The Guardian's Owen Jones attacked outside London pub in a premeditated assault.

[stockhausen]

No message.

 

[stockhausen]

Owen Jones has been guilty of promoting violence himself. . .

Jones has previously called for violence to be inflicted upon certain people and groups of society.

. . . But then again I find it very hard to sympathise with a man who makes calls to violence . . .

He’s publicly supported physical force being used against supporters of different political groups before. . . .

It is amazing how willing people are to make unsubstantiated, context light allegations . . .

 

[stockhausen]

. . . decent far right thug . . .

Say no more squire.

 

[stockhausen]

sorry, I meant "competent"

No need to apologise, I think most sentient beings can see where you are coming from.

 

[stockhausen]

. . . Jones is a professional provocateur.

Haters gonna hate

 

[stockhausen]

. . .
You know the Nazis were not left wing socialists. It's just a stupid point to even try and argue.

I believe that the Nazis murdered a number of Communists during the Holocaust

 

[stockhausen]

. . . we're both reliant on what has been reported and our personal beliefs . . .

And in at least one case in the ability to get triggered about someone who isn't a Tory and who happens to believe in Society?

 

[stockhausen]

But I'm sure they too see themselves as protectors and their violence as justified and defensive. Is there a difference in actuality or merely a difference in the degree of success of PR?

I take it that you are referring here to members of Combat 18? I'm not familiar with these people, Wikipedia describes them as "a neo-Nazi terrorist organization". Who exactly do you believe they are "protecting"?

 

[stockhausen]

As @Chris Wilson points out, Combat 18 is an openly neo-Nazi group that is devoted to violence and hostile to democracy