Quite a leap to bring Gaza and Palestine into a discussion about the US ambassor in Belgium.

jagged-chisel 18 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It logically supports the claim "More and more we see the relationship with authoritarianism and tyranny out in the open."

It's a shame someone is so sensitive to a subject that it can't even be used as additional support of another argument.

	▲	kakacik 17 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Well most of the discussions could very easily end up making parallels to nazis since we see similar situations all around us over and over, hence Godwin's law. its generally considered a poor performance though and better arguments are expected. Palestine is so divisive it should have its own 'law' - both sides are abhorable, both sides are shielded by fanatics who don't want to hear any criticism of their side, despite there being plenty of official evidence with photos, videos, wiki articles and so on.

▲

danw1979 18 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Only if you’re not following along.

The link is police abusing their allowed powers to silence free speech and protest.

▲

flohofwoe 18 hours ago | parent [-]

> The link is police abusing their allowed powers to silence free speech and protest.

If you'd actually read the post you'd know that its about the the US ambassador being an asshole and the Belgian police doing their job (quickly removing a supposed 'active threat' from an event - because that's the only information they had - they later realized their mistake and that the 'active threat' was just a journalist asking inconvenient questions - but at that point the damage was done and the journalist wasn't let back into the event.

▲

danw1979 17 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> they later realised their mistake

Here’s the very problem. The police acting immediately to suppress a supposed threat (even “active” ones, whatever that means) which allows them to silence protest or even inconvenient questions to a public servant…

… and we’re splitting hairs here, but it also allows the police to be manipulated by said public servants to get the protest silenced on their behalf.

The police in this case should have quickly realised the individuals were journalists, posed no real threat (no weapons, explosives, chemicals on their persons) and let them go about their business.

	▲	flohofwoe 17 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I agree that the police could probably have acted more 'flexible' in the first few seconds before removing the journalist from the event. The other somewhat weird fact is that they showed up in 'cilivian' outfits instead of in uniform. Yet still the main problem is the ambassador lying about that person being an active threat. E.g. what if that information would have been correct? All hell would break lose if the police wouldn't take such a call serious and the supposed 'threat' would be real and people killed, from that perspective they seemed to have reacted quite civilized and calm. If the events happened as reported, the ambassador should at the very least be summoned and grilled by the Belgian government.

▲

x3ro 18 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> because that's the information they had

That has always been and will always be the excuse for these kind of rights violations by the police. "Oh it's just what we were told, sorry".

And yes, it's worth bringing up e.g. Palestine or climate activists being beaten, arrested etc. in this context, because it's where the limits and tolerances for this kind of behavior are being tested.

Police, at least in Germany, always justify their transgressions with arguments like: "well we had to beat up these demonstrators because they were engaging in criminal behavior", the "criminal behavior" being "chanting a slogan they don't like" or "carrying an umbrella" (I kid you not).

TLDR: If we continue to allow law enforcement to justify their actions with "well that's just what I was told", we are in for a very bad time, because, it turns out, anything can be justified this way.