Sunday, 16 April 2017

The Real Story of the Battle of Berkeley, aka The Violent Totalitarian Bitch Deserved It

(note, added 04/20: since some SJWs are still lying about this blog and yet sharing the link thinking you won't read it anyways, I thought I'd make it absolutely clear up here that this blog entry was written the day before the guy throwing the punch was in fact identified as a member of a white supremacist group; so no, I was in no way endorsing his ideology, as I wrote below I had no idea what his ideology was. I was cheering and calling heroic the effort of everyone at the Free Speech Event in Berkeley who fought back against Antifa Stalinists intent on harming and killing anyone who tried to object to their censorship agenda. With that context in mind, I still absolutely endorse my position in this blog entry, in opposition to murderous fascists who wanted to ban books and thought and speech, and in support of democracy and human rights. The main body of the this blog entry, and the addendum of 2019, are both unchanged.)





So we've seen a lot of this gif lately:



Along with quotes from leftist shit-heads claiming that this was an image of a "white supremacist punching a woman in the face" during "fights between anti-trump and pro-trump protesters in Berkeley".

Both those claims are lies.

Why don't you fucking cunt leftists tell the whole story? Like how:

a) this happened at a peaceful event organized by Free Speech supporters. It was not some melee between two groups of protesters that just happened to run across each other. It was specifically a Patriot Day meeting of free-speech advocates.

b) The "woman" was part of a huge group of Left-Wing violent thugs who went to the protest specifically to physically attack the free speech advocates. As we've seen for the last two years, it has NEVER been the Right that goes to left-wing events to physically attack people. It is always the Left who comes to Right-wing events with the intention of violently attacking people.

c) On her facebook page, this woman stated her goal was to 'bring back 100 nazi scalps'. Her clear intention was violence.

d) The police in Berkeley were ordered to disarm the Right-wing free-speech advocates, which they did, and were then ordered NOT to disarm the left-wing thugs who brought metal sticks, pepper-spray and explosives!

e) the police were explicitly ordered by Berkeley city government to stand down and do NOTHING to do protect the free speech advocates they'd just disarmed from being attacked by the ARMED and violent left-wing thugs whose goal was specifically to commit acts of violence.

f) In spite of this (because you leftists are fucking pussies), the free speech advocates quickly managed to get the upper hand, by finally deciding they'd had enough of just being beaten on and trying to be the 'better person' and not punch back. WE PUNCHED BACK. And we kicked the fucking shit out of you goddamn commie fucks.

g) In the full version this video, filmed just before the fascist leftist scum were driven away from the event, it is obvious that this 'woman' is charging into the man with the intention of assaulting him and she is in fact (however pathetically) trying to punch him in the throat to disable him. HE PUNCHED HER IN SELF DEFENSE.



I have no idea if this guy who punched the violent totalitarian thug (that happened to be a woman) is a 'white supremacist' or not, but if I had to bet I'd assume that's a media lie. After all, the Left have called me and other fellow Latinos 'white supremacist'. They've called Black people and Asian people and American Indian and East Indians 'white supremacists' too. They called a half-Jewish homosexual a 'white supremacist'. Those words don't mean anything anymore which is a fucking shame, and THE LEFT'S FAULT. In fact, this woman who got punched came to the event specifically with the intention of viciously assaulting 'nazis' when it was obvious that 99.9% of the people at the Free Speech event were anything but. She didn't care if this guy she was lunging at was a real honest-to-god Nazi or if he had adopted 12 black babies with his Burmese transgender husband. He had committed the 'hate crime' of disagreeing with her, and so to her he was a 'nazi'.





What option do you really have, when for the 20th time a group of violent thugs come to your picnic to beat on you, when a woman is charging at you trying to give you a disabling punch to the throat because she wants your 'scalp', but to punch the stupid bitch in the goddamn face??

Certainly, almost no woman ever deserves to be hit by a man. But this bitch sure did. Almost no woman deserves to be called a 'stupid bitch' either, but this one certainly was, when she came to a peaceful event looking to physically assault people for daring to have different ideas than hers.

But don't mistake my statement for misogyny though: all the men who came with her were stupid goddamn bitches who deserved to be punched in the face, too.


Like I said, I have no idea if the guy who hit her was a 'white supremacist' or not, but I know that in that one moment he, and everyone who fought FOR free speech instead of for leftist totalitarian censorship and terrorism at Berkeley, is A MOTHERFUCKING HERO.

RPGPundit

Currently Smoking: Neerup Bent Billiard + Image Latakia
.

POSTSCRIPT: 2019 Addendum due to continued deceptive posting to this blog entry by SJWs
This blog entry was posted immediately after the Berkeley Free Speech Rally. It was a rally in support of Free Speech with a wide variety of attendees. It was explicitly NOT in any form a "white supremacist rally" or anything of the sort. It had a variety of (planned) speakers of different conservative and libertarian viewpoints, and (unlike, say, the Charlottesville rally) there was nothing about its mission statement that had anything whatsoever to do with white nationalism.

At the time I wrote the blog above, neither I nor virtually anyone else knew who the guy throwing the punch at the psychotic antifa terrorist was. It turned out very shortly after this blog was posted that he was identified as a member of a white-nationalist group, undoubtedly a white supremacist. I in no way support white supremacy, in fact I UTTERLY DESPISE it. And as a mixed-ethnicity half-Latino myself these REAL white supremacists (as opposed to who the left label white supremacists, these days literally EVERYONE who disagrees with them) would probably have no taste for me, even if I didn't actively go face them down on social media, which I have done so on a regular basis (something the SJWs never do, because they are actually the only people on earth interested in the real white supremacists continuing to exist, because it allows them to create their false narrative).

The fact that the guy throwing the punch turned out to be a white supremacist does not IN ANY WAY change the intentions of the Antifa Terrorist who attacked him. She came to what was a Free Speech rally, armed with weighted gloves, pepper spray and other weapons, and had posted on Social Media her intention to "claim 100 scalps", in an attack Antifa made. THEY came to the Free Speech rally. THEY attacked. At this same event, Antifa people viciously assaulted people with bricks and lead pipes (the fact that no one died was only thanks to the notoriously bad upper arm strength of the average Antifa terrorist), and shot fireworks at senior citizens. When this deluded woman rushed toward the guy planning to make him her first 'scalp' she had no idea if he was a White Supremacist, a regular conservative, a libertarian, a moderate who didn't like the notorious and egregious attack on free speech on campus, or a conservative Jew training to be a rabbi. She only knew that he was at the Free Speech event and for that she literally wanted to kill him.

So, I write this addendum for the sake of context, mainly that:
a) I didn't know what political allegiance the man being assaulted by this Antifa Terrorist belonged to at the time of writing.
b) I do now know he was a white nationalist, and I abhor white supremacy, nazism, ethnonationalism of any kind from any race, or any other value that goes against the dictum of Dr. Martin Luther King, to judge all men by the content of their character and not the color of their skin.
c) His political affiliation IN NO WAY changes the events as they played out, because the man's Antifa Terrorist attacker had no way of knowing that he was a white supremacist. And she is part of a violent totalitarian movement that wishes to murder anyone who dares oppose their radical and incredibly evil ideology.
So the Violent Totalitarian Bitch Still Absolutely Deserved It.

Finally, I'll point out that my saying so doesn't suggest that I in any way advocate violence against women. Only self-defense against violent totalitarian leftist women who are charging at you with the intent to kill you and claim your scalp. Those women, or indeed any man who does the same, deserves anything that happens to them.

Note: apart from the addition of this post-script, no other part of this blog entry has been changed in any way.

44 comments:

  1. Yeah, the extreme Left has indeed done some serious harm by labelling everything that doesn't agree with it a "Fascist" or a "white supremacist". But the Alt-Right does the same by defending racism and hatespeech in the name of "freedom of speech".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is no such thing as hatespeech. There is only speech.

      Delete
    2. Thank you for illustrating my point.

      Delete
    3. Thomas, this just proves you don't believe in the very concept of free speech. You think you get to choose what is acceptable speech, which is the exact opposite of free speech. Are you in Europe? Europeans have that problem a lot; they don't even know what free speech is in places such as Germany and Holland.

      Delete
    4. There's no definition of "Free Speech" that does not become absurd if it means "any speech I agree with is allowed, some/all that I don't agree with isn't".

      The whole foundation for Free Speech is found in the notion that no matter how despicable you find what someone says, you must defend to the death their right to say it.

      Delete
    5. Matt Celis, having just posted a like 10,000 word long takedown of Pundit's shit take here...PUNCHING is not speech nor is throwing a brick. Pundit isn't saying he has a problem with counter-protesters showing up to this free speech rally to SAY stuff. He has a problem with counter protesters showing up to this free speech rally to hit people.

      "The whole foundation for Free Speech is found in the notion that no matter how despicable you find what someone says, you must defend to the death their right to say it."

      Pundit, you are getting some key things about this quote wrong. First off, the quote is usually attributed to Voltaire but was probably actually spoken by Evelyn Beatrice Hall summing up Voltaire's beliefs. Secondly, the quote is: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

      There are some crucial distinctions here that add up to the fact that no, Voltaire does not expect you to defend Nazis. First there's a vast gulf of difference between "I disapprove of what you say" and "No matter how despicable I find what you say". You're radicalizing the Voltaire/Hall quote to a degree far beyond what's actually being said. Secondly, the Voltaire/Hall quote uses "I" language, not "you" language. Voltaire/Hall says "*I* disapprove of what you say" (and whatever it is, it's probably not as bad as National Socialism, which hadn't been invented yet) "but *I* will defend to the death your right to say it".

      In other words, Voltaire/Hall is declaring his/her/their extreme dedication to free speech. What is NOT being said is:

      "no matter how despicable you find what someone says, you must defend to the death their right to say it."

      Voltaire is saying that he, personally, would defend to the death the right of someone to say something he disapproved of. He is not saying that you have some kind of moral, societal imperative to defend hate speech by Nazis and other hateful wretched subhuman filth.

      Oh, and I'm antifa and your right, I don't even lift bro, my upper arm strength is terrible, gotta work on that, tone up these flabby arms for some NAZI punchin', OORAH.

      Delete
  2. The moment I dread is when the guns come out. I'm kind of surprised that hasn't happened already -- there was a shooting at one rally in Seattle but that was apparently Left-on-Left so has faded quickly from the news. I almost wonder if the liberal politicians and media are encouraging this kind of political terrorism by "antifas" in the hope of provoking some kind of latter-day Kent State which they can then use to bash conservatives, Trump, and of course gun ownership in general.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why would they? Nixon won a landslide after Kent State.

      Delete
    2. Because they're stupid, and still think they control the narrative through traditional Establishment media.

      Delete
  3. Was she aiming to misbehave? Yes. But was she attacking this man? No.

    And how do I know? Well it's all thanks to the evidence you presented!

    So looking at that you can see the man is preparing a punch before she sees him, and she is closing her eyes in expectation, putting up her hands in a defensive manner, and has her back tilted away from the aggressor. This is clearly someone with _no_ self-defense training.

    But don't take my word for it. Go ask actual HtH combat specialists, forensic experts, and kinesthetic animators what they think yourself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your judging all that from a photo that may be several seconds after she attacked him and found he was willing to fight back.

      Delete
    2. Clearly seeing what you want to see. Good try.

      Delete
    3. Ahhhh, Kasmir, still trying to reason with the unreasonable, I see. Consequences are a bitch, however. Consequences of course are never pre-figured by those who do not respect others. So it goes...

      Delete
    4. And here's the point where I share the original footage, free of political commentary, which @ThePundit forgot to do.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8GVtXfATtI

      So no +Rob Schwarz, that's not 'several seconds' after she attacked him.

      And it's funny you use the 'everyone seeing what they want to see' defense +Matt Celis, because that ends up dismissing mine, yours, _and_ @ThePundit's assessment in one magnificent blow. Well played. Perhaps you can tell us how _you_ asses facts then.

      People want this to _matter_, but all I see are a bunch of clowns who think some comic book style battle in #Berkeley will resolve things. This shit is nothing more than a modern #FightClub, and just as relevant.

      But now that I have you chuckleheads in one room, do you condone violent action against those who disagree with your politics?

      Delete
    5. We are condoning self-defense. The leftist showed up to silence others with violent acts. Do you condone that?

      There would have been no melee if the leftists stayed home.

      Delete
    6. She wrote about taking 100 nazi scalps (yes, it's ludicrous that this little girl thought she'd be a badass in a street fight against large men, but that's what Feminism does to your brain), and was photographed using a bottle as a weapon in the fight.

      Delete
    7. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    8. "100 nazi scalps"....seriously pundit how had you not seen Inglorious Basterds by 2017 NINE YEARS after it came out? They have like...movies...in Uruguay, right?

      Delete
    9. Do you think that the fact that it was a movie quote means she wasn't serious? I mean, she might not have been exactly literally saying she planned to kill 100 people, but she went to that Free Speech event with weighted gloves and pepper spray and charged forward to assault people she didn't know just because they'd come to an event held in defense of the 1st amendment.

      Delete
  4. So a neo-Nazi who was (a) dishonorably discharged from the Marines, (b) robbed a cab driver at gunpoint for "looking Iraqi", (c) when serving prison time for the robbery chose David Duke as his role model and inspiration and (d) punched out a girl is Pundy's new man-crush? I know he's been depressed and angry ever since his other hero, Milo NAMBLA-nopolous was exposed as an advocate for the "benefits" of screwing underage boys, but surely RPGPundit can do better than this, right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You don't see the real problem here, do you? With your "punch all the Nazis because their existence is violence" conflated with the very open desire to censor even thoughts and attack on the basis of "conservatives are close enough to Nazis", you did something that shouldn't be possible: you created a conflict where the Nazis are the innocent people. YOU MADE THE NAZIS THE GOOD GUYS! THAT IS HOW BADLY YOU FUCKED UP!

      Delete
    2. Elfdart supports people who shoot explosives at old women to try to set them on fire for coming to a Free Speech talk. That's all you need to know about his sense of morality.

      Delete
    3. Care to back up this claim with an actual quote? Or would you like to apologize for telling a blatant lie?

      Delete
    4. And no, the Left didn't make nazis the "good guys" (though they certainly seem to be trying really hard to give the Nazis a run for their money as the 'bad guys'); what they did was in some way much WORSE.

      They created a situation where the word "nazi" doesn't MEAN anything anymore, because you can no longer know who really is or isn't a nazi. They called me a Nazi. They called Sheriff Clark, a black man, a Nazi. They called a gay jew a Nazi. They call EVERYONE who stands up to them a "nazi" and say it's ok to physically assault nazis, what did they think was going to happen?!

      The end result is that the media claims "this guy who fought at the rally is a neo-nazi", and I'm like "how the fuck am I supposed to believe you? You called ME a nazi five minutes ago!"

      They've destroyed the ability to easily distinguish Nazis from non-Nazis. Which is unbelievably stupid and irresponsible.

      Delete
    5. Mr Ferguson, could you point to where I advocated punching anyone, except in legitimate self-defense?

      Delete
    6. "Actual quote"? You're doing it RIGHT NOW. You're defending someone who came to the rally to attack unarmed people.

      Delete
    7. "They created a situation where the word "nazi" doesn't MEAN anything anymore, because you can no longer know who really is or isn't a nazi. They called me a Nazi. They called Sheriff Clark, a black man, a Nazi. They called a gay jew a Nazi. They call EVERYONE who stands up to them a "nazi" and say it's ok to physically assault nazis, what did they think was going to happen?!"

      Here is where you are right. The radical left are fine with Nazi punching, and there is nothing wrong with that. Ask any WWII Veteran still alive, ask Indiana Jones, ask Captain America, Nazi punching is a long standing American tradition. ALL OF THAT IS FINE. I am cool with all of that. What is not fine is that yes, a lot of them tend to call a LOT of the people who disagree with them Nazis."

      "The end result is that the media claims "this guy who fought at the rally is a neo-nazi", and I'm like "how the fuck am I supposed to believe you? You called ME a nazi five minutes ago!"

      "The end result is that the media claims "this guy who fought at the rally is a neo-nazi", and I'm like "how the fuck am I supposed to believe you? You called ME a nazi five minutes ago!"

      "They've destroyed the ability to easily distinguish Nazis from non-Nazis. Which is unbelievably stupid and irresponsible."

      Here is where you are wrong.

      RPGPundit be like: "IT'S LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR ME--OR ANYONE ELSE!--TO TELL WHO IS A NAZI AND WHO IS JUST SOMEONE THAT THE ALT-LEFT DOESN'T LIKE!"

      ACTUAL FUCKING NAZIS be like: https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/bigots-get-boost-from-bully-pulpit.jpg

      They're really not that hard to spot.

      Delete
    8. Well yes, I'll concede you're right, there's a very easy way to tell if someone is a Nazi. Go and ask someone, and if they're a nazi the dumbfuck will tell you so. Either literally or they'll say "I'm not a nazi but..." and go on to tell you about how they despise people of other races, or Jews, or how there was no holocaust or how Hitler wasn't that bad.

      The dumbfucks can't help themselves.

      What I meant, however, is that the Left has made it impossible to do what we USED to be able to do. If you're older than 30 or so, you will remember a time when if someone said "Bob Robertson is a Nazi" with a straight face, that word was so terrible that it was 90% certain that he WAS a Nazi. Because you wouldn't just throw that word around like confetti.

      Now, if someone, especially anyone on the Left says "Bob Robertson is a Nazi" (or say, Sheriff Clark is a Nazi, or Ben Shapiro is a Nazi, or Kathy Zhu is a Nazi, or Ian Miles Cheong is a Nazi, or Candace Owens is a Nazi, or The RPGpundit is a Nazi), there's a 99% chance that's just a bold-faced lie. So when they say that about a person you don't know, you must now by default assume they're NOT a Nazi.

      And that is a terrible, terrible loss for society. Because now the real Nazis have cover.

      Delete
  5. So you admit you can't point to a single quote where I advocated using explosives on old ladies.

    Concession accepted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Until you unequivocally denounce Antifa and all members of the Left who support it, you are IMPLICITLY supporting violence against innocents for the sake of suppressing Free Speech. You're scum.

      Delete
    2. Sorry Elfdart, but on this one, Pundit is right and you are 100% wrong.

      If you don't understand why, please read this article:

      http://lkvi.blogspot.ca/2017/02/there-is-no-justified-violence.html

      TLDR: You are advocating for violence in a democratic society. That makes YOU the problem.

      Delete
    3. Care to provide a quote to back it up? Can't do it can you?

      Delete
    4. Bullshit there is no justified violence. From time to time, Nazis gotta get punched. And worse.

      Delete
    5. Pundit, I hate the regressive left, the feeling is mutual, and conflicts over my love of free speech versus their openly not giving a SHIT about it lead to the destruction of my career in TTRPGs. I'm also unequivocally in support of Antifa (although I have not myself participated in any street violence or demonstrations, in part because I'm disabled which makes that very difficult) and celebrate Nazi punching in all its forms.

      Explain my existence, if you can.

      Delete
    6. It's easy to explain your existence: You're a moron.

      You claim to love free speech but you support groups that viciously assault people, sometimes with the intent to kill (even if they haven't quite managed that yet, just beaten people to the point of brain damage, set them on fire, etc), for doing nothing other than standing up for the right to free speech. That is the position of a moron.

      Delete
  6. Going by that logic, until you unequivocally denounce Milo NAMBLA-nopolous and all members of the Right who support him, you are IMPLICITLY supporting child molestation.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_UtZUcJjIw

    You're scum.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Milo doesn't support child molestation. Since he's made that clear, I don't need to denounce him.
      On the other hand, Antifa made it very clear that they now feel that MURDERING Trump supporters is justified. You fucking support the violent murder of unarmed innocents.

      Delete
  7. Apparently you didn't watch the video from the Joe Rogan Show where your idol extols the virtues of getting molested. I know it's not pleasant viewing but facts are facts. Milo Sandusky thinks being molested as a kid made him a better lover as an adult. That's sick, and so are you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. George Takei on the Howard Stern show said much the same thing about being molested as a kid. Don't forget to list him in your list.

      Delete
  8. The whole "Punch A Nazi in the face" set are useful idiots working towards a future that is a boot stamping on a face forever.

    Let people be known by their words and deeds.

    ReplyDelete
  9. He actually is a white nationalist, he's the head of "Identity Evropa," but that doesn't really change the facts. His ideas might be dumb but he's got the right to express them, and if that means socking some criminal leftist thug, then it is what it is.

    Really we should be condemning these goons twice as hard, because now they've de-facto LEGITIMIZED actual racists. How fucked up is it that in order to be inellectually honest in defense of freedom of speech and expression, we have to defend literal nazis? Whose fault is that? It's the fault of the people who want to silence them, they made this necessary.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. It's one of the things that pisses me off the most about the left, as the descendant of people who died in Nazi Death Camps. They have watered down the term "nazi" to the point that it means NOTHING. Ditto for "white supremacist". These were important words, because they pointed out specific people who were horrifically awful people, and now those words don't because the left uses them on anyone who disagrees with them.
      Almost as bad is the fact that because I believe in Free Speech, those leftists cunts have put me into the position where I have to defend people who are real Nazis in the traditional sense, and I fucking HATE that. I despise having to do so, but I must, because the alternative is the Pol-Pot Killing Fields that SJWs would cheerily engage in if they only had the power to silence everyone they want silenced.

      Delete
    2. yes it was totally 100% the left that legitimized actual racists and couldn't possibly have had anything to do with racists feeling empowered and emboldened by an openly racist sexist misogynistic white supremacist xenophobic retarded orange shitstain become President Of The United States.

      Yup....normalizing racism was 100% the left. Brava.

      Delete
    3. Donald Trump is very clearly a civic nationalist, and is in no way a white supremacist. He's always, ALWAYS, made it clear that he believes in an America for ALL American citizens.
      That's why support for Trump has GONE UP since the start of his presidency among both blacks AND LATINO citizens.

      Ironically, in an electoral field that depends on extremely tiny margins of victory, it may very well be the non-white vote that makes the difference that secures Trump's re-election. And won't that be hilarious!

      Delete