This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
https://cha.house.gov/2025/1/chairs-loudermilk-massie-release-january-6-2021-pipe-bomb-report
"The FBI’s Investigation into the Pipe Bomber: The FBI did not receive “corrupted data” from one of the major cell carriers in connection with its investigation into the pipe bomber. A former senior FBI official testified that the major cell carrier companies provided “corrupted” cell data to the FBI and suggested that that “corrupted” data may have contained the identity of the pipe bomber; however, in responses to letters from the Subcommittee, the major cell carriers confirmed that they did not provide corrupted data to the FBI and that the FBI never notified them of any issues with accessing the cellular data."
I'm not sure the corrupted cellphone data thing is as you're describing it.
Based on this report, it seems like either
There was no corrupted data and the FBI guy just said something completely erroneous out of incompetence.
The cellphone companies are not aware of the corrupted data, but it's real.
Some sort of miscommunication based on different definitions of the term "corrupted data" between the FBI and cell phone companies.
I can understand not wanting to doubt the sterling moral character of the US intelligence agencies, but this explanation is actually less realistic than the conspiracy approach. The FBI failing to follow a lead on a person who was potentially trying to blow up the president/vice president) because of a miscommunication with a telecom company is a level of incompetence that beggars belief. This is the sort of excuse that would get someone fired from their job at a supermarket or furniture store, and yet there was no corrective action for an investigation into someone attempting to blow up the president during the inauguration? Every single one of the points you raised could have been corrected within a few minutes by someone who actually wanted to investigate the situation, and yet nothing of the sort has happened - this is substantially less realistic than the idea that the FBI is malicious.
I think one of us has misunderstood the other. I'm saying what if there never was any corrupted data and the FBI guy was just talking out of his ass?
That's the original conspiracy theory claim - the FBI lying to cover up something else (most likely that the person planting the pipe bomb was working for intelligence).
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link