutter is a jailed one! Apart from that retort, try as I might, I really, really find it hard to give a fuck.



The unhinged ones here are the pasty white sunburned skinhead facists who physically attack people based upon the fact that they weren't born in England.


----------



## Spion (Oct 23, 2006)

TopCat said:
			
		

> smears, wank and turgid bollocks


 Sounds like he needs to get to the doctors with that list of ailments


----------



## audiotech (Oct 23, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> What are you on about?
> 
> You keep switching between bashing people up in a pre-meditated manner and communitities rightly defending themselves.
> 
> If someone is caught either attempting to torch a mosque or has been caught in the middle of organising such a criminal act, then citizens have the right to detain and use reasonable force against the perputrators until the police arrives. They do not have the right to use violence which would be considered by law as unreasonable.



Speaking of switching, I notice you haven't highlighted those posts the editor requested in which I am supposed to have "encouraged violence"?

Neither have you answered the repeated question I have put to you on what were your reasons for attending a meeting of the BNP?

Can't help feeling superior is it?


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 23, 2006)

pk said:
			
		

> The unhinged ones here are the pasty white sunburned skinhead facists who physically attack people based upon the fact that they weren't born in England.



There are many unhinged ones that are knocking about that I have total contempt for. Your racist comment is noted, however, I have equal contempt for violent unhinged people, no matter what their race, creed or colour is.

Someone like you, who is violent and chooses to get uptight only about the antics of extremists from one race, has a lot more in common with Redwatch than you care to admit....


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 23, 2006)

MC5 said:
			
		

> Speaking of switching, I notice you haven't highlighted those posts the editor requested in which I am supposed to have "encouraged violence"?
> 
> Neither have you answered the repeated question I have put to you on what were your reasons for attending a meeting of the BNP?
> 
> Can't help feeling superior is it?



Read the thread again please. Cheers.


----------



## pk (Oct 24, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> There are many unhinged ones that are knocking about that I have total contempt for. Your racist comment is noted, however, I have equal contempt for violent unhinged people, no matter what their race, creed or colour is.
> 
> Someone like you, who is violent and chooses to get uptight only about the antics of extremists from one race, has a lot more in common with Redwatch than you care to admit....



I was baiting you, in exactly the same way I used to bait Layabout, and you've answered in precisely the same way.

You ARE Layabout, I did have some doubts, but not anymore.

Why are you denying it?


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 24, 2006)

pk said:
			
		

> I was baiting you, in exactly the same way I used to bait Layabout, and you've answered in precisely the same way.
> 
> You ARE Layabout, I did have some doubts, but not anymore.
> 
> Why are you denying it?



*sigh* We have been here before. How can I prove that I am not some other person without giving up my real life indentity?

Please stop making accusations that you know I can't prove one way or the other. Because around around and around in circles this will go, which is what you want, because you know that you can't possibly defend your violent left wing Nazi and racist stance.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 24, 2006)

"pasty white sunburned skinhead facists"'

PK. You are a left wing Nazi racist. Never forget that, you need to remind yourself of that in order to get better.


----------



## pk (Oct 24, 2006)

You are Layabout.

It really is that simple.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 24, 2006)

pk said:
			
		

> You are Layabout.
> 
> It really is that simple.



** Looks in mirror.

Nope. Ner ner.

But you are indeed a racist, a left wing Nazi one at that. Look at the filthy racist shite, you've just posted! 

Shame on you.


----------



## Blagsta (Oct 24, 2006)

You are silly Tonkabout!


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 24, 2006)

Blagsta said:
			
		

> You are silly Tonkabout!









Not as silly as you, Bungle.


----------



## Blagsta (Oct 24, 2006)

What a prat!


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 24, 2006)

Blagsta said:
			
		

> What a prat!



Now now now, be civilised, it doesn't cost anything you know.


----------



## Spion (Oct 24, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> left wing Nazi racist.



Still peddling this ludicrous insult?


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 24, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> Still peddling this ludicrous insult?



He's left wing. 
He's racist and he believes in violence against people because of their political beliefs. 

That pretty much fits into the description of a "left wing Nazi" if you ask me.

It's not an insult, it's a plain fucking fact IMHO. You wouldn't catch me fighting racism with yet more racism, because unlike our friend PK, I'm not racist.


----------



## pk (Oct 24, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> You wouldn't catch me fighting racism with yet more racism, because unlike our friend PK, I'm not racist.



No. You're Layabout.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 24, 2006)

pk said:
			
		

> No. You're Layabout.


----------



## Blagsta (Oct 25, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> He's left wing.
> He's racist and he believes in violence against people because of their political beliefs.
> 
> That pretty much fits into the description of a "left wing Nazi" if you ask me.
> ...



I suggest you read up on some history and find out what Nazi actually means.


----------



## Spion (Oct 25, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> He's left wing.
> He's racist and he believes in violence against people because of their political beliefs.
> 
> That pretty much fits into the description of a "left wing Nazi" if you ask me..



So, in pre-war Germany when Communists fought Nazis they were actually both Nazis? You make no sense





			
				TonkaToy said:
			
		

> It's not an insult, it's a plain fucking fact IMHO. You wouldn't catch me fighting racism with yet more racism, because unlike our friend PK, I'm not racist.



Racists attack people because of their race. Anti-fascists attack people who have chosen to follow and put into practice a particular set of beliefs. There is a world of difference.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 25, 2006)

Spion said:
			
		

> So, in pre-war Germany when Communists fought Nazis they were actually both Nazis? You make no sense



Nazis and Communists are as bad as each other.




> Racists attack people because of their race. Anti-fascists attack people who have chosen to follow and put into practice a particular set of beliefs. There is a world of difference.



Racists do lots of things, very few of them attack people because of their race. That is not to say that racism is acceptable, but there are not millions of racists out there running around attacking people because of their race. Democracy is great, it even allows for racist beliefs that I would rather have delt with in the framework of demorcracy and law, than people going around bashing each other up outside the law.


----------



## pk (Oct 25, 2006)

Do shut up now plonkerboy, there's a good lad.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 25, 2006)

pk said:
			
		

> Do shut up now plonkerboy, there's a good lad.



What are you going to do if I don't? Hunt me down and bash me up?


----------



## pk (Oct 25, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> What are you going to do if I don't? Hunt me down and bash me up?



Are you aware just how much of a twat you sound?


----------



## Blagsta (Oct 25, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Nazis and Communists are as bad as each other.



Incisive historical analysis there.  Well done.


----------



## The Black Hand (Oct 25, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> Nazis and Communists are as bad as each other.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The police bash people up and they don't get arrested.


----------



## TonkaToy (Oct 25, 2006)

Attica said:
			
		

> The police bash people up and they don't get arrested.



Lot's of people bash others up and don't get arrested, is there a point you are trying to make?


----------



## Taxamo Welf (Nov 5, 2006)

TonkaToy said:
			
		

> If the country wants it, then the country shall have it - that's democracy. Now if you don't like it, go and fuck off and live in some shit hole like Yemen.


   
brilliant


----------

