3 ms·

Note that Winston Smith, the generally-held-to-be "hero" of 1984, admits clearly around the middle of the novel that he's willing to use means including killing

Note that Winston Smith, the generally-held-to-be "hero" of 1984, admits clearly around the middle of the novel that he's willing to use means including killing children in pursuit of his ends, so if* confirming that extremists are extreme before arresting them is what this talk is about, ymmv. * I don't watch videos on HN, sorry. Transcript?

keepamovin 3y ago
> ... ineffective strawperson based on unfounded speculation hard pass
- 082349872349872 3y ago
  strawperson? http://www.george-orwell.org/1984/15.html http://www.george-orwell.org/1984/15.html (p2 ch8) > 'To commit acts of sabotage which may cause the death of hundreds of innocent people?' > 'Yes.' ... > 'If, for example, it would somehow serve our interests to throw sulphuric acid in a child's face -- are you prepared to do that?' > 'Yes.' Did O'Brien somehow "create" a terrorist, or merely reveal one? (OTOH, as you prefer founded speculation, please post a transcript. My understanding, based on actual domestic terrorism court filings acquired via PACER, is that the FBI doesn't just ask hypothetical questions as O'Brien does; if the subject says they want a bomb built* for target X, they provide a box with a button which they say will blow up target X, and only arrest if the subject then actually pushes the button.) * McVeigh was able to do it himself, so he slipped through this net.
  - keepamovin 3y ago
    It’s funny to present 1984 as a seeming justification of FBI behavior here. Sort of like an own goal? Anyway, regarding strawperson and unfounded speculation I was referring to your ineffective attempt to characterize the video’s message through this lens, without having watched the video yourself, by your own admission! After making such a mistake, you then seek to blame it on everyone else for not giving you a transcript? I think you have it backwards. Hahaha! Almost as if you’re afraid to look at the content! Or have an aversion to evidence that might go against the story you want to tell. Hmmm… again not a great look for someone advocating for the FBI here, who should have the highest standards. If you wish to have an informed opinion on this content, you’ll need to inform yourself. If you’re unable to do so, you’re not really qualified to talk to the content, are you? Failure to do so, then blaming your mistake on others not educating you is an abuse of responsibility and not respectful. And it just makes you uninformed, and that’s totally on you, no way out of it! Hahaha

keepamovin 3y ago

> ... ineffective strawperson based on unfounded speculation hard pass

082349872349872 3y ago
strawperson? http://www.george-orwell.org/1984/15.html http://www.george-orwell.org/1984/15.html (p2 ch8) > 'To commit acts of sabotage which may cause the death of hundreds of innocent people?' > 'Yes.' ... > 'If, for example, it would somehow serve our interests to throw sulphuric acid in a child's face -- are you prepared to do that?' > 'Yes.' Did O'Brien somehow "create" a terrorist, or merely reveal one? (OTOH, as you prefer founded speculation, please post a transcript. My understanding, based on actual domestic terrorism court filings acquired via PACER, is that the FBI doesn't just ask hypothetical questions as O'Brien does; if the subject says they want a bomb built* for target X, they provide a box with a button which they say will blow up target X, and only arrest if the subject then actually pushes the button.) * McVeigh was able to do it himself, so he slipped through this net.
- keepamovin 3y ago
  It’s funny to present 1984 as a seeming justification of FBI behavior here. Sort of like an own goal? Anyway, regarding strawperson and unfounded speculation I was referring to your ineffective attempt to characterize the video’s message through this lens, without having watched the video yourself, by your own admission! After making such a mistake, you then seek to blame it on everyone else for not giving you a transcript? I think you have it backwards. Hahaha! Almost as if you’re afraid to look at the content! Or have an aversion to evidence that might go against the story you want to tell. Hmmm… again not a great look for someone advocating for the FBI here, who should have the highest standards. If you wish to have an informed opinion on this content, you’ll need to inform yourself. If you’re unable to do so, you’re not really qualified to talk to the content, are you? Failure to do so, then blaming your mistake on others not educating you is an abuse of responsibility and not respectful. And it just makes you uninformed, and that’s totally on you, no way out of it! Hahaha