What do you think of Andy Ngo?

The antifa apologetics are disgusting, honestly. They BURNED DOWN BUILDINGS WITH PEOPLE IN THEM. They dragged people out of their cars and beat them. They beat the subject of this thread so severely he suffered brain damage but apparently none of that counts as "violence towards actual people" because not all people are people to the antifa apologists,

So... is mumsnet alt right now?

Many people are revolted by violence as a tool of silencing. Ngo should be able to say what he likes without getting a beating and brain damage. Do you disagree?

Left wing gender critical women like me should be able voice our opinions without rape and death threats. Perhaps you disagree with that too?

I know literally nothing about Andy Ngo other than his journalism is about Antifa. I’d like to see some proof of his actually being a Nazi before agreeing, as I’ve lurked on this board a long time now and know well how people have been smeared (terf, funded by right-wing fundamentalists etc) to discredit their very important discussions.

Like, Ngo is a literal nazi.

...and you're calling him brave while parroting far right rhetoric. I'm baffled.

You know these people think we should all be housewives, right?

So... is mumsnet alt right now?

Because it looks pretty alt right based on this.

It was only through anti-fascists actively organising to physically confront the violence coming from the far right that this was brought to an end.

That's not true though, is it. Steps forward were made incrementally and peacefully over many decades by many different groups of people. There was no sudden salvation by antifa violence. Racism isn't solved today. It was not brought to an end.

Queer bashing was so common people would only leave LGBT venues in groups and nobody would have dared show same sex affection in public

Queer meant something else then and there was no T on LGB. These days, lesbians are persecuted by extreme left wingers as well as the right.

None of this is relevant to Andy Ngo, whose injuries and persecution remain inexcusable.

The only piece of Andy Ngo's I have read was the one where he came to London and was shocked by the number of Muslims walking around. I haven't bothered with him since that.

Are you for real? Far right and white supremicist groups are now the main terrorist threats in the US and have killed 330 people in the last decade. When the last time an anti-fascist started firing off shots and murdering people in Walmart or massacred young people the way Anders Breivik did.

Yes, the far-right is the bigger terrorism threat in the US; but with rioting and street violence (which can still kill people) then antifa and the far-left may be the bigger threat.

Both of those things are significant issues.

If you think someone chucking a milkshake, or confronting far right violence on the streets is in any way comparable

That's apologist spin. Antifa doesn't merely throw milkshakes or "confront far right violence". What was Andy Ngo doing when he got attacked? He was completely peaceful right?

Some on the far-right are just as hungry for street violence, but antifa will often be starting it. Many events could be peaceful if antifa didn't turn up to attack people. It's not "self defence" unless you want to twist the meaning of that term.

But the DHS is gonna DHS. They have overstated the threat from Islamic terror and now are doing the same for ‘far-right terror’.

The threat is not just from those the far right have murdered, which is a lot of people, but on the influence the far right movements can have on society. When I was growing up almost half of the local Asian shops had to permanently board their windows and were covered in swastika and National Front symbol graffiti. Racist attacks on individuals and businesses were commonplace, left wing meetings were frequently violently attacked, people selling left wing papers often had to have security due to far right violence. The police didn;t give a shit and many were involved themselves in far right groups. Queer bashing was so common people would only leave LGBT venues in groups and nobody would have dared show same sex affection in public, whilst people of colour who attended football matches face an onslaught of racism and potential violence. During all this period the far right held regular street protests to bolster their movements whilst Thatcher's Tory Party and the Tory press, much like today, hyped up the far right with constant press attacks on minorities and diatribes about loony left thugs bent on destroying society.

It was only through anti-fascists actively organising to physically confront the violence coming from the far right that this was brought to an end. That didn't always look pretty, it was rarely perfect, but it was effective and it will sadly no doubt be necessary again.

911 was nearly 20 years ago. In the present day

And? It’s still by far the deadliest terror attack. Especially when your figure of ‘white supremacist terror’ includes the 1994 Oklahoma City bombing figures. More than 20 years ago, correct?

I don’t even think Islamic terror is a big deal in the US (it’s a devastating problem in the Middle East rather). But one needs to put these figures in context.

This, however:

T"he report, published Thursday by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, found that white supremacist groups were responsible for 41 of 61 “terrorist plots and attacks” in the first eight months of this year, or 67 percent

is laughable when you have antifa looting, rioting and burning down buildings all of last year. Basically overshadowed the BLM protests sadly.

But the DHS is gonna DHS. They have overstated the threat from Islamic terror and now are doing the same for ‘far-right terror’.

Antifa never think this will be thrown back in their faces too, but it will once they stop being useful idiots. You don’t think Biden et al are going to tolerate antifa antics for long, do you?

Mask slipping a bit there

What mask? I’m telling you straight that antifa are a known problem that was allowed to fester. They hijacked the BLM riots for their own political purposes and then went looting and rioting. And who’s gonna get the blame? Not those white trust fund kids playing at revolution.

Like, did u forget about 9/11 or the LGBT club shooting in Orlando?

911 was nearly 20 years ago. In the present day ...

T"he report, published Thursday by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, found that white supremacist groups were responsible for 41 of 61 “terrorist plots and attacks” in the first eight months of this year, or 67 percent.

"The finding comes about two weeks after an annual assessment by the Department of Homeland Security warned that violent white supremacy was the “most persistent and lethal threat in the homeland” and that white supremacists were the most deadly among domestic terrorists in recent years."

www.nytimes.com/2020/10/24/us/domestic-terrorist-groups.html

The problem is that they are not firmly dealt with

Mask slipping a bit there.

Are you for real? Far right and white supremicist groups are now the main terrorist threats in the US and have killed 330 people in the last decade

Like, did u forget about 9/11 or the LGBT club shooting in Orlando?

I don’t even consider Islamic terror a major threat in the US but it’s more of a threat than ‘far-right terror’

massacred young people the way Anders Breivik did

You specifically said the US.

begins with demonisation of communists/left wingers/anti-fascists as a violent problem which needs to be firmly dealt with

The problem is that they are not firmly dealt with and that’s why Andy’s coverage is so important.

It’s not. Not even close.

Are you for real? Far right and white supremicist groups are now the main terrorist threats in the US and have killed 330 people in the last decade. When the last time an anti-fascist started firing off shots and murdering people in Walmart or massacred young people the way Anders Breivik did. If you think someone chucking a milkshake, or confronting far right violence on the streets is in any way comparable then I really don't know what to say, except it's pretty clear whose side you'd be on if we ever did face a real threat from the far right here - which always begins with demonisation of communists/left wingers/anti-fascists as a violent problem which needs to be firmly dealt with.

Left wing terrorism - usually based on extreme socialist/Marxist/Communist, anti capitalist anarchism, which would ultimately result in the poorest, most vulnerable people being exploited by a totalitarian state.

Right wing terrorism - Usually promoted by Neo- Nazism, fascism, nationalism, white supremacy (although this could also be black supremacy as in Mugabe's Zimbabwe), aims at overthrowing governments (democracy) and replacing them with nationalist, fascist regimes. Also results in the poorest, most vulnerable people being exploited.

I think Andy Ngo's camera work is very valuable, he's obviously taken great personal risks to get videos of heated situations in the streets. I don't take his word for his written claims, though.

But in terms of violence towards actual people then the threat in the US is from the far/alt right and the violent ideology they pursue

It’s not. Not even close.

And those brave enough to take to the streets and challenge them have historically been vital in preventing far right movements taking hold, even if not always successful

BLM was not protesting against the far-right bogeyman. They were protesting against police brutality.

But in terms of violence towards actual people then the threat in the US is from the far/alt right and the violent ideology they pursue. And those brave enough to take to the streets and challenge them have historically been vital in preventing far right movements taking hold, even if not always successful.

Give me the names of 3 journalists that meet your crtiteria of not being propagandists. Who should I trust according to you?

jj1968 sneering at someone else for being a propagandist could well end up as my MN highlght of the day.

Back to that brain injury, jj1968. Where did it come from?

It is OK to blanket condemn violence. We should be even more concerned about violence perpetrated by our 'own side' in my opinion.

The grovelling apology from Winston Marshall is by far the most chilling and troubling aspect of this.

Thanks for your opinions, it’s hard to get an objective view from the media so it’s very helpful.

Overall OP, you're going to best informed by reading critically from a plurality of sources, even Andy Ngo (shock horror).

And you've never questioned why you saw that? Why things were presented in the right wing media a certain way?

Are you saying the BLM protesters are responsible for property damage?