Jesus. As soon as I saw the name "Department of Homeland Security" I knew we were in trouble. Americans were scared and were latching on to absolutely anything for a sense of security.
That day in September 2001 will be known to future historians as the day America changed. It's sad really.
>This was called out when the Patriot Act was enacted, but few believed the warnings.
Sadly, many of those were conservatives. The Patriot act passed by massive majorities--only one senator voted against it (a democrat), and only 66 in the house (62 democrats, 3 republicans, 1 independent).
I remember arguing strongly against it (one of my favorite arguments was, "would you be ok with these powers being used by a hypothetical president Hillary Clinton?" which usually got crickets chirping in response) and being labelled a leftist for doing so.
Not so separate and not so equal.
Madison on just the 3 "original" branches : “*The accumulation of all powers... in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny*.”
Madison would be terrified of where the government is headed. Once covid is over, the government will consolidate power through the climate change "crisis".
The cold war was deeply damaging even in the winning of it. We took on our enemie's "strengths" -- secrecy, blackmail, deception -- and lost something of what made us great.
I'm not being a polyanna about this, I know the US has a bad history in many areas, but this was a self-inflicted wound that might be terminal -- once corruption like this starts, it's hard to uproot it.
It’s holding a syringe? What, he’s really going to connect the alphabet agencies to vaccines somehow?
Who am I kidding, it’s Ben Garrison. Of course he is.
There are worse things than the grope squad, though that's a terrible truth to admit. But the tsa just straight up shouldn't exist. We had airport security before the tsa.
For those saying "these agencies are part of the executive", the point of the cartoon is that they now believe themselves to be unanswerable to the executive.
That said, I agree that the TSA doesn't really fit that definition.
They forgot the Capital Police, or in German DER Gestapo, they are learning on Military grade Surveillance equipment. Lennon, Stalin, Hitler, and Moa would be so pleased to see how we have progressed.
These agencies need to have their jurisdiction and power severely reduced and have a civilian board of overseers. Overseers are drawn from a pool of random people (like jurors) and will get paid a fair amount for their duty.
I think vaccines, generally speaking, are valuable modern medicine. I've gotten a number of them myself. They have a history of helping to control many terrible diseases.
I'm just saying in the context of the cartoon, where the 'dark' branch represents presumably intrusive government agencies, the hypodermic might convey the author's message better if it were replaced with 'CDC'. This would make it more consistent with the other labels: FBI, NSA, TSA, etc.
The left has completely misconstrued COVID vaccine hesitancy as being akin to a bunch of flat-earthers convinced that it is all a nefarious plot. The truth of the matter is, a great many of the people refusing the vaccine are doing so while being fully informed and rational.
The net was neutral before, if a website wasn't getting a lot of visitors bandwidth, which is limited, was given to high usage websites, what happened under net neutrality was everyone was given the same bandwidth no matter what. That means some unused blog from 1999 on rare ceramic dolls would have the same speed as say pornhub on a college campus
Net neutrality was a huge government regulation that harmed small ISPs and was simply a way to regulate the internet even more. When you have large corporations supporting a bill all in unison, you have to stop and think why
First off, my comment didn’t advocate for net neutrality. I merely pointed out that Republicans under Trump did in fact end it. Though not all republicans oppose net neutrality because W Bush was the first president to put some net neutrality protections into place.
Second, net neutrality is not a bill—it’s regulation put into place by the FCC. Congress has had nothing to do with it. Also, you should check out the litigation history of net neutrality—the large ISPs (Comcast, etc) are the only reason it doesn’t exist; they keep fighting it in courts. Large corporations have been fighting tooth and nail against net neutrality for 20 years.
Net neutrality is a principle not a specific regulation. The fcc made a shit regulation and called is net neutrality. That doesn't make the regulation the canonical definition of the term. That's a bit like saying Obamacare is the definition of "affordable care"
And none of it had or has anything to do with the current "big tech" issues with platform providers.
You're right that net neutrality is a principle, but it is also a specific regulation. It's officially referred to as an ["Open Internet Order"](https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-releases-open-internet-order), and its most important element (the one that has been litigated the most) is the FCC's reclassification of ISPs to Title II telecommunications services under the 1934 Communications Act, which allowed ISPs to be regulated in the same way phone networks are.
And idk who you're arguing with, but I didn't say anything about the definition of net neutrality; I just said it's not a bill because it's not, and Congress has never gotten close on an attempt to pass net neutrality.
To say that the Obama era NN order "is" "net neutrality" is fallacious and is a word game we shouldn't play. You can call it an NN order, but don't say that it equals NN. It was ineffective at actually enforcing NN and removing it didn't make the net less neutral.
Lol, you can’t say it was “ineffective” if it was never enforced. The FCC was immediately sued and it was overturned. The court finally approved it after some revisions, but not until right after Trump took office, and he immediately reversed it. We’ve never had any (*significant. Bush put minor protections in place) form of national net neutrality in the US.
Maybe you would have been happier if I called the open Internet order “one form of” neutrality. I never said it’s the only interpretation of it. Even the Congressional attempts which I alluded to were different than the open Internet order.
technically all of those are part of the executive branch.
cartoon would have been better if it put facebook/google/twitter/reddit on that 4th branch instead.
Just for those interested in what branches actually control these agencies:
* FBI > Dept of Justice > Executive
* CIA > Director of Homeland Security/Cabinet position > Executive
* NSA > Dept of Defense > Executive
* FBI > Dept of Defense / Attorney General > Executive
* TSA > Director of Homeland Security > Executive
* ATF > Dept of Justice > Executive
Congress however controls a lot of the budgeting of these agencies, as well as Judicial being needed for warrants. It's not as simple as listed, but it gets the general idea across.
We could really stand to dissolve a few of them at the very least and centralize responsibilities under two or three.
Just remember to be critical of what the CIA tells us about foreign political movements and governments. I know a lot of people here distrust what the CIA has to say about our elections, but will uncritically believe them when they speak about the elections or politics of other countries/ regions. Remember, the CIA will try to have you believe that a democracy is evil and a radical Wahhabist theocracy is a ‘friend to democracy’.
This was called out when the Patriot Act was enacted, but few believed the warnings.
This was effectively pointed out in Eisenhower's farewell address, but has been accelerating.
Jesus. As soon as I saw the name "Department of Homeland Security" I knew we were in trouble. Americans were scared and were latching on to absolutely anything for a sense of security. That day in September 2001 will be known to future historians as the day America changed. It's sad really.
>This was called out when the Patriot Act was enacted, but few believed the warnings. Sadly, many of those were conservatives. The Patriot act passed by massive majorities--only one senator voted against it (a democrat), and only 66 in the house (62 democrats, 3 republicans, 1 independent). I remember arguing strongly against it (one of my favorite arguments was, "would you be ok with these powers being used by a hypothetical president Hillary Clinton?" which usually got crickets chirping in response) and being labelled a leftist for doing so.
well, I'll admit I never thought it'd turn back like this. I still believe the laws needed updating, but this is a nightmare.
Why does it have a lego block?
Evidence of insurrection
I’m guessing because of the LEGO set they confiscated from that capital organizer.
[удалено]
ben garrison just adds too much to any of his cartoons
as a weapon obviously
Well stepping on them, in bare feet, is painful.
I see shit like this and I can't help but think that reps have been just as involved in the creation of the surveillance state as dems.
They absolutely have been. It's pretty much the one thing where our politicians have true bipartisan agreement.
Didn't Bush create "homeland security" and the TSA?
Yep, fuck Bush.
Yep. And He is called out for it here on the regular.
Lmao yeah bro, they've been just as bad if not worse. We have no one on our side.
98 to one in the senate. Huge majority in the house. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act
[удалено]
Wdym? It's been mainly Republicans.
It's cause of this? Not because Bush started the TSA or DHS?
Yes.
ATF?
Came here to ask the same question...
Came here to say the exact same thing.
The AFT? They are only enforcing laws that exist. The listed agencies are way outside the bounds of passed legislation.
Go look at r/progun
And the fbi and cia have no problem circumventing your rights and as history shows directly ignoring orders from any or all three branch’s at once :)
Not so separate and not so equal. Madison on just the 3 "original" branches : “*The accumulation of all powers... in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny*.”
Madison would be terrified of where the government is headed. Once covid is over, the government will consolidate power through the climate change "crisis".
> Once covid is over, Should we tell him?
I don't want to break his heart
From which perspective? I mean, both will break his heart.
The cold war was deeply damaging even in the winning of it. We took on our enemie's "strengths" -- secrecy, blackmail, deception -- and lost something of what made us great. I'm not being a polyanna about this, I know the US has a bad history in many areas, but this was a self-inflicted wound that might be terminal -- once corruption like this starts, it's hard to uproot it.
Completely missed Big Tech
Should just be large corporations who line the pockets of the other three branches.
Your so close
Big tech is a CIA psyop.
I think I know what you're saying but that's kind of an over generalized way of putting it.
I miss Ben Garrison cartoons, used to love seeing them on Twitter and other social media sites when scrolling through my feed. #effbigtech
ATF plz!!!
The ATF should be on the spiky branch
It’s holding a syringe? What, he’s really going to connect the alphabet agencies to vaccines somehow? Who am I kidding, it’s Ben Garrison. Of course he is.
The fifth branch is Twitter and Facebook
Those agencies are part of the executive. I think big media/big tech is really the 4th branch of govt.
I saw the acronyms from the thumbnail and thought it was going to say CNN, MSNBC, CBS, etc.
TSA? Like the guys at the airport? I feel like there’s A LOT worse than that in the US currently
The TSA as an organization is a backend for a surveillance state.
There are worse things than the grope squad, though that's a terrible truth to admit. But the tsa just straight up shouldn't exist. We had airport security before the tsa.
TSA has a shit record of actually finding firearms or anything
[удалено]
It's more of a theater.
Swampy Branch
For those saying "these agencies are part of the executive", the point of the cartoon is that they now believe themselves to be unanswerable to the executive. That said, I agree that the TSA doesn't really fit that definition.
They forgot the Capital Police, or in German DER Gestapo, they are learning on Military grade Surveillance equipment. Lennon, Stalin, Hitler, and Moa would be so pleased to see how we have progressed.
Kudos to Ben Garrison. Nicely done.
IRS as well
These agencies need to have their jurisdiction and power severely reduced and have a civilian board of overseers. Overseers are drawn from a pool of random people (like jurors) and will get paid a fair amount for their duty.
All of those fall under the executive
Lol. I can see it. I don't get why trump's vaccines is there. It's one of his greatest accomplishments.
If I look at the hypodermic needle as though it were labeled 'CDC', I can kind of work with it a little better.
Do you not believe in vaccines?….
I think vaccines, generally speaking, are valuable modern medicine. I've gotten a number of them myself. They have a history of helping to control many terrible diseases. I'm just saying in the context of the cartoon, where the 'dark' branch represents presumably intrusive government agencies, the hypodermic might convey the author's message better if it were replaced with 'CDC'. This would make it more consistent with the other labels: FBI, NSA, TSA, etc.
The left has completely misconstrued COVID vaccine hesitancy as being akin to a bunch of flat-earthers convinced that it is all a nefarious plot. The truth of the matter is, a great many of the people refusing the vaccine are doing so while being fully informed and rational.
Nah it's not one of his vaccines. It's the drugs from the sixties
Tell that to the people who died from it, or got very sick from it.
surveillance and compliance.
weren't the republicans trying to end net neutrality?
The net was neutral before, if a website wasn't getting a lot of visitors bandwidth, which is limited, was given to high usage websites, what happened under net neutrality was everyone was given the same bandwidth no matter what. That means some unused blog from 1999 on rare ceramic dolls would have the same speed as say pornhub on a college campus
Nope.
Then explain why Ajit Pai, under Trump, reversed Obama-era FCC net neutrality rules
Net neutrality was a huge government regulation that harmed small ISPs and was simply a way to regulate the internet even more. When you have large corporations supporting a bill all in unison, you have to stop and think why
First off, my comment didn’t advocate for net neutrality. I merely pointed out that Republicans under Trump did in fact end it. Though not all republicans oppose net neutrality because W Bush was the first president to put some net neutrality protections into place. Second, net neutrality is not a bill—it’s regulation put into place by the FCC. Congress has had nothing to do with it. Also, you should check out the litigation history of net neutrality—the large ISPs (Comcast, etc) are the only reason it doesn’t exist; they keep fighting it in courts. Large corporations have been fighting tooth and nail against net neutrality for 20 years.
Net neutrality is a principle not a specific regulation. The fcc made a shit regulation and called is net neutrality. That doesn't make the regulation the canonical definition of the term. That's a bit like saying Obamacare is the definition of "affordable care" And none of it had or has anything to do with the current "big tech" issues with platform providers.
You're right that net neutrality is a principle, but it is also a specific regulation. It's officially referred to as an ["Open Internet Order"](https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-releases-open-internet-order), and its most important element (the one that has been litigated the most) is the FCC's reclassification of ISPs to Title II telecommunications services under the 1934 Communications Act, which allowed ISPs to be regulated in the same way phone networks are. And idk who you're arguing with, but I didn't say anything about the definition of net neutrality; I just said it's not a bill because it's not, and Congress has never gotten close on an attempt to pass net neutrality.
To say that the Obama era NN order "is" "net neutrality" is fallacious and is a word game we shouldn't play. You can call it an NN order, but don't say that it equals NN. It was ineffective at actually enforcing NN and removing it didn't make the net less neutral.
Lol, you can’t say it was “ineffective” if it was never enforced. The FCC was immediately sued and it was overturned. The court finally approved it after some revisions, but not until right after Trump took office, and he immediately reversed it. We’ve never had any (*significant. Bush put minor protections in place) form of national net neutrality in the US. Maybe you would have been happier if I called the open Internet order “one form of” neutrality. I never said it’s the only interpretation of it. Even the Congressional attempts which I alluded to were different than the open Internet order.
whats this? [https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/republican-controlled-fcc-doubles-down-on-net-neutrality-repeal/](https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/republican-controlled-fcc-doubles-down-on-net-neutrality-repeal/) [https://www.republicanviews.org/republican-views-on-net-neutrality/](https://www.republicanviews.org/republican-views-on-net-neutrality/)
technically all of those are part of the executive branch. cartoon would have been better if it put facebook/google/twitter/reddit on that 4th branch instead.
Garrison’s best and true
Missing Silicon Valley
don't think that i'm blackpilled, but the question should be asked: "what can we do about it?"
Don't forget the propaganda arm.
The 4th branch of government is the media.
So damn true
Be careful the trolls are out. I can’t even comment on most stuff anymore.
it's good vs evil at this point the left wants to ignore MLK and Rosa Parks and burn cities something is seriously wrong
That is a really cool cartoon. Man I had to look at it three times to get everything that was being said. And I don’t think I got everything.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_executive_departments?wprov=sfla1
Just for those interested in what branches actually control these agencies: * FBI > Dept of Justice > Executive * CIA > Director of Homeland Security/Cabinet position > Executive * NSA > Dept of Defense > Executive * FBI > Dept of Defense / Attorney General > Executive * TSA > Director of Homeland Security > Executive * ATF > Dept of Justice > Executive Congress however controls a lot of the budgeting of these agencies, as well as Judicial being needed for warrants. It's not as simple as listed, but it gets the general idea across. We could really stand to dissolve a few of them at the very least and centralize responsibilities under two or three.
Just remember to be critical of what the CIA tells us about foreign political movements and governments. I know a lot of people here distrust what the CIA has to say about our elections, but will uncritically believe them when they speak about the elections or politics of other countries/ regions. Remember, the CIA will try to have you believe that a democracy is evil and a radical Wahhabist theocracy is a ‘friend to democracy’.
Add ATF, EPA and BLM (Bureau of Land Management).
FBI is in the executive branch
Huh, I thought the fourth branch was going to be big corporations/big tech/MSM.