j8hn

Can you explain how I'm a bad faith actor.

The argument that he gave marching orders is hyperbole.

You raise a good question about why this wasn't stopped before it happened.

Apparently at least one prominent group made public weeks ago that violence was planned at the Capitol. Specific violence to place members of congress under "citizens arrest". I expect to see congressional hearings about this. It's really hard to fathom they were unprepared if the planning was done right out in the open.

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/capitol-siege-was-...

Who decides who are the fascists?

A community activist in Seattle is organizing against Antifa calling them terrorists for causing violence and hijacking social justice issues such as Black Lives Matter and the homeless issue.

Should that group also be refused by everyone, or does it depend on political ideology?

Source:

https://twitter.com/choeshow/status/1345184414016278528

https://twitter.com/choeshow/status/1345192831602679809

But the point is where was most of the planning for violence done?

I realize you're not being literal about all the comments centered around violence on Parler. Or maybe you are?

Are you saying most of the comments there are violent or a good number of them?

What are tech companies liabilities for hosting criminal speech?

According to the Washington Post, a lot of the planning was done on Facebook and Twitter.

Edit:

Interesting that researchers made their findings public weeks before this event that there was specific violence was planned to storm the Capitol.

Source: Originally published in the Washington Post. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/capitol-siege-was-...

Is this true that it was largely organized on Parler?

A Washington Post article said it was very visible on Twitter and Facebook.

Is this speech illegal?

I was just pointing out that these very powerful companies, some are claimed to be monopolies are acting in unison which can be argued seems like cartel behavior.

I didn't say free markets could do whatever they wanted.

Also, wanted to point out that snarky comments are against the guidelines here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

The cartels are all acting in unison.

Is the GOP platform to privatize schools? If it was, how is that a war on education?

How did he send a mob into the Capitol building?

The radical left is a problem in Seattle as they are terrorizing the Capitol Hill neighborhood.

Don't take my word for it. Listen to community activist Victoria Beach explain how she is upset for them terrorizing the area and hijacking the Black Lives Matter movement.

https://twitter.com/choeshow/status/1345184414016278528

https://twitter.com/choeshow/status/1345192831602679809

I think it's reasonable that people who were involved in actual violence or theft should face consequences.

When you say it's pretty simple, others are calling for everyone on the Capitol grounds to be arrested. Technically they were breaking the law by trespassing.

"The war on the female reproductive system". I realize you are referring to pro-choice. I'm curious why you chose to phrase it in this way.

What is the war on education?

Who was terrorized during the events at the Capitol building?

Also, how were those events a racist failure of the police force?

I agree that we shouldn't paint all the people in attendance with a broad brush.

What would you call the people who entered the Capital building and stayed inside the red velvet ropes, who took selfies and made videos like they were on a tour?

Can you give me an example of recent moral insurrection?

I agree that they are under no obligation to host speech they don't agree with.

Let's say if these companies are monopolies. Should they still hold the same power?

If terrorists use Signal to plan and carry out attacks, why shouldn't the technology be regulated or banned?

I don't think it's any secret that groups were planning an attack on the Capital before the days events started in DC.

Were those insurgents domestic terrorists?

What if it is to be found that they primarily used Signal for example to communicate their plans with each other?

People are trying to have civil discussions and you are using inciteful language calling their argument "garbage".

Just the more reason for the government to crack down on anonymized speech and transactions.

You make a good point. Though I have to agree with Snowden when he says this will be remembered as a turning point in the battle for control over digital speech.

A good argument could be made we don't need end to end encryption without a back door. And in this environment, there may be little political opposition.

I'm still trying to understand.

Freedom of speech should only apply to protected classes?

Attacking the user: "IMO, you want to run away to an imaginary world where the events of last Wednesday do not matter"

Agressive tone towards OP: "I'm not going to let you"

They also edited the comment slightly from what you see now.

Back around the debates when the Proud Boys were in the news, I watched a Vice segment about them.

Apparently their current leader is of Cuban descent as was most of the people in the segment. Out of the eight members in the video, six of them previously voted for Obama.

I don't know too much about them except from what I saw on Vice. Is it really a group of white supremacists?

edit: Reference: The Right-Wing Latinos of Miami: Proud Boys and Refugees https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9Qa1f29diE

I see this as the same argument against encryption.

You don't need it because if you don't do anything wrong you don't really need it.