Hacker News Reader

Comment by Grieving | Hacker News Reader

You're talking about a small group of Oath Keepers in an otherwise peaceful protest. But I'm curious, why do you think Stewart Rhodes was never arrested? Would it make more sense given the context that the boogaloos behind the Whitmer kidnapping plot turned out to be FBI agents, as did the leaders of other right-wing groups including the Proud Boys and Atomwaffen Division? Who does the right-wing terrorism scare serve?

View on HN

Right-wing terrorism scare? We all watched angry mobs attempt to disrupt the peaceful transition of power on live TV. These are the same people who proudly fly the flag of literal traitors to our country and call the press the “enemy of the free state.”

If all it takes for your movement to attempt to kidnap elected officials or disrupt transfer of power is a few undercover agents nudging along, your movement is a huge problem.

We all watched protesters demonstrate in a public building, and yes, disrupt the transition of power. Peaceful disruption of the government is the quintessential act of protest.

>call the press the “enemy of the free state.”

Criticism of media is terrorism?

>kidnap elected officials

That group was comprised almost entirely of undercover agents along with a couple of mentally ill people. The FBI orchestrated the entire thing.

>disrupt transfer of power

Again, a valid target for protest.

In a democracy, the results of a free and fair election are actually not a valid target of protest if your form of protest entails an attempt to overturn those results.

Feel free to disrupt traffic and make a scene elsewhere.

In a democracy, people should be allowed to protest if they believe an election is not free and fair, no? If not, why? This is a strange line in the sand that to my knowledge has never existed before in American history. People have protested and contested elections numerous times.

> Feel free to disrupt traffic and make a scene elsewhere.

Yes, disrupt the worker bees, not the queen.

Edit: it does seem strange that you wouldn't include some sort of disclaimer in this convo about your employer's stake in "counter-terrorism".

> If all it takes for your movement to attempt to kidnap elected officials or disrupt transfer of power is a few undercover agents nudging along, your movement is a huge problem.

If it takes more agents then perpetrators to pull off your sting, and if the agents conceptualized, planned, financed, managed the operation, and participated in it…

Well, let’s just say I am going to be the wrong person to sit on your jury if you want a conviction.

You are aware that informant != agent, right?

They aren't strictly synonymous but, as you should know, in this context an "informant" is a kind of agent, both on paper and in practice. They aren't informants in a conventional understanding of the term, just feeding information back to the government. They receive training and are employed to proactively infiltrate and participate in criminal organizations much as any investigator would (or, in these cases, steer non-criminal organizations into criminality).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com