3 ms·

Joining the Knights of Rojava, or Peshmerga, or the Women's Protection Unit YPG looks just like this. They all involve a layover in Istanbul They all involve

Joining the Knights of Rojava, or Peshmerga, or the Women's Protection Unit YPG looks just like this. They all involve a layover in Istanbul They all involve wiring money, sometimes to you for the free tickets They all involve making multiple internet searches of factions in Syria and none of them involve getting arrested, simply because they aren't ISIS Not buying it. The indictment doesn't give details, and the summary the DOJ has lacks specifics on how it determined the bitcoin was going to ISIS, or that she wasn't just speculating on bitcoin. The point is that these are prerequisites for the governments case. The only difference when joining the other factions is that the US won't scoop you up at JFK or in Istanbul if they think you are joining the other factions, and aren't muslim.

mikeash 9y ago
I don't understand how you can simultaneously say that we don't have details and that joining these other organizations looks just like this. We don't know what the evidence is against this person. While it's true that the evidence could be crap, it could also be solid. This looks like a standard indictment for activities that are and should be illegal. I see no reason to think any "thoughtcrime" was involved.
- ringaroundthetx 9y ago
  I'm not using the word thoughtcrime, someone else had though. > I don't understand how you can simultaneously say that we don't have details and that joining these other organizations looks just like this. What is confusing about that? The government doesn't arrest people for trying to join the other ones. OOooh you think those would count as terrorist organizations too! Nope. Thats the point, it is completely subjective BS. You can join other non-state enemy combatant groups and the US will not care at all. I'm surprised I don't hear more about YPG here on HN more often, you might like what they stand for. > We don't know what the evidence is against this person. While it's true that the evidence could be crap, it could also be solid. We agree on this, I simply spelled it out and point out that I can't reserve judgement on the government's side until the evidence is shown, and this doesn't show enough of it to even sound damning to me, the opposite conclusion than what you came to, perhaps its because I am aware of the following: Syria has been a "choose your faction" videogame for 5 years now, with only ISIS being the hidden character you aren't supposed to access. The allegation, to be convincing before trial, needs to at least show how she was affiliated with ISIS aside from some mere google searches. Otherwise, AS WE BOTH AGREE, the evidence will just have to wait till then.

mikeash 9y ago

I don't understand how you can simultaneously say that we don't have details and that joining these other organizations looks just like this. We don't know what the evidence is against this person. While it's true that the evidence could be crap, it could also be solid. This looks like a standard indictment for activities that are and should be illegal. I see no reason to think any "thoughtcrime" was involved.

ringaroundthetx 9y ago
I'm not using the word thoughtcrime, someone else had though. > I don't understand how you can simultaneously say that we don't have details and that joining these other organizations looks just like this. What is confusing about that? The government doesn't arrest people for trying to join the other ones. OOooh you think those would count as terrorist organizations too! Nope. Thats the point, it is completely subjective BS. You can join other non-state enemy combatant groups and the US will not care at all. I'm surprised I don't hear more about YPG here on HN more often, you might like what they stand for. > We don't know what the evidence is against this person. While it's true that the evidence could be crap, it could also be solid. We agree on this, I simply spelled it out and point out that I can't reserve judgement on the government's side until the evidence is shown, and this doesn't show enough of it to even sound damning to me, the opposite conclusion than what you came to, perhaps its because I am aware of the following: Syria has been a "choose your faction" videogame for 5 years now, with only ISIS being the hidden character you aren't supposed to access. The allegation, to be convincing before trial, needs to at least show how she was affiliated with ISIS aside from some mere google searches. Otherwise, AS WE BOTH AGREE, the evidence will just have to wait till then.