Feds in Portland Brutalize Navy Vet.

[eagle1462010]

Well said. There has to be rational middle, there are situations where force is justified.

The moment they destroy private people's property.......IT IS JUSTIFIED...........That is why the Feds were there to restore order......

The So called Navy Vet should have not approached UNIFORMED FEDS PERFORMING THAT DUTY..............Some vet.....he's a moron........well hell we had plenty of MORONS out there.......that is for another thread.

Now wait a minute. I wish you defenders of the Thin Blue Li(n)e would make up your minds. We have seen where they quote the law where the Feds are perfectly justified in protecting Federal Property. But your excuse is that because private property was damaged, the feds are justified. How? They don't have jurisdiction. They can't arrest anyone for damaging private property. They are not empowered to enforce state laws, and there is no federal law prohibiting the destruction of private property except on Federal Lands.

So get with the others, and figure out what it is that you say is right. Because it is getting difficult to have a conversation with you angry folks.

The Federal Gov't is also responsible for protecting Americans......against enemies Foreign and Domestic..........The BLM have become Domestic Terrorist............When local or State Gov'ts refuse to enforce the law.........The Federal Gov't has the right to intervene and restore order.

To bad the mayor got tear gassed..........OH WELL......when I was in you had to get into the gas chamber anyway for training.

The Feds have every right to come in there and stop the destruction of property

 

[Coyote]

Well said. There has to be rational middle, there are situations where force is justified.

The moment they destroy private people's property.......IT IS JUSTIFIED...........That is why the Feds were there to restore order......

The So called Navy Vet should have not approached UNIFORMED FEDS PERFORMING THAT DUTY..............Some vet.....he's a moron........well hell we had plenty of MORONS out there.......that is for another thread.

They are justified in using force against those actively posing a threat.

The navy vet and the shot in the face, for example, were not.

 

[Coyote]

The intimidation factor of running around in unmarked vans, with unmarked uniforms, and unidentifiable Federal Agents, seems to be backfiring. As anyone with a brain could have figured out it would.

As I mentioned before the Conservative Website Hot Air, founded by Michelle Malkin who was attacked at a Blue Lives Matter event this weekend, has another story on the Federal Agents in Camouflage that are running amok in Portland.

Video: Federal cops whale on Navy vet protesting in Portland

Accountability.

hotair.com

There is video at the link, and it is disturbing. A retired naval officer was beaten by the Feds for asking why they were violating their oath.

For a long time now, people have been warning about the dangers of militarized police, and instead of heeding those warnings, the Feds seem to be embracing them in an effort to intimidate the protestors. Instead, more are showing up, outraged at the uniforms absent identification, and the bullying tactics of the agents who are obviously instructed to do so by their superiors.

You can't file a complaint against Agent Jones. If you have no idea it was Jones who bashed your skull in. You can't file a lawsuit complaining that Agent number 9596 cracked your skull if there is no way to know who did it. In Fiction, James Bond and the rest of the 00 Agents had a License to Kill. In reality, it looks like the Federal Agents have that license, and the enemy is anyone who doesn't bow down.

Those of you cheering this brutality, ask yourself this. If Biden wins, are you ready for that machine to be turned on you? Think about it.

You are a moron. Tell you what, find a resident from the city who actually pays for stuff who supports your feeble attempts hug collecting.

Many, many times in this very thread I have said that use of force to subdue a prisoner, or effect an arrest, or in self defense, is perfectly justifiable. I even said that if they were pushing the rioters back, it would be acceptable. However, none of that is taking place. So it isn't justifiable.

Using force on someone is sometimes required by situations. I never speak out against cops who shoot an armed man. I don't speak out when cops have to fight a man who is fighting them. I do speak out when a cop uses force and it is not necessary.

We speak of law and order, but for some reason those laws never seem to apply to the cops. When they do apply, we find excuses to justify the inexcusable. Cops beating someone who is having a seizure as one example.

So in this case, the inexcusable happened and yet someone is angry that the indefensible happened, and turns to attacking me, for posting the story.

I didn't beat the man. I am not in Portland. I am in Georgia, near Savannah. Now honestly, by Rural Georgia Standards, I am a little liberal. By San Francisco or Portland Standards, I am a raging RW loon. In addition to believing in the rest of the bill of rights, I also believe in the Second. Which makes me a loon by their standards.

You can't defend the actions of the Feds. You can't explain them. So you attack those who question them, and expect the law breakers, even the badge wearing ones, to be held to account.

Doesn't anyone else find it weird that we only get like cell phone footage from the Riots? No CNN, no ABC, CBS, Fox... Nothing. No media really covering on the ground. Just what you can get on a cell phone, or Joe Blow can put up on twitter.

Why is that?

The Reporters were being beaten by the Police too, even though they were marked as reporters.

ACLU Sues Portland Police, Saying Officers Attacked Journalists At Protests

The American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon filed a class-action lawsuit Sunday, claiming Portland police are targeting and attacking journalists on duty at protests.

www.opb.org

Informative.

 

[Shelzin]

The intimidation factor of running around in unmarked vans, with unmarked uniforms, and unidentifiable Federal Agents, seems to be backfiring. As anyone with a brain could have figured out it would.

As I mentioned before the Conservative Website Hot Air, founded by Michelle Malkin who was attacked at a Blue Lives Matter event this weekend, has another story on the Federal Agents in Camouflage that are running amok in Portland.

Video: Federal cops whale on Navy vet protesting in Portland

Accountability.

hotair.com

There is video at the link, and it is disturbing. A retired naval officer was beaten by the Feds for asking why they were violating their oath.

For a long time now, people have been warning about the dangers of militarized police, and instead of heeding those warnings, the Feds seem to be embracing them in an effort to intimidate the protestors. Instead, more are showing up, outraged at the uniforms absent identification, and the bullying tactics of the agents who are obviously instructed to do so by their superiors.

You can't file a complaint against Agent Jones. If you have no idea it was Jones who bashed your skull in. You can't file a lawsuit complaining that Agent number 9596 cracked your skull if there is no way to know who did it. In Fiction, James Bond and the rest of the 00 Agents had a License to Kill. In reality, it looks like the Federal Agents have that license, and the enemy is anyone who doesn't bow down.

Those of you cheering this brutality, ask yourself this. If Biden wins, are you ready for that machine to be turned on you? Think about it.

You are a moron. Tell you what, find a resident from the city who actually pays for stuff who supports your feeble attempts hug collecting.

Many, many times in this very thread I have said that use of force to subdue a prisoner, or effect an arrest, or in self defense, is perfectly justifiable. I even said that if they were pushing the rioters back, it would be acceptable. However, none of that is taking place. So it isn't justifiable.

Using force on someone is sometimes required by situations. I never speak out against cops who shoot an armed man. I don't speak out when cops have to fight a man who is fighting them. I do speak out when a cop uses force and it is not necessary.

We speak of law and order, but for some reason those laws never seem to apply to the cops. When they do apply, we find excuses to justify the inexcusable. Cops beating someone who is having a seizure as one example.

So in this case, the inexcusable happened and yet someone is angry that the indefensible happened, and turns to attacking me, for posting the story.

I didn't beat the man. I am not in Portland. I am in Georgia, near Savannah. Now honestly, by Rural Georgia Standards, I am a little liberal. By San Francisco or Portland Standards, I am a raging RW loon. In addition to believing in the rest of the bill of rights, I also believe in the Second. Which makes me a loon by their standards.

You can't defend the actions of the Feds. You can't explain them. So you attack those who question them, and expect the law breakers, even the badge wearing ones, to be held to account.

Doesn't anyone else find it weird that we only get like cell phone footage from the Riots? No CNN, no ABC, CBS, Fox... Nothing. No media really covering on the ground. Just what you can get on a cell phone, or Joe Blow can put up on twitter.

Why is that?

The Reporters were being beaten by the Police too, even though they were marked as reporters.

ACLU Sues Portland Police, Saying Officers Attacked Journalists At Protests

The American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon filed a class-action lawsuit Sunday, claiming Portland police are targeting and attacking journalists on duty at protests.

www.opb.org

Informative.

*laughs*

Sure... ok. And... You would think that they would LOVE to show that footage on their own network. But they don't. WE just have cell phones type reporting.

That makes zero sense.

Try again... WHY ARE THERE NO MAJOR NEWS AGENCIES ON THE GROUND?

Edit: There are reporters with full complement of support that go to WAR ZONES for the top media. But nothing here. Huh... Why is that?

 

[eagle1462010]

Well said. There has to be rational middle, there are situations where force is justified.

The moment they destroy private people's property.......IT IS JUSTIFIED...........That is why the Feds were there to restore order......

The So called Navy Vet should have not approached UNIFORMED FEDS PERFORMING THAT DUTY..............Some vet.....he's a moron........well hell we had plenty of MORONS out there.......that is for another thread.

They are justified in using force against those actively posing a threat.

The navy vet and the shot in the face, for example, were not.

He walked onto the battlefield unprepared and at the wrong Rally point........he's dumb as dirt.........I knew he was a BT........Barely Trainable.

 

[Coyote]

Well said. There has to be rational middle, there are situations where force is justified.

The moment they destroy private people's property.......IT IS JUSTIFIED...........That is why the Feds were there to restore order......

The So called Navy Vet should have not approached UNIFORMED FEDS PERFORMING THAT DUTY..............Some vet.....he's a moron........well hell we had plenty of MORONS out there.......that is for another thread.

They are justified in using force against those actively posing a threat.

The navy vet and the shot in the face, for example, were not.

He walked onto the battlefield unprepared and at the wrong Rally point........he's dumb as dirt.........I knew he was a BT........Barely Trainable.

It is not a battlefield. That is the problem.

 

[eagle1462010]

I'll bet you this guy was one that would go look for the Mail Buoy in Heavy Seas....

Or the guy who would go to the battery locker to bring me the Sound powered phone battery.

Or the guy who we'd send to the engine room for a Big BT punch.........he'd always come back not able to move his arm........LOL........see who here understands that.......LMAO.

 

[eagle1462010]

Well said. There has to be rational middle, there are situations where force is justified.

The moment they destroy private people's property.......IT IS JUSTIFIED...........That is why the Feds were there to restore order......

The So called Navy Vet should have not approached UNIFORMED FEDS PERFORMING THAT DUTY..............Some vet.....he's a moron........well hell we had plenty of MORONS out there.......that is for another thread.

They are justified in using force against those actively posing a threat.

The navy vet and the shot in the face, for example, were not.

He walked onto the battlefield unprepared and at the wrong Rally point........he's dumb as dirt.........I knew he was a BT........Barely Trainable.

It is not a battlefield. That is the problem.

Yes it is...........They have destroyed private property and refused to remove their sorry asses and stop breaking the law..............Those are crimes......and refusing to leave means that FORCE will be necessary to end it..........

Police whether you like it or not is the threat of force to maintain the law..........They shouldn't break the law.......and should have dispersed and went home when told to do so.

 

[Fueri]

Not sure about brutalized. The guy was a trojan. Pepper sprayed him and he took it like it was a shot of breath freshener. lol.

I don't know what was said before this occurred. If he was told to back the hell off and didn't, under the current circumstances, I don't blame the cops. You've punched your ticket to a free baton demonstration at that point, IMO.

they aren't 'cops' they aren't military either, although they are wearing uniforms meant for military & all they have is a patch saying 'police'. no official emblems & especially no names.

they are pseudo/para military that are from the bureau of prisons & customs & border patrol.

btw the CBP wanted to ( & it might have been eliminated already) get rid oflie detector tests for apllicants because the vast majority applying just 2-3 years ago were failing bigley.

Distinction without a difference.

Call them whatever you'd like.

no they aren't. any active or retired vet would argue with that.

when have boppers or CBC been ordered to go to afghanistan, or iraq, etc...?

Officers there to guard proprty. I dont care what you call them, if this guy was told to back off, under the current circumstances he got what he paid for.

good to know you are willing to bend over & give up your constitutional protected rights that easily.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.' ~ ben franklin

Nice deflection.



I'd be fine if they shot every single POS that so much as tossed a bottle at this point. If this guy was trying to get a reaction, approached these guys, which he clearly did, was told to back off and didnt, I couldn't care less what they did to him.

your false equivalency is comparing him to one who is an actual threat.

that's a constitutional fail on yer part.

duly noted.

Wrong. Federal Agents guarding federal property which has been an ongoing target of domestic terrorists committing felonies. If he was given an order to move it along and didn't do so, this is on him.

If you are correct, where are the prosecutions of these federal officers. Answer: you're not.

Your hyperbole doesn't supersede federal law. Sorry 'bout that.

And if you are right, there would be prosecutions and indictments of the so called "rioters". There were not. Therefore there were no crimes committed by the protesters. Just a lot of beatings and rubber bullets.

There are countless videos of them vandalizing federal property. That's a felony are there have been arrests.

 

[Vandalshandle]

And if you are right, there would be prosecutions and indictments of the so called "rioters". There were not. Therefore there were no crimes committed by the protesters. Just a lot of beatings and rubber bullets.

Doesn't anyone else find it weird that we only get like cell phone footage from the Riots? No CNN, no ABC, CBS, Fox... Nothing. No media really covering on the ground. Just what you can get on a cell phone, or Joe Blow can put up on twitter.

Why is that?

Since I do not have cable or satellite TV, I would not know, or care.

 

[jc456]

The intimidation factor of running around in unmarked vans, with unmarked uniforms, and unidentifiable Federal Agents, seems to be backfiring. As anyone with a brain could have figured out it would.

As I mentioned before the Conservative Website Hot Air, founded by Michelle Malkin who was attacked at a Blue Lives Matter event this weekend, has another story on the Federal Agents in Camouflage that are running amok in Portland.

Video: Federal cops whale on Navy vet protesting in Portland

Accountability.

hotair.com

There is video at the link, and it is disturbing. A retired naval officer was beaten by the Feds for asking why they were violating their oath.

For a long time now, people have been warning about the dangers of militarized police, and instead of heeding those warnings, the Feds seem to be embracing them in an effort to intimidate the protestors. Instead, more are showing up, outraged at the uniforms absent identification, and the bullying tactics of the agents who are obviously instructed to do so by their superiors.

You can't file a complaint against Agent Jones. If you have no idea it was Jones who bashed your skull in. You can't file a lawsuit complaining that Agent number 9596 cracked your skull if there is no way to know who did it. In Fiction, James Bond and the rest of the 00 Agents had a License to Kill. In reality, it looks like the Federal Agents have that license, and the enemy is anyone who doesn't bow down.

Those of you cheering this brutality, ask yourself this. If Biden wins, are you ready for that machine to be turned on you? Think about it.

So the vets were in uniform?

 

[jc456]

Not sure about brutalized. The guy was a trojan. Pepper sprayed him and he took it like it was a shot of breath freshener. lol.

I don't know what was said before this occurred. If he was told to back the hell off and didn't, under the current circumstances, I don't blame the cops. You've punched your ticket to a free baton demonstration at that point, IMO.

they aren't 'cops' they aren't military either, although they are wearing uniforms meant for military & all they have is a patch saying 'police'. no official emblems & especially no names.

they are pseudo/para military that are from the bureau of prisons & customs & border patrol.

btw the CBP wanted to ( & it might have been eliminated already) get rid oflie detector tests for apllicants because the vast majority applying just 2-3 years ago were failing bigley.

Distinction without a difference.

Call them whatever you'd like.

no they aren't. any active or retired vet would argue with that.

when have boppers or CBC been ordered to go to afghanistan, or iraq, etc...?

Officers there to guard proprty. I dont care what you call them, if this guy was told to back off, under the current circumstances he got what he paid for.

good to know you are willing to bend over & give up your constitutional protected rights that easily.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.' ~ ben franklin

Nice deflection.



I'd be fine if they shot every single POS that so much as tossed a bottle at this point. If this guy was trying to get a reaction, approached these guys, which he clearly did, was told to back off and didnt, I couldn't care less what they did to him.

your false equivalency is comparing him to one who is an actual threat.

that's a constitutional fail on yer part.

duly noted.

Wrong. Federal Agents guarding federal property which has been an ongoing target of domestic terrorists committing felonies. If he was given an order to move it along and didn't do so, this is on him.

If you are correct, where are the prosecutions of these federal officers. Answer: you're not.

Your hyperbole doesn't supersede federal law. Sorry 'bout that.

And if you are right, there would be prosecutions and indictments of the so called "rioters". There were not. Therefore there were no crimes committed by the protesters. Just a lot of beatings and rubber bullets.

There are countless videos of them vandalizing federal property. That's a felony are there have been arrests.

But you just forgot to link those vandalizing videos....

Destroying others property ok for these fks, defend and they call you names. It’s who they are , not worth our time.
I’d rather touch a pile of shit

 

[Nosmo King]

In a political era during which conspiracy theories too often, regrettably, drive the discourse, what ever happened to the 'Black Helicopters' crowd? They feared Un identified military personnel massing like the Valkyries and snatching people up en mass.

And now, essentially, that is happening in Portland and soon to a city near you. Un identified federal agents using truncheons on Walls of Moms and Navy vets with arms raised.

Is it political affiliations are more meaningful than the stories you believe and fear? Is it against whom the unidentified federal agents are fighting? Or are rights to peaceably assemble flexible? Wall of Moms and Navy vets?

 

[Shelzin]

And if you are right, there would be prosecutions and indictments of the so called "rioters". There were not. Therefore there were no crimes committed by the protesters. Just a lot of beatings and rubber bullets.

Doesn't anyone else find it weird that we only get like cell phone footage from the Riots? No CNN, no ABC, CBS, Fox... Nothing. No media really covering on the ground. Just what you can get on a cell phone, or Joe Blow can put up on twitter.

Why is that?

Since I do not have cable or satellite TV, I would not know, or care.

Fair enough...

 

[Shelzin]

It is not a battlefield. That is the problem.

I agree... It's weird though that major media outlets will put full media crews to battlefields, or at least right outside them where they can actually hear the gunfire, see the explosions, and report there.

Yet... They don't do it here. Where it's not a battlefield, yet... Many would argue that it's just as important, maybe more so... Certainly a whole lot easier AND SAFER... Right?

Why is that?

Edit: Oh come on guys... It's not like it's a trick question. Is there some problem with seeing what's going on in damn near real time? Lord knows that station would have a HUGE following and ratings would jump, would it not? Even if it was a lesser station like CNN it would immediately get views that would rival prime time Fox.

Why not do that? You wouldn't even have to be a part of the crowd... Just get a good view from above.

 

[Muhammed]

A retired naval officer was beaten by the Feds for asking why they were violating their oath.

That's merely a ridiculous unsupported assertion.

I challenge you to explain the reasoning that you used to come to the conclusion that he was beaten for asking a question. Explain the train of logic that you used to come to that conclusion.

I predict that you will run away from that challenge with your tail between your legs, as LWNJ moonbats tend to do when their faulty logic is challenged.

 

[SavannahMann]

A retired naval officer was beaten by the Feds for asking why they were violating their oath.

That's merely a ridiculous unsupported assertion.

I challenge you to explain the reasoning that you used to come to the conclusion that he was beaten for asking a question. Explain the train of logic that you used to come to that conclusion.

I predict that you will run away from that challenge with your tail between your legs, as LWNJ moonbats tend to do when their faulty logic is challenged.

I have answered that a dozen times. Every time a moron finally checks the thread they demand to know how I can say that. Read the thread. I predict you won’t.

 

[pknopp]

Well, when it doubt, beat the hell out of them. You won't be held accountable if it was a mistake, since they don't have badges or ID.

I'm not saying that. You are. Feel free to beat the shit out of the straw man.
Edit: They may very well have been doing nothing. I don't know. Maybe they were saving kittens. I don't know. You don't know either. That's my only point here.

For all we know those two are the ones that put that man on the ground, those people in camouflage saw them do it and came to help him. Is that what happened? I don't know. You don't know either. That's my only point here.

Edit: Doesn't anyone else find it weird that we only get like cell phone footage from the Riots? No CNN, no ABC, CBS, Fox... Nothing. No media really covering on the ground. Just what you can get on a cell phone, or Joe Blow can put up on twitter.

Why is that?

The police are most welcome to release body camera footage.

 

[bodecea]

Well said. There has to be rational middle, there are situations where force is justified.

The moment they destroy private people's property.......IT IS JUSTIFIED...........That is why the Feds were there to restore order......

The So called Navy Vet should have not approached UNIFORMED FEDS PERFORMING THAT DUTY..............Some vet.....he's a moron........well hell we had plenty of MORONS out there.......that is for another thread.

They are justified in using force against those actively posing a threat.

The navy vet and the shot in the face, for example, were not.

He walked onto the battlefield unprepared and at the wrong Rally point........he's dumb as dirt.........I knew he was a BT........Barely Trainable.

I wonder why more and more vets and active duty military are walking away from the Republican......"brand".

 

[Muhammed]

A retired naval officer was beaten by the Feds for asking why they were violating their oath.

That's merely a ridiculous unsupported assertion.

I challenge you to explain the reasoning that you used to come to the conclusion that he was beaten for asking a question. Explain the train of logic that you used to come to that conclusion.

I predict that you will run away from that challenge with your tail between your legs, as LWNJ moonbats tend to do when their faulty logic is challenged.

I have answered that a dozen times. Every time a moron finally checks the thread they demand to know how I can say that.

Just as I predicted, you ran away from the challenge with your tail between your legs.

You made an unsupported assertion, and when challenged to explain your reasoning, you came up totally blank.