Los Angeles under military attack

[Tommy Callahan]

 

[thenorthremembers]

1 minute ago, Tommy Callahan said:

 

 

and this right here should tell you what side you are on.  

[Wacka]

19 minutes ago, SCBills said:

 

In reality, the left wants to destroy our borders, import non-white folks because they view us as oppressors, create a government dependent underclass and backfill their census numbers in blue states losing legal citizens left and right. 

They want a permanent underclass that will be supplying their domestic help.

[SCBills]

Interesting numbers here, especially for those who don’t know any actual legal immigrants. 
 

 

[SectionC3]

1 hour ago, Orlando Buffalo said:

These are two of the dumbest posts I have ever seen from a liberal to cover up for their failures. DJT is out and about amongst the people almost every day and is very public. The hid Biden from view and kept telling you what to believe and you did. When they have to tell me something is a deepfake that is real your point will matter.

As for policy vs law, to make this argument you are admitting the Dems policy is not enforcing the law. Your argument sounds similar to the old Dems of the 1920's, the law says everyone has equal rights it is just our policy does not apply that law across all races. 

Gaslighting, again.  What law is volatile of the 14A?  Just answer the question.  

9 minutes ago, Wacka said:

They want a permanent underclass that will be supplying their domestic help.

I thought you were talking about rich folks there for a second.  That’s what MAGA is.  The trailer folk to do the BS the rich folk don’t want to do. 

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

2 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Gaslighting, again.  What law is volatile of the 14A?  Just answer the question.  

I thought you were talking about rich folks there for a second.  That’s what MAGA is.  The trailer folk to do the BS the rich folk don’t want to do. 

Look at you attempting critical thinking! Your mom would be so proud of you!!

[Mikie2times]

4 hours ago, thenorthremembers said:

 

This is your exact quote. 

 

"The political right in the U.S. often aligns with Christian conservative values promoting policies on issues like abortion, LGBTQ+ rights, and education that reflect those beliefs. This can feel exclusionary to people of different faiths or none at all, especially when those religious values influence laws."

 

As such, me pointing out that a majority of religions disagree with liberal ideals discredits your entire argument that people of other faiths feel excluded by conservative politics.   Something has to dictate law.   Does it not make sense that morality, as seen by a majority of religions, would dictate law rather than a complete lack of morality?   What defines right or wrong for non-believing people?  And where did that the idea of right and wrong originally come from?

 

I am calling you out of touch because your entire argument was that Chrisitan values are the basis for the political right.  Which is what most liberals like to say.  You wouldnt dare to call out any other religion because you dont want to seem intolerant, despite the fact that you're actually completely intolerant.    It's hypocrisy.   

 

The reality is religious values, or just values in general are the things driving the political right.    The Bible may be thousands of years old, but morality, the choice between what is right and what is wrong should not change with time.  

 

The dissolution of those values is why you see people cheering evil in LA right now.     

 

  

 

 

Do you think I care what religion is imposing it's views onto people or that Christianity aligns in its bigotry with other religions bigotry?  I don't attempt to keep up with what ridiculous concepts people follow as a result of them feeling hopeless, needing morality, needing purpose, or just needing to know what happens when the lights go out. It's all the same level of BS to me regardless of who it is. I care when ANY religion imposes it's views onto society in the form of laws. As we have seen with concepts like abortion. Just as I'm sure you care a great deal when other people impose things onto you that your book says is wrong like homosexuality.  

[Doc]

3 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

Best explanation I’ve seen. Rome is has been burning

 

https://www.newsweek.com/peter-turchin-political-violence-donald-trump-barack-obama-riots-2083007

 

 

This is talking about something predicted 5 years before Trump was a serious player on the political scene.  

[Orlando Buffalo]

On 6/9/2025 at 11:49 AM, SectionC3 said:

TDS.  Nice.   A usual fallback when you don’t know what you’re talking about.  What law, exactly, are you talking about here?  And aren’t those challenges (14A) typical conducted as equal protection exercises in the courts?  And, on top of that, you still have this little “powers not reserved problem” to get around. 

 

Also, your spelling sucks.  It’s “raping.”  Not “rapeing.”  

 

On 6/9/2025 at 11:49 AM, SectionC3 said:

 

 

21 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Gaslighting, again.  What law is volatile of the 14A?  Just answer the question.  

 

You already responded to me on this, did you forget? You said it should go before a court because the policies aren't laws. 

Edited Tuesday at 07:14 PM by Orlando Buffalo

[Joe Ferguson forever]

1 hour ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

 

No, Newsom and Bass and the riot organizers want to play hardball. So hardball it is..

Newsome and Bass want control of the response to the riots in their state and city. That's not hardball.  It's states rights.

 

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

1 minute ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

Newsome and Bass want control of the response to the riots in their state and city. That's not hardball.  It's states rights.

 

What response? They keep saying there's no problem.

[JDHillFan]

2 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

Newsome and Bass want control of the response to the riots in their state and city. That's not hardball.  It's states rights.

 

I’m just wondering about the thread title which seems very rational and well thought out. When does the military attack begin?

[Joe Ferguson forever]

52 minutes ago, Mikie2times said:

needing morality

Do you not agree that everyone needs morality regardless of whether they're religious.  It's certainly laid out in Christianity.  It's very clear to me.  And it's peaceful and benign. The trouble starts when people impose their beliefs on others causing loss of freedom for those on the other side.

Edited Tuesday at 07:47 PM by Joe Ferguson forever

[Joe Ferguson forever]

11 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

What response? They keep saying there's no problem.

Around 6:30 p.m.
The Los Angeles Police Department said it responded to a request for assistance from federal authorities at around 6:30 p.m. and arrived at the scene within 55 minutes. The department said its response time was impacted by "significant traffic congestion, the presence of demonstrators, and, notably, by the fact that federal agents had deployed irritants into the crowd prior to LAPD's arrival." 

Later, the Department of Homeland Security claimed the LAPD took two hours to respond. A federal law enforcement official told CBS News that ICE requested assistance from LAPD multiple times over the course of Friday night and that it took more than two hours to honor that request. However, a senior city official in L.A. disputed that timeline, telling CBS News that it took LAPD 55 minutes to respond, not two hours.

The LAPD posted on X at 7 p.m. that it had declared an "unlawful assembly," ordering protesters to leave the area and giving them five minutes to comply. By 8 p.m., video shows LAPD officers had blocked the crowd's path to the detention center. Police said some protesters had thrown large pieces of concrete. CBS News Los Angeles reporters witnessed officers firing non-lethal foam projectiles and bean bag rounds in response.

[Mikie2times]

23 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

Do you not agree that everyone needs morality regardless of whether they're religious.  It's certainly laid out in Christianity.  It's very clear to me.  And it's peaceful and benign. The trouble starts when people impose their beliefs on others  imposing loss of freedom for those on the other side.

I was very harsh in that response and I'm sorry about that. I have a lot of good friends who are religious, most my family is, most people I know are. I don't care that they pick that path and never disparage it as it's very personal to them. To answer your question of course it is needed but morality comes from a lot of places. If you require religion to provide it or think that is the only path to it I think that is a mistake (not saying you feel this way). 

 

I have met completely immoral people who believe in god or say they do (without showing any indication that is the case). Who use religion to manipulate or pursue self fulfilling agendas (sound like anybody we know?).  I see very limited connectivity between somebody who is moral and somebody who says they're religious. Some are, some aren't. I generally accept all of them. Even the immoral ones as who am I to judge how they arrive at such a place. You can only hope they improve as people.  All of this aligns more with the left even if I don't fully identify with them. I never saw the left as trying to limit who people were or minimize others. They try and impose the acceptance of people on the fringe of society and the right doesn't want that. Religion often tells them not to or at least the interpretation they have of it does. Which I often think is just a justifiable way to be a bigoted. 

Edited Tuesday at 08:00 PM by Mikie2times

[yall]

29 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

Newsome and Bass want control of the response to the riots in their state and city. That's not hardball.  It's states rights.

 

Yeah but when you're response is effectively "***** it", especially with regard for federal personnel and property, you can reasonably expect higher authority to weigh in.

[SCBills]

40 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

Newsome and Bass want control of the response to the riots in their state and city. That's not hardball.  It's states rights.

 

They want to supersede the federal authority Trump has to send ICE in and detain criminals. 
 

States rights don’t allow rogue governors or mayors to harbor criminal activity. 
 

Everything we’re seeing right now is due to that catalyst. 
 

 

Edited Tuesday at 08:13 PM by SCBills

[US Egg]

If one has Prime Video, one can watch three local L.A. TV stations for up to the minute news.

[billsfan_34]

On 6/7/2025 at 11:43 AM, Joe Ferguson forever said:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/los-angeles-ice-raids-spark-protests-fear-outrage-our-community-is-under-attack/ar-AA1GfpRF

 

This doesn't look like America.  It looks like fascism.

Attack and protect are much different. If the Guard/Marines wanted to or were ordered to attack, this would be over. False narratives are what has gotten the Democrats where they are now. The party that was once the party of the people is a shell of itself. You keep going down your silly rabbit hole.

1 hour ago, JDHillFan said:

I’m just wondering about the thread title which seems very rational and well thought out. When does the military attack begin?

Ole Joe has always been rational in PPP land 😂

[Doc Brown]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

This is talking about something predicted 5 years before Trump was a serious player on the political scene.  

It's been predicted my whole life.  Just remember.  The 2026 midterms will be the most important vote of our lives.