FBI warns 'armed protests' being planned at all 50 state capitols
cnn.com
cnn.com
[1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-administration-urged-to-t...
Social media is a biofilm blip on the actual peer-to-peer communication network of the US. Ex-military, hams, church groups, school groups, softball teams, public safety, fraternal organizations, book clubs, trade organizations, retiree organizations, even just large corporate types or anyone born before 1990...your screen is not reality, and they knew it and know it. COVID didn’t and won’t leave a dent in the fender.
They never left the old ways, in part because they saw social media as “the shadows”. They never left social media because they were never on social media. Can’t say they were wrong...
BTW, they are the builders and doers, not the “influencers”. They know how to physically accomplish things, like build the modern world, and take things apart (appropriately) when necessary.
“You really don’t want them angry, you wouldn’t like them when they get angry,” to paraphrase Bruce Banner.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Banner_(Marvel_Cinematic...
Nobody was stupid enough to make them angry, were they?
Those two words dont go together in a civil society. you go armed in mass, you're going with the expectation of fighting. Either Defense or Offence.
It's happened many times. More recently, in 1983 someone set off a bomb outside senate chambers to try and kill senators. IIRC Bill Clinton pardoned them.
After September 11th, we shut down air travel across the country for a week because we just didn't know if there were additional threats out there. Would anyone have complained if tech companies shut down a website known to host and inspire radical Islamic terrorism?
Today we face a far more dangerous threat. Imagine if the mob had succeeded in capturing most of Congress -- we could be fighting a civil war right now.
We don't know what else the "patriots" have planned, nor what the FBI, Facebook, or Twitter have seen in private messages and groups. Maybe let's prioritize everyone's physical safety for a few weeks.
Banning people who try to organize armed protests on social media is censorship.
If these people get violent it's big tech's fault for banning them and the media for ridiculing them.
The president called for peace but they still blame him for the violence.
Why is the media critical of the Trump protests but approving of the BLM riots?
I'm expected to be civil in my response to all of the above.
This is immoral, and dismissive of personal responsibility. If these people protest, it is arguably the fault of big tech and the media. If these people get violent, it is their fault, unless big tech and the media are literally and personally committing physical violence against them (which is the key difference between this and the BLM riots).
The businesses destroyed?
The people who didn't have insurance?
Don't want to hear excuses for one side over the other. The fact is, things have gotten to the boil over point on both sides. No one is innocent in any of this, and nothing is accomplished except more damage to the Union.
Enough is enough!
> Trump protests
> BLM riots
[picture from family guy with skin tone chart.jpg]
There are certainly fake protests being organized to get media play, kind of like that Twitter HQ protest people were worried about. Turns out, it wasn't a thing either: https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Trump-rioters-Twitter...
You are being taken.
People who don't care about being lied to like that don't need to be oppressed, they will convince themselves of anything they need to believe all by themselves.
;)
This is exactly the psychological fault exhibited by people who are trying to justify the very real events at DC.