US Presidential Election 2020

[The Boofon]

2 minutes ago, cheesepipes said:

Is milkshaking a modern sexual act involving 2 gentlemen? 

Fortunately not. 

 

It's the aggressive act of throwing a milkshake over someone.

 

Lethal if your lactose intolerant.

 

A bender's headbutt you could say.

[Parklife]

7 minutes ago, cheesepipes said:

Is milkshaking a modern sexual act involving 2 gentlemen? 

A blowjob, if you believe Kelis 

 

[manboobs109]

Mind when chucking milkshakes on people was ok as long as you disagreed with them? 

Strange times

[manboobs109]

4 hours ago, ConsiCanBoogie1903 said:

I think you're confusing fascism with an undemocratic country. The most recent administration were fascist. Shown further by their attempts to undermine the democratic outcome of the election results.  
 

Antifas goal is to oppose fascism where and when they see it, it's an ideology. It's not an organisation as such, rather like minded people meet up and work together to protest or de platform those with fascist views. They've done a great job in outing the KKK coppers and what not in the states. 
 

 

You get democratic fascist countries?

[Ke1t]

4 hours ago, NEM said:

I doubt many of the British army 1939-45 would have supported the fascist zoomers of antifa.

Really?

You reckon the British Army would be on the same side as the folk who who have torchlight parades, carry Swastika flags, throw out Roman salutes, and and chant "The Jews will not replace us" do you?

 

 

 

[NEM]

Just now, Ke1t said:

Really?

You reckon the British Army would be on the same side as the folk who who have torchlight parades, carry Swastika flags, throw out Roman salutes, and and chant "The Jews will not replace us" do you?

 

 

 

Quite the leap 

[NEM]

1 minute ago, rocket_scientist said:

Dayts would be... if he was indeed in the armed forces, which he didn't mention once... for many, many years.

Think Dayts has been pulling your leg......

[Ke1t]

1 minute ago, NEM said:

Quite the leap 

If British soldiers were brought forward in time from 39-45 and saw the spectacle I just described, what do you think they'd make of the people I've just described. 

 

 

[NEM]

2 minutes ago, Ke1t said:

If British soldiers were brought forward in time from 39-45 and saw the spectacle I just described, what do you think they'd make of the people I've just described. 

 

 

Irrelevant.

What do you think they'd make of antifa vandalising war memorials and burning the British flag?

[Ke1t]

Just now, NEM said:

Irrelevant.

What do you think they'd make of antifa vandalising war memorials and burning the British flag?

I can understand you not wanting to answer that, so we'll state the obvious and say, 'Those British soldier would see what was a very typical Nazi parade of the kind popular in the 30s and 40s, particularly in Germany.'

Then we' move on to damage done by Antifi... Does damaging property and burning a flag make one a 'Fascist'?

 French Resistance, who likely burned quite a few French flags, and blew up a great number of French buildings, railroads, communications, even killed their fellow Frenchmen and women were they Fascist?

Jews who rose up in the Warsaw Ghetto, murdering Polish police, blowing up buildings, and... quite likely... burning a few Polish flags... were they Fascist?

I'll answer that, because you seem VERY reticent to actually answer questions... no, they weren't. In fact, quite the opposite, these were acts perpetrated by ANTIFAscists. 

So now we've established that burning flags and damaging property aren't inherently Fascist acts at all. So to point to reactionary violence and flag burning as 'Fascist' would be wholly incorrect.  

Now we can move on from THAT nonsense. 

 

[maryhilldon]

16 minutes ago, Ke1t said:

Really?

You reckon the British Army would be on the same side as the folk who who have torchlight parades, carry Swastika flags, throw out Roman salutes, and and chant "The Jews will not replace us" do you?

 

 

 

Isn't it possible to like neither fascists or Antifa?  I would think the majority of people don't have time for either extreme. 

[NEM]

2 minutes ago, Ke1t said:

I can understand you not wanting to answer that, so we'll state the obvious and say, 'Those British soldier would see what was a very typical Nazi parade of the kind popular in the 30s and 40s, particularly in Germany.'

Then we' move on to damage done by Antifi... Does damaging property and burning a flag make one a 'Fascist'?

 French Resistance, who likely burned quite a few French flags, and blew up a great number of French buildings, railroads, communications, even killed their fellow Frenchmen and women were they Fascist?

Jews who rose up in the Warsaw Ghetto, murdering Polish police, blowing up buildings, and... quite likely... burning a few Polish flags... were they Fascist?

I'll answer that, because you seem VERY reticent to actually answer questions... no, they weren't. In fact, quite the opposite, these were acts perpetrated by ANTIFAscists. 

So now we've established that burning flags and damaging property aren't inherently Fascist acts at all. So to point to reactionary violence and flag burning as 'Fascist' would be wholly incorrect.  

Now we can move on from THAT nonsense. 

 

I'm not answering it because it's irrelevant as Maryhilldon has pointed out.

 

Comparing antifa with the French and Polish resistance.  LOL

[Ke1t]

Just now, NEM said:

I'm not answering it because it's irrelevant as Maryhilldon has pointed out.

 

Comparing antifa with the French and Polish resistance.  LOL

Oh, it's patently obvious why you weren't answering. I don't retrospective require spin. 

While there's a very natural comparison with one antifascist movement and another, even despite your winning and compelling 'LOL'  argument, that wasn't the thrust of the argument. The point was that you're pushing the narrative that 'damaging property and burning flags' makes one Fascist. 

What we did was establish that that's nonsense.  

[NEM]

1 minute ago, Ke1t said:

Oh, it's patently obvious why you weren't answering. I don't retrospective require spin. 

While there's a very natural comparison with one antifascist movement and another, even despite your winning and compelling 'LOL'  argument, that wasn't the thrust of the argument. The point was that you're pushing the narrative that 'damaging property and burning flags' makes one Fascist. 

What we did was establish that that's nonsense.  

Nope I don't think I've made that point Walter

 

[Ke1t]

8 minutes ago, maryhilldon said:

Isn't it possible to like neither fascists or Antifa?  I would think the majority of people don't have time for either extreme. 

Yes it is. 

The scope of my post wasn't that broad. 

[Ke1t]

Just now, NEM said:

Nope I don't think I've made that point Walter

 

You're entitled to think whatever you want. My purpose was to highlight the reality of that 'point'.

"Walter?"

Are we doing some kind of name-calling thing there? 

[Parklife]

14 minutes ago, Ke1t said:

I can understand you not wanting to answer that, so we'll state the obvious and say, 'Those British soldier would see what was a very typical Nazi parade of the kind popular in the 30s and 40s, particularly in Germany.'

Then we' move on to damage done by Antifi... Does damaging property and burning a flag make one a 'Fascist'?

 French Resistance, who likely burned quite a few French flags, and blew up a great number of French buildings, railroads, communications, even killed their fellow Frenchmen and women were they Fascist?

Jews who rose up in the Warsaw Ghetto, murdering Polish police, blowing up buildings, and... quite likely... burning a few Polish flags... were they Fascist?

I'll answer that, because you seem VERY reticent to actually answer questions... no, they weren't. In fact, quite the opposite, these were acts perpetrated by ANTIFAscists. 

So now we've established that burning flags and damaging property aren't inherently Fascist acts at all. So to point to reactionary violence and flag burning as 'Fascist' would be wholly incorrect.  

Now we can move on from THAT nonsense. 

 

Pwned. 

[NEM]

4 minutes ago, Parklife said:

Pwned. 

Has Walter been the victim of a data breach?

[NEM]

Just now, cheesepipes said:

Shit word used by cunts. 

 

 

Must be a millennial thing - I had to google it ?

[NEM]

20 minutes ago, Ke1t said:

You're entitled to think whatever you want. My purpose was to highlight the reality of that 'point'.

"Walter?"

Are we doing some kind of name-calling thing there? 

Your purpose was to highlight the reality of a point I didn't make?  Whatever floats your boat I suppose

[Ke1t]

3 minutes ago, NEM said:

Your purpose was to highlight the reality of a point I didn't make?  Whatever floats your boat I suppose

Hasn't this been your narrative? 

"Was it treason when Antifa and BLM invaded federal buildings to protest Trumps supreme court nominees? "

"I doubt many of the British army 1939-45 would have supported the fascist zoomers of antifa."

"What do you think they'd make of antifa vandalising war memorials and burning the British flag?"

 

 

 

[NEM]

6 minutes ago, Ke1t said:

Hasn't this been your narrative? 

"Was it treason when Antifa and BLM invaded federal buildings to protest Trumps supreme court nominees? "

"I doubt many of the British army 1939-45 would have supported the fascist zoomers of antifa."

"What do you think they'd make of antifa vandalising war memorials and burning the British flag?"

 

 

 

None of those posts were made together or relate to each other.  Nice try though Walt.

To save this going any further I think Antifa aggressively and violently shutting down anyone they don't like or holding an opposing point of view is what makes them fascist.  The flag burning and memorial vandalism just makes them cunts.

 

[Ke1t]

1 minute ago, NEM said:

* None of those posts were made together or relate to each other. 

** Nice try though Walt.

To save this going any further I think Antifa aggressively and violently shutting down anyone they don't like or holding an opposing point of view is what makes them fascist.  The flag burning and memorial vandalism just makes them cunts.

 

* Which is why I said narrative. Do you not know what narrative means?

** There's that 'Walt(er)' comment again. I don't understand its context, but I imagine it's some kind of childish name-calling thing. Would I be correct? Again, you appear reticent to answer pointed questions, so childish name-calling will be my assumption. 

"To save this going any further I think Antifa aggressively and violently shutting down anyone they don't like or holding an opposing point of view is what makes them fascist."

Assuming that were true, which you fail to demonstrate, at a stretch that would make them Militants, not Fascists. 

It's important that you understand what the words you're using actually mean, because I've had to correct you on two important words in this one post.

This is why you're getting frustrated.

[NEM]

1 minute ago, Ke1t said:

* Which is why I said narrative. Do you not know what narrative means?

** There's that 'Walt(er)' comment again. I don't understand its context, but I imagine it's some kind of childish name-calling thing. Would I be correct? Again, you appear reticent to answer pointed questions, so childish name-calling will be my assumption. 

"To save this going any further I think Antifa aggressively and violently shutting down anyone they don't like or holding an opposing point of view is what makes them fascist."

Assuming that were true, which you fail to demonstrate, at a stretch that would make them Militants, not Fascists. 

It's important that you understand what the words you're using actually mean, because I've had to correct you on two important words in this one post.

This is why you're getting frustrated.

Ha ha I'm pretty sure you don't need me to demonstrate that to know it's true.

Militant tactics favoured by fascists.

Nobody getting frustrated here Walt - that's your imagination running away with you again ?

[NEM]

Just now, rocket_scientist said:

It's painful watching two boxers at totally different levels and seeing the lightweight getting thrashed.

On the other hand when the intellectual lightweight continues to argue like an infant and resorts to the levels that you do, there is satisfaction in seeing him getting the humiliation he fully deserves. 

Coming from the forum punch drunk that's quite the insult ?

[Ke1t]

15 minutes ago, NEM said:

Ha ha I'm pretty sure you don't need me to demonstrate that to know it's true.

Militant tactics favoured by fascists.

Nobody getting frustrated here Walt - that's your imagination running away with you again ?

 Well I'm happy that you've learned a new word, but be very careful how you deploy it.

To explain, because I'm in teaching mode today, using a tactic... let's say just for an example. Militancy' that Fascists HAVE been known to employ, okay?

Use of that tactic doesn't make you a Fascist. To clarify, Communists used Militancy as a tool... they weren't Fascists. The peasant uprisings of the Middle Ages used militant tactics... they weren't fascists.

Buddhist groups have used militant tactics against the Chinese... not Fascists.

I know you thought you'd seen a piece of flotsam to desperately grab onto when you saw this new word 'militant', but in your excitement to deploy it in your defence you didnt take even a second to consider if it would hold the weight of your argument.

As demonstrated. It does not.

You continue to use 'Walter', but seem too embarrassed to clarify why. 

I also understand why that would be the case.

[NEM]

7 minutes ago, Ke1t said:

 Well I'm happy that you've learned a new word, but be very careful how you deploy it.

To explain, because I'm in teaching mode today, using a tactic... let's say just for an example. Militancy' that Fascists HAVE been known to employ, okay?

Use of that tactic doesn't make you a Fascist. To clarify, Communists used Militancy as a tool... they weren't Fascists. The peasant uprisings of the Middle Ages used militant tactics... they weren't fascists.

Buddhist groups have used militant tactics against the Chinese... not Fascists.

I know you thought you'd seen a piece of flotsam to desperately grab onto when you saw this new word 'militant', but in your excitement to deploy it in your defence you didnt take even a second to consider if it would hold the weight of your argument.

As demonstrated. It does not.

You continue to use 'Walter', but seem too embarrassed to clarify why. 

I also understand why that would be the case.

fas·cism

  (făsh′ĭz′əm)

n.1. often Fascism

a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, a capitalist economy subject to stringent governmental controls, violent suppression of the opposition, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.

2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.

 

Maybe rather than being fascist I should have said they exhibit fascist behaviours.  My bad.

Lets just leave it at that.

 

Wal′ter Mit′ty

 (ˈwɔl tər)

n., pl. Walter Mit•tys.

an ordinary, timid person who is given to adventurous and self-aggrandizing daydreams.  Such as fighting bears and the likes.

[Studebaker-90]

18 minutes ago, Bad_Mobby said:

Anitifa could kick in ASC 

that’s for sure 

Who couldn’t 

[NEM]

3 minutes ago, rocket_scientist said:

My guess was that he was referring to Walter Cronkite but he's now clarified that it was indeed, as usual, an insult.

You will learn that he posts just to take a contrary view and to be "annoying".

He had a rare show of humility yesterday when he said he wasn't doing it deliberately (with the obligatory laffing face) but he had admitted a day or two before that he was posting deliberately to "be annoying".

[Studebaker-90]

2 minutes ago, Bad_Mobby said:

Wee Jay 

maybe? 

Mong strength