this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2024
265 points (97.8% liked)

politics

19104 readers
3128 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] InternetCitizen2 52 points 4 months ago (2 children)

The "silver lining" is that leadership showed their cards during J6, so intelligence agencies know who to watch. This would be the justification for giving up rights in the patriot act to fight terrorists.

[–] linearchaos 37 points 4 months ago (2 children)

In theory, it works that way.

In practice, we've never openly stopped anyone with those systems.

When it comes time for them to justify the invasion of privacy, they don't have any school shooters stopped, and they don't have any Unabombers stopped. They don't have any cases of stolen kids stopped. They'd be shouting all that from the rooftops to expand and extend that funding.

If they have actually stopped anyone, it's at super-secret spy game levels. The guys you're expecting them to stop aren't even a concern for them. Worse yet, they may actually be rooting for them.

[–] InternetCitizen2 1 points 4 months ago

I'm not saying the lose of privacy is good.

[–] proudblond -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Or they have stopped them, so we haven’t heard about it.

I’m not advocating giving up privacy but you don’t know for sure that these tactics don’t “work.”

[–] Dkarma 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You think they'd shut up if they could look like the heroes??? Lol You don't know cops.

[–] proudblond 4 points 4 months ago

I guess I don’t think of the higher agencies as cops, even though they are. And those higher agencies (FBI, NSA, CIA, etc.) don’t strike me as the type of groups who want to keep the public informed—quite the contrary, actually. I would expect local cops to praise themselves if they got something right, sure.

[–] FuglyDuck 22 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I’m curious.

You ever hear of the Beer hall putsch?

You know, Hitler’s version of Jan 6.

[–] RestrictedAccount 11 points 4 months ago (2 children)

We are in the period before Hitler went to prison and wrote Mein Kampf.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Hitler was a young man at that time, don't forget that. ~~Time~~ History doesn't repeat itself but it rhymes.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago

I don’t think we’re gonna get the prison part in this timeline, but we do already have a book, though the book is just a trump-branded bible that includes a copy of the constitution or something like that.

It’s just mind-bending how successful wish.com Hitler has been with the most incredibly infantile and idiotic tactics, and additionally, on how many people those tactics work so well.