• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

6 Jan 2020 U.S. Events (Split from A Deeply Fractured US)

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,063
Points
1,040
With a little distance, I've been thinking a bit philosophically about this whole thing. I think that in retrospect the crappy security presence was a good thing.

The GOP has been playing with fire for at least the entire Trump presidency. They were trying to ride the populist bandwagon and supported a guy who often was criticizing and challenging the validity of the democratic process and its institutions because it didn't always turn out in his favour. The Republican party allowed this behaviour to happen because it energized their base and won elections. They coddled and supported this stuff. And then it all got away from them. If the security at Congress was able to repel with violence the insurrectionists than it would only serve to reinforce their beliefs that they are the picked on people and the government was against them. It would have also fed the fire of the populists of the GOP.

The fact that the mob got into the building, did harm, and threatened members of Congress forces the Republican party to look at the deal they made. They have to choose. Are they the party of Law and Order or are they the party of the mob? Do they believe in the process or do they think that as long as the leader is on your side anything goes?

Americans as a cultural zeitgeist believe in democracy. They believe in America and the American dream. America and democracy are the same things in many of their minds.

Now we can argue whether or not this was really a threat to democracy from a realistic perspective. No, it wasn't. It takes a lot more than one angry and oddly successful occupation of a government building. But perception is everything, and one thing American's do better than anyone is over-react when they think are being challenged. When their democracy (aka America) is being challenged. And trust me they are going to overreact like crazy to this.

If the police were successful the GOP leadership wouldn't have been directly threatened. Their leadership is now afraid. They looked at each other and thought "my god the fire is out of control, we were in control, what the hell happened". They fed the fire and got burned. Bad.

It also gave social media the excuse they were looking for to remove the method from which Trump used to rally his followers. A violent repulsion of that mob wouldn't have done that.

So I'm glad that the mob got in (not glad people were hurt). I'm glad that US Democracy got a scare. Maybe they won't take it for granted so much. This needed to happen. It's a See It Now moment...

This is no time for men who oppose Senator McCarthy's methods to keep silent, or for those who approve. We can deny our heritage and our history, but we cannot escape responsibility for the result. There is no way for a citizen of a republic to abdicate his responsibilities. As a nation we have come into our full inheritance at a tender age. We proclaim ourselves, as indeed we are, the defenders of freedom, wherever it continues to exist in the world, but we cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home.
The actions of the junior Senator from Wisconsin have caused alarm and dismay amongst our allies abroad, and given considerable comfort to our enemies. And whose fault is that? Not really his. He didn't create this situation of fear; he merely exploited it—and rather successfully. Cassius was right: "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.
 
Last edited:

Weinie

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,558
Points
1,110
Who's policing thought here?

Let's not mistake the actions of government and its agents, with the actions of public sector business that provide communications platforms and infrastructure. There's no 'free speech' claim with any legal grounding to be made against Twitter, Amazon, etc. Those business are free to make decisions about what will be allowed on their platforms. On the infrastructure back end, companies providing web hosting may determine that sites or services utilizing their infrastructure are potentially harmful to their business, or exposing them to legal jeopardy.

Nobody is entitled to a platform provided by someone else.
Yeah........ but,

The major oil companies in Canada seem to have a free hand in setting gas prices, (and they are remarkedly close and follow each other uncannily); the major telecos all seem to offer almost exactly the same plan at (plus or minus 30 cents) the same price, and the major Internet outlets seem to follow a predilection to ban the same commentators, for the same reasons. Talk about a coincidence. Who woulda thought?

But, ban away, Jeff Bezos.
 

Ralph

Member
Reaction score
7
Points
180
Yeah........ but,

The major oil companies in Canada seem to have a free hand in setting gas prices, (and they are remarkedly close and follow each other uncannily); the major telecos all seem to offer almost exactly the same plan at (plus or minus 30 cents) the same price, and the major Internet outlets seem to follow a predilection to ban the same commentators, for the same reasons. Talk about a coincidence. Who woulda thought?

But, ban away, Jeff Bezos.
You mean capitalism?
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
3,673
Points
1,060
It also gave social media the excuse they were looking for to remove the method from which Trump used to rally his followers. A violent repulsion of that mob wouldn't have done that.

It's a good thing he's banned, but social media platforms could have banned Trump 4 years ago if they wanted to.

Banning him with less than 30 days left in power seems as much a business move as it does ethical, especially with the democrats moving into office.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
4,071
Points
1,260
It's a good thing he's banned, but social media platforms could have banned Trump 4 years ago if they wanted to.

Banning him with less than 30 days left in power seems as much a business move as it does ethical, especially with the democrats moving into office.
Uh yeah. That's why Twitter originally only temporarily suspended him at first - his tirades draw too many clicks.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,819
Points
1,160
With a little distance, I've been thinking a bit philosophically about this whole thing. I think that in retrospect the crappy security presence was a good thing.

The GOP has been playing with fire for at least the entire Trump presidency. They were trying to ride the populist bandwagon and supported a guy who often was criticizing and challenging the validity of the democratic process and its institutions because it didn't always turn out in his favour. The Republican party allowed this behaviour to happen because it energized their base and won elections. They coddled and supported this stuff. And then it all got away from them. If the security at Congress was able to repel with violence the insurrectionists than it would only serve to reinforce their beliefs that they are the picked on people and the government was against them. It would have also fed the fire of the populists of the GOP.

The fact that the mob got into the building, did harm, and threatened members of Congress forces the Republican party to look at the deal they made. They have to choose. Are they the party of Law and Order or are they the party of the mob? Do they believe in the process or do they think that as long as the leader is on your side anything goes?

Americans as a cultural zeitgeist believe in democracy. They believe in America and the American dream. America and democracy are the same things in many of their minds.

Now we can argue whether or not this was really a threat to democracy from a realistic perspective. No, it wasn't. It takes a lot more than one angry and oddly successful occupation of a government building. But perception is everything, and one thing American's do better than anyone is over-react when they think are being challenged. When their democracy (aka America) is being challenged. And trust me they are going to overreact like crazy to this.

If the police were successful the GOP leadership wouldn't have been directly threatened. Their leadership is now afraid. They looked at each other and thought "my god the fire is out of control, we were in control, what the hell happened". They fed the fire and got burned. Bad.

It also gave social media the excuse they were looking for to remove the method from which Trump used to rally his followers. A violent repulsion of that mob wouldn't have done that.

So I'm glad that the mob got in (not glad people were hurt). I'm glad that US Democracy got a scare. Maybe they won't take it for granted so much. This needed to happen. It's a See It Now moment...

This is no time for men who oppose Senator McCarthy's methods to keep silent, or for those who approve. We can deny our heritage and our history, but we cannot escape responsibility for the result. There is no way for a citizen of a republic to abdicate his responsibilities. As a nation we have come into our full inheritance at a tender age. We proclaim ourselves, as indeed we are, the defenders of freedom, wherever it continues to exist in the world, but we cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home.
The actions of the junior Senator from Wisconsin have caused alarm and dismay amongst our allies abroad, and given considerable comfort to our enemies. And whose fault is that? Not really his. He didn't create this situation of fear; he merely exploited it—and rather successfully. Cassius was right: "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.
Quite a few in the Democratic party did the exact same in regards to the rioters, but then they were only destroying lives and private property, so the party didn't care. The politicians are only worried because now they are the target.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,189
Points
1,010
Who's policing thought here?

My comment "Gee. I hope we still believe in individual freedom to think. Policing action is one thing, expression another...but thought?" was a response to the preceding comment "The US believes in individual freedom to think as you wish regardless as to how repugnant your thoughts may be to society."

I suppose it lost context when it was yanked into this discussion, despite not having anything to do with 6 Jan 2020 US Events.

However, since we are here: "Nobody is entitled to a platform provided by someone else."

True. And nobody is entitled to assert how someone should feel about being blocked on a platform provided by someone else. If they act out criminally, hold them accountable. By then it's too late for the victims, of course.
 

Altair

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,441
Points
1,110
My comment "Gee. I hope we still believe in individual freedom to think. Policing action is one thing, expression another...but thought?" was a response to the preceding comment "The US believes in individual freedom to think as you wish regardless as to how repugnant your thoughts may be to society."

I suppose it lost context when it was yanked into this discussion, despite not having anything to do with 6 Jan 2020 US Events.
jan 6 2020 was pretty calm.

2021 on the other hand...;)
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,189
Points
1,010
Biden is going to have to choose revenge or stability

The prevailing attitude seems to be that they want stability, right after one more Inquisition. There, we're even. Everyone hold hands.
 

Jungle

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
410
The woman who was shot was Ashli Babbit, a 14-year veteran, who served four tours with the US Air Force, and was a high level security official throughout her time in service.
High-level?? She was an E4 (CAF Cpl equivalent) after 14 years. She was a member of USAF Security Forces, spending most of her time checking IDs at installation access points. HYT (High Year of Tenure) for E4 is 10 years. I suspect she lost one stripe and was HYT’d out, as she was likely undesirable.
 

Blackadder1916

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,161
Points
1,160
High-level?? She was an E4 (CAF Cpl equivalent) after 14 years. She was a member of USAF Security Forces, spending most of her time checking IDs at installation access points. HYT (High Year of Tenure) for E4 is 10 years. I suspect she lost one stripe and was HYT’d out, as she was likely undesirable.

To be accurate (unless you have other verifiable details), the circumstances of Babbitts's military service may not be as you surmise - HYT may not be as strictly applied in the Air Res and ANG where it seems she spent the majority of her time in uniform.

According to service records released by the Air Force Personnel Center, Babbitt served more than 12 years in different parts of the Air Force. She was on active duty from April 2004 to April 2008, and was a reservist from October 2008 to July 2010, AFPC said. The Air National Guard said she was a guardsman from July 2010 to July 2016. (The Air Force initially said Babbitt’s Guard service ended in November 2016.)

AFPC said later on Thursday that Babbitt deployed overseas on multiple occasions, including to Afghanistan in 2005, Iraq in 2006, and the United Arab Emirates in 2012 and 2014. Babbitt’s awards include the Iraq Campaign Medal and the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal.

She last served on active duty at Dyess Air Force Base in Texas as a security forces controller, a job that usually entails manning gate security at Air Force installations.

The Air National Guard said that when Babbitt separated, she was with the 113th Security Forces Squadron of the DC Air National Guard, which is stationed at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland. Her rank at the time of separation from the Guard was not immediately available.

And coincidentally, the Capital Policeman who died in the line of duty on that day also served in the USAF Security Forces.

Sicknick enlisted in the New Jersey Air National Guard in 1997 as a traditional drilling member. He served as a Fire Team Member and Leader of the 108th Security Forces Squadron, 108th Wing, at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, N.J., according to a statement from the New Jersey National Guard. He deployed to Saudi Arabia in 1999 for Operation Southern Watch and Kyrgyzstan in 2003 for Operation Enduring Freedom, and he was honorably discharged in 2003 as a staff sergeant.
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,063
Points
1,040
Quite a few in the Democratic party did the exact same in regards to the rioters, but then they were only destroying lives and private property, so the party didn't care. The politicians are only worried because now they are the target.
Cognitive dissonance caused false moral equivalence fallacy and a thrown in snuck premise.

The snuck premise is that BLM protestors were rioters and therefore wrong. Which is neither the simplistic case you try to present (protestors and rioters are not the same thing, and you can't make them equivalent). It also ignores the thousands of very peaceful BLM protests that happened all over the US including ones where the police marched with the protestors. In the case of this insurrection, it's pretty clear we can't paint everyone there with the same brush. Many were on the lawn praying and doing peaceful stuff. But as I've stated before protests are messy and you have to separate the good and the bad.

Also, protests and even riots are NOT morally equivalent to an insurrection against a legitimate democratic function. One function was protesting the state's violence against its own people. The other was trying to stop a legitimate and legal function of democracy. They are NOT the same thing. Politically this is a common argument X is the same as Y therefore X is OK. Well X isn't the same as Y here.

As for politicians running from distasteful people, yah happens all the time... wait this is the first time the GOP have done it since Trump was elected. Which is why it's so remarkable.

Finally a note about cognitive dissonance. I would recommend those conservatives (or classical liberals like myself) here take a good long look at our own bias' and hypocrisies. Are we the people of law and order only when it's convenient? Real conservatives believe in: laws, proper behaviour, taking responsibility, looking after your community and neighbours, and individual rights. Conservatives are supposed to be the sober adults in the room who look at the world as it actually is. Leaders. We need to act like it.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,819
Points
1,160
High-level?? She was an E4 (CAF Cpl equivalent) after 14 years. She was a member of USAF Security Forces, spending most of her time checking IDs at installation access points. HYT (High Year of Tenure) for E4 is 10 years. I suspect she lost one stripe and was HYT’d out, as she was likely undesirable.
My bad, i cut and pasted from elsewhere
 

Ralph

Member
Reaction score
7
Points
180
FTFY. Monopoly of thought is worse than any other alternative.
Sure. Not sure what that has to do with fuel sellers all trying for a maximum market share to make maximum profits. A monopoly is a single seller with a unique product. That's not what gas stations are. There are a dozen restaurants selling hamburgers in my town; does the observation that they all sell them at aound the same price mean something? Are they all in cahoots?
 

Weinie

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,558
Points
1,110
Sure. Not sure what that has to do with fuel sellers all trying for a maximum market share to make maximum profits. A monopoly is a single seller with a unique product. That's not what gas stations are. There are a dozen restaurants selling hamburgers in my town; does the observation that they all sell them at aound the same price mean something? Are they all in cahoots?
Sigh...................OK, your fuel and hamburger rebuttal vs my philosophical argument.

A monopoly is defined as :



the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.

  • a company or group having exclusive control over a commodity or service

  • a commodity or service in the exclusive control of a company or group.


Thought is neither a commodity or service, but those who wield influence have, over the last several decades, ofttimes conflated that influence with the idea that their particular idea was the only viable idea. Consequently, a monopoly of thought, which contravenes the thinking in any democratic political system or belief, should be anathema in any cognitive process, including yours, which apparently it is since we are having this discussion,.
 
Last edited:

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,819
Points
1,160
Cognitive dissonance caused false moral equivalence fallacy and a thrown in snuck premise.

The snuck premise is that BLM protestors were rioters and therefore wrong. Which is neither the simplistic case you try to present (protestors and rioters are not the same thing, and you can't make them equivalent). It also ignores the thousands of very peaceful BLM protests that happened all over the US including ones where the police marched with the protestors. In the case of this insurrection, it's pretty clear we can't paint everyone there with the same brush. Many were on the lawn praying and doing peaceful stuff. But as I've stated before protests are messy and you have to separate the good and the bad.

Also, protests and even riots are NOT morally equivalent to an insurrection against a legitimate democratic function. One function was protesting the state's violence against its own people. The other was trying to stop a legitimate and legal function of democracy. They are NOT the same thing. Politically this is a common argument X is the same as Y therefore X is OK. Well X isn't the same as Y here.

As for politicians running from distasteful people, yah happens all the time... wait this is the first time the GOP have done it since Trump was elected. Which is why it's so remarkable.

Finally a note about cognitive dissonance. I would recommend those conservatives (or classical liberals like myself) here take a good long look at our own bias' and hypocrisies. Are we the people of law and order only when it's convenient? Real conservatives believe in: laws, proper behaviour, taking responsibility, looking after your community and neighbours, and individual rights. Conservatives are supposed to be the sober adults in the room who look at the world as it actually is. Leaders. We need to act like it.
Law and Order went out the window with George Floyd riots and many of those areas suffer from a lack of policing thanks in large part to the actions of Democratic politicians, who either tied the police hands or made it clear that any officer accused of anything will be tossed to the wolves.
As for the "insurrection", had that really been the goal, then the body count would be much higher. This was a protest that succeeded beyond the wildest dreams of most who attended.
A Russian friend pointed out to me that one of the triggers for the revolution was a heavy snowfall that stopped the shipment of flour to the bakeries, that was the final straw that led to the discontent that exploded across the country, so often it is a smaller event that lights a larger fire. The Soviets once they took control, made sure that the flour arrived at the bakeries to avoid another such occurrence till they were strong enough. So I see the lack of law and Order at the street level as far more important than this singular event.
 
Top