Questions were asked about what "going over the line" meant. Assclowns like Crimethinc are exactly what you'd want to point at and say "that's what I'm talking about." Disagreeing with the government (or even just Republicans) is one thing, but going around encouraging people to vandalize websites/etc is something else.
Jesus. No wonder he looked like he was expecting to be arrested.
Idiots like this may as well go on the Republican payroll. It's all fine to be a mindlessly enthusiastic twit, but when you have the skills and ability to do serious damage to things, you lose that option and have to THINK seriously about the consequences of your actions.
What did he think would be likely to happen in the wake of acts of political vandalism, such as he advocates? Reductions in police powers in the governtment? Reduced government action against hackers? A more permissive government atti
Are vandalism and terrorism now interchangeable terms?
This country's language has been co-opted by the hard right to such an extent that even progressives like you often have had your consciousness arrested.
Other than that, I am with you about the importance of sensible tactics.
No more than "murder" is interchangable with "terrorism".
Ultimately, murder, vandalism, and other assorted crimes are not necessarily terrorism. What makes an act "terrorism", is the reason behind the act. If I kill you for your watch, it's not not terrorism. If I kill you as a warning to others not to say what you're saying, or do what you are doing, it's terrorism.
Likewise, if I destroy your property, harrass you, and restrict your ability to freely move about, all in an effort to make you afraid to participate in something you have a right to participate in, that's terrorism.
Vandalism is not terrorism. Nor is murder. They can however, be used for terrorism. In this case, Crimethinc is advocating the use of vandalism and (even worse) restricting travel, as a means of terrorising Republican convention-goers.
Yep __LINT__ - that's exactly what I meant. Sorry if it was ambiguous enough to be misunderstood by the other poster.
Crimethinc is advocating destruction of property, which I took to be vandalism, even if it is 'merely' digital property, in order to prevent the political participation of that group. That's terrorism folks. If I threatened to spray Stallman (who is a hydrophobe) with water whenever he says 'GNU/Linux', that'd be terrorism, even if on a small scale. It isn't the crime, but the political
Crimethinc (Score:5, Insightful)
Jesus. No wonder he looked like he was expecting to be arrested.
Re:Crimethinc (Score:1, Insightful)
Idiots like this may as well go on the Republican payroll. It's all fine to be a mindlessly enthusiastic twit, but when you have the skills and ability to do serious damage to things, you lose that option and have to THINK seriously about the consequences of your actions.
What did he think would be likely to happen in the wake of acts of political vandalism, such as he advocates? Reductions in police powers in the governtment? Reduced government action against hackers? A more permissive government atti
Re:Crimethinc (Score:1)
This country's language has been co-opted by the hard right to such an extent that even progressives like you often have had your consciousness arrested.
Other than that, I am with you about the importance of sensible tactics.
Re:Crimethinc (Score:1)
Ultimately, murder, vandalism, and other assorted crimes are not necessarily terrorism. What makes an act "terrorism", is the reason behind the act. If I kill you for your watch, it's not not terrorism. If I kill you as a warning to others not to say what you're saying, or do what you are doing, it's terrorism.
Likewise, if I destroy your property, harrass you, and restrict your ability to freely move about, all in an effort to make you afraid to participate in something you have a right to participate in, that's terrorism.
Vandalism is not terrorism. Nor is murder. They can however, be used for terrorism. In this case, Crimethinc is advocating the use of vandalism and (even worse) restricting travel, as a means of terrorising Republican convention-goers.
Re:Crimethinc (Score:0)
Yep __LINT__ - that's exactly what I meant. Sorry if it was ambiguous enough to be misunderstood by the other poster.
Crimethinc is advocating destruction of property, which I took to be vandalism, even if it is 'merely' digital property, in order to prevent the political participation of that group. That's terrorism folks. If I threatened to spray Stallman (who is a hydrophobe) with water whenever he says 'GNU/Linux', that'd be terrorism, even if on a small scale. It isn't the crime, but the political