Conflict erupts at Minneapolis, L.A. protests over George Floyd death

[loomer]

Oh, also, and just another small idea. Maybe he could've taken a vocal stand against the concentration camps his administration opened to imprison crossers from the Mexico-US border.

[ray245]

Well, for a start, he could've curtailed American imperialism abroad and de-escalated drone programs rather than expanding them (and if you don't see the connection, ask Cornel West), not presided over an administration that massively scaled up attacks on journalists and whistleblowers, not renewed the Pariot Act, pushed for actual laws around data privacy, publicly defended anti-fascist action, not labelled participants in the Ferguson and Baltimore protests thugs, and pushed for laws prohibiting the sale of surplus federal military equipment to police departments. You know, just a few ideas.

Also why is it that the go-to response seems to be 'well you just don't understand <x> about America'? It's a silly one, because I'm being guided in my opinions by Americans. So, sure - maybe I don't fully grasp America, but I'm pretty goddamn sure that the people I'm listening to do. Or are you assuming that I'm just making up the anger directed towards his speech from Black leftists?

Could a president who is willing to do all that be elected in the US though? Obama, despite doing all that is still perceived by a large segement of the US voters as being too far-left for their taste, to the extend that they voted in someone who promise to undo everything Obama did, and make things worse.

[loomer]

Probably not, but that doesn't change that his words come off as hollow given that he presided over all these things - and that's the source of the anger. Obama getting up and having a yarn that doesn't address his complicity in the slide towards this is what has people angry at him (well, other than the Right. They're just angry because, you know. He's a Black man with a voice.) The fact that all of this - none of which is actually that radical - is something we can reasonably consider political poison is a sign that maybe the people who think reform is doomed are onto something.

[Zaune]

Obama was one of those who promoted bodycams and forced the police to videotape interrogations in Chicago so it's very hard to say he did nothing. I think you seriously don't understand just how decentralized US policing is.

Central orders from the government needs to be filtered through States and while there's a national standard, it's up to actual counties or said force, be it city or state to meet that standard.

Still. What do you think should have been done ?

I don't have a primary source to hand, but Andrew Yang recently tweeted a proposal for a major step in the right direction: A federal-level police inspectorate. They might not be able to directly sanction law-enforcement organisations unless they can prove malfeasance that's outright unconstitutional, but just having a comprehensive performance evaluation placed in the public domain would force state governments to start taking the problem seriously. And making access to free DoD surplus equipment contingent on compliance would rein in the "destroy the precinct to save the precinct" brigade one way or another.

[Ace Pace]

Probably not, but that doesn't change that his words come off as hollow given that he presided over all these things - and that's the source of the anger. Obama getting up and having a yarn that doesn't address his complicity in the slide towards this is what has people angry at him (well, other than the Right. They're just angry because, you know. He's a Black man with a voice.) The fact that all of this - none of which is actually that radical - is something we can reasonably consider political poison is a sign that maybe the people who think reform is doomed are onto something.

I prefer your latter interpretation, which has Obama believing in the right thing but being ineffectual being the sore point rather than attacking him for somehow being dumb.

It's the same how he both worked for a strong nuclear arms agreement while also working on nuclear modernization.

[MKSheppard]

There was a fire of suspicious origin at the Civil War Naval Museum in Port Columbus Georgia. The open air shed in the back was burned, along with the artifacts that it contained.

https://amp.ledger-enquirer.com/news/lo ... 65931.html

The blaze that destroyed a storage shed behind the Port Columbus National Civil War Naval Museum early Monday was the second one set there over the weekend, authorities said.

Firefighters responding to a 1:05 a.m. call found the open-air shelter in flames from an “incendiary fire” with “multiple points of origin,” said Columbus Fire Marshal Ricky Shores.

The structure behind the 1002 Victory Drive museum was a metal roof supported by poles apparently preserved with creosote, which continued to smolder Monday. It had no walls, but was enclosed by a chain link fence with locked gates.

In September 2018, the shed sheltered artifacts such as the Civil War blockade runner CSS Virginia and the fantail of the ironclad CSS Jackson, according to Ledger-Enquirer archives. “That’s what that shed was built for,” former museum board member Tom Gates said Monday of storing the Virginia.

Shores said the arsonists forced their way inside the fence and set fires in various spots. “That was very clear,” he said.

It was the second time in three days someone had set a fire there. The first attempt was reported at 8:30 a.m. Saturday, he said. That fire did not spread.

Shores said investigators had yet to get an estimate of the damage and loss from the museum, where administrators were not immediately available for comment.

[loomer]

Well hey, it's some actual outsiders coming to cause trouble in the community.

Weird who they targeted, right? I wonder why they'd think these particular people don't have a right to be there...

[loomer]

Derecka Purnell on why the false solidarity of the police should be rejected.

...
For many, acts of police solidarity are wins. Some people believe that “good cops” lead by example for “bad apple” cops who bring shame to the profession. Police reformers hope that relationship building, diversity, and dialogue will make policing less violent. It cannot. And we must never invite or encourage police to march with us in protest against their own violence. ...

Yet history and my spirit tell me that the police who stand with us today will not sacrifice anything to end police violence tomorrow. Will any of them agree to firing police officers en masse? Will they march to cut their multimillion- and multibillion-dollar budgets and urge city councils to invest in Black communities? Will those officers conduct sit-ins to build more schools than cop academies and jails? Will they call on their police unions to retract their endorsements of President Trump? Will they refuse to enforce laws that criminalize poverty, Blackness, and sexual orientation? And will these officers demand that their departments release disciplinary records and disclose complaints against them and their colleagues? No to all of the above. ...

[loomer]

Gwen Snyder has more detail on yesterday's repression in Philadelphia.
Philadelphia's mayor is claiming it was legitimate because a state trooper was supposedly surrounded in his vehicle. To which I say, if the crowd wasn't acting aggressively towards that vehicle, tough shit - he can wait it out like everyone else who's ever been caught in traffic.

[ray245]

Probably not, but that doesn't change that his words come off as hollow given that he presided over all these things - and that's the source of the anger. Obama getting up and having a yarn that doesn't address his complicity in the slide towards this is what has people angry at him (well, other than the Right. They're just angry because, you know. He's a Black man with a voice.) The fact that all of this - none of which is actually that radical - is something we can reasonably consider political poison is a sign that maybe the people who think reform is doomed are onto something.

At this point I think the entire American constitution is due a major reform, and not just via an amendment.

[loomer]

Senate Democrats to introduce resolution condemning their own government's crackdown.

[Highlord Laan]

Now, pete rickets (lower case intentional) is a moron. That much is known by anyone in Nebraskistan that's been paying attention. This is an example of just how trumpian-levels of stupid he actually is.

https://www.facebook.com/SMBCOmaha/vide ... 2301673152

"You people."

[Ace Pace]

Unsurprisingly, majority of Americans support using the military to suppress the protests, including democrats.
We can argue till tomorrow whether this poll is accurate but if it is, 1968 hello?

Raw link

News article

President Trump on Monday threatened to call in the United States military in an effort to curtail protests across the United States, and it turns out most Americans — even some of those who think the president is doing a poor job of handling the demonstrations against police brutality — would support such an action, a new Morning Consult poll revealed Tuesday.

Among all registered voters surveyed, 58 percent said they would somewhat or strongly support having the military supplement city police forces compared to only 30 percent who said they somewhat or strongly oppose the measure.

There are some differences among demographics — younger people are a little more likely to oppose the move than older people, and Republicans were more far more likely to support it than Democrats. But there was still a plurality of 48 percent of Democrats who would back the decision, compared to 43 who wouldn't, though it's worth noting that when splitting the categories more specifically, "strongly opposed" became the most frequent response among Democratic voters.

The Morning Consult poll was conducted online between May 31-June 1 among 1,624 registered voters. The margin of error is 2 percentage points.

Bolding mine.

[ray245]

Unsurprisingly, majority of Americans support using the military to suppress the protests, including democrats.
We can argue till tomorrow whether this poll is accurate but if it is, 1968 hello?

Raw link

News article

President Trump on Monday threatened to call in the United States military in an effort to curtail protests across the United States, and it turns out most Americans — even some of those who think the president is doing a poor job of handling the demonstrations against police brutality — would support such an action, a new Morning Consult poll revealed Tuesday.

Among all registered voters surveyed, 58 percent said they would somewhat or strongly support having the military supplement city police forces compared to only 30 percent who said they somewhat or strongly oppose the measure.

There are some differences among demographics — younger people are a little more likely to oppose the move than older people, and Republicans were more far more likely to support it than Democrats. But there was still a plurality of 48 percent of Democrats who would back the decision, compared to 43 who wouldn't, though it's worth noting that when splitting the categories more specifically, "strongly opposed" became the most frequent response among Democratic voters.

The Morning Consult poll was conducted online between May 31-June 1 among 1,624 registered voters. The margin of error is 2 percentage points.

Bolding mine.

I wonder if this might lead to Trump winning the re-election.

[Ace Pace]

That's the 1968 hypothesis, that widespread unrest drives turnout among those who are impacted by the protests more than by protestors.

[ray245]

That's the 1968 hypothesis, that widespread unrest drives turnout among those who are impacted by the protests more than by protestors.

That will be sad, given that everything will essentially backfire and many people will feel the democratic means of ushering change is no longer that viable.

[Gandalf]

That will be sad, given that everything will essentially backfire and many people will feel the democratic means of ushering change is no longer that viable.

Indeed. If nothing comes of this, then the next protests will be worse, and so will the repressions.

Trump if nothing else now gets an attempt to tap into the American bloodlust that saw Bush II get reelected after he invaded Iraq. But at least this is cheaper and there's no awkward scenes at Dover with coffins coming home.

[ray245]

Indeed. If nothing comes of this, then the next protests will be worse, and so will the repressions.

Trump if nothing else now gets an attempt to tap into the American bloodlust that saw Bush II get reelected after he invaded Iraq. But at least this is cheaper and there's no awkward scenes at Dover with coffins coming home.

Everything is still stacked against the protesters, and the longer things drags on, the harder it will be for the protest to maintain its momentum. With the pandemic still going on in the US, you'll get increased infections amongst some of the most vulnerable communities making it more challenging to sustain large gatherings as well. ( You can't protest if you are hospitalised, or even if you are mildly ill).

If this is a waiting game, the protests will peter out eventually. I hope the protest can achieve viable change and reforms, but a very cynical part of me is thinking that won't happen.

[mr friendly guy]

Hey Aerius

Guess which country the American establishment is trying to blame on the protests.

Take a guess before clicking the link, see if you get it right.

[aerius]

I'm pretty sure it's the same one they're blaming for hacking the elections, hacking power companies, starting an oil price war, and pretty much everything else that isn't covid-19 and China.

[Starglider]

If this is a waiting game, the protests will peter out eventually. I hope the protest can achieve viable change and reforms, but a very cynical part of me is thinking that won't happen.

Occupy Wall Street generated lots of media coverage for a few months, then petered out and achieved basically nothing (even the far left desperate to claim a victory can only say 'it helped build our movement'). The Yellow Vest protests burned cars and blockaded roads in France, Macron offered a few meaningless platitudes and waited them out; media coverage was withdrawn and the protests are slowly petering out. In Ferguson, in the five years after the riots and despite intense political pressure, the rate of police shootings and killings has held steady, and trust in the police has continued to decline. So the odds are not good.

I would say that after the Insurrection Act / federal troop activations and bible incident, the position of 'vote Green because the Democrats are ignoring the left' is pretty much indefensible. However useless you think the Democrats are, the amount of damage Trump is doing to US social, political and constitutional cohesion pretty much demands support for the most viable way to remove him (which, sadly, is Biden).

[loomer]

Several of Minneapolis's councillors are considering a proposal to scrap the entire MPD.

[The Romulan Republic]

I'm pretty sure it's the same one they're blaming for hacking the elections, hacking power companies, starting an oil price war, and pretty much everything else that isn't covid-19 and China.

Obviously the protests are not caused by Russia or China, and contrary to your and mr. friendly guy's insinuations, I have not seen a general or widespread push by "the establishment"* to portray them as originating from Russia or China. However, that does not change the fact that hostile foreign governments, including China and Russia, have used and will use them in any way they can to weaken the US and strengthen their own position. Because of course they will.

Also, frankly, these protests are not about Russia, and should not be hijacked to push a narrative about how Russia (or China) is the victim of the West.


*Which is a conveniently vague term to begin with- see how white male hereditary billionaire Donald Trump was able to sell himself as "anti-establishment

[loomer]

CIA veterans who monitored crackdowns abroad see troubling parallels in Trump’s handling of protests
The scenes have been disturbingly familiar to CIA analysts accustomed to monitoring scenes of societal unraveling abroad — the massing of protesters, the ensuing crackdowns and the awkwardly staged displays of strength by a leader determined to project authority.

In interviews and posts on social media in recent days, current and former U.S. intelligence officials have expressed dismay at the similarity between events at home and the signs of decline or democratic regression they were trained to detect in other nations.

“I’ve seen this kind of violence,” said Gail Helt, a former CIA analyst responsible for tracking developments in China and Southeast Asia. “This is what autocrats do. This is what happens in countries before a collapse. It really does unnerve me.”

Helt, now a professor at King University in Tennessee, said the images of unrest in U.S. cities, combined with President Trump’s incendiary statements, echo clashes she covered over a dozen years at the CIA tracking developments in China, Malaysia and elsewhere.

Other former CIA and national security officials rendered similarly troubled verdicts.

Marc Polymeropoulos, who formerly ran CIA operations in Europe and Asia, was among several former agency officials who recoiled at images of Trump hoisting a Bible in front of St. John’s Episcopal Church in Washington after authorities fired rubber bullets and tear gas to clear the president’s path of protesters.

“It reminded me of what I reported on for years in the third world,” Polymeropoulos said on Twitter. Referring to the despotic leaders of Iraq, Syria and Libya, he said: “Saddam. Bashar. Qaddafi. They all did this.”

The impression Trump created was only reinforced by others in the administration. Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper urged governors to “dominate the battlespace” surrounding protesters, as if describing U.S. cities as a foreign war zone. Later, as military helicopters hovered menacingly over protesters, Gen. Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, toured the streets of the nation’s capital in his battle fatigue uniform.

“As a former CIA officer, I know this playbook,” Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.) said in a tweet. Before her election to Congress last year, she worked at the agency on issues including terrorism and nuclear proliferation.

One U.S. intelligence official even ventured into downtown Washington on Monday evening, as if taking measure of the street-level mood in a foreign country.

“Things escalated quickly,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the sensitive nature of his job. He emphasized that he went as a concerned citizen, not in any official capacity. After seeing tear gas canisters underfoot, he said, he “knew it was time to go” and departed.

Former intelligence officials said the unrest and the administration’s militaristic response are among many measures of decay they would flag if writing assessments about the United States for another country’s intelligence service.

They cited the country’s struggle to contain the novel coronavirus, the president’s attempt to pressure Ukraine for political favors, his attacks on the news media and the increasingly polarized political climate as other signs of dysfunction.

Trump supporters have defended his handling of the unrest, and his trip across Lafayette Square as a display of the strength needed to restore order in dozens of cities where protests have led to looting, fires and violence.

Former Wisconsin governor Scott Walker (R) said it was “hard to imagine” any other president “having the guts to walk out of the White House like this.”

But there were also indications that senior members of the administration were uncomfortable with the president’s outing and eager to minimize their role in it.

A senior Pentagon official said Tuesday that neither Esper nor Milley knew when they set out to accompany Trump that police were about to charge through seemingly peaceful protesters or that they would play supporting roles in a photo op.

Even away from the cameras, Trump has assiduously cultivated the aura of a strongman. Earlier Monday, he had chided governors as “weak” for failing to employ adequate force in the face of mounting protests.

“If you don’t dominate, you’re wasting your time,” Trump said. He offered no words on how to ease tensions in crowds that have massed largely in anger over the death of George Floyd, an African American man who was killed while being pinned to the ground, a knee against his neck, by police in Minneapolis.

Brett McGurk, a former top U.S. envoy to the Middle East who spent two years in the Trump administration, said the president’s words — recorded by participants and shared with news organizations — would only embolden the world’s autocrats and undermine U.S. authority.

“The imagery of a head of state in a call with other governing officials saying, ‘Dominate the streets, dominate the battlespace’ — these are iconic images that will define America for some time,” said McGurk, who led U.S. diplomatic efforts to counter the Islamic State terrorist group. “It makes it much more difficult for us to distinguish ourselves from other countries we are trying to contest” or influence, he said.

In recent years, U.S. officials have urged restraint or denounced crackdowns against protesters or vulnerable groups in Russia, Iran, Turkey, Malaysia, Syria and other countries.

Even this week, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo lectured China about its efforts to prevent citizens of Hong Kong from holding a vigil to mark the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square protests.

“If there is any doubt about Beijing’s intent, it is to deny Hong Kongers a voice and a choice,” Pompeo said in a statement that was met with derision on Twitter because it coincided with crackdowns urged by Trump in the United States.

The seeming hypocrisy in the U.S. position has not been lost on foreign targets of American pressure or criticism.

Ramzan Kadyrov, a Chechen leader who has faced U.S. sanctions for alleged human rights abuses, said Tuesday that he was “watching with horror the situation in the United States, where the authorities are maliciously violating ordinary citizens’ rights,” according to reports from Moscow.

Source

Something something tree of liberty comes to mind.

[loomer]

Regime forces are actively engaged in repressing a peaceful protest in Seattle right now - using, of all things, bike cops as cavalry.