On Thursday afternoon, prosecutors in Texas announced that terrorism charges had been filed against two people for alleged involvement in a shooting during a July 4 protest against the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Prairieland Detention Center in Alvarado, Texas, in which a local police officer was injured.
This is the first time federal terrorism charges have been deployed in association with the “antifa” label, just a month after President Donald Trump announced that he was designating antifa a “major terrorist organization” — a designation that does not exist under law for domestic groups.
The Prairieland case is setting a chilling example for how the government will use so-called counterterrorism efforts to crush anti-fascist dissent. Neither of the people named in the indictment are accused of shooting the gun. Instead, Zachary Evetts and Autumn Hill are accused of “providing material support to terrorists” and having “aided and abetted” the alleged attempted murder of government officers.
The federal indictment accuses Hill, who prosecutors dead-named, and Evetts as being part of an “antifa cell.”
The terrorism charges are an escalation of government efforts to criminalize protest movements by attempting to attribute collective guilt.
The right: we just scrapped a major solar farm that would be cheaper than coal, then lied to everyone and said coal would be cheaper and the environmental impacts don’t exist. Also, we have unidentified ice agents wearing masks raiding peoples houses, sometimes kidnapping American citizens, and the national guard deployed unconstitutionally. We have 80% support for this.
The left: if you don’t support hamas you support genocide
Truly both sides are the same level of illogical here, you nailed it.
So, you’re creating a different point of reference to show dissimilarities as an argument against something that had nothing to do with your references- and nothing at all to what I actually said…. LOL.
My point remains:
Both the far left and the far right accuse anyone that disagrees with them of saying stupid shit that was never said, or being stupid shit they never were.
But by all means, keep emphasizing yet another point people have against the far left: that you all whatabout and play some stupid version of three-card monte with the plot to the point that you force people to defend points they never even made.
I don’t fall for that shit.
To quote you exactly:
If you are talking about the specific instance of “labeling all protestors as antifa” vs “supporting Israel is supporting genocide”… some experts claim Israel is supporting genocide, so the logic is “if someone is supporting Israel they are supporting genocide.” and the protestors all being antifa “members” is just… false. These are not even close to the same level of illogical.
If you mean more generally, my points show they are not comparatively identical in their lack of logic.
The alt right claims to care about the rule of law yet they are breaking the law and disregarding due process, and deporting american citizens as a result. They deployed the national guard to a state against the state’s wishes, illegally, to stand there and do next to nothing. There is no logic here.
The alt right claims they want to help the economy yet their president just threw away a solar project that was already underway to get coal that will be more expensive. There is no logic.
The left claims people who support Israel are supporting genocide. You can disagree with this but there are experts who claim the same. The logic is “some experts claim Israel is committing genocide, therefore if someone supports Israel they are supporting genocide.” Again, you can disagree with the logic, but there is at least a single thought being had, which can not be said for the far right examples.
On that note:
I’d wager not a single far-leftist understands the terms of the MOU (or even knows what it is), has ever even heard of the FMF or FMS- or could point to Palestine on a map before this shitshow ever started, yet so many of them were/are willing to hold our democracy hostage over it.
And as far as my point goes, voting against a fascist is not in any way shape or form- showing support for genocide. But not voting against fascism is absolutely a show of support for fascism.
Hope this cleared things up for you.
You’re comparing the fringe even on lemmy to the average maga voter. The top posts on lemmy are saying that not voting is voting for fascism, so vote for kamala even if it’s just the lesser of two evils. Block lemmy.ml and lemmy.grad if this is what you’re seeing, those are loud but minority voices.
Even assuming your argument were valid, it’s still not true. Some experts have said Israel is committing genocide. Kamala supports Israel. Someone voted for kamala, therefore they are supporting genocide. This logic is faulty, but there is SOME logic there.
Compare this to, we want to help the economy, coal is good and solar is bad…? We just tore down all the solar and hurt the economy…???
If I’m mistaken please show me the logic in the 2nd case?
As to not knowing anything about Palestine or Israel, there is research showing incomplete information is often worse than no information. Someone knowing a few events and being able to point to it on a map could mean LESS than nothing. We need someone who fully understands the history of that area, so for the average person that means either spending 40+ hours researching it, or looking at what the experts who have already done the research and know MUCH more about that entire region were saying, which was “Israel is committing genocide.” Taking the majority opinion of experts and forming an opinion based off that is not illogical at all.