Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    04 Oct '17 09:01
    500 Nazis.

    20,000 anti Nazis

    "The Nazi demonstration in Gothenburg, never even started. The Nordic Resistance Movement was stopped before reaching its permitted assembly point. Instead of Nazis, counter-demonstrators took over Gothenburg's closed streets."

    http://www.socialistworld.net/index.php/international/europe/77-sweden/9462-sweden-a-milestone-in-the-fight-against-nazism

    Gothenburg, September 30, 2017 already marks a milestone in Sweden's anti-racist history. Weeks of boasting and threats from the Nazi "Nordic Resistance Movement" (NMR) ended in them not even reaching their assembly point. Instead they were surrounded for several hours before finally sneaking back to a car park to leave Gothenburg with 35 arrested Nazis less.

    Days and hours before the demo the media acted shamelessly in alliance with the police against alleged left-wing extremists in order to scare away all those who wanted to demonstrate against racism. Liberals and right-wingers made endless speeches in favour of the Nazis’ right to "free speech", declaring demonstrations against Nazi marches as counter-productive...

    Up to 20,000 people turned up and stopped the Nazi march. Banners such as "Railway Workers Against Racism", "Tram Workers Against Nazism", "Students Against Racism", and "Folk Musicians Against Racism" alongside the Teachers Union banners were all around the field. There were also dock workers, council workers, tenants’ association activists. Yes! There were all kinds of anti-racists.

    This is what happens when Nazis are given "permission" to try to abolish freedom of expression for everyone else. We have to act to stop them; and we did! A terrorist organisation like NMR - that used lethal bombs against two refugee camps and a syndicalist office here in Gothenburg last winter - should definitely not be allowed to march and abolish everyone's safety.

    ...The Gothenburg police, plus 1,000 extra police officers from other parts of the country, guarded the Nazis and their planned march route.
  2. Standard member shavixmir
    Guppy poo
    04 Oct '17 09:13
    Originally posted by @finnegan
    500 Nazis.

    20,000 anti Nazis

    "The Nazi demonstration in Gothenburg, never even started. The Nordic Resistance Movement was stopped before reaching its permitted assembly point. Instead of Nazis, counter-demonstrators took over Gothenburg's closed streets."

    http://www.socialistworld.net/index.php/international/europe/77-sweden/9462-sweden-a-milest ...[text shortened]... olice officers from other parts of the country, guarded the Nazis and their planned march route.
    Excellent!

    Warms the heart.
  3. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    04 Oct '17 21:37
    Originally posted by @shavixmir
    Excellent!

    Warms the heart.
    Too bad they couldn't have guided the Nazi's into a recently completed sinkhole.....Say about 1000 meters deep.
  4. 04 Oct '17 22:58 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @sonhouse to Shavixmir
    Too bad they couldn't have guided the Nazi's into a recently completed sinkhole.....Say about 1000 meters deep.
    Sonhouse, please don't imply that the world would be better off with these Nazis.
    RHP could ban you (and hypocritical trolls here condemn you) for such an implication!
  5. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    05 Oct '17 13:05 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    Sonhouse, please don't imply that the world would be better off with these Nazis.
    RHP could ban you (and hypocritical trolls here condemn you) for such an implication!
    So consider the opposite, is the world a better place WITH these Nazi's here? If all they do is protest, nothing illegal there. But if they start again with the killing of Jews, what do we do, just nail them in court while yet another bunch goes after other Jews? Do we even know the ultimate goal or motivation of this latest batch? If they want all Jews dispossessed and continue with that goal, what then? Surely it would mean more killing.
    Didn't we go through enough of that in WW2?

    They are white supremacists. Maybe we could put all the Nazi's and the rest of the white supremacist lot in a big cage with all the Jihadists......
  6. 05 Oct '17 18:59 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by @sonhouse
    So consider the opposite, is the world a better place WITH these Nazi's here? If all they do is protest, nothing illegal there. But if they start again with the killing of Jews, what do we do, just nail them in court while yet another bunch goes after other Jews? Do we even know the ultimate goal or motivation of this latest batch? If they want all Jews di ...[text shortened]... the Nazi's and the rest of the white supremacist lot in a big cage with all the Jihadists......
    My point is that some hypocritical trolls (white men) here like to pretend that it's *always* wrong
    to express the sentiment that the world would be better without some people--white men like
    themselves--while they evidently have no objection to some writers here expressing their
    approval of the genocide of some non-people (such as Muslims).

    (Based upon his record, Sonhouse seems to care most about the approval of his fellow white American men.)

    I would add that white racial supremacists have no legitimate historical grievances while
    'jihadists' vary in their history and motives and many of them have understandable grievances.
    In reality, many Muslims have been recently or still are being oppressed or killed,
    ranging from (generally secular) Muslims in Bosnia to the Rohingya in Myanmar today.
    So it's understandable that many Muslims would prefer to put a religious interpretation
    (rather than the secular one that I would prefer) upon their resistance to oppression.

    Osama bin Laden cited five areas where he believed that Muslims were being oppressed.
    1) Bosnia: Muslims being killed and oppressed (including 'rape camps' ) mostly by Serbs.
    2) Palestine: Muslims being killed and oppressed by Israel
    3) Chechnya: Muslims being killed and oppressed by the USSR and then Russia
    4) Kashmir: Muslims being killed and oppressed by India.
    5) East Timor: Indonesian Muslims allegedly being unfairly defamed by Westerners.

    Osama bin Laden was completely wrong *only* about the case of East Timor (a former Portuguese colony).
    Indonesia (the world's most populous Muslim country) invaded East Timor (after Portugal withdrew)
    and waged a near genocidal campaign of conquest against its almost completely Catholic people.
    For years, the USA and other Western powers condoned (by selling arms) what Indonesia
    was doing to East Timor because Suharto was a favorite right-wing client dictator of the USA.

    So Osama bin Laden was completely wrong about East Timor (where Indonesian Muslims
    were the oppressors), but he was generally right in claiming that Muslims were being
    oppressed in Bosnia, Palestine, Chechnya, and Kashmir.

    Why should a Muslim not at least consider 'jihad' as a course of action after noticing the West's
    general indifference to the Serb nationalist massacre of 8000+ Muslims at Srebrenica?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srebrenica_massacre
  7. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    06 Oct '17 12:16 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    My point is that some hypocritical trolls (white men) here like to pretend that it's *always* wrong
    to express the sentiment that the world would be better without some people--white men like
    themselves--while they evidently have no objection to some writers here expressing their
    approval of the genocide of some non-people (such as Muslims).

    (Based ...[text shortened]... list massacre of 8000+ Muslims at Srebrenica?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srebrenica_massacre
    There seems to be no talking to you. Sorry I ventured an opinion and your own bias against whites will make you reject any claim I think it totally wrong for any massacre, Muslim or otherwise. Like the Armenian massacre. I think it better if I refrain from saying anythiing in response to anything you write. Have a good life. It really sucks being called a hypocritical craven fool when all but two of my own kids are not white and we have fought the locals over racial prejudice for 30 years. We are pursuing a libel case against the local police who are as racist as white supremacists can be and one of our non-white sons was severely beaten by those cops for daring to ask if he had a warrrent to come into our home, where he was grabbed from inside our house and beaten. So label me racist then. What a joke to think you ever could have been a friend,
  8. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    06 Oct '17 18:12
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4qGLDkK9TA

    Existence is futile (so we don't engage).

    It's not up to us to make this a better land.
  9. 06 Oct '17 23:35
    Originally posted by @sonhouse
    There seems to be no talking to you. Sorry I ventured an opinion and your own bias against whites will make you reject any claim I think it totally wrong for any massacre, Muslim or otherwise. Like the Armenian massacre. I think it better if I refrain from saying anythiing in response to anything you write. Have a good life. It really sucks being called a ...[text shortened]... use and beaten. So label me racist then. What a joke to think you ever could have been a friend,
    Again, Sonhouse has a long persistent record of sexist harassment (which my trolls admire) of me.

    For many months, Sonhouse has sent PMs to me, demanding my 'friendship' and that
    that I take a strong interest in his personal life (which is fascinating to him but not to me).
    At least several times, I politely explained that I cannot give him the relationship that he demands,
    but Sonhouse kept refusing to take 'No' as an answer. Indeed, like other 'stalkers',
    Sonhouse apparently misconstrued any response by me as encouragement of his
    personal advances toward me, which always have been unsolicited and unwelcome.

    One woman (who occasionally writes in this forum) noticed enough of Sonhouse's posts at me.
    She condemned Sonhouse as a 'creep' who obviously was 'stalking' me and suggested
    that I should report Sonhouse's persistent unwelcome advances as abuse to RHP.

    I have to say that Sonhouse's, at best, a fool, who laps up the often racist propaganda of the US media.
    While the atheist Sonhouse, claims to loathe all religions, as a white American man, he prefers
    to single out Muslims in particular for demonization, drawing the applause of racist Americans.
    I never have noticed Sonhouse to take or, at least, to keep asserting any position that
    would arouse the hostility of the overwhelming majority of other white American men here.
    (Even though I think that his views tend to be wrong, at least Metal Brain, for instance,
    is not afraid to take an unpopular position like supporting the DPRK, which would offend
    the overwhelming majority of his fellow Americans.)

    Sonhouse disingenuously attempts to excuse his craven behavior by claiming that some
    of his children are not white and have experienced racism, as though it were impossible
    for a person to oppose racism against one group and approve of it against another group.
    Indeed, Normbenign (who was one of the most notorious racists at RHP) claimed that he
    married a black woman and had 'mixed race' (half-black and half-white) children with her.
    Would the racist white Americans here really buy this kind of "There are non-white people
    in my family, therefore I cannot have any racial prejudices" argument?

    Sonhouse keeps showing that he's unworthy of my respect, let alone of my friendship.
  10. Subscriber kmax87
    You've got Kevin
    07 Oct '17 00:46
    Originally posted by @shavixmir
    Excellent!

    Warms the heart.
    You just got to love the northern blonde, blue eyed people!
  11. Standard member Ghost of a Duke
    Zen Master
    07 Oct '17 17:50 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    Again, Sonhouse has a long persistent record of sexist harassment (which my trolls admire) of me.

    For many months, Sonhouse has sent PMs to me, demanding my 'friendship' and that
    that I take a strong interest in his personal life (which is fascinating to him but not to me).
    At least several times, I politely explained that I cannot give him the relat ...[text shortened]... rgument?

    Sonhouse keeps showing that he's unworthy of my respect, let alone of my friendship.
    I've never read so much nonsense. Sonhouse is one of the nicest and respectful people in these forums.

    Personally, i find your statement "my point is that some hypocritical trolls (white men)" to be profoundly racist on your part actually making you a far more likely candidate to be banned.

    Edit - Before you respond by calling me a racist troll, please remember I have never uttered a racist remark in these forums or any other. Highlighting your racism doesn't make me a racist. It really doesn't.
  12. 07 Oct '17 19:32 / 5 edits
    Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
    I've never read so much nonsense. Sonhouse is one of the nicest and respectful people in these forums.

    Personally, i find your statement "my point is that some hypocritical trolls (white men)" to be profoundly racist on your part actually making you a far more likely candidate to be banned.

    Edit - Before you respond by calling me a racist trol ...[text shortened]... these forums or any other. Highlighting your racism doesn't make me a racist. It really doesn't.
    Ghost of a Duke shows his willful blindness to the facts, at best, or his eagerness to dishonestly distort them.
    Ghost of a Duke shows his abysmal ignorance of the persistent harasser, Sonhouse,
    whom he's eager to support on account of his own prejudices.

    Although I have *not* saved most of Sonhouse's many PMs over the years demanding
    my 'friendship' in persistent harassing terms--even after I made it clear that I have no interest--but
    Sonhouse's most recent *unsolicited* PM remains in my Inbox. Does Ghost of a Duke want to read it?

    To his relative credit, even Sonhouse has *not* yet attempted to deny that for years he
    has persistently written posts and sent me *unsolicited* PMs demanding my 'friendship'.
    I always have replied that I have no interest in a personal relationship with Sonhouse.

    Even some men who apparently loathe me have noticed over the years that Sonhouse
    was keen on acquiring some 'friendship' with me. As I recall, these men denounced
    Sonhouse on occasion for what they perceived as his 'white knighting' me.
    (For instance, Sonhouse has written that I obviously am 'profound' as a thinker.
    I claim only that I avoid more of the obvious errors that other writers here tend to make.)

    In fact, Flower04 (a German woman in the USA, who decided to quit RHP in 2016) sent
    me PMs asking if I was OK after she noticed enough posts by Sonhouse 'stalking' (her word) me.
    'What a creep!', she wrote of Sonhouse, denouncing his campaign of sexist harassment.
    She offered her support if I decided to report Sonhouse for abuse to RHP.

    "The forum hell - which has been in the hands of trolls for many years - is just another reason to leave."
    --Flower04 (28 June 2016)

    To sum up, there's ample evidence (which Ghost of a Duke may prefer to ignore) that
    Sonhouse has persistently sought a 'friendship' with me after I have said 'No' to him.
    Ghost of a Duke may admire that behavior; women tend to regard it as harassment.

    Now Ghost of a Duke may object that Sonhouse never has treated him as he has treated me.
    I have no doubt that Roger Ailes could claim to have many male friends who never complained
    about being sexually harassed by him, but enough of his female employees did complain--eventually--
    (after suffering in silence for years) for their grievances to be regarded as credible.
    Roger Ailes might have been a 'great guy' with other men in the locker room, but some
    women have reasons to perceive him very differently. And even if Roger Ailes had
    harassed only one woman, it's still wrong and inexcusable.

    Now I don't claim (I have no knowledge of how Sonhouse treats women in general) that
    Sonhouse's as prolific in his harassment as Roger Ailes evidently was, but Ghost of a Duke's ignorant
    or dishonest defense of Sonhouse is another example of knee-jerk male solidarity in such cases.
  13. Subscriber kmax87
    You've got Kevin
    07 Oct '17 20:24
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    Ghost of a Duke shows his willful blindness to the facts, at best, or his eagerness to dishonestly distort them.
    Ghost of a Duke shows his abysmal ignorance of the persistent harasser, Sonhouse,
    whom he's eager to support on account of his own prejudices.

    Although I have *not* saved most of Sonhouse's many PMs over the years demanding
    my 'friendsh ...[text shortened]...
    or dishonest defense of Sonhouse is another example of knee-jerk male solidarity in such cases.
    And this informs the debate on how a Nazi March was swamped by good upstanding Scandanavians exactly how? Apart from turning this into another referendum on your right to make this about you?
  14. 07 Oct '17 20:33 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by @kmax87
    And this informs the debate on how a Nazi March was swamped by good upstanding Scandanavians exactly how?
    Apart from turning this into another referendum on your right to make this about you?
    Kmax87 shows more of his hypocrisy or ignorance.
    Kmax87 fails to notice, at best, that I *replied directly to a personal attack* by Ghost of a Duke (page 1, post 11),
    who apparently was eager to deny that I could ever have been harassed by Sonhouse.
    The hypocritical Kmax87 prefers *not* to criticize Ghost of a Duke for writing off-topic.

    As far as I can tell, even Sonhouse has *not* disputed that he has acted (writing many
    posts and sending many PMs demanding my 'friendship' ) as I have described, though
    he might choose to deny (along with troll allies like Ghost of a Duke) that it's harassment.

    There's a male common culture of at least condoning, if not actively approving, of sexist harassment.
  15. Standard member Ghost of a Duke
    Zen Master
    07 Oct '17 20:37
    Originally posted by @duchess64
    Kmax87 fails to notice, at best, that I *replied directly to a personal attack* by Ghost of a Duke (page 1, post 11),
    who apparently was eager to deny that I could ever have been harassed by Sonhouse.
    The hypocritical Kmax87 prefers *not* to criticize Ghost of a Duke for writing off-topic.

    As far as I can tell, even Sonhouse has *not* disputed that h ...[text shortened]... ough
    he may choose to deny (along with troll allies like Ghost of a Duke) that it's harassment.
    You view my post as a personal attack?!

    That is even less believable than someone 'demanding' a friendship by PM.