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

901–910 of 915 posts

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

#901

Post by aftbit »

undeveloper wrote: post #326
aftbit wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>[The US State Dept's] examples include alleged railway and pipeline sabotage in Europe, attacks on energy infrastructure, Rose City Antifa, resistance to Atlanta’s proposed police-training center, Jane’s Revenge and publications carrying statements attributed to armed organizations. At least one of these things is not like the others. Why are peaceful protests against "Cop City" (Atlanta's proposed police-training c…

> violent attacks > on energy infrastructure that's not violence

IMO violence is a spectrum. Peaceful protesting with signs is 0 violence. Attacking self-driving cars or department stores without hurting any people is a bit higher up the scale. Attacking food supplies or critical infrastructure is higher still, as it will have downstream effects on everyone that might lead to death and suffering. Attacking actual human bodies is even higher up the scale of course.

I get your point though. There's a strong push to characterize destruction of property as violence, as part of a push to delegitimize protest. To some people, the police can use physical violence against people to stop a protest and that's okay, whereas if the protestors so much as throw a brick through a window, they're violent extremists.

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

#902

Post by OKRainbowKid »

woodpanel wrote: post #899
OKRainbowKid wrote: post #743

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean the ones that haven't actually been busted, their true motivation and political conviction unknown, with the only thing pointing towards left-wing extremism being "Bekennerschreiben" that have linguistic traits of being authored by native Russian speakers?

yeah those "unbusted" ones, like the Hammerbande, that have been caught, caught on camera trying to murder civillians they deemed being Hitler, and thus rightfully jailed.

You were talking about attacks on electricity and rail infrastructure. Why the pivot?

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

#903

Post by asib »

frumplestlatz wrote: post #779
asib wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're appealing to another proscription decision that is extraordinarily controversial.

Controversial -- particularly amongst those of a particular political persuasion that supports a terrorist state -- doesn’t mean preposterous.

It doesn't mean preposterous or not preposterous. It does mean there is general dispute regarding the proscription.

Appealing to it is not really progressing your argument. Both decisions are controversial, you don't make a more convincing argument as to why one controversial decision should not be considered controversial, by pointing to a different, also controversial, decision.

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

#905

Post by yyyk »

bigyabai wrote: post #809
yyyk wrote: post #469

Well, the State Dept is anything but vague about its argument: https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/20... "The A/I Collective exclusively offers its tools and services to radical left-wing actors and manually vets all potential users for ideological affinity before granting them access to its infrastructure. The group has become a key node in a transnational campaign by violent and criminal far-l…

Most importantly, the corner of their website says "free palestine" and we all know how the DC swamp feels about that kind of free expression.

Apparently saying the slogan du jour does not protect you from your actions...

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

#906

Post by baobabKoodaa »

Arainach wrote: post #662
baobabKoodaa wrote: post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never equated those.

> is accurately reciting what this organization says about itself openly Declaring that the State Department's language is "accurately reciting" is equating.

> Declaring that the State Department's language is "accurately reciting" is equating.

Now you are just imagining the word "terrorism" into a sentence that does not include the word "terrorism". As a reminder, here is the sentence we are discussing: "The A/I Collective exclusively offers its tools and services to radical left-wing actors and manually vets all potential users for ideological affinity before granting them access to its infrastructure."

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

#907

Post by baobabKoodaa »

mlindner wrote: post #577
Arainach wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Opposing fascism and racism is not "radical left". It's centrism. The State Department's words are not A/I's.

Being against facism and racism is centrism, being part of an "anti-fascist" or "anti-racist" group is radical left. If you're part of a "group" that has stated goals of pushing something that is already a norm then its pretty clear what what you're doing is not pushing for what is already the norm as if it was the norm you wouldn't need to push for it.

Hey, I'm sorry about my other message. I tried to tell another user in this thread to go f* themselves, and I seem to have accidentally clicked the wrong "reply" link in the tree and so my message went to you instead. What you write here is reasonable.

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

#908

Post by baobabKoodaa »

inigyou wrote: post #784
baobabKoodaa wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

"radical left" is not an accurate recitation of "anti-racist, anti-sexist"

> "radical left" is not an accurate recitation of "anti-racist, anti-sexist"

Gaslighting again. The quote was "anti-fascism, anti-racism, anti-sexism". See how you "accidentally" forgot to mention "anti-fascism" in there? This organization is actively supporting Antifa. Antifa is a prototypical example of what people mean when they talk about "radical left".

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

#909

Post by vorpalhex »

FabCH wrote: post #587
vorpalhex wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PA was armed. > you are not allowed to murder unarmed soldiers, That's also false, you can absolutely kill unarmed combatants so long as they remain combatants. Eg you can bomb an artillery crew even if they don't have sidearms. To be eligible for capture, a combatant must generally surrender. > typically called „arresting“ when a government does it to their own citizens I encourage you to read up on POW camps. There…

An artillery crew is armed with the cannon. POWs don’t have attorneys, but they do have rights. Limiting food and medical aid is a war crime. Of course, everybody routinely violates the rights of POWs, and only the losers ever get prosecuted.

By that logic, PA had fighter jets.

And no, limiting food and medical is not a war crime if the source being limited is from the captor and matches the treatment of their own troops.

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

#910

Post by hereme888 »

cogman10 wrote: post #471
hereme888 wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What sort of logic is this? I use I2P and no one sanctioned me or labeled me a terrorist.

I'd look at the Prairieland Detention Center Case to understand how broadly and aggressively this government is using "terrorism" to go after political opponents. Daniel Rolando Sanchez-Estrada got 30 years in prison for moving a box of magazines related to the protest. He wasn't even at the actual protest. Several people got decades in jail because the FBI successfully convinced a jury that setting off fireworks nea…

That's not what that Antifa terrorist did. All evidence was laid out in the court. You can read the official documents. Or you can keep reading pro-Antifa sites that whitewash what happened.
Post reply on HN