Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

inventati.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 870 posts

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#791

Post by inigyou »

hexator wrote: post #272
32aGh wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you search for "noblogs pkk" you find a handful, literally less than 10, of pro PKK links, all of which have been taken down. Could have been a false flag to discredit antifa. What happened to safe harbor?

Having "pro-PKK views" (or for other groups designated as terrorists for that matter) is not against the law in the US as that is a first amendment right (as long as that speech is not support).

The first amendment only applies to US citizens and residents. The US is allowed to stifle the speech of anyone else.

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#792

Post by marcosdumay »

polski-g wrote: post #549
2legit2quit wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>...then* Italy itself will be shut out of SWIFT. SWIFT is headquartered in Belgium. Only 2 banks out of the total 24 on the board of directors is US banks. Unless there's a hostile takeover of the SWIFT organisation by the US, I think this is a bit of a stretch. (Plot-twist: Italy is on the board of directors.)

SWIFT abides by international law and local laws. Including those against processing money transfer requests for terrorist organizations like A/I.

SWIFT refused to shunt out the Brazilian banks that kept providing services to the public figures involved on the Bolsonaro trial last year.

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#793

Post by inigyou »

tomhow wrote: post #630
pgporada wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

We've banned this account.

Which account - the one who keeps trying to push the idea that anti-fascism is terrorism, and has posted a lot of that sort of thing across different threads, or the one that called that one a bootlicker and hasn't posted anything remotely similar recently?

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#794

Post by inigyou »

graemep wrote: post #701
freeone3000 wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Terrorism used to be defined as attacking civilian targets to aid in political messaging. Attacking military targets is somewhere between an insurgency, partisanism, or an armed conflict. If we let terrorism mean “any act against the state”, then people who burn police cars are the same as people who plant bombs in shopping malls.

> Terrorism used to be defined as attacking civilian targets to aid in political messaging. Not consistently, and its not a clear definition. The same groups that attacked civilians in places I have lived in also attacked military targets as part of the same strategy. Terrorism is used to threaten, divert resources from front lines, cause economic damage, etc. Civilian targets are attacked in most wars. Is a car bomb…

If terrorism is defined as X, that isn't in contradiction with someone who does X and also Y and Z being a terrorist.

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#795

Post by inigyou »

marcosdumay wrote: post #782
isityettime wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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). That pretty much tells you everything you need to know. Definitions of "terrorism" that extend to sabotage against occupying or invading militaries and their allies are meaningless and hollow…

> which means invasion is "war" but resistance is "terrorism" That's the definition every undemocratic occupying power uses.

Democratic ones too. In fact pretty much every government uses this exact definition. In Germany they called the French Resistance terrorists.

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#796

Post by fnordpiglet »

veeti wrote: post #505
fnordpiglet wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The picture everyone is missing is voting in November is how this gets resolved. The only way radical authoritarians survive on 30% approval ratings is apathy. Theres no reason to put up with this, the other side of a 70% electorate opposition is prison for the lawless incumbent

Even if Barack Obama himself was re-elected and the Democrats gained a 102% supermajority, does anybody seriously believe this sanction in particular would be reversed?

I expect it will be by the courts regardless and there will be a massive federal register journal based rollback of the Trump administration and a declaration that all regulation reverts to 2024 by default.

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#797

Post by cindyllm »

inigyou wrote: post #793
tomhow wrote: post #630

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've banned this account.

Which account - the one who keeps trying to push the idea that anti-fascism is terrorism, and has posted a lot of that sort of thing across different threads, or the one that called that one a bootlicker and hasn't posted anything remotely similar recently?

[dead]

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#798

Post by dbspin »

includenotfound wrote: post #337
viccis wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US govt is trying to brand "antifascism" as a terrorist ideology. They host antifa stuff.

[flagged]

Antifa isn't an organisation at all. It's a loosely defined ideology / set of tactics that leftist movements (everything from black block kids to local democratically organised spaces) sometimes use or follow.
Post reply on HN