3 ms·

Any government that wants to snoop on journalists is a government that knows it's doing things against the interests of their constituents. France of all place

Any government that wants to snoop on journalists is a government that knows it's doing things against the interests of their constituents. France of all places. One problem is, modern governments seem to think that any situation in which they may get voted out counts as a national security risk. Another problem is that anything at all that can change how society operates is a national security risk. Climate change is about as big a national security risk as you could get, ironically it seems to be the only one that gets ignored. Solar power is a national security risk because it can change the power balance between consumers and long standing utilities. Same with electric cars, consumers, and fossil fuel companies. Any change to the balance of power / status quo is literally a threat to national security because society sits on a long established foundation of dependence upon certain utilities, companies, services, etc. Change the power dynamic and the foundation of society changes, which is a threat to national security. The final grand irony is that threats to national security are sometimes a good thing, and indicate the healthy progress of society in integrating new technologies and schools of thought. No national security threats is a symptom of stagnation. The ultimate victory of conservatism, the prize for which is generally losing the next war.

zdragnar 3y ago
I don't quite agree that stability or stasis are equivalent to security. Yes, change can coincide with unrest, but there's nothing inherently insecure about incorporating new schools of thought. Otherwise, the US wouldn't have police be run by local governments, separate from and not answering to the national military.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
JPLeRouzic 3y ago
> "anything at all that can change how society operates is a national security risk" In France now two-thirds of staff in police/gendarmerie work in riot control service, and only one-third work in judicial police. There may be good reasons for that, but as a Frenchman, I am unaware that French people in demonstrations are so dangerous. Why do demonstrators need to be countered by armed people trained in urban warfare and equipped with military gear? Indeed there are also real riots with war like scenes, but it's "only" a few hours after the event that riot police arrives. In this matter, firefighters are present during the events and they are real heroes.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > I am unaware that French people in demonstrations are so dangerous Les gilets jaunes were incredibly violent [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_vests_protests#Fatalities_and_injuries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_vests_protests#Fataliti...
  - JPLeRouzic 3y ago
    I agree that there were violent people, but they were a minority and belonged to opportunistic political factions (black blocks). It's these guys who torched small businesses, not the demonstrators. They were young, mobile, and well-trained for urban warfare, which caused many to wonder who trained them and where. These guys were probably 1/100 of the total number of gilets jaunes. In contrast, the average gilet jaune were middle-aged people, often women, who feared falling into poverty. Most were unable to run quickly, even for their life. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouvement_des_Gilets_jaunes#Profil_des_manifestants_et_des_soutiens https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouvement_des_Gilets_jaunes#Pr... (sorry it's in French) BTW my understanding of the WP paragraph that you point out is that most of this violence, injuries, and trauma was done by police, not by these people.
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > These guys were probably 1/100 of the total number of gilets jaunes This is always the case. It's why you need riot police versus ordinary cops. We've had tons of protests in New York, including ones where people are injured and looters blend in, but never (in modern times) at this scale nor intensity. > most of this violence, injuries, and trauma was done by police I don't think the police injured over a thousand of themselves. There were also multiple deaths where protesters used their trucks as weapons. I am not solely indicting the protesters. Just the claim that French protests aren't notably violent.
      - JPLeRouzic 3y ago
        > "protesters used their trucks as weapons" I don't remember such an event. In some cases, other people (not demonstrators) who were trying to cross a blockade their cars. > "Just the claim that French protests aren't notably violent." Sorry I didn't understand that, you are indeed right. There is often a level of violence (see farmers or docker unions) but the Gilets Jaunes were mostly ordinary people, not the smartest, not in their best health, and they were not aggressive in most cases. They were us, feeling things were falling apart and not knowing what to do.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> France of all places France is a notorious snooping hotspot. It was common, in the noughties, to require clean laptops on visits to Paris. Their security service's had a habit of imaging machines left in hotel rooms.
hcfman 3y ago
Well put about they want laws like that because they are doing things against their citizens. The Netherlands simply don’t care about the law. They do what they want with impunity then changed the law on 2020 so that it’s not punishable for all government to lie under oath in court so they can cover up what they do. They can’t be held accountable for obstruction of then they don’t care what the wording of any laws are.
- hcfman 3y ago
  There’s a six documentary here (in Dutch) in which it is quite clear that the Dutch justice department framed 9 innocent people of a murder. One if them committed suicide. At the end of each episode they mentioned two people who presumably were responsible for this who refuse to respond the the documentary makers questions. One of them was the head of the crime unit in Arnhem at the time which explains why they were asked. That person is now the president of the court of Maastricht. No consequences.
  - hcfman 3y ago
    Oh. The link is here https://kro-ncrv.nl/programmas/villamoord https://kro-ncrv.nl/programmas/villamoord

zdragnar 3y ago

I don't quite agree that stability or stasis are equivalent to security. Yes, change can coincide with unrest, but there's nothing inherently insecure about incorporating new schools of thought. Otherwise, the US wouldn't have police be run by local governments, separate from and not answering to the national military.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

JPLeRouzic 3y ago

> "anything at all that can change how society operates is a national security risk" In France now two-thirds of staff in police/gendarmerie work in riot control service, and only one-third work in judicial police. There may be good reasons for that, but as a Frenchman, I am unaware that French people in demonstrations are so dangerous. Why do demonstrators need to be countered by armed people trained in urban warfare and equipped with military gear? Indeed there are also real riots with war like scenes, but it's "only" a few hours after the event that riot police arrives. In this matter, firefighters are present during the events and they are real heroes.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> I am unaware that French people in demonstrations are so dangerous Les gilets jaunes were incredibly violent [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_vests_protests#Fatalities_and_injuries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_vests_protests#Fataliti...
- JPLeRouzic 3y ago
  I agree that there were violent people, but they were a minority and belonged to opportunistic political factions (black blocks). It's these guys who torched small businesses, not the demonstrators. They were young, mobile, and well-trained for urban warfare, which caused many to wonder who trained them and where. These guys were probably 1/100 of the total number of gilets jaunes. In contrast, the average gilet jaune were middle-aged people, often women, who feared falling into poverty. Most were unable to run quickly, even for their life. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouvement_des_Gilets_jaunes#Profil_des_manifestants_et_des_soutiens https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mouvement_des_Gilets_jaunes#Pr... (sorry it's in French) BTW my understanding of the WP paragraph that you point out is that most of this violence, injuries, and trauma was done by police, not by these people.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > These guys were probably 1/100 of the total number of gilets jaunes This is always the case. It's why you need riot police versus ordinary cops. We've had tons of protests in New York, including ones where people are injured and looters blend in, but never (in modern times) at this scale nor intensity. > most of this violence, injuries, and trauma was done by police I don't think the police injured over a thousand of themselves. There were also multiple deaths where protesters used their trucks as weapons. I am not solely indicting the protesters. Just the claim that French protests aren't notably violent.
    - JPLeRouzic 3y ago
      > "protesters used their trucks as weapons" I don't remember such an event. In some cases, other people (not demonstrators) who were trying to cross a blockade their cars. > "Just the claim that French protests aren't notably violent." Sorry I didn't understand that, you are indeed right. There is often a level of violence (see farmers or docker unions) but the Gilets Jaunes were mostly ordinary people, not the smartest, not in their best health, and they were not aggressive in most cases. They were us, feeling things were falling apart and not knowing what to do.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> France of all places France is a notorious snooping hotspot. It was common, in the noughties, to require clean laptops on visits to Paris. Their security service's had a habit of imaging machines left in hotel rooms.

hcfman 3y ago

Well put about they want laws like that because they are doing things against their citizens. The Netherlands simply don’t care about the law. They do what they want with impunity then changed the law on 2020 so that it’s not punishable for all government to lie under oath in court so they can cover up what they do. They can’t be held accountable for obstruction of then they don’t care what the wording of any laws are.

hcfman 3y ago
There’s a six documentary here (in Dutch) in which it is quite clear that the Dutch justice department framed 9 innocent people of a murder. One if them committed suicide. At the end of each episode they mentioned two people who presumably were responsible for this who refuse to respond the the documentary makers questions. One of them was the head of the crime unit in Arnhem at the time which explains why they were asked. That person is now the president of the court of Maastricht. No consequences.
- hcfman 3y ago
  Oh. The link is here https://kro-ncrv.nl/programmas/villamoord https://kro-ncrv.nl/programmas/villamoord