This article sets off my bullshit detector, and let me explain why.
First, it's throwing red meat to the dogs. The internet and tech community is extremely sci-fi and video game friendly. This was one of us, and bad things happened to him.
Second, it's not a news article. There's no presumption of being two sides to the story. One side is given, by a friend, and a call to action given out. Were the officers interviewed? Was the video-tape released (And you know they have video tape)? Nothing of the barest minimum was done to provide some sort of context. The purpose of this piece is clear: it's a call to action, an editorial, an opinion piece. Don't confuse it with a news article.
Third, there's lots of loaded language in here -- "was subject to a beating and arrest", and "the gang of border guards", "and losing it may cost him his entire life" etc.
Look -- I'm not taking sides. Border guards screw up and are badly-trained sometimes. That's why we have video on all border crossings. On the other hand, people crossing the border have been known not to be able to handle submitting to requests from people in authority for various reasons. There is a very good case for using physical force on occasion. I simply don't know what happened.
What do I do when someone starts singing sweet songs of injustice that sounds wonderful to my libertarian senses? That's when I start asking questions.
I would like to know more about this, and from a non-aligned source, before being able to form any kind of opinion at all.
I completely and fully believe the story. I've crossed the Canadian - US border many times by car and I've personally witnessed more than one occasion of absolutely unwarranted aggression on the part of the border guards.
Seriously, you have to make the trip a couple of times per month for a year or two to get any idea of how many rotten apples there are in that basket.
American and Canadian visitors are always completely surprised when we tour the region here, and we go from the Netherlands to France, Belgium and Germany without ever seeing a borderguard in person, let alone having to interact with one.
It's really just costumed theater, you could easily do without it and it would not somehow threaten the American way of life.
American borders being what they are I stopped going there completely after one especially nasty incident in Miami that caused me to miss a connecting flight.
Until sanity returns to the American borders I'm sure they can do without my business.
I used to travel internationally quite a bit, so I've crossed the border many times too. What can I say? It's usually not a pleasant experience no matter which border you are crossing. And it seems to just be getting worse, especially in the U.S.
It's also obvious that people who know Peter think of him as having a docile character. So if I had to guess I'd guess that Peter was indeed wronged.
But I don't have to guess. There should be plenty of evidence for reasonable people to make up their minds. I'll just wait until I hear more information.
Or put another way -- is this a story because of what exactly happened? Or is it a story because it feeds into larger narratives that we already agree on and it comes from somebody well-known on the web? Joe Schmoe gets tasered, perhaps unfairly, and nobody cares. Person-of-note X gets tasered, perhaps fairly, and everybody is up in arms. Why? Because it's easy for us to be. It's a familiar theme with lots of characters doing things we would expect them to do.
That type of story -- one that fits so well into established narratives and stereotype and one that is presented without context -- just makes me feel like I'm being manipulated, even if everything happened just the way it was told and a true injustice was done.
I just don't know. But I do know that if there was serious misconduct on the part of the border agents then heads deserve to roll on this -- just like any other case involving anybody else.
You may be right. It might even be a publicity stunt for Peter's new book (which I'd buy in a heartbeat)...
But in any case, your critique doesn't mean that the event isn't useful for helping people who haven't decided how they feel about the various post-911 excesses formulate a more nuanced opinion.
Remember there has never been a problem between Germany and any of it's neighbours or any problem with terrorism in Europe.
The USA lives under the constant threat of Canadian invasion, following their 1812 burning of the Whitehouse - it's natural for US security on the 'front line' to be nervous.
> The USA lives under the constant threat of Canadian invasion, following their 1812 burning of the Whitehouse - it's natural for US security on the 'front line' to be nervous.
First, it's throwing red meat to the dogs. The internet and tech community is extremely sci-fi and video game friendly. This was one of us, and bad things happened to him.
Second, it's not a news article. There's no presumption of being two sides to the story. One side is given, by a friend, and a call to action given out. Were the officers interviewed? Was the video-tape released (And you know they have video tape)? Nothing of the barest minimum was done to provide some sort of context. The purpose of this piece is clear: it's a call to action, an editorial, an opinion piece. Don't confuse it with a news article.
Third, there's lots of loaded language in here -- "was subject to a beating and arrest", and "the gang of border guards", "and losing it may cost him his entire life" etc.
Look -- I'm not taking sides. Border guards screw up and are badly-trained sometimes. That's why we have video on all border crossings. On the other hand, people crossing the border have been known not to be able to handle submitting to requests from people in authority for various reasons. There is a very good case for using physical force on occasion. I simply don't know what happened.
What do I do when someone starts singing sweet songs of injustice that sounds wonderful to my libertarian senses? That's when I start asking questions.
I would like to know more about this, and from a non-aligned source, before being able to form any kind of opinion at all.