Fact check: 'WE ARE NOT ABLAZE,' Portland fire department says after Trump claim

  • Thread starter Thread starter RidgeSprinter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is the same network whose reporters are standing in front of burning buildings claiming the protests to be peaceful.
The vast majority of protesters were peaceful. It only takes a very few people to make a big blaze and cause lots of damage.
 
I think Trump was speaking of the anarchists. They’ve been
in the Northwest since the 90’s or a bit longer.
 
Its not like an out of control bush fire that is running with no hope of stopping easily and safeily, and causing flame tornadoes and the incredible destruction and desolation. That is what is going on in CA.
A month to 6 weeks ago, a part of Seattle was taken over, this week, more violence in Seattle and I heard about it.
Andy Ngô@MrAndyNgo

@SeattlePD

East Precinct (in the heart of former CHAZ) & throw incendiary devices at the building. They recently barricaded the door with quick drying cement & set building on fire. #SeattleRiots
Different city but I think if one hears about this kind of strife, one might say “Seattle is ablaze”.

Oh, it’s one fire in Portland or whatever. Okay.

A “fiery but peaceful protest” maybe.
 
Last edited:
As illustrated by the fires.
That doesn’t really invalidate the point. It doesn’t take hundreds of people to start a fire.
 
That doesn’t really invalidate the point. It doesn’t take hundreds of people to start a fire.
Actually, it does.
If these ‘protests’ resulted in burning buildings and lawlessness…and they did…they cannot be called ‘peaceful’.
Cnn is peddling fake news.
They have no credibility whatsoever.

So when they cough up a story about some official saying something, my first reaction is to doubt the story is real.

By the way, has any other news agency picked this up?
 
If these ‘protests’ resulted in burning buildings
That’s circular reasoning because you are assuming to be true that which you are trying to prove. The fact is you have a huge number of non-violent protesters and you have a few people who do violence and set fires.
 
That’s circular reasoning
Not at all.
I am not seeking to prove anything.
It is simple reasoning. If these 'protests’result in lawlessness and burning buildings, they cannot be called ‘peaceful’.
These ‘protests’ resulted in both burning buildings and lawlessness, therefore they were not peaceful.

The ‘huge number of non-violent protesters’ do not change the fact that the ‘protests’ resulted in violence.
 
Just remember, this is Donald Trump’s America, not Joe Biden’s.

If you don’t like what’s going on, vote for a change, not more of the same.
 
Also, what do you say when vandalism occurs right outside the Portland mayor’s home. Mayor Wheeler is going to move whenever to spare his neighbors.

I doubt if this is the only place a fire truck went to:


What do we say? Portland is NOT on fire?

Some of these arguements seem very deceptive. Are we talking about one night only? Doh!
 
Wait, I thought Mr. Trump was supposed to be the equivalent of the Corleone family in this narrative, but it’s Mr. Biden who appears to be playing the role of the mafioso offering protection. Ha!

In any event, do you really think Mr. Biden’s election will placate those who have resorted to violence? People who are legitimately protesting peacefully would work with him, I submit, but the folks who are attempting to burn buildings, shoot those they disagree with, etc., are not going to be satisfied with whatever Mr. Biden could realistically accomplish (or, more probably, want to accomplish). Mr. Biden’s campaign aside, he is establishment through and through.
 
this seems like a reasonable take. It seems to me we should always strive to interpret another’s remarks in charity, not look for the most outlandish possible interpretation. It seems to me this was a rhetorical flourish, not a claim that Portland was the equivalent of 1944 Dresden.
 
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
The burned buildings are the result of few non-peaceful people.
And the entire event is now violent.
Did you also agree that the entire protest against removal of confederate statues in Charlottesville was violent because of the violent act of running over and killing Heather Heyer?
 
Last edited:
I object to this characterization. It’s pure speculation and assumes motives.
Maybe you’re right.

 
None of that stuff is racist per se. And some of it is not the federal government’s job. This is why I vote Libertarian when I can. As Ronald Reagan so famously said (am paraphrasing, "When the government says ‘I’m here to help’, be very afraid).
In late July, President Trump announced he would dismantle an Obama-era fair-housing rule and tweeted, “I am happy to inform all of the people living their Suburban Lifestyle Dream that you will no longer be bothered or financially hurt by having low income housing built in your neighborhood…. Crime will go down.” At a Midland, Texas, rally the same day, he said that low-income housing has been “hell for suburbia…. So enjoy your life, ladies and gentlemen.”
 
In late July, President Trump announced he would dismantle an Obama-era fair-housing rule and tweeted, “I am happy to inform all of the people living their Suburban Lifestyle Dream that you will no longer be bothered or financially hurt by having low income housing built in your neighborhood…. Crime will go down.” At a Midland, Texas, rally the same day, he said that low-income housing has been “hell for suburbia…. So enjoy your life, ladies and gentlemen.”
I see this as racist. Maybe I link classism with racism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top