I'm surprised that the protests in Hong Kong were allowed to go on as long as they did, but I'm also surprised that China followed the treaty for as long as they did. Hong Kong was a business linchpin where foreign countries trusted that the rule of law prevailed. That is now gone, and Hong Kong is going to be a bone fought over by the biggest dogs on the planet.
Whenever there has been any kind of systematic riot in the US, it tends to be poor neighborhoods that get burned. They were getting the short end before, they get more of the same in any unrest. What's a bit odd about Portland is that....Portland has always been more than a bit odd. Now they have found a new way to be different.
I was up late watching this on TV. You got mainly peaceful protests and then a group with a different agenda starts chaos. This time the Federal officers were staying out of site and didn't do anything until people start trying to tear down the fence. There was lots of debris in the streets and there was a fairly large fire, don't know what was burning but it wasn't a building.
So, should the people trying to tear down the fence be arrested? Is taking power tools to the fence a crime? What does destroying the fence or damaging that building have to do with what the protests are about?
An obscure body in the SK system. The inhabitants call it Earth
Posts
7,902
Re: Hong Kong, Portland and the Moral Low Ground
The US and Canada are completely different. For a start, the US citizens haven't punched all of each other's front teeth out with hockey pucks yet. Totally different culture. Saying that Canada's just a part of the US is like saying Taiwan is just a part of China. (OK, that last bit was blatant troll bait but sometimes it's just too damn easy).
As for Uncle Roger: yeah, us Brits get equally triggered when an American vlogs on how to make the perfect cup of tea. She used a microwave! An honest to God frickin' microwave, damnit. And don't get me started on how much sugar she put in it. Ruddy septics.
Now there is this cycle of peaceful protests during the day and then vandalism at night.
There's always a certain amount of vandalism with protests. Most of us, including protest leaders, will denounce it in all but a few very specific cases (e.g. in the UK the toppling of the Colston statue was praised by BLM but every other act of vandalism has been condemned). Generally, protest leaders understand that bad behaviour will be seized on by the establishment and used to deflect from the point of the protest. It's what the UK press did when they started to write about how we needed to defend Churchill's statue... even though nobody was calling for it's removal. So a week later we get the unedifying spectacle of a bunch of football hooligans "defending" British values by throwing Nazi salutes in front of Churchill's statue and pissing on the plaque of a police officer who gave his life preventing a terrorist from killing people.
And don't be fooled that they are doing exactly that in the US right now. The reason the local police forces haven't been stepping in is that they actually get to see the acts of vandalism that are being reported and know that, while they are wrong, they do not present any where near the level of threat that you perceive them to be. Mainly because of how exaggerated they are by large sections of the media. The local police forces are making an informed decision on how to best manage risk vs rights. The media are selling copy. The politicians are chasing votes. I'll trust the first of those motives.
It's also why Black Lives Matter protesters usually look like this:-
While the counter protesters ALWAYS look like this:-
Seriously, which of those images frightens you more?
Are some of the protesters engaging in illegal and destructive activity? Yes but they represent a minority. The State authorities who are closer to the problem and have actual skin in the game understand that and understand what represents a proportional response. They are not calling for the kinds of interventions you're now seeing. The business owners, whose rights you cite and call to defend, are not calling for these interventions. The people calling for them are certain parts of the media... because it sells... and Trump... because he's desperate for votes.
Edit> Crossed over with Wes's post and wanted to react to the story in the link. This seems like an odd link to make his point because it's mostly about how peaceful the protests were and how disproportionate the federal response was (including once again tear gassing peaceful protests) so I wonder if it got edited a bit between Wes posting and me reading it. The pertinent bit come in the last few paragraphs:-
"On Friday night, a small group of protesters broke away from the larger crowd and began rocking a section of the fence back and forth and tossing fireworks into the barricaded area at around 10:45 p.m. Federal agents responded with a small release of flash bangs and a few canisters of tear gas.
As the group of agitators continued rocking the fence and tossing fireworks across the barricade, federal agents appeared to escalate their response, the CNN team observed.
A large group of the more peaceful protesters appeared to react to the the smaller group of agitators, by walking over and seeming to try to calm the situation."
... so, a small minority of protesters rocked a fence and threw some fireworks , the federals escalated their response with flashbangs and tear gas and the majority of protesters stepped in and stopped the minority from what they were doing. And your take away from that is that the protesters are the problem?
You want to ask why the police aren't doing their job? So do I. Why are they not preventing unidentified individuals from attacking abducting peaceful citizens from the streets?
Last edited by FunkyDexter; Jul 25th, 2020 at 01:57 PM.
The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter - Winston Churchill
Hadoop actually sounds more like the way they greet each other in Yorkshire - Inferrd
Seriously, which of those images frightens you more?
the first of course, there is much more power in that group than in the second. Both pictures show very well the difference between power and force.
The best friend of any programmer is a search engine
"Don't wish it was easier, wish you were better. Don't wish for less problems, wish for more skills. Don't wish for less challenges, wish for more wisdom" (J. Rohn)
“They did not know it was impossible so they did it” (Mark Twain)
You want to ask why the police aren't doing their job? So do I. Why are they not preventing unidentified individuals from attacking abducting peaceful citizens from the streets?
the few we had as information in France is that the guys were arrested but free immediately because they are federal agents.
The best friend of any programmer is a search engine
"Don't wish it was easier, wish you were better. Don't wish for less problems, wish for more skills. Don't wish for less challenges, wish for more wisdom" (J. Rohn)
“They did not know it was impossible so they did it” (Mark Twain)
No, that was exactly the article I wanted people to read. The problem is you have missed the point of my posts.
Live video feeds showed federal agents dispersing tear gas and flash bangs from behind the heavy metal fence set up as a barricade between the justice center and protesters.
Before the tear gas was released, a CNN team saw a large crowd of peaceful protesters chanting "Black lives matter" and waving the flashlights on their cell phones in the air while listening to speeches.
It was unclear if police or a federal agency released the gas.
Hundreds of people remained along the fence attempting to pull or push it over while some attempted to cut the fence with power tools, the PPB said. People in the crowd were armed with gas masks, shields, leaf blowers, power tools, fireworks and lasers, the PPB statement said.
This show both sides of the issue. The good and the bad. I asked some simple questions in my last post and you have turned that into me living in fear and being manipulated by the media because I'm to stupid to understand what's going on.
So, should the people trying to tear down the fence be arrested? Is taking power tools to the fence a crime? What does destroying the fence or damaging that building have to do with what the protests are about?
I watched this happening on TV as I said before and this isn't what happened,
... so, a small minority of protesters rocked a fence and threw some fireworks , the federals escalated their response and the majority of protesters stepped in and stopped the minority from what they were doing. And you're take away from that is that the protesters are the problem?
They protesters didn't stop the minority that was causing problems, it continued. If you pay attention to the article it just says they attempted to. They weren't successful. The federal response escalated as the crowd attacks escalated. Last night the federal response wasn't disproportionate. My question wasn't about what has happened in the past, it was whether people committing criminal acts should be arrested.
Are some of the protesters engaging in illegal and destructive activity? Yes but they represent a minority. The State authorities who are closer to the problem and have actual skin in the game understand that and understand what represents a proportional response. They are not calling for the kinds of interventions you're now seeing. The business owners, whose rights you cite and call to defend, are not calling for these interventions. The people calling for them are certain parts of the media... because it sells... and Trump... because he's desperate for votes.
I don't know where you got the idea that business owners are OK with the situation. In Seattle, they tried to sue the city because of the lack of protection. Justifying lack of police response because the people committing crimes are a minority doesn't make sense to me, criminals are always the minority. So is your opinion that as long as it's a minority then there should be no arrests for committing crimes. I'm trolling a little...
If you think that Seattle and Portland have handle this situation correctly that's fine. If you think the criminal behavior somehow helps the BLM movement, OK. If you don't think that anyone should be arrested, also OK.
That's why I asked the questions.
As for me, I think they've handled the situation badly. Criminals need to be held accountable, if the PPB had done that then Trump wouldn't have any excuse to send in the feds. Who knows maybe he would have anyway but that's not what my posts were about. My only reason for responding in this thread was, as I said, I'm baffled at the complete lack of response to the crimes being committed by the local officials.
My only reason for responding in this thread was, as I said, I'm baffled at the complete lack of response to the crimes being committed by the local officials.
My understanding was that the Mayors in those cities (Portland among them) had ordered their police to do nothing.
My understanding was that the Mayors in those cities (Portland among them) had ordered their police to do nothing.
You can figure out their motivation on your own.
Your probably right. My guess is they're afraid that enforcing the law would escalate the violence. Maybe that was a good idea at first but 50+ days later I think that approach has now been turned against the city because once people realized there is no consequences for their actions it has emboldened some people to commit criminal acts. I know that if I went downtown and started spray paint a store front or public building or starting a fire in the middle of the street I would be arrested. So by not responding to these acts what you have done is created a double standard, which is one of the main things people are protesting against.
Well that's enough preaching for me. Think I'll take a nap. lol
When Bundy's group took over the Malheur Wildlife Refuge, I felt they had done something illegal, too. The police did very little other than watch. The one time they took action, somebody died, and he pretty well earned it. What other alternative did they have? How many would have died in an assault? How many got away? The police did well, the prosecutors overreached.
Does the fence matter? No, not really. Sure, it's destruction of property, but it's pretty minor property. Take some pictures, deal with people later. I have no problem with that. The alternative is to send police into a hostile crowd to arrest somebody. Sending one guy would be a pretty bad idea, so you'd have to send a well protected group. Right or wrong, that's going to inflame things. I do think vandals should be charged (except in this state, because graduates of the University of Idaho are known as vandals, as that's the schools...mascot...ish thing, so I have lots of friends and colleagues who are vandals), but I see no reason to do so at the time.
This is also how most police deal with chases, now. If they have an ID on the person, let them run. Some people just run, so let them, then deal with it later when they've gotten it out of their system. It reduces the number of high speed chases and keeps everybody safer. In this case, they're following the same tactic, as far as I can see, and I'm fine with that.
I'm not so fine with the federales. We don't have a national police force, so who are they? Is this what they are trained to do? The FBI, in particular, has some history of being overly aggressive to the detriment of all around. Are these folks better? Probably not, as whoever they are, they aren't trained in the area they are now being asked to inhabit.
Yeah I remember a little about the Bundy group. Now today we got armed militias rivals in Louisville. https://www.axios.com/armed-militias...07e650ddc.html
I can remember when I use to enjoy guns, I was raised in the country, target practice, hunting was part of life. But now when I see groups of people walking city streets dressed in camo with assault rifles, it just makes me angry and sad for our country. I'd move to the UK but I don't speak their language.
Does the fence matter? No, not really. Sure, it's destruction of property, but it's pretty minor property. Take some pictures, deal with people later. I have no problem with that. The alternative is to send police into a hostile crowd to arrest somebody. Sending one guy would be a pretty bad idea, so you'd have to send a well protected group. Right or wrong, that's going to inflame things. I do think vandals should be charged (except in this state, because graduates of the University of Idaho are known as vandals, as that's the schools...mascot...ish thing, so I have lots of friends and colleagues who are vandals), but I see no reason to do so at the time.
I mostly agree and if this was just about one fence or one building, I'd completely agree. Did you see what that CHOP zone in Seattle looked like by the time that area was cleared, it was blocks and blocks of damaged property. I don't know how well the idea of take some pictures now and arrest them later would work. It's night and they're wearing masks, plus it leaves them on the street for months to continue these activities.
If I'm reading your post right, it seems you think the best approach is do no policing, because that would inflame things. I can see that as a very attractive solution unless your someone being directly affected by the vandalism. Then there is the question of which laws is it ok for them to break before taking the chance of inflaming things.
I'm not so fine with the federales. We don't have a national police force, so who are they? Is this what they are trained to do? The FBI, in particular, has some history of being overly aggressive to the detriment of all around. Are these folks better? Probably not, as whoever they are, they aren't trained in the area they are now being asked to inhabit.
This was done very poorly and underhandedly. States have had federal units working within their states before but it was a cooperative effort.
I think most people were thinking that this situation would just burn itself out. We'll just look the other way for a while and the problem will just go away by itself. That usually works but we're going on 2 months now. Got to admire the dedication of the protesters, I hope good things come out of all their effort.
Last edited by wes4dbt; Jul 25th, 2020 at 10:15 PM.
An obscure body in the SK system. The inhabitants call it Earth
Posts
7,902
Re: Hong Kong, Portland and the Moral Low Ground
you have turned that into me living in fear and being manipulated by the media because I'm to stupid to understand what's going on.
Not you personally. All of us. You, me, everyone. Affirmation bias is powerful and none of us are exempt. To be clear, the media's goal is not to present you with a bias opinion, it's to make money. Pandering to (or antagonising) your affirmation bias is simply the means to that end. But the effect is still that, in the face of scenes reminiscent of police crackdowns under autocratic, authoritarian regimes which we have long sought to condemn, you will still concern yourself with fences and graffiti.
I don't know where you got the idea that business owners are OK with the situation
I didn't say they were OK with it, I said they weren't calling for this kind of response. You've bought up the Chop but that comparison doesn't apply. The Chop was allowed to exist (I think I agree that it was allowed to do so for longer than necessary) and was ended by an identifiable Seattle police operation. Portland, on the hand, is currently seeing unidentified heavily armed men and the footage is clear and easily found: they are attacking and abducting peaceful protesters. It isn't correlating with the criminality of the targets. The point is not law enforcement. The point is intimidation.
I actually think the timing on the Chop was about right, if a little late. Seriously, go back and watch the footage of it finally being shutdown. It's actually pretty peaceful and I feel the reason for that was that he steam had already been allowed to go out of it. The authorities let it run it's course and then ended it in a single rolling barrier march. Contrast that to Portland.
Did you see what that CHOP zone in Seattle looked like by the time that area was cleared
Yes, debris and graffiti, and all of it covered by business insurance. That doesn't justify the vandalism but neither does it justify unidentified heavily armed men attacking and abducting peaceful citizens from the streets in Portland.
If you think that Seattle and Portland have handle this situation correctly that's fine. If you think the criminal behavior somehow helps the BLM movement, OK. If you don't think that anyone should be arrested, also OK.
Didn't say any of those things but you carry on building your straw men. It'll make you feel better that your self selected bogey men are finally getting the billy-clubbing they deserve... by unidentified heavily armed men.
I'm trolling a little
<shrug> no more than I am. I don't feel like either of us is descending to insults, though, so I'm cool with it if you are.
Last edited by FunkyDexter; Jul 27th, 2020 at 02:07 AM.
The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter - Winston Churchill
Hadoop actually sounds more like the way they greet each other in Yorkshire - Inferrd
I swear, youngin's today don't know how to riot properly. Now LA Riots of the 90's .... now that was proper rioting... weeks and weeks of total chaos and mayhem.
Portland, on the hand, is currently seeing unidentified heavily armed men...
Sorry, but that's neoliberal media narrative, or willful hyperbole... or something.
In every photo and video I have seen those Federal cops are clearly identified as "Police DHS" and not "unidentified" at all.
This has to be just about the weakest link in the scare stories people use as an excuse to run around with their hair on fire.
I've notice that most of the still photos used in the media are those where an arm or equipment is covering their markings. Where that wasn't possible they have have the gamma adjusted way up or down to help obscure these details.
You seem to be fixated on that. Well, I already stated my opinion on that in my first post. Hell we're way past that but if that's all you want to talk about then I'll just move on. It's your thread.
Didn't say any of those things but you carry on building your straw men. It'll make you feel better that your self selected bogey men are finally getting the billy-clubbing they deserve... by unidentified heavily armed men
No you haven't answered any of those questions and I never said I wanted people billy-clubbed. But you do continue to spread a false narrative about the situation.
Yes, debris and graffiti,
So all you've seen is a few bad apples with spray paint.
and all of it covered by business insurance
Really, is that your justification to not hold people accountable for their actions. Does it pay the owners for all their lost revenue, once it's safe they just throw on some new paint and replace the windows, bam everything is ok no other problems. Does make me wonder why they arrest arsonist and bank robbers. Buildings and banks are insured. lol
Last edited by wes4dbt; Jul 27th, 2020 at 08:42 PM.
Sorry, but that's neoliberal media narrative, or willful hyperbole... or something.
In every photo and video I have seen those Federal cops are clearly identified as "Police DHS" and not "unidentified" at all.
So you haven't seen pictures of the unidentified officers does that mean they dont exist or you have just not seen them?
I have to say either way those photos look worrying to me almost like Trump after he couldn't get the Army on the streets, instead gets as near as damn close to it as he can.
Please Mark your Thread "Resolved", if the query is solved & Rate those who have helped you
there are literally groups of unidentifiable men roaming the streets in unmarked vehicles snatching people off the streets.
These are federal agents patrolling and protecting the streets and arresting people who are committing federal crimes because the local police are not able to do anything. They are not unidentifiable which has been proven already in another post. Federal agents primarily utilize unmarked vehicles anyway. Not only is there no requirement for law enforcement vehicles to be marked, but by using marked vehicles, they are now targets. Surely you have seen the tens (if not hundreds) of police vehicles destroyed across the country, so they are saving taxpayer money by using nondescript vehicles. Trump also announced he was going to send federal agents, its not like it was a surprise or secret police.
Further, these arrests may look like they are random and that they are just picking people up off the street, but that cannot be farther from the truth. They are picking up people who committed crimes after the fact in a way that allows for a quick, non-violent arrest. The public wants non-violent arrests... this is what they look like.
These people are not being charged with any offense, no protocols are being followed (no Miranda rights, no identification of the offence being committed, no attempt by the agent to identify themselves). They are then being released without charge because, of course, there are no charges to answer.
These people are being charged. Miranda rights are not required to be read to every person being arrested; they are only read to people who are being interviewed/questioned after an arrest. If a law enforcement officer does not question you, they do not need to read you your rights.
This is being done in opposition to the elected State government. And Trump is openly stating that he is going to continue this practice across the rest of the nation.
The State does not have the authority to tell the federal government that they cannot enforce federal crimes being committed. The state and local governments are failing to protect their communities so the federal government has been deployed to protect federal property.
So you haven't seen pictures of the unidentified officers does that mean they dont exist or you have just not seen them?
I would like to see some photos of these "unidentified" officers.
Originally Posted by NeedSomeAnswers
I have to say either way those photos look worrying to me almost like Trump after he couldn't get the Army on the streets, instead gets as near as damn close to it as he can.
Law enforcement officers trying to keep the peace and protect federal buildings looks worrying to you? Do you not believe in law and order? Would you prefer everyone to just bow down to these violent criminals burning down buildings?
I can't say I believe that's what they are doing. Those federal police didn't show up in cities until Trump decided he had to run on a law and order platform. They're more than a bit strange, too, as some are CBP, which is a bit off the reservation for them. Furthermore, they appear to be overzealous, in Portland...and largely just bluster in other cities. They showed up uninvited to Portland, then Trump said they'd show up all over the place. They haven't. This is politics, not policing.
While I do think there is a point to a police presence, and they may have backed off too much, I would leave it to the cities unless the cities ask for assistance. Pushing it on them is totally in keeping with conservative values, though: Local control...unless the locals don't agree with us, then they get no say at all. This state is totally on board with that. The legislature complains bitterly when the feds do something, but go all authoritarian when cities, school districts, or health districts, want the authority to make decisions.
Interestingly, even Amon Bundy has criticized the actions in Portland. For that, I'd say he was staying consistent with his stated beliefs. He also said that his group almost threw him out over the comments...which also feels consistent: We're against the government...unless they are breaking the heads we want them to break.
One thing appears pretty clear to me, which is that there are elements on both side who are REALLY enjoying this.
One thing appears pretty clear to me, which is that there are elements on both side who are REALLY enjoying this.
And taking advantage of it. It's sad, all this, over policing, under policing, unidentified policing, vandalism, fires, shootings, this all has drowned out the message. It has given the people that didn't want to hear it plenty of ways to justify not to believe in the message.
I think MLK and Gandhi just might have been right when they preached "peaceful civil disobedience". How to get there, I have no clue and very little hope. Maybe a leader will arise, hope so.
Last edited by wes4dbt; Jul 29th, 2020 at 02:07 AM.
Sorry, but that's neoliberal media narrative, or willful hyperbole... or something.
In every photo and video I have seen those Federal cops are clearly identified as "Police DHS" and not "unidentified" at all.
This has to be just about the weakest link in the scare stories people use as an excuse to run around with their hair on fire.
I've notice that most of the still photos used in the media are those where an arm or equipment is covering their markings. Where that wasn't possible they have have the gamma adjusted way up or down to help obscure these details.
What a joke!
This seems rather disingenuous to me. For one thing, those people are not police officers. Secondly, having "Police" and/or "DHS" on their clothing only does so much. For one thing, you cannot see their faces. They are also not identifying themselves by badge number, as police officers are obliged to do. I've heard right-wing militia members talking about taking matters into their own hands and it appears that that may have happened at least once in Texas now, with someone shooting into a group of protesters and killing at least one person. What would be to stop such militia members making themselves look like these federal agents and grabbing protesters off the street, bundling them into similarly unmarked vehicles and taking them away to be murdered somewhere? Police officers are required to identify themselves for very good reason. These federal agents are not doing it and that's bad for those same reasons.
I like your perspective and agree but you may have been mislead on this,
I've heard right-wing militia members talking about taking matters into their own hands and it appears that that may have happened at least once in Texas now, with someone shooting into a group of protesters and killing at least one person.
If your talking about the incident in Austin, Tx 2 or 3 days ago the story seems to be a car turns on a street filled with protesters(by mistake or on purpose is not clear), he starts honking, people move towards his car, the person he shoots is carrying an assault rifle. The guy in the car claims the protester pointer gun at him, the protesters are saying he didn't point the gun at him. That's all the clarity I've seen so far.
Maybe your talking about a different shooting. There are plenty of idiots with guns here in the US.
I like your perspective and agree but you may have been mislead on this,
If your talking about the incident in Austin, Tx 2 or 3 days ago the story seems to be a car turns on a street filled with protesters(by mistake or on purpose is not clear), he starts honking, people move towards his car, the person he shoots is carrying an assault rifle. The guy in the car claims the protester pointer gun at him, the protesters are saying he didn't point the gun at him. That's all the clarity I've seen so far.
Maybe your talking about a different shooting. There are plenty of idiots with guns here in the US.
I'm not sure as I've heard few details, which is why I said "may have happened". What I heard was that a man pushing his quadriplegic wife in her wheelchair was shot dead. I did hear something about someone carrying a rifle being shot but don't know if it's the same incident. This is certainly a good example of why people should not be carrying guns at all. If you can be considered to be acting in self-defense based on your state of mind and not the actions of the other party then anyone could be considered to be acting in self-defence if they see anyone near them with a gun. It's really only a matter of time before the shooting starts when two groups of angry people carrying guns oppose each other. Whether any incident that has already occurred was right-wing militia or not, some have been saying that they will take matters into their own hands. If that happens, it could be a bloodbath. The stupid thing is that they consider themselves the law-abiding ones but what they are suggesting is certainly not abiding by the law. They are fed up and want to take action, yet it never occurs to them that that's exactly why these protests started in the first place.
Secondly, having "Police" and/or "DHS" on their clothing only does so much. For one thing, you cannot see their faces. They are also not identifying themselves by badge number, as police officers are obliged to do. What would be to stop such militia members making themselves look like these federal agents and grabbing protesters off the street, bundling them into similarly unmarked vehicles and taking them away to be murdered somewhere? Police officers are required to identify themselves for very good reason. These federal agents are not doing it and that's bad for those same reasons.
The best friend of any programmer is a search engine
"Don't wish it was easier, wish you were better. Don't wish for less problems, wish for more skills. Don't wish for less challenges, wish for more wisdom" (J. Rohn)
“They did not know it was impossible so they did it” (Mark Twain)
One thing appears pretty clear to me, which is that there are elements on both side who are REALLY enjoying this.
We have the same in France, a few cops that want to play anti-riot police (and do more damage than good, we had a scandal a few years ago) and a few extreme people (we call them black blocs) who only goals are to destroy whatever they can and hurt police as much as they can. they appear now at almost every manifestation. The particularity we have is that we have anti-riot force (CRS) with special equipment and training (they are train to do less wounded as possible among the people). The common police is just there for support (but some like to play "cowboys". Don't know if you have that expression).
The best friend of any programmer is a search engine
"Don't wish it was easier, wish you were better. Don't wish for less problems, wish for more skills. Don't wish for less challenges, wish for more wisdom" (J. Rohn)
“They did not know it was impossible so they did it” (Mark Twain)
Yeah. I'm not sure that we're quite on the same page, but pretty close. When I said they were really enjoying this, I did mean that the situation gave them the freedom to do what they had wanted to do in the past, but weren't allowed to, so if that's what you meant by taking advantage of it, then we're talking about the same thing. I see it on both sides...or all three sides, actually, but the right wing faction isn't quite getting what they want. They want a safe civil war (one where they win without too much personal sacrifice), and they aren't getting that. For the others, there are people in the police and people in the protest groups, that are somewhat liberated by this.
I have told a few jokes about China in other threads:
(1) China is the most open country in the world
(2) China is the country with the richest medical resources in the world (this is due to the deception and over-treatment of traditional Chinese medicine)
Let me tell another joke. The human rights situation in China is better than that in the United States. Specifically, the human rights situation in China is comparable to that of the United Kingdom and Canada, but better than that of the United States and Australia, but weaker than that of France, Germany, and Japan. More importantly, the human rights situation in China has been continuously improving.
Next time, I'll tell some other jokes about China.
I wonder if the Uighur Muslims are laughing at that joke?
I'm not convinced that you know the meaning of that word.
Based on the rest of the spin that follows I boil it down to "I have no facts and I reject any that undermine the narrative I embrace so I'm deflecting with another made up story and some hypothetical scenarios."
Nobody has any facts. Not a one of us is there. I'm probably closest of the people in this thread, and I'm not close. So, we're all basing anything off of what we read, see, and are told. Not a bit of it is first hand.
That's when the politics starts to matter even more. I have no idea why DHS is there, and especially why CBP is there (a part of DHS, I believe). In The Economist for this week is a story that suggests a pretty plausible reason: DHS is totally supine, so Trump is using it as his personal militia. They've had several directors in the last three years, most of them acting, only two went through senate confirmation, and a bunch of the deputies are also acting. So, Trump has created a pliant law enforcement branch. Now he's using them in a role they were never trained for (some individuals likely were in previous jobs), and done so with his usual focus and attention to detail (none at all, for those who don't get sarcasm).
It's political theater conducted by a person who is behind in the poles, desperate to find a cause, and incapable of focusing on anything long enough to make it a cause. Since he has no good reason, and can't articulate what he doesn't have, everybody gets to read into it whatever they want. There is plenty of grist for whatever mill you happen to have. What there isn't, is an action that is both good, defensible, and clearly articulated. Those who like it are making up reasons. Those who don't like it are also making up reasons. They have to. There's nothing else.
Nobody has any facts. Not a one of us is there. I'm probably closest of the people in this thread, and I'm not close. So, we're all basing anything off of what we read, see, and are told. Not a bit of it is first hand.
I'd say we have some facts. Basic facts. You can see there are people/police, you can see what the area looks like in the light of day. But we don't know the whole unbiased story. I don't even think the people there know that. Just to many groups with different agendas. Plus you have the politicians and media with multiple agendas. I think the technical term for this is "It's a Mess".
I know that's nitpicking but I'm bored and got nothing else to do. So, I thought I'd spread some wisdom. lol
Actually, I meant the other point. You see it in this thread. When you look at Portland, everything is seen through a prism. Everybody has a different prism to look through, too. There are some people who I feel are doing the right thing, and I'd say it's the majority. There are also some that I feel are doing the wrong thing, and I'd say that's the minority.
On average, I would say that what DHS did in Portland was a bad thing from almost every perspective. I'd say that's why Trump hasn't followed through with sending federal agents to other cities. It didn't work out the way he wanted in Portland and he has calculated (correctly, I'd say), that he's better off talking about other cities, but not actually doing anything. If that is the case, then it doesn't matter whether you felt DHS was doing the right thing or the wrong thing, because they aren't going to be doing ANY thing, since the real motivation wasn't to solve a policing problem but to solve a political problem.
I'm not convinced that you know the meaning of that word.
Based on the rest of the spin that follows I boil it down to "I have no facts and I reject any that undermine the narrative I embrace so I'm deflecting with another made up story and some hypothetical scenarios."
Reply With Quote
, the federals escalated their response with flashbangs and tear gas and the majority of protesters stepped in and stopped the minority from what they were doing. And your take away from that is that the protesters are the problem?
Originally Posted by FunkyDexter
if the query is solved & Rate those who have helped you 
