Once they get away with the internet kill switch once during a localized uprising, they'll use it at every opportunity. Like tear gas and 2020
How are those ham radio licenses coming along?
Also, in the infamous Millennium Challenge US Military training exercise OPFOR beat US E-warfare and Signals Intelligence by communicating using motorbike messengers. If you're in a city you can go pretty fucking fast on a bicycle.
You can always use radio signals using dishes or larger antennas or just walkie-talkies or whatever if you really need local communication of some sort and you're prepared. But that can be jammed or eventually taken down.
Wow, it's almost as though the freedoms liberals use to justify their belief in their countries' superiority are completely illusory and subject to removal the moment they become inconvenient to those in power!
Wasn't there a nationalist takeover in Kashmir that killed the internet? I seem to remember it being very effective in stopping almost all communication
i mean yeah america can functionally take down 95% of the internet just by marching some goons into amazon and google headquarters and demanding they flip the off switch. plus they can tell ISPs to shut off services. so quite a lot of stuff would be messed with there
:this: :this: :this: Most of this type of rules-based hand-wringing is nothing more than another form of apologism for the US empire that reinforces the myth that this country "protects people's freedoms" or whatever. It's really just another form of :vote: If you're truly doing anything that challenges or inconveniences the people in power, you're on your own. In my opinion, which could obviously be wrong, there isn't much of a point in "defending" all these tedious rules about what the government isn't allowed to do. not even for propaganda purposes. Complaining about "government overreach" is not going to win any hearts and minds for any amount of time. Talking about the material problems the ruling class causes is far more important. Attack the ideology, not just its enforcement mechanisms. Otherwise you end up losing the forest for the trees and burn out from trying to win a rigged game.
We have been left to wonder whether existing documents still green-light the violation of Americans' constitutional rights and civil liberties, or if modern sensibilities and understandings of the law have moderated their approach.
This sentence is implying that the Bush era is not "modern". That things are probably different now... In the modern day with "modern sensibilities", while Roe v Wade is being overturned.
The President has more powers than the office had under Bush. Even Bush wasn't brazen enough to claim the authority to kill US citizens without trial or oversight of any kind. That was Obama.
Bush-era records
Generally not shocking, but really is it surprising the Bush/Cheney era white house thought this?
fun facts:
In response to Freedom of Information Act requests, the George W. Bush Presidential Library turned over to the Brennan Center more than 500 pages generated during this review and subsequent reviews in 2006 and 2008. (Another 6,000 pages were withheld in full because they are classified.)
. . .
As with any archival expedition, the silences are often the most telling. William Arkin, a noted expert on PEADs, reviewed the new materials disclosed by the library and observed that they relate primarily to civil agencies—few, if any, touch on the role of the military in times of crisis. He suggests that this "black side" would have been discussed at a higher level of classification. By implication, the most daring claims to presidential power may have been entirely excluded from this tranche of documents.
I am amused that anyone thinks that the President would respect any laws, norms, or limits to the exercise of executive power during a "State of Emergency".
Wasn’t the internet temporarily disabled in DC at some point in 2020? Or was that fake news?
