There is an irony in what you wrote. The world and many in the US scream racism and xenophobia (and any other phobia they can think of) for attempting to control immigration into the US. They even go as far as saying that people have an uncontested right to move to the US. But try to move to another country?
You may find-out that they don't want you.

This sort of generalisation is just nonsense.
I can speak for the EU to some extent, and I can say that we have our own problems with immigration and immigration policy, and the wish to control immigration is NOT what EU politics criticises about US politics.

That said I'm sure most US citizens would be welcomed here in the EU, certainly by me!

Be that as it may, I think this is moving a bit too far off-topic now even for General.

There is a viewpoint which has been avoided concerning the so-called "peaceful protests" in US cities, such as Portland and Seattle. The Democratic mayors and governors (falsely) claim that the presence of federal law enforcement is equivalent to the use of evil "storm troopers" and elicits fear in the public. Well, it that were true and these governors and mayors want to defuse the violence and fear (as they claim), they should be proposing to use local law enforcement to protect the federal facilities. Furthermore, it is the constitutional duty of the governors and mayors to uphold laws concerning the protection of the public and public facilities. The fact that they are not using local law enforcement to protect federal facilities is a political act that demonstrates that they are in tacit support of the violence in their cities.

Since posting, a "new" theme has emerged, that ANTIFA has co-opted the "peaceful" protests. Ok, if that is valid, the question remains: Why has local law enforcement not intervened to remove the ANTIFA participates from the "peaceful" protests. Again, the Democrats are simply spewing extravagant misdirection to avoid their responsibility to end the violence.

As I've said all along. They have a point.

https://www.cell.com/ajhg/fulltext/S...297(20)30200-7

Don't understand this. I am very far, but I quite similar situation happend in Barack Obama era. It was black man shot six times by white policeman. There also was BLM but area of protest was fast strictly isolated by police and perhaps National Guard?. Why now is different? The second thing are children on protests. It recalled memories of war where one side was using children as live shields. I saw picture of children keeping in hands umbrellas as I think protecting from tear gas. So summing up I concluded that these children taking part in protests are really shields protecting adults from more agressive action of police. I can imagine that people can say that it is democracy lesson. My I seriously doubt the value of such lesson.

The video + people being stuck inside and/or not having anything better to do thanks to covid.

I think it is rather poor joke.

SteveR I have to ask how it is that you think responsibility for maintaining law and order rests solely on any one organization? In your mind are Republicans to blame for the Greensboro debacle that ended in murder and mayhem? I think not. Responsibility is SHARED even in a two, three, four or twenty party system. In fact, I think it is shared by each and every citizen.

I'm not sure what you think the joke was, but I'm entirely serious.

It is a misrepresentation of what I said. To clarify a bit. Law enforcement starts at the local level, then there is the state level. Finally, there is a federal level.

An issue that you need to be aware of, is that there is a separation between the state level and the federal level. Federal law enforcement does not get involved in many enforcement issues, such as speeding tickets or simple assaults. These are local issues.

The Democratic mayors and Democratic governors are shirking their responsibility to protect property and the public by purposely holding back the police. That means that local law enforcement is not being allowed to do their job of preventing civil unrest. In fact, the Democratic governors and mayors are projecting a false narrative, that the mere presence of federal law enforcement to protect federal property is somehow causing violence. That is patently absurd, it is the so-called peaceful protestors who are instigating the violence. They have the free will not to attack property. Local law enforcement is responsible, as the first line of defense, for stopping that type of violence. If the violence escalates, then you bring in state and federal law enforcement resources. The finger of blame needs to be pointed at the Democratic mayors and the Democratic governors who are allowing, in fact encouraging, the unlawful behavior.

Is that so?
AFAIk they're just telling federal law enforcement (and by my definition of police, those types are not police anymore) to GTFO.
So far i have not seen any statement to the effect that that results in _no police_ during protests. As always with you: please corroborate your claims.
Personally I find your POV patently absurd; what I read about the situation (*) is that the protests were peaceful, and the arrival of this federal "army" made matters much worse.
We can discuss the level of violence in Portland until we're both blue in the face, or actually go to Portland and have a look.

Fact remains, there's something inherently undemocratic about those federal troops, and sending them to dissenting regions with statements like these:
(*) https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...deral-arrests/
https://www.politico.com/news/magazi...rcement-302551

Bejing sent troops to Tienanmen Square.

State dept condemned that. https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...rsary-hopes-of

Yet they send federal troops(storm troopers, SS, whatever you want to call them) to handle a state issue. They (current POTUS regime) are guilty of exactly the same thing the Chinese did but they are apparently to stupid to see this.

It is a sad state of affairs indeed.

Its the right wing / Trump administration / campaign propaganda that started the "rumors" of violence by the far left wing fascism, extremists and agitators. While some of the protesters have been ANTIFA they are also right wing extremists and other agitators/extremists that have joined the fray. IMHO it has nothing to do with Democratic leaders shirking their responsibility and in the case of Portland just city where civil protests is their thing.

Once again, the US government thinks the populace cannot deal with complex situations and therefore they create a simple bad guy scenario they can point their finger at. I knew this from the start.
ANTIFA is a term about as vague as "right wing" or "left wing" - it is not any sort of organisation.

Just like the previous poster, I don't belive that all these protesters are ANTIFA, no: most of them are normal people that are just sick of how bad things are, some of them probably belong to various left wing protest groups that could be defined as being part of ANTIFA, some are right wing extremists, and some are paid to stir things up to give the government an opportunity to show strength.