this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2025
578 points (97.5% liked)
Microblog Memes
11007 readers
2095 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
RULES:
- Your post must be a screen capture of a microblog-type post that includes the UI of the site it came from, preferably also including the avatar and username of the original poster. Including relevant comments made to the original post is encouraged.
- Your post, included comments, or your title/comment should include some kind of commentary or remark on the subject of the screen capture. Your title must include at least one word relevant to your post.
- You are encouraged to provide a link back to the source of your screen capture in the body of your post.
- Current politics and news are allowed, but discouraged. There MUST be some kind of human commentary/reaction included (either by the original poster or you). Just news articles or headlines will be deleted.
- Doctored posts/images and AI are allowed, but discouraged. You MUST indicate this in your post (even if you didn't originally know). If an image is found to be fabricated or edited in any way and it is not properly labeled, it will be deleted.
- Absolutely no NSFL content.
- Be nice. Don't take anything personally. Take political debates to the appropriate communities. Take personal disagreements & arguments to private messages.
- No advertising, brand promotion, or guerrilla marketing.
RELATED COMMUNITIES:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You missed the big one. Any affiliated groups. Could even mean that if an "Anifa" is a member of the Democratic party, the whole party is a terrorist organization.
On top of that there is evidence that right wing extremists have made claims that they are Antifa online calling for illegal actions. The quotes in the resolution could all be disingenuous. Furthermore, this opens the door for the right to pose as "antifa" in order to make protesting an act of terrorism.
I'm actually less concerned with that because it's fairly typical for this sort of clause to be included in terrorism law and while I don't know about the US specifically, most countries have some reasonable safeguards in place, especially via the judiciary, to make sure that only groups that are functionally one and the same are included. It's to prevent designated organisations simply splintering and reforming under a new name. So I wasn't really surprised to see that.
As I say, I'm less familiar with the domestic US laws and I don't need to tell you that implementation is just as important as how reasonable the idea is.
What concerns me more than that is the other stuff this document is doing. It is overtly classifying all protestors as terrorists or potential terrorists purely on a basis that antifa have associated themselves with a protest in some vague, undefined way. That's worse than the part you raise because it's open ended: you don't have to prove that the defendant is a member of any particular group, their mere presence at an "antifa-associated" protest (whatever that means) is enough. To me, that's a bigger concern to the American citizen worried about their rights.
Again though, not an American and not involved in American law (though most principles are broadly similar to in my country), I've only looked at it as part of wider studies into international law. So just a worthless two cents in case anyone is interested in an international legal take.