4 ms·

It's hard to tell what's going on here. The article appears to conflate information from many different FBI publications. I downloaded the first linked documen

It's hard to tell what's going on here. The article appears to conflate information from many different FBI publications. I downloaded the first linked document;[1] skimming through it and searching it, it seems to lack the most inflamatory claims in the article. Mostly it seems an exaggerated threat (students at every school are at much greater risk of many other threats) and it has other flaws, but it's not so bad. I think the most common theme is to look for students advocating violence to acheive their goals and use their support network to help them. EDIT: To give you a feel for at least part of the document: * "The response should leverage the strengths of governments, community organizations, social service agencies, and other professionals to provide what is commonly referred to as an “Off-Ramp”. ... The school formulates an intervention plan in conjunction with the community and non-law enforcement entities on the federal or state level. Ideally, an intervention cadre should contain professionals from the local community representing multiple disciplines such as mental health, social workers, law enforcement, school resource officers, faith-based organizations, and/or crisis intervention teams." * "If a student continues on a trajectory to violence, the one remaining option is a law enforcement disruption" ---- [1] Preventing Violent Extremism in Schools: https://info.publicintelligence.net/FBI-PreventingExtremismSchools.pdf https://info.publicintelligence.net/FBI-PreventingExtremismS...

fweespee_ch 11y ago
https://cve.fbi.gov/whatis/?state=propagandaSection1 https://cve.fbi.gov/whatis/?state=propagandaSection1 https://cve.fbi.gov/where/?state=report https://cve.fbi.gov/where/?state=report I believe that is where they got some of the pieces. At least, its the closest I can find to some of the more inflammatory claims. However, all of those have clearly violent messaging.
adaml_623 11y ago
Sorry didn't read the link but fixed the quote "If a student continues on a trajectory to violence, the one remaining option is a law enforcement career"... They forgot the option of joining the armed forces or the US government. Or run for president and advocate violence? It's like it's not even worth making jokes about the hypocrisy and asinine stupidity.
x5n1 11y ago
How about governments advocating violence to achieve their objectives? When can we send the FBI in after them? How about preventing militancy and extremism in government? When can we do something about that?
- hackuser 11y ago
  > How about governments advocating violence to achieve their objectives? That's what governments are for. It is one of the fundemental definitions of a sovereign government, the monopoly on violence.[1] Violence is taboo but sometimes necessary. Only the legitimate authority of the people, acting under the law and through their democratically elected government can exercise it. (As I understand the theory.) As we know, even those legitimate authorities are corrupt to varying degrees; we are cursed with no alternative to human institutions. However, I think it's still much better than individuals making those decisions. > When can we send the FBI in after them? How about preventing militancy and extremism in government? When can we do something about that? That's the job of the voters. Don't forget to vote! ---- [1] The other is the monopoly on justice. The definition works well: For example, in regions of Syria, Daesh uses violence with impunity and runs its own system of justice. You can't really say that the Syrian government has sovereignty over those areas.

fweespee_ch 11y ago

https://cve.fbi.gov/whatis/?state=propagandaSection1 https://cve.fbi.gov/whatis/?state=propagandaSection1 https://cve.fbi.gov/where/?state=report https://cve.fbi.gov/where/?state=report I believe that is where they got some of the pieces. At least, its the closest I can find to some of the more inflammatory claims. However, all of those have clearly violent messaging.

adaml_623 11y ago

Sorry didn't read the link but fixed the quote "If a student continues on a trajectory to violence, the one remaining option is a law enforcement career"... They forgot the option of joining the armed forces or the US government. Or run for president and advocate violence? It's like it's not even worth making jokes about the hypocrisy and asinine stupidity.

x5n1 11y ago

How about governments advocating violence to achieve their objectives? When can we send the FBI in after them? How about preventing militancy and extremism in government? When can we do something about that?

hackuser 11y ago
> How about governments advocating violence to achieve their objectives? That's what governments are for. It is one of the fundemental definitions of a sovereign government, the monopoly on violence.[1] Violence is taboo but sometimes necessary. Only the legitimate authority of the people, acting under the law and through their democratically elected government can exercise it. (As I understand the theory.) As we know, even those legitimate authorities are corrupt to varying degrees; we are cursed with no alternative to human institutions. However, I think it's still much better than individuals making those decisions. > When can we send the FBI in after them? How about preventing militancy and extremism in government? When can we do something about that? That's the job of the voters. Don't forget to vote! ---- [1] The other is the monopoly on justice. The definition works well: For example, in regions of Syria, Daesh uses violence with impunity and runs its own system of justice. You can't really say that the Syrian government has sovereignty over those areas.