Comment by throwawayq3423 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwawayq3423 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> Targetted killing of US citizen without a trial via drone strike ( Anwar al-Awlaki )

This was in a literal war zone against a man who literally declared war on the United States.

> Signed 2012 NDAA with 'indefinite detention' provisions

Didn't answer my question. This law targeted terrorists, not mothers of two, driving home from dropping their kids off at school.

> Extended Patriot ACT in 2011 - Re-authorized FISA in 2012

Didn't answer my question.

> Defended post-Snowden NSA metadata collection

Didn't answer my question.

> Seized reporter's property in leak investigation

This appears to be an actual leak investigation done by the DOJ. I don't recall these journalists being arrested, denied a lawyer, etc. I can't find any evidence that this was a legitimate leak investigation done in accordance with the law.

> 'fast and furious'

Reminder, we are talking about domestic surveillance and illegal detainment for political purposes.

Donald Trump has over 6,000 habeas corpus violations working their way through the court system in America right now. Obama had < 10 in 8 years. He is detaining U.S. citizens without cause, without explanation, and subjecting them to torturous conditions.

Your attempt to say both sides are the same is clearly an attempt to sound intelligent like you're above the discourse. You're not.

See... this is kinda how I know you have a political axe to grind. You are not arguing principles, which makes your outrage.. shall we say less potent. You are arguing your favorite outcome.

Allow me a quick rewrite of your breathless response in a more reasonable language.

<< This was in a literal war zone against a man who literally declared war on the United States.

Was he targeted? Was he targeted willfully? Was he target ted willfully, while administration knew he was an American citizen? When did they know it? Did they stop their plans once they did?

And that is before we get into: do you stop being a citizen when president says so? Seems pretty apt given how we are about to cover Good.

<< Didn't answer my question. This law targeted terrorists, not mothers of two, driving home from dropping their kids off at school.

You are apparently cool with president determining, who the terrorists are. If so, ICE shooting a mother of two ( who was clearly not watching those two kids m ind you ) is just an expansion of powers Obama gave himself. Thanks Obama!

<< Didn't answer my question (x2).

You can barely answer yours. (x2)

<< I can't find any evidence that this was a legitimate leak investigation done in accordance with the law.

I literally laughed. Try harder. Maybe consult an llm? Maybe all those arguments about AI effectively being here already because the floor is so low are not that far fetched.

<< Reminder, we are talking about domestic surveillance and illegal detainment for political purposes.

Sigh, we are talking about what we are talking about. It is cute that you think you can control this conversation though. In a way, it is almost like watching a toddler walking for the first time. Don't get me wrong, it is adorable, but it doesn't change much.

> See... this is kinda how I know you have a political axe to grind.

> Allow me a quick rewrite of your breathless response in a more reasonable language.

The fact that you won't just reply point by point and want to spin up a self-important narrative tells me everything I need to know about this interaction.

> Was he targeted? Was he targeted willfully? Was he target ted willfully, while administration knew he was an American citizen? When did they know it? Did they stop their plans once they did?

I was pointing out how Trump is targeting and killing US citizens in America for peacefully protesting and your "both both sides do it!" attempt was a U.S. citizen literally fighting against the U.S. in a warzone.

>If so, ICE shooting a mother of two ( who was clearly not watching those two kids m ind you ) is just an expansion of powers Obama gave himself. Thanks Obama!

ICE had a specific mandate under Obama (and every other President) to go after only criminals. Trump perverted this mandate to form a militarized police force to attack democratic cities, killing protesters with no accountability.

We get it. You are above all this. You are too smart to think that either party is better than the other.

We get it. You can stop now.

<< I was pointing out how Trump is targeting and killing US citizens in America for peacefully protesting and your "both both sides do it!" attempt was a U.S. citizen literally fighting against the U.S. in a warzone.

Huh? ICE is targeting illegal aliens. Protesters try to interfere ICE targeting illegal aliens.. you know their mandated duties and you are surprised at the results? For comparison, if I were to block FBI/DEA from conducting their operations by using a car, would that be acceptable from your perspective?

Naturally, the whole conversation is kinda silly, because if you know anything about this issue, then you know part of the reason 'sanctuary cities' are called that way is because local police is expected not to coordinate with ICE, which is kinda how the shitshow that you saw in twin cities is not a real issue in jurisdictions that follow federal law..

<< ICE had a specific mandate under Obama (and every other President) to go after only criminals.

And they did. Now, it certainly was something of a surprise how many are willing to protect criminals ( I am sorry, 'protect the community'. If Good actually stayed home and tended to her kids maybe she would have been alive today. But she chose badly. She should have chosen taking care of HER kids. ICE didn't do great, but I can't really fault them here.

<< You are too smart to think that either party is better than the other.

I am smart enough to distance myself. If you have any survival skills left in you, you should consider doing the same. I can't tell if you really believe the tripe you wrote, but it does not really matter. I said it before. The mood has shifted in ways you may have not noticed.

> Huh? ICE is targeting illegal aliens.

Overstaying your visa is a civil offense. Kidnapping and assaulting people who haven't even committed a misdemeanor is illegal and unconstitutional.

> Protesters try to interfere ICE targeting illegal aliens

Well in that case you could declare all protests as "interfering with police operations" thereby making illegal all protests and ohhhhh ok I get it.

You're not a "both sides" guy. You actively support this admin attacking the constitution and you're trying to make it look better by creating false equivalences instead of just owning what you support.

I'd have at least a little respect for you if you just owned it.

We're done here.

<< We're done here.

Whether you realize it or not, we have barely even started. Honestly, I will be amused if you can resist the temptation.

<< I'd have at least a little respect for you if you just owned it.

Pass, I have seen what your respect is worth.

<< You're not a "both sides" guy.

In a sense, I am worse. I a guy in the middle, who is starting to see you as a bigger problem than the illegal alien. Illegal alien can be deported, but I am not sure what can be done with that kind of world model.

<< Well in that case you could declare all protests

Do you get to protest DEA operation of disrupting local dealers? No? Then stop being silly with that weak counter.

<< Overstaying your visa is a civil offense.

And here we are. The siren song of the left. It is has the benefit of being true, but completely meaningless in context.

I had a longer argument, but I won't waste it on you, because you are giving me bumper stickers.

If it helps, I will leave you with one little nugget though. I am not sure what you think exactly, and I sure hope you are just a dumb kid, who simply didn't have a chance to see what real world looks like. Still, even if you are just a kid, whether you realize it or not, your stance does have consequences in real world and your immediate environment. If you do opt to champion those illegal aliens, who only committed civil offense, then you take responsibility for them. All of them. And don't worry, people, who don't will be sure to remind you of your commitments.

gl out there

> In a sense, I am worse. I a guy in the middle

> And here we are. The siren song of the left.

There's something particular sad about people that won't even admit to what they are in public. You know your right wing brand is toxic but you don't want to just be another cult member, so you pretend to be something else so your words will have more (or some) weight.

It's not working.

Have fun being the reason why the rest of your family hates Thanksgiving for the 10th year in a row.

<< There's something particular sad about people that won't even admit to what they are in public.

I don't want to beat the dead horse too much, but have you ever turned that inspection mechanism upon yourself? What did it see? Did it have to look away gasping at the impossible perfection of a celestial being? No? Odd.

You make me chuckle, which is the reason I am continuing in this fashion. Still, I am not even certain you understand what kind of conversation we are having now.

<< It's not working.

Oh, I don't know. Some seeds have clearly taken root.

<< Have fun being the reason why the rest of your family hates Thanksgiving for the 10th year in a row.

A lot of assumptions for such a short sentence. I will ignore it.

> I don't want to beat the dead horse too much, but have you ever turned that inspection mechanism upon yourself? What did it see?

Desperately trying to change the subject is not an argumentation tactic. It's at best, stalling. At worst, trolling.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com