Slashdot Mirror
Pentagon Wants To Predict Anti-Trump Protests Using Social Media Surveillance (vice.com)
Alice Marshall shares an excerpt from Motherboard: The United States government is accelerating efforts to monitor social media to preempt major anti-government protests in the U.S., according to scientific research, official government documents, and patent filings reviewed by Motherboard. The social media posts of American citizens who don't like President Donald Trump are the focus of the latest U.S. military-funded research. The research, funded by the U.S. Army and co-authored by a researcher based at the West Point Military Academy, is part of a wider effort by the Trump administration to consolidate the U.S. military's role and influence on domestic intelligence.
The vast scale of this effort is reflected in a number of government social media surveillance patents granted this year, which relate to a spy program that the Trump administration outsourced to a private company last year. Experts interviewed by Motherboard say that the Pentagon's new technology research may have played a role in amendments this April to the Joint Chiefs of Staff homeland defense doctrine, which widen the Pentagon's role in providing intelligence for domestic "emergencies," including an "insurrection."
The vast scale of this effort is reflected in a number of government social media surveillance patents granted this year, which relate to a spy program that the Trump administration outsourced to a private company last year. Experts interviewed by Motherboard say that the Pentagon's new technology research may have played a role in amendments this April to the Joint Chiefs of Staff homeland defense doctrine, which widen the Pentagon's role in providing intelligence for domestic "emergencies," including an "insurrection."
Gosh, is there no limit to this miserable sack of pus' stupidity and ignorance ? Did he seriously tell a journalist and the entire world that he would sign an executive order to effectively repel the 14th amendement of the Constitution of the United States ?
Yes he did. But you know what ? It's not because he's stupid. It's because he knows perfectly well that his supporters are stupid, and that he can say pretty much any complete absurdity and absolute lie, but if it's what they want to hear, then they'll believe him anyway.
After all, didn't he get elected even after basically calling all his supporters fucking morons ?
"I could stand in the middle of fifth avenue and shoot someone, and I still wouldn't lose any voters".
No you can take your false equivalence and shove it. I've always thought political parties were a bad idea, and nobody is a saint, but the degree of lying and cheating that people in the current US republican party will stoop to is unacceptable in a civil society. Your one example shows your argument is hollow. The GOP was all for repealing the ACA because it sounds good in a campaign slogan but didn't do it because they have no real alternative policy, just talking points. That's a concrete promise that was broken. Then you say some random squishy crap about Obama not sticking to "hope and change". Nothing concrete. On the same issue, the democrats ran on revamping healthcare, and that's what happened. Not single-payer, but the ACA was a concrete improvement to the status quo that could be put into law at the time despite an obstructionist opposition party. One of the main motivations for the ACA was getting the healthcare part of the national economy and national debt and deficit more under control, something the GOP claims they want to do but never do. Your claim that both of these are parties saying one thing and doing another is simply false equivalence.