NBC: Man attacked by six liberals during a political rally in Philadelphia
-
Devken and sutieday, I think you are both offended for different reasons. Pretty sure raphjd's comment was sarcastic, so sutieday, you are justly offended because he is implying all muslim immigrants are terrorists, and Devken, I don't think he was defending Turkey as a religion of peace. I personally would like him to back up a blanket statement like all liberal protests end in violence–without bringing up the Berkley riot or the mad Stanford bike-lock slasher.
BTW, I have searched the Philadelphia police blotters and can find no record of arrests for the bloody attack pictured in the OP. I did find his twitter feed, however, and it looks like he may have been shirtless when attacked. So I owe him the benefit of the doubt. It should be noted that he is best known in Philadelphia for interrupting Christmas Mass in the cathedral screaming that Pizzagate was real and had to be investigated. Now he has traded in his "Trump 2020" sign for one promoting a silent vigil for Seth Rich. So it wouldn't surprise me if he shares culpability in starting the fight.
-
Free speech is not the same as terrorism, throwing gays from the roof tops and all the other things your beloved muslims love to do.
But not all of islam supports terrorism or even Sharia law. There is a faction (and it may be a large one, but certainly not the majority) who use the religion to back up their hate of the West and gays, etc. It is not the religion per se that is the issue, it is the underlying hatred.
But what really amazes me is how often you chastise us for making generalizations about conservatives and the right, but so easily and confidently paint the left with a broad brush. -
Free speech is not the same as terrorism, throwing gays from the roof tops and all the other things your beloved muslims love to do.
And the lowest, most pitiable form of free speech is targeted ethnic or religious hate speech that is willfully blind to the fact that good and bad people exist in all faiths. Regards from an out and proud secular humanist.
-
I still have no idea why a topic about a man attacked by "liberals" turned into a discussion about Islam…
-
I still have no idea why a topic about a man attacked by "liberals" turned into a discussion about Islam…
Good call, sutieday. There are a substantial number of threads on P&D that begin on a variety of nonreligious topics, but are steered toward Islamophobia by the same member, with the same roof analogy, and in retrospect, I regret furthering this hijacking of the thread.
This thread is about the Philadelphia incident, and while I can see it being vibrantly discussed in relation to other political protests in the U.S., I've had enough of these 90-degree topic turns to specific faith-bashing here in the P&D forum. There's a forum for Religion & Philosophy, if they will allow that poster to continually projectile vomit in that ugly direction.
-
Liberals' love of muslims is a political issue.
Also, I need to point out that it was a liberal who pointed out how Turkey treated LGBTs. I just reminded him that Turkey is a "religion of peace" nation.
-
Raphjd, you were the first one to bring religion to this thread, which had to do with the attack on a Trump supporter. It was the second post in the thread and even if I accept your premise, is was seriously OT.
Liberals see nothing wrong with using violence to prove they are the good people. This is why they are such fans of the "religion of peace".
-
All over social media, you will see liberals defending "punch a Nazi". When you ask them to clarify, they tell you a Nazi is anyone you disagree with.
And all over the Internet – from the Dark Web to carefully guarded email lists -- there are invites to gatherings where they discuss assaulting minorities, and in some corners, drive around in pick-up trucks with white robes. Or sometimes, use torches to menace workers taking down shameful Confederate monuments:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/may/14/torch-wielding-group-protests-confederate-statue-r/
You think either side has a monopoly on this behavior?
I'll have you note that the protest you linked to in the washingtontimes contained no political violence. I don't agree with Richard Spencer, but I'm not going to slander him and accuse him of violence, when nothing he has ever done has been violent.
If conservatives attacked liberals/minorities/gays or whatever to any large degree, you'd see tons of video evidence. No, the amount of video documentation on left wing violence far outweights vice versa. To say that "no side has a monopoly on this behavior" is pure unadulterated ignorance.
This base ignorance is especially vile when considering that Hamburg is literally on fire, every car on some streets are literally on fire. All thanks to extreme left-wing antifa.
You guys need to call out left-wing violence more, and stop pretending there's a middle ground here or deflecting with the far smaller amount of conservative political violence. It is your image being tarnished right in front of the eyes of future generations.
-
Raphjd, you were the first one to bring religion to this thread, which had to do with the attack on a Trump supporter. It was the second post in the thread and even if I accept your premise, is was seriously OT.
Liberals see nothing wrong with using violence to prove they are the good people. This is why they are such fans of the "religion of peace".
Well, it is all related.
Maybe if you lived in Europe, you'd see the violence we see from the followers of the "religion of peace".
We don't have all the liberal violence, but we do have muslim violence.
Both groups are offended by everything and anything. "Oh no, I smell roses, let's beat someone up".
-
–---------Did you misplace the quote bracket?------------
Two groups committing violence for vastly different reasons, even if they are part of a larger group does not, imho, unite the issues sufficiently to discuss in one thread. This is another example where the debate deteriorates into broad denouncements of "the other side."The issue of liberal supporting Islamic violence deserves its own thread.
-
–---------Did you misplace the quote bracket?------------
The quote brackets are where they are supposed to be. <shrug>> Two groups committing violence for vastly different reasons, even if they are part of a larger group does not, imho, unite the issues sufficiently to discuss in one thread. This is another example where the debate deteriorates into broad denouncements of "the other side."
"I'm gonna blow you up because you won't bow down to me"
"I'm gonna bash your head in with my bike lock because you won't bow down to me"
Different weapons, same reasons.</shrug>
-
I think the correlation is too broad. There is no evidence that the guy attacked in Philadelphia because he would not "bow" to liberals. I am sure he either got in their fgace, or was attacked by thugs who were just looking for an excuse to commit violence.
As for the post that I thought has misplaced bracket, your reply to my post appears in the same grey box as my quoted post. Since it is not in a black background, it does not appear as a reply, but as part of the my quted post. I know those words are not mine. It looks to me like you wrote your reply above the
"" code.
