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

Exploring the Paramilitary Leaks

micahflee.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 205 posts

Re: Exploring the Paramilitary Leaks

#171

Post by cryptonector »

potato3732842 wrote: post #117
dingnuts wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

hence my confusion at the sudden "left" outcry over the attacks on the FBI and CIA, two organizations they have been bemoaning for my entire life, and with good reason! Those organizations are responsible for some of the absolute worst behavior associated with American history, the most shameful of shameful episodes throughout the Americas were started by the CIA and FBI. I think the outcry is actually mostly media-o…

>hence my confusion at the sudden "left" outcry over the attacks on the FBI and CIA, two organizations they have been bemoaning for my entire life I have been saying it for over a decade, the western world is having a crisis of principals, not a crisis of policy. The inability to implement good policy (both public and private) is a symptom.

I'd like to hear more about this "crisis of principals, not a crisis of policy". What do you mean? Do you mean that there's a turf war between "principals"? How and maybe why is that different than 50 years ago, say, or 70, or any post-war period?

Re: Exploring the Paramilitary Leaks

#172

Post by cryptonector »

wwweston wrote: post #152
dingnuts wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

hence my confusion at the sudden "left" outcry over the attacks on the FBI and CIA, two organizations they have been bemoaning for my entire life, and with good reason! Those organizations are responsible for some of the absolute worst behavior associated with American history, the most shameful of shameful episodes throughout the Americas were started by the CIA and FBI. I think the outcry is actually mostly media-o…

The fundamental confusion here may be the misconception that pro-people pro-liberty or pro-progress means anti-state. Or that the new people are anti-state in any way that means well for most people. It seems entirely consistent that the people most alarmed about law enforcement and intelligence being handed over figures who are indicating they don’t intend to use it in a principled manner are critics who’ve seen how…

> It seems entirely consistent that the people most alarmed ... are critics who’ve seen how even less extreme more accountable people have used these roles poorly.

That would make sense if... there had been accountability in the past for the law enforcement and intel folks who abused their power. So far there's been no accountability ever for any of them no matter what they've done. If that continues and the only change is the targets then that will be very bad indeed, but that's not what Trump and friends are saying, and they seem to want to reduce the size of the agencies in question, which will necessarily reduce the number of targets they can acquire, or the extent to which they can persecute them -- unless of course AI makes them much more efficient in the future, say. Not that there's any guarantee that these agencies will ultimately be reduced in size. But if I take what they're saying at face value and they deliver on it, then I think we're looking at an overall improvement.

Re: Exploring the Paramilitary Leaks

#173

Post by cryptonector »

bilbo0s wrote: post #107
nirav72 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That probably won't last with the recent changes with the FBI leadership.

Oh, ye of unbounded belief in fair play. These people are typically the true believers in the Republic. They also believe they are taking down existential threats to the republic. Finally, they believe in defense in layers. You know what they don't believe in? Playing fair. No. I wouldn't count on new homeland security leadership appointees having a "free hand" in practice. All of them will discover that their phone,…

!remindme 4 years

Re: Exploring the Paramilitary Leaks

#174

Post by rpmisms »

Animats wrote: post #44

What the louder militia members and gun nuts are up to is no secret. Most of that stuff is quite visible. You worry about the ones who organize quietly. Here's "God, Family, and Guns", on YouTube.[1] This week, "What gun would Jesus carry?" (Answer: a 1911, the classic Army .45 automatic from 1911.) Besides, Trump doesn't need an SA. [1] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxFgFKxa3SD1WIZWmBRGEhg

Jesus did say to buy swords, so a brand preference could be inferred.

Re: Exploring the Paramilitary Leaks

#175

Post by cryptonector »

dmos62 wrote: post #68
mjfl wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

"War against Ukraine"? That's the first time I've heard that phrased that way from a non-Russian source. What have you been reading? Aren't you whitewashing Russia's invasion of Ukraine? And, to call Azov an extremist group, or to liken them to people who literally tried to overthrow the US government, or to ISIS, that is plain disturbed.

I've not even heard Russian sources refer to it as the "war against Ukraine"! Typically it's the "special military operation" or something to the effect of a war against a dictator or Western interests or something. Never "war against Ukraine". One does not fight a war against a country whose people one believes want to one to annex them.

Re: Exploring the Paramilitary Leaks

#176

Post by 875368945 »

squigz wrote: post #166
875368945 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the issue is less stopping gun collectors. The issue is preventing self-defense. If there were a magic weapon which can only be used to defend yourself, and not for offensive purposes, then sure! Ban guns! But in today’s world, a firearm is the most effective self-defense tool (tho owning a gun isn’t going to magically make you safer). I grew up supporting gun control, but I think that’s because of my backgro…

> If there were a magic weapon Ah yes, paint the issue as only solvable by a "magic" item... Of course, trying to make the other side seem fundamentally silly is a primary tactic of the pro-gun crowd > only be used to defend yourself, and not for offensive purposes, then sure! Of course not, but the question is more the damage one can do when used for offensive purposes. Anyway, here's your magic solutions. https://e…

> Of course, trying to make the other side seem fundamentally silly is a primary tactic of the pro-gun crowd

I don't think "the other side" is fundamentally silly--that's just the way I write. I take "the other side" extremely seriously because, like I mentioned, I've been to pro gun control protests, and while I now disagree with some of those positions, I have genuine respect for where you're coming from.

In terms of less-lethal weapons, anyone who's serious about self defense should carry pepper spray (though pepper spray is non-lethal, rather than less-lethal). Full stop. If you want to carry a gun, too, that makes sense in some situations. But for myself and anyone who's serious about self-defense, we first of all hope to never have to use any of these tools ever. But if something did happen, I'd much much much rather use pepper spray than something that's more harmful.

The problem with _only_ having pepper spray is that it has limited efficacy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItJAeJz43ts is a trans youtuber who posts a lot of gun content who is talking here about pepper spray. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWUq-OEYpiI is Massad Ayoob talking about the efficacy of pepper spray.

Re: Exploring the Paramilitary Leaks

#177

Post by NoMoreNicksLeft »

pnemonic wrote: post #143
NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>ain't no one showed up and killed 20 elementary kids with knitting needles. Plainly false. Though people who advocate gun control never pay attention, there have been many high-profile mass murders/attacks where people did attack with knives/swords/machetes, and these have comparable body counts. The UK is way ahead of you too, by the way. They've started to implement knife control, including orders for people to br…

The point was that knitting needles are not implements of violence, yet groups using them for the group's explicit purpose can have very bad and harmful takes. One does not need to have a weapon to be harmful. Our Dear Leader has proven that many times. It is a good idea to stand on pro-gun rhetoric when you want all the guns on your side and not being pointed at you. You use confusing double-talk to trick them into…

>Also, the claim that melee weapons are somehow comparable to modern firearms is quite laughable.

People laugh at all sorts of things that aren't very funny.

The body counts for most of the school shootings (and other, various, non-school shootings) that people complain about are just under double digits, or manage to roll right up into double digits. Blade attacks are perfectly capable of that many injuries and deaths within the time constraint of a typical police response. This is born by fact, where such knife attacks have managed those body counts. There are a half a dozen or more in recent years in China, and at least one in Europe that I can think of.

>You use confusing double-talk to trick them into believing you are on their side and you fight for them.

No one with any sense here thinks I "fight for them". I'm just showing that I'm not unwilling for them to exercise their own rights to self-defense. This is because a principle is at stake. If it also contrasts with the general lack of principles among those who advocate gun control somehow, that's their problem.

Re: Exploring the Paramilitary Leaks

#178

Post by NoMoreNicksLeft »

Ancapistani wrote: post #168
NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>that's a cost I think society can stomach. Society believes it can stomach that cost because it is largely irrational, incapable of long-term or worst-case thinking, and utterly oblivious to ground-state reality.

Correct. I always feel the need to preface this statement when I make it here, so here we go: this is in no way meant as a threat or even a statement of my own political beliefs. It is my belief based on being a member of these communities for decades. Any attempt to ban firearms in the United States would result in more death and injury than the problems it is intended to solve. The American people will not give up…

>Any attempt to ban firearms in the United States would result in more death and injury than the problems it is intended to solve.

This is a very generous assumption. I instead assume that the problem that it intends to solve is "how does a government crank down hard on its citizens so that they become some sort of Stalinesque serfs who have no power and those which survive mindlessly obey"... in that scenario, gun prohibition isn't just a good idea but probably a necessary precondition.

For obvious reasons, even if gun control advocates are privy to that reasoning, public relations demands that they not say that part out loud.

Re: Exploring the Paramilitary Leaks

#179

Post by cryptonector »

Animats wrote: post #44

What the louder militia members and gun nuts are up to is no secret. Most of that stuff is quite visible. You worry about the ones who organize quietly. Here's "God, Family, and Guns", on YouTube.[1] This week, "What gun would Jesus carry?" (Answer: a 1911, the classic Army .45 automatic from 1911.) Besides, Trump doesn't need an SA. [1] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxFgFKxa3SD1WIZWmBRGEhg

I don't think "God, Family, and Guns" is the "militia member" or "gun nut" you're looking for. In fact, you probably won't find any of them on YouTube. YouTube's rules for firearm contents basically mean you get much more tame contents on YouTube than elsewhere. You might have to go look on Rumble, but I wouldn't know what channels there or elsewhere because I only use YouTube.

Re: Exploring the Paramilitary Leaks

#180

Post by [deleted] »

red-iron-pine wrote: post #108
boomboomsubban wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I seem to remember a story of a mafia don who turned out to be an informant, which seems wild to me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitey_Bulger

he was informant to cover his ass, and run to attempts to play all sides. slip the feds a little juice tidbit here or there and he gets to run his empire a few months longer. repeat over and over until the feds get smart.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN