[FRIAM] tolerance of intolerance

[glen]

It's pretty hard for me to see how that would stand up in court. If assassination of citizens, much less a fully cleared and daily int-briefed President-elect, is ultimately ruled an "official" action, we've already lost the Republic and committing the actual deed would be futile. No need to worry about losing the Republic if the Republic is already lost.

On 7/16/24 10:47, Russ Abbott wrote:
> Why has no one pointed out the possibility that if Trump wins, Biden could take advantage of his newly declared immunity and have him assassinated?
> 
> -- Russ
> 
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2024, 6:24 AM glen <gepropella at gmail.com <mailto:gepropella at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Yeah. It's one thing to wish it or want it. It's another to think more in Marcus' terms and come up with a more complex strategy not involving stupid 20 year olds and no violence at all. I still hold out hope for my own personal conspiracy theory. Biden becomes the nominee. After the convention fades, the Admnistration announces Biden has gone to the hospital for bone spur surgery. Kamala takes over temporarily and campaigns furiously for Biden-Harris. Biden is re-elected. Biden recovers and gets through the Oath (fingers crossed). Then he goes back to the hospital with some minor thing like a dizzy spell. Kamala takes over again. Biden's condition worsens. First Female President. Biden recovers and becomes America's Grandpa.
> 
>     Come on Deep State. Make it happen. 8^D
> 
>     On 7/15/24 17:30, Russ Abbott wrote:
>      > I wonder what Scott's response would have been to those of us who, in response to the shooting, thought: better luck next time.
>      > On 7/15/24 17:28, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>      >> It ignores the option of doing things quietly and indirectly.
>      >> On 7/15/24 16:46, glen wrote:
>      >>> [Scott's] Prayer
>      >>> https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=8117 <https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=8117>
>      >>>
>      >>> I'm currently surrounded by people who believe intolerance is properly not tolerated. Scott's message, here, seems extraordinary Christian, to me. (Real Christian, not the Christianism displayed in things like megachurches and whatnot cf https://raymondsmullyan.com/books/who-knows/ <https://raymondsmullyan.com/books/who-knows/>). This faith that "going high" will, in the long run, win out, seems naive to me. The temptation to "hoist the black flag and start slitting throats" isn't merely a thresholded reaction, it's an intuitive grasp of the iterated prisoner's dilemma, tit-for-tat style strategies, and Ashby's LoRV. But I'm open to changing my mind on that. Maybe I'm just too low-brow?
>      >>>

-- 
ꙮ Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ ꙮ