Chef Boi RD wrote: ↑Wed Oct 01, 2025 11:20 am
Your take on Portland is complete utter right wing misleading truth bending biased bullshit, UW, no offence, hope you don’t mind me saying. We have loads of friends there and we go to Portland annually, sometimes twice a year, so your assessment IMO just caters to the right wing MAGA cause, all perpetuated by Trumps politics and the lefty woke fear mongering. Fuck me, if you think Portland is out of order I’m curious of the level of mayhem coming from red states like Memphis in which apparently are in greater need of Trumps fascist military attention.
No offense taken, Dude. I learned a long time ago that when you can't address an argument you resort to putting things in your tribal bucket and giving a passionate rant. Why would I be offended by your narrow-minded zealotry?
But let's say you engaged with my post about Portland, which part was misleading:
(1) Portland is tip of the spear for left wing violence to suppress people and ideas they don't like. For background, the modern left wing wave of this mentality -- extremists thinking speech should be responded to with violence and destruction -- kicked off in 2017 with Charles Murray at Middlebury, troll Milo Yiannopolous @ Berkely, and Portland gov't shutting down what was once a run of the mill paraded because of too many credible threats of violence if the county Republican Party participated. Tip of the spear because its among the first place to see this philosophy put into action (and they succeeded without violence -- because they shut the speech activity down through what is properly categorized as terroristic threats (a threat to commit an act of violence with the intent to cause fear ... or coerce a government or civilian group). My source was the Atlantic.
(2) Andy Ngo, a person who writes about antifa, got the shit kicked out of him by antifa in Portland. Now, this happened more than once, and one time it resulted in brain bleeds. Evidence? How about the Oregonian, the mainstream paper in Portland: youtube.com/watch?v=8WzMZxT-41k&rco=1. FWIW, Ngo, a gay Vietnamese immigrant to the US who now I think considers himself conservative after all this, has now fled the US because of all of the death threats he has received for writing his book -- which I am sure you (having not read it) would consider "MAGA propaganda." But whether he's a propagandist, is that video from the Oregonian a lie?
(3) The federal courthouse was under siege for quite awhile in the summer of 2020. Happened again in 2021, if I recall. do I need to give you a cite here. Its all over -- mainstream news, gonzo journalists, etc. Small example, but honestly its all over.
https://kfoxtv.com/news/nation-world/mo ... police-say.
(4) I said I haven't been to Portland in a decade -- and caveated that I don't know how things are now -- but last time I was there were lots of homeless. True? Seems to be addressed in this thread.
(5) I also said that at that time my friends who were involved in local social service projects were dismayed that the local government was more interested in ideology than pragmatically addressing problems. My friends were left wing do gooders, but not the kind that protest, the kind that get dirty, help people get housing, help homeless get jobs.... My story is anecdotal, but don't we all know people who's sense of fairness compels them to get dirty and help people and others whose sense of justice compels them to tell people what their sense of justice is? Local politicians take the same approach -- in one party towns like the one I live in (liberal), the politicians are either pragmatic and open to trying new things when old things haven't work or they circle the wagons to protect their past decisions and their ideological purity.
Those were my claims. Which is false? Or are you just more concerned that these are "talking points" -- the problem isn't whether they are true or false, but that they catalyze people towards political action that you don't like. Inconvenient truths...
Last point, I said in my post that I didn't think the deployment to Portland was a good idea, but allowed for the fact that might be appropriate to protect federal officers and property. There is a claim being made by the administration that there have been a series of attacks on ICE agents and the buildings I just don't know enough about it to know whether it is exaggerated and isolated or whether it is chronic coordinated and therefore augurs for a heightened response. You can't have your law enforcement officers targeted in coordinated assaults against them -- that's terroristic. We of course just saw gun violence in Dallas aimed at an ICE facility that resulted in I believe 3 deaths, and where the evidence again points to political violence -- but in the absence of something more coordinated, I wouldn't think that compels an extraordinary non-standard response. I don't know where the violence is in Portland on the scale of isolated and rare to coordinated and chronic, but understand that the murder rate and the property crime rate doesn't matter if the deployment is for the purpose of and necessary to the functioning of an arm of the federal government.