Yes, Antifa is violent. Yes their are violent groups so what is your point.  Is your point to show that Antifa is violent or is your agenda to make some connection to all people on the left.  This is pretty much what I see.  This isn't about how violent Antifa is but instead a way to tie it to people who are on the left.  Its no better than someone trying to show how violent the Proud boys are and trying to tie that to all people on the right.  What you are doing is no better.

he's a reporter, were you expecting him to quit his job?

I expect him to be smart.  I expect him not to go into a group of violent people and believe he is safe.  I expect if he was going to go into a group of violent people he would either be fast, evasive, can kick some ass or have a pose with him.  If none of the above, then you have to ask yourself was he foolish, believed nothing would happen or knew what he was getting into and went in their like a soldier.  Either way, it was his decision.  People put themselves into dangerous situations all the time if things go south, well sometimes they do not make it.  

My point is that Mr. Ngo knew the situation.  He knew they were on the lookout for him, he knew through the things he has done previously that the group were definitely not going to shake his hand.  Maybe he thought the only thing he would get is a bunch of milkshakes and eggs thrown at him.  Either way, I wonder for the next protest like this will he go into the middle of the group again.

"Yes their are violent groups so what is your point. "

my point in that post was that leftists trying to excuse the violence of antifa by calling out this man for exposing antifa is highly hypocritical since they are the ones who decry victim blaming, to me it pretty much shows that they don't really believe in the values they claim to stand for

"Is your point to show that Antifa is violent or is your agenda to make some connection to all people on the left."

what have I posted can be interpreted that way?

"Its no better than someone trying to show how violent the Proud boys are and trying to tie that to all people on the right."

what about people calling andy ngo far right and not posting any evidence for that assertion? how does that compare?

1.  Saying that he should not have gone is literally saying that terrorism should win.

2.  The police were only feet away and watched it happen.  That should have been the protection he could count on.

3.  If he had brought his own protection, there's little doubt he'd be the one facing criminal charges.  It's backwards, but it's the world we're living in.

Who cares about those people, I am talking about your agenda.  Mr. Ngo seem like the typical conservative reporter. Just as quick to ignore what is happening in his side of the pond as long as he can criticize what is happening in someone else garden. This is what appears to be the aim here.  As long as you can criticize the left, who cares what happens on the right.  Instead their are violent groups on all sides but it appears everyone has an agenda to only recognize the other side and not denounce them all.

"I expect him to be smart.  I expect him not to go into a group of violent people and believe he is safe.  I expect if he was going to go into a group of violent people he would either be fast, evasive, can kick some ass or have a pose with him."

what was she thinking going down that dark alley alone at that time of night wearing a skirt that short? what? she had how many drinks and flirted with that guy? she should have known better

how is this any different to victim blaming women who are victimised after going out to party late at night?

You are right, what was she thinking.  When people do something stupid we feel for the victim but we also wonder why would they put themselves into the situation in the first place.  What you are doing is trying to say people are not responsible for their decisions just because something bad happen.  How many times have you made a dumb decision and asked yourself, why did I do that, I should have known better.  Does that mean the people that did the bad act should not be punished, No but you as the person who put yourself into a bad situation probably would not do it again would you.

"If none of the above, then you have to ask yourself was he foolish, believed nothing would happen or knew what he was getting into and went in their like a soldier."

like a soldier? he wasn't wearing fatigues and an m4 man, he had a camera and some gear for photography

so people who disagree with far leftists are no longer allowed to go out in public if they are around?

I guess I should not use slang in a international thread.  Like a soldier means he went into a dangerous situation knowing the risk and did it anyway.  You are trying to make this about left and right, I am making this about Mr Ngo.  I am saying he absolutely  knew there was danger because he tweeted about it.  This isn't about someone walking out in public or some other BS, this is about someone walking into a group of angry violent people who are on the lookout for you and wish you harm.

"He knew they were on the lookout for him, he knew through the things he has done previously that the group were definitely not going to shake his hand."

so reporters in your view shouldn't report on antifa?

No, a reporter probably should report on all violent groups not just Antifa.  If the reporter ignores the other violent groups just because they are on the right and only report on the left then I would consider that reporter to be garbage.

"I wonder for the next protest like this will he go into the middle of the group again."

well its his job so...

His job isn't to be stupid.  If he walks into the middle of the group again with no protection or a way to prevent harm and get seriously hurt then he would be the absolute fool.

this woman was beaten and sexually assaulted while reporting on events in egypt, what are your views on what happened to her?

"Mr. Ngo seem like the typical conservative reporter."

what are you basing him being a conservative reporter on?

"Just as quick to ignore what is happening in his side of the pond"

what makes him a conservative?

His own words, why ask me questions you already know the answer to.

"This is what appears to be the aim here."

oh he sustained injuries which caused him to bleed in his brain to criticise the left? lol

Or he stepped into the middle of a violent group without any precautions expecting to be saved by nuns.

why are you denying the leftists who beat him their agency? are they not responsible for their actions? why is everything with you revolving around his(the victim) actions?

This is the difference with your stance and mine.  I actually do not care about the left or right, I am putting the responsibility on Mr. Ngo.  Your agenda is to bring the whole left equation into the conversation because that is your purpose.  To you it's the unholy left making a victim of Mr. Ngo.  While what I see is a man putting himself into a dangerous situation and it happen.  If every one of the people who attacked Mr. Ngo got jail time, I would also applaud that as well but that still doesn't dismiss Mr. Ngo placing himself into that situation.  You dismiss his actions because you want to make it political.  I am just talking about people making dumb dangerous decisions and not taking precautions.

" As long as you can criticize the left, who cares what happens on the right"

the right are capable of evil too, what does that have to do with this man being beaten savagely by far leftists?

Take my whole paragraph in context not the blurb.  The aim here is to point the finger and make it political.  You say this man was savagely beaten by the left but that isn't correct.  This man was beaten by Antifa and even if just saying that it still wouldn't totally be correct. This man was beat by people associated by Antifa.  Your statement tries to paint everyone on the left beating this man and you want to make it seem as if the left as in everyone performing this act when it was just a few people in this group.  What you are doing isn't knew and its been done so many times it become obvious the slant taken.

"it appears everyone has an agenda to only recognize the other side and not denounce them all."

based on what?

Based on the above.  Since you want to make it about the left instead of making it about Antifa.  You want to associate it with the left instead of associating the acts on the group and the people involved.  Your agenda is to paint the left as Antifa instead of just recognizing this group as violent.