SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
In what is starting to look like COINTELPRO updated and outsourced for the 21st century, it was recently revealed that cybersecurity firm ZeroFox monitored at least two high-profile Black Lives Matter protest organizers and labeled them as 'physical threats' in secret reports to Baltimore city administrators and to an unnamed 'classified partner' organization at Fort Meade (headquarters of the NSA and other intelligence agencies).
McKesson and Elzie both tell Mother Jones they were "not surprised" that they were being watched. "It confirms that us telling the truth about police violence is seen as a threat," McKesson says. Both activists say they do not know why they were identified as physical threats. McKesson and Elzie live in Missouri, where they helped organize the Ferguson protests. They traveled together to Baltimore for a week and a half during the Freddie Gray protests.
This classification of non-violent political protesters as threats follows the nationwide, FBI-orchestrated purge of the Occupy movement that was legally enabled by labeling them a terrorist threat.
(Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Saturday August 08 2015, @08:20PM
The Department of Homeland Security has been monitoring the Black Lives Matter movement since anti-police protests erupted in Ferguson, Missouri last summer, according to hundreds of documents obtained by The Intercept through a Freedom of Information Act request. [firstlook.org]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Adamsjas on Saturday August 08 2015, @08:28PM
Professional protesters that move from city to city to stir up trouble are "physical threats". There are people that do nothing else in their life but rush from protest to protest, riot to riot.
These are essentially social terrorists, that could/should be jailed, but are allowed to run loose, because they are easy to track.
An indicator species for burning buildings as it were.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by eof on Saturday August 08 2015, @08:49PM
When did exercising a right to protest become "stirring up trouble" and being "social terrorists"?
Can you support your attempt to associate their activism/protests with the rioting that took place? If not, why are you so willing to jail people based on their viewpoint?
(Score: 4, Informative) by Hairyfeet on Saturday August 08 2015, @10:53PM
I'll just leave this here [youtube.com] but if you need a place to start how about Why its OK to Kill a Cop: Black legal scholar [youtube.com]. IMHO this just shows the racism of the ultra left that has taken over the liberal camp and run all of us that believed in the civil rights movement out, because if this was a disease like sickle cell that was wiping out double digits every single week in the inner cities? there would be screams of racism if we didn't stop it, but because its black kids just slaughtering black kids (and anybody else that gets in their path) you are considered a racist for daring to want to do anything about it!
I'll just end with a quote from the black activist David Carroll "black lives matter, but only if they are taken by a white person, otherwise they ain't worth shit".
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 08 2015, @11:13PM
> Why its OK to Kill a Cop: Black legal scholar
Recording a video on your phone waiting at the drive through of McDonalds does not make someone a legal scholar.
> I'll just end with a quote from the black activist David Carroll
A hot-head posting rants on youtube does not an activist make.
You are one messed up dude hairy. Messed up.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by eof on Sunday August 09 2015, @12:25AM
I don't understand what your post has to do with anything. Quoting some random person changes the Constitution? It certainly doesn't provide evidence against the people mentioned in the original post. It also does not represent the thinking of an entire community.
Regarding violence in some black neighborhoods, there are constant efforts to address it in churches and other community organizations (working with municipal leaders, when given a chance). Just because the only reports you see or pay attention to show the negative side of these communities doesn't mean nothing positive goes on. Further, there is a difference between representatives of (local) government killing people under questionable circumstances and seemingly getting off without consequence, and the violence you refer to. In the latter case, suspects will be sought and prosecuted.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Hairyfeet on Sunday August 09 2015, @01:37AM
There have been less black men killed by cops in the last 3 years than have been killed by each other in the last 30 days....which is causing the most deaths? And the more important question is WHY are cops (and everybody else) more likely to shoot first when it comes to black males? Could it be because Blacks commit 7.5 times more violent interracial crimes than Whites, although they comprise only one-seventh of the White population [sodahead.com]?
Again if this was sickle cell or Aids? There would be screams to fix this on every national network, but because this would require actually doing something about the 72% of blacks are born out of wedlock [politifact.com] and being raised with NO fathers and NO support systems? Well we should just pretend it doesn't exist, just look at the insane number of hoops the MSM goes through to keep from saying flash mobs are nearly always (as in more than 97%) out of control black teens. Why do cops shoot? Because they are afraid of black teens, why are they afraid? Because you are 7.5 times more likely to be violently attacked by a black teen than a white.
So unless you are willing to argue that reality is racist? You are never gonna do anything about cops shooting blacks until you do something about the fact that nearly all violent calls they see every day involves black teens.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 09 2015, @03:11AM
> There have been less black men killed by cops in the last 3 years than have been killed by each other in the last 30 days....
You so fail at basic math. Either that or you are a genius at lying with statistics. I'm going with math failure myself.
Did you know that there have been less black men killed by cops in the last 3 years than white men killed by each other in the last 30 days? [fbi.gov] Even more so, 36% of people killed by whites are women, both a far higher rate and absolute number than women killed by black murderers. Women have every right to be afraid of whites.
PS You know are citing a well reasoned blog when the "top opinion" is:
"DoJ under Holder has already sent a memo saying that they will NOT prosecute any prosecute any minority on white crimes."
(Score: 1) by eof on Sunday August 09 2015, @05:18AM
I am not going to put any faith in numbers from a web site I've never heard of (particularly one that claims only a foreign journalist could find/report the data), and I'm not going to go digging for crime statistics now. Is there a problem with crime in some black communities? Yes. Does that mean that all black people should be considered armed and dangerous by police (or anyone else)? No. I give the following quote from an interview with Orlando Patterson [salon.com] often because I tire of making the point (I encourage you to read the entire interview):
Regarding efforts to fix problems, as I mentioned before, there have always been such efforts. Some of this is mentioned in an article [chronicle.com] I read today. The featured person thinks that the black community bears some responsibility for the current overreach of the authorities; it is a controversial view, but his work demonstrates my point about efforts within the community. It is interesting that the focus of government efforts when opioids were ravaging the black community was incarceration; now that it is a more general problem the call is for treatment.
You interject your preconceptions when you claim that the children born out of wedlock are being raised with no fathers and no support systems; the article you cite makes a point to say this is not necessarily the case.
Finally, quoting statistics is simply the start of understanding what is going on. There is a context which gives rise to the numbers.
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Sunday August 09 2015, @06:39AM
So in other words you won't believe anything that isn't parroted by HuffPo? Because if you had bothered to look at the links (or hell even use Google) the results are coming from the FBI crime statistics. Are you gonna argue the FBI statistics are racist too? Oh and juust FYI but those stats are AFTER the FBI tried to tilt the field (because they knew how bad they look) by listing anybody Hispanic as white. A black Brazilian fresh off the boat from Rio? According to the FBI he is white now, why? Because they saw how bad the stats looked for Black American males and needed SOME way to fudge the numbers! Several have tried removing the Hispanic numbers and if you do that? The numbers jump to 12 to 1!
And before anybody jumps in with "systemic racism" or "its poverty" or any of that bullshit? A black man fresh off the boat from Africa, who has no money, a fricking language AND cultural barrier against him which American blacks do not have? He is 300% more likely to reach middle class than an American black in his lifetime and something like 1500% more likely to reach middle class in a single generation! Now why is that? I would argue it is because the American black culture has become toxic with its glorification of violence across the board, glorification of abuse and degradation of women, acceptance and glorification of unwed motherhood, and leaders that push a victim narrative. If you want the numbers you are welcome to look at the stats from the DoJ and FBI [infowars.com] and the facts don't lie, this is an epidemic. The links to the PDFs are right in the middle of the link, help thyself.
You don't put out a fire by bitching about the paint on the house next door, you fight the fucking fire! And sadly that is EXACTLY what we are seeing here because to say different would go against the political narrative being pushed. Why do cops shoot first with blacks? Because they are afraid of them, but WHY are they afraid of them and not of Whites, Hispanics, Asians, etc? Because of the numbers above. And WHY are the numbers like that? Because you have a toxic culture that glorifies violence and infantilizes blacks [youtube.com] by telling them nothing they do is their fault, nobody to raise them or teach them right from wrong, as the prison shrink in the video says "the emotional maturity of a 10-12 year old". If the cops stopped going into the inner city altogether, do you think the violence will disappear? If the cops had no guns, will the violence go down, or do you think you'd just have a lot of dead cops? You can't solve a problem by only only looking at the symptoms, you have to get to the root, and the root is black teens have become a threat to themselves and to all around them, simple as that. The numbers do not lie.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 09 2015, @06:58AM
Reading your posts is like taking a punch in the gut. It must be 100 times worse to actually be you, living your life filled with such malevolence.
(Score: 1) by eof on Sunday August 09 2015, @03:22PM
Could it be because people hold the view that US black culture is toxic that an African immigrant coming to the US is more likely to be successful?
Speaking of not reading links, you have made no mention of mine, but it doesn't matter. I have made the mistake of following you into a broad discussion of race in America--that was not my intent. Clearly you have strong views that won't be altered by anything I have to offer. Similarly, nothing you have written convinces me that you have arguments that I haven't heard before and found lacking. I do suggest you read more broadly than outlets that support your views.
Getting back to my original point, McKesson and Elzie have a Constitutional right to protest that is not abridged by the fact that they are black Americans.
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Monday August 10 2015, @08:22AM
Again you are speaking of HuffPo, yes? Because I provided you the FBI and DoJ statistics and what is your reply? By attacking me NOT by arguing your position.
What we see here is the classic "new progressive" tactic of attacking the messenger, have no comeback? Data not on your side? Not a problem just ignore the evidence and call the person who brought it up names and say they are ignorant, showing the new left for what they are, nothing but partisan hacks.
So I put it to you once again, I have provided you with the numbers, straight from the FBI and DoJ and these are AFTER they added all Hispanics into the white column BTW, and it still shows you are 7.5 times more likely to be attacked by an American Black than ANY other race So how about instead of merely throwing insults you try actually debating the evidence? Or are you not well read enough and need to "read more broadly than outlets that support your views"?
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 09 2015, @10:11PM
When police refuse to do their jobs, vigilantism is inevitable. Citizens delegate justice to the legal system to ensure fairness and impartiality, but when the justice system continually fails to serve justice for years and even decades or longer, the citizens' hands are forced and they have no choice but to rescind the power they delegated and take matters into their own hands.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Saturday August 08 2015, @11:25PM
In Ferguson, the locals were 99% peaceful, and the outsiders were more than 50% troublemakers. There are multiple accounts of the riots being triggered by outsiders. It doesn't cost an outsider when all the local businesses are burnt down - he gets to go home to his own peaceful neighborhood, where he can still get a cup of coffee at the local 7/11.
It wouldn't have been terribly hard to justify closing the roads into Ferguson, to prevent outsiders coming in. The demonstrations would almost certainly have remained peaceful.
Of course, past history in the US should make anyone fearful of allowing government that authority.
http://tulsahistory.org/learn/online-exhibits/the-tulsa-race-riot/ [tulsahistory.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 08 2015, @11:54PM
> In Ferguson, the locals were 99% peaceful, and the outsiders were more than 50% troublemakers.
Dude! What is it with you just randomly making up numbers that justify your biases? Seriously, we all know you pulled that 50% straight out of your ass since you've never been anywhere near Ferguson.
BTW, in case you missed it from the summary, the two people in the story are from the Ferguson area. Does that make them the 1% who are troublemakers?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 08 2015, @09:15PM
> Professional protesters that move from city to city to stir up trouble are "physical threats".
> These are essentially social terrorists
Just like Martin Luther King Jr.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anal Pumpernickel on Saturday August 08 2015, @10:13PM
Well, I can see you probably won't be happy until you live in a full-fledged police state. Maybe you should try North Korea instead; moving there would surely be less work than changing a country significantly.
The phrase "social terrorist" just shows how watered-down the word "terrorist" has become. Now merely exercising your constitutional rights is considered terrorism by some people. Maybe you don't care enough to try to change the country you live in, but some people do. While that may 'inconvenience' you and others at times, you'll just have to deal with it. That's an extremely small price to pay for being able to exercise your liberties and allowing people who actually care about improving their country to work on improving it while you sit by, do nothing, and then complain about them.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by gman003 on Saturday August 08 2015, @11:09PM
Erm, what?
Most protests, probably 90%+, don't turn violent at all. The ones that do rarely turn into riots or looting, since it's usually the police forcibly shutting it down, and the "violence" is "people really not wanting to be tear-gassed for exercising free speech". Professional protestors are also the ones that are helping to *keep* those protests nonviolent. Remember MLK? He was a professional protestor, by any reasonable definition of the term. And he turned simmering violence into nonviolent protests. Modern professional protestors follow in that lead, or at least aspire to.
There *is* a phenomenon where protests turn into riots due to people coming in from afar. It's usually opportunists - people close enough to easily come, but far enough to not be directly affected by the cause. And the professionals are aware of this, and try to keep such people out of their protests, with varying degrees of success. That's what happened at Ferguson - and even then, the amount of violence was severely exaggerated by the media.
(Meta-discussion: I am seriously starting to worry about the thinly-veiled racism that's popping up more and more often in the comments section. Was it always there, just normally downvoted to oblivion where it belongs? If so, I'd vote to again make negative mods actually lower a comment's score.)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 08 2015, @11:17PM
> Was it always there, just normally downvoted to oblivion where it belongs?
Yes, the racism has always been here. Especially given that this site has no under the age of 30, lots of old white guys losing their shit over losing their birth-right as king of the hill.
> If so, I'd vote to again make negative mods actually lower a comment's score.
That's still how it works.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday August 09 2015, @01:16AM
Especially given that this site has no under the age of 30, lots of old white guys losing their shit over losing their birth-right as king of the hill.
Here's a classic example of the thinly veiled racism. I think a bunch of it is just trolling though.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 09 2015, @01:29AM
>> lots of old white guys losing their shit over losing their birth-right as king of the hill.
>
> Here's a classic example of the thinly veiled racism.
Awww, did I hurt your feelings?
You consistently post with the wisdom of a teenager, but you are obviously older than 30.
The loss of unearned privilege is the most painful loss of them all because it feels so undeserved when in fact the privilege was undeserved to begin with. If talking about the undisputed fact that being white gives people a leg up in american society is racism then you are mighty lucky to have never experienced what is like to be non-white.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday August 09 2015, @02:52AM
Awww, did I hurt your feelings?
No.
The loss of unearned privilege
Didn't happen and I doubt you believe the claim you make either.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 09 2015, @03:16AM
>> The loss of unearned privilege
> Didn't happen and I doubt you believe the claim you make either.
What didn't happen? You haven't lost any of that privilege yet? I tend to agree. People on this website are mostly well enough off that they haven't lost much privilege yet. But just like the person who has always lived a sheltered life, even the barest hint of a loss is enough to send you into total freakout mode.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 09 2015, @10:17PM
Stating facts does not make one a racist. Now if he said something about them deserving it or make a comment about all whites or something, that would be racist, but simply saying "white guys lose their shit because non-whites are becoming more common" is not racist. The guy may be a bigot, who knows, but his statement does not support that accusation.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday August 09 2015, @11:39PM
Stating facts does not make one a racist.
So how many people in this thread are you pretending to be?
(Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 09 2015, @02:26AM
Negative mods do still lower a comment's score. Except Disagree, which is a +0 mod.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by gman003 on Sunday August 09 2015, @02:46AM
Odd, I must have misremembered the announcement about that change.
So now instead of an incorrect hypothesis as to why unsavory comments are on the rise, I have no hypothesis. Which is better but still not good.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 09 2015, @03:18AM
You just haven't read enough to notice them. Your UID is relatively high. I don't think we've cracked 6000 yet.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday August 08 2015, @11:20PM
Now, now - Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton just APPEAR to wander the nation, stirring up trouble.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday August 09 2015, @01:03AM
all that moderations
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Sunday August 09 2015, @01:46AM
I can't believe I just read someone use the phrase "social terrorist" here. I seriously hope you're just trolling, but if you aren't, damn, you're a moron and a fascist who has absolutely no understanding of American values. Here's to hoping you're a native of Myanmar or some other place where there's no social terrorism to speak of, because of the repressive government sponsored terrorism of its own population.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 08 2015, @10:25PM
They also show the department [Department of Homeland Security] watching over gatherings that seem benign and even mundane. For example, DHS circulated information on a nationwide series of silent vigils and a DHS-funded agency planned to monitor a funk music parade and a walk to end breast cancer in the nation’s capital.
The rich are afraid of an uprising. They don't know what will trigger it, so everything is treated as a threat.
Too bad they are just being paranoid.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by aristarchus on Saturday August 08 2015, @10:33PM
Back before the latest American Imperial Wars of Discretion. these same folks were keeping a close eye on the Quakers. Peacenik Christians, pointing out your moral bankruptcy, definitely a "physical threat".