20 ms·

"Terrorist activities, child sexual exploitation, violent extremism, credible threats of mass violence, carrying out or deliberately acting as an accomplice to

"Terrorist activities, child sexual exploitation, violent extremism, credible threats of mass violence, carrying out or deliberately acting as an accomplice to sexual assault" falls under moralism and cancel culture? We've seen things that fester online that lead to real life tragedies or to the damaging of the fabric of democracy itself. Including insurrection on the US Capitol which took its roots on Twitter. There's a spectrum between "cancel culture is bad" vs. "let domestic terrorists and CP sharers gather". And I don't think there's a slippery slope concern. Twitch already bans people for unexplained reasons anyways.

jkhdigital 6y ago
A rowdy unarmed (not a single firearm) mob is not an “insurrection”. I’m not condoning what happened, but can we please stop using hyperbolic language?
- rising-sky 6y ago
  Not a single firearm? https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/17/politics/capitol-insurrection-weapons-ron-johnson/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/17/politics/capitol-insurrection... However, I'm not sure where you got the "opinion" that an insurrection must be carried out with a firearm? You can do a quick Google search for the definition of the term. Here's one from the Cambridge dictionary > an organized attempt by a group of people to defeat their government and take control of their country, usually by violence https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/insurrection https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/insurrec...
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
    A protest that was larger than expected and overran the existing security isn't exactly an organized attempt.
    - ngokevin 6y ago
      Upon watching the evidence and trial, it's clear it was organized. They had Save the Dates months ahead (at the exact time the election was being certified) with continued rhetoric that the election was stolen and that they had to march to the Capitol and fight.
      - tryonenow 6y ago
        Literally everything you're describing would be identical to that of a preplanned protest. The implication of "organization" is that of a plan for "insurrection", for which there is no proof of premeditation.
      - TeeMassive 6y ago
        > with continued rhetoric that the election was stolen and that they had to march to the Capitol and fight. None of which are proof of a planned insurrection. Of all the meanings you only picked the ones that fitted your predetermined conclusion. Believing the "election was stolen" is an opinion that comes up every elections from both sides. "Marching" most often means marches, which is a peaceful demonstration in itself, and the Capitol is not just the Capitol building, it's also the Capitol Grounds and the surrounding areas. Fighting is a term often used colloquial non-violent way, as in "fight cancer" and "fighting for civil rights".
  - nfyjkbxa 6y ago
    Organized, it says right there. You think that mob was organized? There was no plan Also, your CNN citation says in the headline that there was a gun found, but then the body of the article contradicts it > Some of the weapons that were confiscated had been seen being used inside the US Capitol including a baseball bat, a fire extinguisher, a wooden club, a spear, crutches, a flagpole, bear spray, mace, chemical irritants, stolen police shields, a wooden beam, a hockey stick, a stun gun, and knives. Where're the guns? CNN knows people only read headlines; they're so brazen with their narrative. After they claimed over and over that Sicknick was killed with a fire extinguisher based on zero evidence for weeks there's no reason to trust the rest of these details in an article from February are true anyway, especially if CNN can't keep the facts straight between the headline and the article body
    - castis 6y ago
      It is absurd to assume that there were zero firearms of any kind at that event. There aren't zero firearms at children's birthday parties.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - aigen001 6y ago
      Here's your gun. https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/case-multi-defendant/file/1364751/download https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/case-multi-defendant/file/13...
      - TeeMassive 6y ago
        > within the District of Columbia Nothings in your court case says anything about the Capitol building.
        CapnTrips 6y ago
        >On or about January 6, 2021, within the District of Columbia, CHRISTOPHER ALBERTS, did carry and have readily accessible, a firearm, that is, a Taurus G2C semi-automatic handgun, on the United States Capitol Grounds and in any of the Capitol Buildings. In the same sentence you quoted
  - jkhdigital 6y ago
    I stand corrected: a single Taurus G2C 9mm with 25 rounds was confiscated from a man exiting the Capitol. One firearm, not zero.
- imnotlost 6y ago
  Maybe if it happened on a random Tuesday in April or whatever, but it did happen at a very specific time, didn't it?
- TylerE 6y ago
  Oh, come on. They broke into the Capitol building, and in to the Senate chambers, while congress was in session.
  - caseysoftware 6y ago
    Everyone knows that if you reside at the podium for 10 seconds uninterrupted, you become the President of the Senate and can issue any rules you want. We're just lucky they didn't get the Gavel of Power too! Or.. in the real world, we understand how the US political system works, realize there was no real "insurrection," and we rightly call it a bunch of jackasses trespassing. Your call.
    - bitmunk 6y ago
      They chanted about executing your VP.
      - Kim_Bruning 6y ago
        https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/noose-hung-outside-capitol/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/noose-hung-outside-capitol... Wasn't an idle threat either.
    - cloverich 6y ago
      I appreciate your perspective, but would argue you are overestimating the stability of our system. Also its not like those "jackasses" came out of nowhere... they were part of a protest organized by the sitting President to protest... the outcome of a typical election.
- ngokevin 6y ago
  I watched the whole trial, it's pretty hard to excuse. Even GOP minority senate leader agreed he was guilty of inciting insurrection (despite voting not to convict on a technicality he created). Sorry if it doesn't match up with your worldview.
- diob 6y ago
  This is just moving the goal posts (not to mention plenty of weapons and threats were involved). In all seriousness, at what point would you call something an insurrection? Go ahead and define it now, that way in the future when "X" happens you can't reply with "X is bad, but it's not an insurrection". I'm being completely serious, please define insurrection, in your terms, so that in the future I can identify it accurately. I feel like this has to be the first thing we do with folks who constantly say "X isn't Y". Okay, define how something gets classified as Y.
  - tryonenow 6y ago
    A mob occupying private land, for weeks (months?), and declaring autonomy under a radical, explicitly and overtly anti-american, revolutionary flag, threatening and ejecting any approaching officials, including medical services, with violence. Particularly when this mob is affiliated with a decentralized network throughout the united states with similar goals. Storming the capitol with weapons, having leaders with knowledge of the layout, and actually spilling blood. The picture of the right in this country by media is generally a caricature of an inbred, uneducated southern hick, so it's easy to pretend that they planned for a serious coup and we're just completely incompetent. But the lack of weapons in any significant quantity, or their use, or even their brandishing in the capitol, suggests that there were never any serious plans for a coup or even for violence. The fact that "insurrectionists" came within 5 feet of the entrance to the chamber with the politicians they were allegedly targetting and obliviously walked past it more likely shows that there was no serious preparation, given that the layout is easily searchable online. This is manufactured hysteria by the media, for political goals. It comes from the same place as this twitch policy - we are in the midst of a dirty culture war.
    - weswpg 6y ago
      > there was no serious preparation "Oh, please. Attempted murder? They don't give the Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry!"
  - jimbob45 6y ago
    You asked a well-considered question and got a stupid response. What a waste. My definition would be rioting, specifically using escalating violence until success, to attempt to coerce a system into passing laws that it would not otherwise have passed or wanted to pass (up to and including deposing the leader). I feel like my view loosely fits the Capitol riot, heavily fits the BLM riots, and heavily fits the 1776 insurrection.
- PhasmaFelis 6y ago
  "Many in the crowd attacking the Capitol have said their intent was to stop the vote confirmation and keep Trump in office despite the election results. That’s an insurrection." https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/feb/15/ron-johnson/yes-jan-6-capitol-assault-was-armed-insurrection/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/feb/15/ron-johnso...) "Unarmed" is definitely false, per the other comments: the FBI confiscated "a baseball bat, a fire extinguisher, a wooden club, a spear, crutches, a flagpole, bear spray, mace, chemical irritants, stolen police shields, a wooden beam, a hockey stick, a stun gun, and knives." But several people seem to be arguing that only firearms count. In that case: Christopher Alberts was arrested with a handgun and charged with unlawful possession of a firearm on Capitol grounds. Grant Moore was found an with unlicensed gun in his vehicle near the Capitol; Lonnie Leroy Coffman, the same, except it was multiple guns and 11 Molotov cocktails. (Source for all: https://www.usatoday.com/storytelling/capitol-riot-mob-arrests/ https://www.usatoday.com/storytelling/capitol-riot-mob-arres...) We can all be thankful he didn't use them, but a person who goes to a protest with Molotovs does not have personal defense in mind.
  - PhasmaFelis 6y ago
    One more for future reference: Cleveland Meredith apparently arrived too late for the riot, but was arrested the day after with two unregistered guns after threatening to "put a bullet in [Pelosi's] noggin on live TV.”
- IgorPartola 6y ago
  Oh come on. You have to keep your head pretty deep in the sand to think this was just tourists wandering through the Capitol. They killed a police officer and were chanting that they wanted to kill the VP and Speaker of the House. They flew a confederate flag inside the Capitol. Stop making excuses for traitors.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
darepublic 6y ago
The Chaz was worse wasn't it, there were more deaths, it lasted longer and the participants were given very charitable coverage. Violence and lawlessness is ok if you're on the right team basically.
- mlazos 6y ago
  Except if you went to chaz, it was actually fine and the news blatantly exaggerated reality for advertising $$
  - darepublic 6y ago
    I'm sure it was mostly fine, in the same way if you stuck to certain places in the capital riots the majority of the people congregated were peaceful. The Chaz also usurped local businesses, there were plenty of firearms and at least five shootings. This is indisputable. Now you will say those are just bad apples, but you wouldn't give the same leniency to the capital riots would you. Also the leaders of the Chaz bare some responsibility for the deaths that happened in them do they not? But of course no one really cares about that, whereas assinine tweets by unpopular politicians mean they are traitors who orchestrated an attempted coup. To me the framing of similar events is very different based on political allegiance.. hence why I'm worried about these biased reporters gaining more power to determine who does and does not have a voice in society.
    - darksaints 6y ago
      50 people were murdered in Seattle in 2020. One of them happened in Chaz, the rest happened under the full protection of the Seattle PD. Maybe the reason why people don't make a big deal about the Chaz is because it literally was not any worse than it would have been with the SPD around, and in many ways it was better. The fact of the matter is that Seattle sans police is virtually indistinguishable from Seattle with police. Unfortunately, facts often do not sell ads for pillows and gold that target two-bit Trump supporters.
    - throwawaysea 6y ago
      There were more deaths and more crime than what is just officially attributed to CHAZ. CHAZ also left behind a massive tent encampment that took over Cal Anderson park (adjacent to CHAZ), which at one point was used for riot staging. Police found a weapons cache hidden inside a tent that appeared to be for the homeless but wasn’t (https://thepostmillennial.com/revealed-antifa-stored-weapons-in-seattle-occupied-park/ https://thepostmillennial.com/revealed-antifa-stored-weapons...). The sprawling homeless camp became its own controversy, with black bloc/antifa affiliated activists trying to set up a new autonomous zone following something similar in Portland (https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2020/12/18/296959-n296959 https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2020/12/18/296959-n296959). All this chaos and the park being taken over as an illegal homeless encampment provided cover for a homicide-suicide (https://thepostmillennial.com/homicide-suspect-in-seattle-slaying-was-arrested-and-released-more-than-34-times/ https://thepostmillennial.com/homicide-suspect-in-seattle-sl...). The person committing the homicide was Travis Berge, a repeat offender who was featured in the documentary “Seattle is Dying” as a prime example of permissive restorative justice policies don’t work (https://komonews.com/news/local/travis-berge-repeat-offender-out-of-jail-but-drug-struggle-remains https://komonews.com/news/local/travis-berge-repeat-offender...). He killed a woman that was allegedly his “girlfriend” before killing himself.
TeeMassive 6y ago
> We've seen things that fester online that lead to real life tragedies or to the damaging of the fabric of democracy itself. Including insurrection on the US Capitol which took its roots on Twitter. I find your comment quite one sided and exaggerated. There was no insurrection on the Capitol because there was no guns, no widespread weapon carry, no significant violence inside and no proof of an organization to actually overthrow the government was shown in the various reports and court cases. The surveillance videos showing the protesters walking in calmly in file following the cordon is the definitive proof of that. In fact the censorship and manipulation of social media is known to cause the formation of various ideological bubbles that acts as positive feedback loops for extremism. On the other hand we saw waves of violence since last year that were instigated by actual self-proclaimed insurrectionists. News presenting the violence were minimized while news of politicians supporting the protests and news stations downright lying the violence while buildings were burning on the background. This is all due to the censorship and narrative control of big media conglomerates, not actual open conversations. > There's a spectrum between "cancel culture is bad" vs. "let domestic terrorists and CP sharers gather" Crimes are not on a spectrum, either someone is guilty or not, there is no in between. And as pointed out by Justice Thomas recently, when organizations become too big they can be subject to regulations as public utilities, which will made them unable to infringe on the first amendment of their users. > And I don't think there's a slippery slope concern. Contrary to popular belief, fascism and Nazism did not rise because of free speech, but because of speech suppression and narrative control (read propaganda) along side with a close collaboration with intelligence services that began as early as the 1920s. Given that the more we they censor the more they have power which makes them more and more successful in censorship and narrative control means that we are in a positive feedback loop, which is slippery slope. > Twitch already bans people for unexplained reasons anyways. And?
- Kim_Bruning 6y ago
  If you say "there was no violence"; how do you explain the deaths?
  - TeeMassive 6y ago
    Natural causes, obesity, police violence and, maybe, one instance of death that could have been caused by the scuffles which was originally blamed on a fire extinguisher (the story of which was retracted by the NYT just after the vote on impeachment). This is common knowledge at this point. Also I said "significant violence", as in enough to overthrow the government.
JamesBarney 6y ago
If they actually committed any of those crimes you don't need to cancel them because prison doesn't let you stream.
- wslack 6y ago
  Not if the evidence for such things isn't admissible. (like certain types of recordings)
  - imgabe 6y ago
    Hmm, I wonder if the justice system has any reason for why some kinds of evidence aren’t admissible? Nah, they probably just want to let a few criminals off the hook for funsies.
    - weswpg 6y ago
      Your sarcasm aside, there are obviously plenty of reasons why there are failings of the justice system and most people agree that the government isn't the sole arbiter of social accountability.
      - imgabe 6y ago
        I'm not saying the justice system is perfect, but we've spent literally thousands of years refining it and people have fought and died for things like rules of evidence, the right to face your accusers, trial by jury, presumption of innocence etc, etc. These things are still not a reality in many places in the world. To throw that out and say "Nah let's nuke this guy's life because an anonymous person sent us a screenshot that they claim is him doing something racist" is not an improvement. This is moving in the wrong direction.
      - ewindal 6y ago
        Good thing there are multi-billion private companies out there that can pick up the slack and punish the real criminals.
  - 6y ago
alfiedotwtf 6y ago
You say this as if that list is fixed for all of eternity. If you don't want to call this a slippery slope, then how about the thin end of the wedge.
- uvnq 6y ago
  Wow, that's a really interesting idiom. I've never heard that before and will definitely use it over slippery slope, especially since pointing out a slippery slope is often incorrectly called a fallacy (from my understanding, it is only a fallacy if there is no established trend).
  - alfiedotwtf 6y ago
    It’s used a lot in political planning i.e here’s our ultimate aim, what’s our thin end of the wedge, and what’s our pretext
throwawaysea 6y ago
What took place at the Capitol wasn’t an insurrection or a coup (https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/01/06/why-this-wasnt-a-coup-capitol-2020-election-trump/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/01/06/why-this-wasnt-a-coup-c...). It was by and large a protest, like numerous past protests at the Capitol that didn’t generate the same media coverage due to bias (https://www.allsides.com/blog/capitol-hill-breach-riot-coverage-demonstrates-media-bias https://www.allsides.com/blog/capitol-hill-breach-riot-cover...). There were literally tens of thousands of people in DC for rallies and protests, including several thousand in front of the Capitol. A few hundred went past the barriers and almost all those who did, are only going to end up with a minor trespassing charge. Calling all of that an “insurrection” and claiming that Trump or rally organizers were “damaging the fabric of democracy” is not just hyperbolic, but explicitly false. There is also definitely a slippery slope concern. It isn’t just illegal activities that are being censored on Twitter or Twitch or Facebook or elsewhere. If your opinion/perspective disagrees with progressives on some controversial topic like gender identity or guns or illegal immigration or the coronavirus, you will be censored even though you aren’t breaking any law. Such censorship has been normalized bit by bit over the last four years, and is exactly the slippery slope in action. And since it inhibits the exchange of ideas and free flow of political opinions in a system that depends on it, such censorship is the REAL damage to the fabric of democracy.
kstenerud 6y ago
And of course punishment without process of law has never gone awry before, and never slippery sloped into something nightmarish. I'm sure it'll all be fine. It's not like we have ample historical examples of this sort of thing.
Clampower 6y ago
And all of this while twitch’s “Just Chatting” section is basically Soft Core porn, “hot tub streams” accessible to underage users, exploiting vulnerable, desperate people for insane amount of donations. Twitch is definitely a slippery slope, especially in distributing soft core porn to underage kids.
- uvnq 6y ago
  Agreed. Personally I think we need to do a better job of preventing kids from being exposed to this kind of stuff. Not just on Twitch but everywhere else.
imtringued 6y ago
Cancel culture isn't about a company banning things, it's about an outrage mob getting angry to the point where it becomes untenable for a company to defend an individual that hasn't broken the law. What you are talking about is something completely different. That's not even cancel culture. It's upholding the law and it requires zero opinions from a random outrage mob, you report the content, the company reviews it and immediately deletes it if it goes against the law. There is no petitioning required to pressure a company because the vast majority of companies delete content like that as soon as they can identify its illegal nature.

jkhdigital 6y ago

A rowdy unarmed (not a single firearm) mob is not an “insurrection”. I’m not condoning what happened, but can we please stop using hyperbolic language?

rising-sky 6y ago
Not a single firearm? https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/17/politics/capitol-insurrection-weapons-ron-johnson/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/17/politics/capitol-insurrection... However, I'm not sure where you got the "opinion" that an insurrection must be carried out with a firearm? You can do a quick Google search for the definition of the term. Here's one from the Cambridge dictionary > an organized attempt by a group of people to defeat their government and take control of their country, usually by violence https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/insurrection https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/insurrec...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
  A protest that was larger than expected and overran the existing security isn't exactly an organized attempt.
  - ngokevin 6y ago
    Upon watching the evidence and trial, it's clear it was organized. They had Save the Dates months ahead (at the exact time the election was being certified) with continued rhetoric that the election was stolen and that they had to march to the Capitol and fight.
    - tryonenow 6y ago
      Literally everything you're describing would be identical to that of a preplanned protest. The implication of "organization" is that of a plan for "insurrection", for which there is no proof of premeditation.
    - TeeMassive 6y ago
      > with continued rhetoric that the election was stolen and that they had to march to the Capitol and fight. None of which are proof of a planned insurrection. Of all the meanings you only picked the ones that fitted your predetermined conclusion. Believing the "election was stolen" is an opinion that comes up every elections from both sides. "Marching" most often means marches, which is a peaceful demonstration in itself, and the Capitol is not just the Capitol building, it's also the Capitol Grounds and the surrounding areas. Fighting is a term often used colloquial non-violent way, as in "fight cancer" and "fighting for civil rights".
- nfyjkbxa 6y ago
  Organized, it says right there. You think that mob was organized? There was no plan Also, your CNN citation says in the headline that there was a gun found, but then the body of the article contradicts it > Some of the weapons that were confiscated had been seen being used inside the US Capitol including a baseball bat, a fire extinguisher, a wooden club, a spear, crutches, a flagpole, bear spray, mace, chemical irritants, stolen police shields, a wooden beam, a hockey stick, a stun gun, and knives. Where're the guns? CNN knows people only read headlines; they're so brazen with their narrative. After they claimed over and over that Sicknick was killed with a fire extinguisher based on zero evidence for weeks there's no reason to trust the rest of these details in an article from February are true anyway, especially if CNN can't keep the facts straight between the headline and the article body
  - castis 6y ago
    It is absurd to assume that there were zero firearms of any kind at that event. There aren't zero firearms at children's birthday parties.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - aigen001 6y ago
    Here's your gun. https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/case-multi-defendant/file/1364751/download https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/case-multi-defendant/file/13...
    - TeeMassive 6y ago
      > within the District of Columbia Nothings in your court case says anything about the Capitol building.
      - CapnTrips 6y ago
        >On or about January 6, 2021, within the District of Columbia, CHRISTOPHER ALBERTS, did carry and have readily accessible, a firearm, that is, a Taurus G2C semi-automatic handgun, on the United States Capitol Grounds and in any of the Capitol Buildings. In the same sentence you quoted
- jkhdigital 6y ago
  I stand corrected: a single Taurus G2C 9mm with 25 rounds was confiscated from a man exiting the Capitol. One firearm, not zero.
imnotlost 6y ago
Maybe if it happened on a random Tuesday in April or whatever, but it did happen at a very specific time, didn't it?
TylerE 6y ago
Oh, come on. They broke into the Capitol building, and in to the Senate chambers, while congress was in session.
- caseysoftware 6y ago
  Everyone knows that if you reside at the podium for 10 seconds uninterrupted, you become the President of the Senate and can issue any rules you want. We're just lucky they didn't get the Gavel of Power too! Or.. in the real world, we understand how the US political system works, realize there was no real "insurrection," and we rightly call it a bunch of jackasses trespassing. Your call.
  - bitmunk 6y ago
    They chanted about executing your VP.
    - Kim_Bruning 6y ago
      https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/noose-hung-outside-capitol/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/noose-hung-outside-capitol... Wasn't an idle threat either.
  - cloverich 6y ago
    I appreciate your perspective, but would argue you are overestimating the stability of our system. Also its not like those "jackasses" came out of nowhere... they were part of a protest organized by the sitting President to protest... the outcome of a typical election.
ngokevin 6y ago
I watched the whole trial, it's pretty hard to excuse. Even GOP minority senate leader agreed he was guilty of inciting insurrection (despite voting not to convict on a technicality he created). Sorry if it doesn't match up with your worldview.
diob 6y ago
This is just moving the goal posts (not to mention plenty of weapons and threats were involved). In all seriousness, at what point would you call something an insurrection? Go ahead and define it now, that way in the future when "X" happens you can't reply with "X is bad, but it's not an insurrection". I'm being completely serious, please define insurrection, in your terms, so that in the future I can identify it accurately. I feel like this has to be the first thing we do with folks who constantly say "X isn't Y". Okay, define how something gets classified as Y.
- tryonenow 6y ago
  A mob occupying private land, for weeks (months?), and declaring autonomy under a radical, explicitly and overtly anti-american, revolutionary flag, threatening and ejecting any approaching officials, including medical services, with violence. Particularly when this mob is affiliated with a decentralized network throughout the united states with similar goals. Storming the capitol with weapons, having leaders with knowledge of the layout, and actually spilling blood. The picture of the right in this country by media is generally a caricature of an inbred, uneducated southern hick, so it's easy to pretend that they planned for a serious coup and we're just completely incompetent. But the lack of weapons in any significant quantity, or their use, or even their brandishing in the capitol, suggests that there were never any serious plans for a coup or even for violence. The fact that "insurrectionists" came within 5 feet of the entrance to the chamber with the politicians they were allegedly targetting and obliviously walked past it more likely shows that there was no serious preparation, given that the layout is easily searchable online. This is manufactured hysteria by the media, for political goals. It comes from the same place as this twitch policy - we are in the midst of a dirty culture war.
  - weswpg 6y ago
    > there was no serious preparation "Oh, please. Attempted murder? They don't give the Nobel Prize for attempted chemistry!"
- jimbob45 6y ago
  You asked a well-considered question and got a stupid response. What a waste. My definition would be rioting, specifically using escalating violence until success, to attempt to coerce a system into passing laws that it would not otherwise have passed or wanted to pass (up to and including deposing the leader). I feel like my view loosely fits the Capitol riot, heavily fits the BLM riots, and heavily fits the 1776 insurrection.
PhasmaFelis 6y ago
"Many in the crowd attacking the Capitol have said their intent was to stop the vote confirmation and keep Trump in office despite the election results. That’s an insurrection." https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/feb/15/ron-johnson/yes-jan-6-capitol-assault-was-armed-insurrection/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/feb/15/ron-johnso...) "Unarmed" is definitely false, per the other comments: the FBI confiscated "a baseball bat, a fire extinguisher, a wooden club, a spear, crutches, a flagpole, bear spray, mace, chemical irritants, stolen police shields, a wooden beam, a hockey stick, a stun gun, and knives." But several people seem to be arguing that only firearms count. In that case: Christopher Alberts was arrested with a handgun and charged with unlawful possession of a firearm on Capitol grounds. Grant Moore was found an with unlicensed gun in his vehicle near the Capitol; Lonnie Leroy Coffman, the same, except it was multiple guns and 11 Molotov cocktails. (Source for all: https://www.usatoday.com/storytelling/capitol-riot-mob-arrests/ https://www.usatoday.com/storytelling/capitol-riot-mob-arres...) We can all be thankful he didn't use them, but a person who goes to a protest with Molotovs does not have personal defense in mind.
- PhasmaFelis 6y ago
  One more for future reference: Cleveland Meredith apparently arrived too late for the riot, but was arrested the day after with two unregistered guns after threatening to "put a bullet in [Pelosi's] noggin on live TV.”
IgorPartola 6y ago
Oh come on. You have to keep your head pretty deep in the sand to think this was just tourists wandering through the Capitol. They killed a police officer and were chanting that they wanted to kill the VP and Speaker of the House. They flew a confederate flag inside the Capitol. Stop making excuses for traitors.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

darepublic 6y ago

The Chaz was worse wasn't it, there were more deaths, it lasted longer and the participants were given very charitable coverage. Violence and lawlessness is ok if you're on the right team basically.

mlazos 6y ago
Except if you went to chaz, it was actually fine and the news blatantly exaggerated reality for advertising $$
- darepublic 6y ago
  I'm sure it was mostly fine, in the same way if you stuck to certain places in the capital riots the majority of the people congregated were peaceful. The Chaz also usurped local businesses, there were plenty of firearms and at least five shootings. This is indisputable. Now you will say those are just bad apples, but you wouldn't give the same leniency to the capital riots would you. Also the leaders of the Chaz bare some responsibility for the deaths that happened in them do they not? But of course no one really cares about that, whereas assinine tweets by unpopular politicians mean they are traitors who orchestrated an attempted coup. To me the framing of similar events is very different based on political allegiance.. hence why I'm worried about these biased reporters gaining more power to determine who does and does not have a voice in society.
  - darksaints 6y ago
    50 people were murdered in Seattle in 2020. One of them happened in Chaz, the rest happened under the full protection of the Seattle PD. Maybe the reason why people don't make a big deal about the Chaz is because it literally was not any worse than it would have been with the SPD around, and in many ways it was better. The fact of the matter is that Seattle sans police is virtually indistinguishable from Seattle with police. Unfortunately, facts often do not sell ads for pillows and gold that target two-bit Trump supporters.
  - throwawaysea 6y ago
    There were more deaths and more crime than what is just officially attributed to CHAZ. CHAZ also left behind a massive tent encampment that took over Cal Anderson park (adjacent to CHAZ), which at one point was used for riot staging. Police found a weapons cache hidden inside a tent that appeared to be for the homeless but wasn’t (https://thepostmillennial.com/revealed-antifa-stored-weapons-in-seattle-occupied-park/ https://thepostmillennial.com/revealed-antifa-stored-weapons...). The sprawling homeless camp became its own controversy, with black bloc/antifa affiliated activists trying to set up a new autonomous zone following something similar in Portland (https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2020/12/18/296959-n296959 https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2020/12/18/296959-n296959). All this chaos and the park being taken over as an illegal homeless encampment provided cover for a homicide-suicide (https://thepostmillennial.com/homicide-suspect-in-seattle-slaying-was-arrested-and-released-more-than-34-times/ https://thepostmillennial.com/homicide-suspect-in-seattle-sl...). The person committing the homicide was Travis Berge, a repeat offender who was featured in the documentary “Seattle is Dying” as a prime example of permissive restorative justice policies don’t work (https://komonews.com/news/local/travis-berge-repeat-offender-out-of-jail-but-drug-struggle-remains https://komonews.com/news/local/travis-berge-repeat-offender...). He killed a woman that was allegedly his “girlfriend” before killing himself.

TeeMassive 6y ago

> We've seen things that fester online that lead to real life tragedies or to the damaging of the fabric of democracy itself. Including insurrection on the US Capitol which took its roots on Twitter. I find your comment quite one sided and exaggerated. There was no insurrection on the Capitol because there was no guns, no widespread weapon carry, no significant violence inside and no proof of an organization to actually overthrow the government was shown in the various reports and court cases. The surveillance videos showing the protesters walking in calmly in file following the cordon is the definitive proof of that. In fact the censorship and manipulation of social media is known to cause the formation of various ideological bubbles that acts as positive feedback loops for extremism. On the other hand we saw waves of violence since last year that were instigated by actual self-proclaimed insurrectionists. News presenting the violence were minimized while news of politicians supporting the protests and news stations downright lying the violence while buildings were burning on the background. This is all due to the censorship and narrative control of big media conglomerates, not actual open conversations. > There's a spectrum between "cancel culture is bad" vs. "let domestic terrorists and CP sharers gather" Crimes are not on a spectrum, either someone is guilty or not, there is no in between. And as pointed out by Justice Thomas recently, when organizations become too big they can be subject to regulations as public utilities, which will made them unable to infringe on the first amendment of their users. > And I don't think there's a slippery slope concern. Contrary to popular belief, fascism and Nazism did not rise because of free speech, but because of speech suppression and narrative control (read propaganda) along side with a close collaboration with intelligence services that began as early as the 1920s. Given that the more we they censor the more they have power which makes them more and more successful in censorship and narrative control means that we are in a positive feedback loop, which is slippery slope. > Twitch already bans people for unexplained reasons anyways. And?

Kim_Bruning 6y ago
If you say "there was no violence"; how do you explain the deaths?
- TeeMassive 6y ago
  Natural causes, obesity, police violence and, maybe, one instance of death that could have been caused by the scuffles which was originally blamed on a fire extinguisher (the story of which was retracted by the NYT just after the vote on impeachment). This is common knowledge at this point. Also I said "significant violence", as in enough to overthrow the government.

JamesBarney 6y ago

If they actually committed any of those crimes you don't need to cancel them because prison doesn't let you stream.

wslack 6y ago
Not if the evidence for such things isn't admissible. (like certain types of recordings)
- imgabe 6y ago
  Hmm, I wonder if the justice system has any reason for why some kinds of evidence aren’t admissible? Nah, they probably just want to let a few criminals off the hook for funsies.
  - weswpg 6y ago
    Your sarcasm aside, there are obviously plenty of reasons why there are failings of the justice system and most people agree that the government isn't the sole arbiter of social accountability.
    - imgabe 6y ago
      I'm not saying the justice system is perfect, but we've spent literally thousands of years refining it and people have fought and died for things like rules of evidence, the right to face your accusers, trial by jury, presumption of innocence etc, etc. These things are still not a reality in many places in the world. To throw that out and say "Nah let's nuke this guy's life because an anonymous person sent us a screenshot that they claim is him doing something racist" is not an improvement. This is moving in the wrong direction.
    - ewindal 6y ago
      Good thing there are multi-billion private companies out there that can pick up the slack and punish the real criminals.
- 6y ago

alfiedotwtf 6y ago

You say this as if that list is fixed for all of eternity. If you don't want to call this a slippery slope, then how about the thin end of the wedge.

uvnq 6y ago
Wow, that's a really interesting idiom. I've never heard that before and will definitely use it over slippery slope, especially since pointing out a slippery slope is often incorrectly called a fallacy (from my understanding, it is only a fallacy if there is no established trend).
- alfiedotwtf 6y ago
  It’s used a lot in political planning i.e here’s our ultimate aim, what’s our thin end of the wedge, and what’s our pretext

throwawaysea 6y ago

What took place at the Capitol wasn’t an insurrection or a coup (https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/01/06/why-this-wasnt-a-coup-capitol-2020-election-trump/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/01/06/why-this-wasnt-a-coup-c...). It was by and large a protest, like numerous past protests at the Capitol that didn’t generate the same media coverage due to bias (https://www.allsides.com/blog/capitol-hill-breach-riot-coverage-demonstrates-media-bias https://www.allsides.com/blog/capitol-hill-breach-riot-cover...). There were literally tens of thousands of people in DC for rallies and protests, including several thousand in front of the Capitol. A few hundred went past the barriers and almost all those who did, are only going to end up with a minor trespassing charge. Calling all of that an “insurrection” and claiming that Trump or rally organizers were “damaging the fabric of democracy” is not just hyperbolic, but explicitly false. There is also definitely a slippery slope concern. It isn’t just illegal activities that are being censored on Twitter or Twitch or Facebook or elsewhere. If your opinion/perspective disagrees with progressives on some controversial topic like gender identity or guns or illegal immigration or the coronavirus, you will be censored even though you aren’t breaking any law. Such censorship has been normalized bit by bit over the last four years, and is exactly the slippery slope in action. And since it inhibits the exchange of ideas and free flow of political opinions in a system that depends on it, such censorship is the REAL damage to the fabric of democracy.

kstenerud 6y ago

And of course punishment without process of law has never gone awry before, and never slippery sloped into something nightmarish. I'm sure it'll all be fine. It's not like we have ample historical examples of this sort of thing.

Clampower 6y ago

And all of this while twitch’s “Just Chatting” section is basically Soft Core porn, “hot tub streams” accessible to underage users, exploiting vulnerable, desperate people for insane amount of donations. Twitch is definitely a slippery slope, especially in distributing soft core porn to underage kids.

uvnq 6y ago
Agreed. Personally I think we need to do a better job of preventing kids from being exposed to this kind of stuff. Not just on Twitch but everywhere else.

imtringued 6y ago

Cancel culture isn't about a company banning things, it's about an outrage mob getting angry to the point where it becomes untenable for a company to defend an individual that hasn't broken the law. What you are talking about is something completely different. That's not even cancel culture. It's upholding the law and it requires zero opinions from a random outrage mob, you report the content, the company reviews it and immediately deletes it if it goes against the law. There is no petitioning required to pressure a company because the vast majority of companies delete content like that as soon as they can identify its illegal nature.