• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

American politics

Danishfurniturelover said:
I mean I hate the protesters as much as the next person but demonizing them as monsters does no one any good. Lets call them agitators, set out to deliberately undermine the law enforcement officials trying to remove people who have broken the law and entered the country illegally.
Click to expand...
I’d have more sympathy for the so called law enforcement if they weren’t repeatedly breaking the law themselves and then trying to cover it up.
 
Crab.C.Nesbitt said:
I’d have more sympathy for the so called law enforcement if they weren’t repeatedly breaking the law themselves and then trying to cover it up.
Click to expand...
True.

This does however have nothing to do with law enforcement. ICE and CBP are not law enforcers with regulatory authority to perform crowd control, handle demonstrations or anything remotely close to that. They handle immigration and civic law. They have zero justification to carry weapons, yet they do. They are poorly trained, from the pool of uneducated, and probably quite afraid and/or emotional.

So you have to ask -why- do they deploy them like this? They KNOW people will get killed. They KNOW someone will film it, and create a storm. So why do it? To remove illegal aliens? Horsebrick! Illegal aliens has been removed without innocent bystanders (and/or protesters, agitators, whatever) being shot for years. This has nothing to do with immigration either, it has everything to do with intimidation, and creating a reaction. As if someone should, say... torch the Reichstag, or something.

Which is why it is important that the people who must react to stop this must be the moderate republicans, NOT the "radical left" (who by the way, are not leftist at all, by European standards) or anyone associated with them.
The democrats must continue to protest, to seek litigations, and by all means, take to the streets, but they must do it with utmost care not to give any excuse for "riot acts" or claiming "acts of sedition".

Because that is what this is about.
 
Junior19 said:
True.

This does however have nothing to do with law enforcement. ICE and CBP are not law enforcers with regulatory authority to perform crowd control, handle demonstrations or anything remotely close to that. They handle immigration and civic law. They have zero justification to carry weapons, yet they do. They are poorly trained, from the pool of uneducated, and probably quite afraid and/or emotional.

So you have to ask -why- do they deploy them like this? They KNOW people will get killed. They KNOW someone will film it, and create a storm. So why do it? To remove illegal aliens? Horsebrick! Illegal aliens has been removed without innocent bystanders (and/or protesters, agitators, whatever) being shot for years. This has nothing to do with immigration either, it has everything to do with intimidation, and creating a reaction. As if someone should, say... torch the Reichstag, or something.

Which is why it is important that the people who must react to stop this must be the moderate republicans, NOT the "radical left" (who by the way, are not leftist at all, by European standards) or anyone associated with them.
The democrats must continue to protest, to seek litigations, and by all means, take to the streets, but they must do it with utmost care not to give any excuse for "riot acts" or claiming "acts of sedition".

Because that is what this is about.
Click to expand...
.....yeah that......and the Epstein files.
 
Crab.C.Nesbitt said:
I’d have more sympathy for the so called law enforcement if they weren’t repeatedly breaking the law themselves and then trying to cover it up.
Click to expand...
Probably have broken the law in this instance in my view, though I'm not trained in law enforcement.

They are doing a difficult job in trying circumstances not made any easier by professional trouble makers out to impede them. It is clear why the protesters are doing it, to stop the deportations of people in a country illegally.

Is this where we are at, democracy has fallen so far we have such little respect for it that we do what we want to stop laws we don't agree with. Weird.
 
Danishfurniturelover said:
Probably have broken the law in this instance in my view, though I'm not trained in law enforcement.

They are doing a difficult job in trying circumstances not made any easier by professional trouble makers out to impede them. It is clear why the protesters are doing it, to stop the deportations of people in a country illegally.

Is this where we are at, democracy has fallen so far we have such little respect for it that we do what we want to stop laws we don't agree with. Weird.
Click to expand...

Surely democracy is the right to protest?? You are making little or no sense
 
MartyFunkhouser said:
Surely democracy is the right to protest?? You are making little or no sense
Click to expand...
By taking a gun to the protest?

Thats not protesting thats going with intent to cause trouble and be an agitator. I protest regularly these days but i do not impede the police force.

Hopefully my dear friend will allow me to show what happened to her just last saturday at a protest in Brighton where she was hit by a man in front of police officers a white English chap not that is really relevant and the police did not arrest the man as in their words "we already know him, he is currently out on bail"

think about that for a second, a man hits a woman who was just standing their with a British flag with love for Israel on it and she was punched in the throat and the police did not arrest him. I saw this with my own eyes.

The is a big difference between protesting which i agree everyone should have the right to, even those poor souls in Iran and being a professional agitator who takes a gun to a protest.
 
Danishfurniturelover said:
By taking a gun to the protest?

Thats not protesting thats going with intent to cause trouble and be an agitator. I protest regularly these days but i do not impede the police force.

Hopefully my dear friend will allow me to show what happened to her just last saturday at a protest in Brighton where she was hit by a man in front of police officers a white English chap not that is really relevant and the police did not arrest the man as in their words "we already know him, he is currently out on bail"

think about that for a second, a man hits a woman who was just standing their with a British flag with love for Israel on it and she was punched in the throat and the police did not arrest him. I saw this with my own eyes.

The is a big difference between protesting which i agree everyone should have the right to, even those poor souls in Iran and being a professional agitator who takes a gun to a protest.
Click to expand...

He hadn't drawn his gun, he was filming with a camera, also the laws and rights of Americans, that you and your cronies are always comparing to the UKs lack of gives him that right to carry a gun. You can't just change the laws and rights of people to suit your argument, you either care about peoples freedoms as you keep saying over the years, or you don't.
 
Danishfurniturelover said:
By taking a gun to the protest?

Thats not protesting thats going with intent to cause trouble and be an agitator.
Click to expand...
Not according to the Rittenhauser-judgement!
Regardless, with the 1st and 2nd amendments still in place, that does not matter! It was his right!
It is rather peculiar though, how all protesters on the left are "professional agitators", "paid", and what not, while a bunch of masked men in tactical gear using tear gas and flagpoles at REAL law enforcement officers at the Capitol were "nice tourists" who were lured into a trap, right?

I'm not saying that bringing your gun to a demonstration is a wise thing to do. In our part of the world it would be an insane (and in most cases illegal) thing to do. But in Minnesota, with the laws and permits they have, it was his right!

Also, if what he did was "agitation", I hope I'm brave enough to be an agitator even without pay when the time comes.

Danishfurniturelover said:
Hopefully my dear friend will allow me to show what happened to her just last saturday at a protest in Brighton where she was hit by a man in front of police officers a white English chap not that is really relevant and the police did not arrest the man as in their words "we already know him, he is currently out on bail"

think about that for a second, a man hits a woman who was just standing their with a British flag with love for Israel on it and she was punched in the throat and the police did not arrest him. I saw this with my own eyes.
Click to expand...

Well, that's of course not ok.
However, what relevance does it have to the Minnesota-case? Would it be better if the cop drew his MP5 and blew him out of the way with a burst?

Danishfurniturelover said:
The is a big difference between protesting which i agree everyone should have the right to, even those poor souls in Iran and being a professional agitator who takes a gun to a protest.
Click to expand...

How do you qualify as an professional agitator? By being shot?
 
Last edited:
Junior19 said:
Not according to the Rittenhauser-judgement!
Regardless, with the 1st and 2nd amendments still in place, that does not matter! It was his right!
It is rather peculiar though, how all protesters on the left are "professional agitators", "paid", and what not, while a bunch of masked men in tactical gear using tear gas and flagpoles at REAL law enforcement officers at the Capitol were "nice tourists" who were lured into a trap, right?

I'm not saying that bringing your gun to a demonstration is a wise thing to do. In our part of the world it would be an insane (and in most cases illegal) thing to do. But in Minnesota, with the laws and permits they have, it was his right!

Also, if what he did was "agitation", I hope I'm brave enough to be an agitator even without pay when the time comes.



Well, that's of course not ok.
However, what relevance does it have to the Minnesota-case? Would it be better if the cop drew his MP5 and blew him out of the way with a burst?



How do you qualify as an professional agitator? By being shot?
Click to expand...
I never defended the rioters in Washington, I have always been pretty critical of Trump and his supporters. Look at the first post in this very thread for proof of that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back