Nspm-7 Labels Common Beliefs as Terrorism 'indicators'

One may argue that tit-for-tat is appropriate, but generous-tit-for-tat is better.

Are we going to classify every single variations of the political beliefs of every domestic terrorists even if they are shared by millions of others law abiding citizens?

Alternatively, consider the world in which the claim that it is victim blaming is 100% true. Such a world, where large parts of the U.S. are focusing their attention on righting grievances instead of anything else, is a world where the U.S. is too distracted by actual civil war to avoid suffering conquest by foreign powers.

https://web.archive.org/web/20210617103741/https://www.white...

At least in the broad-strokes PDF I see no mention of "radical Christian" anything. If there's some citation, I'd be curious to see it if it can still be found and if it mentions specific groups.

The word “war” has meaning.

The executive is saying “war” and “portland” in the same sentence.

We the people can invoke treason— the commander in chief said the word and an American city.

Those two things are treason.

This isn’t hard. We just need to STAND UP.

It isn’t like we need to say anything.

Quite literally a mass formation of people to represent, “all of your generals that represent your digital social presence are documented pedophiles, just stop.”

We'll see about that. The prominent members of his like are all doing their best impressions of him and it's they're not very convincing. Their sycophancy is the best indicator that they lack the spine to do the audacious things he does.

Someone with a completely different demeanor yet still standing above the crowd is what will likely succeed Trump and, as of now, I don't see it.

It remains to be seen. Trumpism is built directly around his entertaining cult of personality. Once he is out who's going to entertain the masses?

These topics are incredibly salient to discuss if we’re going to improve our industry and society. Everything is political, and should be discussed in the context of technology here - which this article is highly relevant for.

Enforcing it as a rule is an explicit enablement of the status quo.

If HN is about intellectual curiosity, the heated disagreement in this comment section should be proof of how stimulating this topic is. But we’d rather stick our heads in the sand rather than confront what inconveniences us.