Meet 6 College Professors Who Promote Violence

Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,

Colleges and universities are breeding grounds for the Radical Left, encouraging Antifa violence and would-be Communist revolutionaries. That sounds outrageous, but it’s absolutely true. More and more, we’re hearing stories about instructors supporting Antifa, leading “resistance” groups, and making genocidal comments about white people. The Radical Left has taken over the higher education system.

It’s pretty hard to hope for unity when our halls of higher education are hard at work creating a generation of young people who hate everything for which America stands. The backward logic used to sway the feelings and opinions of students is obvious to us, but to younger, idealistic people without experience in the real world, it can seem like these instructors are brilliant souls marching to the beat of a drum so escalated that mere mortals can’t even hear it, much less understand it.

When I wrote an article last week about plans for an attempted Communist revolution on November 4th, it was met with the expected amount of trollery and denial from people who said I was full of it. Lots of people who disagree like to call this a crazy conspiracy theory, but if I’m using their own words and actions to paint a picture, I hardly see how this could be my vivid imagination. They also argued that they were on the side of the angels. “Antifa is good,” they said. “If you are against Antifa, that means you are FOR fascism,” they opined. Obviously, that is a fallacy of relevance, because instead of arguing a point, it misrepresents the opposing opinion. But to the people who want to believe that anyone who differs is the enemy, it holds more weight than a tank full of actual evidence.

Part of the issue is the population of the ivory towers of academia. For some reason, the people who end up teaching young people – at least the ones getting media attention – are extreme in their views. These professors and instructors are held in such esteem by the universities that the students, if they aren’t the critically thinking type, believe every word they speak to be gospel. And their Communist leanings aren’t discouraged at all. In fact, in many colleges and universities, these inmates are running the asylums. Liberalism has so overwhelmed the system of higher education that this list of the most liberal colleges in America took up 28 pages.

The Marxist agenda in many of these colleges and universities is so blatant that many parents no longer encourage their children to attend. (I’m thrilled that my homeschooled youngest daughter opted for a vocational program instead of college.)

Here are just a few examples of Radical Left teachers influencing the next generation.

If you wonder why we’re divided, look no further. This is only a handful of incidents that decry white people, promote Communism, and support violent resistance.

1. An instructor at Clemson University was recently outed by College Reform for volunteering his graphic design skills to help a local Antifa chapter that made headlines in February for openly promoting violence on campus. He replied to this request for help that was posted on the Upstate Antifa Facebook page.

2. Assistant Professor Bart Knijnenburg, another notable member of Indivisible Clemson, caused national outrage when he wrote that “All Republicans are racist scum” in a Facebook post.

3. A professor from Drexel University was recently put on leave “for his own safety” after blaming the Las Vegas Massacre on the white patriarchy. Professor George Ciccariello-Maher posted a heated series of Tweets that said:

This is the same professor who tweeted last December of his desire for the deaths of white people. Interestingly, Ciccariello-Maher appears to be white and is a self-proclaimed “actual communist.”

4. Another example of this is Rashida Love, director of First Peoples Multicultural Advising Services at Evergreen University who demanded “A Day Without White People” at the Oregon institution. When another member of the staff, Professor Bret Weinstein, rightly objected, he had to be escorted from the campus for his own safety as protests became heated. Then, a bunch of self-proclaimed Neo-Nazis decided to counterprotest the protest and things really went downhill. (The whole story is here.) What this tells us is that when professors speak up against the Radical Left agenda, they lose their jobs and face real threats to their physical safety.

5. Professor Michael Isaacson is a member of Antifa who teaches at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice. He was quoted in an article on The Hill justifying violence against “Nazis.”“The justification [of the use of violence] is that Nazi ideology at its very core is founded on violence and on wielding power by any means,” said Mike Isaacson, one of the founders of Smash Racism D.C., an Antifa organization in Washington.Isaacson is unequivocal in his defense of violence as a legitimate tool to combat the creeping threat of what he deems authoritarianism.

“There is the question of whether these people should feel safe organizing as Nazis in public, and I don’t think they should,” said Isaacson.

“I don’t think anyone should think that someone who is intent on politically organizing for the sake of creating a state-sponsored genocide — I don’t think is something that we should protect,” he said. (source)

He also posted this Tweet, which finally cost him his job.

His account is awash with violent rhetoric, although he himself isn’t violent “if for no other reason than I’m rather slight of frame,” he said with a chuckle.  “I’m not so good in a fight.” (source)

6. A Dartmouth professor published The Antifascist Handbook, complete with a call to arms. Mark Bray calls his book an “unabashedly partisan call to arms.”

The President of Dartmouth repudiated Bray in a statement saying he was “supporting violent protest.” He continued, “As an institution, we condemn anything but civil discourse in the exchange of ideas. The endorsement of violence in any form is contrary to Dartmouth values.” (source)  But Bray’s colleagues were livid and a hundred of them signed a petition asking the president to retract his statement. Doesn’t this just underline how many other professors feel the same way?

Why are these people in leadership positions in our education system, influencing young people with their hatred?

There is a Radical Left in America, and it is represented in our colleges and universities. How long will it be before Conservative or Libertarian kids can’t even safely attend a university?

It’s incredibly naive to think this won’t boil over.

While there are plenty of people who are left-leaning and dislike President Trump who would never dream of behaving violently toward their neighbors. we can’t use those examples to deny what’s actually happening. There are factions out there who want nothing more than to further destabilize America and force their radical beliefs on everyone in the most militant way possible. Undercover recording after undercover recording has disclosed the plans and the methods that are being discussed, but the mainstream, in their blind hatred of Trump, is glossing over all of it.

The Radical Left has shut down parades with their threats, violently attacked Trump supporters or those whom they believe to be conservative, boasted of “righteous beatings,” and have blatantly plotted sedition with no fear of reprisal. Militant groups believe they should be able to “expropriate” the property of those with whom they disagree and distribute it to others. They no longer want free speech at all if the opinion expressed isn’t straight out of the Politically Correct Opinion Handbook and they’ll silence it by any means necessary.

As I have written before, the laws of physics apply here just like they do in the rest of the natural world. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Even those who have no wish to fight may one day be placed in situations when they must defend themselves. If you become a target, the attack will be relentless and will only be stopped if you persevere.

At some point, government crackdowns will begin. We could be looking at martial law to quell the violence and tanks rolling through our streets. If things continue to escalate with this so-called “justifiable violence,” we’re going to be facing the ugliest time in American history. as violence begets further violence.

Antifa Groups Plan Nationwide "Deface Columbus Day" Acts For Monday

Tomorrow"s Columbus Day celebrations could turn violent, as various "antifa" anarchist groups have announced a nationwide campaign to deface Christopher Columbus statues during Monday"s holiday.

According to PJ Media, at least five Christopher Columbus statues have already been vandalized in New York City in recent weeks, based on reports from Far Left Watch. In one case last month, vandals defaced a "larger-than-life" statue of Columbus in Central Park, leaving blood-red paint on his hands, and scrawled, "Hate will not be tolerated" and “#SomethingsComing” on its pedestal.

What is coming appears to be a coordinated campaign to destroy or deface monuments across the country on Columbus Day.  The NYC-based antifa group Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement (RAM) made the announcement on Thursday, September 21, calling on antifa groups nationwide to “decorate” their neighborhoods.

According to Far Left Watch, RAM is "an extremely militant group that advocates for the violent redistribution of property" and for "the abolition of gender."

The militant group recently hosted an "Our Enemies in Blue" anti-police workshop at its branch in Brooklyn, NY. RAM posted a video called "Against Columbus Day" on the antifa website It’s Going Down, showcasing destroyed monuments across the country and black-clad antifas pacing around menacingly to what appears to be 1980s German electropop.

Call to Action! Deface Columbus Day
Hashtags: #FuckColumbusDay #DestryColonialism
10/9/17https://t.co/JYYZRSvCQ9 pic.twitter.com/5Yy98gIci4

— RevAbolitionMov (@RevAbolitionist) September 21, 2017

"The battles lines have been drawn and white supremacists are on notice," the RAM group wrote in a statement on the website. "White nationalist statues are crumbling all over the US as our collective revolutionary power is growing."

While a recent poll showed that a majority of Americans support a holiday honoring Christopher Columbus, RAM called Columbus Day, October 9, "one of the most vile ‘holidays’ of the year." The group called on supporters "to take action against this day and in support of indigenous people in the US and abroad who have been victims of colonialism and genocide."

We are calling for groups to “decorate” their neighborhoods as they see fit: put up murals, wheatpaste posters, drop a banner, etc. On October 9th put a picture of your action on social media and use the hashtags below. With these actions multiplied around the country, we will make it unequivocally clear that revolutionaries will always stand with the indigenous!

Conveniently, the anarchist organization encouraged supporters to record and broadcast their crimes by using the hashtags #F*ckColumbusDay and #DestroyColonialism. By making it that much easier for the police to capture any potential lawbreakers tomorrow, we wonder how long before this "antifa" group is portrayed as yet another subversive infiltration organization used by Putin to sabotage and destroy the United States.

As far as the police is concerned, with antifa having given advance notice days in advance of its intended criminal acts, the arrests should be easy to make.

"They Won't Know What Hit Them" Shocking Undercover Footage Exposes Antifa's "Premeditated" Violence

As if the public needed any more evidence that violence is a central part of Antifa’s mission, conservative comedian Steve Crowder has published footage that he and his producer surreptitiously recorded after infiltrating a local Antifa cell and accompanying it to a protest at the University of Utah.

The shockingly candid footage offers a disturbing glimpse into the innerworkings of Antifa - a loosely organized band of far-left agitators - and the central tenant of violent resistance that encapsulates the group"s philosophy. The footage primarily focuses on a transgender woman, the purported leader of a small cell of Antifa protesters, who can be heard telling Crowder"s producer that she’s armed with a handgun, and that she expects reinforcements to arrive later with “two AKs”. The organizer can also be heard recommending that Crowder’s producer buy a small blade at a military surplus store and strap it to his ankle “just in case.”

What they show appears to confirm that the group protesters were planning to disrupt a speaking event hosted by conservative commentator and Daily Wire founder Ben Shapiro, whom Antifa has accused of being a nazi despite the fact that he is Jewish. Shapiro"s recent appearances at UC Berkeley and other university campuses drew protests, with demonstrators labeling him a “fascist.”

But perhaps the most surprising thing about the footage was the fact that mainstream media reporters AND police essentially told Crowder & Co. to get lost when they shared it with them.

In another shocking excerpt, the Antifa leader – whom Crowder didn’t name because he said he didn’t want to “dox” anybody, though he added that police have confirmed that they have been monitoring her – described a plan to lure right-wing demonstrators to a secluded area where, presumably, they would be attacked by Antifa.

“Plain clothes, hard tactics, I don’t think they’ll know what hit them. Because they’re not prepared for what we’re planning,” the organizer says at one point.

In the video, another unnamed Antifa member who goes by the pseudonym Clark can be heard explaining that the difference between Antifa and other activist groups is a “willingness to respond with violence.”

As we’ve reported time and time again, Antifa protesters have been inciting violence across the country since Trump’s upset victory in November, beginning with protests during Trump’s inauguration that quickly turned violent in destructive.

According to Fox 13 News in Salt Lake City, Crowder published the undercover video Thursday that purports to show far left-wing protesters distributing weapons ahead of the speech. Crowder’s production team presented the video to police moments after it was recorded.

Yet after evaluating the video, the police determined that there was no credible threat.

“Police looked at the video, evaluated other information available to them, and determined the individuals did not pose a credible threat that warranted action,” Nelson told Fox 13 News.

Similarly violent clashes instigated by members of the far-left group erupted on the campus of UC Berkeley in early February, where members of the group hurled Molotov cocktails and attacked “facists” and “nazis” who were attending a speaking event by Milo Yiannopoulos, causing extensive property damage on campus.

While both the mainstream media and more mainstream leftists initially defended the group, public sentiment has soured on the group.

Several media organizations – including the LA Times, Washington Post, the Atlantic, Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal – have criticized the group’s violent tactics. A month ago, it was reported that the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security classified Antifa as a "domestic terrorist" group in internal communications that described them as "primary instigators of violence at public rallies" going back to at least April 2016 when the reports were first published."

Will The Deep State's War On Trump Lead To An Actual Civil War?

Authored by Andrew Karybko via Oriental Review,

Oriental Review is publishing the English original of Andrew Korybko’s interview with an Iranian newspaper from earlier this month.

After only eight months after entering into office, we have witnessed the resignation and dismissal of 15 high-ranked people from the White House. In view of this, do you think that Trump will be able to finish his first term? Some analysts suggest that he won’t, so how unstable do you think the political situation in the US, and how serious of a threat does it pose to Trump’s presidency?

There have been over a dozen high-level and much-publicized personnel shifts in the Trump Administration in the past 9 months, but they shouldn’t be interpreted as signaling that the President himself will be leaving anytime soon. These are all just casualties of Trump’s war with the “deep state” (permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies), whereby the vested power interests in the US are fighting to defeat the “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) movement. Throughout the course of this conflict, Trump has clearly been thrown on the defensive as he’s had to compromise on his promised foreign policy platforms in order to retain a chance at succeeding on the domestic front, but even that looks uncertain right now in some respects as the “deep state”, aided by the RINOs (Republicans In Name Only), relentlessly continues to chip away at MAGA in order to retain their power and influence.

If they can force Trump into submission and turn him into their puppet, as they’re trying to do, then there would be no need to attempt to remove him from office; likewise, if he continues to resist in some capacities, as he’s doing on domestic issues, then this scenario because more possible. Even so, it’s unlikely to succeed except in the event that Trump’s enemies can pull off turning him into the “fascist dictator” that they’ve fear mongered he’d become even before he was elected.

The only conceivable way for this to happen is if the domestic unrest in the US between the Alt-Left and Alt-Right becomes so uncontrollable that Trump is forced to implement limited martial law, and if (or likely when) a racial minority or group thereof is killed during this time, regardless of the circumstances, this would be used to swiftly bring about attempted impeachment charges on whatever trumped-up pretext can be made. It’s not being implied that this will succeed, but just that if one talks about the impeachment scenario, then this is the only one out of the wide array that are being bandied about which has any realistic chance of succeeding, though the odds are nevertheless still slim.

“The New Yorker” recently published an article which said that racism and fascism have been on the rise after Trump’s election, pointing to the incident in Charlottesville as proof of that. In your view, what’s the risk that this will spark a war between the left and right in the US?

“The New Yorker”, given its liberal-progressive and endemic anti-Trump bias, shouldn’t be trusted as a reliable source of information, but the fact that it’s pushing the Mainstream Media narrative about Trump coming to power on the backs of racists and fascists deserves to be elaborated on. This is a false stereotype which suggests that “white” (Caucasian) people are racists simply because of their skin color, and therefore voted for Trump on that basis alone, which isn’t the case at all and is condescending to the tens of millions of people who supported him for his policies.

That being said, there are indeed some actual racists and fascists who openly support Trump, but they’re such a small minority of the population as to be statistically irrelevant. For instance, the notorious Ku Klux Klan only has several thousand members nationwide, which pales in comparison to the at least 100,000-200,000 members of the Alt-Left militant group “Antifa”, which has proven to be much more violent and dangerous than their Alt-Right counterparts.

The reason why the “deep state” is trying to link racists and fascists to Trump is to discredit his election victory, so their affiliated Mainstream Media proxies amplify the voices and numbers of a tiny minority of a minority of individuals in order to promote this perception. Nevertheless, they are dangerous and deserve to be condemned, though to be fair, so too should most of their Alt-Left counter-protesters, and for even more urgent reasons.

When “Antifa” is heralded as “heroes” despite their wanton destruction and actual fascist-like violent intolerance for any dissenting views, this lends “legitimacy” to their tactics and “normalizes” them, essentially turning Far-Left street destabilizations into an accepted part of life for the elite because of their weaponized instrumentalization in intimidating the vast majority of Trump’s non-racist non-fascist base.

In turn, this can only provoke a defensive reaction from these people which spikes the chances of Left-Right clashes becoming as common in the future in America’s cities as gangland shootings are today.

To tie all of this in with the previous question, the reason why the “deep state” and Soros-affiliated Alt-Left groups want to spark such pronounced disorder and chaos in the US is to fuel a Color Revolution which would then rapidly descend into an Unconventional War of urban terrorism and political killings, all with the intent of driving Trump to become the “fascist dictator” that they fear mongered he’d become so as to have a basis for pushing through impeachment proceedings against him should racial minorities be killed if he implements limited martial law in response.

WSJ Turns On Antifa: Violent, Black-Clad Protesters Are "Dividing The Left"

Since Bay Area TV anchor Frank Somerville published an honest description of "the hate" he experienced from "violent, clad in black" protesters while trying to document a right-wing rally in Berkeley, the liberal media has decidedly turned against AntiFa – the loosely organized band of black-clad thugs who show up to “counter-protest” at conservative events and demonstrations around the country. WSJ"s report describes the group as the left-wing equivalent of the fascists and white supremacists that AntiFa claims to oppose - characterization that the media has so far been reluctant to embrace.

This week, The Wall Street Journal has jumped on the bandwagon, publishing a deeply researched history of the group, and interviewing other leftist organizers who’ve criticized the group for being too violent and damaging the credibility of the left. 

In one scene, WSJ recollects how Antifa protesters viciously attacked a small crowd of right-wing demonstrators who showed up last month’s “No to Marxism” rally in Berkeley, even though the rally had been canceled. Using clubs and wooden shields emblazoned with “no hate,” groups of around half a dozen beat and chased their outnumbered “adversaries” out of the park.

As one long-time liberal activist in Massachusetts noted, Antifa’s tactics are dividing the resurgent leftist movement that has coalesced around opposition to President Donald Trump.
AntiFa “doesn’t represent us,” she told WSJ.

“The antifa tactics are testing the liberal movement that has galvanized in opposition to Mr. Trump—creating a rift among its leaders, organizers and demonstrators about whether to denounce a radical fringe, some of whose antidiscrimination objectives, if not tactics, they share.

James Hannon, a psychotherapist and seasoned liberal organizer in Massachusetts who marched at a recent Boston rally against racism, said elements of the antifa movement that use confrontational tactics allow others to blur the line between leftist groups and the hate groups against which they protest.

“The social justice, the peace movement, the left or just progressives really have to start calling out the antifa and say, `Hey, hey, hey, you don’t represent us,’ ” said Mr. Hannon, 67 years old. “’We’re surrendering a moral high ground.’”

As we reported last week, one leader of an AntiFa group based in Washington DC explained in an editorial published by the Hill that violence is a core tenant of the group’s philosophy. He also explained his bizarre belief that Nazis and fascists have infiltrated the highest levels of US police departments and the military.

One WSJ reporter described being threatened by an AntiFa protester while attempting to peacefully document the rally.

“Protesters in dark get-ups set off smoke bombs, toppled police barricades and smashed the cameras of some journalists and bystanders. “You do it again, I’ll break your phone,” a man in a Spider-Man mask told a Wall Street Journal reporter who was taking photographs.”

Even Berkeley’s major condemned the black-clad protesters following last month’s rally.

Mayor Arreguin of Berkeley disagreed: “We saw a large group of black-clad extremists who really turned a peaceful protest on its head.”

A Green Party organizer who spoke with WSJ said she opposes AntiFa’s willingness to resort to violence, and its anti-democratic messaging.

“At a March antiracism rally in Minneapolis, she said, activists chanted “punch a Nazi in the face” and lighted on fire a scarecrow dressed as a white nationalist. “The people who end up taking the rap for it are black organizers,” said Ms. Pree-Stinson, 36, who described herself as a black Latina.

In Boston, masked counterprotesters distributed fliers titled “WHY ANTIFA?” The leaflets criticized the “liberal” approach of believing that elections, courts, the Constitution, a free press and other institutions would “prevent things from going too far.”

They called for “uncompromising militancy” against fascists and said antifa “must force their hate out of public spaces by any means necessary.”

By our count, WSJ is the fifth mainstream media organization to publish a story criticizing the group, which came to national prominence after its involvements with rioting at President Donald Trump’s inauguration.

Here"s a collection of some of the other headlines...

Bloomberg:

The Washington Post:

The Atlantic:

The LA Times:

A Whitehouse.gov survey published last month demanding that the White House label AntiFa a terrorist group received the 100,000 signatures needed to demand a response. Meanwhile, last month, the media reported that the Department of Homeland Security described AntiFa as a purveyor of "domestic terrorism" in internal communications.

The Hypocrisy Of AntiFa

Authored by Jonathan Turley via The Hill.com,

The University of California in Berkeley was again the scene of violence recently, as protesters claimed license to silence those with whom they disagree. Their fight against “fascism” took the form of not just stopping a speech, but assaulting those who came to hear it.

For those of us at universities and colleges, these counter-demonstrators, and in particular the masked antifa protesters, are a troubling and growing presence on our campuses. They have been assaulting people and blocking speeches for years with relatively little condemnation. They flourish in an environment where any criticism is denounced as being reflective of racist or fascist sentiments.

However, as the latest violence in Berkeley vividly demonstrates, there is no distinction between these protesters and the fascists they claim to be resisting. They are all fascists in their use of fear and violence to silence others. What is particularly chilling is how some academics have given this anti-speech mob legitimacy through pseudo-philosophical rationalizations.

At Berkeley and other universities, protesters have held up signs saying “F--k Free Speech” and have threatened to beat up anyone taking their pictures, including journalists. They seem blissfully ignorant of the contradiction in using fascistic tactics as anti-fascist protesters. After all, a leading definition of fascism is “a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control.”

CNN recently interviewed antifa protesters who insist that violence is simply the language that their opponents understand. Leftist organizer Scott Crow endorsed illegal actions and said that antifa activists cover their faces to “avoid the ramifications of law enforcement.” Such violent logic is supported by some professors.

Last week, Clemson University Professor Bart Knijnenburg went on Facebook to call Trump supporters and Republicans “racist scum.” He added, “I admire anyone who stands up against white supremacy, violent or nonviolent. This needs to stop, by any means necessary. #PunchNazis.” He is not alone. Trinity College Professor Johnny Williams, who teaches classes on race, posted attacks on bigots and called on people to “let them f-----g die.”

These voices go beyond the troubling number of academics supporting speech codes and the curtailment of free speech. These are scholars who have embraced the antithesis of the life and values of academia. They justify violence to silence those who are deemed unworthy to be heard. Dartmouth Professor Mark Bray, the author of a book entitled “Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook” is one of the chief enablers of these protesters. Bray defines antifa as “politics or an activity of social revolutionary self defense. It’s a pan-left radical politics uniting communists, socialists, anarchists and various different radical leftists together for the shared purpose of combating the far right.”

Bray speaks positively of the effort to supplant traditional views of free speech: “At the heart of the anti-fascist outlook is a rejection of the classical liberal phrase… that says I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” He defines anti-fascists as “illiberal” who reject the notion that far right views deserve to “coexist” with opposing views.

Bray says that the protesters do not “see fascism or white supremacy as a view with which they disagree as a difference of opinion.” Their goal is not co-existence but “to end their politics.” Bray and other academics are liberating students from the confines of what they deem the false “allegiance to liberal democracy.” Once freed of the values of free speech and democratic values, violence becomes merely politics by other means.

When pushed, Bray’s rationalization for the antifa movement rapidly descends into intellectual gibberish:

“There is a certain political lens that - agree or disagree with the lens - there is an element of continuity in terms of the types of groups targeted. I don’t know of any Democratic Party events that have been ‘no platformed,’ or shut down by anti-fascists. So there is a political lens, people will quibble about what the lens is, who designs the lens, but I don’t think the slippery slope is actually, in practice, nearly as much of a concern as people imagine it would be.”

There does not have to be a “lens.” Indeed, that it is the principle of the “liberal democracy” so casually cast aside by Bray and his braying followers. While Bray insists that he is not in favor of violent protests or even free speech, he insists that there is a duty to stop those who threaten the existence of others and the antifa protests are a form of “community self defense.”

Ironically, Bray and others have come to use the intellectual freedom of our universities to advance the most anti-intellectual movement in our history. They are destroying the very academic institutions that have protected their extreme views. Just as the father of the atomic bomb, Robert Oppenheimer, said that “physicists have known sin,” the antifa movement is the sin of academia in abandoning our core values.

These protesters believe that history shows the dangers of free speech and the need to deny it to those who would misuse it. It is a familiar sentiment that “all the experience... accumulated through several decades teaches us... to deprive the reactionaries of the right to speak and let the people alone have that right.” Those were the words of another early anti-fascist, China"s Communist Party leader Mao Zedong.

FBI, DHS Officially Classify Antifa Activities As "Domestic Terrorist Violence"

President Trump was crucified by the mainstream media a few weeks back after hosting an improvised press conference and saying there was "blame on both sides" for the violence in Charlottesville that resulted in the death of a counterprotester.  The comments resulted in most of Trump"s advisory councils being disbanded, as CEO"s around the country pounced on the opportunity to distance themselves from the administration, and heightened calls from CNN for impeachment proceedings.

The problem is that while Trump"s delivery probably could have been a bit more artful, the underlying message seems to be proving more accurate with each passing day and each new outbreak of Antifa violence.

As Politico points out today, previously unreported FBI and Department of Homeland Security studies found that "anarchist extremist" group like Antifa have been the "primary instigators of violence at public rallies" going back to at least April 2016 when the reports were first published.

Federal authorities have been warning state and local officials since early 2016 that leftist extremists known as “antifa” had become increasingly confrontational and dangerous, so much so that the Department of Homeland Security formally classified their activities as “domestic terrorist violence,” according to interviews and confidential law enforcement documents obtained by POLITICO.

Since well before the Aug. 12 rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, turned deadly, DHS has been issuing warnings about the growing likelihood of lethal violence between the left-wing anarchists and right-wing white supremacist and nationalist groups.

Previously unreported documents disclose that by April 2016, authorities believed that “anarchist extremists” were the primary instigators of violence at public rallies against a range of targets. They were blamed by authorities for attacks on the police, government and political institutions, along with symbols of “the capitalist system,” racism, social injustice and fascism, according to a confidential 2016 joint intelligence assessment by DHS and the FBI.

Not surprisingly, law enforcement officials noted that the rise in Antifa violence overlapped perfectly with Trump"s campaign as they made appearances at rally after rally to incite chaos...all the while making it seem as if violent, racist Trump supporters were to blame.

“It was in that period [as the Trump campaign emerged] that we really became aware of them,” said one senior law enforcement official tracking domestic extremists in a state that has become a front line in clashes between the groups. “These antifa guys were showing up with weapons, shields and bike helmets and just beating the shit out of people. … They’re using Molotov cocktails, they’re starting fires, they’re throwing bombs and smashing windows.”

Almost immediately, the right-wing targets of the antifa attacks began fighting back, bringing more and larger weapons and launching unprovoked attacks of their own, the documents and interviews show. And the extremists on both sides have been using the confrontations, especially since Charlottesville, to recruit unprecedented numbers of new members, raise money and threaten more confrontations, they say.

“Everybody is wondering, "What are we gonna do? How are we gonna deal with this?"” said the senior state law enforcement official. “Every time they have one of these protests where both sides are bringing guns, there are sphincters tightening in my world. Emotions get high, and fingers get twitchy on the trigger.”

As you"ll likely recall, one such event came in June 2016 when Antifa showed up at a rally in Sacramento and began violently attacking protestors with canes and knives.  Of course, with the whole thing caught on video, it"s pretty clear who the instigators of violence were (see our post here).

Some of the DHS and FBI intelligence reports began flagging the antifa protesters before the election. In one from last September, portions of which were read to POLITICO, DHS studied “recent violent clashes … at lawfully organized white supremacist” events including a June 2016 rally at the California Capitol in Sacramento organized by the Traditionalist Workers Party and its affiliate, the Golden State Skinheads.

According to police, counter-protesters linked to antifa and affiliated groups like By Any Means Necessary attacked, causing a riot after which at least 10 people were hospitalized, some with stab wounds.

At the Sacramento rally, antifa protesters came looking for violence, and “engaged in several activities indicating proficiency in pre-operational planning, to include organizing carpools to travel from different locations, raising bail money in preparation for arrests, counter-surveilling law enforcement using three-man scout teams, using handheld radios for communication, and coordinating the event via social media,” the DHS report said.

Insane video. Crowd sees any signs of "Nazis" and they run&attack. A lot of people bleeding/getting maced. @ABC10 pic.twitter.com/PoFhILfZ95

— Frances Wang (@FrancesWangTV) June 26, 2016

Of course, it"s not just California.  As the FBI and DHS note, the Antifa group operates much like terrorist cells with disconnected groups all over the country.

Even before Charlottesville, dozens and, in some cases, hundreds of people on both sides showed up at events in Texas, California, Oregon and elsewhere, carrying weapons and looking for a fight. In the Texas capital of Austin, armed antifa protesters attacked Trump supporters and white groups at several recent rallies, and then swarmed police in a successful effort to stop them from making arrests.

California has become another battleground, with violent confrontations in Berkeley, Sacramento and Orange County leading to numerous injuries. And antifa counter-protesters initiated attacks in two previous clashes in Charlottesville, according to the law enforcement reports and interviews.

More recently, the antifa groups, which some describe as the Anti-Fascist Action Network, have evolved out of the leftist anti-government groups like “Black bloc,” protesters clad in black and wearing masks that caused violence at events like the 1999 Seattle World Trade Organization protests. They claim to have no leader and no hierarchy, but authorities following them believe they are organized via decentralized networks of cells that coordinate with each other. Often, they spend weeks planning for violence at upcoming events, according to the April 2016 DHS and FBI report entitled “Baseline Comparison of US and Foreign Anarchist Extremist Movements.”

Dozens of armed anti-fascist groups have emerged, including Redneck Revolt and the Red Guards, according to the reports and interviews. One report from New Jersey authorities said self-described antifa groups have been established in cities including New York, Philadelphia, Chicago and San Francisco.

Meanwhile, even by the spring of 2016, the FBI had already grown concerned enough about Antifa that they began investigating overseas trips by activists out of concerns that they were coordinating with European anarchists to stage large bombings in the U.S.

By the spring of 2016, the anarchist groups had become so aggressive, including making armed attacks on individuals and small groups of perceived enemies, that federal officials launched a global investigation with the help of the U.S. intelligence community, according to the DHS and FBI assessment.

The purpose of the investigation, according to the April 2016 assessment: To determine whether the U.S.-based anarchists might start committing terrorist bombings like their counterparts in “foreign anarchist extremist movements” in Greece, Italy and Mexico, possibly at the Republican and Democratic conventions that summer.

Some of the antifa activists have gone overseas to train and fight with fellow anarchist organizations, including two Turkey-based groups fighting the Islamic State, according to interviews and internet postings.

Alas, we suspect you"ll hear precisely nothing about any of this on CNN.

Establishment Turns on ANTIFA; It's Now Quite Fashionable to Condemn Them

Content originally published at iBankCoin.com

In the September issue of The Atlantic, the cosmopolitan political magazine for globalist elites, the topic of ANTIFA was broached. I wouldn"t call their assessment of the alt-left group a rebuke, but instead a mild chastising.
 

Antifa believes it is pursuing the opposite of authoritarianism. Many of its activists oppose the very notion of a centralized state. But in the name of protecting the vulnerable, antifascists have granted themselves the authority to decide which Americans may publicly assemble and which may not. That authority rests on no democratic foundation. Unlike the politicians they revile, the men and women of antifa cannot be voted out of office. Generally, they don’t even disclose their names.
 
Antifa’s perceived legitimacy is inversely correlated with the government’s. Which is why, in the Trump era, the movement is growing like never before. As the president derides and subverts liberal-democratic norms, progressives face a choice. They can recommit to the rules of fair play, and try to limit the president’s corrosive effect, though they will often fail. Or they can, in revulsion or fear or righteous rage, try to deny racists and Trump supporters their political rights. From Middlebury to Berkeley to Portland, the latter approach is on the rise, especially among young people.
 
Revulsion, fear, and rage are understandable. But one thing is clear. The people preventing Republicans from safely assembling on the streets of Portland may consider themselves fierce opponents of the authoritarianism growing on the American right. In truth, however, they are its unlikeliest allies.

After the events in Berkeley this past weekend, where ANTIFA thugs went haywire, beating Trump supporters up for sport, support for the violent leftist group has plunged.

I am concerned that this video of Antifa beating a 16 year old Trump supporter will cause the public to turn on us. pic.twitter.com/e72n3agbDx

— Beverly Hills Antifa (@BevHillsAntifa) September 1, 2017

Now we"re seeing widespread condemnation from both the media and establishment hacks, deep state troglodytes and politicians alike. Clearly, someone pulled the plug on ANTIFA. Perhaps an important think tank did some proprietary polling and concluded the risk-reward analysis wasn"t worth shilling for them anymore, especially in light of the events in Texas. Back in June, Trump supporter and advocate, Jack Posobiec, wondered why CNN didn"t even acknowledge the group"s existence.

Hi @BrianStelter! Why does CNN cover-up Antifa? pic.twitter.com/ioQRqWcVbk

— Jack Posobiec ???????? (@JackPosobiec) June 4, 2017

Here"s a brief rundown of some of the recent remarks. Bear in mind, about a fortnight ago, the media and a whole slew of politicians, on both the right and the left, condemned President Trump for criticizing ANTIFA. Both Marco Rubio and Mitt Romney praised the group as being "anti-fascist."

Remember this?

The worm has turned.

Let"s cut the crap from the @TheDemocrats. Obviously @GeorgeSoros pulled the plug on #Antifa, and suddenly @NancyPelosi has a conscience.

— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) August 31, 2017

The Morning Shill got the go ahead to condemn the masked marauders.

Glad you finally got shamed into doing the obvious, Paul! https://t.co/SjcveSLhbC

— Breitbart News (@BreitbartNews) September 1, 2017

.@TheDailyShow"s Trevor Noah rails against Antifa: They are "vegan ISIS" https://t.co/JwuBpF5W7m pic.twitter.com/Y4V0GDopke

— The Daily Beast (@thedailybeast) September 1, 2017

#NeverTrump. #NeverAntifa.https://t.co/3rPBsRsyLf

— Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) September 1, 2017

Apparently, some didn"t get the memo.

All of us should be anti-fascists. I am anti-fascist

That the abbreviation for that, Antifa, is now some kind of bad thing, is ridiculous.

— Shaun King (@ShaunKing) August 31, 2017

Paul Ryan Draws Strength From Pelosi, Finally Condemns Antifa As "Left-Wing Thugs"

In the days since Trump"s controversial press conference on the Charlottesville tragedy in which he said there was "blame on both sides," Republicans have been tripping over one another to distance themselves from the White House.  Apparently the mere suggestion that Antifa, a Leftist group that has repeatedly incited violence at protests around the country, was anything more than an innocent bystander was grounds for impeachment, at least according to CNN, and just not something that Republicans in Congress were willing to touch.

One such Republican that has been noticeably silent on the Antifa movement is none other than House Speaker Paul Ryan...that is until Nancy Pelosi took a stand and gave him the courage to actually express his own opinion...well, through a spokeswoman anyway.  Finally, after days of being heavily criticized for a failure to condemn violent Antifa attacks at Berkeley, Ryan"s staff issued the following statement to the Daily Caller last night:

"Speaker Ryan believes, as is obvious, these individuals are left-wing thugs, and those who are committing violence need to be arrested and prosecuted. Antifa is a scourge on our country."

Of course, the statement sets a somewhat different tone when compared to Paul Ryan"s Facebook post from last week, entitled "Let There Be No Confusion," which was clearly a shot at Trump.

I still firmly believe this hate exists only on the fringes. But so long as it exists, we need to talk about it. We need to call it what it is. And so long as it is weaponized for fear and terror, we need to confront it and defeat it.

That is why we all need to make clear there is no moral relativism when it comes to neo-Nazis. We cannot allow the slightest ambiguity on such a fundamental question.

This is a test of our moral clarity. The words we use and the attitudes we carry matter. Yes, this has been a disheartening setback in our fight to eliminate hate. But it is not the end of the story. We can and must do better. We owe it to Heather Heyer, and to all our children.

So why the sudden change of heart for Pual Ryan? 

Maybe it"s related to the fact that his predecessor, Nancy Pelosi, managed to muster the political courage to denounce the hate group some 24 hours before him?  Per the Washington Times, Pelosi released the following statement on Antifa earlier this week:

"Our democracy has no room for inciting violence or endangering the public, no matter the ideology of those who commit such acts.  The violent actions of people calling themselves antifa in Berkeley this weekend deserve unequivocal condemnation, and the perpetrators should be arrested and prosecuted."

Then again, maybe it was the main stream media"s cover that allowed Ryan the strength to acutally speak his mind...The Washington Post recently unleashed this shocking headline...

That was quickly followed by The Los Angeles Times...

Then, The Atlantic...

And, liberalist of them all, Bloomberg...

It seems as though America"s politicians learned nothing from the 2016 presidential election.  If nothing else, Trump"s campaign should have taught our pandering politicos that sometimes people actually like it when you speak your mind...apparently they"re slow learners.

Alas, it does however seem as though Obama"s "lead from behind" strategy sunk in...so maybe politicians just learn lessons on a multi-year lag?

Brandon Smith: "Sorry, Joe Biden - The 'Soul' Of America Is Conservative"

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.com,

Some political figures truly embody the classic role of the divider; their purpose seems to be to agitate and provoke, to instigate conflict rather than mediate peace. Al Sharpton and Nancy Pelosi come to mind. Let"s not forget John McCain or Lindsay Graham. Barack Obama was known as the "great divider" for much of his presidency. While many leftists would argue that Donald Trump is the "most divisive" president in generations, I think the mainstream media has proven far more provoking than he has. In the case of Charlottesville, we see a whole host of individuals and institutions seeking to promulgate continued social tensions well beyond anything Trump has done. One of these individuals is Joe Biden.

In a short essay for The Atlantic, Joe Biden was quick to capitalize on the death of a protester in Charlottesville at the hands of an apparent white nationalist, spewing forth a host of cliches on "dark forces" creeping out from the hidden corners of America to smother the light and happiness of the silent Kumbaya majority like some kind of J.R.R. Tolkien novel.

This narrative is nothing new. It is the narrative that was promoted throughout the 2016 presidential election cycle as well as the Brexit debate in the U.K. - the notion that dangerous and "ignorant" portions of the citizenry in western society (labeled "populists") are quietly organizing for a last stand against the "inevitable evolution" of progressive multiculturalism and globalism. They are presented as the throwbacks, the cave people, the Cro-Magnons, the people who refuse to get with the times and embrace the social justice revolution.  They are, according to gatekeepers like Biden, in the way.

While a host of names and labels are used to define this group of malcontents preventing society from achieving full-blown Utopia, we all know who establishment snake oil peddlers are really referring to: conservatives.

The racism subplot to this scripted conflict has always been present. When the vote on the U.K. exit from the European Union proved successful, the automatic accusation in the media was that this was driven by "hidden racism," along with the consistent idea that older generations were trying to live off the backs of younger generations while interfering with "natural" shifts in cultural consciousness. These claims were greatly amplified during the rise of the Trump administration.

I have to say, these assertions are fascinating to me. The amount of propaganda and projection involved is truly staggering.

Biden"s hope along with other establishment con-men, I believe, is that he can continue to simplify the narrative down to a series of false associations. White nationalists were present at Charlottesville? Indeed. White nationalists were standing in defense of the confederate statue issue? Yes. White nationalists faced off against Antifa counter-protesters? Certainly. A white nationalist drove his car into a group of counter-protesters and killed one of them? It would seem so, though I still think the man deserves a fair trial before being convicted in the media. But here is where Biden and his ilk deliberately go off the rails in order to incite wider tensions...

At this point, the narrative moves from facts to wild assumptions and misconceptions. White nationalists were present in Charlottesville, but does this mean everyone (or even most people) in Charlottesville protesting in defense against the removal of confederate statues was a racist? No. Does this mean that people who support the existence of confederate statues are automatically racists? No. Does this mean that anyone that stands in opposition to groups like Antifa is a racist or a fascist? No. Just because one man acted violently in response to Antifa and other leftists groups, does this mean that Antifa represents the "good guys" in Biden"s little screenplay? No.

But this is the story we are being sold. Not just by Biden, but by many other political interests.

I would specifically reference a recent panel of Trump supporters by CNN, during which the "journalist" was dismayed to discover that none of the people involved was willing to play along with the message that Donald Trump"s response to Charlottesville was anything other than logical.

I want readers to take note of a specific assertion made by CNN, as well as Biden, here - the assertion that it is the job of leftist groups like Antifa to "fight" or even destroy "hate groups" or "fascist groups." CNN outright compares Charlottesville to World War II, claiming that because the allies were justified in going to war with Nazis back then, that Antifa is justified in going to war with "Nazis" today. But again, when you consider the reality that Antifa and similar groups associate all conservatives with fascism, this narrative opens the door to a level of intolerance and violence that is unacceptable and also misplaced.

Beyond that, it seems to me that CNN, Biden and others are happily supporting the false assumption that "hate speech" is not protected speech in America. I don"t personally care for the white nationalist platform, being that skin color and genetic background is ultimately irrelevant, and as I noted in my last article, some of these groups end up being led by government paid provocateurs. But these groups still have the Constitutional right to protest grievances in public spaces. It does not matter how distasteful one person or another finds them to be.

Laughably, Biden spends the majority of his diatribe in The Atlantic admonishing the very existence of these groups as if they are a threat to the constitution. Stating:

"The giant forward steps we have taken in recent years on civil liberties and civil rights and human rights are being met by a ferocious pushback from the oldest and darkest forces in America. Are we really surprised they rose up? Are we really surprised they lashed back? Did we really think they would be extinguished with a whimper rather than a fight?

...Today we have an American president who has publicly proclaimed a moral equivalency between neo-Nazis and Klansmen and those who would oppose their venom and hate.

We have an American president who has emboldened white supremacists with messages of comfort and support

....This is a moment for this nation to declare what the president can"t with any clarity, consistency or conviction: There is no place for these hate groups in America. Hatred of blacks, Jews, immigrants - all who are seen as "the other" - won"t be accepted or tolerated or given safe harbor anywhere in this nation."

Biden has the audacity to concoct this fallacy and then associate it with the "defense of the constitution" at the end of the article.  I guess the "medal of freedom" he received as a surprise gift from Barack Obama was just a meaningless trinket after all.

I don"t know that anyone claimed a "moral equivalency" between racists and people opposed to racism. That is not what the confederate statue issue is about anyway. What I do know, though, is that under the law every group present at Charlottesville had a Constitutional right to be there, regardless of how Biden or others view their "morals."

I would point out that many people, myself included, actually find the communistic fanaticism of Antifa and other social justice groups to be a much greater threat to the freedom and stability of our nation than anything white nationalist groups promote. But many conservatives, myself included, still defend Antifa"s right to free speech in public places as long as they do not interfere in the free speech rights of others. This is something leftist groups are not willing to do. These groups should be thanking their lucky stars for conservatives and conservative principles, otherwise they might have been stomped out of existence a long time ago. It is conservative thought that defends the rights of any group or individual, acting in accordance with the law, to speak freely in public forums.

It is conservative thought that defends the speech of Antifa. It is conservative thought that defends the existence of confederate statues. And yes, it is conservative thought that defends the speech of white nationalists and many others. This does not mean we necessarily agree with any particular group"s position.  The nature of the speech is irrelevant. In this kind of open social environment, ideas can do battle, rather than people. When one group begins to assert preeminence and says the speech of others is now unprotected, the door is opened wide to battles between people, rather than ideas.

If a person does not agree with certain views, they can always go back home, or back to their own private websites and forums. But, as soon as they enter the public sphere, they are not entitled to insulation from the ideas of other people.

What Biden and others are championing is at bottom the ideology of "futurism," a movement launched in Europe and Russia in the early 20th Century driven by violent change or extermination of traditional principles. Futurism is often credited as being a precursor to both fascist and Bolshevist political movements (as well as globalism), and its core mantra is that all "new" ideas and systems must take precedence over old ideas and systems. New generations must advance the dominance of their ideologies over older generations. Heritage must die out. Traditions must be abandoned. Progress must be pursued.

The problem is, there are very few "new" ideas in the world. In cultural terms, society is cyclical. The same ideas come and go over the centuries; rehashed and rebranded, but certainly not new. What Antifa represents is classic communism and cultural Marxism. These are old ideals. The destruction of a nation"s history and heritage in the name of expedient political progress and "social justice" is a classic strategy turned into a science by the likes of Lenin and Mao. And this strategy is merely an extension of one of the oldest ideas ever — collectivist tyranny.

If we are to be honest here, the conservative philosophy of individual freedom and Constitutional liberty as a foundation of political life is the newest of ideas to be adopted by any culture in human history.

When we examine the mindset of the average American, there is definitely a sizable division.  But, one thing the vast majority of us agree on is that government power is not to be trusted.  Only 20% of Americans today believe the government will "do what is right" most of the time.  The largest ideological group in the US according to recent polls continues to be conservatives.  Conservative principles of limited government and individual liberty are the bedrock upon which America was founded.  While many Democrats (and some Republicans) will insist upon larger government as the solution to all our societal ills, this is predicated on the notion that THEY are in control of that government.  Place a host of Republicans in seats of power in Washington and the liberals become just as distrustful of the establishment as any hardcore libertarian (aka - true conservative).

You see, the fact is that most people are really conservative at heart until they think they have the reins of government in their hands.  What Biden and other establishment elites want is to use government power as a temptation; a prize that will corrupt anyone that attains it and alienate anyone that doesn"t.  In the case of his Atlantic article, Biden is luring leftists into stupidity and ruin.  Biden WANTS domestic strife and conflict.  He wants the left to believe they are fighting a righteous fight when they on the wrong side of history not to mention nothing more than cannon fodder.  And they think he is actually on their side...

Biden claims that today we are in a battle "for America"s soul," but the reality is that establishment elites and the useful idiots they employ are seeking to suffocate the soul of our nation so that they can build their own vision on top of the ashes. This is what futurists do. This is what communists and fascists do. This is what globalists do. America has survived as long as it has because some ideas never become outdated. The Bill of Rights and the Constitution itself are merely the legal embodiment of the eternal principles of natural law and individual liberty. What is new is the idea that these principles must be protected by government, that they actually RESTRICT government, and that, in fact, the only job government should really be concerned with is to ensure the continuation of these restrictions on leadership and these freedoms for citizens.

This is conservative. This is the soul of America. You cannot call for the exact opposite and still claim you are a champion of America"s soul.

Bloomberg Jumps On The 'AntiFa'-Bashing Bandwagon "More In Common With Nazis Than American Ideals"

It appears Bay Area TV anchor Frank Somerville"s honest description of "the hate" he experienced from "violent, clad in black" protesters in Berkeley was the tipping point for the liberal media to turn against AntiFa en masse.

I experienced hate first hand today... It came from these people dressed in all black at a protest in Berkeley.

Ironically they were all chanting about NO hate.

Some had shields and gloves. Some had helmets. Some had gas masks.

And then, for the first time since the campaigns began late last year and protests broke out, The Washington Post unleashed this shocking headline.

That was quickly followed by The Los Angeles Times...

Then, The Atlantic...

And now, liberalist of them all, Bloomberg...

Authored by Eli Lake,

The masked "antifa" anarchists have more in common with the Tiki-torch Nazis than with American ideals.

As America feels like it"s coming apart at the seams, I have a modest proposal. The hard-right and hard-left activists who so enjoy protesting one another should meet every few weekends in a large national park and have at it.

The rest of us could begin to treat this wave of street agitation as the sideshow it is.

After all, this is not a fight for the soul of America. Neither the Tiki-torch Nazis nor the masked anarchists represent a viable American future. They are simply engaging in nostalgia, a scarier version of Civil War battle re-enactments.

Lumping them together does not equate two unequal sides. The cause of anti-fascism is noble, whereas the racists marching in Charlottesville are telling journalists like me I should be sent to the ovens. I"m not talking about the folks on the left who are nonviolent and unmasked, showing up to protest the fascists. I"m referring to the extreme wing that invites itself to these gatherings to "protect" these model citizens. Those "antifa" are something altogether different.

You may have heard of them recently. Human rights historian Mark Bray, who has recently become an unofficial spokesman for the movement, says that "its adherents are predominantly communists, socialists and anarchists who reject turning to the police or the state to halt the advance of white supremacy."

Recently this crowd has been getting some good press. No less a public intellectual than Cornel West said after Charlottesville that had it not been for antifa, "we would have been crushed like cockroaches."

Following the president"s vacillations and equivocations after that horror, a popular Twitter meme emerged comparing the antifa to the GIs who stormed the beaches of Normandy.

Not quite the most apt historical parallel. Zoom back to between the world wars. Most of the people who fought the fascists in Europe"s streets were themselves radical leftists. Both extremes helped to weaken already weak governments in Germany, Italy and Spain.

To get a sense of the depravity of that political moment, read George Orwell"s "Homage to Catalonia," a brilliant memoir of his time fighting in the Spanish civil war. Spoiler alert: The socialists and the fascists fighting for Spain were both authoritarians. Antifa today is the heir not to the Western allies who fought the Nazis, but rather the Soviets who bled them out on the eastern front. After the Third Reich fell, the red army turned the Eastern European states in its dominion into vassals. "Antifa" is a misnomer. It"s more like "also-fa."

This movement in the U.S. has been around for decades. Originally it confronted neo-Nazis at punk concerts and the like. Today though, antifa has become the violent vanguard of the censorious progressive "safe space" movement, in which ideas and speakers deemed offensive are equated with physical violence. It was the Berkeley chapter of antifa that prevented Milo Yiannopoulos and Ann Coulter from speaking at the college this year.

Now whatever one wants to say about those two, they are not Nazis. Indeed, the hysterical reaction to their appearances proves a point Yiannopoulos often makes, that political correctness on campus is a great menace to the principle of free speech.

Antifa"s vigilantism is dangerous in part because its aim is so poor. We can all agree in the abstract to oppose Nazis and other assorted fascists. The disagreement arises in labeling who"s a fascist. So far antifa has shown little discernment in this respect.

Many antifa activists showed up at Trump rallies, where presumably everyone supporting him was lumped in with the Nazis and Klansmen. Antifa activists this month clashed with the police at a rally in Boston, which was ironically called to support "free speech." It"s true that some of the speakers invited to this event were reactionaries. But the rally was open to people of all political stripes to support the idea that in America we are free to assemble and say what we wish.

So if any neo-Nazis or antifa activists are reading this, please agree on a schedule and demonstrate against one another far away from the rest of us. I recommend Yellowstone National Park. I promise to get the word out to the media to cover these events with the same seriousness we reserve for Renaissance fairs and Star Trek conventions.

*  *  *

Anyone who’s been paying attention has been presented with many examples of Antifa’s violent thuggery. Now, it’s almost encouraging to hear that the MSM at least has enough sense not to fall on its sword protecting a bunch of violent, embittered hoodlums.

So that"s four mainstream liberal media outlets decrying AntiFa... did they just admit - ever so sheepishly - that President Trump was right? There are "bad people" on both sides?!

Liberal Media Continues To Turn Against 'AntiFa': "This Is Food For The Adversary"

Yesterday, the Washington Post surprised readers by turning against black-clad “Antifa” protesters who violently assaulted no fewer than five conservative demonstrators at a rally in Berkeley, Calif. on Sunday. Previously, the US capital’s paper of record and its mainstream media cohorts had focused their scorn on violence committed by conservative protesters, particularly in the aftermath of the tragic car-attack in Charlottesville, Va. earlier this month.

But as it turns out, WaPo was ahead of the curve. Because today, both the Los Angeles Times AND The Atlantic published similarly scathing attacks on the black-clad demonstrators, portraying members of Antifa as brutal thugs who routinely gang up on overmatched supporters of President Donald Trump at events like Sunday’s anti-Marxist rally in Berkeley. Violent confrontations instigated by AntiFa have also occurred at rallies and events stretching from Portland, Ore. to Washington D.C. However, before this week, accounts like these were mostly confined to “conservative” media like the Daily Caller and Washington Times.

The LATimes" report focuses on how Antifa has alienated other leftist groups, who object to its violent tactics. One of the individuals quoted in the story, Todd Gitlin, founder of Students for a Democratic Society, one of the original anti-Vietnam War groups, blamed Antifa for sullying the left’s reputation and accused them of being “food for the adversary.”

…first, the headline…

…now, the story...

“But as the protest got underway, some of those in masks would resort to mob violence, attacking a small showing of supporters of President Trump and others they accused, sometimes inaccurately, of being white supremacists or Nazis.

The graphic videos of those attacks have spurred soul-searching within the leftist activist movement in the Bay Area and beyond. Emotions remain raw in the wake of this month’s white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va., which left one woman dead and dozens injured.”

...

‘This is food for the adversary,’ said sociologist Todd Gitlin, a founder of Students for a Democratic Society, which organized the first national protests against the Vietnam War. He pointed out that violent acts committed by a few will almost always hijack the narrative of the entire protest, and that it is happening now should be no surprise.”

The Atlantic continued with a more comprehensive accounting of Antifa’s sins, beginning with the protester who famously punched Richard Spencer in the face on inauguration day…

“In Washington, D.C., the response to that question centers on how members of Congress can oppose Trump’s agenda, on how Democrats can retake the House of Representatives, and on how and when to push for impeachment. But in the country at large, some militant leftists are offering a very different answer. On Inauguration Day, a masked activist punched the white-supremacist leader Richard Spencer. In February, protesters violently disrupted UC Berkeley’s plans to host a speech by Milo Yiannopoulos, a former Breitbart.com editor. In March, protesters pushed and shoved the controversial conservative political scientist Charles Murray when he spoke at Middlebury College, in Vermont.”

...responses sometimes spill blood. Since antifa is heavily composed of anarchists, its activists place little faith in the state, which they consider complicit in fascism and racism. They prefer direct action: They pressure venues to deny white supremacists space to meet. They pressure employers to fire them and landlords to evict them. And when people they deem racists and fascists manage to assemble, antifa’s partisans try to break up their gatherings, including by force.

Such tactics have elicited substantial support from the mainstream left.

...

Antifa believes it is pursuing the opposite of authoritarianism. Many of its activists oppose the very notion of a centralized state. But in the name of protecting the vulnerable, antifascists have granted themselves the authority to decide which Americans may publicly assemble and which may not. That authority rests on no democratic foundation. Unlike the politicians they revile, the men and women of antifa cannot be voted out of office. Generally, they don’t even disclose their names.

...

Revulsion, fear, and rage are understandable. But one thing is clear. The people preventing Republicans from safely assembling on the streets of Portland may consider themselves fierce opponents of the authoritarianism growing on the American right. In truth, however, they are its unlikeliest allies.

Antifa has until now effectively enjoyed immunity from criticism in the mainstream press.

But the first inklings of a sea-change in public opinion emerged over the weekend, when one local reporter shared his story about being harassed and attacked by members of Antifa at Sunday’s rally. His remarks appear to have struck a chord...

KTVU anchor Frank Somerville, a well-known Bay Area TV personality, took to Facebook this weekend to share what happened to him when he took a day trip to Berkeley on Sunday. Somerville – hardly a conservative – explained how the Antifa protesters threatened to destroy his phone and needlessly demeaned and attacked him for the simple act of trying to document a rally taking place on public property.

In response, Somerville declared that he “experienced hate first hand today... It came from these people dressed in all black at a protest in Berkeley.”

“Ironically they were all chanting about NO hate.

Some had shields and gloves. Some had helmets. Some had gas masks.”

Anyone who’s been paying attention has been presented with many examples of Antifa’s violent thuggery. Now, it’s almost encouraging to hear that the MSM at least has enough sense not to fall on its sword protecting a bunch of violent, embittered hoodlums.

Like they say, three’s a trend…