4 ms·

Not that I support this, but it's not unreasonable to ask for information to stop illegal immigration or human trafficking. Some advocate groups have been an ac

by Wohlf 8y ago

Not that I support this, but it's not unreasonable to ask for information to stop illegal immigration or human trafficking. Some advocate groups have been an accessory to and/or aiding and abetting these crimes.

lallysingh 8y ago
Then they go through the witness interview process, not the criminal interview process.
- AckSyn 8y ago
  Accessories to criminal behavior get the criminal interview process. It's not hard to grasp.
- genericone 8y ago
  Aiding and abetting a criminal is itself a crime, following that reasoning leads to a criminal interview, regardless of whether you think the original crime should be considered criminal.
  - renholder 8y ago
    >Aiding and abetting a criminal is itself a crime... Bold move there, Cotton, got anything to back this claim up? As far as anyone's aware, these are just reporters who were reporting on the story.
    - genericone 8y ago
      Bold move there cotton? I've heard the phrase before, but could you explain what it means in this context? I didn't say anyone was a criminal or what is a crime, what I am saying is that if you follow this particular train of thought: 1) You consider the action of Person A to be a crime. Note: The situation at hand at the border is so controversial, that many people DO consider it a crime, and many people consider their act as a RIGHT. I'll let you decide whether it is a crime or a right. But lets say you consider it a crime for the sake of this thought exercise. 2) You consider that the actions of Person B has aided Person A in the act in ANY way. 3) You reason from this that Person B has taken a partial role in the criminal act in 1) based on the legal doctrine that is Aiding and Abetting, which means: "aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures" So can we agree that a person who believes it is a crime, and believes that journalists HELP the ones performing the acts, that that someone would also reason that those journalists are committing a crime?
creaghpatr 8y ago
Journalism is one of the most popular covers for intelligence operations, because of the obvious overlap of responsibilities and the 'moral' cover of being a journalist.
- everybodyknows 8y ago
  >intelligence operations ... This dodges the point: The journalists were suspected of political activism, not of intelligence gathering for a foreign power.
cloudsinthesky 8y ago
> not unreasonable to ask for information It is unreasonable to state that being asked for information is the exact same thing as being accused of a crime and found guilty. OP comment stated unequivocally that these journalists are criminals. That's just False as far as we can tell. Being asked for information has nothing to do with actually being a criminal, but you are conflating the two.
Frost1x 8y ago
I feel that its unreasonable to demand such information, however, asking is an entirely different story. If an otherwise innocent citizen's movement out of the country is being restricted (as described in the report) for no evidenced reason, I view that as an infringement of their personal liberties. When people re-enter the country, I can see it as a bit different and investigation could be more warranted, but I still don't agree with it. The fact these border zones are not considered US soil and you, as a citizen, immediately have some subset of rights is absurd and I doubt the founders of this country would agree with as being legal at all. I understand how such measures are justified through the idea of increased security, but it does so at the cost of liberty, which is never a good trade off. Frankly, the US immigration services I've interacted with at the airport make you really feel like you're entering a police state when you return. Japan for example was a breeze and not at all intimidating and they have far stricter immigration policies than the US.
hector_vasquez 8y ago
Involuntarily locking up and interrogating someone for 13 hours isn't "asking for information," and yes, it is unreasonable. In the land of the free/home of the brave that is known as an "arrest," and it can only be done if there's a charge. This is simply using passport flagging and ports of entry to persecute the political enemies of the current administration.
- renholder 8y ago
  Normally, I'd be on the upboat train to upvote town for your comment but there's a caveat that you've overlooked: When you're at a border crossing, the protections that you believe that you have are actually lessened or non-existent.[0] [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception Feck it, have an upboat, anyways, just on principle.

by Wohlf 8y ago

lallysingh 8y ago

Then they go through the witness interview process, not the criminal interview process.

AckSyn 8y ago
Accessories to criminal behavior get the criminal interview process. It's not hard to grasp.
genericone 8y ago
Aiding and abetting a criminal is itself a crime, following that reasoning leads to a criminal interview, regardless of whether you think the original crime should be considered criminal.
- renholder 8y ago
  >Aiding and abetting a criminal is itself a crime... Bold move there, Cotton, got anything to back this claim up? As far as anyone's aware, these are just reporters who were reporting on the story.
  - genericone 8y ago
    Bold move there cotton? I've heard the phrase before, but could you explain what it means in this context? I didn't say anyone was a criminal or what is a crime, what I am saying is that if you follow this particular train of thought: 1) You consider the action of Person A to be a crime. Note: The situation at hand at the border is so controversial, that many people DO consider it a crime, and many people consider their act as a RIGHT. I'll let you decide whether it is a crime or a right. But lets say you consider it a crime for the sake of this thought exercise. 2) You consider that the actions of Person B has aided Person A in the act in ANY way. 3) You reason from this that Person B has taken a partial role in the criminal act in 1) based on the legal doctrine that is Aiding and Abetting, which means: "aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures" So can we agree that a person who believes it is a crime, and believes that journalists HELP the ones performing the acts, that that someone would also reason that those journalists are committing a crime?

creaghpatr 8y ago

Journalism is one of the most popular covers for intelligence operations, because of the obvious overlap of responsibilities and the 'moral' cover of being a journalist.

everybodyknows 8y ago
>intelligence operations ... This dodges the point: The journalists were suspected of political activism, not of intelligence gathering for a foreign power.

cloudsinthesky 8y ago

> not unreasonable to ask for information It is unreasonable to state that being asked for information is the exact same thing as being accused of a crime and found guilty. OP comment stated unequivocally that these journalists are criminals. That's just False as far as we can tell. Being asked for information has nothing to do with actually being a criminal, but you are conflating the two.

Frost1x 8y ago

I feel that its unreasonable to demand such information, however, asking is an entirely different story. If an otherwise innocent citizen's movement out of the country is being restricted (as described in the report) for no evidenced reason, I view that as an infringement of their personal liberties. When people re-enter the country, I can see it as a bit different and investigation could be more warranted, but I still don't agree with it. The fact these border zones are not considered US soil and you, as a citizen, immediately have some subset of rights is absurd and I doubt the founders of this country would agree with as being legal at all. I understand how such measures are justified through the idea of increased security, but it does so at the cost of liberty, which is never a good trade off. Frankly, the US immigration services I've interacted with at the airport make you really feel like you're entering a police state when you return. Japan for example was a breeze and not at all intimidating and they have far stricter immigration policies than the US.

hector_vasquez 8y ago

Involuntarily locking up and interrogating someone for 13 hours isn't "asking for information," and yes, it is unreasonable. In the land of the free/home of the brave that is known as an "arrest," and it can only be done if there's a charge. This is simply using passport flagging and ports of entry to persecute the political enemies of the current administration.

renholder 8y ago
Normally, I'd be on the upboat train to upvote town for your comment but there's a caveat that you've overlooked: When you're at a border crossing, the protections that you believe that you have are actually lessened or non-existent.[0] [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception Feck it, have an upboat, anyways, just on principle.