Could be and in any regard it's pretty fucked up regardless their motivation because they are toying with people's life and well being to morally grandstand.
"what do we want, dead cops. when do we want it, now". Would they be peaceful if the cops didn't enforce the peace and allowed anti-BLM protestors that are known to be violent to clash with them?
Few questions Why stop at 9/11? What about the 90's, 80's and 70's? I am sorry but looking at a small piece of data to skew it to what you want to be is disingenuous considering the 6 year calm after 9/11. http://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/...
That only runs to 2010 but it very much puts into context what you are claiming. Or "Only 6% of
groups that have attacked the United States are focused on a religious ideology". But from what I can tell, leftist ideology is popular among terrorists.
What is the point in only having a partial view of data?
Are you more concerned about a lone wolf or a group?
Is everyone's home in anyway shape or form connected to the bank robber? It's not your home. It's your deposit slip in the bank that the police want to dust for fingerprints against known criminals.
It's one website. It's self described purpose frames them to be of relevance. In addition to the evidence used to justify the warrant.
Do we limit the warrant for any other server for other crimes? No, then why is this different?
But if your message is to advocate to dehumanize and commit genocide on others, then we have a different kind of speech here.
Did you say the same thing with "What do want, dead cops. When do we want it, now!"
Words are not violent.
you need to question why your are ideologically standing behind a history of atrocity and genocide to get your message out.
If you do not value free speech I think you need to reconsider what it means to live in a western democratic society. You cannot have democracy without free speech. You have free speech if you allow anyone to say any stupid shit. I know I am free because a neo nazi can say stupid shit I don't agree with and I will defend their right to say it.
There are some violent BLM protesters. The entire movement does not stand for doing violence. So that's the false equivalence.
Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists on the other hand are inherently violent groups
I must have missed all the violence that happened with every march these groups have done. You are saying that they are inherently violent but they have only spoken their views. Racist views or not they have not done any action. When do youd ecide a white supremacist march should be violently shut down? if they are inherently violent why is it antifa and bamn are more violent? why is it violence only erupts when antifa show up and the cops do nothing?
providing they remain within the bounds of the law.
I don't understand when antifa are antagonizing violence with government complicity.
not grouping Neo-Nazis in with groups like BLM and Antifa.
so far out of those 3 groups, 2 of them have been violent. Words are not violent.
Fascists be challenged at every turn.
It matters how you challenge them. Violence is NOT the answer.
African-Americans be treated fairly and without bias,
That goes for every race. It is fashionable to hate white people. Just ask the vice mayor of charlottsville.
, I said you should limit the warrant to those that had contact with the known offenders.
How are you going to know until you have the data? How are you going to know who helped the conspirators 2 steps away ring leaders etc? Are you goign to trust the company to hand over all relevant data or are you going to get it all and sift through it yourself?
By the same reasoning, they might as well get a warrant for every store in the Charlotte area which sells tiki torches to hand over all their receipts from last week.
No, because a store has a different reason for existing beyond supplying tiki torches to white supremacists. Unlike the self description the website has. When framed in their own description it's a little clearer as why you would be able to have a larger scope. In addition to whatever existing evidence they have to get the warrant in the first place.
the place to be searched is the website listed. The things to be seized is information relevant to an ongoing investigation regarding riots and conspiracy to riot.
if you have a better idea for warrants I would love to hear it. Actually, nvm considering how you respond.
Absolutely. To shut up cunts like you, I'd be okay with completely legalizing child porn. A few kids getting diddled is peanuts in comparison to the amount of freedom it's led to us sacrificing.
The warrant is for the server that may have hosted illegal content not the individual people. Do you limit other warrants for other criminal activity on other servers? No, then why is this different?
Ok, if you think it's false equivalence. Would you blame BLM if they were marching down the street chanting "what do want dead cops, when do want it now". The government rescinds their permit to protest, orders the cops to not intervene should violence happen, and the police direct the BLM march toward anti-blm protestors that have been known to be violent? After which, is then banned from every private server and social media platform and blamed as the ones who started it?
BLM has been tied to violent perpetrators and associated to rioting more than once. BAMN has been violent and leaders arrest for inciting riots/rioting. Antifa has repeatedly used violence and antagonized violence with other protests. You may not like people doing it, but it isn't false equivalence when each has promoted hatred toward a race as the vice mayor of Charottesville have shown. There is blatant hypocrisy.
Of all the neo-nazi/white supremacists protests that happen, they only seem to get violent when the police don't do their job and antifa or bamn show up antagonizing violence. Why is that?
What is the purpose of facebook and what is the purpose of the site listed in the warrant? Apples and oranges. Even their self described mission frames their site in such away that lends itself to the idea that it was used by rioters to organize riots.
Would you limit the search warrant if the server was hosting child porn or any other illegal content?
Using a warrant is not getting around anyone's rights. That is the proper way to do these types of things. If you are going to argue scope, stick with scope. If you are goign to argue "get around people's rights" then I think you too hyperbolic to talk with because a warrant was issued by the independent judiciary. If you have a better idea to do these things... lets hear it.
It's not a strawman. If you limit the warrant to only the known 200 (assuming all used the same place to organize and assuming it is this website) you will not necessarily have the information to identify much less convict other conspirators. Do you limit other warrants for other criminal activity on other servers? No, then why is this different?
The point is that this is through a warrant approved by the independent judiciary and not the actions of the executive taken alone without input. A judge looked at the evidence and signed off on the warrant... Do you have any legal expertise to say your opinion has more merit than the judge giving the ok?
? How did we get from D-Day and the Civil Rights movement to bowing down to the sacred right of Nazis to preach hate?
First, the war ended. Second, they are fellow American citizens with every right that you have. Third, the civil rights in the constitutions apply to every American. Fourth, what makes America great is the fact that we allow neo-nazi's to speak because we afford the protections of law to every American citizen no matter what ideology they have. Finally, the government does not get to decide when the protections of law be rescinded based on political ideology.
This is the result of a government with a low level of voter representation and it's one that many predicted.
Particularly so with local elections and governments. In addition to expecting the federal government to handle the personal issues of citizens that are better handled by local governments.
So, that's a valid excuse for this abuse of Executive power?
The executive isn't acting alone and had a warrant.... I don't understand. How in any way is this abuse by the executive when they went through the proper channels obtain a warrant?
This dragnet?
If you have a server that is potentially hosting illegal activity, would you limit the warrant to be only known criminals or would you try to find conspirators and associates to known criminals? Particularly so when some of the crimes are conspiracy to riot.
you can bet good money that the courts will eventually side with the government -
Well then I look forward to your thesis and system that is better than warrants and a separate judiciary.
How is getting a warrant to find criminals wrong? That is the right way to do this sort of thing. WTF are you trying to say?
Do you know the evidence which was used to justify the warrant ? If so then why does the justice department disagree with your assessment that it is "wrong"?
You don't understand "conspiring to commit a crime", do you? If you use a server to commit a crime (planning a riot) then the "communication path" I mean "server" that was used to plan the riots warrants a look by the government and all relevant information to identify associates and conspirators of known criminals.
The primary purpose of the site was for legal organizing.
Are you sure about that with the ~200 felon rioters? Do you know the evidence the government has to get a warrant?
Slashdot Mirror
Could be and in any regard it's pretty fucked up regardless their motivation because they are toying with people's life and well being to morally grandstand.
lol, You missed it. It's a joke.
https://www.bing.com/search?q=...
Can I can an obligatory whoosh :)
Like many in the nation. Many a mind was lost that night. The night of a thousand Reeeee's.
If that is the case, where is the crowdfunding source for all the public defenders? Not for this one high profile case.
There is an irony to your statement that I don't think you intended or are aware. The public defenders office very expensive.
https://news.vice.com/article/...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Why is it different for other criminal activity on other servers?
the group espouses peaceful demonstrations.
"what do we want, dead cops. when do we want it, now". Would they be peaceful if the cops didn't enforce the peace and allowed anti-BLM protestors that are known to be violent to clash with them?
Few questions
Why stop at 9/11? What about the 90's, 80's and 70's? I am sorry but looking at a small piece of data to skew it to what you want to be is disingenuous considering the 6 year calm after 9/11. http://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/...
That only runs to 2010 but it very much puts into context what you are claiming. Or "Only 6% of
groups that have attacked the United States are focused on a religious ideology". But from what I can tell, leftist ideology is popular among terrorists.
What is the point in only having a partial view of data?
Are you more concerned about a lone wolf or a group?
Correction, it's not even your deposit slip. It's the banks registry of visitors.
Is everyone's home in anyway shape or form connected to the bank robber? It's not your home. It's your deposit slip in the bank that the police want to dust for fingerprints against known criminals.
It's one website. It's self described purpose frames them to be of relevance. In addition to the evidence used to justify the warrant.
Do we limit the warrant for any other server for other crimes? No, then why is this different?
But if your message is to advocate to dehumanize and commit genocide on others, then we have a different kind of speech here.
Did you say the same thing with "What do want, dead cops. When do we want it, now!"
Words are not violent.
you need to question why your are ideologically standing behind a history of atrocity and genocide to get your message out.
If you do not value free speech I think you need to reconsider what it means to live in a western democratic society. You cannot have democracy without free speech. You have free speech if you allow anyone to say any stupid shit. I know I am free because a neo nazi can say stupid shit I don't agree with and I will defend their right to say it.
The bowels didn't evacuate... Or did they?
There are some violent BLM protesters. The entire movement does not stand for doing violence. So that's the false equivalence.
Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists on the other hand are inherently violent groups
I must have missed all the violence that happened with every march these groups have done. You are saying that they are inherently violent but they have only spoken their views. Racist views or not they have not done any action. When do youd ecide a white supremacist march should be violently shut down? if they are inherently violent why is it antifa and bamn are more violent? why is it violence only erupts when antifa show up and the cops do nothing?
providing they remain within the bounds of the law.
I don't understand when antifa are antagonizing violence with government complicity.
not grouping Neo-Nazis in with groups like BLM and Antifa.
so far out of those 3 groups, 2 of them have been violent. Words are not violent.
Fascists be challenged at every turn.
It matters how you challenge them. Violence is NOT the answer.
African-Americans be treated fairly and without bias,
That goes for every race. It is fashionable to hate white people. Just ask the vice mayor of charlottsville.
, I said you should limit the warrant to those that had contact with the known offenders.
How are you going to know until you have the data? How are you going to know who helped the conspirators 2 steps away ring leaders etc? Are you goign to trust the company to hand over all relevant data or are you going to get it all and sift through it yourself?
By the same reasoning, they might as well get a warrant for every store in the Charlotte area which sells tiki torches to hand over all their receipts from last week.
No, because a store has a different reason for existing beyond supplying tiki torches to white supremacists. Unlike the self description the website has. When framed in their own description it's a little clearer as why you would be able to have a larger scope. In addition to whatever existing evidence they have to get the warrant in the first place.
the place to be searched is the website listed. The things to be seized is information relevant to an ongoing investigation regarding riots and conspiracy to riot.
if you have a better idea for warrants I would love to hear it. Actually, nvm considering how you respond.
Absolutely. To shut up cunts like you, I'd be okay with completely legalizing child porn. A few kids getting diddled is peanuts in comparison to the amount of freedom it's led to us sacrificing.
And you lost it. the fuck is wrong with you.
The warrant is for the server that may have hosted illegal content not the individual people. Do you limit other warrants for other criminal activity on other servers? No, then why is this different?
Ok, if you think it's false equivalence. Would you blame BLM if they were marching down the street chanting "what do want dead cops, when do want it now". The government rescinds their permit to protest, orders the cops to not intervene should violence happen, and the police direct the BLM march toward anti-blm protestors that have been known to be violent? After which, is then banned from every private server and social media platform and blamed as the ones who started it?
BLM has been tied to violent perpetrators and associated to rioting more than once. BAMN has been violent and leaders arrest for inciting riots/rioting. Antifa has repeatedly used violence and antagonized violence with other protests. You may not like people doing it, but it isn't false equivalence when each has promoted hatred toward a race as the vice mayor of Charottesville have shown. There is blatant hypocrisy.
Of all the neo-nazi/white supremacists protests that happen, they only seem to get violent when the police don't do their job and antifa or bamn show up antagonizing violence. Why is that?
What is the purpose of facebook and what is the purpose of the site listed in the warrant? Apples and oranges. Even their self described mission frames their site in such away that lends itself to the idea that it was used by rioters to organize riots.
Would you limit the search warrant if the server was hosting child porn or any other illegal content?
Using a warrant is not getting around anyone's rights. That is the proper way to do these types of things. If you are going to argue scope, stick with scope. If you are goign to argue "get around people's rights" then I think you too hyperbolic to talk with because a warrant was issued by the independent judiciary. If you have a better idea to do these things... lets hear it.
It's not a strawman. If you limit the warrant to only the known 200 (assuming all used the same place to organize and assuming it is this website) you will not necessarily have the information to identify much less convict other conspirators. Do you limit other warrants for other criminal activity on other servers? No, then why is this different?
The point is that this is through a warrant approved by the independent judiciary and not the actions of the executive taken alone without input. A judge looked at the evidence and signed off on the warrant... Do you have any legal expertise to say your opinion has more merit than the judge giving the ok?
? How did we get from D-Day and the Civil Rights movement to bowing down to the sacred right of Nazis to preach hate?
First, the war ended.
Second, they are fellow American citizens with every right that you have.
Third, the civil rights in the constitutions apply to every American.
Fourth, what makes America great is the fact that we allow neo-nazi's to speak because we afford the protections of law to every American citizen no matter what ideology they have.
Finally, the government does not get to decide when the protections of law be rescinded based on political ideology.
They got a warrant... What is supposed to happen if the government is investigating criminal activity?
This is the result of a government with a low level of voter representation and it's one that many predicted.
Particularly so with local elections and governments. In addition to expecting the federal government to handle the personal issues of citizens that are better handled by local governments.
So, that's a valid excuse for this abuse of Executive power?
The executive isn't acting alone and had a warrant.... I don't understand. How in any way is this abuse by the executive when they went through the proper channels obtain a warrant?
This dragnet?
If you have a server that is potentially hosting illegal activity, would you limit the warrant to be only known criminals or would you try to find conspirators and associates to known criminals? Particularly so when some of the crimes are conspiracy to riot.
you can bet good money that the courts will eventually side with the government -
Well then I look forward to your thesis and system that is better than warrants and a separate judiciary.
How is getting a warrant to find criminals wrong? That is the right way to do this sort of thing. WTF are you trying to say?
Do you know the evidence which was used to justify the warrant ? If so then why does the justice department disagree with your assessment that it is "wrong"?
You don't understand "conspiring to commit a crime", do you? If you use a server to commit a crime (planning a riot) then the "communication path" I mean "server" that was used to plan the riots warrants a look by the government and all relevant information to identify associates and conspirators of known criminals.
The primary purpose of the site was for legal organizing.
Are you sure about that with the ~200 felon rioters? Do you know the evidence the government has to get a warrant?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
everybody looks like a nazi, don't they?