More "largely peaceful" Portland protests

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

So the rioters in Portland attempted to burn an occupied police precinct down while attempting to barricade the occupants inside. Looking forward to the explanations of how this is peaceful and also, more importantly, the fault of the police.

https://katu.com/news/local/portland-protests-continue-as-mayor-wheeler-decries-violence

This has to stop and it has to stop now. The spineless mayor has finally come out against the rioters, what will he actually do to stop this?

[BmorePat87]

Good line: Don’t think for a moment that if you are participating in this activity, you are not being a prop for the reelection campaign of Donald Trump — because you absolutely are,” the mayor had said. “If you don’t want to be part of that, then don’t show up.”

The precinct captain seemed to think the fire was isolated agitators:

“I don’t want people to get confused to think that this was something related to Black Lives Matter,” Passadore said of the precinct rally. “I’ve been the incident commander for 24 nights of the 70-plus events, and I’ve seen amazing protesting going on in the city of Portland where people gather together.”

[GMDino]

(08-07-2020, 09:36 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: So the rioters in Portland attempted to burn an occupied police precinct down while attempting to barricade the occupants inside.  Looking forward to the explanations of how this is peaceful and also, more importantly, the fault of the police.

https://katu.com/news/local/portland-protests-continue-as-mayor-wheeler-decries-violence

This has to stop and it has to stop now.  The spineless mayor has finally come out against the rioters, what will he actually do to stop this?

Well clearly this ISN'T a "peaceful" anything.  What a disingenuous suggestion.

Or should we ask to see what happened before that led up to it...like when Trump's Goon Squad was gassing and beating people just standing talking or walking down the street?  I've been told we need to know ALL the facts and do a full, complete and thorough investigation before we can pass any judgment on anything.  


















NOTE:  EVERYTHING between the two   and in italics is SARCASM.  No one is defending what SSF posted as "peaceful".  The SARCASM is to show how some people will go to great lengths to defend their side while other can accept that bad things and wrong things happen that should not be defended.  Thank you and have a good day.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-08-2020, 09:40 AM)GMDino Wrote: Well clearly this ISN'T a "peaceful" anything.  What a disingenuous suggestion.

And yet we keep hearing about the "largely peaceful" protests, do we not?  

Quote: Or should we ask to see what happened before that led up to it...like when Trump's Goon Squad was gassing and beating people just standing talking or walking down the street?  I've been told we need to know ALL the facts and do a full, complete and thorough investigation before we can pass any judgment on anything.  

Your attempt to pass this obvious dig off as sarcasm aside, the violence in Portland was what caused the deployment of Federal law enforcement, not the other way around.  Whether there presence exacerbated it is certainly a topic for discussion.

Quote:NOTE:  EVERYTHING between the two   and in italics is SARCASM.  No one is defending what SSF posted as "peaceful".  The SARCASM is to show how some people will go to great lengths to defend their side while other can accept that bad things and wrong things happen that should not be defended.  Thank you and have a good day.

Which is rather the point of the thread, even the spineless mayor can no longer defend the actions of the mob.  The Feds are gone, can't blame them anymore.  The question now is what will he actually do to stop it?

You have a good day as well and enjoy your weekend! :andy:

[GMDino]

(08-08-2020, 12:28 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: And yet we keep hearing about the "largely peaceful" protests, do we not?  

Indeed. Perhaps that is because they have been and your single example with the ridiculous "question" about it defending the peaceful ones is something that I would expect from other posters but not you.

(08-08-2020, 12:28 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Your attempt to pass this obvious dig off as sarcasm aside, the violence in Portland was what caused the deployment of Federal law enforcement, not the other way around.  Whether there presence exacerbated it is certainly a topic for discussion.

"obvious".

What "caused" the deployment of Trump's Goons was Trump running for reelection and wanting to "look tough" because as we see his actions haven't done much if we believe your posts.

(08-08-2020, 12:28 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Which is rather the point of the thread, even the spineless mayor can no longer defend the actions of the mob.  The Feds are gone, can't blame them anymore.  The question now is what will he actually do to stop it?

I'll need a citation of where the mayor defended looting and violence.

Or maybe there isn't one and you are simply putting all protestors together because you don't like what they are protesting. :andy:

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-08-2020, 02:02 PM)GMDino Wrote: Indeed.  Perhaps that is because they have been and your single example with the ridiculous "question" about it defending the peaceful ones is something that I would expect from other posters but not you.

Single example?  Someone has memory issues.

Quote:"obvious".  

What "caused" the deployment of Trump's Goons was Trump running for reelection and wanting to "look tough" because as we see his actions haven't done much if we believe your posts.

Or it could be the nightly attacks on the federal courthouse that were allowed to occur by the local governemnt.

Quote:I'll need a citation of where the mayor defended looting and violence.

Sure.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/riot-declared-portland-mayor-crowd-feds-disperse-tear/story?id=71937598

"I want to thank the thousands of you who have come out to oppose the Trump administration's occupation of this city," Wheeler told people gathered downtown near the federal courthouse, according to the Associated Press. "The reason this is important is it is not just happening in Portland ... we're on the front line here in Portland."

When you join a group that has routinely engaged in violence and make statements applauding that group,, you are obviously condoning that group's activities.  The, "occupation" and "front lines" comments were especially interesting, it's almost like he's describing a war.  As someone who routinely, and often correctly, attacks Trump's choice of words I would imagine you'd have some issue with this.  Oh, and then his group got tear gassed.

Quote:Or maybe there isn't one and you are simply putting all protestors together because you don't like what they are protesting.  :andy:

Sadly, for both of us, I don't have to make anything up in this regard.  You defend people who engage in violence on a daily basis.  But it's ok because you approve of what they're protesting/rioting against.  t.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-09-2020, 05:50 PM)GMDino Wrote: Congrats SSF.  You are now able to cast about accusations and I can't defend myself or ask you to provide proof without my post being taken down.

Enjoy yourself...it's a small club.

Or you could, you know, actually respond to the points made instead of playing the victim.  At no time did I attack you personally.  I pointed out that the violent nature of these protests is a well known fact, hence citing instances did not seem necessary.  If you disagree with any of my assertions please feel free to delineate how.


I will say, one of the most interesting aspects of today's culture is the elevation of victimhood to the ultimate aspiration. I guess it's not just the millennials and after who are susceptible to this.  I'll still be here if you actually want to debate the topic down the road.  

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

More "largely peaceful" protests last night.

https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=261082&ec=1&ch=twitter

"Officers from the Oregon State Police and PPB arrived in the area to disperse the crowd. They were met with a hostile crowd who began throwing glass bottles and paint balloons at them. The hostile crowd also tried to injure officers by shining green lasers into their eyes, which is a crime in Oregon. Three officers suffered injuries. Two were transported to an area hospital by police vehicle and later released."

I suppose the defenders here have largely given up at this point? Maybe the local government will actually do something about this now?

[GMDino]

(08-09-2020, 06:12 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Or you could, you know, actually respond to the points made instead of playing the victim.  At no time did I attack you personally.  I pointed out that the violent nature of these protests is a well known fact, hence citing instances did not seem necessary.  If you disagree with any of my assertions please feel free to delineate how.


I will say, one of the most interesting aspects of today's culture is the elevation of victimhood to the ultimate aspiration. I guess it's not just the millennials and after who are susceptible to this.  I'll still be here if you actually want to debate the topic down the road.  

Sure thing for the THIRD TIME.

You provided zero evidence that anyone here "defended" the violence.  Zero evidence that the mayor defended the violence.

No let's see if you have evidence that I defend it in a daily basis.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-09-2020, 07:37 PM)GMDino Wrote: Sure thing for the THIRD TIME.

You provided zero evidence that anyone here "defended" the violence.

Who said anyone defended the violence?  As anyone who read the thread would know, I said we keep hearing about how these protests are "largely peaceful", yet we keep seeing violent riots.  I wondered about that incongruity

 

Quote:Zero evidence that the mayor defended the violence.

I actually posted exactly that in this very thread.  When you choose, as an elected official, to participate in a protest that turns into a violent riot on a daily basis, while also using terms like "occupation" and "front line", two terms meant to denote a battlefield, then you are absolutely defending the violence that occurs on a daily basis.  So, there's that.

Quote:No let's see if you have evidence that I defend it in a daily basis.

Who said you did?  I said you defend the people engaged in the violence, not the violence itself.  Yes, I realize that's an inconsistent position, but I'm not the one "occupying" it.

[GMDino]

They have been "largely" peaceful.


Again, you accused me of something and you better have proof of it.

[*michaelsean*]

Chatlotte looks like a campfire sing along compared to this.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-10-2020, 07:24 AM)GMDino Wrote: They have been "largely" peaceful.

A subjective term.  Would you continue to use it to describe the Portland protests?

Quote:Again, you accused me of something and you better have proof of it.

I accused you of defending the protests, you have.  I stated the protests in Portland now routinely turn violent, which they do.  If you're still protesting in Portland or defending the protests then you are condoning the violence that occurs on a daily basis there.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-10-2020, 10:15 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Chatlotte looks like a campfire sing along compared to this.

And yet we probably here more about Charlotte to this day then we do about Portland.

[Belsnickel]

(08-10-2020, 10:18 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: A subjective term.  Would you continue to use it to describe the Portland protests?

I accused you of defending the protests, you have.  I stated the protests in Portland now routinely turn violent, which they do.  If you're still protesting in Portland or defending the protests then you are condoning the violence that occurs on a daily basis there.

I am under the impression from sources local to Portland that the daily/nightly protests are largely peaceful, and then later on there is a significantly smaller group engaging in the violence and vandalism. That the protests and the violence are two separate things. There were news articles quoting a Portland police captain saying just this.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-10-2020, 10:28 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I am under the impression from sources local to Portland that the daily/nightly protests are largely peaceful, and then later on there is a significantly smaller group engaging in the violence and vandalism. That the protests and the violence are two separate things. There were news articles quoting a Portland police captain saying just this.

Significantly smaller but still a very large group.  Regardless, the fact is the protests turn violent on a daily basis.  If you're still attending these protests you do so in full knowledge of this, consequently you are, at the very least, tacitly condoning what happens.  Let's put it this way, you and I attend a protest for a cause we care about.  It starts out peaceful but several days in a not insignificant number of the people protesting with us turn violent.  After a few more days it becomes apparent that this is happening every day and will continue to happen.  Do you still go to the "largely peaceful" protests earlier in the day?  I certainly wouldn't as I wouldn't want to be associated, or seeming to condone, the daily violence that occurs later in the day.  At the very least you're emboldening the violent protesters who take support from the large number of people present earlier in the day.

[GMDino]

(08-10-2020, 10:18 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: A subjective term.  Would you continue to use it to describe the Portland protests?


I accused you of defending the protests, you have.  I stated the protests in Portland now routinely turn violent, which they do.  If you're still protesting in Portland or defending the protests then you are condoning the violence that occurs on a daily basis there.

(08-09-2020, 12:57 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Sadly, for both of us, I don't have to make anything up in this regard.  You defend people who engage in violence on a daily basis.  But it's ok because you approve of what they're protesting/rioting against.  t.

At least be honest.

I have spoken in support of protests and against violence and looting which I believe (and other have also said) that are not part of the protests but rather a small group that uses protest as a cover for their ways.

Not are you wrong but you are doubling down on it without a single shred of evidence.

Thanks.

Edit to add I should have been done with this before. I will be now.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-10-2020, 10:53 AM)GMDino Wrote:


At least be honest.

Ahh, I see your confusion.  Let me retype that; you defend people who engage in daily violence.  For wont of a comma.

Quote:I have spoken in support of protests and against violence and looting which I believe (and other have also said) that are not part of the protests but rather a small group that uses protest as a cover for their ways.

That's the thing, you don't get to choose to separate them simply because that's your preference.  We heard all about the Confederate flags at the MI protest and it turned out to be one guy.  This is all part and parcel of the same movement.  If the people protesting were against the violence then they would cease protesting in the area in which the daily violence occurs.  If there is a separation then make it obvious.  They haven't, which tells you something.  

Quote:Not are you wrong but you are doubling down on it without a single shred of evidence.

Thanks.

I think you meant to type "not only are you wrong".  Maybe my clarification will mollify you a bit.

[Belsnickel]

(08-10-2020, 10:48 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Significantly smaller but still a very large group.  Regardless, the fact is the protests turn violent on a daily basis.  If you're still attending these protests you do so in full knowledge of this, consequently you are, at the very least, tacitly condoning what happens.  Let's put it this way, you and I attend a protest for a cause we care about.  It starts out peaceful but several days in a not insignificant number of the people protesting with us turn violent.  After a few more days it becomes apparent that this is happening every day and will continue to happen.  Do you still go to the "largely peaceful" protests earlier in the day?  I certainly wouldn't as I wouldn't want to be associated, or seeming to condone, the daily violence that occurs later in the day.  At the very least you're emboldening the violent protesters who take support from the large number of people present earlier in the day.

I disagree. This logic is strikingly similar to the logic of the ACAB movement.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-10-2020, 11:05 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I disagree. This logic is strikingly similar to the logic of the ACAB movement.

Not in the slightest.  Would you attend a rally if you knew that it would later devolve into planned violence?  If the message you're rallying for is important would you not then move the peaceful rally to another location instead of choosing the exact same spot to protest in which said violence has occurred the past few weeks?  You are actively choosing to associate yourself with people who are engaging in planned violence on a daily basis.