4 ms·

> can be easily searched if I'm ever notable enough to have influence Simply by voting, or working for a certain company, or or striking or joining a union, or

by grecy 3y ago

> can be easily searched if I'm ever notable enough to have influence Simply by voting, or working for a certain company, or or striking or joining a union, or seeking an abortion may very well be notable enough for them to label you a certain way so they can pin something on you - "Acting against state interests" or some such.

2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
> Simply by voting Please show me a instance where a judge approved a warrant to investigate the crime of voting.
- virtue3 3y ago
  The whole problem with this shit is they don't always need a warrant. If you are a non-us citizen or you're deemed "a terrorist" they can do whatever. This complicates further with crap like the US spying on say Swedish residents and then forwarding information to Sweden. Technically; Sweden isn't spying on it's citizens, the US is. But it's the same result.
  - Forbo 3y ago
    Or they can just buy the data they want from whatever surveillance capitalism megacorp and not even have to bother collaborating with international orgs, regardless of citizenship/national origin/whatever.
- knodi123 3y ago
  https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/11/crystal-mason-illegal-voting-texas/ https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/11/crystal-mason-illega...
  - nonethewiser 3y ago
    I guess that’s a good point. Not everyone can vote so there absolutely should be investigations into people bypassing the law. I assumed “legal” voting from the original comment but I guess its not all legal.
    - knodi123 3y ago
      > so there absolutely should be investigations into people bypassing the law No, there really shouldn't have been an investigation. This was evil, wasteful, and above all, truly fucked up. She didn't "steal" a vote from anyone. She cast a provisional ballot, after asking permission. There doesn't need to be an investigation- just check the facts, and deal with her provisional ballot as necessary. At my college, we had a guy walk across the stage at the graduation ceremony for the school of engineering. But he wasn't in the school of engineering; he just found there ceremony to be at a more convenient time, and assumed it was all the same. They didn't call his name, and nothing came of it. Because it was an administrative issue. What they didn't do, was throw him in jail for trying to steal an engineering degree. Because there was zero chance of that happening, and he wasn't even trying to do that.
      - 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
        That's not what is being debated here. We are debating whether judges regularly sign off on warrants for legally voting or voting for the wrong candidate.
        knodi123 3y ago
        Nobody said "regularly", or "legally" or "wrong candidate" until you, just now. Feels like goalpost moving. But if you think my example was pointless, feel free to ignore it. I answered the question that was asked, and now I'm done.
        2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
        > Simply by voting This means voting illegally?
        knodi123 3y ago
        Nope, it means "simply by voting". Whether the vote is valid or not, whether it should be tossed out or kept, is a separate issue that really should be determined asynchronously, and carry no penalty. Especially if, as in this case, she literally asked the authorities if it was okay, and her ballot was only ever provisional in the first place.
CaptWillard 3y ago
I'm with you for the most part, but your examples don't seem to represent the type of citizens that the IC has been targeting for at least the last decade. Still, we should never allow the government to do to our opponents what we wouldn't want done to our allies.
- nonethewiser 3y ago
  So called white supremacists.
- grecy 3y ago
  > type of citizens that the IC has been targeting for at least the last decade. The really crazy part is that none of us has any clue what type of citizens the IC has been targeting. I'd be willing to bet it's all of us.

by grecy 3y ago

2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago

> Simply by voting Please show me a instance where a judge approved a warrant to investigate the crime of voting.

virtue3 3y ago
The whole problem with this shit is they don't always need a warrant. If you are a non-us citizen or you're deemed "a terrorist" they can do whatever. This complicates further with crap like the US spying on say Swedish residents and then forwarding information to Sweden. Technically; Sweden isn't spying on it's citizens, the US is. But it's the same result.
- Forbo 3y ago
  Or they can just buy the data they want from whatever surveillance capitalism megacorp and not even have to bother collaborating with international orgs, regardless of citizenship/national origin/whatever.
knodi123 3y ago
https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/11/crystal-mason-illegal-voting-texas/ https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/11/crystal-mason-illega...
- nonethewiser 3y ago
  I guess that’s a good point. Not everyone can vote so there absolutely should be investigations into people bypassing the law. I assumed “legal” voting from the original comment but I guess its not all legal.
  - knodi123 3y ago
    > so there absolutely should be investigations into people bypassing the law No, there really shouldn't have been an investigation. This was evil, wasteful, and above all, truly fucked up. She didn't "steal" a vote from anyone. She cast a provisional ballot, after asking permission. There doesn't need to be an investigation- just check the facts, and deal with her provisional ballot as necessary. At my college, we had a guy walk across the stage at the graduation ceremony for the school of engineering. But he wasn't in the school of engineering; he just found there ceremony to be at a more convenient time, and assumed it was all the same. They didn't call his name, and nothing came of it. Because it was an administrative issue. What they didn't do, was throw him in jail for trying to steal an engineering degree. Because there was zero chance of that happening, and he wasn't even trying to do that.
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
      That's not what is being debated here. We are debating whether judges regularly sign off on warrants for legally voting or voting for the wrong candidate.
      - knodi123 3y ago
        Nobody said "regularly", or "legally" or "wrong candidate" until you, just now. Feels like goalpost moving. But if you think my example was pointless, feel free to ignore it. I answered the question that was asked, and now I'm done.
        2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
        > Simply by voting This means voting illegally?
        knodi123 3y ago
        Nope, it means "simply by voting". Whether the vote is valid or not, whether it should be tossed out or kept, is a separate issue that really should be determined asynchronously, and carry no penalty. Especially if, as in this case, she literally asked the authorities if it was okay, and her ballot was only ever provisional in the first place.

CaptWillard 3y ago

I'm with you for the most part, but your examples don't seem to represent the type of citizens that the IC has been targeting for at least the last decade. Still, we should never allow the government to do to our opponents what we wouldn't want done to our allies.

nonethewiser 3y ago
So called white supremacists.
grecy 3y ago
> type of citizens that the IC has been targeting for at least the last decade. The really crazy part is that none of us has any clue what type of citizens the IC has been targeting. I'd be willing to bet it's all of us.