Note: in my dissertation on the role of language in radicalization, written pre-9/11, one of the main factors I uncovered that facilitated radicalization was the perception of experienced trauma.
Not necessarily REAL trauma, but PERCEIVED trauma.
That's what QAnon feeds on.
Targeting both white males who identify with the perceived traumatic experiences of being 'picked on' in school, as well as males + females who have legitimately experienced sexual trauma who hope for the promise of ending child sexual predation
Journalists need to understand and undermine this narrative of Trump as victim and Trump as Savior of Children by sharing the truth that colors their reporting:
Trump is a mob-linked serial sexual predator who directly participated in the sex trafficking of young girls.
Survivors of sexual abuse who follow Pizzagate+QAnon need to know that it was created not to help children, but as a protection racket designed to help cover for Trump's own involvement in child trafficking.
They need to know that they are being used to PROTECT the predators.
Those who empathize with Trump because journalists "pick on" him need to know the reason why you pick - because there are decades of history and personal experiences that those of you IN media have had that may not meet journalistic rigor or be backed by 3 independent sources...
Predators don't just rely on the demand for multiple sources confirming your stories.
They thrive on it.
Journalists need to show the real impacts of Trump's predation on real people, to show who the true victims are.
If you don't, YOU are just as responsible for perpetuating the risk of QAnon + other types of extremist violence done at the hands of Trump supporters.
p.s. you might also want to look into how many of those involved in promoting Pizzagate/QAnon full-time have 'careers' in modeling/acting/as social media 'influencers' or media personalities - and see who their patrons have been in recent years.
If you want to reduce threats nationwide, why do we need to determine intent?
Why aren't ALL threats simply treated as if they were realistic, and ensure that those making threats are prosecuted?
If a reasonable person thinks that a statement is a threat of physical or psychological harm, made either directly to a potential victim, or regarding a third person/class of individuals, and that potential victim wishes for that individual to be held responsible, they should be.
If we start prosecuting these offenses, the message that online threats are federal crimes in and of themselves - especially threats intended to manipulate the threatened person's behaviour (extortion) - will vastly reduce the chaff analysts need to sift through...
I'm going to start a thread for people from the capitol insurrection that I find interesting, but haven't seen anyone poking at.
I'll start with this guy, who was issuing orders to Gieswien's crew at the west Capitol courtyard.
He starts out asking the police "How does it feel... to have your own tactics used against you?"
I originally thought he was the one who shouted "A Team line it up" but that may be incorrect. Regardless, only someone who knows what tactics will be used would issue that taunt.
Another note for @SeditionHunters/ @capitolhunters: using a gate inside a DAW with these settings, give or take, let you hear the nearby audio much more clearly. I'd have to play a bit more with params to understand what Gieswein is saying, but it's def possible to isolate.
>> It's particularly interesting the Biden admin's announcement was originally scheduled for Friday, but has been delayed until Monday...
during the same weekend CPAC is being held in Orlando.
Think that might be why @tedcruz is so worried about
FREEDOM?
But, to be clear, the number of current US officials on those videos is likely to be non-negligible, with those on all sides of the political spectrum.
Deploying that info could lead to further social destabilization, and there might be a need for time to manage that strategy.
Seriously - if anyone has time/avail. resources, PLEASE - we need a simple universal (rails) app for public health agencies to use for signing people up for notifications, waitlists & appointments?
I get that normally this would be an opportunity for paying customers, but the cost:service to humanity ratio on this one would be out of this world for marketing purposes...
If anyone is willing to provide hosting resources, already I have front/backend wireframes in my head;
I've spent the morning looking at existing sites where I live, and - seriously - only @meijer allows you to sign up for a waitlist. How is that AT ALL rational?
Give people a waitlist to help set expectations, and a LOT of anxiety will be reduced.
I haven't done this yet, but it's tempting: what would happen if I were to run facerec on capitol rioters using photos from convicted sexual predators as my seed faces?
It would be a service if they didn't notify their home state and the DC Sex Offender Registry Unit beforehand
note: only to get counts, any matches would be handed off to law enforcement.
nothing would be posted publicly until they've been officially violated, if at all.
Getting the photos would be a HUGE task, though.
FWIW, probably TOO huge a task. And the risk of doing it without having lawyers clear the ability to use data from each state is WAY out of my reach.
This would def be something @FBI should be able to do, though.
You're seeing those who helped cause the problem lament what they did - but who is extending legitimacy to those who tried to raise red flags ~10 years before it lead to insurrection?
Maybe the people WITH foresight are the ones you should start listening to.
There's a real problem with continually fetishizing those who eventually came to realize their actions cause harm over those who can see and elucidate the risks in advance.
It normalizes - even promotes continuing to participate in ventures that put people at risk.
that _should_ show us that their judgement is flawed, and diminish our willingness to trust their judgement in the future, not to invite them to join the pundit class.