We maintain the disagreement apparently- diametrically opposed.
You seem to give no leeway to a peaceful protestor in this case when, BLM protestors were also breaking the Andrews law/ an edict... whatever.
She posed no apparent threat to property or life ... in fact was in danger of her own ( because of police overreach as well as commitment to her peaceful cause). I am no extremist and am a law abiding citizen however I, see mitigating circumstances in situations when they are apparent. This is such a case.
The term used re the protests as 'riots' is a disgraceful politicisation or lack of knowledge of the definition in the use of the English language.
Because some other 'tard was wrecking something or throwing a bottle has no relevance to the woman's specific situation.
Media reporting of the Portland {Actual) 'riots' was described as peaceful protests by US and Australian media....particularly evidenced by the softening terminology of the ABC in their narratives of ABC" good" and ABC "bad". I'll call out what I believe is hypocrisy and overstepping democratic boundaries when I see them. "Victimhood Thing " No. If you want to expose that, talk about/to the ABC, ATSIC, S H Young. or Kristina Kennealy et.al in the first instance. They'll put you in touch with a plethora of faux victims.
