Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FBI Seeking Information Related to Violent Activity at the U.S. Capitol Building

tips.fbi.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 152 posts

Re: FBI Seeking Information Related to Violent Activity at the U.S. Capitol Building

#111

Post by jeppesen-io »

flycaliguy wrote: post #20
optimalsolver wrote: post #4

My favorite of these guys was West Virginia state legislator Derrick Evans: >The video shows a crowd surging through a Capitol door, past security, while an alarm repeatedly blares. As Evans enters an area called National Statuary Hall he celebrates and states his own name: “We’re in! We’re in! Derrick Evans is in the Capitol!” https://wvmetronews.com/2021/01/09/derrick-evans-resigns-w-v...

I don’t think these people had or have any interest in being anonymous. They are standing up for what they believe in. A public display is an important part of this all, it’s part of their statement as Americans in America.

> don’t think these people had or have any interest in being anonymous. They are standing up for what they believe in

There are many people who stand up for what they belive in. What is clear, to me at least, is a group of people that belive they are protected from their actions because of what they are or what the belive in

Re: FBI Seeking Information Related to Violent Activity at the U.S. Capitol Building

#113

Post by mxmilkb »

bendbro wrote: post #97
TheGeminon wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you downvoted it because the word terror might upset other people? This is a post about an attack that killed at least 5 people.

Words have power [1]. The power to help and the power to harm. And in the age of social media, that power is magnified more than ever before [2]. So while the intent of the comment may have been to improve our shared world, that doesn't give a warrant to do more harm. We all need to chip in to ensure our words are precise and devoid of language that might upset, frighten, or harm others in our community. And one more…

"And one more thing- which I'm sure doesn't apply to you- the idea that past harm justifies new harm is the same beliefs that justified the rise of a certain dictator in a certain central european power behaved in the 1930s/40s."

Those words are too vague. People were led to believe that the core of their government was being defrauded. Were they harmed? Did some of them go on to harm?

(I didn't see your flagged comment. Currently mine is at -3.)

Re: FBI Seeking Information Related to Violent Activity at the U.S. Capitol Building

#114

Post by ineedasername »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #88
ineedasername wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counterproductive regardless. Peaceful non-destructive protests have achieved a lot more social change in modern history than violent and/or destructive methods.

Are you familiar with the capitol bombing, Bill Ayers, weather underground, and Obama launching his political career from Ayer’s house? Ayers being famous for admitting he doesn’t regret setting the bomb. Instead of being labeled a terrorist, he was made a professor and launched a lot of the social justice movement in education. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/03/02/a-... https://thehill.com/blogs…

I don't think you're refuting me by bringing up a domestic terrorist that accomplished no positive social change through their violent acts.

It's a far stretch to even imply the highly limited interactions between Ayers and Obama were in some way responsible for his rise to the presidency or that Ayers in any way influenced Obama to regard violence as the correct path for social change.

In fact, considering the ridiculous guilt-by-association he was subject to, it's more accurate to say Obama became president despite that limited connection, not because of it.

In short, the overblown Ayers-Obama link doesn't contradict my statement regarding peaceful protest.

Re: FBI Seeking Information Related to Violent Activity at the U.S. Capitol Building

#115

Post by throw0101a »

flycaliguy wrote: post #20
optimalsolver wrote: post #4

My favorite of these guys was West Virginia state legislator Derrick Evans: >The video shows a crowd surging through a Capitol door, past security, while an alarm repeatedly blares. As Evans enters an area called National Statuary Hall he celebrates and states his own name: “We’re in! We’re in! Derrick Evans is in the Capitol!” https://wvmetronews.com/2021/01/09/derrick-evans-resigns-w-v...

I don’t think these people had or have any interest in being anonymous. They are standing up for what they believe in. A public display is an important part of this all, it’s part of their statement as Americans in America.

> They are standing up for what they believe in.

They think of themselves as patriots, as John Wilkes Booth did:

> He had spent so much time among like-minded people who hated Lincoln, and he had read so many accounts denouncing Lincoln as a tyrant bent on destroying the Constitution and "personal liberty" that he expected to be hailed as a hero.

> Instead he was stunned to learn that he was being hunted down like a beast, while Lincoln was held up throughout much of the nation as a martyred saint.

> Source for this: The bibliography in my biography of Lincoln.

* https://twitter.com/Teri_Kanefield/status/134722988063564595...

> “This is not America,” a woman said to a small group, her voice shaking. She was crying, hysterical. “They’re shooting at us. They’re supposed to shoot BLM, but they’re shooting the patriots.”

* https://archive.is/tZVFs (for paywall)

* https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/capitol-trump-ins...

Re: FBI Seeking Information Related to Violent Activity at the U.S. Capitol Building

#116

Post by zepto »

Rapzid wrote: post #95
zepto wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a very big distinction between some diversion of funding and responsibility away from police towards those issues and abolishing the police. Anyone who says it doesn’t mean abolish the police is ignoring the fact that for many activists it does mean abolish the police . The hashtag does not imply abolishing the police, but that is exactly what defund the police means to many people.

Abolishing the police is a rather fringe idea though, and it's not the colloquial meaning for "defund the police"(a terrible catch phrase BTW). Representing it as such seams misinformed at best, but likely(IMHO) disingenuous.

Colin Kapaernic is probably the best known activist against police brutality towards black people in the USA.

He defines it as abolishing the police.

I have come across many activists who want to abolish the police.

I would assume that most vaguely left leaning people wouldn’t support that as a policy, but it is certainly not a ‘fringe’ definition from the point of view of the activist community with whom it is most associated.

There is absolutely nothing disingenuous about recognizing that mainstream activists do mean to abolish the police.

We have to accept that both definitions are in use.

What is disingenuous, is to dismiss or deny the idea that anyone other than opponents of it think it means abolish the police.

That is essentially a motte-and-bailey tactic, and all it does is stop honest discussion.

Re: FBI Seeking Information Related to Violent Activity at the U.S. Capitol Building

#117

Post by TeaDrunk »

zepto wrote: post #70
TeaDrunk wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That very same essay literally means the other hashtag so I'm confused: "By abolishing policing and prisons, not only can we eliminate white supremacist establishments, but we can create space for budgets to be reinvested directly into communities to address mental health needs, homelessness and houselessness, access to education, and job creation as well as community-based methods of accountability . This is a futur…

There is a very big distinction between some diversion of funding and responsibility away from police towards those issues and abolishing the police. Anyone who says it doesn’t mean abolish the police is ignoring the fact that for many activists it does mean abolish the police . The hashtag does not imply abolishing the police, but that is exactly what defund the police means to many people.

The second hashtag in question says: 'reappropriatefundsfromthepolicetosocialservicesbetterabletohandlenonviolentissues'

which is about what Colin is literally saying in that quote.

Re: FBI Seeking Information Related to Violent Activity at the U.S. Capitol Building

#118

Post by ErikVandeWater »

jp57 wrote: post #40
alecco wrote: post #5

Greenwald rang the alarm on this just yesterday. Violence in the Capitol, Dangers in the Aftermath From the Cold War to the War on Terror: the harms from authoritarian "solutions" are often greater than the threats they are ostensibly designed to combat. https://greenwald.substack.com/p/violence-in-the-capitol-dan... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25686567

If they had burned the Capitol to the ground with everyone in it, Greenwald would be concerned about the authoritarian harms of the response.

I feel like you are proving his point? Can you imagine the authoritarian lockdowns if hundreds of US politicians were killed?

Every remaining politician would do everything in their power to not have that happen again, regardless of the constitutionality of those actions.

Re: FBI Seeking Information Related to Violent Activity at the U.S. Capitol Building

#119

Post by rhino369 »

slothtrop wrote: post #69
rayiner wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abol... > Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police It’s not some unjustified fearmongering. Anarchists literally took over part of Seattle. At my university, protestors are demanding to completely dismantle the campus police: https://www.wbez.org/stories/northwesterns-president-and-stu...

University antics operate in their own bubble. A fraction want abolition, but they'd also plainly say so. "Defund" by definition doesn't mean abolish.

It does unless you expect them to work for free and pay for their own operations somehow.

Re: FBI Seeking Information Related to Violent Activity at the U.S. Capitol Building

#120

Post by zepto »

TeaDrunk wrote: post #117
zepto wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a very big distinction between some diversion of funding and responsibility away from police towards those issues and abolishing the police. Anyone who says it doesn’t mean abolish the police is ignoring the fact that for many activists it does mean abolish the police . The hashtag does not imply abolishing the police, but that is exactly what defund the police means to many people.

The second hashtag in question says: 'reappropriatefundsfromthepolicetosocialservicesbetterabletohandlenonviolentissues' which is about what Colin is literally saying in that quote.

No. He is not just talking about reappropriating funds.

He is saying the police must be completely abolished.

The quote begins “By abolishing policing and prisons...”

You seem to have overlooked this somehow.

The name he has chosen for his project is:

“Abolition for the People, The Movement for a Future Without Policing & Prisons”

It couldn’t be any clearer.

Post reply on HN