6 ms·

That's hard to believe, we essentialy won the war on terror here's a real report not a political charged blog: https://www.justice.gov/archive/olp/pdf/patriot_

That's hard to believe, we essentialy won the war on terror here's a real report not a political charged blog: https://www.justice.gov/archive/olp/pdf/patriot_report_from_the_field0704.pdf https://www.justice.gov/archive/olp/pdf/patriot_report_from_...

vmception 5y ago
You should read literally anything from the last 15 years, especially from rights groups. EFF, ACLU, watchdogs, thinktanks. If you only respect government sources then the GAO has plenty of gems on this topic. I’ll make a separate comment for my other thoughts
- busymom0 5y ago
  ACLU has gone to crap in the last few years unfortunately. It's been fully co-opted by the democrats for many years. Just like the SPLC, ADL etc. Look at where vast majority of their donations come from. 1. ACLU actively gives their data to Facebook: https://www.axios.com/aclu-data-shares-facebook-4f1d21f4-d432-4998-8c67-364500015c28.html https://www.axios.com/aclu-data-shares-facebook-4f1d21f4-d43... https://fortune.com/2021/04/02/aclu-shares-data-facebook-third-parties-digital-privacy/ https://fortune.com/2021/04/02/aclu-shares-data-facebook-thi... 2. ACLU claims Second Amendment is Racist > "Racism is foundational to the Second Amendment and its inclusion in the Bill of Rights." https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1419294620417155074 https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1419294620417155074 Fun fact: Vermont ratified the individual right to gun ownership and the abolishing of slavery in their State Constitution at the same time in 1777. The second amendment actually helped defeat racism and the only thing racist about it is the disproportionate infringement against minorities. > Vermont’s Declaration of Rights of 1777 set forth the following fundamental rights and abolished slavery: That all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent, and unalienable rights, amongst which are the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety. Therefore, no male person, born in this country, or brought from over sea, ought to be holden by law, to serve any person, as a servant, slave, or apprentice, after he arrives to the age of twenty-one years; nor female, in like manner, after she arrives to the age of eighteen years. > Vt. Constitution, Art. I, § 1 (1777). See Zilversmit at 116. The Vermont Declaration also provided: “That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State . . . .” Id., § 15. 3. ACLU used to defend free speech of even neo-nazis but have since then abandoned their principles: https://greenwald.substack.com/p/aclu-again-cowardly-abstains-from https://greenwald.substack.com/p/aclu-again-cowardly-abstain... 4. ACLU's most famous lawyer calls JK Rowling and Abigail Shrier "white supremacists" without any proof whatsoever: https://twitter.com/abigailshrier/status/1358246098364583936?lang=en https://twitter.com/abigailshrier/status/1358246098364583936... The same lawyer has also called for banning of Abigail Shrier's book. 5. Last year, they warned against using COVID-19 passport systems as they endanger privacy rights by creating a new surveillance infrastructure to collect health data which has the potential of mission creep to expand into other areas such as conditioning travel or access to housing. Such status may be stored with other personal details, such as travel, employment, or housing information, heightening the intrusiveness of an immunity passport system. They recommended focussing on the implementation of widespread, free, and quick testing, without creating a new privacy-invasive infrastructure that threatens everyone’s rights. https://archive.is/5KrP8 https://archive.is/5KrP8 But now, ACLU claims ‘Vaccine mandates actually further civil liberties’: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/vaccine-mandates-actually-further-civil-liberties-the-aclu-writes-in-an-op-ed-11630609117 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/vaccine-mandates-actually-... The ACLU, Prior to COVID, Denounced Mandates and Coercive Measures to Fight Pandemics. Now, they have completely reversed its views, arguing vaccine mandates help civil liberties and bodily autonomy "is not absolute." https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-aclu-prior-to-covid-denounced https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-aclu-prior-to-covid-den...
s5300 5y ago
Really? Last I saw we just surrendered to the Taliban, freed 5000 of them including the current leader, the insurgency is now the de-facto government of Afghanistan, and we recently had a high profile journalist hacked to pieces with a hand saw in an embassy and didn't do a damn thing about it. How is the war on terror "essentially won" in your eyes? Also, for your bit about being hard to believe - the agency reported it themselves, so you're essentially saying you believe nothing except that which conforms to your existing world view. Not sure what to say about that.
- kuraudo 5y ago
  The taliban are the legitimate government of Afghanistan and were never terrorists. Ironically, the United States seems to love shipping in terrorists to destabilize afghanistan.
  - s5300 5y ago
    Ahh, just like greater North Western Taiwan. Northern Alliance must've been some pretty bad dudes too. Ironically, if we want to go by your definitions, Afghanistan doesn't exist, therefore nor does a government. It's a construct of the West. In the reality you're trying to suggest, that entire region exists as a bunch of regional tribes, perhaps more like the Emir(ates). Unfortunately, they are not United.
    - vmception 5y ago
      No, they’re saying that targeting the Taliban was incorrect and illegitimate scope creep, perpetuated by war hawks who needed to conflate the Taliban as an enemy and mislead the American public with incoherent Islamaphobia. The US mandate against the Taliban was to prevent Al Queda from using the Taliban’s military infrastructure. The Taliban was never officially deemed a terrorist organization, or a non-state enemy combatant, and only Pakistan was ever involved (instructed) to arrest or detain Taliban operatives and leaders. (That being said, due to the consequence free nature and lack of oversight, Taliban operatives were targeted and killed fairly indiscriminately especially by the drone pogroms.) Despite the lack of distinction made to the Americans who were needed to remain scared and confused to support the expensive operation, the war time and diplomatic efforts mostly distinguished between Al Queda and the Taliban. Its just US news and leaders who were playing US and NATO’s people for two decades straight. This discussion isn't about the tribal nature of that region, which is valid. You’re absolutely right that the “government” and even the nation state concept can be ignored there. Unless you are a woman with different aspirations than what the governing authority says. But thats not this discussion.
craftinator 5y ago
> we essentialy won the war on terror Are you from Afghanistan by any chance? Or are you trolling way too hard?
raxxorrax 5y ago
> we essentialy won the war on terror Are you serious? The US looks terribly weak against terror because the fear alone makes them infringe on civil liberties on a massive and broad scale.
vmception 5y ago
How do you believe we have won the war on terror? We have very visible and emboldened domestic terror groups despite whatever state preemptive capabilities the Patriot Act brought in And for Islamic extremists, the US mainland was barely ever the target. It just remains an eligible target due to an interpretation of jihad as long as we are seen as an invader in traditionally islamic lands. Al Queda has more extreme offshoots which have destabilized regions including the effects of so many refugees sent all over the mediterranean Strict Shariah from “not terrorist groups” are back in force despite 20 years of US wasting its resources and dividing itself over the budget overruns. This includes the extreme interpretation of Jihad that endangers US and all NATO countries. Can you tell me more about your influences? Like how is your world, your newsfeeds, thrown you into such a niche where you can only regurgitate a 17-year old DOJ report to support it and believe it
amcoastal 5y ago
Plenty of other people have responded to this comment, I don't have much to add except that you're literally the first person I've ever heard even suggest this.
pvaldes 5y ago
> we won the war on terror Apart of the zombie outbreak at January trying to hang the vice president in the damned Capitol of the USA all looks fine, yep

vmception 5y ago

You should read literally anything from the last 15 years, especially from rights groups. EFF, ACLU, watchdogs, thinktanks. If you only respect government sources then the GAO has plenty of gems on this topic. I’ll make a separate comment for my other thoughts

busymom0 5y ago
ACLU has gone to crap in the last few years unfortunately. It's been fully co-opted by the democrats for many years. Just like the SPLC, ADL etc. Look at where vast majority of their donations come from. 1. ACLU actively gives their data to Facebook: https://www.axios.com/aclu-data-shares-facebook-4f1d21f4-d432-4998-8c67-364500015c28.html https://www.axios.com/aclu-data-shares-facebook-4f1d21f4-d43... https://fortune.com/2021/04/02/aclu-shares-data-facebook-third-parties-digital-privacy/ https://fortune.com/2021/04/02/aclu-shares-data-facebook-thi... 2. ACLU claims Second Amendment is Racist > "Racism is foundational to the Second Amendment and its inclusion in the Bill of Rights." https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1419294620417155074 https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1419294620417155074 Fun fact: Vermont ratified the individual right to gun ownership and the abolishing of slavery in their State Constitution at the same time in 1777. The second amendment actually helped defeat racism and the only thing racist about it is the disproportionate infringement against minorities. > Vermont’s Declaration of Rights of 1777 set forth the following fundamental rights and abolished slavery: That all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent, and unalienable rights, amongst which are the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety. Therefore, no male person, born in this country, or brought from over sea, ought to be holden by law, to serve any person, as a servant, slave, or apprentice, after he arrives to the age of twenty-one years; nor female, in like manner, after she arrives to the age of eighteen years. > Vt. Constitution, Art. I, § 1 (1777). See Zilversmit at 116. The Vermont Declaration also provided: “That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State . . . .” Id., § 15. 3. ACLU used to defend free speech of even neo-nazis but have since then abandoned their principles: https://greenwald.substack.com/p/aclu-again-cowardly-abstains-from https://greenwald.substack.com/p/aclu-again-cowardly-abstain... 4. ACLU's most famous lawyer calls JK Rowling and Abigail Shrier "white supremacists" without any proof whatsoever: https://twitter.com/abigailshrier/status/1358246098364583936?lang=en https://twitter.com/abigailshrier/status/1358246098364583936... The same lawyer has also called for banning of Abigail Shrier's book. 5. Last year, they warned against using COVID-19 passport systems as they endanger privacy rights by creating a new surveillance infrastructure to collect health data which has the potential of mission creep to expand into other areas such as conditioning travel or access to housing. Such status may be stored with other personal details, such as travel, employment, or housing information, heightening the intrusiveness of an immunity passport system. They recommended focussing on the implementation of widespread, free, and quick testing, without creating a new privacy-invasive infrastructure that threatens everyone’s rights. https://archive.is/5KrP8 https://archive.is/5KrP8 But now, ACLU claims ‘Vaccine mandates actually further civil liberties’: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/vaccine-mandates-actually-further-civil-liberties-the-aclu-writes-in-an-op-ed-11630609117 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/vaccine-mandates-actually-... The ACLU, Prior to COVID, Denounced Mandates and Coercive Measures to Fight Pandemics. Now, they have completely reversed its views, arguing vaccine mandates help civil liberties and bodily autonomy "is not absolute." https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-aclu-prior-to-covid-denounced https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-aclu-prior-to-covid-den...

s5300 5y ago

Really? Last I saw we just surrendered to the Taliban, freed 5000 of them including the current leader, the insurgency is now the de-facto government of Afghanistan, and we recently had a high profile journalist hacked to pieces with a hand saw in an embassy and didn't do a damn thing about it. How is the war on terror "essentially won" in your eyes? Also, for your bit about being hard to believe - the agency reported it themselves, so you're essentially saying you believe nothing except that which conforms to your existing world view. Not sure what to say about that.

kuraudo 5y ago
The taliban are the legitimate government of Afghanistan and were never terrorists. Ironically, the United States seems to love shipping in terrorists to destabilize afghanistan.
- s5300 5y ago
  Ahh, just like greater North Western Taiwan. Northern Alliance must've been some pretty bad dudes too. Ironically, if we want to go by your definitions, Afghanistan doesn't exist, therefore nor does a government. It's a construct of the West. In the reality you're trying to suggest, that entire region exists as a bunch of regional tribes, perhaps more like the Emir(ates). Unfortunately, they are not United.
  - vmception 5y ago
    No, they’re saying that targeting the Taliban was incorrect and illegitimate scope creep, perpetuated by war hawks who needed to conflate the Taliban as an enemy and mislead the American public with incoherent Islamaphobia. The US mandate against the Taliban was to prevent Al Queda from using the Taliban’s military infrastructure. The Taliban was never officially deemed a terrorist organization, or a non-state enemy combatant, and only Pakistan was ever involved (instructed) to arrest or detain Taliban operatives and leaders. (That being said, due to the consequence free nature and lack of oversight, Taliban operatives were targeted and killed fairly indiscriminately especially by the drone pogroms.) Despite the lack of distinction made to the Americans who were needed to remain scared and confused to support the expensive operation, the war time and diplomatic efforts mostly distinguished between Al Queda and the Taliban. Its just US news and leaders who were playing US and NATO’s people for two decades straight. This discussion isn't about the tribal nature of that region, which is valid. You’re absolutely right that the “government” and even the nation state concept can be ignored there. Unless you are a woman with different aspirations than what the governing authority says. But thats not this discussion.

craftinator 5y ago

> we essentialy won the war on terror Are you from Afghanistan by any chance? Or are you trolling way too hard?

raxxorrax 5y ago

> we essentialy won the war on terror Are you serious? The US looks terribly weak against terror because the fear alone makes them infringe on civil liberties on a massive and broad scale.

vmception 5y ago

How do you believe we have won the war on terror? We have very visible and emboldened domestic terror groups despite whatever state preemptive capabilities the Patriot Act brought in And for Islamic extremists, the US mainland was barely ever the target. It just remains an eligible target due to an interpretation of jihad as long as we are seen as an invader in traditionally islamic lands. Al Queda has more extreme offshoots which have destabilized regions including the effects of so many refugees sent all over the mediterranean Strict Shariah from “not terrorist groups” are back in force despite 20 years of US wasting its resources and dividing itself over the budget overruns. This includes the extreme interpretation of Jihad that endangers US and all NATO countries. Can you tell me more about your influences? Like how is your world, your newsfeeds, thrown you into such a niche where you can only regurgitate a 17-year old DOJ report to support it and believe it

amcoastal 5y ago

Plenty of other people have responded to this comment, I don't have much to add except that you're literally the first person I've ever heard even suggest this.

pvaldes 5y ago

> we won the war on terror Apart of the zombie outbreak at January trying to hang the vice president in the damned Capitol of the USA all looks fine, yep