Federal law enforcement pulling people of the street in Portland

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: deadlysyn
a reply to: Xtrozero

The problem is they don't feel like a murder charge is enough and that all police officers should be held accountable, because feelings or something.

The ones calling all cops bad are the same ones saying we shouldn't be mad at all of Islam because of a few terrorists.

Conversely, many of the ones saying not all cops are bad are the ones lumping all the protesters together with the looters/rioters.

That's why people should shoot the looters WHILE they are looting, so there's no misunderstanding.

a reply to: frogs453

US Attorney For Oregon Calls For Investigation Into Portland Protester Arrests

U.S. Attorney Billy Williams said Friday he wants an investigation into actions of federal officers who have pulled Portland protesters off the street and into unmarked vehicles.

Federal officers with U.S. Customs and Border Protection have come under significant scrutiny after OPB first reported Thursday that they may have been involved in constitutionally questionable arrests in Portland.
[...]
“Based on news accounts circulating that allege federal law enforcement detained two protesters without probable cause, I have requested the Department of Homeland Security Office of the Inspector General to open a separate investigation directed specifically at the actions of DHS personnel,” Williams said in his statement.

But there sure are a lot of fascist government apologists here, thinking it's proper for Americans to be snatched off the streets by unidentifiable agents without apparent cause and be denied due process and their Constitutional rights because of some distorted sense of "law &order!" If the Gestapo fits their brand of politics, they appear to be ok with it, the rights of their fellow citizens be damned. Now we see how how Nazi Germany became what it did: people like these Anti-American apologists.

Why am I not surprised.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: deadlysyn
a reply to: Xtrozero

The problem is they don't feel like a murder charge is enough and that all police officers should be held accountable, because feelings or something.

The ones calling all cops bad are the same ones saying we shouldn't be mad at all of Islam because of a few terrorists.

Conversely, many of the ones saying not all cops are bad are the ones lumping all the protesters together with the looters/rioters.

That's why people should shoot the looters WHILE they are looting, so there's no misunderstanding.

People have a right to defend their own property.

But gunning down random criminals not posing a threat to their or others' lives?

Not so much.

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: deadlysyn
a reply to: Xtrozero

The problem is they don't feel like a murder charge is enough and that all police officers should be held accountable, because feelings or something.

The ones calling all cops bad are the same ones saying we shouldn't be mad at all of Islam because of a few terrorists.

Conversely, many of the ones saying not all cops are bad are the ones lumping all the protesters together with the looters/rioters.

That's why people should shoot the looters WHILE they are looting, so there's no misunderstanding.

People have a right to defend their own property.

But gunning down random criminals not posing a threat to their or others' lives?

Not so much.

When people break into your house, you are going to equivocate?

Why not give them a hug.

pfft.

Twitter

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: deadlysyn
a reply to: Xtrozero

The problem is they don't feel like a murder charge is enough and that all police officers should be held accountable, because feelings or something.

The ones calling all cops bad are the same ones saying we shouldn't be mad at all of Islam because of a few terrorists.

Conversely, many of the ones saying not all cops are bad are the ones lumping all the protesters together with the looters/rioters.

That's why people should shoot the looters WHILE they are looting, so there's no misunderstanding.

People have a right to defend their own property.

But gunning down random criminals not posing a threat to their or others' lives?

Not so much.

When people break into your house, you are going to equivocate?

Why not give them a hug.

pfft.

Hence "People have a right to defend their own property."

JFC man.

pfft.

a reply to: Liquesence

Apologies, can you source when I stated "Radomly gunning down people"?

Seem to have lost that post.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: deadlysyn
a reply to: Xtrozero

The problem is they don't feel like a murder charge is enough and that all police officers should be held accountable, because feelings or something.

The ones calling all cops bad are the same ones saying we shouldn't be mad at all of Islam because of a few terrorists.

Conversely, many of the ones saying not all cops are bad are the ones lumping all the protesters together with the looters/rioters.

That's why people should shoot the looters WHILE they are looting, so there's no misunderstanding.

Are there guns that also record video?

a reply to: DBCowboy

You didn't say those exact words.

But you did say:

"That's why people should shoot the looters WHILE they are looting."

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: DBCowboy

You didn't say those exact words.

But you did say:

"That's why people should shoot the looters WHILE they are looting."

Yes.

Were there too many words?

Unmarked police cars and plainclothes cops have been arresting criminals off the streets for years. More power to them

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: DBCowboy

You didn't say those exact words.

But you did say:

"That's why people should shoot the looters WHILE they are looting."

Yes.

Were there too many words?

Nope, but "people should start shooting them" sounds awfully like "gunning down criminals (looters)."

The implication is pretty clear.

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: DBCowboy

You didn't say those exact words.

But you did say:

"That's why people should shoot the looters WHILE they are looting."

Yes.

Were there too many words?

Nope, but "people should start shooting shooting them" sounds awfully like "gunning down criminals (looters)."

The implication is pretty clear.

Personally, I think people committing crimes should be punished.

But that's just me.

My bad.

a reply to: Liquesence
Otherwords, rewording his statement so you hear what you want to hear.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: DBCowboy

You didn't say those exact words.

But you did say:

"That's why people should shoot the looters WHILE they are looting."

Yes.

Were there too many words?

Nope, but "people should start shooting shooting them" sounds awfully like "gunning down criminals (looters)."

The implication is pretty clear.

Personally, I think people committing crimes should be punished.

But that's just me.

My bad.

I think so, too.

But according to due process and law.

Surely you agree with that.

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: DBCowboy

You didn't say those exact words.

But you did say:

"That's why people should shoot the looters WHILE they are looting."

Yes.

Were there too many words?

Nope, but "people should start shooting shooting them" sounds awfully like "gunning down criminals (looters)."

The implication is pretty clear.

Personally, I think people committing crimes should be punished.

But that's just me.

My bad.

I think so, too.

But according to due process and law.

Surely you agree with that.

Gosh golly!

Going to be hard to do when you leftists get rid of the police!

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: DBCowboy

You didn't say those exact words.

But you did say:

"That's why people should shoot the looters WHILE they are looting."

Yes.

Were there too many words?

Nope, but "people should start shooting shooting them" sounds awfully like "gunning down criminals (looters)."

The implication is pretty clear.

Personally, I think people committing crimes should be punished.

But that's just me.

My bad.

I think so, too.

But according to due process and law.

Surely you agree with that.

Gosh golly!

Going to be hard to do when you leftists get rid of the police!

Golly Gosh.

Too bad this isn't the pit.

Because this thread seems to be about extrajudicial and unwarranted "arrests" of American citizens by unidentifiable people (feds?).

Anyway.

The judiciary still exists, as well as the Constitution, and due process. If we can keep it, and not turn into a fascist state.

*shrug*

Thought you stood up for and against that stuff.

Has anyone posted an updated article? It seems it wasn't peaceful after all. Link

Rioters Storm Portland Police Precinct; Feds In Unmarked Cars Arrest Some Rioters

The latest attack began on July 16, just hours after police dismantled the so-called “autonomous zone,” dubbed the Chinook Land Autonomous Territory (CLAT), located in Lownsdale Square across from the federal Pioneer Courthouse, FOX News reported.

After clearing and closing Lownsdale Square and nearby Chapman Square, officials had fences installed around both areas, Oregon Public Broadcasting reported.

Later in the evening, hundreds of protesters gathered at Laurelhurst Park, while a separate group of approximately 200 more demonstrators converged on the area outside the Multnomah County Justice Center, the Portland Police Bureau (PPB) said in a press release.

The Laurelhurst Park group took off marching towards the Southeast Precinct on East Burnside Street at approximately 8:20 p.m.

When they arrived at the police station, they promptly blocked all lanes of traffic and shined lights in the eyes of the officers posted outside the building, PPB said.

Police used a sound truck to urge the group to “stay peaceful,” according to the press release.

About an hour later, “the group began making statements about wanting to enter Southeast Precinct and burn down the property,” PPB said. “The group was admonished by the sound truck and told not to enter the property or they would be subject to arrest or use of force.”

The rioters responded by igniting a blaze in the roadway, while others stormed onto the Southeast Precinct property, police said.

Ok, that doesn't sound peaceful to me. It also sounds like the police were trying to get them to stay peaceful but the "protesters" had other things on their minds.

Officers began making “targeted arrests” at 11:40 p.m., and declared the gathering to be an unlawful assembly minutes later.

By that time, the rioters were attacking police using bottles, sticks, and rocks, police said.

Officers repeatedly ordered the group to disperse, but most ignored the warnings.

Police began breaking up the mob shortly before midnight.

“While dispersing the group, a vehicle associated with the group drove up behind officers, narrowly missing officers on foot and causing an extremely dangerous situation,” PPB said. “The vehicle was later stopped.”

Police arrested several individuals before “disengaging the crowd,” at which point a “majority” of the rioters returned to the Southeast Precinct and blocked the roadway once again, police said.

More rioters were arrested after an additional slew of warnings to leave the area went unheeded.

I could quote the whole article but if you take the time to read it, it appears very clear to me that these so-called peaceful protesters were not and have not been peaceful for some time. That doesn't justify any group of unidentified people taking others off the street without proper procedures but it does deflate the claim that the protesters were just being peaceful. No, they were rioters waiting for the chance to destroy whatever they could and attack police.

a reply to: HalWesten
That doesn't really address the apparent extrajudicial potentially unlawful detainment (kidnapped) of citizens by agents lacking proper identification, now does it?

Which is what this thread is about.

The Gov and ACLU concur.

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: DBCowboy

You didn't say those exact words.

But you did say:

"That's why people should shoot the looters WHILE they are looting."

Yes.

Were there too many words?

Nope, but "people should start shooting shooting them" sounds awfully like "gunning down criminals (looters)."

The implication is pretty clear.

Personally, I think people committing crimes should be punished.

But that's just me.

My bad.

I think so, too.

But according to due process and law.

Surely you agree with that.

Gosh golly!

Going to be hard to do when you leftists get rid of the police!

Golly Gosh.

Too bad this isn't the pit.

Because this thread seems to be about extrajudicial and unwarranted "arrests" of American citizens by unidentifiable people (feds?).

Anyway.

The judiciary still exists, as well as the Constitution, and due process. If we can keep it, and not turn into a fascist state.

*shrug*

Thought you stood up for and against that stuff.

I do hold the Constitution in high regard.

But I hold no quarter with those who voluntarilly spit on it.