| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
On January 12 2021 04:27 farvacola wrote: It's a great move on his part because if he wins, well he wins, and if he loses, it sharpens the arguments in favor of DC statehood. Taxation without representation is complete bullshit. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On January 12 2021 04:39 ShoCkeyy wrote: Taxation without representation is complete bullshit. It's ostensibly why we fought the war for independence. In theory, nobody should be against giving DC statehood. But here we are. There are a lot of people waiting for their chance to press charges on Trump right now. It's like he spent his 4 years in office committing crimes in broad daylight or something. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14047 Posts
they were using free trial software for their user data protection. Anyway here's a link to 57 terabytes of archived data from the site. https://archive.org/details/archiveteam?and[]=parler&sin=&sort=-publicdate | ||
|
oBlade
United States5765 Posts
On January 12 2021 03:07 Dan HH wrote: Esoteric? I'm not sure that point can be made any simpler but I'll try. Direct action (including riots or revolutions) by itself is neither positive nor negative. The comparision between the number of burning cars during the deposition of a dictator with the number of burning cars due to the result of a world cup match is absurd. What we've been discussing for the past 5 days is direct action based on a complete fabrication. If BLM had destroyed buildings in response to Jussie Smoilet's (sp?) claims and you would have compared that with the storming of the capitol then you wouldn't have made an ass of yourself. Oh I understand where we've crossed wires now. You believe I put forth the claim that "if left support BLM right to violence, left must support right to storm Capitol," whereas we were actually talking about the proportionality of police responses based on different variables, which was very interesting. Your point is that burning down police stations, federal courthouses, is a force for good when someone gets shot by a police officer, whereas there's no such equivalent grievance to justify the latter action, therefore I would be wrong: all I can say is I'm sorry you've fallen into an imaginary argument. It's quite interesting, the police chief says he asked for support many times (I don't know if this is CYA), but he was rejected or delayed, the DC mayor also said she didn't want the response to look disproportionate like in the 2020 protests. Despite it being a right wing event. That's a weird kind of reverse political correctness. People spend years explaining how dangerous the right can be, and then don't take steps commensurate with that belief when it's important? The bottomless incompetence of government. On January 12 2021 03:17 Liquid`Drone wrote: What if I want nothing bad to happen to people who are listening to speeches, wearing hats, getting riled up or smiling, but I'm fine with negative things happening to people attempting to storm congress? I'm not sure whether you've actually been following the thread or reading any posts in this thread or watching the news lately, but something happened Wednesday 5 days ago and people now are responding to those specific events, they're not talking about that other stuff you seemingly randomly decided to mention. Those examples were for responding to someone's attempted soul read smearing me as blind, a propagandist, and insincere spinster, which is obnoxious. It's my reciprocal take on what causes bias in the public consciousness. You only have to read as far as one page to see why I mentioned that.. On January 12 2021 03:17 Liquid`Drone wrote: Some of the people involved in the storming of congress wanted to kidnap, and overwhelmingly likely, kill congress members. They certainly wanted them to overturn the election results. Obviously not all of them were all that dangerous - seems like a large majority were guiled by Trump into thinking what they were doing was a just and fair thing and that they'd be protected by the god-emperor, and a lot of them behaved more like drunk tourists than like insurrectionists. Trump is the main culprit here. But I also can't really be made to feel all that badly about the people who died, or the people who are losing their jobs for having taken part of this. Like, the murders of George Floyd or Breonna Taylor sparked big protests. Some other ones, too. But almost 1000 african americans have been killed by police since 2016. Not all of those killings spark similar outrage - sometimes, if, for example, the police actually was threatened, if the person killed actually did pull out a gun, then it's largely considered justifiable self defense. The woman in question at Wednesday's coup attempt probably wasn't the offender most deserving of being shot, but I really can't be made to feel particularly bad for her, either. At best she gets a darwin award. It's fair enough. I can see an argument either way. But I won't be gaslit for questioning police competence. For example, let's say she was just a mentally ill conspiracy nut. I don't want police shooting mentally ill people for sport because someone was too stupid to plan to bring riot gear but they manage to be nonlethal with the 1776 larpers who actually attacked and murdered police. I hope also no harm comes to you for being a drunk tourist, or you lose your job for listening to the wrong speech. It's just very telling how both sides seem to have cared so little about violence until it arrived at their workplace. | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
https://www.state.gov/biographies/donald-j-trump/ Does this mean they're fast tracking the impeachment? Apparently Mike Pence arrived to the WH today, don't have a source on that just yet. But this is starting to blow up on Twitter. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On January 12 2021 04:47 Sermokala wrote: So I will admit that I didn't understand exactly what was being released and while I don't really understand most of the exacts the Photo ID's have not been breached but video with GSP meta data photo's with peoples faces and every post (deleted or not) has all been downloaded through various means. the FBI probably has all of that they were using free trial software for their user data protection. Anyway here's a link to 57 terabytes of archived data from the site. https://archive.org/details/archiveteam?and[]=parler&sin=&sort=-publicdate Parler was literally run with the attitude that everything would just magically sort itself out, like a Libertarian fantasy. Turns out when nobody did the work to make sure the site was secure or moderated, it just... wasn't. | ||
|
Yurie
11929 Posts
On January 12 2021 05:05 ShoCkeyy wrote: So the DoS has wrote in their page for Trump that today his term ends at 7:40pm EST. https://www.state.gov/biographies/donald-j-trump/ Does this mean they're fast tracking the impeachment? Apparently Mike Pence arrived to the WH today, don't have a source on that just yet. But this is starting to blow up on Twitter. It seems to be handling time zones badly if that is what it says: Donald J. Trump's term ended on 2021-01-11 19:38:51. More likely that the page got hacked than it being an official announcement. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21953 Posts
On January 12 2021 05:05 ShoCkeyy wrote: Some government employee having a laugh?So the DoS has wrote in their page for Trump that today his term ends at 7:40pm EST. https://www.state.gov/biographies/donald-j-trump/ Does this mean they're fast tracking the impeachment? Apparently Mike Pence arrived to the WH today, don't have a source on that just yet. But this is starting to blow up on Twitter. There hasn't been an impeachment conviction vote. Pence invoking the 25th doesn't instantly end Trumps term, that would require Trump to not contest or if he did Congress to vote. Unless Trump stepped down voluntarily and I would see that has unlikely but possible if Pence promised him a pardon. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2649 Posts
Oh I understand where we've crossed wires now. You believe I put forth the claim that "if left support BLM right to violence, left must support right to storm Capitol," whereas we were actually talking about the proportionality of police responses based on different variables, which was very interesting. Your point is that burning down police stations, federal courthouses, is a force for good when someone gets shot by a police officer, whereas there's no such equivalent grievance to justify the latter action, therefore I would be wrong: all I can say is I'm sorry you've fallen into an imaginary argument. It's quite interesting, the police chief says he asked for support many times (I don't know if this is CYA), but he was rejected or delayed, the DC mayor also said she didn't want the response to look disproportionate like in the 2020 protests. Despite it being a right wing event. That's a weird kind of reverse political correctness. People spend years explaining how dangerous the right can be, and then don't take steps commensurate with that belief when it's important? The bottomless incompetence of government. The failure of security falls on law enforcement specifically, not government in general and certainly not politicians except for those in the executive branch. Yes democrats have spent the last 4 years warning people about extreme right wing violence. You also had BLM making a point that large parts of law enforcement are racist right wing fucks which leads to disproportionate violence against black people and no violence against right wing groups. So why are you confused when police leadership fail to properly gauge how dangerous this group was. And the politicians who could have overruled them was actively egging the rioters/terrorists on... It's fair enough. I can see an argument either way. But I won't be gaslit for questioning police competence. For example, let's say she was just a mentally ill conspiracy nut. I don't want police shooting mentally ill people for sport because someone was too stupid to plan to bring riot gear but they manage to be nonlethal with the 1776 larpers who actually attacked and murdered police. I hope also no harm comes to you for being a drunk tourist, or you lose your job for listening to the wrong speech. It's just very telling how both sides seem to have cared so little about violence until it arrived at their workplace. The police on site acted incredibly competent. Their leadership just didn't want to acknowledge that "1776 larpers" are actually domestic terrorists. They also didn't shoot anyone for sport it was necessary (because of failures in leadership in law enforcement, due to bias towards right wing extremists). The fact that they only had to kill one person is extremely impressive and show great restraint. It's also funny that you think the crowd were "drunk tourists" who just listened to "the wrong speech". It just boils down to victim blaming on a group level. "I'm sorry you're honor, we were just drunk and in town and heard this speech so we had to break into the Capitol, murder a police officer, try to get at the VP and senators in order to try to stop a democratic election. We didn't really mean to but look, the police lines were so thin! It was only like 20 cops in riot gear trying to hold the line. They were basically asking for it and we couldn't help our self so we just had to do it. It's really all their fault. In the end they shot one person when we tried to rush the VP!" It's the equivalent of blaming a rape victim for having a short skirt and being drunk and then having the gall to complain that she punched you once. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28707 Posts
On January 12 2021 04:58 oBlade wrote: Those examples were for responding to someone's attempted soul read smearing me as blind, a propagandist, and insincere spinster, which is obnoxious. It's my reciprocal take on what causes bias in the public consciousness. You only have to read as far as one page to see why I mentioned that.. ya sorry the first paragraph of my post was a bit rude. I still don't really think the equivalences make sense but I don't have to be all sarcastic jerky about it. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15725 Posts
| ||
|
pmh
1366 Posts
It seems a bit odd to me that 1400 officers would be unable to stop 8000 protestors,isnt the ratio between law enforcement and protestors way lower usually? | ||
|
Lmui
Canada6215 Posts
On January 12 2021 05:48 pmh wrote: In an article overhere that analyzes how the storming of the capitol could have happend it was said that 1400 police officers where unable to stop 8000 protestors. Are these numbers correct and where 1400 police officers available? It seems a bit odd to me that 1400 officers would be unable to stop 8000 protestors,isnt the ratio between law enforcement and protestors way lower usually? It didn't look like there were anywhere near 1400 officers in the vicinity. Maybe 1400 in the police force, a fraction of which are actively working, and a fraction of that who're actually at the capitol buildings. None of them were equipped for crowd control either, no tear gas, rubber bullets etc that you'd normally see used in cases like this. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9137 Posts
On January 12 2021 04:58 oBlade wrote: Oh I understand where we've crossed wires now. You believe I put forth the claim that "if left support BLM right to violence, left must support right to storm Capitol," whereas we were actually talking about the proportionality of police responses based on different variables, which was very interesting. Your point is that burning down police stations, federal courthouses, is a force for good when someone gets shot by a police officer, whereas there's no such equivalent grievance to justify the latter action, therefore I would be wrong: all I can say is I'm sorry you've fallen into an imaginary argument. It's quite interesting, the police chief says he asked for support many times (I don't know if this is CYA), but he was rejected or delayed, the DC mayor also said she didn't want the response to look disproportionate like in the 2020 protests. Despite it being a right wing event. That's a weird kind of reverse political correctness. People spend years explaining how dangerous the right can be, and then don't take steps commensurate with that belief when it's important? The bottomless incompetence of government. I responded to the troublesome equivalences in your post rather than to the main point you were interested in when you made it (letting people in as a strategy). The plural in my first post was because it was in response to a string of similar equivalences missing the forest for the trees on purpose or otherwise. And while yours wasn't the most egregious of them, I do think you are playing coy now by saying you were purely discussing police responses. These two quotes in particular: "if her skin had been another color, the incident would have sparked its own protests or riots about police brutality." "progressive officials have used their own discretion to try to appease those groups through leniency" Are trying to point out a hypocrisy that only exists if we discard the 'real vs imaginary grievances' part of the two events and focuses on skin color and property damage in a vacuum. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21953 Posts
On January 12 2021 05:24 JimmiC wrote: Right wing domestic terrorists have topped the threat list for as long as I can remember. People in charge know how big of a threat they are. But there are limited ways to stop politicians from appealing to them and riling them up.People have been trying to explain how dangerous the right is to those in charge for some time, but they won't listen. Maybe now they will. It is not so much incompetence of government as it is willful disregard of those people loyal to Trump believe facts. Your second paragraph is some really hard slippery sloping missed in with some false equivalence. | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
In the wake of this move, officials said the number of analytic reports produced by DHS about domestic terrorism, including the threat from white supremacists, has dropped significantly. People in and close to the department said this has generated significant concern at headquarters. “It’s especially problematic given the growth in right-wing extremism and domestic terrorism we are seeing in the U.S. and abroad,” one former intelligence official told The Daily Beast. ( article about it, one of many : https://www.thedailybeast.com/homeland-security-disbands-domestic-terror-intelligence-unit ) | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15725 Posts
| ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On January 12 2021 06:34 Nevuk wrote: Well, in 2018 Trump shut down the DHS focused on domestic terrorism. So the agency specifically created for this purpose was hamstrung in any efforts to combat it. ( article about it, one of many : https://www.thedailybeast.com/homeland-security-disbands-domestic-terror-intelligence-unit ) Boy, that doesn't sound at all like that time Trump shut down the pandemic response team put in place specifically to deal with a problem that emerges during his tenure, while he simultaneously fans the flames and exacerbates the problem... Totally new behavior for him. | ||
|
Lmui
Canada6215 Posts
On January 12 2021 07:04 Mohdoo wrote: Parler is suing Amazon. By my estimation, Amazon likely has 10x the number of lawyers as Parler has employees. There's no way Amazon doesn't have a clause saying they can cancel service for any reason whatsoever. And here we go: If we reasonably believe any of Your Content violates the law, infringes or misappropriates the rights of any third party, or otherwise violates a material term of the Agreement (including the documentation, the Service Terms, or the Acceptable Use Policy) ("Prohibited Content"), we will notify you of the Prohibited Content and may request that such content be removed from the Services or access to it be disabled. If you do not remove or disable access to the Prohibited Content within 2 business days of our notice, we may remove or disable access to the Prohibited Content or suspend the Services to the extent we are not able to remove or disable access to the Prohibited Content. Notwithstanding the foregoing, we may remove or disable access to any Prohibited Content without prior notice in connection with illegal content, where the content may disrupt or threaten the Services or in accordance with applicable law or any judicial, regulatory or other governmental order or request. In the event that we remove Your Content without prior notice, we will provide prompt notice to you unless prohibited by law. We terminate the accounts of repeat infringers in appropriate circumstances. I think that "reasonably believe any of Your Content violates the law," applies so... "If you do not remove or disable access to the Prohibited Content within 2 business days of our notice, we may remove or disable access to the Prohibited Content or suspend the Services to the extent we are not able to remove or disable access to the Prohibited Content." takes effect. Parler is starting from behind against one of the richest companies in the world. Good luck. Even if they won against Amazon, they'd have to win against one of either Google or Apple in court too, and I don't see Parler having deep enough pockets to win lawsuits against 2 of the big 5 tech companies. | ||
| ||
|
|
IPSL
ZZZero vs rasowy
Napoleon vs KameZerg
OSC
BSL 21
Tarson vs Julia
Doodle vs OldBoy
eOnzErG vs WolFix
StRyKeR vs Aeternum
Sparkling Tuna Cup
RSL Revival
Reynor vs sOs
Maru vs Ryung
Kung Fu Cup
Cure vs TBD
Reynor vs TBD
WardiTV Korean Royale
BSL 21
JDConan vs Semih
Dragon vs Dienmax
Tech vs NewOcean
TerrOr vs Artosis
IPSL
Dewalt vs WolFix
eOnzErG vs Bonyth
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
