Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
You’re right, owning a hand gun will be effective means to rebel against the most militarized government in the world.
Vietnamese farmers would agree with you.
FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
381–390 of 612 posts
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#382Earlier quoted context omitted.
ICE is hopefully waiting for any sign of violence against them so that they can escalate even more. They do their best to provoke. You know where are all NRA and "have gun against govermental tyrrany" guys? In the ICE or supporting from sidelines. And they are itching for when they will finally be able to commit even more violence.
Sure, but not resisting ICE is also a desired outcome for them. May as well pick the one that might lead to a better outcome for the oppressed.
They are being resisted tho by people on the ground. The missing resistance is among politicians.
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#383To clarify why it’s aggressive: federal employees have a legal duty to secure classified information, but everyone else does not. Reporters are not federal employees and it’s not illegal for them to have or discuss classified materials. Most of what Snowden leaked was classified, and remains classified to this day , but you and I can read about it on Wikipedia. The government pursued Snowden because he was legally ob…
What if you had the hard copies of the classified files or the original USB drive used in exfiltrate the classified data, not a digital copy.
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#384Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would highly recommend the book Amusing Ourselves to Death if you are looking to understand how the populace got to the point where truth is irrelevant and nothing really matters. It helped my mental model a lot at the very least.
I’m extremely aware of amusing ourselves to death I think we came away with very different conclusions To me it is abject proof that individuals do not have the mental emotional or other capacity to actually behave in the modern world such that they retain their mental independence and develop a sense of personal epistemology Humans are way too dumb and prone to propaganda to actually have a coherent society at the s…
I believe, but cannot prove, that our malleability was an evolutionary advantage. It enabled homo sapiens to gather in ever larger social groups.
Media, from obelisks to tiktok, enables exploitation of our evolutionary quirk.
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#385To clarify why it’s aggressive: federal employees have a legal duty to secure classified information, but everyone else does not. Reporters are not federal employees and it’s not illegal for them to have or discuss classified materials. Most of what Snowden leaked was classified, and remains classified to this day , but you and I can read about it on Wikipedia. The government pursued Snowden because he was legally ob…
Explain why they pursued Julian Assange then. Based on your own logic then Assange did not have any requirement to protect classified information yet he was Public Enemy number one. I know people who personally sat on the Edward Snowden board and spent years of their life trying to create a case within the intelligence community against this guy
> Explain why they pursued Julian Assange then.
There is a difference between someone essentially just handing you a pile of classified documents and you going around soliciting and encouraging people to break the law and mishandle the documents to give to you.
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#386Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well then that will be something for the courts to sort out, especially in the open carry states. But I think you are underestimating the effect it will have on individual federal agents, who might decide the pay isn't good enough anymore. These scenes are also put on for the benefit of the politicians watching.
> Well then that will be something for the courts to sort out, especially in the open carry states. They already sorted it out - in open carry states. In the above situation, the court in open carry state sides with cops. It is really simple. Sentencing cop for on duty murder is extraordinary hard even in clear cut cases. Guns presence means a cop can say he was afraid. And afraid cop is entitled to kill. > But I thi…
During BLM protests there were anti-protesters doing exactly what I described, and they were not automatically shot at by police. Of course the political roles are reversed, but I don't believe it is as guaranteed as you suggest. And the legality is of course much more complicated than you portray as well.
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#387Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know whether you've noticed, but being armed is simply giving the Federales more reasons to kill you first. The woman shot in Minneapolis was shot on the pretext of using her car as a weapon. How do people really expect this to work? In detail? You show up with an armed militia at a school and the ICE guys just drive on past (and then raid someone else)? Or are they expecting more of an Amerimaidan situation?…
Just so we're clear, you're arguing that ICE is already murdering people on the street with impunity, but people shouldn't defend themselves or they'll just get murdered harder ?
They're arguing that the fight is precisely what the administration is looking to generate.
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#388Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure why they call the name ("Department of War") informal . Seems pretty formal to me. It's displayed on the building.
It takes an act of Congress to change the name. Trump just made one of his dictatorial proclamations.
It was originally named the department of war, and changing it to defence was just newspeak anyway.
Of all the things trump has done, I actually like this one. At least he’s being honest about his intentions for what this department does.
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#389Without paywall: https://archive.is/1haDB
Re: FBI raids Washington Post reporter's home
#390Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if the 1st shot through the front of the vehicle is ruled (if it even gets to that point) to be legit, the 2nd and 3rd through the side window almost certainly wouldn't. There's virtually no way this guy walks free if it goes to a fair trial. If I was on a jury for that case, I'd need some very, very convincing evidence to suggest the officer was in serious fear for his life (or anyone else's) given the publicly…
I mean, at 03:05 she does drive into him, and I have a feeling she would have ended up dead anyway were it police officers instead of ICE. I have watched LOTS of bodycam footages and it is crazy to me that people get shot in scenarios that does not require lethal force, but people seem to side with the cops. I think neither cops nor ICE should be doing this shit.
Again, the first shot could be ruled to be justified, but the second and third were indisputably after the officer was out of harms way.
There's also unanswered questions about jurisdiction and whether the officers were acting within the scope of their duties, which would also be a major factor in the justification for use of force.