Protesters retake Portland State University library after police leave
PORTLAND, Ore. (KATU) — Hours after Portland police officers, clad in riot gear, cleared the Millar Library at Portland State University Thursday morning of protesters, who had staged a more than two-day occupation of the building, police retreated, apparently ceding control of the library once again to protesters.
Like, fuck it. Go in with armor, masks, and brass knuckles. Go in en masse, and just absolutely hammer the shit out of the assholes. And then leave. Apparently the cops are useless anyway.
This is must-know history. WWII-era Democrats, from the God-FDR on down wanted to be just like the Soviet Union. A second bill of rights, my ass. While you're at it, look up the fundamental difference between positive (Marxist) rights and negative (true human freedom) rights.
SC - "I’m old enough to remember when complaining about George Soros was considered “anti-Semitism” I old enough to remember when... telling people who complain about anyone being treated unfairly because of the colour of their skin... "just lighten up", was considered funny.
"There was never any censorship" - If your false narrative fails, lie, lie, again. It's a policy of denial Mr. Mulder.
Would someone please tell Ed that libertarians were once called economic conservatives, and we haven't changed much, making us naturally "maga-adjacent"?
Meanwhile, the NYT-adjacent keep getting more ignorant.
Libertarians are GOP-adjacent when the Democrats are in control. When the GOP is in control, they manage to be fans of spending lots and lots of money we don't have.
For over a hundred years, libertarians (i.e. classical liberals, i.e. Constitutionists) have a choice of voting for a lot more gov't. (Dems), and a little bit less a-lot-more gov't. (Repubs).
And here we are, at the precipice.
Today, we're all precipice adjacent!
This is why, while I still think we should *use* DJT/maga to continue to reform (finally) the Republican Party into its long ago promise of a "limited gov't" party (I know, I know, not at all a perfect pairing), I wouldn't mind an RFK victory. It would be the first time since the Civil War a non-Dem, non-Repub won. But *that* would require a hell of a lot of lock-step Dem voters switching.
The protests appearing all over at the same time saying the same message does not feel organic. There has to be someone or something pulling some strings to coordinate all of this. It is an election year and we've almost come to expect chaos every four years. But in this case, what purpose does it serve?
Ultimately, any new laws from here on out are going to be designed to further the destruction of the country. Congress is and never was your friend. Portland again? I though they sold that city to the Chinese.
Bills/laws like that is how they finagled hate-speech laws, often in violation of constitutions and others laws, into place in various european nations - essentially, any criticism of jews, jewish customs, pointing out jewish lobbying groups doing whatever, and so on became hate speech.
Then the already very vagye definition was broadened until it basically means:
"Indigenous [insert ethnicity/nationality here], christians, heterosexuals, and men may be freely threatened, defamed, and talked about however you please, but no others"
We had a case in the early '90s when the biggest mosque in Stockholm was found selling CDs and cassettes with various speeches on the topic of "kill all the jews, it is god's will and holy to do so" and so, including slogans and chants dating back centuries in the arab world - not only was this a clear violation of the hate speech law as it was applied back then, it was also incitement to violence, fomenting civil unrest and violent uprising (a crime where the minimum punishment is eight years in prison and the actual time served can be put by the court as open-ended), and a violation of the UN treaty on genocide*, which we had committed to adhere to.
The state's prosecutor tried every trick he had to drop the case, and once it went to court he basically pleaded for the defence.
The reason for this was that the moslem population in several areas was key to ensure Socialist Democrat victory in key districts (and the Socialist Democrat party has been allied with the palestinian arabs and moslems in general ever since the days SS-veterans trained Arafat in setting up the insurgency), the prosecutor a card-carrying Parteigenossen, and the court members all party creatures too.
This case established precedence that the ethnicities of the parties involved shall be weighed in the balance when deciding if a hate crime has been committed or not - and now, the US is heading that way on a rocket-propelled sled. Not just in practice, but in actual law. You will get a similar case, and you will get the result that "defaming" jews is a crime, if it is done by a person of group such-and-such, but not so-and-so.
You will get that, because that crack is all they need to pour their foulness of politically controlled courts into the body of society proper. You should try to get your presidential candidates to answer if they will have that bill removed, or not.
And the answer to that is even older: One law for all or no laws at all.
As an aside, the actual ine "Quis custodiet ipsos custos" doesn't concern police or courts of law (and roman equivalents were in many ways /very/ different from ours); it is about the eunuchs guarding the women during a religious festival when the women roamed the streets and men had to stay inside or risk being sex-mobbed to death.
High born usually had their festivities indoors, guraded by enunuchs, so that the Pater Familias wouldn't have reason to suspect his offspring was another man's.
But who'd guard the eunuchs?
Puts a different light in it, I think, since it wasn't considered a crime or even adultery if the women participating in the festival had sex with eunuchs (done "right", a eunuch can perform as desried, he just can't breed).
Yeah, we got a bunch of retards blocking the road into my work today. The cops apparently let them sit there being a road hazard for 8+ hours, or that was hoe long it took them to get bored and leave. I don't know, I worked for 12 hours today, and mostly saw the new via internal email.
I hate that stupid bullshit. You want to protest? I fully support the right of people to protest in favor or opposition to anything, no matter how vile, whether I support it or not, from the sidewalk. Don't block traffic. It doesn't matter if I *do* agree with them, I'd *still* support dragging those assholes out of the street by their hair.
Not to mention the fact that it's counterproductive because if you block the road, people don't see your fucking protest.
Of all of the days to have not driven a D9 Cat to work... Alas.
As for that stupid law, I think anyone who has seen my posts here will know I'm death on antisemitic assholes, but that law is still fucking retarded and a violation of 1A. So fuck it, and everyone who voted for it. I hate how this country is being debased.
People tired that here when the climate goblin was trying to block the entrance to parliament.
There's a several centuries old law making it a crime to in any way hinder or hamper a member of parliament from attending, but the prosecutor deemed it n/a because there are other entrances to the building, which is a violation of the stated purpose of the law.
Update: It appears the protestors have re-occupied the PSU library.
https://www.katu.com/news/local/portland-police-secure-portland-state-university-library-after-clearing-of-protesters-22-arrests-free-palenstine-israel-students-millar-library
Protesters retake Portland State University library after police leave
PORTLAND, Ore. (KATU) — Hours after Portland police officers, clad in riot gear, cleared the Millar Library at Portland State University Thursday morning of protesters, who had staged a more than two-day occupation of the building, police retreated, apparently ceding control of the library once again to protesters.
😖🙄
Like, fuck it. Go in with armor, masks, and brass knuckles. Go in en masse, and just absolutely hammer the shit out of the assholes. And then leave. Apparently the cops are useless anyway.
That's going to be the end result somewhere. UCLA got close a couple nights ago.
When police refuse to do their jobs, the public WILL step in sooner or later.
Were those police cars Chevy Volts? They have been known to spontaneously combust. ; )
This is must-know history. WWII-era Democrats, from the God-FDR on down wanted to be just like the Soviet Union. A second bill of rights, my ass. While you're at it, look up the fundamental difference between positive (Marxist) rights and negative (true human freedom) rights.
https://www.coolidgereview.com/forgotten-book/depression-that-wasnt
The more things change, the more things stay the same.
Please hold your nose and vote Republican this time around. We can't slap down the Democrats hard enough.
Nice to have some common ground with the (ridiculous) protestors! FJB, indeed!
Here is the danger of an "environmentalist" POTUS. (Looking at you, RFK.)
https://issuesinsights.com/2024/05/03/heres-how-we-know-the-climate-crisis-is-not-about-the-climate/
SC - "I’m old enough to remember when complaining about George Soros was considered “anti-Semitism” I old enough to remember when... telling people who complain about anyone being treated unfairly because of the colour of their skin... "just lighten up", was considered funny.
"There was never any censorship" - If your false narrative fails, lie, lie, again. It's a policy of denial Mr. Mulder.
Since you're the last one to comment, you get the latest G update --
"mices are for snacking! nom nom nom!"
SC - just catching up, thanks for the G update - what bout S&B?
Sorry to despoil everyone's day with the idiot Intelligencer Ed Killjoy, but at least I'm sending it via the almost-idiot msn.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/are-libertarians-maga-adjacent-now/ar-AA1o3nsT?ocid=BingNewsSerp
Would someone please tell Ed that libertarians were once called economic conservatives, and we haven't changed much, making us naturally "maga-adjacent"?
Meanwhile, the NYT-adjacent keep getting more ignorant.
Libertarians are GOP-adjacent when the Democrats are in control. When the GOP is in control, they manage to be fans of spending lots and lots of money we don't have.
Yep.
For over a hundred years, libertarians (i.e. classical liberals, i.e. Constitutionists) have a choice of voting for a lot more gov't. (Dems), and a little bit less a-lot-more gov't. (Repubs).
And here we are, at the precipice.
Today, we're all precipice adjacent!
This is why, while I still think we should *use* DJT/maga to continue to reform (finally) the Republican Party into its long ago promise of a "limited gov't" party (I know, I know, not at all a perfect pairing), I wouldn't mind an RFK victory. It would be the first time since the Civil War a non-Dem, non-Repub won. But *that* would require a hell of a lot of lock-step Dem voters switching.
The protests appearing all over at the same time saying the same message does not feel organic. There has to be someone or something pulling some strings to coordinate all of this. It is an election year and we've almost come to expect chaos every four years. But in this case, what purpose does it serve?
Destruction of the Constitution (true Capitalism), and replacement by collectivist oligarchy, an oxymoron if there ever was one.
That's the big question.
Ultimately, any new laws from here on out are going to be designed to further the destruction of the country. Congress is and never was your friend. Portland again? I though they sold that city to the Chinese.
The music on that protestor video is spot on. We need to spread that far and wide. Ridicule is our greatest weapon.
I restacked this. Thanks for making my life easier.
Bills/laws like that is how they finagled hate-speech laws, often in violation of constitutions and others laws, into place in various european nations - essentially, any criticism of jews, jewish customs, pointing out jewish lobbying groups doing whatever, and so on became hate speech.
Then the already very vagye definition was broadened until it basically means:
"Indigenous [insert ethnicity/nationality here], christians, heterosexuals, and men may be freely threatened, defamed, and talked about however you please, but no others"
We had a case in the early '90s when the biggest mosque in Stockholm was found selling CDs and cassettes with various speeches on the topic of "kill all the jews, it is god's will and holy to do so" and so, including slogans and chants dating back centuries in the arab world - not only was this a clear violation of the hate speech law as it was applied back then, it was also incitement to violence, fomenting civil unrest and violent uprising (a crime where the minimum punishment is eight years in prison and the actual time served can be put by the court as open-ended), and a violation of the UN treaty on genocide*, which we had committed to adhere to.
The state's prosecutor tried every trick he had to drop the case, and once it went to court he basically pleaded for the defence.
The reason for this was that the moslem population in several areas was key to ensure Socialist Democrat victory in key districts (and the Socialist Democrat party has been allied with the palestinian arabs and moslems in general ever since the days SS-veterans trained Arafat in setting up the insurgency), the prosecutor a card-carrying Parteigenossen, and the court members all party creatures too.
This case established precedence that the ethnicities of the parties involved shall be weighed in the balance when deciding if a hate crime has been committed or not - and now, the US is heading that way on a rocket-propelled sled. Not just in practice, but in actual law. You will get a similar case, and you will get the result that "defaming" jews is a crime, if it is done by a person of group such-and-such, but not so-and-so.
You will get that, because that crack is all they need to pour their foulness of politically controlled courts into the body of society proper. You should try to get your presidential candidates to answer if they will have that bill removed, or not.
The issue involved is an ancient one: Who will watch the watchers?
And the answer to that is even older: One law for all or no laws at all.
As an aside, the actual ine "Quis custodiet ipsos custos" doesn't concern police or courts of law (and roman equivalents were in many ways /very/ different from ours); it is about the eunuchs guarding the women during a religious festival when the women roamed the streets and men had to stay inside or risk being sex-mobbed to death.
High born usually had their festivities indoors, guraded by enunuchs, so that the Pater Familias wouldn't have reason to suspect his offspring was another man's.
But who'd guard the eunuchs?
Puts a different light in it, I think, since it wasn't considered a crime or even adultery if the women participating in the festival had sex with eunuchs (done "right", a eunuch can perform as desried, he just can't breed).
That's my nitpick of the day.
We must compare collections of picked nits one day
Presidential candidates answering if they will have the bill removed or not......😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣 Right!
Tear gas and water cannons don't sound so barbaric anymore, do they?
Hey, check it out, the Big Guy IS a uniter after all!!!
Well shit, the phucking lyers faces didn't fall off...
I WAS TOLD THEIR PANTS WOULD CATCH FIRE!
Their phucking nose didn't grow either
Yeah, we got a bunch of retards blocking the road into my work today. The cops apparently let them sit there being a road hazard for 8+ hours, or that was hoe long it took them to get bored and leave. I don't know, I worked for 12 hours today, and mostly saw the new via internal email.
I hate that stupid bullshit. You want to protest? I fully support the right of people to protest in favor or opposition to anything, no matter how vile, whether I support it or not, from the sidewalk. Don't block traffic. It doesn't matter if I *do* agree with them, I'd *still* support dragging those assholes out of the street by their hair.
Not to mention the fact that it's counterproductive because if you block the road, people don't see your fucking protest.
Of all of the days to have not driven a D9 Cat to work... Alas.
As for that stupid law, I think anyone who has seen my posts here will know I'm death on antisemitic assholes, but that law is still fucking retarded and a violation of 1A. So fuck it, and everyone who voted for it. I hate how this country is being debased.
Judge in Seattle recently dropped all charges for the people who blocked I5 a couple weeks ago.
Wonder what lesson the 'protestors' learned from that?
If the Feds weren't run by the enemy, they could get involved on that one.
"Interference with interstate commerce"
People tired that here when the climate goblin was trying to block the entrance to parliament.
There's a several centuries old law making it a crime to in any way hinder or hamper a member of parliament from attending, but the prosecutor deemed it n/a because there are other entrances to the building, which is a violation of the stated purpose of the law.
But law is what power says it is.
Edit: tried, not tired.