Anti-Semitic White-Nationalist Stephen Bannon Co-Wrote Trump's Inauguration Speech - Polidicks

[QUOTE=sgman91;51711607]Give me like your top 5 white supremacist Breitbart articles. It should be pretty easy if they're a "white supremacist publication" and they publish articles every day.[/QUOTE] is a false article propagating false news not something worthy of you not supporting said source anymore

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51711629]is a false article propagating false news not something worthy of you not supporting said source anymore[/QUOTE] I already said they're a bad news source, but being a bad sensationalist source is very different than being a "white supremacist publication." He's essentially saying that they're on par with white supremacist groups like the KKK. That's a pretty massive claim that should demand a large amount of evidence. A few questionably insensitive articles aren't nearly enough.

[QUOTE=Crazy Ivan;51711503][longpost about not posting sources][/QUOTE] posting sources are for your own benefit so that you can better convince everyone else who reads your posts when using a public forum to converse. remember: the opinion of the audience is more important than that of the person you are discussing with

[QUOTE=sgman91;51711607]Give me like your top 5 white supremacist Breitbart articles. It should be pretty easy if they're a "white supremacist publication" and they publish articles every day.[/QUOTE] [url=http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/05/15/bill-kristol-republican-spoiler-renegade-jew/]One.[/url] [url=http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/01/03/dortmund-mob-attack-police-church-alight/]Two.[/url] [url=http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/03/22/polling-muslims-in-the-west-increasingly-sympathise-with-extremism-terror/]Three.[/url] [url=http://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2016/07/26/geller-muslim-migrants-devastate-community/]Four.[/url] [url=http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/06/15/roger-stone-huma-abedin-most-likely-saudi-spy/]Five.[/url] No, not a site of extremist bigots at all. Ya got me.

[QUOTE=archangel125;51711725][url=http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/05/15/bill-kristol-republican-spoiler-renegade-jew/]One.[/url] [url=http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/01/03/dortmund-mob-attack-police-church-alight/]Two.[/url] [url=http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/03/22/polling-muslims-in-the-west-increasingly-sympathise-with-extremism-terror/]Three.[/url] [url=http://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2016/07/26/geller-muslim-migrants-devastate-community/]Four.[/url] [url=http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/06/15/roger-stone-huma-abedin-most-likely-saudi-spy/]Five.[/url] No, not a site of extremist bigots at all. Ya got me.[/QUOTE] Only the first and last one seem kinda "white supremacist" to me, while the others are just your usual republican drivel, which is nothing to get scared about

[QUOTE=Pops;51711616]ADL also thinks Pepe is a racist symbol. they're wrong at times.[/QUOTE] [quote]The majority of uses of Pepe the Frog have been, and continue to be, non-bigoted. However, it was inevitable that, as the meme proliferated in on-line venues such as 4chan, 8chan, and Reddit, which have many users who delight in creating racist memes and imagery, a subset of Pepe memes would come into existence that centered on racist, anti-Semitic or other bigoted themes. [/quote] They are spot on about pepe and even if they weren't your post is faulty inductive reasoning.

Thanks. You posted all the ones that I assumed you would post. [QUOTE=archangel125;51711725][URL="http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/05/15/bill-kristol-republican-spoiler-renegade-jew/"]One.[/URL][/QUOTE] Honestly, how is this white supremacist? It's written by an out and proud Jew about how Bill Kristol is going against Jewish interests by supporting political candidates who are against Israel. You're welcome to disagree, but how can you possibly argue it's white supremacist? It literally has nothing to do with it. You got this off a website without actually reading it, didn't you? [QUOTE][URL="http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/01/03/dortmund-mob-attack-police-church-alight/"]Two.[/URL][/QUOTE] Again, how is this white supremacist? AT BEST, it's anti-Islamic, but really, it's just sensationalism and an unjustified stretching of the truth. [QUOTE][URL="http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/03/22/polling-muslims-in-the-west-increasingly-sympathise-with-extremism-terror/"]Three.[/URL][/QUOTE] Here's the opening paragraph: "On the back of the Brussels terror attack it is worthwhile remembering that while a majority of Muslims in the West appear to have no truck with terrorism or extremism, there are a significant number who sympathise with terrorism and repeatedly attempt to justify attacks on the West." It then goes through a bunch of studies that show how there are some issues with the Islamic population of western countries, like 20 percent of UK Muslims have sympathy for the 7/7 bomber. They quote the source which says exactly that. Again, where's the part that argues that white people are superior to non white people (aka. white supremacist language)? [QUOTE][URL="http://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2016/07/26/geller-muslim-migrants-devastate-community/"]Four.[/URL][/QUOTE] An article about a specific town that is have a lot of issues with Muslims migrants. Again, even if you disagree with the content, where's the white supremacy? [QUOTE][URL="http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/06/15/roger-stone-huma-abedin-most-likely-saudi-spy/"]Five.[/URL][/QUOTE] This is an interview with Roger Stone. Politico also did an article on it: [URL]http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/roger-stone-huma-abedin-terrorist-agent-224261[/URL] Are they also white supremacists? Please don't say I'm ignoring your evidence because I directly responded to each one. None of these are white supremacist. You might disagree with them. You might think they aren't fair, but AT MOST they show that Breitbart isn't a fan of Muslims. I have a feeling you didn't actually read any of these. You went to Google, picked them off a list from some left-wing site, and posted them.

M-Murica?

[QUOTE=AaronM202;51711288]Can someone catch me up to speed on who Stephen Bannon is and why he's bad?[/QUOTE] badically a neonazi wrote a speech that sounded very hitlarian

[QUOTE=Sableye;51711926]badically a neonazi wrote a speech that sounded very hitlarian[/QUOTE] This is the exact response i didnt want because it doesnt explain anything and just assumes i'll agree he's bad cause he's bad, unlike what everyone else did, but okay.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51711849]words[/QUOTE] that yu-gi-oh moment you played right into my trap ahah are you for real [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Shitposting" - Pascall))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=Mechanical43;51711935]that yu-gi-oh moment you played right into my trap ahah are you for real[/QUOTE] What?

[QUOTE=AaronM202;51711968]What?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=sgman91;51711849]You posted all the ones that I assumed you would post.[/QUOTE] how 2 not have healthy discussion

[QUOTE=lxmach1;51711974]how 2 not have healthy discussion[/QUOTE] I dont understand how thats a "YU-GI-OH TRAP CARD WHOA" moment.

[QUOTE=AaronM202;51711983]I dont understand how thats a "YU-GI-OH TRAP CARD WHOA" moment.[/QUOTE] I'm struggling to see hows its even relevent to the discussion

[QUOTE=lxmach1;51711974]how 2 not have healthy discussion[/QUOTE] I wanted to let him make his own argument in order to address it. That generally works better than putting words in his mouth. I had already done the research long before he posted the articles. I knew exactly which he would pick because it's the same ones that every left-wing site lists. It's not exactly hard to guess.

[QUOTE=ph:lxyz;51711508]Did you know that in 2017, it's not acceptable to have centrist views? To one side of every shouting match, the centrist is an apologist for the extreme interpretation of the other team's 'views', and therefore "as bad as the worst of them", whatever the topic may be about.[/QUOTE] I dunno, I consider myself center left more or less, and I generally find myself in decent company with my political opinions being accepted by most people around me. There are republican candidates that I probably would've shrugged and said 'alright, sure, they won this time.' Trump's views are not centrist. He's further right than Obama was left by a long shot. This isn't about having a shouting match because I'm like, soooo angry we're not implementing communism, I'm pissed because we elected a far-right loon and his cohort of crazy flying monkeys. I just want sane fucking economic policy and progress on cleaner sources of energy on the national scale. That's it.

Interesting. I didn't sense anything anti Semetic or white nationalist during his speech

Bannon could very well be an anti semite, or he could not be. It seems to be beside the point - he encourages the distribution of white supremacist and anti-semitic media. The message itself is a means to an end. It rallies those dumb enough to believe it. He's a dangerous propaganda artist that we would do well to keep an eye on.

[QUOTE=RocketSnail;51712138]Interesting. I didn't sense anything anti Semetic or white nationalist during his speech[/QUOTE] the point is that the fucking president gave a speech written by a neo-nazi

[QUOTE=Judas;51712228]the point is that the fucking president gave a speech written by a neo-nazi[/QUOTE] Could you cite some reasons why he is a neo-nazis from your pov?

[QUOTE=Tudd;51712273]Could you cite some reasons why he is a neo-nazis from your pov?[/QUOTE] all of the glaring antisemitism and racism posted on breitbart, if the man himself isn't a neo-nazi he's undenyably a neo-nazi enabler

[QUOTE=Judas;51712298]all of the glaring antisemitism and racism posted on breitbart, if the man himself isn't a neo-nazi he's undenyably a neo-nazi enabler[/QUOTE] SGman already pointed out the reasons why they weren't really solid examples of antisemitism. How is a guy who has jewish writers/runs a jewish founded publication going to attract actual neo-nazis? Not to mention actual Neo-nazis publications like the Daily Stormer call for boycott on Breibart for having Jewish writers like Milo [url]http://www.dailystormer.com/holy-crusade-alt-right-to-boycott-breitbart-until-milo-is-removed/[/url]

[QUOTE=sgman91;51711849]Thanks. You posted all the ones that I assumed you would post. Honestly, how is this white supremacist? It's written by an out and proud Jew about how Bill Kristol is going against Jewish interests by supporting political candidates who are against Israel. You're welcome to disagree, but how can you possibly argue it's white supremacist? It literally has nothing to do with it. You got this off a website without actually reading it, didn't you? Again, how is this white supremacist? AT BEST, it's anti-Islamic, but really, it's just sensationalism and an unjustified stretching of the truth. Here's the opening paragraph: "On the back of the Brussels terror attack it is worthwhile remembering that while a majority of Muslims in the West appear to have no truck with terrorism or extremism, there are a significant number who sympathise with terrorism and repeatedly attempt to justify attacks on the West." It then goes through a bunch of studies that show how there are some issues with the Islamic population of western countries, like 20 percent of UK Muslims have sympathy for the 7/7 bomber. They quote the source which says exactly that. Again, where's the part that argues that white people are superior to non white people (aka. white supremacist language)? An article about a specific town that is have a lot of issues with Muslims migrants. Again, even if you disagree with the content, where's the white supremacy? This is an interview with Roger Stone. Politico also did an article on it: [URL]http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/roger-stone-huma-abedin-terrorist-agent-224261[/URL] Are they also white supremacists? Please don't say I'm ignoring your evidence because I directly responded to each one. None of these are white supremacist. You might disagree with them. You might think they aren't fair, but AT MOST they show that Breitbart isn't a fan of Muslims. I have a feeling you didn't actually read any of these. You went to Google, picked them off a list from some left-wing site, and posted them.[/QUOTE] For the record, two was a story that was proven to be a complete fabrication. They aren't past making shit up entirely to push an agenda. Four's a joke. They're effectively blaming a lack of law enforcement presence and poor government social support on the muslim immigrants living in their neighborhood Three does exactly what you(falsely, in that case) dismissed the DOJ report on the Ferguson department for; makes an argument using a bunch of stats without taking into account the many variables. For the other two, fine, you win. You've successfully dismantled my argument, so I'll amend my statement. Steve Bannon is a man running a propaganda organization that caters to ultranationalists and bigots of every stripe, and clearly has an interest in pushing an agenda in favour of a racially and culturally homogenous America. He went on record to call his website 'The platform for the Alt-right' last year. If you need any evidence of the audience the website caters to, do have a look at the comment section for any of those above articles. It's a hive for the "I'm not racist, but" crowd. Degenerates without the balls to come right out for what they are.

I would punch Steve Bannon

Has anyone actually proven Bannon is far right or a white nationalist? Wikipedia just cites a bunch of garbage mainstream media sources during the freak out over his appointment, which is misinformation and more of an outcry by the media and the establishment left after they were briefed on the alt right by hillary clinton (a deeply a pro-EU neoliberal hawk). This was because she felt threatened by 1) declining trust in media and Congress mixed with polarization 2) losing momentum on social media and the Internet to 'meme magic' 3) arrival of the 'euro far right' (which can hardly be described as fascist, FN for example being basically a social democratic party that argues muslim immigration is a threat to liberal values and that the EU is undemocratic) phenomenon to our shores 4) tensions with Russia reaching a height, starting with her sabre rattling over Putin's election in 2011 and ending with Russia becoming an enemy of our questionable export of democracy (which hillary distinguished herself from Obama in advocating for), as driven by Ukraine and Syria. So far, evidence seems to basically be 1) the alt right is at most western chauvinist 2) breitbart rejects political correctness and represents one of the most successful alternative media platforms in that regard, which trump catapulted into new relevance by pandering to this nationalist dissent with the economic and political elite 3) the comment section is an Internet comment section 4) the media has catapulted the 'inventor' of a name for a loosely connected and diverse political movement, Richard Spencer, into prominence and this connects him to anyone who is a civic nationalist, western chauvinist, et al while simultaneously being a white male 5) breitbart doesn't why away from posting what are basically 'hate facts' in regards to things like crime statistics (although even Ben Shapiro, who condemned breitbart, makes his primary message to 'SJWs', Hollywood, and academia consist of 'facts don't care about your feelings'). Honestly, this 'white nationalism' seems to be a product of Western political and social values moving to the left in the era of globalization and the goalposts for 'reactionary populist nazi' changing accordingly. This is so nakedly about power politics, since alt right nationalism represents as much of a thread to moneyed interests as the far left, however it's much more dangerous because it's not a foreign ideology. More importantly, unlike the far left it's an ideology of the middle class, the ailing backbone of america whose success is historically tied to the success of liberal democracy (particularly in conquering class and race/ethnicity/nationality issues).

i gave the front page of breitbart a cursory view and i'd say they're pro israel as fuck [url]http://www.breitbart.com/author/breitbart-jerusalem/[/url] [editline]22nd January 2017[/editline] i guess technically you don't have to like jews to be pro-israel but it helps a lot [editline]22nd January 2017[/editline] i really don't like breitbart but I don't think "antisemitism" can fit my list of reasons it is garbage

[QUOTE=Conscript;51712469]Has anyone actually proven Bannon is far right or a white nationalist? Wikipedia just cites a bunch of garbage mainstream media sources during the freak out over his appointment, which is misinformation and more of an outcry by the media and the establishment left after they were briefed on the alt right by hillary clinton (a deeply a pro-EU neoliberal hawk). This was because she felt threatened by 1) declining trust in media and Congress mixed with polarization 2) losing momentum on social media and the Internet to 'meme magic' 3) arrival of the 'euro far right' (which can hardly be described as fascist, FN for example being basically a social democratic party that argues muslim immigration is a threat to liberal values and that the EU is undemocratic) phenomenon to our shores 4) tensions with Russia reaching a height, starting with her sabre rattling over Putin's election in 2011 and ending with Russia becoming an enemy of our questionable export of democracy (which hillary distinguished herself from Obama in advocating for), as driven by Ukraine and Syria. So far, evidence seems to basically be 1) the alt right is at most western chauvinist 2) breitbart rejects political correctness and represents one of the most successful alternative media platforms in that regard, which trump catapulted into new relevance by pandering to this nationalist dissent with the economic and political elite 3) the comment section is an Internet comment section 4) the media has catapulted the 'inventor' of a name for a loosely connected and diverse political movement, Richard Spencer, into prominence and this connects him to anyone who is a civic nationalist, western chauvinist, et al while simultaneously being a white male 5) breitbart doesn't why away from posting what are basically 'hate facts' in regards to things like crime statistics (although even Ben Shapiro, who condemned breitbart, makes his primary message to 'SJWs', Hollywood, and academia consist of 'facts don't care about your feelings'). Honestly, this 'white nationalism' seems to be a product of Western political and social values moving to the left in the era of globalization and the goalposts for 'reactionary populist nazi' changing accordingly. This is so nakedly about power politics, since alt right nationalism represents as much of a thread to moneyed interests as the far left, however it's much more dangerous because it's not a foreign ideology. More importantly, unlike the far left it's an ideology of the middle class, the ailing backbone of america whose success is historically tied to the success of liberal democracy (particularly in conquering class and race/ethnicity/nationality issues).[/QUOTE] You hit the nail on the head so I don't think you need anyone to explain it to you now.

Bannon's a bit of a shit stirrer and a real jackass, as are most breitbart employees, but to call it "neo-nazi" in any way is intellectually dishonest

So Trump didn't even write his own speech, and the speech was still a trainwreck that caused the USD's value to take a dive. This is promising.