portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary portland metro

actions & protests | anti-racism

White Males Conduct, Orchestrate Vandalism / Property Destruction In Downtown Portland

Prove me wrong.

Show me the photos, videos of African-American, nonwhite ANYGenders committing acts of property destruction downtown the past two days.
****ing hypocrite cowardly little shits

black voters 11.Nov.2016 06:30

.i.

had they turned out in the same number as 2012, Hillary would be president.

This "protest" is just another in an endless parade by the usual suspects of spoiled brats and entitlement lice.

A Vote for Trump was a big FUCK YOU at the system. Who know these rioters were actually part of the system..

Wrong! 11.Nov.2016 06:53

OD

A vote for Trump was a vote for establishment! Who else is more entitled, more privileged???
A vote for Jill Stein was a FUCK YOU to the establishment!

The Establishment was happy you voted for Jill Stein 11.Nov.2016 08:27

.i.

It insures an easier victory for them.

To be clear the eGOP hates Trump as much as the establishment Democrats do.

The working day democrats pushed Trump over the top. Face it.

Many Bernie people in Michigan and Wisconsin voted for Trump. Face it.

If you want to fix this problem then we need a run off system (not simple score voting blues).

Actually No 11.Nov.2016 09:12

SSWX

I'm not condemning nor condoning the property destruction, fires and what have you but I did see at least two African Americans setting fires and trying to break shit. For the record, there was some diversity amongst the smashy smashy.

oh my, naughty words on building 11.Nov.2016 13:03

Silly Rabbit

whats the world coming too?
the problems of graffiti and property damage is miniscule compared to the bigger issue afoot

^ [quote] "compared to the bigger issue afoot" which is, ________ ? 11.Nov.2016 13:09

_

Trump's promise to cancel TPP? (already Canada and Mexico have made nods in that direction, 70 days before him entering the POTUS)


Please do elucidate what the **** the "bigger issue afoot" is, because a bunch of soup sandwich child white boy vandals with incoherent #SheWon signs aren't getting it across.


 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/11/433692.shtml

Mixed nuts 11.Nov.2016 13:27

Silly Rabbit

_ you answered you're own questions (regarding bigger issue afoot)

Also...

one man with a sign about Clinton doesn't equate to all vandalism (etc) being done by as _ said:
"soup sandwich child white boy vandals with incoherent #SheWon signs aren't getting it across."

you wrap 5,000 peoples message into a "white boy soup commercial"

folks getting their angered all [side focused] at some graffiti slogan while they miss the big ship passing by in front of them

Silly Rabbit 11.Nov.2016 16:16

.i.

I assume you don't have anything worth spray painting, so you can't relate.

What if someone spray painted FUCK OBAMA on your child and sent him/her on their way to school, and the teacher just told them, Silly Rabbit, its just paint, it will wash off, you have bigger problems.

'Silly Rabbit' chose themselves an appropriate moniker 11.Nov.2016 16:44

_

a caricature.


[Quote] "big ship passing by in front of them"

TPP and NAFTA, hugely damaging and destructive global trade agreements being one of the *primary motivations* for Battle in Seattle 1999, are about to be fully canceled by Trump :

UAW Seeks To Join Trump In Effort To Dismantle NAFTA
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/11/433714.shtml

Schumer To Labor Leaders: TPP Is Dead
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/11/433693.shtml


Yet here you are.

clueless doesn't even begin to describe Silly Rabbit et al.

Please! 11.Nov.2016 17:21

OD

"What if someone spray painted FUCK OBAMA on your child and sent him/her on their way to school, and the teacher just told them, Silly Rabbit, its just paint, it will wash off, you have bigger problems."

No one has done any such thing that neat that equivalent! No one is spraypainting kids. Buildings aren't fucking people.

OD 11.Nov.2016 17:48

.i.

Its hard to relate damage to someone who owns nothing of value to be damaged. To them its some rich guy who has more than they will ever have, so FUCK THEM.

Whats more likely is the property is owned by some middle class working stiff, who now has to spend a few hundred dollars to clean it up. Who now has to pay higher insurance rates on his/her property. Who has to raise his/her costs to his/her customers.

The next time a cop kicks your teeth out, I won't tell you its just unplanned dental work and the cop just felt like expressing his feeling to you.
I will be on your side in bringing that cop to justice. Keep that in mind the next time you feel like expressing yourself.

Overkill, ya think? 11.Nov.2016 18:42

OD

"The next time a cop kicks your teeth out, I won't tell you its just unplanned dental work and the cop just felt like expressing his feeling to you."

An apologist for police viciousness, how disgusting! And for what? A little property damage?! GTFO!

again. 11.Nov.2016 19:33

.i.

you are only seeing things via what is important to you, and you alone. Now we are talking about something you seem to care about, so its now important.

What happened to "When they go low, we go High? What happened to "Will Trump accept the outcome of the election"?

this spoiled brat approach to not getting one's way is why the democrats are now where they were during the 1870s during reconstruction.

Its unhelpful and counter productive. So please continue and get it out of your system, take your binky, get some play-doh therapy in your snowflake safe space, and when you are ready to be an adult, please let us know.

"play-doh therapy" no kidding 11.Nov.2016 20:05

_

This whole thing of protesting the President Elect is incredibly childish.

at least wait until he actually becomes president, starts to 'screw up' or whatever. Then you will have something i.e. actual administration in place to base opposition upon.


btw I'm glad as **** that Hillary didn't win. But I will be first in line to protest Trump if he starts screwing up i.e. going back to Bush-era torture policies, imperial overreach, clocking back civil liberties/surveillance of free citizens, ****s up the health care he promises to fix, further bloats FedGov etc. as a consequence of his administration's policies. It's too soon in November 2016 to even discern what is going to happen yet.

Wait to see if he "screws up"??? 11.Nov.2016 22:24

OD

Are you suggesting there's a chance Trump might turn out to be a decent swell guy, and shame on us for judging him too harshly?

Yeah, anyone who takes out a full page ad in the Times demanding the execution of Black and Latino teens who were FALSELY accused of rape was, is, and forever always be a piece-of-shit! So fuck Trump, he has no redemptive qualities. Fuck him, and fuck anyone who voted for him!


"forever a piece-of-shit" 11.Nov.2016 23:05

_

So getting rid of NAFTA and TPP (what Trump spent one-fourth of all his campaign time for the past 18 months talking about) is bad?

good to know whose side you're on

p.s. OD we notice that you never discuss class, only  http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/11/433641.shtml#448525 foulmouthed race-baiting.

Here's some suggested reading / educational material for ol' OD :

 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/11/433692.shtml#448594

OD = ally of Wall Street insurance-bankers

"FALSELY accused of rape" 11.Nov.2016 23:13

_

In addition to the misogynist and advocating-violence rhetoric  http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/11/433641.shtml#448525

DT lives rent-free in OD's cranium. OD seems to have a fixation on Trump himself and, now, after the Tuesday election the sixty million Americans who cast a vote for him (QUOTE: "fuck anyone who voted for him") .... never mind that tens of millions of them, Republicans included assuredly cast a DT vote simply because the alternative major party candidate was absolutely not an option.
( and thank goodness that worked out for us all the way it did )


As to the topic of rape, remember that Hillary Clinton during the 1980s and her husband's own governorship in Arkansas, had as one of her main First Lady tasks the role of snuffing out (yes _literally_ in a few cases) any of the "bimbo eruptions" brought on by ol' Slick Willy's misadventures. As in intimidating, suppressing, and sometimes killing the women in question. This of course went on in documented fashion all thru the 1990s and beyond, for decades. She is some damn feminist-example lawyer, defending her child rapist (Bill + underage girls, never mind the 'of age' ones...) husband that way. Good on 'er.

forever a piece-of-shit v2.0 11.Nov.2016 23:18

_

So in summary, OD (see above 2 posts for links/references)

YOU, OD are forever a piece-of-shit for (merely one example, Not to mention the race-baiting and inciting acts of violence already covered-linked above) referring to women as "lying dirty bitch" and posting it on Portland Indymedia under the guise of 'activism'.

OD = forever a misogynist piece-of-shit

couldn't say it better... 11.Nov.2016 23:34

shaker

than OD in their comment...

shaker "couldn't say it better than OD" - 11.Nov.2016 23:45

_

you then assent OD's referring to women as "lying dirty bitch" and posting it on Portland Indymedia as 'activism' :

 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/11/433641.shtml

Trumptards Fuck off! 12.Nov.2016 00:18

OD

Ok it's becoming more and more clear now. For months I had been misguided... concerned about agents and SHILLS for war-mongering criminal HRC. I was naive. I now see that it is SHILLS for fascist Trump I need to be concerned about! The same assholes who complain about "property damage" even as innocent people of color are murdered in the streets.

misogynist "lying dirty bitch" violence advocate OD, tells others to "fuck off" 12.Nov.2016 00:27

_

that's rich
keep posting, you're 'winning'...

Birddogging Violent Provocateur wrote
[quote] "I now see that it is SHILLS for fascist Trump I need to be concerned about!"

[quote] "a racist White"

[quote] "The dirty bitch"

[quote] "racist dirty bitch"

[quote] "These goddamned pigs"

[quote] "race-traitors"

[quote] "Black cops should watch their backs"


Cop's Wife Fakes Burglary, Blames BLM
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/11/433641.shtml

 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/11/433641.shtml#448525


The Police Murders Of Terence Crutcher & Keith Lamont Scott
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/09/433220.shtml

 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/09/433220.shtml#448042
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/09/433220.shtml#448045

Bernie Sanders says he will work with Donald Trump 12.Nov.2016 00:53

_

Sanders Statement on Trump

Wednesday, November 9, 2016

BURLINGTON, Vt., Nov. 9 - U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) issued the following statement Wednesday after Donald Trump was elected president of the United States:

"Donald Trump tapped into the anger of a declining middle class that is sick and tired of establishment economics, establishment politics and the establishment media. People are tired of working longer hours for lower wages, of seeing decent paying jobs go to China and other low-wage countries, of billionaires not paying any federal income taxes and of not being able to afford a college education for their kids - all while the very rich become much richer.

"To the degree that Mr. Trump is serious about pursuing policies that improve the lives of working families in this country, I and other progressives are prepared to work with him. To the degree that he pursues racist, sexist, xenophobic and anti-environment policies, we will vigorously oppose him."


video of OD and his friends 12.Nov.2016 01:19

_

+


Donald Trump's Unique Human Decency On Iraq 12.Nov.2016 12:14

John V. Walsh

 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/10/433491.shtml

From a humanitarian standpoint, the content of Trump's condemnation of the war is outstanding. In fact, to grieve over the lives of Americans but not the people of Iraq is a form of racism. Trump is virtually unique among major politicians in taking this stand on the lives of innocents the US has attacked. He should be praised for it.

As election day approaches, it is time to ignore the noise of the moment and think clearly about the crucial issues facing us, none of which is more important than war or peace. The War on Iraq has been a touchstone for these issues over the last 14 years.

On Iraq, Clinton and her operatives have sought to avoid at all costs an accurate comparison of her position over the last 14 years to Trump's. "What did Trump say?" has been buried by the Clintonites and company. "When did he say it?" has been slyly substituted for it. The time line has been used to equate the positions of Hillary the most notorious of hawks with that of Trump.

Let us have a look at Trump's words as well as the dates they were uttered. And compare them to Hillary's:



Donald Trump's Unique Human Decency on Iraq

"What did he say?" not merely "When did he say it?"

by John V. Walsh / October 15th, 2016

What was the purpose of this whole thing (the war on Iraq)? Hundreds and hundreds of young people killed. And what about the people coming back with no arms and legs? Not to mention the other side. All those Iraqi kids who've been blown to pieces. And it turns out that all of the reasons for the war were blatantly wrong. All this for nothing. (Emphasis, JW)

Donald Trump on Iraq War, August, 2004  http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a37230/donald-trump-esquire-cover-story-august-2004/ , reiterated verbatim, August, 2016  http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a37230/donald-trump-esquire-cover-story-august-2004/ , reiterated verbatim, August, 2016  link to www.esquire.com , reiterated verbatim, August, 2016 link to heavy.com .

Obviously I have thought about that a lot in the months since (her October 2002 vote in favor of the Iraq war resolution). No, I don't regret giving the President authority.

Hillary Clinton on Iraq War, April, 2004  http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/21/iraq.hillary/ .

As election day approaches, it is time to ignore the noise of the moment and think clearly about the crucial issues facing us, none of which is more important than war or peace. The War on Iraq has been a touchstone for these issues over the last 14 years.

On Iraq, Clinton and her operatives link to www.buzzfeed.com have sought to avoid at all costs an accurate comparison of her position over the last 14 years to Trump's. "What did Trump say?" has been buried by the Clintonites and company. "When did he say it?" has been slyly substituted for it. The time line has been used to equate the positions of Hillary the most notorious of hawks with that of Trump.1

Let us have a look at Trump's words as well as the dates they were uttered. And compare them to Hillary's:

2002.

Trump utters four words of wavering assent in September but no animated support.

Hillary votes for war "with conviction" in long speech in October.

First come Trump's famous four words "Yeah, I guess so." These are the four words that Trump uttered link to soundcloud.com on September 11, 2002, a month before the Senate vote on the War, when Howard Stern asked out of the blue whether Trump favored invading Iraq2 These four words can be regarded as a half-hearted, off the cuff assent to the war, but they hardly amount to a well-considered position let alone a policy statement.3

The next month in October, 2002, then Senator Hillary Clinton voted in favor of the War on Iraq "with conviction" and emerged as an enthusiastic proponent of the war. She retained that "conviction" without wavering until January, 2008, at least, when Obama threatened her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination by presenting himself, falsely, as a peace candidate.4

2004.

Trump makes a passionate, humane denunciation of the war, now unchanged for 12 years.

Clinton sticks to her vote for war.

Now we come to 2004 and Trump's first clearly articulated position on the war to appear in print. This was the inspiring statement and it has been buried in the timeline. It was published in Esquire in August of 2004, and, though not long, it is rarely quoted in full. Here it is:

Look at the war in Iraq and the mess that we're in. I would never have handled it that way. Does anybody really believe that Iraq is going to be a wonderful democracy where people are going to run down to the voting box and gently put in their ballot and the winner is happily going to step up to lead the country? C'mon. Two minutes after we leave, there's going to be a revolution, and the meanest, toughest, smartest, most vicious guy will take over. And he'll have weapons of mass destruction, which Saddam didn't have.

What was the purpose of this whole thing? Hundreds and hundreds of young people killed. And what about the people coming back with no arms and legs? Not to mention the other side. All those Iraqi kids who've been blown to pieces. And it turns out that all of the reasons for the war were blatantly wrong. All this for nothing.(Emphasis, JW)

Trump calls attention to the death and injuries inflicted on Americans, as have other politicians who have criticized the war. But then he goes on to lament the deaths of innocent Iraqis as well. No other major political figure, so far as this writer knows, has expressed such sentiments. They stand in stark contrast, for example, to those of Madeleine Albright, who famously declared that the deaths of 500,000 children, due to Clinton era sanctions of the 1990s, were "worth it."

Thus, from a humanitarian standpoint, the content of Trump's condemnation of the war is outstanding. In fact, to grieve over the lives of Americans but not the people of Iraq is a form of racism. Trump is virtually unique among major politicians in taking this stand on the lives of innocents the US has attacked. He should be praised for it.

Let us now look at one example of how this statement of Trump's has been handled in the "progressive" media, in an article in Mother Jones by Tim Murphy entitled, "What did Donald Trump Say on the Iraq War and When Did He Say it," by Tim Murphy. When Murphy gets to the Esquire article above, he quotes only the first of the two paragraphs and leaves out the second, which refers to the needless loss of life. And therefore it leaves out the impressive section, which I have italicized above, bemoaning the loss of Iraqi lives! Do you think that is honest, dear reader? Or would you call it a lie of omission?

What about Trump's consistency? The statement above remains Trump's position; he quoted every word of it, word for word, in his foreign policy address of August, 2016. Thus he has stood by his position for 12 years.5

In 2004, Clinton stuck to her vote on the Iraq war. She said to Larry King on April 20: "Obviously I have thought about that a lot in the months since (her October 2002 vote in favor of the Iraq war resolution). No, I don't regret giving the President authority."

2007.

Trump adds one new feature to his critique: The war was not a mistake but based on lies by Bush.

Clinton remains solidly committed to her Iraq War vote.

In 2007 Trump added one more component in an interview with Wolf Blitzer. The added component is that the war was based on lies - not mistakes, not faulty intelligence but lies. Again no major political figure has said this, certainly not Hillary Clinton.

In the interview Trump says: "Look, everything in Washington has been a lie. Weapons of mass destruction was a total lie. It was a way of attacking Iraq, which he (George W. Bush) thought was going to be easy and it turned out to be the exact opposite of easy. ... Everything is a lie. It's all a big lie." Here again Trump has remained consistent. In one primary debate he confronted Jeb Bush with the fact that his brother lied us into Iraq.

What was Hillary's position in 2007? She remained committed to her 2002 vote, despite the call of many antiwar Democrats to apologize and admit it was a mistake. To an audience in Dover, New Hampshire, in February, she said defiantly: "If the most important thing to any of you is choosing someone who did not cast that vote or has said his vote was a mistake, then there are others to choose from." She could afford to be defiant. She was the front runner for the Democratic nomination at that point. Little did she know that Obama would be a serious contender.

2008.

Trump's position is unchanged.

Hillary lies about the reason for her Iraq War vote.

By 2008 Obama was endangering Hillary's bid for the presidency by presenting himself in the Democratic primary as the antiwar candidate - falsely as we can now see. In the second Democratic presidential debate, Hillary claimed she voted for the war with the understanding that Bush would wait for UN inspectors to finish their job of searching for weapons of mass destruction. But as Carl Bernstein and others have pointed out, she voted against the Levin amendment, which would have imposed precisely that restriction on Bush. In other words, she lied.

We could go on and try to pierce the fog of words in the present election to wriggle out of her strong advocacy for the criminal adventure in Iraq. But her deeds as Secretary of State speak much louder than any words she and her advisors might engineer.

More than anyone else she was responsible for the illegal bombing and regime change operation that overthrew Gaddafi and plunged Libya into a failed state riddled with Islamic extremists. She is still pursuing the same policy of regime change or destruction in countries of the Middle East and North Africa that have defied the US. Her advocacy of a no-fly zone in Syria right now is more of the same - and it assures war with Russia according to General Joseph Dunford, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and possibly nuclear war. She remains virulently hawkish - irredeemably so one might say.

Is the impression conveyed by Clinton and her apologists that there is no difference between Trump and Clinton on the Iraq War correct? It is not. And it tells us that there will be an enormous difference between a Trump and a Clinton presidency. Since that difference involves the very question of human survival, what does that say about our responsibility come November 8?

1. For example, a fund raising appeal from Code Pink recently popped into my inbox with this line: "Both candidates supported the Iraq War at its inception, though both have now walked back that support." Clearly the implication is that the two candidates have the same stance on Iraq. A vague timeline is trotted out but not a word about the content of what the candidates said.

2. To be complete there were actually thirteen words, "Yeah, I guess so. I wish the first time it was done correctly."

3. Trump also claims that he had frequent verbal fights with his friend Sean Hannity over the period leading up to the war with Hannity pro and Trump con. Hannity backs him up on that, but in fairness that is not evidence because it is not in the public domain. Memory can be tricky in these situations especially when a friend seeks support. So we simply cannot make a judgment about that.

4. To be complete, there was another Trump statement in 2003, although it is quite ambiguous and directed more at tactics than policy. In January, 2003, Trump in an interview with Neil Cavuto, before the commencement of "Shock and Awe" in March, made some comments on the War. This time there was no endorsement of the War - not even an off the cuff endorsement. Instead there was confusion, and the discussion revolved around tactics of war. Trump said, "Well, he (Bush) has either got to do something or not do something, perhaps, because perhaps (he) shouldn't be doing it yet and perhaps we should be waiting for the United Nations, you know." No endorsement, no outspoken opposition. (The brief interview can be found here  http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/in-2002-donald-trump-said-he-supported-invading-iraq-on-the?utm_term=.xuynekLV6#.pmoDmgj8L and Trump's summary of it in his August, 2016, foreign policy address  http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/in-2002-donald-trump-said-he-supported-invading-iraq-on-the?utm_term=.xuynekLV6#.pmoDmgj8L and Trump's summary of it in his August, 2016, foreign policy address  link to www.buzzfeed.com and Trump's summary of it in his August, 2016, foreign policy address link to heavy.com ).

5. Was Trump's stand on Iraq opportunist? Trump took his position on Iraq long before he was in politics. He entered the presidential race as a candidate for the Republican nomination, not the Democratic one. At the time he entered the race, the GOP was the reliable party of war, dominated by the neocons. His position on Iraq could hardly have helped him with that crowd. So let us not call Trump's position opportunist, designed to get votes. As he became a more serious contender, the neocons left the GOP to join the Democrats and support Hillary.


fascist Trump ? 12.Nov.2016 14:43

.i.

it wasn't Trump who paid a goon squad to go beat up supporters of their political opponent.

It was Hillary's team that paid thugs to beat up trump supporters.

That is the definition of Fascism. (violence against ones political opponents. )

OD - even as innocent people of color are murdered in the streets. 12.Nov.2016 14:45

.i.

Huh,

I don't rate and rank murdered innocent people.

OD seems to have a rating system, where one group or chosen minority has more value than another.

I would call that the very definition of racism, but what do I know.

"video of OD and his friends" 12.Nov.2016 16:35

OD

Funny, but I'm no Clinton shill, not by a long stretch. As soon as you manage to pull Trump's teet out of your mouth, YOU can fuck off too!


"I'm no Clinton shill, not by a long stretch." Lulz. 12.Nov.2016 16:47

_

(well if you aren't then...) Who had a chance to defeat Trump?

No, not Stein/Baraka.

"I'm no Clinton shill" because you hate women.

none of this absolves OD from his race-baiting misogynistic advocacy of violence (under the guise of 'activism' posted to PDX imc... hence my hunch OD = birddogging provocateur plant.
Shill by any other name
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/11/433641.shtml#448525

and ah yes the inevitable Trump-Hitler graphic. Call and raise :


"OD seems to have a rating system" indeed he does. 12.Nov.2016 16:58

_

a misogynist racial-graded one that advocates violent acts :

 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/11/433701.shtml#448603

[quote] "I now see that it is SHILLS for fascist Trump I need to be concerned about!"

[quote] "a racist White"

[quote] "The dirty bitch"

[quote] "racist dirty bitch"

[quote] "These goddamned pigs"

[quote] "race-traitors"

[quote] "Black cops should watch their backs"


 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/11/433641.shtml#448525
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/09/433220.shtml#448042
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/09/433220.shtml#448045

"-" 12.Nov.2016 18:04

OD

You can keep posting your links all you want, it won't make a damned bit of difference. You're either a Trumptard or Shill-bot faking "outrage" and making red herrings out of a few choice words you act like you find objectionable. You're a typical Portland internet "activist" who simply talks shit and tries to micro-manage other people's thoughts/actions. I've dealt with assholes like YOU before. You people don't intimidate me one bit!


"keep posting your links all you want" ok will do. 12.Nov.2016 19:33

_

"your links" These are things YOU (OD) have posted on PDX IMC for all to see.


OD is a misogynist race-obsessed troll on Portland Indymedia that advocates violent acts.

His lame excuse for the below-documented anti-woman hate speech is that they're "red herrings" which we "find objectionable".

As seen here, squirming to escape from advocacy of violence with his rhetorical turntabling.

Yep, OD's a pretend Portland internet "activist" who simply talks shit and tries to micro-manage other people's thoughts/actions.
( either that, or a paid provocateur who advocates physical violence on Portland Indy )

We've dealt with assholes like OD before. He doesn't intimidate us one bit!


 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/11/433701.shtml#448603

---------------------------------
THINGS THAT 'OD' POSTED / STATED
RIGHT HERE ON PORTLAND INDYMEDIA :
---------------------------------


[quote] "I now see that it is SHILLS for fascist Trump I need to be concerned about!"

[quote] "a racist White"

[quote] "The dirty bitch"

[quote] "racist dirty bitch"

[quote] "These goddamned pigs"

[quote] "race-traitors"

[quote] "Black cops should watch their backs"


 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/11/433641.shtml#448525
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/09/433220.shtml#448042
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/09/433220.shtml#448045

Broken record 12.Nov.2016 20:50

OD

Now you're just repeating yourself. Do us all a favor and get a new gig. Or better yet, down a bottle of bleach, you fuckwit!

"Broken record" / "fuckwit" = OD. 12.Nov.2016 21:45

_

[QUOTE, 'OD']"Or better yet, down a bottle of bleach!"

There ^ you go again OD, advocating violent acts.

(also) Talking shit and attempting vainly to micro-manage other people's thoughts/actions.


Coming from a misogynist race-obsessed _________ .

btw, I was the one reposted the "Dear Liberal" video

-Carey Wedler- 13.Nov.2016 02:28

OD

Was that you? That was an awesome video. Thank you for posting that.

Yes ^ 13.Nov.2016 10:40

_

I reposted the Carey Wedler video, here to the Newswire.

merely thought it was useful info and some might appreciate it. Glad you did.

We Want Rules ?! 13.Nov.2016 14:57

Sorry Pal