One thing I don't see mentioned is scale of death vs. scale of demonstration. There was a relatively small number of people in Washington, and in one day, much damage was done. 5 killed, O(100) injured, and the capitol overrun.
The demonstrations this past summer were on another level. It's estimated that 20 million [0] people were involved. Yes there was violence and people acting in bad faith. But as a percentage of total protests it is _far_ less. I believe this says something about the intent of both demonstrations.
The article is in fact explicit on that point.
I am not idiotically following democratic ideology and am willingly letting anyone get their shot, i’ll listen all sides sides. The problem with these radical people is that they are not making much sense, they seem confused and alienated. If you ask them what they want you don’t get a well shaped idea. Banning them from the table doesn’t seem like a good idea, but what’s the alternative, start believing the parallel reality the live in? It is contagious and dangerous, I lost some elders in my family to this nonesense, it is absolutely saddening and we have to do something about it. Otherwise a large part of humanity is going mad, do we want that? What is your soluion to stopping this mess? Be honest, do you not think at all that Trump stoked chaos during his reign?
I’d like for all of us to take one month off electronic information and start taking informaion directly from our own small envitonment and tune in with nature whenever possible. A break like that would reset things in part. The other part is that we have to put a hand and build the future however we want
It makes a fairly big difference surely? It's odd that nobody seems to mention that aspect when they bring this up.
Objectively false - you didn't read the article again. It says "In Louisville, Kentucky, early Monday, a man was shot dead during a protest against the death of Breonna Taylor." right in the middle.
Other HN commenters who are acting in good faith: I invite you to click the article and C-f for that text. Yes, not all of the deaths were at the protests - my apologies for not reading carefully - but the claim that none of them are is factually incorrect.
> puppet
You've been continually resorting to ad-hominems and content-less fallacies, labels, and accusations. This is anti-intellectual.
You are not acting in good faith by deliberating leaving out the most important part of the paragraph, or the article, which repeatedly points out that none of the actual shootings were related to the protests.
Because right now, people accused of terrorism can be held in Guantanamo without habeas corpus. They are also subject to inclusion on government "kill lists"[1] with no opportunity for judicial review. The executive branch is claiming powers it has not had since the time of absolute monarchy. We should carefully consider any proposal to expand the meaning of the word "terrorism".
I'm outraged too, but I think these criminals should be afforded full due process rights. At both the investigatory stage and the trial stage.
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/us-invokes...
One could argue "terrorists" as you're defining re Gitmo should as well, but that's a different topic.
Non-state foreign terrorists are held at Guantanamo.
I think that due process rights of despicable people should be protected precisely because I want them to be available to disfavored affinity groups like religious minorities, labor movements, and pacifists.
This is not an action.
5 people died. 50 officers were wounded, some seriously enough that they are still in the hospital.
Multiple protestors had zip ties and other means of restraint on them, knives, and guns, and on their social media profiles were promoting violence against legislators.
This wasn't protesting. It was terrorism. And these terrorist attacks were organized and coordinated on Parler and other social media.
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/capitol-rio...