Women protesting Donald Trump

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 4:25 am

https://youtu.be/S1eb9vQ1vAk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Are these the black block anarchists you mentioned Charlie?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 4:58 am

No. But since i'm sure your enquiry is in good faith (lol) i'll inform you (once again) that black bloc anarchists typically are dressed in all black with black face coverings. If you scroll backwards a page or two you can find a post full of examples of black bloc anarchists posted by Moffitt. Of course, he mistakenly thought they were just protesters turning violent but i'm sure you can see that that isn't the case.

I don't know who that guy was in your video, but i am aware of The Rebel and it's antagonistic style. Not only that but the guy hits the camera, not the reporter, i think we both know why she's lying. Not that that excuses his actions of course and i'm sure charges will be pressed for assaulting a camera (or criminal damage).

This is kinda of what The Rebel and people like you do, you find one guy among thousands and try to make everyone think that he is typical and that his actions are typical of everyone else there. You probably don't know, nor care, that The Rebel will likely have been there for hours on end trying to antagonise one idiot into doing exactly that so that they can share the video among their viewers and reinforce their narrative that violent, leftist thugs are trying to silence them, when really out of hours of effort they were only able to provoke one guy.

Hopefully he'll turn himself in, or be caught, because as far as i'm concerned it was as much a crime to give cretins like these what they want as it was to vandalise someone's camera.

You'll have to grapple with the question of why that woman lied about being hit when he clearly hit the camera that she wasn't holding. But i'll remain content in the knowledge that that guy is the anomaly in a crowd of otherwise good and peaceful protesters, and that i look down on him almost as much as i do on people like you.

He'll be arrested and cautioned/charged assuming the preceeding few minutes of footage don't offer some kind of justification(not sure how), which is what should happen in a civilised society such ad Canada. I assume you knew this was in Canada, right? Not Washington where those anarchists were trying to riot? Maybe you didn't. Maybe it didn't matter to you, because this proves we're all violent, hateful bastards, right?

(On thinking about it a bit more the guy is looking up at the camera when he hits it, and then down when he's addressing the woman claiming to be hit in the face when he hits the camera. How did that happen? Was she levitating?

It's so obvious that she's full of ****.)

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:48 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:No. But since i'm sure your enquiry is in good faith (lol) i'll inform you (once again) that black bloc anarchists typically are dressed in all black with black face coverings. If you scroll backwards a page or two you can find a post full of examples of black bloc anarchists posted by Moffitt. Of course, he mistakenly thought they were just protesters turning violent but i'm sure you can see that that isn't the case.

I don't know who that guy was in your video, but i am aware of The Rebel and it's antagonistic style. Not only that but the guy hits the camera, not the reporter, i think we both know why she's lying. Not that that excuses his actions of course and i'm sure charges will be pressed for assaulting a camera (or criminal damage).

This is kinda of what The Rebel and people like you do, you find one guy among thousands and try to make everyone think that he is typical and that his actions are typical of everyone else there. You probably don't know, nor care, that The Rebel will likely have been there for hours on end trying to antagonise one idiot into doing exactly that so that they can share the video among their viewers and reinforce their narrative that violent, leftist thugs are trying to silence them, when really out of hours of effort they were only able to provoke one guy.

Hopefully he'll turn himself in, or be caught, because as far as i'm concerned it was as much a crime to give cretins like these what they want as it was to vandalise someone's camera.

You'll have to grapple with the question of why that woman lied about being hit when he clearly hit the camera that she wasn't holding. But i'll remain content in the knowledge that that guy is the anomaly in a crowd of otherwise good and peaceful protesters, and that i look down on him almost as much as i do on people like you.

He'll be arrested and cautioned/charged assuming the preceeding few minutes of footage don't offer some kind of justification(not sure how), which is what should happen in a civilised society such ad Canada. I assume you knew this was in Canada, right? Not Washington where those anarchists were trying to riot? Maybe you didn't. Maybe it didn't matter to you, because this proves we're all violent, hateful bastards, right?

(On thinking about it a bit more the guy is looking up at the camera when he hits it, and then down when he's addressing the woman claiming to be hit in the face when he hits the camera. How did that happen? Was she levitating? It's so obvious that she's full of ****.)

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/twitchy.co ... tmobile-gb" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Black block anarchists?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:57 am

Damo wrote:https://www.google.co.uk/amp/twitchy.co ... tmobile-gb
Black block anarchists?

Are you having trouble identifying colours?

morpheus2 · Post by **morpheus2** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 7:30 am

Imploding Turtle wrote: (On thinking about it a bit more the guy is looking up at the camera when he hits it, and then down when he's addressing the woman claiming to be hit in the face when he hits the camera. How did that happen? Was she levitating? It's so obvious that she's full of ****.)

The camera was on a tripod, he hit the camera against her face....surely can't have been that difficult to figure out?
But I suppose when you're on the defensive you'll see what you want to see whatever side of the fence you're on.

morpheus2 · Post by **morpheus2** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:15 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:I was actually wrong to admit a mistake since as it turns out i was right.

Trump promised to change the GOP party platform on abortion. Here he is on video being interviewed and specifically being asked about changing the Republican platform to include exceptions for rape, incest, and for the life of the mother. He says he will "absolutely" do that. (edit: the interviewer even specifically asks about the passage of text i quote below)

Was looking at the comments section in the link Turtle provided, some of the comments from the fundie Christians are hilarious.....or terrifying if they are empowered, there's some sheer lunacy on there, the evil that religion is capable of programming in a grown person is very, very scary.

HiroshimaClaret · Post by **HiroshimaClaret** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:47 am

At least all their husbands and boyfriends could have a day off from their constant whining.

Clareting · Post by **Clareting** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:49 am

Trump supporter gets hair set alight. Women's March where certain women aren't welcome.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=avkdMoZn18Q" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Falcon · Post by **Falcon** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:56 am

Just a reminder to everyone that peaceful protest is a hallmark of ours and America's democracy. Trump himself said as much on Twitter last night.

The vast, vast majority of these protestors did so peacefully. As ever with this type of thing, the odd nutcase lets themselves down, but some of the things I've seen and heard said about the protestors as a whole have been grossly unfair.

SmudgetheClaret · Post by **SmudgetheClaret** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:40 pm

I can really understand their outrage because Hilary and Bill have always treated women with the upmost respect havent they ??

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:47 pm

I really, really, really didn't want to comment on any of this but ffs lads eh?

I get the distinct impression that "equality" isn't that important to some of you. or that its taken a long time and a lot of sacrifices from a lot of people to get where we are today.

That that might be eroded by a bunch of men with outdated ideas is why they are in force on the streets, and quite rightly too.

Reb · Post by **Reb** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:56 pm

Most of the responses on this thread illustrate why we woman protested and why I took part in a march that expressed our discomfort with the politics of misogeny and hate. It was a peaceful way to show how we feel, not hi-jacked by political activists, just 100,000 people saying out loud how we feel. As one of the placards near me said "I can't believe we are still having to protest this ****". From looking at the views on this thread I think that unfortunately we will have to protest this **** for a lot longer.

sanah · Post by **sanah** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:57 pm

I don’t understand what these feminists were protesting about. Trump has repeatedly expressed support for Planned Parenthood in terms of women’s health care which he vowed many times during the campaign to protect. If it is about Roe v Wade and the appointment of conservative judges, he is not the only Republican president who has promised his base while campaigning to do the same thing. Why didn’t these massive feminist protests take place when previous pro-life candidates like George Bush came into office? These protests do not seem to make any sense at all. And I get the sense that they are being engineered by the Washington and Wall-street establishment who see Trump as a threat.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:59 pm

I think the fundamentalist Christian argument is overdone here. I have known women who are not Christian at all, who are still convinced that the organism growing inside them is a "baby". I never tried to convince them they are wrong, because it is a pretty widespread view.

It's actually a fairly short step from believing that a foetus is a "baby", to saying you shouldn't kill "babies". If you believe that killing babies is wrong, then by all means oppose abortion. If you believe that killing babies is wrong but abortion is right, then you need to re-educate the people who believe they are pregnant with a "baby".

It's not just a Christian thing, though the sanctity of human life is one of the things Christians go for. Rightly or wrongly.

Reb · Post by **Reb** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:03 pm

" Grab them by the pussy - you can do anything to them" - that one line in itself should surely by repulsive to anyone who has mothers, sisters and daughters - or is that your view of women as well?

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:05 pm

Millions of women voted for Trump, far more than protested. This is fascism at it's worst, it's making out that women are a collective and that they all share the same political views.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:11 pm

Pretty sure even the neo-nazi ones wouldn't fancy being grabbed by the pussy.

FCBurnley · Post by **FCBurnley** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:14 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:I trust you'll retract this since i've been able to show that I was originally right.

So do we assume you are now left ?

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:30 pm

Pstotto wrote:Millions of women voted for Trump, far more than protested. This is fascism at it's worst, it's making out that women are a collective and that they all share the same political views.

Worse than the Holocaust? It's not fascism at all, let alone "at its worst".

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:36 pm

DSR, it is the mechanics of fascism at it's worst i.e. politically hijacking half the population and claiming to be representative of them, it is a media usurpation, utterly userious of women, in fact and a far bigger insult to them, AS THAT, than anything Donald Trump has ever said.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:56 pm

morpheus2 wrote:The camera was on a tripod, he hit the camera against her face....surely can't have been that difficult to figure out?
But I suppose when you're on the defensive you'll see what you want to see whatever side of the fence you're on.

Was she also on a tripod? And what am i being defensive about?

WadingInDeeper · Post by **WadingInDeeper** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:09 pm

What baffles me is why wait until now. Why were they not protesting like this in the previous 8 years, under the nice Mr Obama, when the US still had one of the worst records for maternity rights.

Why not protest earlier in countries where they have even stricter laws on abortions, why not a world wide protest about women's rights in countries like Saudi Arabia or Pakistan etc?

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:29 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:White, straight men have nothing to worry about

This has to be one of my favourite posts ever.

Thank you Lancaster.

Guich · Post by **Guich** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 4:47 pm

As he was elected democratically under a system approved by his own organisation, but is systematically dismantling the Labour Party as a credible opposition, why have there not been protests about Jeremy Corbyn? I know an awful lot of ex Labour voters who are heartbroken and horrified so why haven't they taken to the streets?

I'm coming to the conclusion that the protesters represent the left more than they do women as it's only the (liberal) left that ever seems to protest. Mrs G says women's rights protests and aggressive feminism, as well as positive discrimination in recruitment, generally hinder the cause of women, and allow true sexism to thrive while everyone else worries about what they are saying. I think she once voted Tory though.

I'm making the tea btw as I'm working at home and she's a crap cook.

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:49 pm

THE bullshit word of the century: equality. We are not a clone species.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:54 pm

But you are agreeing that people deserve to be treated equally, regardless of race, religion or gender?

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:57 pm

What do you mean 'treated equally?' Who is this 'treater'?

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:04 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:But you are agreeing that people deserve to be treated equally, regardless of race, religion or gender?

Are people not treated equally, regardless of race, religion or gender?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:17 pm

Exactly what I wrote.

You either believe in equality, or you don't

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:21 pm

What a prat you are, Lancaster, 'believing in equality'? What the hell are you on about, what generic fantasy are you on?

HatfieldClaret · Post by **HatfieldClaret** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:40 pm

Don't worry Lancaster, if someone can't work out what equality means, don't bother trying to explain it.

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 7:42 pm

Hatfield, you're in the prat group, too, yeah? You've both been in the toilets together busily comparing notes about the size of your dicks and you've decided all men are equal, yeah? Are going to chop an inch or two off, if not?

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 7:44 pm

You both have identical size houses and cars, both wear the same shoes and undies, both have identical brains i.e. you both tune into Victoria Derbyshire every morning and think you know where it's at? Ho ho ho, jerks.

DCWat · Post by **DCWat** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 7:57 pm

I'm not quite sure what point you are trying to make here, Pstotto.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:00 pm

I think the point he's making is that the discussion is a little bit over his head.

ontario claret · Post by **ontario claret** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:12 pm

It was supposed to be "Women's Day". The direct connection to Trump is more convenient, I think. Obviously, the organization has taken a long, long time. If Hillary had won, it would have become a celebration of her. She didn't, and I'm beginning to think more and more that that was good thing.

ontario claret · Post by **ontario claret** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:14 pm

Actually, what Trump is proposing is that women lay down in their rice fields, have the kid, and get immediately back to work, while breast-feeding. It works in Vietnam, so why not in America?

ontario claret · Post by **ontario claret** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:16 pm

And why are you all on here, while you should be discussing that ridiculous Arsenal game yesterday?

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:25 pm

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/m.mic.co ... tmobile-gb" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Now look what's happened

Clareting · Post by **Clareting** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:29 pm

A message to non feminist women

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hlidu1UoWyA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HatfieldClaret · Post by **HatfieldClaret** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:30 pm

Pstotto wrote:You both have identical size houses and cars, both wear the same shoes and undies, both have identical brains i.e. you both tune into Victoria Derbyshire every morning and think you know where it's at? Ho ho ho, jerks.

You might have something there, we've never been seen in the same room at the same time apparently. We are one and the same....

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:57 pm

I will treat you equally, then. Sod off!

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 9:03 pm

(Checks he's logged in as Lancaster, rather than Hatfield)

Taken in the spirit that it was intended!

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 9:31 pm

I never liked Hatfield In The North, anyway, I thought they were a rubbish pop group...

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:34 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:Exactly what I wrote.

You either believe in equality, or you don't

It's the nuance of your argument that makes it so persuasive.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Tue Jan 24, 2017 1:45 am

Trump has reinstated the 'global gag rule' that bans American federal funding for any organisation anywhere in the world that even discusses abortion.