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

Signs you're a dangerous terrorist: using Signal, moving zines

werd.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 95 posts

Re: Signs you're a dangerous terrorist: using Signal, moving zines

#81

Post by Arodex »

armchairhacker wrote: post #31
Arodex wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, if he did it and there was no opposition, it certainly makes it "valid". Where exactly has it been made invalid? Has anyone done anything to make it invalid? Aren't they free, and can they do it again? And the slush fund for the Jan 6 rioters is just suspended, not canceled. It will come back.

Just because something happened doesn’t make it “valid”: it’s not moral, and your side doing it may not have the same effect (good people can’t use evil tools as effectively as evil people). I don’t really care whether Jan 6 rioters are free, they’ve spent months-to-years in jail anyways. What’s important is preventing future crimes, which punishing deserved people broadly on your side helps. > Can they do it again I…

>Just because something happened doesn’t make it “valid”

If nothing happens to change it, it is valid just by being a fait accompli. Your words are just words, if they don't translate into a tangible reality. An hallucination.

>I don’t really care whether Jan 6 rioters are free, they’ve spent months-to-years in jail anyways. What’s important is preventing future crime

Enrique Tario has been harassing former capitol policemen. Any Jan 6 rioter is free to go after the police, or family or friends or anyone who denounced them.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/22/enrique-tarr...

>In 2028 if a Dem wins?

No, in 2026. After the 2020 election, polling places and local state officials were threatened and attacked in dozen of places.

>Trump won’t successfully pardon a crime as egregious as this

It doesn't make sense, he's done far worse already, and he is preparing to do far, far worse. Hesgeth is more than ready to use the Army against the US population:

https://www.npr.org/2025/09/30/nx-s1-5557232/hegseth-general...

VP Vance is ready to invoke the insurrection act:

https://archive.is/85Zmd

Re: Signs you're a dangerous terrorist: using Signal, moving zines

#82

Post by DangitBobby »

JuniperMesos wrote: post #75
DangitBobby wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't terrorism typically carried out against civilians and non-combatants? Surely not all violence is terrorism or it ceases to have any meaning.

If you're treating cops and guards at an immigration detention facility as "non-civilians" and "combatants", then this is a good sign that the thing you're doing is engaging in some kind of ideological rebellion against the state. Which is fair to call terrorism, unless you're in favor of it, in which case you'd call it freedom fighting or rebellion but with positive valence.

People who are above the law and shoot at other people with impunity are combatants. What the fuck are we even talking about? Ideological rebellion against the state alone does not terrorism make.

Re: Signs you're a dangerous terrorist: using Signal, moving zines

#83

Post by JuniperMesos »

tsol wrote: post #80
JuniperMesos wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Armed opposition to the government seems like a pretty central definition of terrorism to me. Of course one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, but that's true in all armed conflicts between nations and aspiring nations.

In that case America's founding would be rooted in terrorism. Against the British monarchy, of course.

Yes; if they had lost the British government would've executed most of the American founding fathers.

Re: Signs you're a dangerous terrorist: using Signal, moving zines

#84

Post by prepend »

foobarchu wrote: post #65
prepend wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The shooter claimed he only shot because he saw the officer shooting at the back of fleeing unarmed protestors This is still not the right move. I think I remember people being convicted of shooting back at cops directly shooting at them. But shooting at cops because you think they are shooting at protestors is never going to end up properly.

Then what's the right to it doing in the constitution?

There’s a right to bear arms, not to brandish and shoot them.

Nowhere does the Constitution say you can fire on police if you think they are doing something wrong. Especially when you’re incorrect.

I think the rule for insurrections is that you better be right. Or at least more powerful than the government (see American Revolution).

Re: Signs you're a dangerous terrorist: using Signal, moving zines

#85

Post by prepend »

DangitBobby wrote: post #71
pasta67 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The constitution is fine. The main issue is about definition of oppression that is shifted by Left. And can I point the dissonance here as you seem to not get it - you want to overthrow "oppression"... and AT THE SAME TIME complain that "opressive" government has unfair laws against you? If you do not succeed at overthrowing "oppression", expect to be punished like losers, as state has monopoly on violence and is fre…

There's no dissonance in saying that the oppression is oppressive and the oppressors violate their own laws.

I think the dissonance is in thinking the actions of these protestors is ethical and legal.

Re: Signs you're a dangerous terrorist: using Signal, moving zines

#86

Post by prepend »

DangitBobby wrote: post #73
prepend wrote: post #61

> One fired an AR-15 at the police This is what makes this different. There’s lots of gun clubs all over the place. But if a member shoots at the police (or anyone, really) they are going to get the book thrown at them and everyone associated with them who helped them, etc. Because that changes your club from something normal to something that tried to shoot cops. There’s a group in my town called the NFA club or som…

It would be nice if cops could start following the law, in this case not firing at non-combatants would have sufficed.

Yes, certainly.

These are separate issues. Cops doing illegal things does not mean it’s appropriate for private citizens to do illegal things.

Compounding the injustice is that probably nothing will happen to the cops, but harsh sentences for the protestors. The solution to this is not shooting cops.

Re: Signs you're a dangerous terrorist: using Signal, moving zines

#87

Post by prepend »

DangitBobby wrote: post #72
JuniperMesos wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Armed opposition to the government seems like a pretty central definition of terrorism to me. Of course one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, but that's true in all armed conflicts between nations and aspiring nations.

Isn't terrorism typically carried out against civilians and non-combatants? Surely not all violence is terrorism or it ceases to have any meaning.

Not really. Check out IRA, Hezbollah, Tamil Tigers, etc.

Frequently military or government workers are the target.

Re: Signs you're a dangerous terrorist: using Signal, moving zines

#88

Post by prepend »

DangitBobby wrote: post #82
JuniperMesos wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're treating cops and guards at an immigration detention facility as "non-civilians" and "combatants", then this is a good sign that the thing you're doing is engaging in some kind of ideological rebellion against the state. Which is fair to call terrorism, unless you're in favor of it, in which case you'd call it freedom fighting or rebellion but with positive valence.

People who are above the law and shoot at other people with impunity are combatants. What the fuck are we even talking about? Ideological rebellion against the state alone does not terrorism make.

It does if you lose.

If Al Qaeda had toppled the government and institutes the global caliphate, then they wouldn’t be terrorists.

Re: Signs you're a dangerous terrorist: using Signal, moving zines

#89

Post by prepend »

tsol wrote: post #80
JuniperMesos wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Armed opposition to the government seems like a pretty central definition of terrorism to me. Of course one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, but that's true in all armed conflicts between nations and aspiring nations.

In that case America's founding would be rooted in terrorism. Against the British monarchy, of course.

And if they Nazis had won they would be cool, etc etc.

I don’t think your point is debated by anyone.

Re: Signs you're a dangerous terrorist: using Signal, moving zines

#90

Post by DangitBobby »

prepend wrote: post #86
DangitBobby wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be nice if cops could start following the law, in this case not firing at non-combatants would have sufficed.

Yes, certainly. These are separate issues. Cops doing illegal things does not mean it’s appropriate for private citizens to do illegal things. Compounding the injustice is that probably nothing will happen to the cops, but harsh sentences for the protestors. The solution to this is not shooting cops.

When they don't enact the actual solutions people will start shooting the cops. That's just the way decline of a society works.
Post reply on HN