7 ms·

The NY Times has devolved into a political pamphlet and as such has - at least in my eyes - lost nearly all credibility. This is a shame, the paper used to repr

The NY Times has devolved into a political pamphlet and as such has - at least in my eyes - lost nearly all credibility. This is a shame, the paper used to represent the best of what journalism had to offer, "all the news that's fit to print" and all. Now they actively engage in revisionism - the '1619 project' - and push forward the narrative of 'white guilt' and other such divisive nonsense. From what I gather - listening to Brett Weinstein explaining things who again got it from a former DHS officer - those federal agents have observers on top of buildings who direct street level agents towards potential targets who engage(d) in actions deemed illegal. Those street level agents arrest individuals who are taken to some federal property where they are held for a few hours after which they are released, usually without being indicted. In a few cases people have been read their rights which would indicate they are to be subjected to interrogation. While having federal officers prowling the streets in unmarked vans gives off bad vibes of south-American 'disappearances' this has - at least thus far - not been documented. What is also clear is that the fact that local authorities allowed the situation to escalate to this level is inexcusable and is what eventually gave rise to these federal actions.

d4mi3n 6y ago
There's a lot to unpack here, but I'd like to engage you on a few points in your comment: > Those street level agents arrest individuals who are taken to some federal property where they are held for a few hours after which they are released, usually without being indicted. In a few cases people have been read their rights which would indicate they are to be subjected to interrogation. The NYT footage clearly depicts uniformed individuals without identification detaining protesters. When asked who they are, they do not respond. The bit about cars has been documented elsewhere, but is immaterial to the problem of identification and accountability: you can't expect people to react well when they don't even know who is arresting them, or why. I'm also personally alarmed that people are "sometimes" being informed of their rights, but we can save that for another discussion. > What is also clear is that the fact that local authorities allowed the situation to escalate to this level is inexcusable and is what eventually gave rise to these federal actions. The "local authorities" include the mayor of Portland and the governor of Oregon. Regardless of how one feels about the protests or their legitimacy, any proponent of state's rights should be very alarmed by the situation. They are elected officials representing their constituents, and in their own state their rights and desires should be respected. I don't want to get into arguments about how trustworthy NYT is, but many of the things covered in the footage above have been confirmed and documented by many other news sources. Regardless of which one you trust, I think we can all agree that the situation could be handled much better than it has been and that regardless of what the federal response is, we need accountability at all levels of law enforcement.
- bendbro 6y ago
  The very first line of what the NYT wrote is a complete lie: "Peaceful protests were already happening for weeks when federal officers arrived on July 4. Our video shows how President Trump’s deployment ignited chaos." May 31st: Looting and fire at Justice Center, adjacent to federal courthouse: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=250814 https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=25081... June 27th: Some feds arrive in response: https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2020/07/evidence-shows-portland-police-working-with-federal-officers-at-protests-contradicting-city-officials.html https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2020/07/evidence-shows-portl...
  - chx 6y ago
    Complete lie?? No. The protests have been mostly peaceful with a few small incidents. https://twitter.com/ImmCivilRights/status/1267134040177545216 https://twitter.com/ImmCivilRights/status/126713404017754521... > Letting a demonstration be judged by its most violent participants but not judging a police force by its most violent cops is the language of the oppressor. Calling them a "few feds' as if they were inconsequential is again disingenious. The problem is not their number but that they are not in uniform, they have no insignia and they kidnap people off the streets. https://www.opb.org/news/article/federal-law-enforcement-unmarked-vehicles-portland-protesters/ https://www.opb.org/news/article/federal-law-enforcement-unm... The big problem here, of course, is if white supremacists show up in "tacticool" gear and truly kidnap you to murder you then it'd be prudent to resist. But if these goons are actually feds then it'd be prudent not to resist. But you can't tell. Even just four feds behaving like this would be enough to create this unbearable situation. But beyond such practical concerns, this is the tactics of an authoritarian regime. This is why my so many of my friends in Portland joined the protests, this is absolutely not tenable. I was born behind the Iron Curtain. Our phone was bugged. We knew. I know a ... little ... about authoritarian regimes and secret police.
    - bendbro 6y ago
      > Complete lie?? No. The protests have been mostly peaceful with a few small incidents. See my comment in the sibling thread. The protests have been composed of both violent and peaceful members. While peaceful protestors far outnumber violent ones, violence does occur most of the nights between those two dates. Calling the protests peaceful is a lie and saying the federal police started the violence was a lie- it was well established there before they arrived. > Letting a demonstration be judged by its most violent participants but not judging a police force by its most violent cops is the language of the oppressor. I fail to see why this is relevant. I think the demonstrations are fine. I think the riots are not. I think the federal police can defend their federal courthouse from vandalism and breakins. > Calling them a "few feds' as if they were inconsequential is again disingenious. My mistake, I am willing to amend to "many". I used "some" as I do not actually know their number. > The problem is not their number but that they are not in uniform, they have no insignia and they kidnap people off the streets. Kidnapping is an exaggeration. It is an arrest. While I agree the uniforms are problematic, it doesn't make the act illegal. > The big problem here, of course, is if white supremacists show up in "tacticool" gear and truly kidnap you to murder you then it'd be prudent to resist. It's prudent to resist in any case where someone tries to arrest you without cause. That said, you may incorrectly judge whether or not they have cause, so simply listening to their orders since they are police is a better option. When you can't identify them as police, as you said, that is a problem. That said, the odds that you will encounter a situation where you are have unknowingly committed a crime and cannot identify the person arresting you as an officer are highly improbable. It's worth criticizing the officer's uniforms and approach, but going from that criticism to "tactics of an authoritarian regime" is a unfounded jump. > This is why my so many of my friends in Portland joined the protests, this is absolutely not tenable. Simple way for your friends to avoid arrest by the feds: don't go hang outside their courthouse while people throw shit at it. > I was born behind the Iron Curtain. Our phone was bugged. We knew. I know a ... little ... about authoritarian regimes and secret police. These aren't KGB breaking into your home at 3am for whispering some slight dissent to your third cousin- these are federal police arresting people for standing on the fed's doorstep and breaking shit. There is an obvious difference and I will be side-by-side with you when they actually start abducting people. That said, where did you live and what did you experience? Why do you think the feds, who I see as arresting people for obvious acts of vandalism, are similar to a secret police, who punish people for spurious crimes without a public trial?
MrBuddyCasino 6y ago
> The NY Times has devolved into a political pamphlet and as such has - at least in my eyes - lost nearly all credibility. This is a shame, the paper used to represent the best of what journalism had to offer, "all the news that's fit to print" and all. Now they actively engage in revisionism - the '1619 project' - and push forward the narrative of 'white guilt' and other such divisive nonsense. This is exactly what happened, and it is very sad to watch. The downfall of an institution. What is also sad to see is such a comment getting downvoted, on HN of all places. You‘d expect people to have read a history book or two, but apparently not. None of this woke stuff holds up to any intellectual standards, and is terribly damaging for everyone involved. Why the supposed „coastal elite“ falls for it I don’t know.
scruple 6y ago
> The NY Times has devolved into a political pamphlet and as such has - at least in my eyes - lost nearly all credibility. This is a shame, the paper used to represent the best of what journalism had to offer, "all the news that's fit to print" and all. WaPo broke incredible, historic stories in its day. Today it's settling a $250M lawsuit against a teenager that they _aggressively_ defamed... for the crime of wearing a MAGA hat and an awkward smile. CNN already paid this kid and his family $25M... These publications are rags today and I'm glad to have had the foresight to cancel my subscriptions when RussiaGate made it undeniably clear what direction they were moving.

d4mi3n 6y ago

There's a lot to unpack here, but I'd like to engage you on a few points in your comment: > Those street level agents arrest individuals who are taken to some federal property where they are held for a few hours after which they are released, usually without being indicted. In a few cases people have been read their rights which would indicate they are to be subjected to interrogation. The NYT footage clearly depicts uniformed individuals without identification detaining protesters. When asked who they are, they do not respond. The bit about cars has been documented elsewhere, but is immaterial to the problem of identification and accountability: you can't expect people to react well when they don't even know who is arresting them, or why. I'm also personally alarmed that people are "sometimes" being informed of their rights, but we can save that for another discussion. > What is also clear is that the fact that local authorities allowed the situation to escalate to this level is inexcusable and is what eventually gave rise to these federal actions. The "local authorities" include the mayor of Portland and the governor of Oregon. Regardless of how one feels about the protests or their legitimacy, any proponent of state's rights should be very alarmed by the situation. They are elected officials representing their constituents, and in their own state their rights and desires should be respected. I don't want to get into arguments about how trustworthy NYT is, but many of the things covered in the footage above have been confirmed and documented by many other news sources. Regardless of which one you trust, I think we can all agree that the situation could be handled much better than it has been and that regardless of what the federal response is, we need accountability at all levels of law enforcement.

bendbro 6y ago
The very first line of what the NYT wrote is a complete lie: "Peaceful protests were already happening for weeks when federal officers arrived on July 4. Our video shows how President Trump’s deployment ignited chaos." May 31st: Looting and fire at Justice Center, adjacent to federal courthouse: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=250814 https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=25081... June 27th: Some feds arrive in response: https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2020/07/evidence-shows-portland-police-working-with-federal-officers-at-protests-contradicting-city-officials.html https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2020/07/evidence-shows-portl...
- chx 6y ago
  Complete lie?? No. The protests have been mostly peaceful with a few small incidents. https://twitter.com/ImmCivilRights/status/1267134040177545216 https://twitter.com/ImmCivilRights/status/126713404017754521... > Letting a demonstration be judged by its most violent participants but not judging a police force by its most violent cops is the language of the oppressor. Calling them a "few feds' as if they were inconsequential is again disingenious. The problem is not their number but that they are not in uniform, they have no insignia and they kidnap people off the streets. https://www.opb.org/news/article/federal-law-enforcement-unmarked-vehicles-portland-protesters/ https://www.opb.org/news/article/federal-law-enforcement-unm... The big problem here, of course, is if white supremacists show up in "tacticool" gear and truly kidnap you to murder you then it'd be prudent to resist. But if these goons are actually feds then it'd be prudent not to resist. But you can't tell. Even just four feds behaving like this would be enough to create this unbearable situation. But beyond such practical concerns, this is the tactics of an authoritarian regime. This is why my so many of my friends in Portland joined the protests, this is absolutely not tenable. I was born behind the Iron Curtain. Our phone was bugged. We knew. I know a ... little ... about authoritarian regimes and secret police.
  - bendbro 6y ago
    > Complete lie?? No. The protests have been mostly peaceful with a few small incidents. See my comment in the sibling thread. The protests have been composed of both violent and peaceful members. While peaceful protestors far outnumber violent ones, violence does occur most of the nights between those two dates. Calling the protests peaceful is a lie and saying the federal police started the violence was a lie- it was well established there before they arrived. > Letting a demonstration be judged by its most violent participants but not judging a police force by its most violent cops is the language of the oppressor. I fail to see why this is relevant. I think the demonstrations are fine. I think the riots are not. I think the federal police can defend their federal courthouse from vandalism and breakins. > Calling them a "few feds' as if they were inconsequential is again disingenious. My mistake, I am willing to amend to "many". I used "some" as I do not actually know their number. > The problem is not their number but that they are not in uniform, they have no insignia and they kidnap people off the streets. Kidnapping is an exaggeration. It is an arrest. While I agree the uniforms are problematic, it doesn't make the act illegal. > The big problem here, of course, is if white supremacists show up in "tacticool" gear and truly kidnap you to murder you then it'd be prudent to resist. It's prudent to resist in any case where someone tries to arrest you without cause. That said, you may incorrectly judge whether or not they have cause, so simply listening to their orders since they are police is a better option. When you can't identify them as police, as you said, that is a problem. That said, the odds that you will encounter a situation where you are have unknowingly committed a crime and cannot identify the person arresting you as an officer are highly improbable. It's worth criticizing the officer's uniforms and approach, but going from that criticism to "tactics of an authoritarian regime" is a unfounded jump. > This is why my so many of my friends in Portland joined the protests, this is absolutely not tenable. Simple way for your friends to avoid arrest by the feds: don't go hang outside their courthouse while people throw shit at it. > I was born behind the Iron Curtain. Our phone was bugged. We knew. I know a ... little ... about authoritarian regimes and secret police. These aren't KGB breaking into your home at 3am for whispering some slight dissent to your third cousin- these are federal police arresting people for standing on the fed's doorstep and breaking shit. There is an obvious difference and I will be side-by-side with you when they actually start abducting people. That said, where did you live and what did you experience? Why do you think the feds, who I see as arresting people for obvious acts of vandalism, are similar to a secret police, who punish people for spurious crimes without a public trial?

MrBuddyCasino 6y ago

> The NY Times has devolved into a political pamphlet and as such has - at least in my eyes - lost nearly all credibility. This is a shame, the paper used to represent the best of what journalism had to offer, "all the news that's fit to print" and all. Now they actively engage in revisionism - the '1619 project' - and push forward the narrative of 'white guilt' and other such divisive nonsense. This is exactly what happened, and it is very sad to watch. The downfall of an institution. What is also sad to see is such a comment getting downvoted, on HN of all places. You‘d expect people to have read a history book or two, but apparently not. None of this woke stuff holds up to any intellectual standards, and is terribly damaging for everyone involved. Why the supposed „coastal elite“ falls for it I don’t know.

scruple 6y ago

> The NY Times has devolved into a political pamphlet and as such has - at least in my eyes - lost nearly all credibility. This is a shame, the paper used to represent the best of what journalism had to offer, "all the news that's fit to print" and all. WaPo broke incredible, historic stories in its day. Today it's settling a $250M lawsuit against a teenager that they _aggressively_ defamed... for the crime of wearing a MAGA hat and an awkward smile. CNN already paid this kid and his family $25M... These publications are rags today and I'm glad to have had the foresight to cancel my subscriptions when RussiaGate made it undeniably clear what direction they were moving.