Poll on what to do about Antifa taking over Seattle

How should Antifa be handled?

  • The police in Seattle should remove them

    Votes: 32 39.0%
  • Trump should send in troops to remove them

    Votes: 14 17.1%
  • Just let them take over as much of Seattle as they want and ignore them

    Votes: 36 43.9%

  • Total voters
    82
The third option, of course.

Assuming that elections there are reasonably honest, the fine liberal citizens of that city are getting exactly what they voted for.

If that city/state ever asks President Trump for help of any kind, he should reply with that old but true saying "You made your bed. Now lie in it."

Except we do have a pretty clear precedent for "You can leave the US if you want, but you don't get to take the real estate with you."
 
So Antifa has taken over streets in Seattle declaring them liberated zones and blocking any entrance into those areas of town.

So how should this be handled?

Don't be surprised if you have heard about this. The press..............well................ya know.

Ignore them! Totally. Let them serve as an example of Marxist leadership. They built a wall, they check ID's they will confiscate stuff.

Do nothing

Nothing

And say what to the people who own houses and businesses in that area? "Too bad, so sad, you'll just have to lose everything so we can make a political point"?

The battle for all the marbles is this November. Trump allowed the Coup plotters to slide this long, he can let some street urchins run wild a little longer

You'll excuse me if I don't think elections and politics are "all the marbles" over and above law and order, or the fabric of our civilized society.

Agreed, but if seditious traitors who were engaged in an actual Coup d'etat against President Trump are still freemen, our fabric of society is already royally fucked
 
So Antifa has taken over streets in Seattle declaring them liberated zones and blocking any entrance into those areas of town.

So how should this be handled?

Don't be surprised if you have heard about this. The press..............well................ya know.
I would have had troops and Abrams tanks in there day one and what riot and revolt there was would have been very short indeed. It would already be a footnote in history as one of the stupidest and one sided revolts in the history of mankind.
Armored cars with water canons would have been more than sufficient.
 
Untrue. Very much untrue. They were also shooting at National Guard, civilians and each other as well as throwing firebombs, dropping stones from buildings and every other act of violence imaginable.

The stuff you posted didn't say anything about people shooting at cops. You lose.

The cops did shoot a lot of black people, though.
 
Ever feel like your visiting a new version of the hunger games. The lies and negative altered photos even one seen on Fox, more on line, contradicted so much of what was said by those in the zone that could not tell fact from fiction. had to go to Seattle TV & NEWS PAPERS. so far it looks like a street fair, residents of the area main complaint seems to be want of a noise curfew after 11 pm. the way our political leaders handle everything is becoming more embarrassing both party's few exception's .
There are other problems such as parking and traffic. I walked through the zone in daytime a couple of times and there wasn't much difference. There are people hanging around the police substation and more homeless people than usual. It seems a mixed bag in regard to merchants and residents, some like it and some don't. They say there's a lot going on at night, music, poetry reading, movies and speakers.
 
Last edited:
If-as reported-the terrorists have negotiated a deal with the city. If they don't have an organization or leadership who did the city negotiate with, what makes the city believe whoever did so can honor the "deal" and why weren't they arrested? If people admitted that they were part of the group with the power to negotiate they should have been immediately arrested.
That's Fox News
The real story as reported locally is the city is making some safety changes. There was no negotiations as such. City officials held a meeting with protest organizers, businesses, and residents on Sunday to discuss proposed changes. The major change is the city replacing a light temporary barrier with a concert barrier to protect pedestrians from vehicle traffic. Other changes are being made to allow easier access by the public and emergency vehicels.
What part of "... meeting with protest organizers...to discuss proposed changes." do you not understand? How is that not negotiation?

Again: Nolette said operating a citizen checkpoint on a public street is illegal.
Why is the city assisting with illegal activity?
I wasn't at the meeting but as I understand it, the city said they were planning on replacing the temporary barricade with a concrete one to protect pedestrians from vehicles and some other minor public safety changes and there was no objection. I would guess the protesters had some comments and maybe they asked the city for something. I don't know if you call that negotiating. When the Chief of Police said there was no one to negotiate with, I think she meant there was no one leader to make decisions. I think Raz Simone is sort of a spokesman.
 
Untrue. Very much untrue. They were also shooting at National Guard, civilians and each other as well as throwing firebombs, dropping stones from buildings and every other act of violence imaginable.

The stuff you posted didn't say anything about people shooting at cops. You lose.

The cops did shoot a lot of black people, though.
I was alive awake and paying attention while that was going on and don't need a link. I posted from memory and from the MSM news of the time. You think all those wounded and killed non-rioters were downed by harsh language? You think all the people shot were shot by police? In 100+ cities?
Post a creditable source that claims the rioters did no shooting before trying to make foolish claims. '68 was the year I got my draft notice and I had to wonder about the possibility of being drawn into the conflict. Instead I was sent to Vietnam where they were also shooting even if not so much. Sometimes you just can't win.
 
If-as reported-the terrorists have negotiated a deal with the city. If they don't have an organization or leadership who did the city negotiate with, what makes the city believe whoever did so can honor the "deal" and why weren't they arrested? If people admitted that they were part of the group with the power to negotiate they should have been immediately arrested.
That's Fox News
The real story as reported locally is the city is making some safety changes. There was no negotiations as such. City officials held a meeting with protest organizers, businesses, and residents on Sunday to discuss proposed changes. The major change is the city replacing a light temporary barrier with a concert barrier to protect pedestrians from vehicle traffic. Other changes are being made to allow easier access by the public and emergency vehicels.
What part of "... meeting with protest organizers...to discuss proposed changes." do you not understand? How is that not negotiation?

Again: Nolette said operating a citizen checkpoint on a public street is illegal.
Why is the city assisting with illegal activity?
I wasn't at the meeting but as I understand it, the city said they were planning on replacing the temporary barricade with a concrete one to protect pedestrians from vehicles and some other minor public safety changes and there was no objection. I would guess the protesters had some comments and maybe they asked the city for something. I don't know if you call that negotiating. When the Chief of Police said there was no one to negotiate with, I think she meant there was no one leader to make decisions. I think Raz Simone is sort of a spokesman.
If that is true the city is complaisant with insurrection by helping them fortify their illegal barricade. Anyone who claims they can speak for the terrorists should be promptly arrested and investigated.
 
I was alive awake and paying attention while that was going on and don't need a link. I posted from memory and from the MSM news of the time. You think all those wounded and killed non-rioters were downed by harsh language? You think all the people shot were shot by police?

Most of them probably were, but we were talking about Chicago's riots.. not the whole country.

Post a creditable source that claims the rioters did no shooting before trying to make foolish claims.

It's not my job to prove a negative.

It's like saying, "Prove I don't have a rainbow-farting unicorn in my yard!"
 
If-as reported-the terrorists have negotiated a deal with the city. If they don't have an organization or leadership who did the city negotiate with, what makes the city believe whoever did so can honor the "deal" and why weren't they arrested? If people admitted that they were part of the group with the power to negotiate they should have been immediately arrested.
That's Fox News
The real story as reported locally is the city is making some safety changes. There was no negotiations as such. City officials held a meeting with protest organizers, businesses, and residents on Sunday to discuss proposed changes. The major change is the city replacing a light temporary barrier with a concert barrier to protect pedestrians from vehicle traffic. Other changes are being made to allow easier access by the public and emergency vehicels.
What part of "... meeting with protest organizers...to discuss proposed changes." do you not understand? How is that not negotiation?

Again: Nolette said operating a citizen checkpoint on a public street is illegal.
Why is the city assisting with illegal activity?
I wasn't at the meeting but as I understand it, the city said they were planning on replacing the temporary barricade with a concrete one to protect pedestrians from vehicles and some other minor public safety changes and there was no objection. I would guess the protesters had some comments and maybe they asked the city for something. I don't know if you call that negotiating. When the Chief of Police said there was no one to negotiate with, I think she meant there was no one leader to make decisions. I think Raz Simone is sort of a spokesman.
If that is true the city is complaisant with insurrection by helping them fortify their illegal barricade. Anyone who claims they can speak for the terrorists should be promptly arrested and investigated.
The city can do whatever they want with their barricades. The city replaced the light plastic barricade with a concrete one. If they hadn't, some nut would drive a vehicle through it and run over a bunch of people.
 
look - they declared they are no longer part of the US so fine - set up immigration outside their "walls" and if anyone tries to come over, ask for their passport.

no passport, get your ass back in there.
no trade agreements? gee, gonna get rough, huh?
how you going to power those 6 blocks?

it could get really fun to just fuck with them at this point.


They should just cut cell phone and internet service to the area, the assholes would vacate in a hurry.

.
Which would cut off service for about 20,000 people outside the area as well many businesses. Not gonna happen. In fact with a recent poll that shows 44% of residents favoring leaving the area as it is and 40% favoring removing barriers and opening it up, there is not much pressure on the city to do anything.


:link::link::link:

.
 
look - they declared they are no longer part of the US so fine - set up immigration outside their "walls" and if anyone tries to come over, ask for their passport.

no passport, get your ass back in there.
no trade agreements? gee, gonna get rough, huh?
how you going to power those 6 blocks?

it could get really fun to just fuck with them at this point.


They should just cut cell phone and internet service to the area, the assholes would vacate in a hurry.

.
Which would cut off service for about 20,000 people outside the area as well many businesses. Not gonna happen. In fact with a recent poll that shows 44% of residents favoring leaving the area as it is and 40% favoring removing barriers and opening it up, there is not much pressure on the city to do anything.


:link::link::link:

.
 
Trump has no authority to do anything with regard to unrest in Seattle.

He can, however; erect a border around this new country and strictly enforce immigration to the United States.

How do you figure the President has no authority to put down insurrection?
Because they are not rising up against the United States?

Seattle is just a fucked town and NOT the United States.
 
So Antifa has taken over streets in Seattle declaring them liberated zones and blocking any entrance into those areas of town.

So how should this be handled?

Don't be surprised if you have heard about this. The press..............well................ya know.

Ignore them! Totally. Let them serve as an example of Marxist leadership. They built a wall, they check ID's they will confiscate stuff.

Do nothing

Nothing

And say what to the people who own houses and businesses in that area? "Too bad, so sad, you'll just have to lose everything so we can make a political point"?

The battle for all the marbles is this November. Trump allowed the Coup plotters to slide this long, he can let some street urchins run wild a little longer

You'll excuse me if I don't think elections and politics are "all the marbles" over and above law and order, or the fabric of our civilized society.

Agreed, but if seditious traitors who were engaged in an actual Coup d'etat against President Trump are still freemen, our fabric of society is already royally fucked

So your plan is what? Just write it off as lost and forget about it?

Getting President Trump re-elected is the means, not the end goal. The end goal is having a safe and free civil society. If we have to sacrifice that to get President Trump re-elected, then there's no point in re-electing him at all.
 
Trump has no authority to do anything with regard to unrest in Seattle.

He can, however; erect a border around this new country and strictly enforce immigration to the United States.

How do you figure the President has no authority to put down insurrection?
Because they are not rising up against the United States?

Seattle is just a fucked town and NOT the United States.

Seattle is a fucked town IN the United States. If you take control of US territory and declare yourself independent of the US and put up signs saying, "You are now leaving the US", then you're an insurrection against the US. This definition is not dependent on size and scope of the insurrection.
 
So Antifa has taken over streets in Seattle declaring them liberated zones and blocking any entrance into those areas of town.

So how should this be handled?

Don't be surprised if you have heard about this. The press..............well................ya know.

Ignore them! Totally. Let them serve as an example of Marxist leadership. They built a wall, they check ID's they will confiscate stuff.

Do nothing

Nothing

And say what to the people who own houses and businesses in that area? "Too bad, so sad, you'll just have to lose everything so we can make a political point"?

The battle for all the marbles is this November. Trump allowed the Coup plotters to slide this long, he can let some street urchins run wild a little longer

You'll excuse me if I don't think elections and politics are "all the marbles" over and above law and order, or the fabric of our civilized society.

Agreed, but if seditious traitors who were engaged in an actual Coup d'etat against President Trump are still freemen, our fabric of society is already royally fucked

So your plan is what? Just write it off as lost and forget about it?

Getting President Trump re-elected is the means, not the end goal. The end goal is having a safe and free civil society. If we have to sacrifice that to get President Trump re-elected, then there's no point in re-electing him at all.

Let's sent in the US military, 82nd and 101st, kill a few hundred street urchins to restore "order"

What have you accomplished?

Please tell me
 
So Antifa has taken over streets in Seattle declaring them liberated zones and blocking any entrance into those areas of town.

So how should this be handled?

Don't be surprised if you have heard about this. The press..............well................ya know.

Ignore them! Totally. Let them serve as an example of Marxist leadership. They built a wall, they check ID's they will confiscate stuff.

Do nothing

Nothing

And say what to the people who own houses and businesses in that area? "Too bad, so sad, you'll just have to lose everything so we can make a political point"?

The battle for all the marbles is this November. Trump allowed the Coup plotters to slide this long, he can let some street urchins run wild a little longer

You'll excuse me if I don't think elections and politics are "all the marbles" over and above law and order, or the fabric of our civilized society.

Agreed, but if seditious traitors who were engaged in an actual Coup d'etat against President Trump are still freemen, our fabric of society is already royally fucked

So your plan is what? Just write it off as lost and forget about it?

Getting President Trump re-elected is the means, not the end goal. The end goal is having a safe and free civil society. If we have to sacrifice that to get President Trump re-elected, then there's no point in re-electing him at all.

Let's sent in the US military, 82nd and 101st, kill a few hundred street urchins to restore "order"

What have you accomplished?

Please tell me

"Street urchins"? They're full adults, taking control of US territory by force and declaring themselves independent of the United States, and patrolling that territory armed with "assault weapons", as leftists like to call them, and you're trying to dismiss them as though they're the ragged little pre-pubescents who beg tourists for loose change in Mexico. I find that offensive, and so would they. Exactly what do you require beyond all this to suddenly decide it's serious and meaningful?
 
Trump has no authority to do anything with regard to unrest in Seattle.

He can, however; erect a border around this new country and strictly enforce immigration to the United States.

How do you figure the President has no authority to put down insurrection?
Because they are not rising up against the United States?

Seattle is just a fucked town and NOT the United States.

Seattle is a fucked town IN the United States. If you take control of US territory and declare yourself independent of the US and put up signs saying, "You are now leaving the US", then you're an insurrection against the US. This definition is not dependent on size and scope of the insurrection.
Someone slapping signs on a wall declaring independence does not constitute insurrection, nor does a protest group declaring 6 city blocks an autonomous zone with the support of city government and the tacit support of the governor. The city certain has the right to enforce laws in the city as they choose. They can and do close streets and multi blocks for protests, and various other purposes and increase and decrease police presence as they deem necessary.

Although Seattle's autonomous zone which has become a laboratory experiment in social justice is repugnant to authoritarians who believe the only way to deal with descent is through force, Seattle is acting within the US constitution and federal laws. As long as the governor and the people of Seattle support the mayor, there's not much Trump can do about it and congress is not about to get involve in this.

In regard to the Insurrection Act, the 1981 Reagan Justice Department concluded that the Insurrection Act does not give the federal government or president unlimited powers, it has to be done in concert with governors. A provision of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007, added by an unidentified sponsor, amended the Insurrection act to permit military intervention without state consent, in case of an emergency that hindered the enforcement of laws. Bush signed this amendment into law, but some months after it was enacted, all fifty state governors issued a joint statement against it, and the changes were repealed in January 2008. As it stands today, the law is on Seattle's side.

IMHO, the mayor's experiment will not last long. The Chief of Police has gone on record as wanting to take control of the police substation and return police patrols to the area. The mayor has conditioned the future of the autonomous zone on the community being able to contain any serious violence and that seems very unlikely because there is no unified leadership in the zone. And the self-declared protectors, mostly unarmed have shown no inclination at protecting the community other than who enters the area.

 

Forum List

Back
Top