Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like providing encrypted communications? I think we can all see the potential problems with this, even if a specific group is awful. “The specific claim: a far-left media group that describes itself as a “tool” for militants to share information “to be acted upon” used A/I’s services to publish communiqués and calls to action for U.S.-designated terrorist groups, including FAI/FRI, the IRGC, Hamas, Hizballah,…
> Hizballah Is that Hezbollah's little brother?
A/I shuts down
171–180 of 636 posts
Re: A/I shuts down
#172Re: A/I shuts down
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
IRGC, Hamas, Hizballah and maybe others are far right organizations, so I don't think this is purely left/right. And what about signal? I am pretty sure many violent/terrorist groups use it too. I don't have an opinion about this group, because I didn't even know it existed. But, like often with things related to the free speech, I think this topic is more complex than you make it out to be.
Re: A/I shuts down
#174Hmm, I would have expected more outrage from the US "free speech absolutists" over this US government decision ;)
Did you catch the part where A/I Collective is operated by foreign parties outside the US?
Re: A/I shuts down
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US Republican party has been inventing an increasingly elaborate alternate reality fiction in order to convince their voters to keep voting for policy positions that obviously work against those voters' own interests. One component of this alternate reality is a fictional terrorist organization called "antifa." They claim that anyone who does not align with their policies is a member of this organization. This al…
> "They claim that anyone who does not align with their policies is a member of this organization" No one is claiming that Amy Klobuchar or Gavin Newsom is a member of antifa.
Re: A/I shuts down
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not familiar with A/I, but this sounds pretty damning – the ideological vetting of users in particular seems to discount any sort of neutral utility defense.
Ideologically vetting can mean a lot of things. Like, a sign on the door that says "NO TERFS" is a form of ideological vetting. By this logic any right wing message board would be designated terrorists the moment one person who has posted there commits a violent act. This is meant to chill domestic left-wing activism. Just like the person who got 30 years for delivering some zines ( https://freedom.press/issues/texas…
Re: A/I shuts down
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like providing encrypted communications? I think we can all see the potential problems with this, even if a specific group is awful. “The specific claim: a far-left media group that describes itself as a “tool” for militants to share information “to be acted upon” used A/I’s services to publish communiqués and calls to action for U.S.-designated terrorist groups, including FAI/FRI, the IRGC, Hamas, Hizballah,…
[flagged]
Re: A/I shuts down
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not familiar with A/I, but this sounds pretty damning – the ideological vetting of users in particular seems to discount any sort of neutral utility defense.
Ideologically vetting can mean a lot of things. Like, a sign on the door that says "NO TERFS" is a form of ideological vetting. By this logic any right wing message board would be designated terrorists the moment one person who has posted there commits a violent act. This is meant to chill domestic left-wing activism. Just like the person who got 30 years for delivering some zines ( https://freedom.press/issues/texas…
Re: A/I shuts down
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A/I knowingly provided services to groups that verifiably did some rather violent things they are accused of If that's disqualifying, a lot of US government contractors are in trouble.
[flagged]
Re: A/I shuts down
#180I have experienced this kind of language personally back when the collective started (they have root in the no-global movement, a protest group that contributed to the violence at the Genova G8).
At the time I was a young activist on their side, but the 'we are not violent' wink-wink nudge-nudge attitude was not main stream but very much all over the place and became hard to ignore.
[1]https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/20...
edit: forgot the link to the designation