Antifa turns on democrats

@joe-shmo said
Estimated $1,000,000,000 to $2,000,000,000 loss to public/private property in the US is related to George Floyd protests. How did they achieve such financial carnage by such passive and peaceful "banding together in the streets" I wonder? Do you suppose that's all pavement damage from the extra foot traffic?

"Related to George Floyd protests" how?

The majority of violence at the protests themselves was by police.

@no1marauder said
"Related to George Floyd protests" how?

The majority of violence at the protests themselves was by police.

As I already stated...related to the destruction of public and private property. Are you looking for an itemized list of awarded insurance claims? You're more than welcome to google it. I'm not going to waste my time posting links that you'll just dismiss because "The Guardian" couldn't be bothered to write on that aspect of the protests...

Here...case in point. They did write about damages, but they dismiss that as a cover for police to use force and imply it was likely the result of bad actors that fan the flames then slip away!...what a crock of horse manure. Notice they don't dare present an estimate of said damages because they are hack journalists.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/01/george-floyd-riots-violence-damage-property-police-brutality

@kevcvs57 said
What about when fascist scum turn up at state blogs with automatic weapons, what about when them freedom loving fascist patriots attempt to kidnap a state governor.
Freedom! My ass
TERRORISM is what the Republican Party have nailed there colours to and they should share the fate that all terrorists share when a democratically elected state catches up with them.

What if they are doing this to defeat fascism?
what if the state governor was a fascist who abuses his power?

I'll take people that fight for freedom any day

@no1marauder said
"Related to George Floyd protests" how?

The majority of violence at the protests themselves was by police.

Oh, please, No1! You sound like Suzie blaming the Proud Boys, jeeeezus.

These "protesters" were looting k-mart, for kripe's sake.
They attempted to burn down federal courthouses in numerous cities. Who are you kidding???

@joe-shmo said
As I already stated...related to the destruction of public and private property. Are you looking for an itemized list of awarded insurance claims? You're more than welcome to google it. I'm not going to waste my time posting links that you'll just dismiss because "The Guardian" couldn't be bothered to write on that aspect of the protests...

No, I'm asking you how such damage was "related" to the protests.

Do you have an answer?

@earl-of-trumps said
Oh, please, No1! You sound like Suzie blaming the Proud Boys, jeeeezus.

These "protesters" were looting k-mart, for kripe's sake.
They attempted to burn down federal courthouses in numerous cities. Who are you kidding???

"Numerous cities"?

Name them.

You've already been cited for your ridiculous exaggerations on this subject i.e. "cities burned to the ground" "BLM being the armed wing of the Democratic party" etc. etc.

More of the same.

There was a certain amount of property damage and looting but I dispute they were "related" to the protests themselves. The Kerner Commission explained what caused inner city riots more than 50 years ago and their findings are still valid: "https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/1968-kerner-commission-got-it-right-nobody-listened-180968318/"

@no1marauder said
No, I'm asking you how such damage was "related" to the protests.

Do you have an answer?

They are causally related. There is a "protest", and some of the "protestors" decide to burn buildings and trash property. If there is no "protest" there are no "protestors" that can decide to act in a criminal manner.

Imagine if you will, there is a protest marching down the street, and in their wake there are vehicles/buildings on fire, storefront windows smashed, and stolen goods. You trying to imply they are not causally related? How lawyerly of you...

@earl-of-trumps said
What if they are doing this to defeat fascism?
what if the state governor was a fascist who abuses his power?

I'll take people that fight for freedom any day

A lot of what ifs there earl but it’s safe to say that the camouflage wearing, gun toting right winger who goes looking for a female to kidnap / assassinate is probably going to be the fascist in this scenario.

@joe-shmo said
They are causally related. There is a "protest", and some of the "protestors" decide to burn buildings and trash property. If there is no "protest" there are no "protestors" that can decide to act in a criminal manner.

This is incorrect. Unless you can show the people during the protests did the damage, what happened afterward is not casually related to the protests.

Even without protests, there would have been unrest and property damage in response to the incidents of police brutality. The Kerner Commission report's findings on such matters are still valid.

@joe-shmo said
As I already stated...related to the destruction of public and private property. Are you looking for an itemized list of awarded insurance claims? You're more than welcome to google it. I'm not going to waste my time posting links that you'll just dismiss because "The Guardian" couldn't be bothered to write on that aspect of the protests...

Here...case in point. They di ...[text shortened]... eguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/01/george-floyd-riots-violence-damage-property-police-brutality

The Guardian article you cite is clearly labelled "opinion", so your complaint about it being an example of writing by "hack journalists" is misplaced.

@no1marauder said
This is incorrect. Unless you can show the people during the protests did the damage, what happened afterward is not casually related to the protests.

Even without protests, there would have been unrest and property damage in response to the incidents of police brutality. The Kerner Commission report's findings on such matters are still valid.

So what your saying is there had to be legal arrests for damages and these suspects had to testify they were participating in the protests during a trial under oath? That is the only the criteria you'll except...how lawyerly and completely expected! I guess we are done here...

@joe-shmo said
So what your saying is there had to be legal arrests for damages and these suspects had to testify they were participating in the protests during a trial under oath? That is the only the criteria you'll except...how lawyerly and completely expected! I guess we are done here...

I'm saying unless the violence occurred at the protests, it is not "causally related" to the protests. This is especially true since BLM and other groups organizing the protests oppose violence and rioting.

@no1marauder said
I'm saying unless the violence occurred at the protests, it is not "causally related" to the protests. This is especially true since BLM and other groups organizing the protests oppose violence and rioting.

I'm saying unless the violence occurred at the protests, it is not "causally related" to the protests

define "at the protest" please. Spatially, temporally, cognitively, or some arbitrary range of superpositions of said "states of existence"?

This is especially true since BLM and other groups organizing the protests oppose violence and rioting

To what extent are the actions of individual protestors owned by organization A,B,C... who called for the protests?

Does BLM own the George Floyd protests? I think not... The actions of the protest are manifested in the cumulative response of its individual protestors...that may gravely deviate from the stated tenets of BLM or any other involved organizer with varying array tenets.

@joe-shmo said

I'm saying unless the violence occurred at the protests, it is not "causally related" to the protests

define "at the protest" please. Spatially, temporally, cognitively, or some arbitrary range of superpositions of said "states of existence"?

[quote]This is especially true since BLM and other groups organizing the protests oppose violence and rioting[/q ...[text shortened]... ely deviate from the stated tenets of BLM or any other involved organizer with varying array tenets.

I believe the words "at the protests" are sufficiently clear in the English language.

For example, the storming of the Capitol and attempts to murder government officials occurred "at the protest" in Washington on January 6. Whereas, the smashing of windows at 1 am hours after and miles away from where a demonstration against police violence was held is not "at the protests".

@no1marauder said
I believe the words "at the protests" are sufficiently clear in the English language.

For example, the storming of the Capitol and attempts to murder government officials occurred "at the protest" in Washington on January 6. Whereas, the smashing of windows at 1 am hours after and miles away from where a demonstration against police violence was held is not "at the protests".

"For example, the storming of the Capitol and attempts to murder government officials occurred "at the protest" in Washington on January 6."

Out of curiosity: In that example, were the protestors at the insurrection or the insurrectionist at the protest?

"Whereas, the smashing of windows at 1 am hours after and miles away from where a demonstration against police violence was held is not "at the protests"."

Do you have evidence of an official "end of protest time" for said event? What internal organization dictates and enforces that "end of protest time". Furthermore, 100,000 people show up to such an event. What is the protests uniquie physical position?