Antifa takes over Seattle, Washington

[AgnosticBoy]

There is now evidence that Antifa group was in the midst of the protestors. Coinciding with the timing of recent protests, now Antifa has taken over a few city blocks in a Seattle area and they're calling it the "autonomous zone".

https://www.city-journal.org/antifa-sea ... omous-zone


And their real agenda was not about George Floyd but rather they used those protests to incite more chaos. The New York times reports the real agenda:

While Mr. Floyd’s death in Minneapolis drove most of the energy in the streets toward ending police violence and racial injustice, some of those here in recent days have pushed for a wider focus. Some of the messages mirror the 2011 Occupy movement and seemed aimed at targeting corporate America for its role in social inequities.

"The more we encourage and focus on the race thing, the greater our attention is not focusing on the fact that this is class warfare,” said a 28-year-old protester and self-described anarchist who identified himself only by his first name, Fredrix.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytime ... e.amp.html

So the real agenda is not about race.

Why did mainstream media ignore all of the evidence that Antifa was involved?

Does this show the weakness of Democrats (Washington State Governor is a Democrat) when they let domestic terrorists take over their neighborhoods?

[koko]

TGC,

Just because one supports defunding of the police doesn't mean they are part of either of these groups or any group whatsoever.

This is a point I've tried to make to him but without any success whatsoever.

[AgnosticBoy]

TGC,

Just because one supports defunding of the police doesn't mean they are part of either of these groups or any group whatsoever.

This is a point I've tried to make to him but without any success whatsoever.

Would White supremacist topple statutes of Confederate generals or that of slaveowners?

[Tcg]

TGC,

Just because one supports defunding of the police doesn't mean they are part of either of these groups or any group whatsoever.

This is a point I've tried to make to him but without any success whatsoever.

It appears that some reach conclusions absent facts. When this happens any argument that supports the conclusions reached beforehand, no matter how illogical, will be considered valid. That appears to be the case here.


Tcg

[AgnosticBoy]

TGC,

Just because one supports defunding of the police doesn't mean they are part of either of these groups or any group whatsoever.

This is a point I've tried to make to him but without any success whatsoever.

It appears that some reach conclusions absent facts. When this happens any argument that supports the conclusions reached beforehand, no matter how illogical, will be considered valid. That appears to be the case here.


Tcg

I think you both lack confidence in the audience here. Do you really think they can't tell the difference between someone pushing a political narrative vs. someone offering just the facts ??

You can bet they know who is here to push a liberal agenda and who's not. Why do you think CNN is trusted only by 40% of its viewers?

[Zzyzx]

I think you both lack confidence in the audience here. Do you really think they can't tell the difference between someone pushing a political narrative vs. someone offering just the facts ??

You can bet they know who is here to push a liberal agenda and who's not.

Do you bet that readers know who is here to push a bible agenda (even those who attempt to appear neutral)?

Why do you think CNN is trusted only by 40% of its viewers?

Although I do not participate in television watching, I consider that an indication that some viewers are wise enough to question individual sources of information and to seek information from multiple, disconnected sources.

I question the judgment of those who depend upon a narrow range of information sources.

[koko]

TGC,

Just because one supports defunding of the police doesn't mean they are part of either of these groups or any group whatsoever.

This is a point I've tried to make to him but without any success whatsoever.

It appears that some reach conclusions absent facts. When this happens any argument that supports the conclusions reached beforehand, no matter how illogical, will be considered valid. That appears to be the case here.


Tcg

The Washington Post has done extensvie research into the issue in this thread. Contrary to its heading in the OP, and contrary to Trump's lies, NOT ONE PERSON IN ANTIFA HAS BEEN INDICTED BY ANY JURISDICTION NATIONWIDE for any involvement in any disorder:

[AgnosticBoy]

[Replying to Zzyzx in post #55]

You failed to mention that the worse of the crimes are happening in areas run by Democrats. The autonomous zone in Seattle was allowed to take place under a Democrat mayor, a Democrat police chief, and a Democrat governor. It was referred to as a "summer of Love" or even a "festival".

Here's how one source describes Antifa:

"...antifa is not a single organization but rather an umbrella term for far-left-leaning militant groups that confront or resist neo-Nazis and white supremacists at demonstrations.

There is no hierarchical structure to antifa or universal set of tactics that makes its presence immediately recognizable, though members tend to espouse revolutionary and anti-authoritarian views, said Mark Bray, a historian at Rutgers University and author of “Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook.”

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-wor ... -violence/

So let's see... we have groups that are rioting, pulling down statutes of Whites, taking over territory (the autonomous zone), calling for defund the police, all LEFT-leaning messages and tactics, but yet you don't see the evidence that it's Antifa or even Antifa-Like? I believe most are convinced by my evidence.

[Tcg]

I believe most are convinced by my evidence.

It should not be overlooked that this conclusion concerning your "evidence" is presented absent evidence.


Tcg

[AgnosticBoy]

I believe most are convinced by my evidence.

It should not be overlooked that this conclusion concerning your "evidence" is presented absent evidence.


Tcg

Don't overlook this FACT:
Perhaps Trump's threat of designating Antifa as a terrorist organization has forced them to become less apparent. If they came out claiming to be Antifa then they'd certainly be a target of law enforcement.

The FBI defines domestic terrorism as acts "perpetrated by individuals and/or groups inspired by or associated with primarily U.S.-based movements that espouse extremist ideologies of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature."

The USA Patriot Act from 2001 defines domestic terrorism as a dangerous act occurring within U.S. territory that violates criminal laws in ways that are "intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping." That definition is also in the U.S. Government Code, the 53 title compilation of federal legal statutes.

Under the Patriot Act, the federal government has multiple resources to combat international terrorism. It has the authority to conduct surveillance of suspected terrorists, and can mount undercover sting operations and obtain financial records.

There still are some tools investigators can use. According to testimony given to Congress in May by Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brad Wiegmann, judges can issue property search warrants and warrants for tax and educational records in cases involving domestic terrorism. Law enforcement may also intercept communications on information that reveals "a threat of terrorism, including domestic terrorism."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-is-do ... ed-states/

[koko]

Don't overlook this FACT:
Perhaps Trump's threat of designating Antifa as a terrorist organization has forced them to become less apparent. If they came out claiming to be Antifa then they'd certainly be a target of law enforcement.

The FBI defines domestic terrorism as acts "perpetrated by individuals and/or groups inspired by or associated with primarily U.S.-based movements that espouse extremist ideologies of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature."

The USA Patriot Act from 2001 defines domestic terrorism as a dangerous act occurring within U.S. territory that violates criminal laws in ways that are "intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping." That definition is also in the U.S. Government Code, the 53 title compilation of federal legal statutes.

Under the Patriot Act, the federal government has multiple resources to combat international terrorism. It has the authority to conduct surveillance of suspected terrorists, and can mount undercover sting operations and obtain financial records.

There still are some tools investigators can use. According to testimony given to Congress in May by Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brad Wiegmann, judges can issue property search warrants and warrants for tax and educational records in cases involving domestic terrorism. Law enforcement may also intercept communications on information that reveals "a threat of terrorism, including domestic terrorism."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-is-do ... ed-states/

The Department of Justice has failed to indict so much as one member of Antifa is all the prosecutions it has undertaken.