"anti-facists" face jail

[MellySingsDoom]

Thanks TopCat - I'll get to scribbling then

 

[joemac]

solidarity

 

[Riklet]

Sent them all post-cards from Albania with some german anarcho-sydicalist oddballs i bumped into haha.

Hope it cheered 'em up a bit, n lets them know they are still very much in peoples' thoughts.

 

[Orang Utan]

are they innocent then?

 

[Riklet]

Guilty in what sense? They're in jail...

Hope the german fash are still getting splitting headaches tbh!

 

[Deareg]

are they innocent then?

What has that got to do with anything?

 

[Orang Utan]

people are writing to them in prison and other supportive stuff.
if they are not innocent, then why?

 

[love detective]

jesus fuck

 

[Orang Utan]

what?

 

[butchersapron]

people are writing to them in prison and other supportive stuff.
if they are not innocent, then why?

Because they're guilty.

 

[Orang Utan]

ok, i just don't agree that you should physically attack someone for holding abhorrent views.
i don't think they should be in jail, but i wouldn't condone being all supportive about it either.

 

[past caring]

people are writing to them in prison and other supportive stuff.
if they are not innocent, then why?

Because they're serious about their anti-fascism, perhaps?

 

[past caring]

ok, i just don't agree that you should physically attack someone for holding abhorrent views.
i don't think they should be in jail, but i wouldn't condone being all supportive about it either.

I'm not sure they were attacked for holding abhorrent views - they were attacked for promoting them and acting on them.

 

[past caring]

FFS, what a I doing on here.

 

[Random]

ok, i just don't agree that you should physically attack someone for holding abhorrent views.

Not just for holding views, but for organising to put those views into practise.

 

[Orang Utan]

 

[dylanredefined]

ok, i just don't agree that you should physically attack someone for holding abhorrent views.
i don't think they should be in jail, but i wouldn't condone being all supportive about it either.

If the fascists were on their way to torch a corner shop or some other act it would be easier to justify.Just jumping them on the way to a concert just seems more like thuggery than a political act.

 

[Orang Utan]

that's what i would have thought.
however, i suppose there may be more to the case than has been made public, hence the support

 

[gunneradt]

ok, i just don't agree that you should physically attack someone for holding abhorrent views.
i don't think they should be in jail, but i wouldn't condone being all supportive about it either.

if you attack someone unprovoked then of course you should go to jail. Violence can't be condoned just because you don't agree with their political beliefs.

It'll tarnish the rest of their lives and rightly so

 

[Orang Utan]

nah, you should only go to jail if your presence in society is a constant risk to others' well being.

 

[gunneradt]

nah, you should only go to jail if your presence in society is a constant risk to others' well being.

which theirs obviously is if they randomly attack strangers

 

[DrRingDing]

ok, i just don't agree that you should physically attack someone for holding abhorrent views.

I agree that people can think what they want. But if you're fash and organise or worse you deserve to be fucked over.

 

[butchersapron]

which theirs obviously is if they randomly attack strangers

Which they didn't.

 

[gunneradt]

Which they didn't.

Well it looks like they attacked someone. If it was unprovoked ie their victims had done nothing to provoke them, then they are as guilty as charged. Beliefs are not an excuse for violence in any shape or form.

 

[butchersapron]

Well it looks like they attacked someone. If it was unprovoked ie their victims had done nothing to provoke them, then they are as guilty as charged. Beliefs are not an excuse for violence in any shape or form.

You said "if they randomly attack strangers" with the implication that they did. Did they?

 

[gunneradt]

You said "if they randomly attack strangers" with the implication that they did. Did they?

...according to the newspaper report they did. A stranger is someone you have no acquaintance with or who has no acquaintance with you. It was unprovoked.

It's no different to randomly attacking someone on the way home from the pub because you've had a few too many.

 

[butchersapron]

...according to the newspaper report they did. A stranger is someone you have no acquaintance with or who has no acquaintance with you. It was unprovoked.

It's no different to randomly attacking someone on the way home from the pub because you've had a few too many.

That's your 'stranger' thing? Grow up.

Did they

randomly attack strangers"

Yes/no.

 

[gunneradt]

That's your 'stranger' thing? Grow up.

Did they

Yes/no.

I'm not the one condoning random acts of violence. It matters not. They're where they belong anyhow.

 

[DrRingDing]

I'm not the one condoning random acts of violence.

No one is.

 

[butchersapron]

I'm not the one condoning random acts of violence. It matters not. They're where they belong anyhow.

Did they, as you claim

randomly attack strangers"

yes/no?