Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Cherry picking bad one organization doesn’t make me feel any better about this over-broad order.
[flagged]
U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
91–100 of 831 posts
Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> Their own manifesto says they use their limited resources to support groups they align with. Woah, with radical statements like that, we might have to go after mutual aid groups, PACs, and churches.
I mean, I think it entirely depends on the nature of the groups they support?
Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#93[flagged]
Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#94Everyone’s missing the big picture here which is that this targeting of infrastructure providers as “terrorists” is unprecedented and concerning: https://decode39.com/16319/autistici-inventati-case-sets-a-n... If a radical group sets up shop on I2P, are I2P users and devs now terrorists? This is a problem. What about Monero users/devs? Veilid? Tox? Signal?
[flagged]
> If they choose to support the PKK, which the EU, UK, and US have all deemed a terrorist organization for over 20 years, then of course the US should sanction them and they have no moral ground to stand on.
No moral ground to stand on? Would you say that about Amazon who supports the US regime, which is in the business of bombing Iranian schoolgirls? Is that less terrorist?
This collective of course has much more of a moral ground to stand on than indeed Amazon.
Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#95For those like me who don't have context, here is the New York Times article on this recent news / event https://archive.fo/e8Gss > The State Department on Wednesday designated three groups based in Europe, including two that advocate Palestinian rights, as transnational terrorist organizations. > The move is part of the Trump administration’s fight against what it calls a “resurgence of far-left political terrorism”…
Palestine Action has been designated a terrorist group in the UK as well after sabotaging military aircraft (the article says they sprayed paint, but does not say it was sprayed inside jet engines, rendering them inoperable). Masar Badil supports "armed struggle". One of the other groups ("hammer") recently designated a terrorist group (and linked to A/I Collective in another article I read ) got its name by attacking people in Germany with hammers.
Designating A/I Collective a terrorist group is different as it is not directly supporting violence, but it is providing free services to people who do, and it says it provides services to groups its aim is to "provide support exclusively to individuals or groups we feel we have an affinity with.". On the other hand their terms forbid "military use" which is broadly defined enough to rule out terrorism.
I think its likely they do have sympathy for violent groups, n the other hand, unless they have been going out of their way to support violence in some way I do not see reasonable grounds for banning them. Lots of commercial services have dodgy users. My fear is that is is heading in the direction of "if you do not hand info to the US authorities on demand you will be deemed a terrorist"
Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be explicitly clear, a "neutral infrastructure provider" does not describe A/I so your scenario is hypothetical. >careful, if you start going after neutral infrastructure providers, that means google, amazon, microsoft, meta, and more will also need to go. No, because they actively respond to removal request. Open by default, supporting request for removal. The difference comes in when you are open by default and…
> To be explicitly clear, a "neutral infrastructure provider" does not describe A/I so your scenario is hypothetical. i am replying specifically to your comments about neutral providers (that's why i quoted the part of your comment that i did) > No, because they actively respond to removal request. there is still orders of magnitude more conversations going through the providers i mentioned, related to terrorism/csam…
[flagged]
Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#97Everyone’s missing the big picture here which is that this targeting of infrastructure providers as “terrorists” is unprecedented and concerning: https://decode39.com/16319/autistici-inventati-case-sets-a-n... If a radical group sets up shop on I2P, are I2P users and devs now terrorists? This is a problem. What about Monero users/devs? Veilid? Tox? Signal?
[flagged]
So since The International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, will US sanction him too?
Or since ONU has declared illegal the occupation of territory in West Bank, will US sanction Israel?
Or will the United States only sanction those who simply see things differently from them?
Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#98Everyone’s missing the big picture here which is that this targeting of infrastructure providers as “terrorists” is unprecedented and concerning: https://decode39.com/16319/autistici-inventati-case-sets-a-n... If a radical group sets up shop on I2P, are I2P users and devs now terrorists? This is a problem. What about Monero users/devs? Veilid? Tox? Signal?
[flagged]
> If they choose to support the PKK, which the EU, UK, and US
But they are not choosing to support the PKK.
They accuse it of being “a major far-left tech collective whose services are used by the most active and violent Antifa cells in the United States and across the world.”
The far left is a terrorist group? Where are all these violent "antifa cells"?
They labeled this groups as a terrorist organization so they could claim that anyone protesting the fascist Trump regime will easily be labeled terrorists and thrown in jail without a trial.
Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Can you articulate this more? Are you saying the first amendment gives A/I a constitutional right not to be sanctioned?
Yes, we are talking about a communications service, one specifically focusing on political speech.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Email, chat, websites, blogs - these are all speech! A/I's overt political statement (that you are indicting them for) points to their primary interest being to facilitate political speech - a type of speech with some of the strongest protections (that whole "assemble ... and petition the Government" thing)
Beyond that, they're presumably a neutral conduit like every other service provider. If some users of their services are communicating to coordinate crimes, then unless A/I is getting directly involved in those conversations (with the government producing hard evidence of this), it's the exact same dynamic as every other email/hosting provider.
Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
Autistici/Inventati is an Italian collective, active since around 2001, that runs free digital services for activists, grassroots groups and anyone who wants to communicate without being profiled. It provides email accounts, mailing lists, blogs, websites, chat and VPN access.
[flagged]
[flagged]