Discuss Rioting

BlastemSkyHigh

The Original Fuck You Bomb
Premium
173
134
68
So I have heard a lot about how the riots and violence are justified right now and about how there's no 'talking to the far right'.
About how 'you can't reason with hate' and so on. To me I consider them excuses. You can't justify violence.
Violence breeds violence. It always will. To build a peaceful, fair and just world you cannot rise to it. Violence stems from hate, hate stems from fear, fear stems from ignorance.

And ignorance can be cured.
 

BlastemSkyHigh

The Original Fuck You Bomb
Premium
173
134
68
And I hate love, what's your point?
At my work which is a Catholic hospital,
The pharmacy and gift shop (which is run by sisters of the cloth) had windows broken, cars at the hospital had windows broken, my teammates even bunkered down during this, it's senseless and pointless, that shit they did there was uncalled for.
 

Ryan McAury

Investigator
263
54
97
Look at this.
Here is proof the Dutch police uses provocator agents to stir the soup.

Cops dressed as hooligans, to get a riot starting!

It is in Dutch, but the language doesn't matter.
The images are very clear!

It starts at the right side, between the trees.
At least 5 hooligan cops try to pick out one victim.
They don't succeed, but then they retreat near a police car.
One of them understands the goofy mistake of 4 police hooligans
hiding behind the door of a policecar, and gestures them to move on...
Woohaa! Caught red handed!

 
Last edited:

ib4

Error
Staff
1,910
2,882
257
Look at this.
Here is proof the Dutch police uses provocator agents to stir the soup.

Cops dressed as hooligans, to get a riot starting!

It is in Dutch, but the language doesn't matter.
The images are very clear!

It starts at the right side, between the trees.
At least 5 hooligan cops try to pick out one victim.
They don't succeed, but then they retreat near a police car.
One of them understands the goofy mistake of 4 police hooligans
hiding behind the door of a policecar, and gestures them to move on...
Woohaa! Caught red handed!

I'm not saying your claim is false, I wouldn't put any possibility of turning people on people passed the gov or various agencies...but I do wonder about this new mindset and method people use where we see a video like this, and we label it exactly what we think it is. ex: "LOOK AT THESE PROVOCATEUR AGENTS!!! ITS CLEARLY A SETUP! LOOK SEE HES GOT SHADES ON AND HOPS IN A COP VAN! SEE THIS IS CLEAR PROOF HES THE ANTI-CHRIST!!!"

But when you watch the video, it looks like they are trying to haul someone away and they get outed in the process. If they are undercover agents with a mission to take out truly dangerous people, or as riot training goes, the inciter, then that is what this looks more like. Maybe even if the guy they were trying to haul off, also got in the van with them as if he was with them and not being taken away, then there'd be proof. But just as the video is, and to simply say its a bigger conspiracy...i dont see that proof in this video.

I've seen this a lot lately where people produce some material and say its indefinite proof of their claim...but the truth is, in videos like this, there can be many reasons. Which part of it proves they are there strictly to provoke a more dangerous narrative about the protests and convert a peaceful protest to an angry mob? Even, so, lets say that is exactly what they were doing, if the protesters turn into an angry mob, were they really peaceful protesters to begin with? Or have we also thrown out the discipline factor too where we don't respond to people who want us to get angry because we are better than that...and when we do respond to idiots provoking us, we take responsibility for not having more emotional discipline. If i'm at work and jimmy next to me keeps verbally antagonizing me, and i respond by bashing his skull to a literal pulp with my stapler...you think i'm going to get away with "he kept verbally assaulting me!!!"? Heck no, they are going to think i'm a psychopath.

Please don't respond trying to derail what I'm actually asking here and turn it into what i do or don't support. I'm all for protesting the fucked up system.I fucking hate the justice system and cops too. I'm simply questioning the half ass method many people use not to prove their points. We can't win any kind of war when we are forcing erroneous or opinionated information down peoples throats and calling it fact. That's exactly what the man did to us all these years.
 

Ryan McAury

Investigator
263
54
97
Well, the point is, that policemen aren't recognizable as policemen.
The idea of a uniform is to say: Hey, I am here in the name of the law.
If some civilians charge into a crowd, what else is it, other than a provocation?

The police should always wear a uniform
Just like the military.
If you don't wear a uniform as a soldier, you could be a terrorist or a spy,
and such a bloke deserves to be shot.

Very strange how you react..
Been there, seen it many times.
Me too!
My brother in law is a policeman, and he also hates this method.

And even in this clip, you can see the police shows you they were acting stupid.
That's why one of them started waving his hand to tell the others to move out of the
positon at the police van. :)
 

ib4

Error
Staff
1,910
2,882
257
Well, the point is, that policemen aren't recognizable as policemen.
The idea of a uniform is to say: Hey, I am here in the name of the law.
If some civilians charge into a crowd, what else is it, other than a provocation?

The police should always wear a uniform
Just like the military.
If you don't wear a uniform as a soldier, you could be a terrorist or a spy,
and such a bloke deserves to be shot.

Very strange how you react..
Been there, seen it many times.
Me too!
My brother in law is a policeman, and he also hates this method.

And even in this clip, you can see the police shows you they were acting stupid.
That's why one of them started waving his hand to tell the others to move out of the
positon at the police van. :)
So again, im not trying to get into all that. ill simply say I strongly dislike cops and leave it there.

Now i get it, technically there is no fighting oppressive forces with any kind of moral rule or respect. Oppressors just need to be dismantled by all means necessary because they themselves manipulate the rules to achieve what they want.

I'm questioning this common method we use nowadays where we say "aha! look what i've got! this is proof!" But the proof provided is ultra questionable and shows many outcomes

Take the death of George Floyd for instance. This video shows a guy kneeling on this mans neck while begging for his life and his none of his partners intervening. With this kind of video, you can confidently deduce and say, these guys did not care about this mans life, and are guilty of murder. The video displays this well. There's almost no question about it. Even when you start to break it down, at the very least, they could have responded in some kind of way to him saying he couldn't breath.

But in your situation, this video you provided, its hard to say whats actually happening here and what the intent is of the individuals involved. Without any proof, other than this video, a statement like yours is almost purely conjecture isn't it? You said these guys were caught red handed-- " Cops dressed as hooligans, to get a riot starting! ". You said it seemingly definitive, and I want to know which part of this video says that to you. Which part of this video is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that, that was their intention? As i mentioned before, id understand your response, if the guy they were trying to take away at first, who eventually ran away, was spotted getting into the police van on his own. Then yea, look at this guys, we guys these assholes working together! That didnt happen though.

Again, my point here is, situations like this where material is provided and confidentially called proof when its hard to say what exactly is happening. I mentioned uncovers provided for two possible reasons in my first reply. Another being, and our local department used it here during our protests, providing hidden backup for the uni's within the crowd.

If all of this is going to go over your head, at least just tell me which part of the video, in your opinion, is absolute proof they were there to get a riot cookin? I just want to know how your mind works :D
 

MisterFister

There's a very good chance that I don't care.
3,333
4,978
257
A few torched big box stores and a few dead people is not even a blip on the screen once you idiots put the Marxists in charge.
 
  • 1Agree
Reactions: RebelBuddha

CoprophagousCop

Social Distancing Warrior
Premium
2,525
2,394
357
I just think it is funny how the undercover cops' instinct is to run and hide in the police van when trouble starts.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: ib4

Ryan McAury

Investigator
263
54
97
Well, this thread is about rioting. I just gave a straight forward video clip that shows how violence can start.
It is just one of many examples.
 

Ryan McAury

Investigator
263
54
97
Well.. Yesterday there were riots planned by youngsters in the south. Now the police, including the undercover agents, kept a distance.
Some kids were taken to the police station for throwing some firework. In the Netherlands, that isn't allowed.
The police behaved well, and no riot broke out.
In the south we are more relaxed :)
 

RageAgainst

Chaotic Neutral
7,542
611
507
You can't justify violence.
Incorrect.

Violence in self-defense is one justification. That kind of instantly makes your statement false.

Then there's the case of the American revolution, which was clearly violent, and is clearly considered justified by most of Americans. Same for World War 2. Hell, a lot of people justify US violence in Vietnam and the Middle East to this day. Same with police violence (justified as something necessary).

What you are really saying is not that you can't justify violence. It's that the violence in the specific context you are talking about has no justification. Which is also incorrect, at least because it misses the point. It's not so much about moral justification as it is about human nature. The violent reaction you've seen is a reaction to a collective existential threat (something you'd better understand sooner than later), and it was predictable because non-violent means of resolution have been systematically ignored and rejected.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: BlastemSkyHigh

Canadian Pyro

Postaholic
1,742
122
377
Rage is basically right.

Violence in itself is not like, a super desirable thing that we should be celebrating. It really does seem like the cops care more about a few smashed windows than the people they've killed, though. Which is more violent?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: BlastemSkyHigh

BlastemSkyHigh

The Original Fuck You Bomb
Premium
173
134
68
Well then let me rephrase that,

Violence is one of those epidemics that doesn’t respect limits or borders. Unfortunately, there are many types of justified violence, and you can find it everywhere in the world. From the way that someone asks you for or demands something, to the most bloody wars that take hundreds of lives.
Even if you don’t directly participate in the latter, you are a witness, which affects you on many levels.
Sometimes it seems like we are genetically designed to be aggressive. However, violence (a form of aggressiveness) is cultural.
We learn and reproduce it and, in turn, teach and validate it.
But just as you can learn it, you can unlearn it and stop the cycle.
 

BlastemSkyHigh

The Original Fuck You Bomb
Premium
173
134
68
Well Keyboard warrior,
you could give it your best shot,
but don't be a sniveling little crybaby when I embarrass you in front of your whole family by whooping yer ass like the child predator your moniker states,
and because of that, I would use extreme violence, and maybe, just maybe... if you were lucky, I wouldn't cut yer mini-manhood off and shove it up yer nose.