Antifa Mob Viciously Assaults Journalist Andy Ngo at Portland Rally

  • Thread starter Thread starter Victoria33
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
V

Victoria33

Guest
Antifa Mob Viciously Assaults Journalist Andy Ngo at Portland Rally
Robby Soave

Andy Ngo, a photojournalist and editor at Quillette , landed in the emergency room after a mob of antifa activists attacked him on the streets of Portland during a Saturday afternoon demonstration.

The assailants wore black clothing and masks, and were engaged in a counter-protest against several right-wing groups, including the Proud Boys. Ngo is a well-known chronicler of antifa activity, and has criticized their illiberal tactics on Fox News. He attended the protest in this capacity—as a journalist, covering a notable public event.

According to Ngo, his attacker stole his camera equipment. But video footage recorded by another journalist, The Oregonian 's Jim Ryan, clearly shows an antifa activist punching Ngo in the face. Others throw milkshakes at him:
Click to expand...
Updates on this is that some stories are saying there may have been fast drying cement in the milk shakes thrown.
 
Nothing says anti-fascist like assaulting people.
Nothing says tolerance like assaulting someone who holds right-wing views.
Nothing says defending minorities like assaulting a man of Vietnamese heritage.
Nothing says defending gays like assaulting a gay man of Vietnamese heritage.

What is so bizarre is the communications director of Human Rights Coalition, an LGBT activist group is victim blaming. She ought to be ashamed of herself. This isn’t some fringe person on the Internet, this is a prominent person at a massive activist group.

Then you have left-wing commentators complaining he’s not a journalist. This is what post-morality looks like. So only journalists now are a protected class? No one deserves to be assaulted.
 
Last edited:
Updates on this is that some stories are saying there may have been fast drying cement in the milk shakes thrown.
Click to expand...
This is entirely fake, and probably impossible.
 
Andy Ngo mostly just writes slanderous right-wing junk articles about European cities having “no go zones” because of evil Muslims, or other such nonsense. He isn’t some innocent bystander, he’s explicitly far-right, and I imagine he anticipated this kind of response when he went to “document” those protests.
 
Oh, well then, glad he got hospitalized! Thanks for pointing out what a horrible person he is and why he deserved to be assaulted! Can’t have people disagreeing with antifa writing articles about them.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
Andy Ngo mostly just writes slanderous right-wing junk articles about European cities having “no go zones” because of evil Muslims, or other such nonsense. He isn’t some innocent bystander, he’s explicitly far-right, and I imagine he anticipated this kind of response when he went to “document” those protests.
Click to expand...
We call that victim blaming.
It boggles the mind how anyone can defend assault. It really does.
Having a camera out is not the equivalent of assault.
 
Last edited:
It is remarkable how the group that claims to be anti-fascist acts more fascist than most.
The dress like blackshirts, act like blackshirts, and promote statist socialist ideas.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
Andy Ngo mostly just writes slanderous right-wing junk articles about European cities having “no go zones” because of evil Muslims, or other such nonsense. He isn’t some innocent bystander, he’s explicitly far-right, and I imagine he anticipated this kind of response when he went to “document” those protests.
Click to expand...
I see no proof of this, I also see that he’s gay from one article. Could this be the reason some dislike him?

@TheLittleLady @angel12

Yes, I am pinging you, if you vote up these kinds of posts or other ones I have seen you all vote up, I wonder what the rationale is? Is violence okay? You deserve to be responded to as well.

Like that post yesterday on Trump that got all those likes. Believe me, if I were to talk about a “dark, dark world” and “Trump _____s” in regards to say those of the Jewish faith or of a minority, say blacks, I don’t think I’d be getting lenient treatment. I think rightfully, this would be heavily dealt with. I don’t think I’d get the reasoning because I don’t see that rationale, “hey, he’s just talking about who voted for whom” so it’s okay. And also, responding while not directly addressing the issue the thread is about, immigration at that. So, one could really say, it was just a random comment thrown in.

I almost wonder if the attitude condones severe misconduct or in other cases violence.

I am sorry, that some Democrats have come close to or in the views of others, endorse infanticide. This hardly means I would ever endorse them being bloodied up and put in the hospital or taken to the emergency room. They were asking for it, no, I would not reason that way.

If these are people’s contributions to civil discussion, I believe it should be seen. It really seems menacing and revolting behavior.

By the way, I do not judge Andy Ngo, I have seen some of his work but not all to jump to some conclusion that he had possibly a milk shake mix with quick drying cement and was bloodied up but he’s Islamophobic so he was asking for it. I think anyone who votes up these kinds of posts should be seen for doing this as well. In fact, I have seen none of these kinds of articles from Any Ngo, I consider it hearsay but will look for examples. He has a right to his opinion as well.
 
Last edited:
Victoria33 said:
I am sorry, that some Democrats have come close to or in the views of others, endorse infanticide.
Click to expand...
You suggest that some Democrats endorse infanticide. But the bills just passed in very red states do allow for abortions when the mother is at risk, independent of gestation age. These bills were passed by strongly republican legislatures. If you insist on pointing fingers, why not point in both directions.
 
Just Google his name. It’s easy to find the stuff he’s posted on Quillete.
By the way, I do not judge Andy Ngo, I have seen some of his work but not all to jump to some conclusion that he had possibly a milk shake mix with quick drying cement and was bloodied up but he’s Islamophobic so he was asking for it.
Click to expand...
I never said he was asking for it. But the narrative that he was some independent journalist that got savagely attacked is nonsense. He’s a public figure that has positioned himself to the right, and has positioned himself as being opposed to “antifa.” He was there to denounce them, he wasn’t just passing though.
He has a right to his opinion as well.
Click to expand...
He doesn’t have a right to lie about the state of European countries in a deliberate attempt to stir up ethnic and religious divisions.
 
I agree, and am very concerned about the seeming indifference of Portland officials to Antifa events - especially when directed against a free press…

At the same time, I am less concerned with hooligans on the streets than the hooliganism of Trump’s foreign affairs, when we can’t seem to hold a perspective that attaches serious opprobrium to dictators, even those who revel in the dispatching with their press critics through murder.

Does anyone respect the rule of law anymore, or is it just a matter of our side winning?
 
Last edited:
Regular_Atheist said:
But the narrative that he was some independent journalist that got savagely attacked is nonsense. He’s a public figure that has positioned himself to the right, and has positioned himself as being opposed to “antifa.” He was there to denounce them, he wasn’t just passing though.
Click to expand...
So he got what was coming to him. What happens when a left wing journalist gets beat up covering a “white supremacist” rally? Will you defend them too? Or do the new rules only go one way?
 
Last edited:
Regular_Atheist said:
But the narrative that he was some independent journalist that got savagely attacked is nonsense. He’s a public figure that has positioned himself to the right, and has positioned himself as being opposed to “antifa.” He was there to denounce them, he wasn’t just passing though.
Click to expand...
Fine, but none of that matters in terms of the violence from this fascistic group in this event and many others.
 
JonNC said:
Does it matter to @Guinness ‘s point?
Click to expand...
No journalist should get beat up covering a rally.
Neither should an agent provocateur seeking to broadcast misinformation.
But I have no problem with non-violent efforts to silence the latter. Neither do I see the latter as wholly blameless should that lead to violence.
 
Last edited:
dvdjs said:
No journalist should get beat up covering a rally.
Neither should an agent provocateur seeking to broadcast misinformation.
Click to expand...
And the difference between a “journalist” and an “agent provocateur seeking to broadcast misinformation” is the “journalist” says the things you want to hear and the other guy doesn’t?
dvdjs said:
But I have no problem with non-violent efforts to silence the latter. Neither do I see the latter as wholly blameless should that lead to violence.
Click to expand...
IOW, the guy I disagree with shouldn’t have the snot beat out of him, but if he does I won’t complain too much and mostly blame him.

I think the most surprising thing about this is the people defending a journalist getting assaulted aren’t just the fascist crazies of “antifa”, but also supposedly mainstream outlets like the NYT and WaPo. They are going to be shocked when the rules they advocate start applying to them…
 
Last edited:
dvdjs said:
No journalist should get beat up covering a rally.
Neither should an agent provocateur seeking to broadcast misinformation.
Click to expand...
We agree.
dvdjs said:
But I have no problem with non-violent efforts to silence the latter.
Click to expand...
Depends on the efforts.
Shouting Down to prevent speech? Absolutely opposed. If Antifa wishes to promote, in an organized setting, its fascistic socialist views, opponents should not interfere.
Proposing government prevent speech based on content?
Absolutely opposed, unless it is promoting or advocating violence. There are already legal remedies for slander.
Using speech to provides contrary view that overwhelmingly defeats the other view ?
Absolutely in favor.
dvdjs said:
Neither do I see the latter as wholly blameless should that lead to violence.
Click to expand...
Unless it is a call for or clear incident of violence, they are completely blameless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top