4 ms·

This looks like Thought Policing, are people not allowed to express their views on private FB groups ? What exactly is the crime here except may be Thought Cri

by qazpot 7y ago

This looks like Thought Policing, are people not allowed to express their views on private FB groups ? What exactly is the crime here except may be Thought Crime.

dbingham 7y ago
When we're talking about a law enforcement group that has near complete power in the 100 mile border zone? These are people who aren't restricted by the constitution in their exercise of authority. They don't have to have probably cause to detain, don't have to get warrants to search, can pretty much do whatever they want to you. So when they turn out to be deeply biased, yea, that's news and it's scary.
nacs 7y ago
The FB group members aren't just random people -- they're composed of CBP employees who are talking about their employment-related matters in a disgusting manner. There may not be a crime here but it's directly relevant to the work they do as government employees and deserves attention.
nkrisc 7y ago
For the average citizen, sure, it could be considered thought policing. But when we're talking about citizens that have been granted additional privileges in order to fulfill certain duties, we need to hold them to a higher standard for as long as they hold those additional privileges.
NotSammyHagar 7y ago
It's the same problem as previous exposure of other Facebook groups. We need government agencies with police powers to treat people with some neutrality and respect. If they groups are commonly making racist sexist comments about politicians and those they have power over, they are at the very least suspect. It's not a normal workplace thing to have fake oral sex pics of politicians.
kasperni 7y ago
Well you could argue then, that Peter Strzok was just sending private texts to his lover.
CompanionCuuube 7y ago
Don't forget that Customs started asking about account names for social media. Trying to police a private group goes even further than that. But at least it lends validity to the social media account request. ;)

by qazpot 7y ago

This looks like Thought Policing, are people not allowed to express their views on private FB groups ? What exactly is the crime here except may be Thought Crime.

dbingham 7y ago

When we're talking about a law enforcement group that has near complete power in the 100 mile border zone? These are people who aren't restricted by the constitution in their exercise of authority. They don't have to have probably cause to detain, don't have to get warrants to search, can pretty much do whatever they want to you. So when they turn out to be deeply biased, yea, that's news and it's scary.

nacs 7y ago

The FB group members aren't just random people -- they're composed of CBP employees who are talking about their employment-related matters in a disgusting manner. There may not be a crime here but it's directly relevant to the work they do as government employees and deserves attention.

nkrisc 7y ago

For the average citizen, sure, it could be considered thought policing. But when we're talking about citizens that have been granted additional privileges in order to fulfill certain duties, we need to hold them to a higher standard for as long as they hold those additional privileges.

NotSammyHagar 7y ago

It's the same problem as previous exposure of other Facebook groups. We need government agencies with police powers to treat people with some neutrality and respect. If they groups are commonly making racist sexist comments about politicians and those they have power over, they are at the very least suspect. It's not a normal workplace thing to have fake oral sex pics of politicians.

kasperni 7y ago

Well you could argue then, that Peter Strzok was just sending private texts to his lover.

CompanionCuuube 7y ago

Don't forget that Customs started asking about account names for social media. Trying to police a private group goes even further than that. But at least it lends validity to the social media account request. ;)