Looks like we have a total keyboard-badass here to set all of us straight on politics.

Look at when he joined. He is not a newbie troll.

The TC Jester said:

---

I don't believe that you are "not a liberal or leftist of whatever".

Liberals always try to claim "independent" or "concerned moderate" around here.

---

I am a constitutionalist and believer in the billof rights.

As in I believe much of it is great and protects our freedoms. I think it should be applied to people I both agree and don't agree with.

That doesn't seem to be the case for many of the folks posting on this topic as far as I can tell.

blindey said:

---

Looks like we have a total keyboard-badass here to set all of us straight on politics.

---

Actually, I have a point of view and was sharing it.

Many here have a point of view and share it.

Mine is slightly different and apparently that causes a quick escalation and goes straight to personal attacks.

I'm all for the 1A and everyone's right to peacefully assemble and protest. More power to you to try to influence others to your beliefs.

When it becomes action that violates the law, like destruction of property or assaulting others, the government has an obligation to restore law and order.

If it's wide spread and systemic law violation that is an insurrection and needs to be responded to with full force, including lethal force if required.

If that fails, and it becomes more than law enforcement can handle, then the law abiding citizens must act. Yes, at that point we are talking about citizens acting as a militia to fight (And kill) for this country.

We are currently getting close to an insurrection and we should be in wait and see mode for whether or not the government/LEO can quell it.

Whoop It Gigem Style said:

---

blindey said:

---

Looks like we have a total keyboard-badass here to set all of us straight on politics.

---

Actually, I have a point of view and was sharing it.

Many here have a point of view and share it.

Mine is slightly different and apparently that causes a quick escalation and goes straight to personal attacks.

---

And your point of view about the Navy veteran was significant and reasonable enough. It is yellow slow-down sign at least. Nothing wrong with that point.

Whoop It Gigem Style said:

---

And just as a comment,

I am new to the Politics board.

It would be really great if you would actually respond to what I wrote as opposed to making general arguments about some other position or talking point you read somewhere or was said by someone else.

I get you want me to be some half-baked soft on crime liberal so my positions fit into some bucket you can dismiss and you will probably do that regardless.

I am neither a liberal nor leftist nor whatever.

I actually believe in states in rights and the bill of rights and I find you guys seem generally challenged with their equal application and I don't understand why.

---

Here is a good litmus test for you.

Was the South Carolina militia justified in seizing Fort Sumter?

The TC Jester said:

---

Whoop It Gigem Style said:

---

The TC Jester said:

---

I don't believe that you are "not a liberal or leftist of whatever".

Liberals always try to claim "independent" or "concerned moderate" around here.

---

I am a constitutionalist and believer in the billof rights.

As in I believe much of it is great and protects our freedoms. I think it should be applied to people I both agree and don't agree with.

That doesn't seem to be the case for many of the folks posting on this topic as far as I can tell.

---

I couldn't disagree with you more on your last statement. Just about everyone here (who you probably detest) were pro "freedom of assembly" both when the "cannot gather in groups of more than 10" and "no church" orders came down...as well as when there are/were peaceful protests pushing ridiculous causes most of us don't believe in or see right through.

If liberal local and state leaders are going to sit by and cheer the destruction of their city at the hands of domestic terrorists (that is literally what these bad actors are), I am 100% fine with the feds fighting terrorism. It seems like some of you think these people can't be terrorists bc they're mostly white liberals or something. It's weird. But you should google the definition of "terrorist".

---

Jeez. I don't detest anyone on this board. I don't know any of you.

I found Navy-guy fascinating as he was beaten; appears to be a peaceful protester (with a bunch of gray-area around being in a place where non-peaceful stuff was going on.)

I don't see many folks on this thread supporting navy guy, nor recognizing that beating him was a violation of his rights. That is the inconsistency in the application of the logic I don't understand.

Alright gents.

I got to get back to work.

Thanks for the useful discussions.

Best and Gigem.

Whoop It Gigem Style said:

---

The TC Jester said:

---

Whoop It Gigem Style said:

---

The TC Jester said:

---

I don't believe that you are "not a liberal or leftist of whatever".

Liberals always try to claim "independent" or "concerned moderate" around here.

---

I am a constitutionalist and believer in the billof rights.

As in I believe much of it is great and protects our freedoms. I think it should be applied to people I both agree and don't agree with.

That doesn't seem to be the case for many of the folks posting on this topic as far as I can tell.

---

I couldn't disagree with you more on your last statement. Just about everyone here (who you probably detest) were pro "freedom of assembly" both when the "cannot gather in groups of more than 10" and "no church" orders came down...as well as when there are/were peaceful protests pushing ridiculous causes most of us don't believe in or see right through.

If liberal local and state leaders are going to sit by and cheer the destruction of their city at the hands of domestic terrorists (that is literally what these bad actors are), I am 100% fine with the feds fighting terrorism. It seems like some of you think these people can't be terrorists bc they're mostly white liberals or something. It's weird. But you should google the definition of "terrorist".

---

Jeez. I don't detest anyone on this board. I don't know any of you.

I found Navy-guy fascinating as he was beaten; appears to be a peaceful protester (with a bunch of gray-area around being in a place where non-peaceful stuff was going on.)

I don't see many folks on this thread supporting navy guy, nor recognizing that beating him was a violation of his rights. That is the inconsistency in the application of the logic I don't understand.

---

Weird that you think you have to have physically met someone to detest them. Extremely naive. At the very least, your tone was confrontational from the get go...and the focus of this thread isn't on "navy guy" and wasn't when you barged in aggressively.

hbtheduce said:

---

Whoop It Gigem Style said:

---

The TC Jester said:

---

Whoop It Gigem Style said:

---

The TC Jester said:

---

I don't believe that you are "not a liberal or leftist of whatever".

Liberals always try to claim "independent" or "concerned moderate" around here.

---

I am a constitutionalist and believer in the billof rights.

As in I believe much of it is great and protects our freedoms. I think it should be applied to people I both agree and don't agree with.

That doesn't seem to be the case for many of the folks posting on this topic as far as I can tell.

---

I couldn't disagree with you more on your last statement. Just about everyone here (who you probably detest) were pro "freedom of assembly" both when the "cannot gather in groups of more than 10" and "no church" orders came down...as well as when there are/were peaceful protests pushing ridiculous causes most of us don't believe in or see right through.

If liberal local and state leaders are going to sit by and cheer the destruction of their city at the hands of domestic terrorists (that is literally what these bad actors are), I am 100% fine with the feds fighting terrorism. It seems like some of you think these people can't be terrorists bc they're mostly white liberals or something. It's weird. But you should google the definition of "terrorist".

---

Jeez. I don't detest anyone on this board. I don't know any of you.

I found Navy-guy fascinating as he was beaten; appears to be a peaceful protester (with a bunch of gray-area around being in a place where non-peaceful stuff was going on.)

I don't see many folks on this thread supporting navy guy, nor recognizing that beating him was a violation of his rights. That is the inconsistency in the application of the logic I don't understand.

---

That "gray-area" includes explosives being thrown at federal officers. And yes, I'm not going to support people dumb enough to hang around a full blown violent riot.

The violation of his rights is also less than your suggestion. At the point of getting beat, he was criminally ignoring the lawful orders of federal officers. Officers that had explosives thrown at them. Its not rocket science why they were quick to forcibly subdue a non-compliant dude.

---

This times a million.

Quote:

---

I found Navy-guy fascinating

---

I saw an interview of him after the fact.

I found him looney.

Non-violent protests are always the way to go, for every club swung and canister of gas spent, transformation is at hand. Just because you may not share the political persuasions with someone, does not mean they are dispossessed of human rights to peacefully assemble and ask for recourse from their government. Seeing images of violence against peace across the country only stirs this message.

Reminds of me Invictus~

Out of the night that covers me,
Black as the pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever gods may be
For my unconquerable soul.

In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.

Beyond this place of wrath and tears
Looms but the Horror of the shade,
And yet the menace of the years
Finds and shall find me unafraid.

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate,
I am the captain of my soul.

Quote:

---

Seeing images of violence against peace across the country only stirs this message.

---

Where do you see that?

I see violence against rioters and looters.

Don't care. If anything, not enough violence has been brought to bear. There's a saying often attributed to Orwell (and Kipling and Churchill)

Quote:

---

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

---

Seems appropriate here.

Or perhaps a real Kipling quote, if we're doing Victorian English authors.

Quote:

---

Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.
Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.

---

https://www.poetryloverspage.com/poets/kipling/tommy.html

Prognightmare said:

---

BlackLab said:

---

This city and its government are crazy.

---

Authorize the use of live fire rounds.

---

Terrible idea.

I don't think every protester in Portland is personally violent. However anyone who has any apprehension about using violence to further their cause, be it by themselves or others, long ago decided it would be a good idea to stay home.

I agree, who had this on their 2020 Bingo card?

ETA: The irony of using ring around the rosie which was a reference to a physical sign of a plague pandemic is rich.