DHS Demanded Google Surrender Data on Canadian’s Activity, Location Over Anti-ICE Posts

https://www.wired.com/story/dhs-demanded-google-surrender-data-on-canadians-activity-location-over-anti-ice-posts/

147 points · 13 comments · view on lemmy.world

13 Comments

outandinburger@ttrpg.network · 38 pts · 102d
[ removed ]
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works · 35 pts · 102d (3 replies)

How very China & Russia of them

Rindogang@lemmy.ml · -17 pts · 102d (2 replies)

"What are we? A bunch of Asians?"

pelespirit@sh.itjust.works · 12 pts · 102d (1 reply)

I'm being anti-authoritarian, not racist. Besides, Russians will say their Asian one day and European the next. They're an odd bunch.

Rindogang@lemmy.ml · -8 pts · 102d

Oh please. If you were truly anti authoritarian you’d recognize that a state enforcing the will of one group over another is authoritarianism, but when it’s a side you like, you don’t call it that

And Russia is often not considered European simply because it's fighting the West for resources... for the exact same reason Latin America is excluded from the ''West'' despite its culture

BigTuffAl@lemmy.zip · 13 pts · 102d (1 reply)

When the empire dissolves we're going to have to root these freaks out, one by one, regionally, until the whole continent is de-nazified. We're going to be tearing down barbed wire and jails for the rest of my life.

Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 0 pts · 102d

too entrenched especially with the DINOS who are the other republicans, would take over if, even the magat-y ones somehow gets removed.

WhoIzDisIz@lemmy.today · 7 pts · 102d (5 replies)

Paywall-free archive version.

who@feddit.org · 2 pts · 102d (4 replies)

Is there a paywall on the original? I don't see one, but I have scripts disabled.

WhoIzDisIz@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 102d (3 replies)

Can't imagine why I'd have commented with that otherwise.

who@feddit.org · 0 pts · 101d (2 replies)

Then try to imagine that some people do exactly that, and the rest of us don't know you or commenting habits.

My question was therefore reasonable. It was also informative, by letting other readers know they can avoid that kind of paywall without revealing their interests to the dodgy archive site.

Your response reads like snark, which doesn't help anyone. I'll try convince myself that you didn't mean it that way.

WhoIzDisIz@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 101d (1 reply)

It wasn't snark, but mild confusion. If my response was snark, then your question prompting it could be interpreted as condescending brag. Compounded now by the seemingly absurd attempt at justification by claiming some people go through the effort of creating & providing needless non-paywall archive links just because they can. Never mind the arrogant, self-righteous tone.

Whatever. This is pointless. Chao.

who@feddit.org · 0 pts · 101d

It wasn’t snark, but mild confusion.

In that case, I'm sorry for misunderstanding.

I hope you can understand that at least nine times out of ten, a response like yours (instead of simply answering or ignoring the question) turns out to be from someone looking for a fight. I'm glad to find that the last sentence of my reply turned out to be warranted, at first. Lashing out really wasn't necessary.

Whatever. This is pointless. Chao.

Fair enough. Ciao.

corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 102d

despite an ask included

This is how I know the article wasn't written by a journalist.