News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
>With the election looming, there will probably ramp up attacks around that time as well.
is there any evidence to support this?
do I have evidence of future acts of terrorism? ...no?
while evidence of the future is impossible, surely you're not just guessing. what makes you think that's a reasonable thing to expect?
because they did it multiple times before?
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/fbi-foils-extremist-plot-to-bring-down-baltimores-electrical-grid
https://www.opb.org/article/2023/01/19/surge-in-oregon-washington-substation-attacks-as-fbi-warns-neo-nazi-plots/
https://time.com/6244977/us-power-grid-attacks-extremism/
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64832129
but why would it ramp up around the election? the pieces you cite seem to be lone-wolf attacks with no organization or real plan.
Likely because elections are politically charged events, and they always drive an increase in politically motivated crimes.
Given that a preponderance of these recent acts have been from right wing persons, often associated with beliefs that they want to trigger a destabilizing event for society, and that the last election had at least one notable act of right wing violence, it's not unreasonable to predict that this election will be at least as decisive.
Given that, concern about escalating threats to power infrastructure, with right wing groups have specifically threatened, seems prudent.
It's not "elections make us hate transformers", but elections cause violence, one of the most violent groups repeatedly and specifically threatens power infrastructure, and this election is going to have more nastiness than usual, most likely.
but this **is** just all conjecture. there's no specific threat that the FBI is warning about or anything?
The FBI has not issued a specific threat advisory for election driven violence against power infrastructure.
DHS has issued broad warnings about both infrastructure threats and election threats, and generalized details of specific plots involving each independently.
Conjecture isn't quite the right word. This isn't forming a conclusion based on incomplete information.
This is making a prediction based on prior trends. B is is correlated with C. A causes B. Therefore A happening should make you anticipate an increase in C.
i'm not trying to be difficult here, i just find that there are a lot of outlandish predictions ("trump is the end of democracy", anyone?) and i just think there should be strong evidence for claims like that. as it is, i wouldn't be surprised if there were no provable right-wing infrastructure attacks this year, but i wouldn't be surprised if there were. it's a cointoss, so saying it's going to happen just can't be justified in my mind.
Except no one said it's "going to". Statements about the future are always probable, and all of the statements in this thread have been probable.
There's a difference between being evidence based and being willfully blind.
Multiple intelligence community warnings about rising risk of right wing violence, multiple warnings about said violence targeting infrastructure, and warnings about expectations that violence will increase as we get closer to the elections makes it an extremely small logical step to "maybe those people we think are going to do more stuff will do it in the way that we've noticed they've been doing more often, particularly now that we're approaching a key time for stuff to happen".
And, for the record, bringing up a president notably associated with a violent mob storming the Capitol building, who recently joked about wanting to be a dictator and promised retribution on reporters and political opponents is not a good way to punctuate your scepticism of a threat.
Talking about suspending the constitution makes it a bit less "outlandish" to say that the person is a threat to democracy.
don't bother talking to him anymore. @bigmouthcommie is a troll.
On one hand he directly said he would be a dictator.
On the other hand, he says a lot of things, often contradicting things he said a few days before...
Damn, sure have been a lot of "lone wolves" doing things lately...
even the pbs link has a supposed expert explaining that the right wing is tending toward lone wolf/cell structures