A/I shuts down

Ya'll don't realize what the actual plan was. It wasn't to use the mob to overthrow the government, it was to use the mob to delay the certification of the vote. Which they did, but it wasn't for long enough. They were going to overthrow the Constitution by just deciding for themselves they won despite the votes. And they're in power again, so they're very likely going to do exactly that next time.

The whole plan after the judicial effort failed (using the courts to overturn the vote outcome) and the individual shakedowns failed (calling up governors and demanding they change the vote outcome) was to pressure senators to throw out the state certificates, kick them back to the states, and have the states decide that Trump won instead. They had a whole slate of fraudulent shadow certificates with Trump as the winner ready for Senators to certify. That 10000% would have worked because there are more red states than blue, so they would have just picked Trump over Biden.

But Pence refused to go along with the plan. So the mob was the last ditch effort to convince the senators. Its purpose was not to kill the senators but to delay the vote to give more time to affect the influence campaign. So that plan was also very very close to working because they did delay the vote. It only didn't work because Mitch McConnell refused to end the session and kept everyone around to complete the certification of the vote on January 7. But the fact that it happened on January 7 means that the plan very nearly worked.

You need to look at J6 as a buffer overflow attack. There are no instructions for what to do if the J6 vote is disrupted by a mob, the hope was that but putting the country in that illegal state would allow for arbitrary instructions to be executed.

> prosecuting your own war criminals

American here. This is a non-starter. Nobody does it. And war is a domain where leading on moral authority requires firepower to back it.

We don’t agree on what does and doesn’t constitute a war crime, the term seems to cover almost all war as well as actions taken by every global and regional power in almost every military action they’ve each taken.

We need reform. But pretending we can legally ban war is silly.

Again, I'm working off of the only actual information I'm aware of, A/I's self-description of how the process works. If someone has more information they should provide it rather than relying on maybes! The existence of an intake form, to be clear, doesn't really suggest that form is the extent of the process or that any reasonable answers are accepted.

> As if that holds any value, especially considering the rest of your comment, which completely ignores the rhetoric of that "designation".

I am not saying that you have to hold my experience to any value, but I am stating that was my experience. Anyone is free to interpret as they prefer, but I would question your argument as to why. It sounds a lot like "whataboutism". The fact that the designation is bad does not change my experience with the rhetoric of the collective.

If you'd rather know why I do not express much judgement on the designation: I did not pass any judgement of the dialectic in the designation because I don't claim to have the same experience with such - or any - dialect in English.

I also state that 'a broken clock ...' underlining - I thought - the fact that I don't think the US government does normally much good.

> "violent Antifa cells" in the second sentence should be the wake up signal.

It's not as obvious to me as it is to you why "violent antifa cells" is a wake up signal. Would you mind explaining further?

> There was/is no protest group called the no-global movement.. you are using language the same way Trump & co

Admittedly, these are memories from quite a while ago, I don't exclude some of them might be wrong, but as much as it's not a movement with a cohesive leadership and structured belief, for what it's worth, wikipedia seems to agree with me on the existence of a "No global movment" and its connection with the Genova G8 issues [1]. I would invite you to avoid name calling, such as comparing me to Trump :D

I had no connection with black bloc, and while I agree with you that it was a small minority in the protest having violent intentions, I disagree that only black bloc was to blame for those violent intentions.

I also don't absolve the police, what happened was horrifying, but this again does not take away from the fact that the rhetoric used in the communication by the collective reminds me of the 'not so not violent' groups that at the very least orbited the violence, and, in my personal opinion, very much winked at and approved of it.

I don't see you make an argument contrary to what I am saying other than discrediting my own experience based on the fact that - in your opinion - I don't criticize both sides equally?

[1]https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movimento_no-global

You are basically saying that supporting American imperialism is not exclusive to NATO. And I don‘t dispute that.

I also think that history has been far too kind to France’s supposed opposition to the illegal invasion. France stood firmly inside a military alliance who’s members broke international law and disregarded human rights. If France and Germany were serious about their supposed opposition to that war they would have at least threatened to withdraw. But such actions were never even considered. France and Germany were perfectly happy to allow American Imperialist agenda to materialize, even though most other NATO countries took a more active role in the crimes.