https://www.liquidpoker.net/


LP international Poland    Contact            Users: 452 Active, 1 Logged in - Time: 15:37

Truth Discussion Time - Page 93

New to LiquidPoker? Register here for free!
Forum Index > General
  First 
  < 
  88 
  89 
  90 
  91 
  92 
 93 
  94 
  > 
  Last 
Loco   Canada. Jan 25 2019 15:22. Posts 20963


  On January 25 2019 02:22 Baalim wrote:
Show nested quote +



this guy is clearly an activist

On the specific question that if they could have been overpowred, It might have been evenish in terms of potential damage


Oh no, an activist using his free speech rights to peacefully denounce the ill-treatment of Native Americans! He almost disturbed some happy Church-goers in the process! Better plaster that all around right-wing news.

LOL dude there are literally 5 black Israelites doing the protest. They film all of their protests and it's easy to see at different parts of the video, especially when they are setting up. Whole fucking school of teenagers vs 5 guys, yeah it's a really tough question. You can also see Nathan Phillips has his own protest going on at the beginning with large numbers, banging the drums already, they are doing their own thing separately. They had been doing a large prayer/music circle thing (21:30 in the full vid) and nothing happens for over an hour before him and 2 other guys decided to walk over to the MAGA kids. If he was an OMG_ACTIVIST_TROUBLEMAKER why would he have waited that long and why would he only bring two people with him and stayed for only a whole 2 minutes chanting near them? "I don't believe his intentions (appeal to personal incredulity fallacy) and I have no evidence to support my views except that HES AN ACTIVIST!1!1 (non sequitur fallacy)"


  So I push right-wing propaganda, and now I'm also a tomahawk chop dancing racist.... In before I'm a nazi lol



Well you're at the very least a fascist enabler, seeing how you not only manage to spread some of their propaganda but you also oppose anti-fascist action.

fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccountLast edit: 25/01/2019 15:36

Santafairy   Korea (South). Jan 25 2019 16:14. Posts 2224

1) if you oppose something about the left you're a fascist enabler or worse

2) all media is biased but only left wing media is reputable, this is an objective assessment btw it's not just because I personally follow liberalism

3) so if it's not printed in the liberal media it doesn't count as a fact

4) what's that the liberal media isn't covering this story that not only runs against their platform but also makes them personally look ridiculous? tough luck buddy that makes it RIGHT-WING PROPAGANDA and that's fascism, can't have that

can you imagine being this radicalized and not realizing it

It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen 

blackjacki2   United States. Jan 25 2019 19:22. Posts 2581


  On January 25 2019 14:22 Loco wrote:
They had been doing a large prayer/music circle thing (21:30 in the full vid) and nothing happens for over an hour before him and 2 other guys decided to walk over to the MAGA kids.



Nothing happened in over an hour so he had to go over to deescalate all the nothingness


Baalim   Mexico. Jan 26 2019 05:35. Posts 34246


  On January 25 2019 14:22 Loco wrote:

Oh no, an activist using his free speech rights to peacefully denounce the ill-treatment of Native Americans! He almost disturbed some happy Church-goers in the process! Better plaster that all around right-wing news.



He is an activist, a confrontational one it seems

He is seeing walking into a group of kids banging a drum in their face, was he:

a) trying to save some poor genocidal israelites from the kids
b) doing activism and confront some MAGA hat kids

Yeah I'll go with B bob.


  LOL dude there are literally 5 black Israelites doing the protest. They film all of their protests and it's easy to see at different parts of the video, especially when they are setting up. Whole fucking school of teenagers vs 5 guys, yeah it's a really tough question.



Well If theres only 5 in a "battle royale" fight to the death situation I would give it the kids, in a more realistic situation I think the Israelites could smash some kids badly and if they are getting overrun they could probably fend them off and run away, I think you underestimate the strenght difference between a 15yo and a grown man.

Would 5 men take on 50 women? "Battle royal" no, but in a real situation they would destroy the brave front-liners and probably just be able to escape away with far less damage then they dished out.


  "I don't believe his intentions (appeal to personal incredulity fallacy) and I have no evidence to support my views except that HES AN ACTIVIST!1!1 (non sequitur fallacy)"



I belive what I see, that looked remotely an attempt to defuse a confrontation in the contrary its such a fucking huge escaltion that it made it to the news, and him doing shit like this before is not a non sequitur, quite the contrary.



 
Well you're at the very least a fascist enabler




There you go ladies and gentleman.... the awaited "youre a Nazi" LOL


  but you also oppose anti-fascist action.



Opposte ANTIFA and you are a Nazi.




You see? this is why I wanted to discuss this over the details of the economic models, because this way is so much easier to show what a joke your views are

Ex-PokerStars Team Pro Online 

Loco   Canada. Jan 26 2019 19:18. Posts 20963

Right because fascism is from the left, so you oppose antifa because they are the real fascists. Up is down, right is left. Gotta remind myself of that when I read your post and then everything makes perfect sense.

fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount 

Baalim   Mexico. Jan 26 2019 23:44. Posts 34246


  On January 26 2019 18:18 Loco wrote:
Right because fascism is from the left, so you oppose antifa because they are the real fascists. Up is down, right is left. Gotta remind myself of that when I read your post and then everything makes perfect sense.



Fascism is a collectivist ideology, it would fall under left wing in economical terms but right wing under current definiton of left/right since ethnonationalism, strong borders etc is considered righ wing, I thought I made this clear before, playing diccionary is your thing, not mine.

I oppose Antifa because I oppose any group who uses violence and intimidation to push their ideology, to shut down others people's freedom of speech etc.

If there were a group who went to leftist rallies to beat commies up and they tried to torch down buldings in universities with leftist speakers I would obviously also oppose them.

Ex-PokerStars Team Pro OnlineLast edit: 27/01/2019 00:59

Stroggoz   New Zealand. Jan 27 2019 07:25. Posts 5291

Antifa does use violence, i disagree with this morally and tactically. Violence is clearly not a good strategy for a group like Antifa, since they operate in western societies where states can no longer be violent internally to dissidents. However, if a group does use violence, then it becomes acceptable for a state to respond in kind (to the public, to some degree), and no one is better at violence than a state. Even brutalized societies that face virtual genocide, often violence is an incorrect strategic response to winning freedom, take west papua for example, their strategy has been to just go around to the international community and tell people what's happening to them and to record atrocities and put them on the internet, and it worked a lot better than violence did. (also their military power is insignificant compared to their oppressors, Indonesia-so there is no hope of them winning through violence). Secondly, violence often alienates the rest of the population, so it isn't a good way of getting people to agree with you.

It's worth pointing out that if your a pacifist, antifa is so low on the list of violent groups on the world that it barely merit's a mention, and for something to be called facism it has to fit the definition; at minumum it should require a state that tortures its own dissidents. I think Hitler or nazi philosophers like carl schmidt would be turning in their grave if they saw Anfifa labeled as fascist. Same goes for freedom of speech; If that's something you care about, antifa is pretty dam low on the list of violators you should care about. I wonder if Amnesty International even cites them in their report. There is a lot of hypocrisy in those that point to Antifa and cry about freedom of speech, not saying you baal, but the right in general, enjoys all the media coverage in the world, likes to brag about bombing hospitals during the iraq war for 'spreading propaganda', and then whines about leftists throwing molotov's.

Antifa is also a very small sector of the radical left but gets a lot of coverage from fox new's, cnn, ect because they want to point to the radical left and say 'that's what the radical left is'

One of 3 non decent human beings on a site of 5 people with between 2-3 decent human beings 

VanDerMeyde   Norway. Jan 27 2019 11:13. Posts 5108

Arrests Europe (Europol) I think they are from 2017: (suspects of terrorism)

Right wingers: 12
Left wingers: 32
Jihadists 900+

Nuff said

:D 

Santafairy   Korea (South). Jan 27 2019 16:02. Posts 2224


  On January 27 2019 06:25 Stroggoz wrote:
Antifa does use violence, i disagree with this morally and tactically. Violence is clearly not a good strategy for a group like Antifa, since they operate in western societies where states can no longer be violent internally to dissidents. However, if a group does use violence, then it becomes acceptable for a state to respond in kind (to the public, to some degree), and no one is better at violence than a state. Even brutalized societies that face virtual genocide, often violence is an incorrect strategic response to winning freedom, take west papua for example, their strategy has been to just go around to the international community and tell people what's happening to them and to record atrocities and put them on the internet, and it worked a lot better than violence did. (also their military power is insignificant compared to their oppressors, Indonesia-so there is no hope of them winning through violence). Secondly, violence often alienates the rest of the population, so it isn't a good way of getting people to agree with you.


this is interesting because when you say that western states aren't violent against their own citizens, then it suggests to me an environment where revolutionary leftists would specifically feel entitled to operate with impunity, as what happens in portland oregon where the municipal government there sits on their hands anytime antifa does something or people complain about them they say there's nothing they can do. like I understand you're saying they're not morally necessary because the tyranny that they should exist to oppose isn't there, but they can still use the excuse for their own power and interests (note: not advocating the Tienanmening of antifa)


  It's worth pointing out that if your a pacifist, antifa is so low on the list of violent groups on the world that it barely merit's a mention, and for something to be called facism it has to fit the definition; at minumum it should require a state that tortures its own dissidents. I think Hitler or nazi philosophers like carl schmidt would be turning in their grave if they saw Anfifa labeled as fascist. Same goes for freedom of speech; If that's something you care about, antifa is pretty dam low on the list of violators you should care about. I wonder if Amnesty International even cites them in their report. There is a lot of hypocrisy in those that point to Antifa and cry about freedom of speech, not saying you baal, but the right in general, enjoys all the media coverage in the world, likes to brag about bombing hospitals during the iraq war for 'spreading propaganda', and then whines about leftists throwing molotov's.


those dead people wouldn't consider the western institutions antifa opposes as "fascist" either

if you look at the world in general then that's probably true that antifa is not a large offender, however if you're looking at things that are relevant to a specific society someone lives in and not the third world, then apart from criminal and gang violence, what are the big groups responsible for politically motivated or politically opportunistic violence

islamists luckily get caught all the time either by tips or informants or plants or surveillance or something but in terms of like a mob of people assembling in the street and violently rioting, isn't that almost guaranteed to be the left?


  Antifa is also a very small sector of the radical left but gets a lot of coverage from fox new's, cnn, ect because they want to point to the radical left and say 'that's what the radical left is'


not all radical leftists!

It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen 

Loco   Canada. Jan 27 2019 19:40. Posts 20963


  On January 27 2019 06:25 Stroggoz wrote:
Antifa does use violence, i disagree with this morally and tactically. Violence is clearly not a good strategy for a group like Antifa, since they operate in western societies where states can no longer be violent internally to dissidents. However, if a group does use violence, then it becomes acceptable for a state to respond in kind (to the public, to some degree), and no one is better at violence than a state. Even brutalized societies that face virtual genocide, often violence is an incorrect strategic response to winning freedom, take west papua for example, their strategy has been to just go around to the international community and tell people what's happening to them and to record atrocities and put them on the internet, and it worked a lot better than violence did. (also their military power is insignificant compared to their oppressors, Indonesia-so there is no hope of them winning through violence). Secondly, violence often alienates the rest of the population, so it isn't a good way of getting people to agree with you.



The state is inherently violent always, but I guess you mean they don't engage in overt violence 'unprovoked', which is a specious distinction that we should care little about since we know that its purpose is to impose violence structurally and to defend it, but states do engage in overt violence as well. There are countless examples of it. Just to take one recent example, the force that is being used against the Gilets Jaunes movement in France. Almost all of those people who were injured/mutilated/lost an eye were regular people who were protesting peacefully (or in some cases they were not even part of the protests, they were passing by). These were not accidents, the police force shot 'flashballs' at their faces purposefully and since I speak French, I can tell you there are recordings of police officers gleefully talking about what they're doing as they are doing it. Anyway, this is kind a topic on its own.

The goal of antifa is not to fight the state or to win popular approval, it's to disrupt fascist organizing, because if no one does, the ideology spreads like a cancer, which is a problem because liberals tend to sympathize with fascists for many reasons. Antifa uses violence on a case-by-case basis, and it has been effective in doing so. If you doubt this, I would invite you to watch a debate between Brian Tracy from Crimethinc and Chris Hedges or Philosophy Tube's video on Antifa as they both go in depth. Reasoning with fascists is not an option, nor is non-violence sometimes. The violence that is used by antifa is used to prevent worse violence as you know, that is the main distinction. This is not to justify individual acts of violence, of course there has been instances where they were unjustified. But if you are not ready to use violence, then your opponents will always have the advantage, since they will know your limits, your 'toolkit', and they are the ones who can catch you by surprise and feel comfortable at all times. The same is true with the state. Ultimately, you cannot win against the state at this point in time in any violent protest, but the state will be quicker to try to reach a compromise if the threat is serious enough. As for the 'people will not agree with you' argument, using the Gilet Jaunes example again, even if the media has attempted to delegitimize the movement due to a very small minority of people breaking things and setting things on fire etc., the movement has kept popular approval for nearly two months now. We can also mention the American Revolution, the Irish war for independence, the Haitian and Jamaican slave revolts, the American Civil Rights movement, Stonewall (the catalyst for LGBT rights), all used violence successfully for very good reasons.

fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccountLast edit: 28/01/2019 20:55

Stroggoz   New Zealand. Jan 28 2019 09:12. Posts 5291

There is some violence by western states against their own people but it is very mild-it's not the main source of population control, thought control is. If you don't understand this your essentially clueless about politics. But from what i gather you do understand it. The sources you cite, some are a long time ago, under different circumstances when states really were brutally violent and used it as a main source of control. The civil rights movement started in the 1930's and became very successful with non violent tactics in the 1960's. I still havn't been convinced, i won't watch that debate but i saw one between those two people on black bloc some years ago and wasn't convinced, although they were talking about the success of ows, what actually matters is how things like ows happen in the first place. exisiting capitalism is now basically fully reliant on controlling public opinion, if it doesn't, it will break down. so how to combat that, it is very obvious that changing public opinion is the answer, i don't think violence will get liberals to stop sympathizing with facism, i havn't seen any cases of this.

One of 3 non decent human beings on a site of 5 people with between 2-3 decent human beings 

Loco   Canada. Jan 28 2019 13:47. Posts 20963

Yeah that's the debate I was talking about. Black bloc isn't used by all antifascists but it seems to be effective sometimes at least. You know that Trump's administration has criminalized wearing black during protests as a result of it being used, that is an example of violence that people gloss over. Minorities that participate in such things are singled out and criminalized, they are assumed to be guilty of a crime just by being there; most arrests are not directly charged with rioting, they are charged with incitement to riot or conspiracy to riot, which carries a very hefty sentence. Laws under consideration in Tennessee, North Carolina, and North Dakota would even allow motorists to plow into protesters in the street.

These tactics don't convince liberals, but at least during some events like the Brazilian education crisis in 2013, the black bloc protesters were welcomed. But it's not for them; the liberals are not the ones who can prevent lives from being lost during events like Charlottesville. Remember that these are designed as self-defense units to protect the front-line of protests. Keep in mind that while liberals were complaining about the incivility of punching Richard Spencer two years ago, they entirely ignored the fact that at the same time an alt-right activist shot an anti-fascist at a protest outside of a Milo Yiannopoulos speech at the University of Washington on Inauguration Day. He spent three weeks in the ICU and lost his gall bladder and part of his liver. Liberals have an incoherent worldview that they need to address through education. While such people catch up to reality, not everyone is content to sit around and let fascists organize, and I think that's for the better. They are not mutually exclusive things, but some are better suited to teach and others are people of action.

I am temperamentally against violence and will keep far from it, but I think it has its uses as a last resort or in situations where there is a lot of evidence that it will prevent worse violence. Have you seen how much violence the fascists have engaged in in Brazil, or how much violence and murder the Venezuelan opposition has taken part in? Whatever antifa has done is minimal (but you've rightfully pointed that out) in comparison. And yet it [the fascists; the opposition] has the tacit support of most people on this website and liberals, or at least they find no reason to look for it or speak of it. People claim to be anti violence or "anti collectivism" but it's through their omissions and the exceptions that they make when push comes to shove that their worldview is exposed as the incoherent and often morally bankrupt thing that it is.

fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccountLast edit: 28/01/2019 20:58

Stroggoz   New Zealand. Jan 28 2019 23:16. Posts 5291

yes, your last paragraph, i already agreed with that, like i said, antifa is hardly violent on the grand scheme of things and it doesn't merit much of a mention when compared to truly horrendous regimes. I also agree that it is certainly true that your standard liberal is simply incapable of perceiving their own violence, this goes all back through history, as when karl marx pointed out the paris commune got ridiculed for it's violence by the bourgousie but there was silence after the national guard massacred them.

Violence can be justfied, it has to be examined on a case by case basis. I don't see any other way. I just didn't think some of Anfia's methods were the best, imo they were helping legitimize the right.

One of 3 non decent human beings on a site of 5 people with between 2-3 decent human beings 

Baalim   Mexico. Jan 29 2019 03:50. Posts 34246


  On January 27 2019 06:25 Stroggoz wrote:
Antifa is also a very small sector of the radical left but gets a lot of coverage from fox new's, cnn, ect because they want to point to the radical left and say 'that's what the radical left is'



Ironically there isn't a better recruitor for the far right than Antifa, nothing radicalizes an impressionable boy like watching an idiot in black beating up a girl in a MAGA hat who wants to attend a Milo talk.

Ex-PokerStars Team Pro Online 

Baalim   Mexico. Jan 29 2019 04:12. Posts 34246


  On January 28 2019 12:47 Loco wrote:
Laws under consideration in Tennessee, North Carolina, and North Dakota would even allow motorists to plow into protesters in the street.



Impending your freedom of movement is violence, you cannot infringe other's rights to protest against the government.


  Keep in mind that while liberals were complaining about the incivility of punching Richard Spencer two years ago,



So I assume you disavow the whole "punch a Nazi" thing right?



  they entirely ignored the fact that at the same time an alt-right activist shot an anti-fascist at a protest outside of a Milo Yiannopoulos speech





You mean one of these guys got shot? well it's a fucking tragedy that the rest didn't get shot too.




  I am temperamentally against violence and will keep far from it, but I think it has its uses as a last resort or in situations where there is a lot of evidence that it will prevent worse violence



"my violence is good violence because it prevents even more future violence"

Not sure if ANTIFA or US foreign policy.

Ex-PokerStars Team Pro Online 

Loco   Canada. Feb 03 2019 23:39. Posts 20963


  On January 29 2019 02:50 Baalim wrote:
Show nested quote +



Ironically there isn't a better recruitor for the far right than Antifa, nothing radicalizes an impressionable boy like watching an idiot in black beating up a girl in a MAGA hat who wants to attend a Milo talk.


Except the evidence has been in for a long time, and you are wrong. You're not just a little bit wrong either, but massively wrong. It comes out of the alt right's mouth that antifa has been successful against them and is winning. You are literally just parroting their old talking points that "enlightened centrists" and liberals easily fall for. This is the reason antifa is needed, because if it were for you guys, the alt-right would have grown massively. I'd suggest you start getting out of your comfort zone and re-evaluate the evidence that you think you have on your side. I know it's something you have a really hard time doing, but on this one issue I think you will hate yourself later. You remember that quote you used to share from Bertrand Russell about being on the side of the majority and re-evaluating? Now's a good time to believe in it.






Yesterday there was another big neo-nazi rally planned in Stone Mountain, but guess what... they didn't show up. You can guess why.






  You mean one of these guys got shot? well it's a fucking tragedy that the rest didn't get shot too.



Guy gets hit in the face and has no trauma from it (I'm assuming since he has a large grin on that thumbnail) versus guy gets shot and loses pieces of two of his organs. You prove my point about the lesser violence and then laugh at me for mistakenly doing so. Not your best side. Anyway, these isolated incidents can be cherry-picked, we all know that. Debating them is a largely futile endeavor unless you're investigating the matter in good faith over a significant period of time. What most people don't know and should know is the history of these movements and what happens when fascists are allowed to organize. If you want to convince me that I should not support anti-fascism, you need to explain to me how I'm getting the historical facts wrong, and explain to me why the alt-right would be lying about this and explain why their activities have diminished so much outside of online recruiting.


  So I assume you disavow the whole "punch a Nazi" thing right?



I was agnostic on this issue when I saw it. My first instinct was to say that it wasn't going to help their cause, it caused a big argument between me and my gf at the time, but I didn't know much about antifa then. My opinion now doesn't matter once we have evidence that it has worked. If you can demonstrate that there is a better way to go about things, lead the way my man, I'll vouch for your tactics instead. It's weird how an-caps have a lot to say about the left's methods but it's just words from the sidelines from people who never organize (I say it's weird because, unlike liberals/centrists, you call yourselves anarchists but you have no praxis). One thing I can say is that it is a big problem if it becomes the first line of defense. Doxxing them, affecting their livelihood, disturbing their rallies with noise should always come first. Antifa should only be violent as a last resort and only when there is concrete proof that people are Neo-Nazis planning worse violence. And I'm not talking smashing some dumb Trumper's head with a big lock, obviously. As far as I know, the vast majority of antifa doesn't encourage that, and they're much happier when they succeed without violence and injuries on their side. But the threat should be there that antifa is willing to escalate things, because, as chief-Nazi Richard Spencer said, this is what represses and frustrates them the most; this is why they've lost so far.

fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccountLast edit: 04/02/2019 19:00

RiKD    United States. Feb 04 2019 01:24. Posts 8445

"Our compañeros say that the only condition in which they will give up their weapons is over their dead bodies. It's that simple. If someone has to give up their weapons, we're willing to let the Federal Army give us the ones they give up. That's the only way. The difference is the cause of war is not who has the weapons but it's how they get used. We are ready to stop using them. Which means we'll stop using them for a while or forever but never to give them up. It's very clear. As soon as they propose the surrender of weapons it's over. No one will accept it. No one."

- Subcomandante Marcos

Don't fight a guy with a purple belt in BJJ and some muay thai and some boxing and some wrestling if you are an unarmed noob. Don't be unarmed in a knife fight. Don't bring a knife to a gun fight. Don't bring some white supremacist ass revolver to a rally where ex-military antifa are packing AKs.

 Last edit: 04/02/2019 02:35

Santafairy   Korea (South). Feb 04 2019 06:59. Posts 2224

do you have a reputable source or just vice

left wing militias I feel safer already

It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen 

RiKD    United States. Feb 04 2019 17:07. Posts 8445

Yeah, because Nazis organizing is such a positive thing... Go shake and shudder in your mortgaged starter home you little bourgeois bitch.


Loco   Canada. Feb 04 2019 17:58. Posts 20963


  On February 04 2019 05:59 Santafairy wrote:
do you have a reputable source or just vice

left wing militias I feel safer already



A reputable source for what? For fascists advocating for violence, committing it, and saying that they would have been successful doing more of it if it wasn't for antifa? Can you tell me what does it matter where the journalist is from when it comes straight from their mouth?

So you want it straight from their mouth without a journalist? Not sure why, but sure, here's a ton of footage by the alt-right themselves. 34:00 onward has a lot of it with little to no commentary.



If you're only talking about the Stone Mountain rally, here's another source:

https://www.ajc.com/news/breaking-new...ternal-strife/gvReqHeqcXNqFytV9xm1jK/


  Saturday rally at Stone Mountain by small group of white supremacists and white nationalists seeking to grab media attention during Super Bowl weekend has collapsed amid apparent infighting and fears for their personal safety.

On Thursday, Michael Weaver, another far-right activist who had emerged as the principal spokesman for the event, released a written statement saying the rally had been postponed until a future date out of fears of violence from counter-protesters.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Speaking generally here to everyone, if you are against anti-fascist action (as a whole, or just when they use violence), what you are implying is that the state should have the monopoly on violence. If you want to explain your rationale, I'd like to hear it. Keep in mind that this is what they think of the "free speech" that you think they should have:

fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccountLast edit: 04/02/2019 18:35

 
  First 
  < 
  88 
  89 
  90 
  91 
  92 
 93 
  94 
  > 
  Last 



Poker Streams

















Copyright © 2024. LiquidPoker.net All Rights Reserved
Contact Advertise Sitemap