Lisa : That's specious reasoning, Dad.
Homer : Thank you, sweetie.
Lisa : Dad, what if I were to tell you that this rock keeps away tigers.
Homer : Uh-huh, and how does it work?
Lisa : It doesn't work. It's just a stupid rock.
Homer : I see.
Lisa : But you don't see any tigers around, do you?
Homer : Lisa, I'd like to buy your rock.
Now you can debate whether it is the result of good policing or of a much smaller muslim immigration or some other factor.
(Or are you referring to the person I replied to…?)
Well, this is awkward... Yes.
But, for the most part America has been safe before and after the one isolated event of 9/11 and there's no proof that anything we've done since has made us safer (likely it's had the opposite effect by stirring up animosity).
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_World_Trade_Center_bombin...
https://tutanota.com/blog/posts/nsa-phone-surveillance-illeg...
here's a real report not a political charged blog: https://www.justice.gov/archive/olp/pdf/patriot_report_from_...
Are you serious? The US looks terribly weak against terror because the fear alone makes them infringe on civil liberties on a massive and broad scale.
Last I saw we just surrendered to the Taliban, freed 5000 of them including the current leader, the insurgency is now the de-facto government of Afghanistan, and we recently had a high profile journalist hacked to pieces with a hand saw in an embassy and didn't do a damn thing about it.
How is the war on terror "essentially won" in your eyes?
Also, for your bit about being hard to believe - the agency reported it themselves, so you're essentially saying you believe nothing except that which conforms to your existing world view. Not sure what to say about that.
They might have had poor taste in house guests (which cost them a generation of war) but they are the legitimate government of Afghanistan
Northern Alliance must've been some pretty bad dudes too.
Ironically, if we want to go by your definitions, Afghanistan doesn't exist, therefore nor does a government. It's a construct of the West.
In the reality you're trying to suggest, that entire region exists as a bunch of regional tribes, perhaps more like the Emir(ates). Unfortunately, they are not United.
The US mandate against the Taliban was to prevent Al Queda from using the Taliban’s military infrastructure.
The Taliban was never officially deemed a terrorist organization, or a non-state enemy combatant, and only Pakistan was ever involved (instructed) to arrest or detain Taliban operatives and leaders. (That being said, due to the consequence free nature and lack of oversight, Taliban operatives were targeted and killed fairly indiscriminately especially by the drone pogroms.)
Despite the lack of distinction made to the Americans who were needed to remain scared and confused to support the expensive operation, the war time and diplomatic efforts mostly distinguished between Al Queda and the Taliban.
Its just US news and leaders who were playing US and NATO’s people for two decades straight.
This discussion isn't about the tribal nature of that region, which is valid. You’re absolutely right that the “government” and even the nation state concept can be ignored there. Unless you are a woman with different aspirations than what the governing authority says. But thats not this discussion.
If you only respect government sources then the GAO has plenty of gems on this topic.
I’ll make a separate comment for my other thoughts
1. ACLU actively gives their data to Facebook:
https://www.axios.com/aclu-data-shares-facebook-4f1d21f4-d43...
https://fortune.com/2021/04/02/aclu-shares-data-facebook-thi...
2. ACLU claims Second Amendment is Racist
> "Racism is foundational to the Second Amendment and its inclusion in the Bill of Rights." https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1419294620417155074
Fun fact: Vermont ratified the individual right to gun ownership and the abolishing of slavery in their State Constitution at the same time in 1777. The second amendment actually helped defeat racism and the only thing racist about it is the disproportionate infringement against minorities.
> Vermont’s Declaration of Rights of 1777 set forth the following fundamental rights and abolished slavery: That all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent, and unalienable rights, amongst which are the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety. Therefore, no male person, born in this country, or brought from over sea, ought to be holden by law, to serve any person, as a servant, slave, or apprentice, after he arrives to the age of twenty-one years; nor female, in like manner, after she arrives to the age of eighteen years.
> Vt. Constitution, Art. I, § 1 (1777). See Zilversmit at 116. The Vermont Declaration also provided: “That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State . . . .” Id., § 15.
3. ACLU used to defend free speech of even neo-nazis but have since then abandoned their principles:
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/aclu-again-cowardly-abstain...
4. ACLU's most famous lawyer calls JK Rowling and Abigail Shrier "white supremacists" without any proof whatsoever:
https://twitter.com/abigailshrier/status/1358246098364583936...
The same lawyer has also called for banning of Abigail Shrier's book.
5. Last year, they warned against using COVID-19 passport systems as they endanger privacy rights by creating a new surveillance infrastructure to collect health data which has the potential of mission creep to expand into other areas such as conditioning travel or access to housing. Such status may be stored with other personal details, such as travel, employment, or housing information, heightening the intrusiveness of an immunity passport system. They recommended focussing on the implementation of widespread, free, and quick testing, without creating a new privacy-invasive infrastructure that threatens everyone’s rights.
But now, ACLU claims ‘Vaccine mandates actually further civil liberties’:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/vaccine-mandates-actually-...
The ACLU, Prior to COVID, Denounced Mandates and Coercive Measures to Fight Pandemics. Now, they have completely reversed its views, arguing vaccine mandates help civil liberties and bodily autonomy "is not absolute."
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-aclu-prior-to-covid-den...
We have very visible and emboldened domestic terror groups despite whatever state preemptive capabilities the Patriot Act brought in
And for Islamic extremists, the US mainland was barely ever the target. It just remains an eligible target due to an interpretation of jihad as long as we are seen as an invader in traditionally islamic lands.
Al Queda has more extreme offshoots which have destabilized regions including the effects of so many refugees sent all over the mediterranean
Strict Shariah from “not terrorist groups” are back in force despite 20 years of US wasting its resources and dividing itself over the budget overruns. This includes the extreme interpretation of Jihad that endangers US and all NATO countries.
Can you tell me more about your influences? Like how is your world, your newsfeeds, thrown you into such a niche where you can only regurgitate a 17-year old DOJ report to support it and believe it
Apart of the zombie outbreak at January trying to hang the vice president in the damned Capitol of the USA all looks fine, yep
Are you from Afghanistan by any chance? Or are you trolling way too hard?
San Bernadino shootings.
Day-of, the bomb sniffing dogs left the finish line area when the VIPs did.
Not long after, the bombers set up their bombs...
If that is true then increasing surveillance would not change a thing, at the end data collected will just sit there untouched, or waiting to be abused.
Trump gave it a shot by assassinating Soleimani, the Iranians just didn't retaliate enough to provide justification.
Maybe my freedom is being infinged somehow but I haven't noticed it