Feds 'black-bagging people' in Portland

"Do you mean violent acts like showing a press pass, holding a boom box or asking a question?"

What exactly did you “want to find out” here?

The leafblowers are creative. I’ll give them that.

I’m pretty sure he wanted to find out whether you recognized that the claim that the police are using rubber bullet and tear gas based on “violence” is complete bullshit of the highest order and that any pretense that the police are justified in their actions is so flimsy that it can’t be given credence in any honest way.

Pretty much, yeah. I thought the purpose of those questions would have been fucking obvious to most people.

I saw the video in question, too - no, it wasn’t a guy just on his way home trying not to get tear-gassed. It was a guy deliberately and methodically smashing windows.

I wouldn’t call his mask “military”, though - it looked like one of the half-face rubber things they sell in hardware stores with pink N100 filter cartridges.

OK, let’s put this thread - give then 900 reports it’s generated - onto what my regulators would call ‘enhanced oversight’.

From this point forward, everything and everyone needs to be on best behavior. If a questions asked, try to answer it. No personal cracks of any kind about another poster.

Failure to comply may result in warnings, penalties, banning from thread or forum and will almost certainly get this thread shut down.

I hope that’s clear.

I protested last night by the Justice Center and federal courthouse. I was interested to see first-hand what it took to bring out the gas. Turns out, it takes shaking the fence and shooting off a few fireworks.

The fence is reinforced by concrete barriers, so it was not coming down no matter how much people shook it. The fireworks were not a risk. There were no officers outside at the time, and the building was heavily reinforced after the Oklahoma City bombing. The ground floor is all concrete; there’s nothing to catch on fire.

But this was enough. The feds started with tear gas along the fence. In the second round, they launched it into the crowd, the canisters nearly hitting people who were just standing there.

What struck me was just how ineffective it was as a tactic. Everyone backed off a bit when it was released, people would throw the canisters back at the goons, the dads would rev up the leaf blowers, and then everyone went right back to the fence once it cleared. As we’d back off, people everywhere on the perimeter were shouting “saline, saline!” holding bottles to wash out your eyes if you caught some. Several volunteer medics were also around for people who got it worse. No one scattered and went home.

Whatever your opinion on the appropriateness of the response, it is undeniable that it’s an abject failure in meeting the stated goals. There were more than 4000 people still at the protest at 11:00 pm. This is compared to 100s at that time during peak protests in May, and 20-40 just a couple weeks ago. Every action the feds take just further incites the crowd. They can’t escalate this to victory.

Chaos is their goal, not order. They (Barr’s thugs) want to start and escalate fights.

Agreed. I was careful to say stated goals, which you and I know are a sham.

But I also came away with more confidence that their goal of chaos is failing too. I think the first few nights of secret arrests scared people, but they aren’t scared anymore. We realize the ineffectiveness of their tactics, and it felt like more of a game. I have videos of tear gas wafting while the drumming circle kept playing and people danced.

And if the order is not over safety concerns, but solely violation of curfew?

Apologizes, the @ thing put you in, then I changed it, but it went back. I don’t know, my bad.

The chaos is for the cameras.

Trump is losing suburbanites in droves. And seeing this sort of thing may be what scares them into coming back to the MAGA side.

He is hoping to scare the suburbanites back into the fold… but it might not work because of all the other crap he’s done (or sometimes what he hasn’t done).

It might backfire, because the yellow-shirt moms and leaf-blower dads who are getting gassed look just like those suburbanites (and probably some of them are suburbanites? I haven’t seen that addressed.)

So gassing these protests may scare those suburbanites way away from Trump. Just hope it doesn’t scare them away from the polling booths in states where they manage to require in-person voting.

There was a paper recently by someone that studies this type of stuff. His analysis of the 60’s was that non-violent protests in the first half of the 60’s resulted in strong public support and the passing of significant civil rights legislation. Then in the second half of the 60’s the protests became violent and it pushed enough of the public towards a law and order position that Nixon got elected instead of Humphrey (who was substantially behind the civil rights legislation).

The Seattle local news last night had one of the protesters that recently was part of a large group of people breaking windows, starting fires etc.

One of his statements was that they targeted businesses that don’t have a BLM sign in the window.

I was already against destruction of property, but this is even worse, if you don’t have the right type of thought or speech, they will destroy your property.

False. The person in the link was instantly blinded in one eye and partially blinded instantly in the other; she most certainly did not stand still while a laser was played over her.

Sandmen have been issued laser goggles since the incident but they were not cheap and they are good for only one frequency of laser beam; there are several different frequencies out there.

The chief danger is from cheap green lasers. The green is achieved by doubling the frequency of an IR laser which is then emitted at a lower power than the original. Expensive lasers filter out the IR, the cheap ones don’t bother, and IR is more damaging than the green.

I am in no way supporting the actions of the Federal thugs, but shining a laser at them is far more threatening than a rock.

Exactly, which is why the Trump administration is trying to make the protests violent, and to blow out of proportion any examples they find of violence.

He hopes that people will be fooled by this, and vote for him, even though he is the one that is instigating and creating the vast majority of the violence.

He may be right, people do tend to be easily fooled, and do tend to retreat into authoritarianism when they are afraid or confused.

Be interested in seeing this interview, any chance you can link it?

Was he a protest leader, or just some guy? Did he specifically say that they were destroying property that didn’t have the right type of thought of speech, or did he say that they simple avoided damaging property of supporters? How many windows did they actually break? How many businesses did they burn down?

Context and nuance are very important here. Paraphrases could completely change the meaning of something into the opposite of what was actually said. Random people talking to the press are not always aware of the overall situation, even if the press makes it sound as though the random person they got to do an interview is in charge of everything.

The way you phrased it sounds like there was an organized effort to burn out anyone who didn’t have the right type of thought or speech, and that very well may be the case, but without actual context, it is rather hard to say.

Portland is backfiring but Trump is too invested to back down now. Chances are he’s losing everyone who doesn’t pay attention to Fox News and/or OANN.

https://news.yahoo.com/the-battle-of-portland-trumps-escalating-tactics-against-protestors-are-backfiring-in-oregon-200349636.html

Former Seattle Chief of Police to the Washington Post, regarding Portland: “I believe it’s safe to say it has backfired.”

I noted this argument before, IMHO it misses that it is not 1968 again, one has to look at what happened in 1992: Bush senior and the Republicans then did try to equate the Democrats (and others that pointed at the LA riots to be the result of years of neglect of poor areas in the USA and lack of police reform) with the violent rioters. The republicans failed to convince many then that the violence they saw on tape and the insane acquittal of the police that almost killed Rodney King then was hunky dory.

Now the Republicans are trying harder to convince people now that all protesters of police brutality have no reason to protest or that they are all violent rioters. So far it is clear, by looking at the polls, that trying to equate grandmothers and veterans protesting against the federals with violent rioters and criminals is not working.