LA Riots 2025

[ZiprHead]

 

[ZiprHead]

'How the hell is this legal?' Critics react to Fox doctoring interview to suggest Newsom lied

Social media reacted badly to Fox News deceptively editing video to claim Gov. Gavin Newsom lied about a disputed phone call.Last week, President Donald Trump told reporters he had “called” Newsom and suggested he “do a better job” over violent protests of Trump’s immigration policies.“He’s done...

www.alternet.org

 

[Politesse]

Well it's always "support" roles. The National Guard will be there to support ICE. Though it's nothing ICE cannot do themselves. Further, these National Guard troops can be considered to be of questionable training. After their basic training, I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that their one weekend a month training consists largely of sitting on their ass waiting for 1600 to roll around. My point: These dudes of questionable training and likely little if any experience will be in some of the most volatile areas of Los Angeles. Further, in most cases the National Guard will normally work with local law enforcement. I don't think this will be the case this time. There will be seasoned LA police experienced with dealing with the people in the areas they serve and my aforementioned inexperienced guardsmen mixed in. What could go wrong?

Just like Ghorman. You send in the least qualified "help" imaginable, give them unclear and nonsensical objectives, then blame it all on the rebels when things inevitably go tits-up.

Pinochet did likewise on Earth. Put out a bunch of newbs who didn't know better.

Yes, but you bring up a real thing and people start picking sides.

A classic example of weaponizing things the other way was the infamous Selma March; King and his crew were well aware that the sheriff was corrupt as hell and that state-supported violence was likely if they went ahead with the march. They chose the site in part because the news cameras don't show up for strictly peaceful protests. His side didn't engage in violence, so he needed an antagonist with no such qualms, and knew that he had just such a villain in James Gardner Clark.

 

[Derec]

But the state was not ‘getting out of control.’ Trump is targeting California and Newsom because it’s red meat for his base, to distract from the fact that he’s stealing from ordinary citizens and giving it to billionaires.

Then why are LWNJs in LA so eager to help him do it?

 

[Derec]

A classic example of weaponizing things the other way was the infamous Selma March; King and his crew were well aware that the sheriff was corrupt as hell and that state-supported violence was likely if they went ahead with the march. They chose the site in part because the news cameras don't show up for strictly peaceful protests. His side didn't engage in violence, so he needed an antagonist with no such qualms, and knew that he had just such a villain in James Gardner Clark.

That's a big difference. Imagine if the first thing he and his people did when they arrived in Selma was set a bunch of taxicabs on fire and loot a few stores for good measure.

 

[Toni]

But the state was not ‘getting out of control.’ Trump is targeting California and Newsom because it’s red meat for his base, to distract from the fact that he’s stealing from ordinary citizens and giving it to billionaires.

Then why are LWNJs in LA so eager to help him do it?

I’m sorry, I don’t know the acronym LWNJ.

 

[Derec]

Wow, some cars were vandalized and rocks were thrown. How terrible.

Yes, throwing rocks at vehicles belonging to a federal agency is horrible. And if you had listened to the video (it is only 27s long), you'd have heard that an agent was injured in the process too.

People here legally are swept off the streets by unknown masked individuals who refuse to provide ID and sent to prisons overseas without trial or conviction.

Note that these idiots do not want any immigration enforcement whatsoever.

 

[Derec]

I’m sorry, I don’t know the acronym LWNJ.

Left-Wing Nut Jobs.

 

[southernhybrid]

Laughing Dog, do you not find it at least odd that these protestors are proudly bearing Mexican flags while burning US flags during a protest that they NOT be sent back to Mexico?

You didn't ask me but, no, I do not find it odd. You do realize it's brown skinned people who are being targeted, right? People of Mexican and other latin American nations descent. By people representing the United States government represented by the United States flag.

This isn't rocket surgery. You shouldn't need some right wing dipshit to explain things to you. You seem smart enough that you should be able to figure it out by yourself.

While it does seem that Trump and company are primarily going after minorities, I read an article yesterday that they are also planning on deporting a large number of European immigrants, including some from England. If I have time, I'll see if I can find the article I read. I guess he's going after them because Europe has criticized the little toddler felon. So, nobody is really safe from this tyrant. Before long, American citizens who have not committed any crimes will be on their way to Gitmo. In fact, I think that is where he's threatening to send them, instead of back to their native countries.

Trump has also said that anyone who burns an American flag should spend a year in prison, despite the fact that SCOTUS upheld flag burning as a right to free speech. And, just because a person burns a flag or protests doesn't mean they hate their country. It means they want to make their country a better place, or as the line from an old jazz song goes: "Even when I hate you, it's only because I love you."

I found the article I read this morning about Trump plans to send Europeans to Guantanamo. I'm sharing it but I know that many of you don't like giving WaPo your email address, so I'll just copy as much as is necessary to show you his deranged plans.

https://wapo.st/43DKuRC

Trump to ramp up transfers to Guantánamo, including citizens of allies​

Plans show the administration is preparing to send thousands of foreigners to the infamous detention facility, including people from Britain, France and Italy, with no intent to notify their home governments.

The foreign nationals under consideration hail from a range of countries. They include hundreds from friendly European nations, including Britain, Italy, France, Germany, Ireland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Lithuania, Poland, Turkey and Ukraine, but also other parts of the world, including many from Haiti. Officials shared the plans with The Washington Post, including some documents, on the condition of anonymity because the matter is considered highly sensitive.

The administration is unlikely to inform the foreigners’ home governments about the impending transfers to the infamous military facility, including close U.S. allies such as Britain, Germany and France, the officials said.

Allies? I think former allies is the appropriate wording.

 

[Derec]

But hey, some cars were burned.

How does an allegedly improper arrest in Alabama justify setting Weymo taxis on fire, throwing rocks and scooters at LAPD vehicles, or looting Nike and Apples stores?
Please explain.

 

[Derec]

No, I don’t find it odd or disturbing or fearful. Nor do I think those protesters were necessarily afraid of personal deportation to Mexico. Burning a US flag is not an automatic indication of hatred of the US but a complaint or disagreement with US policy.

There are better ways to express disagreement with the polices of a particular government. Burning the flag indicates hatred or at least hostility to the US as a whole. That's why it is the favored tactic of anti-US protests in places like Iran.

Note that burning the flag is only protected speech (whatever you think the content of said speech is) if it is your flag and you are burning it safely. If you steal the flag, that is a crime and not protected speech.
Anti-ICE protesters burn American flags at Seattle federal building

Protesters always cause fear in some people. And while these protesters play into Magafools bigotry, they are exposing Trump’s authoritarianism and contempt for US law.

Rioting is not protesting. Nobody should be ok with the tactics used here - arson, vandalism, looting - no matter what you think of the immigration debate.

Note also that immigration, along with inflation, is a big reason Trump got elected. "No human is illegal on stolen land" and "abolish ICE" are not popular messages. Trump is doing plenty of bad and unpopular things, from letting RFK control health policy to the "Big Beautiful Bill". And yet, the Resistance 2.0 is focusing on stuff where Trump's policies are, at least in principle, more popular.

 

[Derec]

There is a big difference between criticizing certain aspects of US, especially its politics, as everyone does (particularly on this forum) - and expressing hostility and hatred toward America, which is what these yahoos are doing.

Are they?

Yes.

Or are they expressing hostility and hatred toward the current President, and his policies?

There are better ways to do that. Hell, if you want to burn something, burn DJT in effigy. Both actions express hostility, as you are destroying something with fire, but one is destroying a symbol representing Donald Trump, while the other is destroying a symbol of the United States as a whole.

Or take the "Death to Amerikka[sic]" graffito. Bad spelling aside, that expresses hostility to US as a whole, not toward particular policies or a particular government. It is also a slogan beloved by islamofascists like Khamenei.

DJT can't see a difference between "hating DJT and his policies", and "hating America"; Can you?

I can. However, these rioters may be similar to DJT if they can't see this difference themselves.

 

[Derec]

View attachment 50982

Ah yes, a reference to the only riot that the Left will admit was bad.

I disagree with Trump's pardons, and think that anybody who assaulted cops or committed other crimes on 1/6 should have been prosecuted and served their sentence.

But 1/6 should not be used to dismiss left-wing riots, be it the 2020 riots or the new 2025 ones.
If you disagree with Trump's pardons, do you think that the LA rioters should get away with their crimes?

 

[Tristan Scott]

There is a big difference between criticizing certain aspects of US, especially its politics, as everyone does (particularly on this forum) - and expressing hostility and hatred toward America, which is what these yahoos are doing.

Are they?

Yes.

Or are they expressing hostility and hatred toward the current President, and his policies?

There are better ways to do that. Hell, if you want to burn something, burn DJT in effigy. Both actions express hostility, as you are destroying something with fire, but one is destroying a symbol representing Donald Trump, while the other is destroying a symbol of the United States as a whole.

Or take the "Death to Amerikka[sic]" graffito. Bad spelling aside, that expresses hostility to US as a whole, not toward particular policies or a particular government. It is also a slogan beloved by islamofascists like Khamenei.

DJT can't see a difference between "hating DJT and his policies", and "hating America"; Can you?

I can. However, these rioters may be similar to DJT if they can't see this difference themselves.

Death of America?
Yes, it is happening right before your eyes, and guess what? Its not some boneheads throwing rocks and burning some cars.

Maybe you should wake up.

 

[Derec]

Maybe the LA cop broke a nail firing that rubber bullet at the female news reporter.

Or maybe a rioter threw a rock at a cop's head from a fucking overpass!

Your continuing downplaying of left-wing violence is getting as tiresome as your 1/6 whataboutism.

 

[Derec]

Death of America?
Yes, it is happening right before your eyes, and guess what? Its not some boneheads throwing rocks and burning some cars.

Maybe you should wake up.

I am opposed to Trump as well, but I am awake enough to see that there is plenty to dislike about the other extreme as well. Extremists on both ends of the horseshoe are destroying America.
Why do you think somebody like Trump was elected in the first place in 2016? A big reason for it, I think, in addition to Hillary being a poor candidate, was that people were appalled by the violence of the #BLM riots from 2014 on. There was even a riot (in Charlotte) in September 2016, meaning shortly before those fateful elections.

 

[Derec]

There was no false equivalence. You mistake the level of vehemence is irrelevant. The point is both are complaints. Really, this is not rocket science,

Apparently to you it might be rocket science, if you still not understand why it's a false equivalence.

I comprehend you still don’t get it. The difference in emotional content is irrelevant to the issue of why protesters should leave the country. And that ignores that there was no necessary hostility or hatred towards America,

If people say "Death to Amerikka[sic]", why is it wrong to say that they should leave the US if they hate it so much? It's a fair observation.

Clearly, my expectation was misplaced.

Because it was a faulty argument predicated on you denying that your false equivalence between criticizing policies and hostility toward the country as a whole was in fact false equivalence.

Spoken like a true John Bircher. Neither necessarily represents hatred of the USA. Burning the flag was a popular anti-Vietnam protest.

Not really a good example, as plenty of anti-Vietnam protesters were anti-US as well.
And these days you will often see US flag burning at anti-US protests in the Middle East.

“Death to Amerikka” is an anti-fascist statement.

On the contrary! Bad spelling aside, it is a sentiment often expressed by islamofascists like the dictator of Iran.

 

[Toni]

I’m sorry, I don’t know the acronym LWNJ.

Left-Wing Nut Jobs.

Ah, thanks. From what I can tell, the protesters have been pretty good. Trump’s uniformed agitators are not the only ones on Trump’s payroll who are there to stir the pot while turning up the flames.

 

[Toni]

There was no false equivalence. You mistake the level of vehemence is irrelevant. The point is both are complaints. Really, this is not rocket science,

Apparently to you it might be rocket science, if you still not understand why it's a false equivalence.

I comprehend you still don’t get it. The difference in emotional content is irrelevant to the issue of why protesters should leave the country. And that ignores that there was no necessary hostility or hatred towards America,

If people say "Death to Amerikka[sic]", why is it wrong to say that they should leave the US if they hate it so much? It's a fair observation.

Clearly, my expectation was misplaced.

Because it was a faulty argument predicated on you denying that your false equivalence between criticizing policies and hostility toward the country as a whole was in fact false equivalence.

Spoken like a true John Bircher. Neither necessarily represents hatred of the USA. Burning the flag was a popular anti-Vietnam protest.

Not really a good example, as plenty of anti-Vietnam protesters were anti-US as well.
And these days you will often see US flag burning at anti-US protests in the Middle East.

“Death to Amerikka” is an anti-fascist statement.

On the contrary! Bad spelling aside, it is a sentiment often expressed by islamofascists like the dictator of Iran.

The fascists I fear destroying this country are all MAGA. Do not be fooled by the dark hair and beard. Could be one of my kids ( it’s not, for sure) who looks like the Welsh part of the family.

Burning US flags is protected speech and a legitimate form of protest. If I were flying a flag, it would be upside down.

 

[ZiprHead]

Wow, some cars were vandalized and rocks were thrown. How terrible.

Yes, throwing rocks at vehicles belonging to a federal agency is horrible. And if you had listened to the video (it is only 27s long), you'd have heard that an agent was injured in the process too.

I did watch it and I did know that.

People here legally are swept off the streets by unknown masked individuals who refuse to provide ID and sent to prisons overseas without trial or conviction.

Note that these idiots do not want any immigration enforcement whatsoever.

Really? Is that why I keep hearing people say "they said they were only going to get the criminals, rapists, and gangsters."