Author Topic: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)  (Read 90475 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25722
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1785 on: January 13, 2021, 10:58:32 AM »
No, not nailed it.  The mob uproar isn't about "market forces".  We would never have known who was hosting Parler's services until this came up.   Prior to January 6, no one was making decisions as to where to host their content based on whether Parler was there or not.   I don't know for certain; .

The bolded part is the only thing that you can say.  How can you possibly, in your own good conscience, make the other statements (given how frequently you've told many of us not to get in others' heads)?  You know precisely none of this. Neither do I.  But how do you know that AWS wasn't already getting pressure from constituents other than their employee base?  How do you know that the Chevron CIO isn't also a bleeding heart socialist activist, and has his renewal with AWS up for renewal this year?  How many other AWS contracts are up for renewal - if there's even a risk of losing 1% of them, isn't that significant enough to take action?  How many millions of dollars of revenue comes from SMB / credit card / monthly / pay-as-you-go companies have their email hosted at AWS, that Google Cloud and Azure would be targeting precisely with this information?  Maybe AWS is already starting to see customer attrition?

I'm more than willing to bet AWS has done their calculus - including the lawsuit - and deemed this to be a good business decision - tangibly and intangibly, along with the goodwill that they are going to either earn, or avoid losing.  I'm gobsmacked to think that you - YOU - think this is so much (or more of) a moral decision as it is a business one.

Look, if you're going to single me out for "not knowing for certainty" then 99.968% of the posts over the last week - and you can run that all the way back to November of 2016 pretty easily, maybe even June of 2015 - should shut the fuck up too.  I say that to be funny, not crass, but it's a fair point.  I at least am drawing analogues to ACTUAL decisions I've been in.  I'm not now and never once ever said "I am right, take me for gospel!"  I am merely trying to even the scales to what I see are sanctimonious value judgments that I know FOR A FACT - since I'm one of them myself - not all people share.   I do not at all see why I should be denied a service because someone else has a bug up their ass and a social media account.

Many here have posited reasonable, probable scenarios, and I just see myself as doing the same.


Quote
Any "market forces" are a construct of the mob itself.  Amazon doesn't fear losing Pinterest, or Tumblr, they fear having to answer either publicly or through the courts to the mob looking to create trouble.

Who specifically is "the mob" you speak of that is going to take it to AWS thru the courts?  "The Mob" is going to vote with their pocketbook.  That's (most likely) what Amazon is looking to avoid.

But now YOU answer the question I asked XJ and Jaffa.   No, I'll save you guys the mystery:  AWS is not selling to you and me.  They are not the cake salesman, getting incremental business.  They are not Apple, with retail stores.  They are not your independent bookstore, with a VERY narrow niche that they have to literally cater to.  They are a business platform application.  See Jaffa's other post; there are enough people who have a bug up their ass about Amazon, and yet Bezos is still swinging dicks with Elon Musk for wealthiest wierdo in the world.  I would bet - based on a very educated guess - there is negligible business impacts to them keeping Parler on board.  They're worried about something more (listen to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's instagram rant; that'll plant some seeds as to what they're afraid of).  Court action.  CONGRESSIONAL "You're with us, or GET OUT!" action. 

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25722
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1786 on: January 13, 2021, 11:10:47 AM »
AWS doesn't care about losing other customers, they are worried about incurring the wrath of the mob.  Not because they are "right", but because they are unpredictable and dangerous. AWS doesn't want bomb threats at facilities. They don't want cyberattacks on their operations.

Fair.  And for what it's worth, if your major point is that 'mob mentality' (in the literal sense, with bomb threats and cyberattacks) is bad, I agree with you.  I'll reiterate that up until my last post, I didn't realize that this was the kind of mob behavior you might be focusing on. 

But I think it's still worth noting that there's a different kind of public backlash, mob mentality in the softer sense where we collectively shout about stuff on Twitter and damage a company's reputation.  In my mind, this type of public backlash is perfectly valid.  I'm not in love with it, but it's there, and it does have power.
Honestly, I think there's a fair amount of overlap between the two mobs. You've got the people planting bombs, and the people collectively hitting the down-vote button as fast as they can, and they're both acting, in large part, as part of a collective, independent of any real rational basis. Strangely, the folks running amok in DC probably put more thought into what it is that they're doing than the people who's sole understanding of Amazon and Parler come from the memes their facebook "friends" share with them. I can assure you that Amazon isn't afraid of rational liberals upset with the way they see Constitutional issues playing out. They're scared shitless of the people who will act, and the greater number who will follow based solely on "Trump Be Racist!" You're very correct that this "soft mob" is there and it does have power. That's not necessarily a good thing when it's so devoid of reason and apt to act irrationally. It's hard to stay out of something's way when you can never tell when or where it's going to turn.

This is a REALLY good point.   Businesses often don't care what the answer is, just as long as it's an answer they can forecast and expect.   I've written a lot about Obama's culpability in the crash of '08, and while I don't think it was with bad intent (since he later showed very clearly that he learned his lesson) he fomented a fair amount of the environment that allowed that crash to happen.  All the movies in the world don't change that there was STILL money in real estate, but many businesses chose to pull it back and keep their powder dry in the face of the uncertainty of universal healthcare and draconian (to those on the other side; and remember, I was in the environmental industry at that time) environmental provisions promised by the incoming Administration, all to be borne by corporations.   (You'll note now that there has been little correction in the market following the election - the correction in 2016 was literally the NIGHT of the election), because most reasonable people think Joe Biden is not interested, at least in the short term, of "blowing everything up".  He has so many trans-national issues to take care of that sticking it to big business isn't high on the list.)    Businesses can adapt to anything - well, most things - as long as there is runway.   Curveballs are a different story. 

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25722
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1787 on: January 13, 2021, 11:13:03 AM »
Quote
What's the difference (and there is a difference) between the examples you gave and the example to hand?

From a capitalist perspective? I don't think there is a significant difference. Businesses choose to supply (of cease supplying) certain markets based on what is best for their business at the time. As the demand for vegan and free range food grows from environmentally conscious buyers, the more they supply. If the market for them would dry up, they would stop supplying them. And as a larger part of the Parler userbase became more overtly and vocally fascist (and just so we're clear, I'm not painting every user with this brush, just saying a certain critical mass showed up there) they decided it was a segment of the market they no longer want to supply services to.

(And your language is very telling; there's no "bending over backward", no gymnastics on my part.)

"Bend over backwards" (at least in British parlance) means to "make every effort". It's not a negative critique.

Not always, but often it also it implies a teaspoon of desperation and unreasonableness, as if the effort is not worthy of the outcome.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25722
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1788 on: January 13, 2021, 11:20:29 AM »
How is this different than any other market force that is driven by nonsense/emotion/etc that isn't logical?

Why is the liberal mob being treated like some alien force when most of America was created by various mobs of different affiliations and devotions? I don't support the mobs at all, but I don't see how the "trump is a racist" mob is any different than "curse words will destroy our kids and gays will ruin families" mob or the "rap music creates murderers" mob. We seem annoyed but content with all mobs thus far when it comes to driving market decisions, yet now it's something that will lead to the downfall of the country?

Again, it sucks, but it's not new, it's not different, it's just liberal this time.

And, as Stadler would say about the attempted coup, isn't this just an opportunity for our amazing system to play itself out? If AWS screws over Parler (I have no idea what Parler is) then either they are acting legally and in their best interests, or Parler can take them to court (which they are) and the courts will sort everything out. Is the system not capable of handling angry liberals?

For me it's almost entirely because of what you write about.   The behaviors are being rationalized with this quasi-moral hands-up, "it's market forces" explanation, as if it was something that no one could control, and the outcomes painted as an arm's length objective business decision.  And it's anything but.  I'd probably still write what I write, but I'd've given up the ghost a long time ago if it was just "yeah, we're bullying, and we'll shut up and take it when the pendulum swings the other way".  But that's not how it's going down.

It's why I quoted the domestic terrorist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.   When SHE calls for liberation and revolution, it's "democracy in action", but when it's the GOP, it's insurrection, terrorism and criminality.  I'm with you, Adami; call it what it is for BOTH sides, and stop pretending that there are moral differences.  There aren't.

(And since I have to, I added the "domestic terrorist" to her name to make it CLEAR that I'm NOT taking sides; it's ALL bad.  Get off social media, get off the steps of the capital and start having reasonable, calm, measured debates rooted in mutual respect and a common goal of compromise and a better America.)

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5147
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1789 on: January 13, 2021, 11:23:44 AM »
It's why I quoted the domestic terrorist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.   When SHE calls for liberation and revolution, it's "democracy in action", but when it's the GOP, it's insurrection, terrorism and criminality.  I'm with you, Adami; call it what it is for BOTH sides, and stop pretending that there are moral differences.  There aren't.

How many times has AOC advocated armed insurrection against the House of Representatives?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25722
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1790 on: January 13, 2021, 11:30:37 AM »
I would be largely on board with that approach. 

I will note, however, that such an approach would essentially involve AWS taking on the burden of moderating Parler.  I'm not sure it's totally reasonable to expect that from them.

Not really disagreeing with you, though.  I (as an individual) would have preferred that approach.

Not only unreasonable to expect them to do that, but AWS most likely can't.  Just because AWS has a service agreement to host Parler (and who knows what services their providing - infrastructure, software, platform, website management, monitoring, security, storage, backup... there's a host of any number of services that AWS could be hosting - it's probably the infrastructure and platform) doesn't mean they have access to the actual content.  In fact, their contracts probably prohibit them from doing so, as a matter of privacy and confidentiality.  I would doubt they have inside access to the databases holding the content.

In the absence of Parler being unwilling or unable to moderate themselves, I'm really not sure what choice AWS has/had?

Point of clarity:  I'm not sure how this fits with what's being said, but let's not assume anything with respect to the AWS to enforce PARLER'S ToS.   There is no duty there, and AWS shouldn't in any way be held accountable for same.  When it comes to the Parler ToS, any discussion about AWS is about tolerance and "you're with us or you're part of the problem".  I used to work for a company that sold passenger trains to Amtrak.   I have no interest - input or advice - into how Amtrak manages the conduct of ridership on it's trains.  If a rider gets drunk and pisses on one of the tables, it is NOT my business or my problem.  I don't care if they let it go, or ban them entirely, and I have no say in the matter even if I did.

Offline Adami

  • Moderator of awesomeness
  • *
  • Posts: 31760
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1791 on: January 13, 2021, 11:33:40 AM »
Stads, my sweet beautiful bride to be, you really lost me at some point there.

I am happy, thrilled even, to call both sides of the public mob the same. To me, people saying XYZ should be cancelled for being too right wing (even though that's not what's happening with Parler, just to be clear) or those idiots who got episodes of Golden Girls, Community, and 30 Rock pulled for black face are no different than the people who make sure there's no cursing or boobs on TV (you know what I mean) or why schools have strict dress codes or needing schools to cater to religious demands. They're all the mob. It's just that historically, this mob has generally (not always) been right wing, conservative, and religious and now they're mostly left wing and liberal. But I don't see them as different at all.

As far as AOC goes...huh? Sweet heart, you calling her a terrorist is NOT a sign that you're not taking sides. It's pretty clear you have an anti-liberal bias on a lot of this stuff. If you're claiming AOC is a terrorist, I assume you think every GOP member who backs Trump is a terrorist? I sure don't. I'd call the people who stormed the capital and destroyed property and left bombs etc domestic terrorists, to be sure.

And no, revolution isn't always the same. The cause DOES matter. It's why the KKK aren't exactly the same as MLK Jr. It's why the Nazis aren't exactly the same as the original American revolutionaries. The cause does matter. You might disagree, but as usual, you'd be wrong.  :heart
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25722
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1792 on: January 13, 2021, 11:33:55 AM »
It's why I quoted the domestic terrorist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.   When SHE calls for liberation and revolution, it's "democracy in action", but when it's the GOP, it's insurrection, terrorism and criminality.  I'm with you, Adami; call it what it is for BOTH sides, and stop pretending that there are moral differences.  There aren't.

How many times has AOC advocated armed insurrection against the House of Representatives?

That is a very specific question that doesn't really reflect the multitude of ways by which one could qualify as a domestic terrorist, and that wouldn't be the only expression of insurrection.  But to answer your question, none that I know of.  Change even just one word, though, ("armed") and I think the answer is now greater than zero.

Did Trump call for and advocate ARMED insurrection against the House of Representatives? 

(Also, go back to the multitude of posts by me and others - like Jaffa - that warned of more of the same danger, JUST BETTER AT IT.)

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25722
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1793 on: January 13, 2021, 11:44:35 AM »
Stads, my sweet beautiful bride to be, you really lost me at some point there.

I am happy, thrilled even, to call both sides of the public mob the same. To me, people saying XYZ should be cancelled for being too right wing (even though that's not what's happening with Parler, just to be clear) or those idiots who got episodes of Golden Girls, Community, and 30 Rock pulled for black face are no different than the people who make sure there's no cursing or boobs on TV (you know what I mean) or why schools have strict dress codes or needing schools to cater to religious demands. They're all the mob. It's just that historically, this mob has generally (not always) been right wing, conservative, and religious and now they're mostly left wing and liberal. But I don't see them as different at all.

As far as AOC goes...huh? Sweet heart, you calling her a terrorist is NOT a sign that you're not taking sides. It's pretty clear you have an anti-liberal bias on a lot of this stuff. If you're claiming AOC is a terrorist, I assume you think every GOP member who backs Trump is a terrorist? I sure don't. I'd call the people who stormed the capital and destroyed property and left bombs etc domestic terrorists, to be sure.

Well, frankly, I don't really think ANY of them were really "domestic terrorists".  Criminals, yes, most certainly, but I'm not sure what "domestic terrorist" means in this context.   We don't all have to love democracy.   Bernie and Ocasio-Cortez are "democratic socialists"; that implies dissatisfaction with our democracy, at least in it's current form (though I suppose you could argue their point is more about the economic structure of our country).  If you consider anyone who advocates violence to achieve their political ends, then yeah, some of the people on the steps and some of the people in office are domestic terrorists.   I'm not interested, frankly, in that debate, more in how the lines are drawn. Why Ocasio-Cortez can scream foul on the election and reject compromise from her colleagues and it's "just", but someone else who sees differently can't.  She is engaging in the same divisive, argumentative, "us versus them", love-it-or-leave it behavior.  It's no different; that's what interests me.   


Quote
And no, revolution isn't always the same. The cause DOES matter. It's why the KKK aren't exactly the same as MLK Jr. It's why the Nazis aren't exactly the same as the original American revolutionaries. The cause does matter. You might disagree, but as usual, you'd be wrong.  :heart

I don't think the cause does matter on an objective level, and that's where we've sort of gone wrong with all this. That's the moralizing I've been talking about.   The Nazi's weren't wrong because they fought to protect their soil (I use that term broadly), or killed other soldiers in battle.  They were wrong because they killed innocent civilians for no real reason at all, and outright TOOK other people's land to further that slaughter of civilians.  That's not a "cause" per se; that's responding to a crime.   The American Revolutionaries, for the most part ONLY killed other soldiers in batter, and WERE fighting to protect their soil (again, broadly).    Same with the KKK; they saw/see a different power structure.  So does Ocasio-Cortez; we don't like their power structure (at least I don't) but that's not where they are wrong.  They have a right to their views as long as it stays in idea form.  They took (criminal) action. 

Once you start to parse causes, you're in vigilante territory.  I'm not okay with that, not if you REALLY mean what you say about democracy.   I remember saying to someone (it was a discussion like this, but on the Genesis forum before it shut down) that Iraq really WAS to me about democracy.  If the Iraqi people voted to reinstall Saddam Hussein to power, we, as Americans, had to shut up and go home, because at least the people have spoken.  We don't have to like the answer; only how we GOT the answer. 

« Last Edit: January 13, 2021, 11:50:22 AM by Stadler »

Offline Adami

  • Moderator of awesomeness
  • *
  • Posts: 31760
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1794 on: January 13, 2021, 11:45:53 AM »
Yea, we just disagree. All good.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5147
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1795 on: January 13, 2021, 11:51:30 AM »
Quote
They were wrong because they killed innocent civilians for no real reason at all

Without using a moral argument, can you explain why is that a bad thing?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

Offline Adami

  • Moderator of awesomeness
  • *
  • Posts: 31760
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1796 on: January 13, 2021, 11:52:35 AM »
Quote
They were wrong because they killed innocent civilians for no real reason at all

Without using a moral argument, can you explain why is that a bad thing?

Indeed. Plus they DID have a reason and were doing so in a way that was legal in their system.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline Elite

  • The 'other' Rich
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15382
  • Gender: Male
  • also, a tin teardrop
    • Overhaul
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1797 on: January 13, 2021, 12:46:27 PM »
Well, frankly, I don't really think ANY of them were really "domestic terrorists".

Come on now, let's not go over this again. If we all stick to the same definition of 'terrorist' which according to the Cambridge dictionary is the following: "someone who uses violent action, or threats of violent action, for political purposes" then that's EXACTLY what the capitol mob did.

This is not a case of viewpoint, or not wanting to call it that. They're terrorists, they're all from the US, hence 'domestic terrorists'. Call things what they are.
Hey dude slow the fuck down so we can finish together at the same time.  :biggrin:
Squ
scRa are the resultaten of sound nog bring propey

Offline jingle.boy

  • I'm so ronery; so sad and ronery
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 33577
  • Gender: Male
  • DTF's resident deceased dictator
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1798 on: January 13, 2021, 01:10:41 PM »
Look, if you're going to single me out for "not knowing for certainty" then 99.968% of the posts over the last week - and you can run that all the way back to November of 2016 pretty easily, maybe even June of 2015 - should shut the fuck up too.  I say that to be funny, not crass, but it's a fair point.  I at least am drawing analogues to ACTUAL decisions I've been in.  I'm not now and never once ever said "I am right, take me for gospel!"  I am merely trying to even the scales to what I see are sanctimonious value judgments that I know FOR A FACT - since I'm one of them myself - not all people share.   I do not at all see why I should be denied a service because someone else has a bug up their ass and a social media account.

Many here have posited reasonable, probable scenarios, and I just see myself as doing the same.

All fair.  I only push back (and you know this about me) when I see someone doing the very things that they (often) 'call out' others for doing.  Just ask mrs.jingle... I'm not tolerant of that.  At. All.  You may be entirely right (and I may even agree with you to some extent)... but you don't know.  Nobody really knows.  It's all just positing.  But one thing that I've learned from being called out when I speak (type) as if I know what others' thoughts or motivations are, is to caveat my comments with 'I think', 'it seems', 'i can see how' etc.... You yourself have conditioned me to challenge when someone makes a statement as a an outright fact that they have absolutely no way of knowing for certain.
Looking at my most recent posts, it almost seems like I'm trying to become the Common Sense of DTF :lol
You'd have an easier time trying to bring the internet to the Amish.
Turns out chlamydia tastes pretty good.

Offline jingle.boy

  • I'm so ronery; so sad and ronery
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 33577
  • Gender: Male
  • DTF's resident deceased dictator
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1799 on: January 13, 2021, 01:15:23 PM »
Well, frankly, I don't really think ANY of them were really "domestic terrorists".  Criminals, yes, most certainly, but I'm not sure what "domestic terrorist" means in this context. 

I've mentioned/questioned this at least twice here in the last week, positing the idea that if this event last week was conducted by a few thousand Arabs or Muslims, waiving Iraqi/Saudi/Isis flags, would you that be considered an act of terrorism? 

I don't know if you've purposefully avoided addressing it, or conveniently sidestepped it, or outright missed it.  I'd be interested to see a response.
Looking at my most recent posts, it almost seems like I'm trying to become the Common Sense of DTF :lol
You'd have an easier time trying to bring the internet to the Amish.
Turns out chlamydia tastes pretty good.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25722
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1800 on: January 13, 2021, 01:21:47 PM »
Well, frankly, I don't really think ANY of them were really "domestic terrorists".

Come on now, let's not go over this again. If we all stick to the same definition of 'terrorist' which according to the Cambridge dictionary is the following: "someone who uses violent action, or threats of violent action, for political purposes" then that's EXACTLY what the capitol mob did.

This is not a case of viewpoint, or not wanting to call it that. They're terrorists, they're all from the US, hence 'domestic terrorists'. Call things what they are.

I'm okay with that.  Again, I'm not arguing FOR or AGAINST a particular person, act or position.  I'm just saying if you're going to use these terms be consistent.   If "threats of violent action for political purposes" is domestic terrorism, we should have at least taken pause when ANYONE says we "need to liberate" some portion of our country from the existing government and/or leadership.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25722
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1801 on: January 13, 2021, 01:27:12 PM »
Well, frankly, I don't really think ANY of them were really "domestic terrorists".  Criminals, yes, most certainly, but I'm not sure what "domestic terrorist" means in this context. 

I've mentioned/questioned this at least twice here in the last week, positing the idea that if this event last week was conducted by a few thousand Arabs or Muslims, waiving Iraqi/Saudi/Isis flags, would you that be considered an act of terrorism? 

I don't know if you've purposefully avoided addressing it, or conveniently sidestepped it, or outright missed it.  I'd be interested to see a response.

Please don't set me up like that.   I've already said I don't care what we call it, and that's not based on nationality or religion.  If Tormund Giantsbane (the dude in the bear cloak) is a domestic terrorist, so be it.  If he was Arab or Muslim I would say the same thing. But then so are the violent actors in the riots from last year.   If we decide he (Tormund) isn't then neither is an AMERICAN Arab or Muslim protesting.  I don't play that game.   I would draw the line if there was actual violence and they were not acting on behalf of themselves as American citizen, but rather in place of a foreign government (I distinguish between Russian bots and Russian hacking this way as well). 

Offline El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25091
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1802 on: January 13, 2021, 01:29:50 PM »
Well, frankly, I don't really think ANY of them were really "domestic terrorists".  Criminals, yes, most certainly, but I'm not sure what "domestic terrorist" means in this context. 

I've mentioned/questioned this at least twice here in the last week, positing the idea that if this event last week was conducted by a few thousand Arabs or Muslims, waiving Iraqi/Saudi/Isis flags, would you that be considered an act of terrorism? 

I don't know if you've purposefully avoided addressing it, or conveniently sidestepped it, or outright missed it.  I'd be interested to see a response.
I'd call them both a few dozen terrorists mixed in with a few thousand rioters. I stand by my original notion that they were, for the most part, a disorganized and aimless rabble. At the same time I can't not notice the guys with the zip ties, or the shirts stating "American Civil War 2021." There were very definitely some honest to God revolutionaries in there. Unfortunately, Americans kind of suck at making distinctions. Particularly when those distinctions conflict with their own precepts. Since they're all Trumptards they're necessarily all racists, insurrectionists, Nazis, and terrorists.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25091
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1803 on: January 13, 2021, 01:35:31 PM »
Well, frankly, I don't really think ANY of them were really "domestic terrorists".  Criminals, yes, most certainly, but I'm not sure what "domestic terrorist" means in this context. 

I've mentioned/questioned this at least twice here in the last week, positing the idea that if this event last week was conducted by a few thousand Arabs or Muslims, waiving Iraqi/Saudi/Isis flags, would you that be considered an act of terrorism? 

I don't know if you've purposefully avoided addressing it, or conveniently sidestepped it, or outright missed it.  I'd be interested to see a response.

Please don't set me up like that.   I've already said I don't care what we call it, and that's not based on nationality or religion.  If Tormund Giantsbane (the dude in the bear cloak) is a domestic terrorist, so be it.  If he was Arab or Muslim I would say the same thing. But then so are the violent actors in the riots from last year.   If we decide he (Tormund) isn't then neither is an AMERICAN Arab or Muslim protesting.  I don't play that game.   I would draw the line if there was actual violence and they were not acting on behalf of themselves as American citizen, but rather in place of a foreign government (I distinguish between Russian bots and Russian hacking this way as well).
I'm factoring premeditation towards a specific action in my definition. I don't know what the extent of Tormund's criminality was (but there is plenty), but terrorism or insurrection should require more than mindless rampaging. My hunch is that both the Antifa and the Trumptard crowd there were largely the same. Large gatherings of like-minded people who ran amok, and included a few people with the specific intent to fuck shit up.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25722
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1804 on: January 13, 2021, 01:36:25 PM »
Look, if you're going to single me out for "not knowing for certainty" then 99.968% of the posts over the last week - and you can run that all the way back to November of 2016 pretty easily, maybe even June of 2015 - should shut the fuck up too.  I say that to be funny, not crass, but it's a fair point.  I at least am drawing analogues to ACTUAL decisions I've been in.  I'm not now and never once ever said "I am right, take me for gospel!"  I am merely trying to even the scales to what I see are sanctimonious value judgments that I know FOR A FACT - since I'm one of them myself - not all people share.   I do not at all see why I should be denied a service because someone else has a bug up their ass and a social media account.

Many here have posited reasonable, probable scenarios, and I just see myself as doing the same.

All fair.  I only push back (and you know this about me) when I see someone doing the very things that they (often) 'call out' others for doing.  Just ask mrs.jingle... I'm not tolerant of that.  At. All.  You may be entirely right (and I may even agree with you to some extent)... but you don't know.  Nobody really knows.  It's all just positing.  But one thing that I've learned from being called out when I speak (type) as if I know what others' thoughts or motivations are, is to caveat my comments with 'I think', 'it seems', 'i can see how' etc.... You yourself have conditioned me to challenge when someone makes a statement as a an outright fact that they have absolutely no way of knowing for certain.
This is a never-ending spiral though, because I answer, then I'm rationalizing like Ocasio-Cortez. :)  You're right though; and I appreciate your honesty.   I think I've set myself apart from others here (ESPECIALLY the snarky one-hit wonders who drop a bomb then disappear for two days) in that I not only admit that I'm not certain, I wear it as a badge of honor.  The fact is, people act irrationally all the time (and that's not a bad thing).  The whole field of economics is based on a "rational actor", and there's an entire school of thought now that only deals with IRRATIONAL actors, because.   I can only assemble ALL the facts as I see them and see what theories fit them.  It seems to me that there are too many people that use emotion in place of facts, and disregard those facts that don't support the narrative.

I've been clear: I just want the person who is typing the scathing reply throwing 70+ million people under the bus for being "Republican" as if that meant "alien" or "serial killer" and who is feeling oh-so-smug about their righteousness to have pause that there may actually be a reasonable, acceptable, high-probability answer that DOESN'T jive with their precious world-view, and a reasonably educated, reasonably articulate, reasonably sane (except when it comes to Kiss and Margot Robbie) person behind that.

Offline cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 27005
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1805 on: January 13, 2021, 01:38:27 PM »
From my understanding, there was quite a bit of premeditation going on for this.  Not for everyone, but some small groups of people totally planned what they did.  Those people are domestic terrorists to me.  The people who were there protesting and getting caught up in what the terrorists were doing probably don't deserve the label.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2021, 01:53:25 PM by cramx3 »

Offline SwedishGoose

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 1809
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1806 on: January 13, 2021, 01:50:42 PM »
Well, frankly, I don't really think ANY of them were really "domestic terrorists".  Criminals, yes, most certainly, but I'm not sure what "domestic terrorist" means in this context. 

I've mentioned/questioned this at least twice here in the last week, positing the idea that if this event last week was conducted by a few thousand Arabs or Muslims, waiving Iraqi/Saudi/Isis flags, would you that be considered an act of terrorism? 

I don't know if you've purposefully avoided addressing it, or conveniently sidestepped it, or outright missed it.  I'd be interested to see a response.

Please don't set me up like that.   I've already said I don't care what we call it, and that's not based on nationality or religion.  If Tormund Giantsbane (the dude in the bear cloak) is a domestic terrorist, so be it.  If he was Arab or Muslim I would say the same thing. But then so are the violent actors in the riots from last year.   If we decide he (Tormund) isn't then neither is an AMERICAN Arab or Muslim protesting.  I don't play that game.   I would draw the line if there was actual violence and they were not acting on behalf of themselves as American citizen, but rather in place of a foreign government (I distinguish between Russian bots and Russian hacking this way as well).
I'm factoring premeditation towards a specific action in my definition. I don't know what the extent of Tormund's criminality was (but there is plenty), but terrorism or insurrection should require more than mindless rampaging. My hunch is that both the Antifa and the Trumptard crowd there were largely the same. Large gatherings of like-minded people who ran amok, and included a few people with the specific intent to fuck shit up.

Sorry, but are you saying that there were Antifa there at the Capitol?
So far I have seen zero proof of that, just as I have seen zero proof of widespread election fraud.

Lies are powerful and dangerous tools....

Offline jingle.boy

  • I'm so ronery; so sad and ronery
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 33577
  • Gender: Male
  • DTF's resident deceased dictator
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1807 on: January 13, 2021, 01:55:33 PM »
Well, frankly, I don't really think ANY of them were really "domestic terrorists".  Criminals, yes, most certainly, but I'm not sure what "domestic terrorist" means in this context. 

I've mentioned/questioned this at least twice here in the last week, positing the idea that if this event last week was conducted by a few thousand Arabs or Muslims, waiving Iraqi/Saudi/Isis flags, would you that be considered an act of terrorism? 

I don't know if you've purposefully avoided addressing it, or conveniently sidestepped it, or outright missed it.  I'd be interested to see a response.

Please don't set me up like that.   I've already said I don't care what we call it, and that's not based on nationality or religion.  If Tormund Giantsbane (the dude in the bear cloak) is a domestic terrorist, so be it.  If he was Arab or Muslim I would say the same thing. But then so are the violent actors in the riots from last year.   If we decide he (Tormund) isn't then neither is an AMERICAN Arab or Muslim protesting.  I don't play that game.   I would draw the line if there was actual violence and they were not acting on behalf of themselves as American citizen, but rather in place of a foreign government (I distinguish between Russian bots and Russian hacking this way as well).

I'm really not trying to 'set you up' nor do I see how it is a setup.  In my mind, terrorism is terrorism... it need not carry the additional moniker of "domestic", but it's a commonly done thing.  I simply provided an alternatively comparable scenario that would often be recognized as terrorism.  If your answer was no, I wanted to hear the rational; if the answer was yes, then I would say the label of "domestic" terrorism would aptly apply.

Are 100% of the people last week on Capitol Hill "terrorists"?  I wouldn't think so.  Some people were truly just demonstrating, and stayed far back from the fray.  I would say anyone involved in breaching the barricades and getting up the steps could/should be labeled as such (they've intentionally and in some cases violently circumvented security and law enforcement protecting a federal property and elected government officials), and definitely anyone involved in storming and breaching the building.  Whether they premeditated it or not.
Looking at my most recent posts, it almost seems like I'm trying to become the Common Sense of DTF :lol
You'd have an easier time trying to bring the internet to the Amish.
Turns out chlamydia tastes pretty good.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25722
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1808 on: January 13, 2021, 02:02:16 PM »
Well, to me it's a setup as soon as race/nationality come into play.  If you didn't mean that, then ignore that part.  :)

I think there has to be SOME intent though, if you're going to slap labels.   It's a conscious decision to throw punches or break a window or something like that, and I'm a fan of being responsible for your own actions.  But I can't get my head around EVERY person there who didn't stand back and deescalate automatically being branded "domestic terrorists". Those words have weight.

Offline El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25091
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1809 on: January 13, 2021, 02:35:57 PM »
Well, frankly, I don't really think ANY of them were really "domestic terrorists".  Criminals, yes, most certainly, but I'm not sure what "domestic terrorist" means in this context. 

I've mentioned/questioned this at least twice here in the last week, positing the idea that if this event last week was conducted by a few thousand Arabs or Muslims, waiving Iraqi/Saudi/Isis flags, would you that be considered an act of terrorism? 

I don't know if you've purposefully avoided addressing it, or conveniently sidestepped it, or outright missed it.  I'd be interested to see a response.

Please don't set me up like that.   I've already said I don't care what we call it, and that's not based on nationality or religion.  If Tormund Giantsbane (the dude in the bear cloak) is a domestic terrorist, so be it.  If he was Arab or Muslim I would say the same thing. But then so are the violent actors in the riots from last year.   If we decide he (Tormund) isn't then neither is an AMERICAN Arab or Muslim protesting.  I don't play that game.   I would draw the line if there was actual violence and they were not acting on behalf of themselves as American citizen, but rather in place of a foreign government (I distinguish between Russian bots and Russian hacking this way as well).
I'm factoring premeditation towards a specific action in my definition. I don't know what the extent of Tormund's criminality was (but there is plenty), but terrorism or insurrection should require more than mindless rampaging. My hunch is that both the Antifa and the Trumptard crowd there were largely the same. Large gatherings of like-minded people who ran amok, and included a few people with the specific intent to fuck shit up.

Sorry, but are you saying that there were Antifa there at the Capitol?
So far I have seen zero proof of that, just as I have seen zero proof of widespread election fraud.

Lies are powerful and dangerous tools....
Not at all. I have no idea who planted the pipe bombs, but the people storming the capitol were Trumptards all the way. I was saying that the same description applies to the people running amok in the capitol as the people running amok in Portland or Kenosha. If we're going to call members of one group domestic terrorists it should probably go both ways.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Ben_Jamin

  • Posts: 11374
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm just a man, thrown into existence by the gods
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1810 on: January 13, 2021, 06:12:38 PM »
Well, frankly, I don't really think ANY of them were really "domestic terrorists".

Come on now, let's not go over this again. If we all stick to the same definition of 'terrorist' which according to the Cambridge dictionary is the following: "someone who uses violent action, or threats of violent action, for political purposes" then that's EXACTLY what the capitol mob did.

This is not a case of viewpoint, or not wanting to call it that. They're terrorists, they're all from the US, hence 'domestic terrorists'. Call things what they are.


We could use this modern term of Terrorists to describe the past, and see that the Lands of America were claimed by Terrorists.
I don't know how they can be so proud of winning with them odds. - Little Big Man

"We can't rewrite history. We can learn our own history, and share it with other people. While, we learn, from them, their history." -Me,Myself,I

Offline Elite

  • The 'other' Rich
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15382
  • Gender: Male
  • also, a tin teardrop
    • Overhaul
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1811 on: January 14, 2021, 03:15:34 AM »
Well, frankly, I don't really think ANY of them were really "domestic terrorists".

Come on now, let's not go over this again. If we all stick to the same definition of 'terrorist' which according to the Cambridge dictionary is the following: "someone who uses violent action, or threats of violent action, for political purposes" then that's EXACTLY what the capitol mob did.

This is not a case of viewpoint, or not wanting to call it that. They're terrorists, they're all from the US, hence 'domestic terrorists'. Call things what they are.

We could use this modern term of Terrorists to describe the past, and see that the Lands of America were claimed by Terrorists.

Yes. Yes, they were.

My country's success (and I would think a lot of countries') in the world was originally built on oppression of other people. Europeans are no saints either.


The question is; why would you want to do that? Naming people in the past 'terrorists' just to give them a label, doesn't really do anything, other than assigning a value judgement (which might be exactly what you want to do).

I can imagine, Benjamin (you especially!), that this is a touchy subject and I don't mean to be rude in any way, but the thing is, that past has happened and there's nothing we can do about it now, except be aware of the consequences of those action, so that we can prevent similar things from happening in the future. I am not proud that my country's history contains slavery as well, but it's also not something I can actively do something about, nor can I (personally) be held accountable for the things my ancestors did.


With that said, I think it is very important to call things happening NOW as they are. That's why I keep bringing up the fact that this capitol mob were (largely, not all of them) terrorists. The reason I make this distinction between the past and present, is because past events (however horrible they might have been) can not be changed. The present can, and should in case of terrible things happening, be changed based on the lessons we can take from the past.
Hey dude slow the fuck down so we can finish together at the same time.  :biggrin:
Squ
scRa are the resultaten of sound nog bring propey

Offline jingle.boy

  • I'm so ronery; so sad and ronery
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 33577
  • Gender: Male
  • DTF's resident deceased dictator
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1812 on: January 14, 2021, 06:23:03 AM »
Well, to me it's a setup as soon as race/nationality come into play.  If you didn't mean that, then ignore that part.  :)

I think there has to be SOME intent though, if you're going to slap labels.   It's a conscious decision to throw punches or break a window or something like that, and I'm a fan of being responsible for your own actions.  But I can't get my head around EVERY person there who didn't stand back and deescalate automatically being branded "domestic terrorists". Those words have weight.

I only used the Arab/Muslim examples because of what seemed to be a focus on the word "domestic".  Ergo, "terrorism" used on it's own seemed to imply foreign actors.  Regardless, we're unnecessarily getting into the weeds here.  You and I interpret the events of last Wednesday (among other things  ;)) quite differently.  I see what you're saying on your second point here, but on the flipside, those that didn't pre-plan to storm inside the Capitol, damage/ransack the place, intimidate police/security ... I'd still consider them terrorists.  Additionally, just because people did hang back on the lawn or the streets doesn't mean they aren't / can't be considered "terrorists".  It's not a physical line that defines what would/could be defined as terrorism.  It's a behaviour and set of actions, and not easily applied with a broad stroke.
Looking at my most recent posts, it almost seems like I'm trying to become the Common Sense of DTF :lol
You'd have an easier time trying to bring the internet to the Amish.
Turns out chlamydia tastes pretty good.

Offline Ben_Jamin

  • Posts: 11374
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm just a man, thrown into existence by the gods
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1813 on: January 14, 2021, 09:54:38 AM »
Well, frankly, I don't really think ANY of them were really "domestic terrorists".

Come on now, let's not go over this again. If we all stick to the same definition of 'terrorist' which according to the Cambridge dictionary is the following: "someone who uses violent action, or threats of violent action, for political purposes" then that's EXACTLY what the capitol mob did.

This is not a case of viewpoint, or not wanting to call it that. They're terrorists, they're all from the US, hence 'domestic terrorists'. Call things what they are.

We could use this modern term of Terrorists to describe the past, and see that the Lands of America were claimed by Terrorists.

Yes. Yes, they were.

My country's success (and I would think a lot of countries') in the world was originally built on oppression of other people. Europeans are no saints either.


The question is; why would you want to do that? Naming people in the past 'terrorists' just to give them a label, doesn't really do anything, other than assigning a value judgement (which might be exactly what you want to do).


Exactly, you can label people anything. Once you label someone, and if you are good manipulator of people, you can get people to shun the other based on that label. You can manipulate the mob to consider them guilty, without evidence that person is what you are calling them. That is what people are doing right now. Labelling them Domestic Terrorists without actually being convicted of being the domestic terrorist. It's relative to the salem witch Trials, when people hung women because they were labelled as being a witch. And hanging my native peoples, for being pagan, or doing heresy, and there are people out there whom still think this of our people and other people.


I can imagine, Benjamin (you especially!), that this is a touchy subject and I don't mean to be rude in any way, but the thing is, that past has happened and there's nothing we can do about it now, except be aware of the consequences of those action, so that we can prevent similar things from happening in the future. I am not proud that my country's history contains slavery as well, but it's also not something I can actively do something about, nor can I (personally) be held accountable for the things my ancestors did.


The past is the past, but that doesn't mean they are not doing what they did in the past today. It's just more veiled, changed, updated, and evolved, into the present day terms. They are still doing these atrocities, and are treating us like we don't exist at all. Just look at our education system, and being from New Mexico, it's amazing how many Americans think we are a part of Mexico, even at that, It's an entire culture shock to tourists from the big cities, you can see it in there eyes and the way they present themselves, almost like how I see people's body motions and reactions when they're at a museum or zoo. 

Trump did it by blasting a tribes gravesite for his wall. You still got oil companies, wanting to drill for oil, or in the terms of the past, Mine for Oil. Mining is a big factor in how we were treated and the rise of everything in the world. That alone is fascinating, just how much came from the Americas.

But what you are saying about the past being the past, is exactly how and why I am upset with my own people for crying victim and blaming the other, yet while doing nothing to be whom we once were, and just accepting the assimilation. What upsets me, is they are just talking about one aspect of our cause of Identity Struggles, Colonializm and Slavery, and not the Mining that was the cause of this Slavery. To me, and what I see, is this Mining is still going on today. That's what I mean by they're still the same just evolved and has the face and look of the present day, modern era.


With that said, I think it is very important to call things happening NOW as they are. That's why I keep bringing up the fact that this capitol mob were (largely, not all of them) terrorists. The reason I make this distinction between the past and present, is because past events (however horrible they might have been) can not be changed. The present can, and should in case of terrible things happening, be changed based on the lessons we can take from the past.

So what is the lesson here? and who are the ones that should be learning from this lesson? The people or the Politicians? I say both. The politicians need to start listening to the people and let their voices be heard, or else you get what just happened. The people also need to start being more self-reliant, and less reliant on the government, that alone puts stress on the government system as it has to work harder to accommodate the amount of people relying on the government, especially if they are not doing their part to help.

The politicians shouldn't be going around labelling people something just because they don't agree with them, or don't want to bother listening to their concerns. They have always been this way.

I don't know how they can be so proud of winning with them odds. - Little Big Man

"We can't rewrite history. We can learn our own history, and share it with other people. While, we learn, from them, their history." -Me,Myself,I

Offline Ben_Jamin

  • Posts: 11374
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm just a man, thrown into existence by the gods
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1814 on: January 14, 2021, 10:02:26 AM »
Well, frankly, I don't really think ANY of them were really "domestic terrorists".  Criminals, yes, most certainly, but I'm not sure what "domestic terrorist" means in this context. 

I've mentioned/questioned this at least twice here in the last week, positing the idea that if this event last week was conducted by a few thousand Arabs or Muslims, waiving Iraqi/Saudi/Isis flags, would you that be considered an act of terrorism? 

I don't know if you've purposefully avoided addressing it, or conveniently sidestepped it, or outright missed it.  I'd be interested to see a response.

Please don't set me up like that.   I've already said I don't care what we call it, and that's not based on nationality or religion.  If Tormund Giantsbane (the dude in the bear cloak) is a domestic terrorist, so be it.  If he was Arab or Muslim I would say the same thing. But then so are the violent actors in the riots from last year.   If we decide he (Tormund) isn't then neither is an AMERICAN Arab or Muslim protesting.  I don't play that game.   I would draw the line if there was actual violence and they were not acting on behalf of themselves as American citizen, but rather in place of a foreign government (I distinguish between Russian bots and Russian hacking this way as well).
I'm factoring premeditation towards a specific action in my definition. I don't know what the extent of Tormund's criminality was (but there is plenty), but terrorism or insurrection should require more than mindless rampaging. My hunch is that both the Antifa and the Trumptard crowd there were largely the same. Large gatherings of like-minded people who ran amok, and included a few people with the specific intent to fuck shit up.


Like America, I saw a melting pot of reasons why people were there.

There were those whom were waiting for this moment to seize the opportunity for Revolution. There were those that wanted to have proof that they were at some major event, and could say "See, I was there." You have people who had to see it for their own eyes, to see for themselves what really goes on. You have people whom were gullible and believed this was the insurrection that the mighty DJT was summoned to accomplish. You have people there who are just upset, they didn't even bother hearing the case of "Election Fraud", and feel silenced.

There were many different reasons why people went, and why we shouldn't be labeling anybody there, until the FBI does their case and finds them guilty of Domestic Terrorism. Isn't this why we have the judicial system in the first place?...so we wouldn't have Mob Rule determining the fate of someone.
I don't know how they can be so proud of winning with them odds. - Little Big Man

"We can't rewrite history. We can learn our own history, and share it with other people. While, we learn, from them, their history." -Me,Myself,I

Offline Ben_Jamin

  • Posts: 11374
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm just a man, thrown into existence by the gods
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1815 on: January 14, 2021, 10:13:35 AM »
Well, frankly, I don't really think ANY of them were really "domestic terrorists".  Criminals, yes, most certainly, but I'm not sure what "domestic terrorist" means in this context. 

I've mentioned/questioned this at least twice here in the last week, positing the idea that if this event last week was conducted by a few thousand Arabs or Muslims, waiving Iraqi/Saudi/Isis flags, would you that be considered an act of terrorism? 

I don't know if you've purposefully avoided addressing it, or conveniently sidestepped it, or outright missed it.  I'd be interested to see a response.

Please don't set me up like that.   I've already said I don't care what we call it, and that's not based on nationality or religion.  If Tormund Giantsbane (the dude in the bear cloak) is a domestic terrorist, so be it.  If he was Arab or Muslim I would say the same thing. But then so are the violent actors in the riots from last year.   If we decide he (Tormund) isn't then neither is an AMERICAN Arab or Muslim protesting.  I don't play that game.   I would draw the line if there was actual violence and they were not acting on behalf of themselves as American citizen, but rather in place of a foreign government (I distinguish between Russian bots and Russian hacking this way as well).

I'm really not trying to 'set you up' nor do I see how it is a setup.  In my mind, terrorism is terrorism... it need not carry the additional moniker of "domestic", but it's a commonly done thing.  I simply provided an alternatively comparable scenario that would often be recognized as terrorism.  If your answer was no, I wanted to hear the rational; if the answer was yes, then I would say the label of "domestic" terrorism would aptly apply.

Are 100% of the people last week on Capitol Hill "terrorists"?  I wouldn't think so.  Some people were truly just demonstrating, and stayed far back from the fray.  I would say anyone involved in breaching the barricades and getting up the steps could/should be labeled as such (they've intentionally and in some cases violently circumvented security and law enforcement protecting a federal property and elected government officials), and definitely anyone involved in storming and breaching the building.  Whether they premeditated it or not.

Have you seen the videos of the people in the building. They look like they're taking a tour. Only a handful of those that actually went in, caused damage. Not all who went in started it. Once, the doors are open, people will flock inside, that's the point of an insurrection, which is the precursor to a Revolution. But if we want to go into definitions, this definition Revolution states "activity or movement designed to effect fundamental changes in the socioeconomic situation" and by that definition, you could consider any protest a revolution, right?

But the FBI has the people they are concerned about posted on the board, and those people are the only ones of concern and should be considered truly being deserving of the Domestic Terrorist label. Will, they get them to talk about any other plans, who knows?...



I don't know how they can be so proud of winning with them odds. - Little Big Man

"We can't rewrite history. We can learn our own history, and share it with other people. While, we learn, from them, their history." -Me,Myself,I

Offline jingle.boy

  • I'm so ronery; so sad and ronery
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 33577
  • Gender: Male
  • DTF's resident deceased dictator
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1816 on: January 14, 2021, 11:25:21 AM »
Yes, I have seen the videos of people walking around like it was a guided tour.

I trust you've seen the pics and videos of windows being smashed, police intimidated and threatened, and a hoard (easily a few dozen) people using their collective mass like a battering ram while police tried to barricade and prevent them from entering - with one officer in very clear distress over getting crushed by it?  Or masses over-running the police lines both inside and out?  Just in case you hadn't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVZvp-Dv0gg
https://youtu.be/lfP_5L8epow?t=143

Police don't defend like this for "only a handful of people".
Looking at my most recent posts, it almost seems like I'm trying to become the Common Sense of DTF :lol
You'd have an easier time trying to bring the internet to the Amish.
Turns out chlamydia tastes pretty good.

Offline Ben_Jamin

  • Posts: 11374
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm just a man, thrown into existence by the gods
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1817 on: January 14, 2021, 11:49:11 AM »
Yes, I have seen the videos of people walking around like it was a guided tour.

I trust you've seen the pics and videos of windows being smashed, police intimidated and threatened, and a hoard (easily a few dozen) people using their collective mass like a battering ram while police tried to barricade and prevent them from entering - with one officer in very clear distress over getting crushed by it?  Or masses over-running the police lines both inside and out?  Just in case you hadn't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVZvp-Dv0gg
https://youtu.be/lfP_5L8epow?t=143

Police don't defend like this for "only a handful of people".

Yes I have, and when you open the Floodgates, it's like hell with people trying to get inside from a hole in the wall. There's going to be pushing, shoving, and all of that.



This is where it then goes into the intent of the person. Was that persons intent on being violent? Or was it to just be part of something?

I am saying this as you have to take all this into consideration, before labelling someone as a terrorist. Because being labelled a terrorist is big deal. The same as being labelled a pedophile does....And I am not defending these at all.

The system works for people not to be accused of being labelled something before being proven that person is or isn't what they're being labelled as.

We can label people ourselves, but in the end, the judicial system has the final say in these matters. If you have a problem with it, then you have a problem with the judicial system.
I don't know how they can be so proud of winning with them odds. - Little Big Man

"We can't rewrite history. We can learn our own history, and share it with other people. While, we learn, from them, their history." -Me,Myself,I

Offline cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 27005
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1818 on: January 14, 2021, 12:03:52 PM »
I'm going to let the FBI determine who did what here, but I think it's safe to believe there were some domestic terrorists involved, and lots of other people who got caught up in the moment.  However, if you trespassed I have no issue with the FBI charging them and labelling such people as criminals even if they were otherwise peaceful protesters who got caught up in the heat of the moment.  You don't get a pass just because you ended up being apart of the mob mentality.

Offline El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25091
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Trump Tweets (sorry Stadler)
« Reply #1819 on: January 14, 2021, 12:09:05 PM »
Yes, I have seen the videos of people walking around like it was a guided tour.

I trust you've seen the pics and videos of windows being smashed, police intimidated and threatened, and a hoard (easily a few dozen) people using their collective mass like a battering ram while police tried to barricade and prevent them from entering - with one officer in very clear distress over getting crushed by it?  Or masses over-running the police lines both inside and out?  Just in case you hadn't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVZvp-Dv0gg
https://youtu.be/lfP_5L8epow?t=143

Police don't defend like this for "only a handful of people".
In the grand scheme of things it was a handful of people, though. The rally size was in the tens of thousands, and the number of people actually forcing their way into the capitol is going to be less than 500.


I'm going to let the FBI determine who did what here, but I think it's safe to believe there were some domestic terrorists involved, and lots of other people who got caught up in the moment.  However, if you trespassed I have no issue with the FBI charging them and labelling such people as criminals even if they were otherwise peaceful protesters who got caught up in the heat of the moment.  You don't get a pass just because you ended up being apart of the mob mentality.
Absolutely. And that was kind of my point about the handful. You've got a whole lot of idiot trumptards, a smaller subset of unruly trumptards who got swept up into the herd, and an even smaller subset of those who qualify as legitimate insurrectionists. Not my place to sort them out, but I think the distinctions are very important.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson