Baltimore Mayor Gave Rioters 'Space To Destroy'

THIS Mayor is an idiot!
I don't know whether she is Democrat or a Republican...but she's a complete loon...and needs to be dumped ASAP!
Essentially, she stated in a press conference that she told the police that they should allow protesters the space they need to destroy private property and police cars...in order to protect their freedom of speech.

Someone (Baltimore voters?) should tell this Mayor that 'destroying things' is NOT free speech.

Sometimes a protest is just a riot camouflaged in self-righteousness. It might not start that way, and the actors might not think that it is. But nonetheless, sometimes it is.

A few miles from my apartment, the Miami neighborhood Liberty City has yet to shake the aftereffects of the 1980 riots that sprang from the acquittal of four officers in the killing of a black man. In California, neighborhoods and property values remain scarred from the Watts Riots in 1965 and the Rodney King Riots in 1992. More recently in Ferguson, Mo., the long-term consequences of a few nights of looting and burning are starting to be felt by residents and property owners.

So it makes sense, in a way, that facing a weekend of protests against the mysterious police-related death of resident Freddie Gray, that Baltimore authorities would be on edge.

What no one expected is what Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake admitted in a press conference on Sunday: that she asked the Baltimore Police Department to “give those who wished to destroy space to do that.”

Overall, Baltimore police said 34 arrests were made during Saturday’s main demonstration, and six officers were allegedly injured.

Several downtown storefronts were smashed, and some police cars were damaged.

FULL Article:
fusion.net...Text

a reply to: IAMTAT

Actually, that was the smart thing to do.

Because escalating the police presence and force, only would have escalated the violent protesters. Sometimes, you just have to let them be.

They would have put more people in harm by trying to act, as opposed to just doing containment like they did.

~Tenth

a reply to: IAMTAT

This tells you what you needed to know:

Stephanie C. Rawlings-Blake (born March 17, 1970) is an American politician and the 49th and current Mayor of Baltimore City. She is the second woman to hold the office. A member of the Democratic Party, she currently serves as secretary of the Democratic National Committee (DNC)[1] and Vice President of the U.S. Conference of Mayors.[2]

en.wikipedia.org...

Was there ever a question really as to her political affiliation?

a reply to: tothetenthpower

And if they want to destroy MORE businesses and private property next time?...Where do you draw the line?
5 businesses? 10? An entire city block? This way madness and anarchy lies.

If she wants to give them room to destroy, she should start by letting them protest at her house. The only reason that they picked that particular spot to protest was because the Orioles game was nationally televised.

So she's telling the rioters that the police will not interfere with their riot......yeah that will work...
Bbwwwaahahaha!

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: IAMTAT

Actually, that was the smart thing to do.

Because escalating the police presence and force, only would have escalated the violent protesters. Sometimes, you just have to let them be.

They would have put more people in harm by trying to act, as opposed to just doing containment like they did.

~Tenth

Smart to do, not if you were one of "two were injured in the mayhem"
www.usatoday.com...
Or the business owners whose businesses were smashed and looted

And what did our Black President do while the riots went on?
He engaged in a metaphorical reenactement of Hunger Games
dailycaller.com...
partying with the elite and telling jokes.
Baltimore burned while Obama fiddled. (a metaphor, Nero fiddled while Rome burned)

That's how much he really cares about what is going on in the US.
Or how much he is willing to be a real Black leader.

a reply to: tothetenthpower

ATTENTION protesters in EVERY major American city with a progressive liberal democrat Mayor:
Burn, loot and destroy all you need to exercise your freedom of speech...We've got your back...and will give you ALL the space you need for destruction.----Lunacy!

so does this mean that the city will be paying in full for all damage this has caused? after all the Mayor gave them the permission to do it, thus it should be financially responsible for ALL damage and losses suffered due to her (and thus the city's) choice.

If someone can't get a gay wedding cake in Baltimore...will the Mayor allow protesters to burn down the bakery in order to exercise their freedom of speech? Is that cool?
It's only fair. Right?

Just another damned if you do/don't scenario that you people are lapping up like thirsty dogs.

The mayor allows this: "What progressive liberal baby! Our president just sat at a party laughing it up while it happened too!"

The police crack down: "MARTIAL LAW IMMINENT! They're taking away our rights! Obama is going drone us all!"

Keep drinking the media Kool-Aid, you're a useful tool for them.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: tothetenthpower

ATTENTION protesters in EVERY major American city with a progressive liberal democrat Mayor:
Burn, loot and destroy all you need to exercise your freedom of speech...We've got your back...and will give you ALL the space you need for destruction.----Lunacy!

Don't be dramatic.

They had a contained section. They simply just didn't come out in force and start mass arrests. They weren't allowing them to go all over the city and loot and burn everything. It was containment, as opposed to active subduing.

~Tenth

Wonder if that comment just opened the city to lawsuits from any business damaged or looted.

originally posted by: grandmakdw

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: IAMTAT

Actually, that was the smart thing to do.

Because escalating the police presence and force, only would have escalated the violent protesters. Sometimes, you just have to let them be.

They would have put more people in harm by trying to act, as opposed to just doing containment like they did.

~Tenth

Smart to do, not if you were one of "two were injured in the mayhem"
www.usatoday.com...
Or the business owners whose businesses were smashed and looted

And what did our Black President do while the riots went on?
He engaged in a metaphorical reenactement of Hunger Games
dailycaller.com...
partying with the elite and telling jokes.
Baltimore burned while Obama fiddled. (a metaphor, Nero fiddled while Rome burned)

That's how much he really cares about what is going on in the US.
Or how much he is willing to be a real Black leader.

What the hell does Obama have to do with this?

What did you expect to do?

He's got two choices:

1. Come out in favor of the protests - which is mindblowing stupid.

2. Come out in favor of the police force - which again, mindbogglingly stupid and would make things worse.

My god, people blame Obama for anything and everything they can. Might as well blame him for the guy getting killed in the first place.

And I didn't say it was good they were rioting, I said it was good that they decided to CONTAIN them as opposed to escalating the situation.

I love that the same people who bitch about police brutality also bitch about the lack of it when it suits them.

~Tenth

originally posted by: tothetenthpower

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: tothetenthpower

ATTENTION protesters in EVERY major American city with a progressive liberal democrat Mayor:
Burn, loot and destroy all you need to exercise your freedom of speech...We've got your back...and will give you ALL the space you need for destruction.----Lunacy!

Don't be dramatic.

They had a contained section. They simply just didn't come out in force and start mass arrests. They weren't allowing them to go all over the city and loot and burn everything. It was containment, as opposed to active subduing.

~Tenth

Too bad for those private businesses who happened to be in the City Hall mandated 'containment space'.

a reply to: tothetenthpower

Doesnt matter, someone's home, business is destroyed. Are YOU gonna pay for the damages? Is this moron mayor??

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: tothetenthpower

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: tothetenthpower

ATTENTION protesters in EVERY major American city with a progressive liberal democrat Mayor:
Burn, loot and destroy all you need to exercise your freedom of speech...We've got your back...and will give you ALL the space you need for destruction.----Lunacy!

Don't be dramatic.

They had a contained section. They simply just didn't come out in force and start mass arrests. They weren't allowing them to go all over the city and loot and burn everything. It was containment, as opposed to active subduing.

~Tenth

Too bad for those private businesses who happened to be in the City Hall mandated 'containment space'.

Exactly my feeling! So someone's stuff gets destroyed while these animals get their 'First Amendment' rights taken care of.
Does the victim get to take their 'First Amendment' rights out on the Mayor's house in return?

Another incited test by agents provocateurs.

Obama Administration is involved 100%. Don't think they aren't.

Obama to issue executive order on “police militarization”

I think they want a Federal "civilian" police force to patrol the big Democrat cities.

It gets closer after each riot.

originally posted by: tothetenthpower

originally posted by: grandmakdw

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: IAMTAT

Actually, that was the smart thing to do.

Because escalating the police presence and force, only would have escalated the violent protesters. Sometimes, you just have to let them be.

They would have put more people in harm by trying to act, as opposed to just doing containment like they did.

~Tenth

Smart to do, not if you were one of "two were injured in the mayhem"
www.usatoday.com...
Or the business owners whose businesses were smashed and looted

And what did our Black President do while the riots went on?
He engaged in a metaphorical reenactement of Hunger Games
dailycaller.com...
partying with the elite and telling jokes.
Baltimore burned while Obama fiddled. (a metaphor, Nero fiddled while Rome burned)

That's how much he really cares about what is going on in the US.
Or how much he is willing to be a real Black leader.

I love that the same people who bitch about police brutality also bitch about the lack of it when it suits them.

~Tenth

Since when did protecting private property from BGF, Bloods & Crips become police brutality?

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: tothetenthpower

originally posted by: grandmakdw

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: IAMTAT

Actually, that was the smart thing to do.

Because escalating the police presence and force, only would have escalated the violent protesters. Sometimes, you just have to let them be.

They would have put more people in harm by trying to act, as opposed to just doing containment like they did.

~Tenth

Smart to do, not if you were one of "two were injured in the mayhem"
www.usatoday.com...
Or the business owners whose businesses were smashed and looted

And what did our Black President do while the riots went on?
He engaged in a metaphorical reenactement of Hunger Games
dailycaller.com...
partying with the elite and telling jokes.
Baltimore burned while Obama fiddled. (a metaphor, Nero fiddled while Rome burned)

That's how much he really cares about what is going on in the US.
Or how much he is willing to be a real Black leader.

I love that the same people who bitch about police brutality also bitch about the lack of it when it suits them.

~Tenth

Since when did protecting private property from BGF, Bloods & Crips become police brutality?

You do realize that a huge police presence, would have cause MORE property damage, MORE looting, MORE violence, MORE injuries and overall, just MORE troubles right?

~Tenth