[naasking]

> In those emails Bannon instructs Milo/etc to target specific groups. There were multiple instances of this throughout the emails.

I suppose you mean the Breitbart emails. Targeting groups would not surprise me, they obviously have an agenda and bias, like most organizations. The real question is whether these same emails actually suggest that they don't believe the propaganda they published, and that they're just doing it to fulfill ulterior motives.

Edit: I see now you added considerably more text. Sorry to hear about your friend, but I don't see how Breitbart is any worse in principle than hocking crystals and astrology (and I know people who have stopped meds from this kind of influence). As long as they are not directly inciting violence, we should be policing actions not words.

[spitfire]

You're suggesting Julius Steicher shouldn't have been charged in the Nuremberg trials?

There is a direct comparison to the actions taken leading up to and during WWII and now. It's the exact same material being published again.

In fact in some cases it's literally the exact same "Jew pulling puppet strings of <X> from above" posters/ads as were in WWII. You can look up some of the ads Brexit leave campaigns have put out.

There absolutely is a direct plan to incite violence, check the emails. These guys just know if they don't directly say it they're not accountable.

One of a few Nazi Jewish puppet master posters: https://www.ushmm.org/media/emu/get?irn=542389&mm_irn=44098&... One of a few Soros puppet master posters: https://morningmail.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/soros-pup...

And of course a video of Bannon laying things out: https://twitter.com/brexit_sham/status/1117536807242149893

[naasking]

> You're suggesting Julius Steicher shouldn't have been charged in the Nuremberg trials?

If Breitbart and Bannon were acting solely at the direction of white supremacists or neo-Nazis, and so the ultimate agenda of ethnocleansing were clear, that's a totally different scenario. There's no need for charity or a presumption of innocence. The summaries of the emails I've read suggest that isn't the case.

> There absolutely is a direct plan to incite violence, check the emails.

I'd love to, but googling doesn't seem to turn up anything but comments and summaries. Given the emotionally charged nature of this topic, I'd prefer to read the source myself. If you have a link please share.

> And of course a video of Bannon laying things out

Sounds like he's laying out a campaign strategy. Again the question is whether he actually believes in it, or if he's pushing this agenda for ulterior motives.