101–110 of 136 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nah you can drop 26 thousand bombs without ever being at 'war' https://www.cfr.org/blog/how-many-bombs-did-united-states-dr...
I think it quite unlikely that police will come to your home and drop 26 thousand bombs. Just based on my own personal experience, tho.
[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=police+bombed+a+black+neighb...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The militarization of police is largely a U.S. problem among first world countries. As a practical matter I'm more concerned about things like investigations with poor judicial oversight, poorly justified police searches, warrantless or rubber stamped surveillance, frivolous information requests, general lack of respect for privacy rights, etc. France, for instance, unfortunately seems to have moved quite a bit in th…
Militarization of police is happening in Germany, as well: * Police special forces (SEK which are organized on the state level unlike GSG9 which are state police) have switched from blue to military-like green/brown uniforms (which have no tactical value, but that's another discussion). * Police in e.g. Berlin are changing their fully automatic weapons by phasing out the 9mm MP-5 and replacing it with 5.56x45 G36 ass…
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polizeiuniform_(Deutschland)#M...
The CCC are in no position to complain. They have become too political and openly support left extremist groups. They allow talks by Antifa members and they have Antifa flags in their centers [1]. These are people who threaten and practice violence for political reasons and are watched by state police. [1] https://twitter.com/DandelionInaBox/status/90147462783431884...
Become? The CCC has always been a political organization.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think they do, but I'm not 100% certain. I don't know how far you want to define "police state", but in general, SWATting won't be terribly successful here, the only police units with near-military equipment are special units like the GSG9, and while there's certainly racism, and also at least one probable murder (Oury Jalloh), our police doesn't regurlarly murder minorities. If you limit it to surveillance etc., y…
The militarization of police is largely a U.S. problem among first world countries. As a practical matter I'm more concerned about things like investigations with poor judicial oversight, poorly justified police searches, warrantless or rubber stamped surveillance, frivolous information requests, general lack of respect for privacy rights, etc. France, for instance, unfortunately seems to have moved quite a bit in th…
I found this part the most disturbing: > While searching the premises of the board members in Augsburg, Jena, Dresden, and Berlin, the police – on their own accord –decided to extend the search to premises also used by members of the CCC: the OpenLab in Augsburg. Here the officers were confronted with hackers in their natural habitat: substances to clean and etch circuit boards as well as hair bleach. After interpret…
The police aren’t THAT dumb. They where likely given marching orders to provide plausible dinability and cease as much or hardware as possible with the belief that they can find something after the fact that justifies their actions in public oppinion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And Munich is traditionally governed by the center-left SPD. I find your attempt to inject party politics in this a diversion. Just because the state government is well to the right and turning populist, it doesn't mean that the independent judiciary is just the same.
> it doesn't mean that the independent judiciary is just the same. Try to tell this a Bavarian pothead.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The blog doesn't just "inform about political protest", it explicitly advocates for violence. Their primary motivation seems to be hate of the political right. As a leftist myself, I think that "leftist hateblog" is a pretty accurate description.
We can get into word definition games here, but “hate” generally refers to a desire for the extermination or oppression of a group of people based on personal characteristics like race or ancestry. Conflating “hate” with any call for political violence is disingenuous and a sloppy attempt at bad faith rhetoric. Do you consider the New York Times a “hateblog” for their endorsement of political violence against the for…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sure, as the article says, if they search every @gmail user because of one @gmail criminal they will eventually search the criminal too. How is that a different story?
They didn't search every @gmail user, they searched what would be roughly equal to (in gmail's commercial case) a payment provider for gmail, and people loosely related to such a provider. It's a flawed comparison, obviously.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm referring to the blog which is said to be the reason for all this. The blog is named "AUGSBURG für Krawalltouristen" and has the tagline "Den AfD-Bundesparteitag am 30.06./01.07.2018 angreifen!". Translated: "Augsburg for Hooligans: Attacking the AfD party conference on the 30.06/01.07.2018". "Krawalltouristen" specifically is a term that came up for the first time, I think, with the G20 protests last year. Hooli…
So the purpose of the blog is to inform about a political protest. I still think it's misleading to refer to it as hateblog, even if the organisers are militant or radical.
I don't know if somebody is going to say that this is edgy triple-layer sarcasm, but its pretty clear to me that at least some readers of the site will take this as an endorsement of potentially lethal violence against political opponents.
If you throw rocks at political opponents, you don't think they're just misguided and their policies unfortunate, you hate their guts.
EDIT: The paragraph is explicitly about breaking windows, and say to be careful not to risk hitting people. So it's not about violence against individual people, but it's still violence, and illegal. And you don't break people's windows if you merely disagree with them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The police aren’t THAT dumb. They where likely given marching orders to provide plausible dinability and cease as much or hardware as possible with the belief that they can find something after the fact that justifies their actions in public oppinion.
The police aren’t THAT dumb. They were likely given marching orders to provide plausible deniability and seize as much or hardware as possible with the belief that they can find something after the fact that justifies their actions in public opinion.
If not to make it intelligible, then perhaps to engage in one-up-man-ship? But since feeding the ego tends to be a zero sum game, at what cost? Perhaps the original poster has one of a whole host of conditions which make it difficult to reproduce spellings as per a standard. Perhaps the original poster learned the language primarily through hearing, rather than reading. Who knows?
So what did your one-up-man-ship gain us, the community? Nothing of value (since good spelling is merely indicative of background, rather than capability), but perhaps something of harm, since you might have hurt an otherwise valuable contributor who may not have control over how they spell.
In short, your comment is a net detriment to the community.