SDF Chatter

4,734 readers
180 users here now
founded 2 years ago
ADMINS
SDF

Support for this instance is greatly appreciated at https://sdf.org/support

1
 
 
2
 
 
3
 
 
4
5
6
7
 
 
8
 
 

Thirty years ago today, I was driving a moving van across the country, from the west coast to the east. The hold was packed well; the ride was wobbly, and I kept the heavy vehicle between the lines, mile after mile. Driving carefully, I was surprised to be stopped by state troopers. When I rolled down the window to face some polite questioning, I didn’t know that Timothy McVeigh had bombed the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people and injuring 684 more.

In the days that followed, the horror was treated for what it was: an attack by a racist, right-wing anti-government terrorist. I worry now that, thirty years on, a similar attack is very likely, and would have a different outcome. I don't want us to be more frightened than we should be. But I do want us to be ready, so that a moment of predictable shock does not become a lifetime of avoidable subjugation.

As I will try to show, the present government invites a terror attack. Most of the people directing the relevant agencies are incompetent; the next few layers down have been purged in culture wars; much the remaining personnel have resigned, been fired, or are demoralized; resources have been diverted away from terror prevention; Americans has been distracted by fiction and chaos; and potential attackers have been encouraged.

And so we have to think — now — about what would follow such an attack. Musk, Trump, Vance, and the rest would try to exploit the moment to undo remaining American freedoms. Let me cite Lesson 18 of On Tyranny.

18. Be calm when the unthinkable arrives. Modern tyranny is terror management. When the terrorist attack comes, remember that authoritarians exploit such events in order to consolidate power. The sudden disaster that requires the end of checks and balances, the dissolution of opposition parties, the suspension of freedom of expression, the right to a fair trial, and so on, is the oldest trick in the Hitlerian book. Do not fall for it.

In just three months, the Trump people have made the unthinkable much more likely. They have created the conditions for terrorism, and thus for terror management. This is true at several levels.

Most obviously, they have debilitated the services that detect terrorist threats and prevent attacks: the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the National Security Agency (NSA). The CIA is a foreign intelligence service. The FBI is the federal police force. The NSA, which specializes in cryptography and foreign signals intelligence, is part of the Department of Defense. Homeland Security is a cabinet-level department that amalgamates a number of functions from immigration control through disaster relief and anti-terrorism.

Overall guidance over the intelligence agencies is exercised by Tulsi Gabbard, who is known as an apologist for the now-overthrown Assad regime in Syria and the Putin regime in Russia. The director of the FBI is Kash Patel, an author of children's books that promote conspiracy theories, and a recipient of payments from sources linked to Russia. Patel plans to run the agency from Las Vegas, where he resides in the home of a Republican megadonor. The deputy director of the FBI is Dan Bongino, a right-wing entertainer who has called the FBI "irredeemable corrupt" and indulged in conspiracy theories about its special agents. He now draws FBI special agents away from their usual duties to serve as a personal bodyguard. The director of Homeland Security is Kristi Noem, who lacks relevant expertise.

Noem has distinguished herself by posing in front of a cell full of prisoners in El Salvador. Homeland Security is focused on spectacular abductions at the expense of its other missions. Its programs to prevent terrorism have been defunded, and it is no longer keeping up its database on domestic terrorism. As one insider put it: “The vibe is: How to use DHS to go after migrants, immigrants. That is the vibe, that is the only vibe, there is no other vibe. It’s wild — it’s as if the rest of the department doesn’t exist.” The obsession with migrants means that local law enforcement, all across the country, is being in effect federalized in the service of an objective that is essentially irrelevant to core missions. That, too, makes life easier for aspiring terrorists.

The National Security Agency sits within the Department of Defense, which is run by Pete Hegseth, a right-wing entertainer and culture warrior. He has fired people who were qualified, and is unable to keep even his own people at work — he just lost four staffers in one day. The “meltdown” at the top of the Pentagon bodes ill.

The leadership of the NSA itself was recently changed, under bizarre and troubling circumstances. After a meeting with conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer, Trump fired the NSA director, General Timothy Haugh. Wendy Noble, the deputy director, was also fired. This decapitation was part of a larger set of firings initiated by Loomer. It takes place during an ongoing purge of military leaders and national security officials. From the perspective of potential attackers, the culture wars mean vulnerability.

Meanwhile, other Department of Defense agencies that are central to the twenty-first century security of the United States, such as the Defense Digital Service, are destroyed by Elon Musk’s DOGE. It is worth contemplating the reaction of a former Pentagon official: “They’re not really using AI, they’re not really driving efficiency. What they’re doing is smashing everything.” In general, the penetration of the federal government by DOGE has weakened its functions, and likely made critical data available to adversaries who wish to hurt Americans.

The rank and file of the critical institutions are subjected to administrative hostility and chaos. The names of active CIA officers have been sent on open emails to the White House, and in a Signal chat in which a reporter was included. CIA employees have been urged to take early retirement. CIA officers involved in any way in diversity recruitment have been fired (a judge has blocked this, for the time being).

FBI special agents have been exposed to similar indignities. Top FBI officials have been pressured to resign and have done so. Musk-Trump is pursuing FBI special agents who were involved in prosecutions of people who stormed the Capitol on January 6th 2021. Patel proposes that special agents be trained by a company that promotes commercial fights that is based in Las Vegas. Sending FBI special agents to Nevada to simulate Fight Club for Patel’s personal delectation is not going to keep Americans safe.

The Musk-Trump people run national security, intelligence, and law enforcement like a television show. The entire operation of forcible rendition of migrants to a Salvadoran concentration camp was based upon lies. It is not just that Kilmar Abrego Garcia was mistakenly apprehended. The entire thing was made for television. Its point was the creation of the fascist videos. But this is a media strategy, meant to frighten Americans. And a media strategy does not stop actual terrorists. It summons them.

Terrorism is a real risk in the real world. The constant use of the word to denote unreal threats creates unreality. And unreality inside ket institutions degrades capability. Security agencies that have been trained to follow political instructions about imaginary threats do not investigate actual threats. Fiction is dangerous. Treating the administration’s abduction of a legal permanent resident as a heroic defense against terror is not only mendacious and unconstitutional but also dangerous.

Moreover, Musk-Trump make the United States look vulnerable. Americans under the spell of Trump’s or Musk’s charisma might imagine that strength is being projected. Not so. To prospective terrorists we look erratic and weak. Even apparently unrelated policies — such as enabling foreign disinformation, gutting environmental protection, undoing weather forecasting, ending food inspections, and undermining disease control — make life easier for terrorists and open avenues of attack. By taking apart the government, crashing the economy, and dividing the population, Musk and Trump invite attention of the worst sort, from people who wish to hurt Americans.

Who are such people? Three possible groups of perpetrators of a major terrorist attack in the United States are native right-wing nationalists or white supremacists (“domestic violent extremists”), Islamicists, and Russians.

Most terrorism in the United States is domestic, and most of the domestic terror comes from the far right. We have recently seen a series of white supremacist killings. Cody Balmer, who wanted to kill Pennsylvania’s (Democratic, Jewish) governor, wrote that “Biden supporters should not exist.”

It might seem counter-intuitive that the far right would carry out acts of terror under Trump, but this is already the norm, and there are good reasons to expect worse. Musk pushes the story that civil servants deserve pain. The most lethal domestic terror attack in US history, McVeigh’s bombing, was directed against federal workers. Right-wing terrorists might believe that terror is what Trump wants. The suspect in the recent Florida mass shooting “advocated for President Donald Trump's agenda and often promoted white supremacist values,” according to someone who saw him regularly. Trump has long practiced stochastic violence. His pardon of the January 6th criminals encourages terror with the promise of forgiveness. Patel promoted a recording of the January 6 criminals singing the national anthem. This coddling culture of martryrdom makes more killing more likely.

There is also another scenario. Far right movements can divide, with the more impatient angry with those they see as compromised. This is a lesson from the history of fascism. Some supporters of Trump will be disappointed with him. The assassination attempt on Trump was carried out by someone whose social media posts conveyed hatred of Jews and immigrants. Bongino now has to contend with fans of his show who think that the January 6th criminals should be running the FBI.

The Murrah Federal Building, Oklahoma City, 19 April 1995

And our guard has been dropped. Even at the best of times, the FBI has generally had trouble articulating the centrality of domestic right-wing terrorism. Now the risk is denied. High officials of Musk-Trump tend to share the views of right-wing nationalists, which makes it less likely that they will be seen as a threat. Under Patel, the FBI will deprioritize this important area of investigation. In keeping with his and Noem’s priorities, FBI agents have been assigned away from domestic terrorism. Thus far, the main "terrorist" threat seen by Trump-Musk are protestors in front of Tesla dealerships. Diverting attention to parking lots will not keep Americans safe.

Musk-Trump are also generating scenarios for Islamicist terror. A motivation for Islamicist terrorists is contention over territory in the Middle East. The Trump administration advocates the ethnic cleansing of the entire (surviving) population of Gaza. The US armed forces are also firing ordnance into Yemen with the announced goal of "annihilating" the Houthis who hold power. In a Signal group chat, top national security officials rejoiced (with emojis) over a strike in which a building collapsed. It seems unclear that Musk-Trump will have accounted for the related terrorism risk.

Russia is now a risk in a way that it was not before. It has special units that carry out acts of destruction abroad, such as assassinations and sabotage. In the last three years, these operations have accelerated inside Europe, and include blowing up military sites. Russia also pays people inside other countries to carry out acts of terror and sabotage. Russia has been carrying out cyber attacks inside the United States for years.

Before Musk-Trump, the United States had been fastidious about including Russia as a possible source of foreign terror. Now Russia is presented as an ally and Putin as a friend; intelligence and defense work designed to monitor Russian sabotage inside the United States have been scaled back, as has tracking of Russian war crimes in Ukraine and public reporting on Russia. Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, rationalizes Russian aggression. Patel, the FBI director, owes his career to the claim that people who (truthfully) speak of Russian operations inside the United States are carrying out a hoax. Trump’s nominee for US district attorney for Washington, DC, is a media star in Russia.

This is all beyond the wildest dreams of the Kremlin. The Putinism on display in the federal government creates an atmosphere in which a Russian operation inside the United States would be much easier.

It is not hard to see what Russia would gain from a false-flag terror attack on American territory. Moscow would be seeking to weaken the United States, and by generating a response from Musk-Trump that suits Russia. Having Trump blame his enemies for what was in fact a Russian attack is in the interest of the Russian Federation.

Other actors than these three are also possible. I fear, though, that whether I am right or wrong about the specific source, there can be no doubt that we are far more vulnerable than we were three months ago. And any major attack, regardless of origin, would lead to the same kind terror management. The people in the White House have no governing skills, but they do have entertainment skills. They will seek to transform themselves from the villains of the story to the heroes, and in the process bring down the republic. Please indulge me if I ask you to consider Lesson 18 again.

18. Be calm when the unthinkable arrives. Modern tyranny is terror management. When the terrorist attack comes, remember that authoritarians exploit such events in order to consolidate power. The sudden disaster that requires the end of checks and balances, the dissolution of opposition parties, the suspension of freedom of expression, the right to a fair trial, and so on, is the oldest trick in the Hitlerian book. Do not fall for it.

20 lessons, read by John Lithgow

That lesson arises from two notorious twentieth-century examples: the Reichstag Fire in Germany in 1933, which Hitler used to declare a state of emergency, and the Kirov assassination in the Soviet Union in 1934, which Stalin used as an excuse to expand terror. In both cases, it is the reaction that we remember, rather than the event itself.

I wish that terrorist attacks were a moment when government could be trusted. But the temptation, for any government, is to take the shock and to divert it in a convenient direction. And the temptation, for us, is to imagine that our leaders will rise to the occasion. After 9/11, I listened to President Bush address the nation, sitting in my pickup, on the driveway outside a friend’s house. Though my own politics were very different, I remember the pull inside me, the wish to believe that he would do the right thing. I didn’t let myself believe anything of the sort, but I remember the feeling: and it is that tug that we cannot let get the best of us.

Our present government would be the last to resist the temptation to exploit terror. Musk-Trump would, I fear, make little if any attempt to apprehend the responsible people, especially if they are Americans or Russians. They might blame the Democratic Party, or Americans they hate for other reasons, or the opposition generally, or Canadians or Ukrainians or other Europeans. They will likely try to put an end to the American republic.

Right then comes is the critical moment when we must prevent ourselves from going along.

I do not relish describing this chain of events. But the only way to cut the chain it is to see the links. And when we can imagine that we ourselves have the power to cut the links, as we do, we can also imagine ourselves more free.

History teaches us how terrorist attacks are exploited. Our advantage is that we know this history, and so react sensibly. Do not give the present regime the benefit of the doubt after it allows a terrorist attack to take place on American soil. Be skeptical about its account of who is to blame. Insist that Musk-Trump take responsibility. And understand that freedom is the first condition of security. A terrorist attack is no reason to concede anything to this regime. On the contrary: such a failure by Musk-Trump would be one more reason, and a very powerful one, to resist it.

Throughout history, and around the world right now, government indifference and incompetence that leads to civilians deaths has been seen as a reason for protest.

The night before I was stopped by the police, I had been driving that truck through water. It was a time of high rain in the central United States. Highways were flooded.

In the pre-revolutionary France of the eighteenth century, decadent rulers said “après nous, le déluge” — “after us, the flood.” We care not at all about the consequences of our actions; we are here to profit so long as we can. This is the attitude of Musk, Trump, and the rest. They are in it for themselves, provoking disasters for the rest of us along the way.

A few days before that drive began, I finished my doctoral dissertation, about revolutions, based on research in post-communist Poland. One of my supervisors was the the British historian Timothy Garton Ash. Considering the task of Poland’s new democratic government, he reversed the formula of French royalty, writing: “après le deluge, nous.”

After the flood, we remain. The disaster brought by the decadent is part of the story. But it is not the conclusion. It is what we do next that matters.

9
10
 
 

Support Masafer Yatta

https://supportmasaferyatta.com/

“For the next three weeks [from?], we are making the film [No Other Land] available online in North America* as part of an effort to raise support for Masafer Yatta because our community is still being destroyed and we urgently need your help.

“All profits from renting the movie will go directly to support Masafer Yatta communities!

“If you already watched our film, you can donate any amount you like to the villages ...”

*) Rent privately online for $13.99

#WestBank #NoOtherLand #MasaferYatta
@palestine@lemmy.ml @palestine@a.gup.pe @israel

11
 
 

Belinda and the Doctor, in animated form on a 1950s-era Miami street.

When Polygon had a chance to video-chat with Doctor Who stars Ncuti Gatwa and Varada Sethu in advance of the new season, there was an experience that leapt out as their favorite: filming the animated sequences for this Saturday’s episode.

Not recording — filming.

“Shooting the animation was very fun,” Gatwa said, “because it was just a different way of working, and we’ve not had that.”

“I think when we first read it,” Sethu added, “we assumed that we’d be doing a voice-over much later on and they were just going to animate it. But no, we had to really shoot it.”

“And they animated to our actions,” Gatwa clarified, “and what we did in the scene. It was cool.”

[Ed. note: This piece contains mild spoilers for the second episode of Doctor Who’s 2025 season.]

in a scene from Doctor Who, Mr. Ring-a-Ding preens on the curtained proscenium of a movie theater, while the Doctor and Belinda look at him in curiosity.

The episode — called “Lux” — features guest star Alan Cumming (Schmigadoon!, X2) as the animated antagonist Mr. Ring-a-Ding, a strange character who could have stepped out of any level of Cuphead, modeled after the animation styles of the 1930s. And in one pivotal moment in the story, he traps the Doctor and Belinda inside an animated film as animated characters.

When Polygon asked showrunner Russell T Davies about the process behind Who’s dive into animation, he said that it was always something he’d wanted to do in his career, but had never had the budget for it before.

“It costs a fortune, let’s be absolutely honest,” Davies said over video chat. “It’s a proper skill; it should cost a fortune, because it’s a proper labor of love. And so to be able to do that with Disney Plus was absolutely gorgeous.”

Davies noted that his first job at the BBC was working in graphic design — on the children’s series Why Don’t You? among others. “Cartooning and cartoons is in my blood and bones. If my life had taken a different turn, I would be working graphics and then cartoons in some shape or form.”

Still, Davies said, working with animation was a learning experience. “I’ve been through effects meetings a million times. We had meetings I didn’t know existed with animation, signing off everything — you have to sign off every blink that the character makes, every flex of its hand. Just designing it, and discovering the history of it. Even discovering things like — I remember at some point someone saying, ‘Like classic cartoons of the ’30s and ’40s and ’50s, should he have white gloves?’ But actually, that’s a minstrel’s gloves, and the white gloves are kind of frowned upon now — or it has a different context now, that in our context wouldn’t look good. So you learn things like that. It was fascinating. We learned about the entire history of cartoons.”

Alan Cumming’s performance was recorded in stages, according to Davies: First, a preliminary voice recording so that Gatwa and Sethu would have something to react to on set, and then a second, booth recording of Cumming’s voice and mouth movements, “so the animators and the actor can get to know each other in the middle stage, as it were.” And finally, the animators would add any additional dialogue recording and exclamations that cropped up in the process of animation.

Davies said that he and his team were not experts, and so they were happy to lean on their animation partners for process details. “I think they liked us,” he laughed, “because we said, ‘Ideally, how would you want to do this?’ […] Whatever the animator said would be best, that’s what we did.”

And in the case of the Doctor and Belinda’s brief stint as cartoon characters, that meant filming Gatwa and Sethu in character, so that the animators could work with the actors’ own movements. The results are one of modern Who’s most strange and cinematically metatextual moments, as the show’s heroes strive to literally become more three dimensional and escape the flat plane of the screen.

“It was just an enormous playground,” Davies said, and then corrected himself. “Far more than a playground — a proper professional world of animation. I loved the weeklies with the animators, I loved those meetings. I loved it. It made me very happy.”


From Polygon via this RSS feed

12
 
 

I’ll try to summarize this as much as possible but it’s really hard.

Me and my bf have been talking since end of November so it hasn’t been that long but we got really attached to each other. I always had guys talk to me only for sexual stuff so it took me a long time to believe he actually cared for me for anything besides that. He is the best guy and most caring one I’ve ever met. During the begininning (when I was unsure of what we were) this was the first month, he asked me my body count, I got so scared and threw a fake number at him to see how he would react. He was so upset and was crying and I felt guilty and then told him the actual number and was even more upset but then was fine after a day or so. I felt horrible. After awhile I was still unsure of what we were (we’re 7 hours away drive) and was asking him “what are you talking to me for? What do you want from me?” And he never said boyfriend girlfriend but he said he can’t tell me exactly because he doesn’t know what can happen in the future with his work and all of that. He was scared of telling me something and then me possibly being affected by it a year from now… anyways, then I started feeling it was official. I have TikTok and have had some people say they’d send me money to chat (I know it’s dumb). I told my boyfriend if he would be okay with it as I was not sending anything of myself and he said yes. I was messaging one guy and he wanted nudes so I sent the fake nudes (my bf knew) and then instead of sending money he sent me nudes back and I was so grossed out and told him this isn’t the payment he said and then we argued and I blocked. I didn’t tell my boyfriend about the nudes he sent. Moving on, another guy sent me money for doing nothing, just talking about our day and then my boyfriend said he’s not fine with it unless they are sending money through go fund me link (which I understand because he doesn’t like the attention aspect behind it). I said okay and I blocked him. I did request more money via email because I was dumb but never added back and only requested the one time the day after. I feel so stupid for this. On TikTok someone said they’d send money on go fund me if I give them my Instagram first. I thought nothing of it, I thought I’d give it, get them to send, and just remove. But then they sent a dick photo out of nowhere and I blocked. I felt so guilty and couldn’t stop crying. I told my boyfriend this and he was so heartbroken that I lied. That I gave my instagram out for money. Which I understand. And I told him that the first guy also sent dick stuff and he got more upset. He needed space and we were both in a rlly dark time. We decided to talk about it in person. By the time we were gonna meet, we were begininning to talk to each other more normally and he would make jokes that he made before (sexual and regular) and I guess I got my hopes high for thinking it’ll go back to the same

We met up on Thursday night to friday. When I got to the hotel we hugged for a long time and I told him I want to talk about it but he said he wanted to enjoy the night and he didn’t know what to say. I insisted multiple times but nope. We enjoyed the night and we did everything we usually do. The next day was also fine until I noticed he looked upset and that’s when it all came up. We cried a lot, hugged a lot. And I guess he just can’t trust me the same and he’s scared he’s going to invest more feelings and end up being more hurt. I feel so bad for my dumb actions and how it made him feel. I don’t know what to do.

He’s like the only good thing in my life. I asked him what made him finally think of this decision and he said when I was singing along to my music that he didn’t feel or react the same as he used to before. That shattered me. I told him how does he feel that’s different but us having sex and cuddling all night was okay? We both care and like each other a lot and we agreed to being friends and not getting rid of each other from our lives. He says he knows I made a mistake and stuff but idk how to live with this guilt. I don’t want to lose him, I want to prove to him that I will never hurt him again.

13
 
 

Bei einem Blick auf den Unfallort stellt sich unweigerlich die Frage: Wie konnte das passieren? In Bochum hat es eine Seniorin geschafft, plötzlich mit einer Seite ihres Wagens auf zwei parkenden Autos zu stehen. Und die Rettung aus ihrem Auto gestaltet sich für die Feuerwehr zudem als herausfordernd.

14
 
 

^Pervitin, Propaganda, and Power^


The story of Pervitin is not just about Nazi Germany—it’s a cautionary tale about what happens when power seeks to dominate not only people, but their biology. The Third Reich’s chemical warfare wasn’t just in gas chambers or on battlefields—it was in the bloodstream of its own citizens. The myth of Nazi discipline wasn’t built solely on ideology or fear—it was built on meth.

And as we examine modern systems of power, propaganda, and pharmaceutical dependence, we must ask ourselves: how much of our compliance is truly our own? And how has history mistaken intoxication for conviction?

Because the most dangerous drug of all is the one that makes us believe we’re in control.

Pervitin, Propaganda, and Power

~Subject Index: Pervitin, Nazi Germany, WWII drugs, methamphetamine in war, propaganda history, Hitler meth, military stimulants, psychology of soldiers, Third Reich, WWII deep dive, Mad Philosopher~

15
16
3
Duty calls (lemmy.world)
submitted 6 minutes ago by cm0002@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.world
 
 
17
 
 

Episode104

18
19
 
 

The White House had not intended to send its revised — and more aggressive — set of demands to Harvard on April 11, according to a report by the New York Times published Friday evening.

Trump administration officials claimed that the demands — which were seen as excessive and illegal to Harvard’s administrators — should not have been sent and were “unauthorized,” according to the Times, which cited two unnamed sources.

The April 11 letter was signed by Josh Gruenbaum, the commissioner of the General Services Administration, Sean R. Kevney, the acting general counsel of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, and Thomas E. Wheeler, the acting general counsel of the U.S. Department of Education.

A Harvard spokesperson slammed the government’s response as “breathtakingly intrusive” in a statement to The Crimson.

20
 
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/28433704

The New York Times reported that one of Bukele’s aides planted the tropical-looking drinks on the table to make it look like Abrego Garcia was living large. Van Hollen confirmed this on Friday. “This is a lesson into the lengths that President Bukele will go to deceive people about what’s going on,” he said, “and it also shows the lengths that the Trump administration and the president will go to, because when he was asked … about this, he just went along for the ride.”

Van Hollen added that Bukele’s government wanted the meeting to take place by a pool: “They actually wanted to have the meeting [take place] by the side of the pool in the hotel,” he said. “This is a guy who’s been in CECOT. This is a guy who has been detained. They want to create this appearance that life was just lovely for Kilmar, which, of course, is a big fat lie.”

21
 
 
22
23
24
2
PIC (cdn.masto.host)
submitted 8 minutes ago by Kathrin@trouth.eu to c/nocontextpics@lemmy.world
25
 
 
view more: next ›