5 ms·

> A lot of what happened was/is domestic terrorism Check your facts. This is so wildly off base I'm surprised this comment is still here. This is the pumped u

> A lot of what happened was/is domestic terrorism Check your facts. This is so wildly off base I'm surprised this comment is still here. This is the pumped up FOX/alt-right narrative. Domestic terrorism is the alt-right creating militias to abduct governors (yesterday) or kill state senators (see: Oregon last summer). Smashing a Starbucks window or starting a fire in a garbage can (or a half-assed molotove cocktail) is faaaaar from opening fire nightly on thousands of protestors, gassing them with banned CS gas, and trying to disappear them in unmarked cars, done by unmarked goons with no badges.

philwelch 6y ago
The FBI defines domestic terrorism as follows: > Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature. Now, a peaceful protest that spontaneously turns into a riot probably shouldn’t qualify, but when the same people show up night after night over 100 nights in a row to engage in premeditated violent and criminal behavior based on political and ideological motivations—it meets the standard, as does the plot against Gov. Whitmer and so on. It is an extremely low-intensity form of terrorism, but it is the illegal use of violence for political purposes. Check your facts yourself before making excuses for this behavior.
- ineedasername 6y ago
  Most of the people showing up aren't there to cause violence or criminal behavior. If you want to call the violent arsonists "domestic terrorists" that's one thing, but the protests as a whole do not have violence as their purpose, nor most of their members, so labelling the protests as a whole "domestic terrorism" is an over reach of the term. A few dozen criminals with lighter fluid and matches don't turn the other few thousand people into terrorists.
  - philwelch 6y ago
    I generally agree with that. When the same protest in the same place every single night turns to violence 100 nights in a row though, and when the violent people deliberately use peaceful protests as a smokescreen for their behavior, it does start to get suspicious why a peaceful protester would show up for that kind of thing night after night.
    - ineedasername 6y ago
      If they had another way to push back against the societal diminishment and dehumanization from subtle, and sometimes not so subtle sources. So they go out and try to keep awareness of the issue high. If others only want to destroy, and others who would seek to intimidate them and deny a problem exists-- if they show up as well, the protesters are both blameless and helpless to do otherwise unless they give up their cause. If you were the target if oppression, would you give up your cause when people with no sympathy showed up and caused trouble? Think of it in simpler terms. You're at work and someone shouts you down every time you try to say something. Are you to blame that their shouting disturbs the office? Should you stop trying to speak? Except at work, if management refused to act to fix the situation, you could at least try to find another job. Finding another society is rather more difficult, and the best way is usually not by finding another place, but by changing the one you have into the one you want.
    - xrd 6y ago
      You are absolutely wrong that at the "same protest in the same place every single night turns to violence 100 nights in a row." The reason people like me showed up multiple times to these protests is because these issues matter and we Portlanders don't want the narrative to be that our end goal was to be violent. I've got kids that are biracial who will be impacted by police brutality, I've got relatives that have been impacted, and I have friends who have dealt with the issues we are protesting. What else should I do beyond peaceful protesting en masse? Did taking a knee for four years like Colin Kaepernik did result in substantial changes to the system? You can suspect all you want. You could consider that perhaps those causing violence are attempting to brand these protests as something else. That's not my intention nor the intention of the people I know who are there, nor the other people of Portland I know who support these protests. And, that should not be my problem to fix. You could consider that to be your problem of your perception or a problem of your understanding, and do something about that, like talk to the people protesting, instead of reading the "news" which, I dunno, could be slightly biased. Have you engaged with people protesting and asked them: why are you there night after night? You know my answer now. Otherwise, you are getting your answers from people who aren't there, or who might have an agenda different than mine.
rglover 6y ago
Just last night: https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1314216315113009154 https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1314216315113009154 https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1314031953146863617 https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1314031953146863617 These are not right-wing boogeymen: this is reality. I constantly hear "check your facts" in the face of clear objectivity. You're using classic "whataboutism" to ignore reality. In essence, you're proving the exact argument I'm making above. Speaking to the point you're making, all I can say is: play stupid games, win stupid prizes. People want to LARP as revolutionaries and now they're learning what that means. That doesn't make it right, it's just reality.
- jeffrom 6y ago
  Careful of the source folks: Andy ngo is a grifter who is close with the proud boys, an organization whose members are currently facing charges or charged across the US with violent crimes ranging from battery to murder. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vice.com/amp/en_us/article/d3apyv/super-awkward-for-right-wing-blogger-andy-ngo-to-make-a-cameo-in-video-of-plot-against-antifa https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vice.com/amp/en_us/article/...
  - rglover 6y ago
    Andy Ngo didn't film it, another person did. He just shared it.
    - jeffrom 6y ago
      Just pointing out your source has ties to a violent rightwing hate group. Not sure how what you wrote is a response to that.
      - rglover 6y ago
        He’s not the source. You making that association for others was a character attack trying to undermine the credibility of the information I posted. A common psychological manipulation tactic to distract people from valid information. I don’t know much about these guys but based on their stated tenets they don’t sound like a hate group: https://proudboysusa.com/tenets/ https://proudboysusa.com/tenets/.
lawnchair_larry 6y ago
No, it’s literally the textbook definition of domestic terrorism. This is the reality on the ground. It is not a fox news narrative. The bullshit narrative going around is that they are abusing peaceful protesters. The fact that you attempt to minimize it by pretending it’s a garbage can on fire and that you pretend that police are opening fire on peaceful protesters is so far from reality I don’t know how anyone can still even pretend that is the case.
- phobosanomaly 6y ago
  There is no way that anyone will make any sort of progress by debating this way. You will not convince anybody of anything. If you have numbers that objectively compare the number of people committing property crimes with the number of peaceful protesters and clearly show that these were overwhelmingly violent riots not peaceful protests, please share them, along with the source. For example, here is a collection of photos from getty images showing large numbers of people protesting in Los Angeles. They appear to be overwhelmingly peaceful, with small pockets of violence that are not representative of the event as a whole. https://www.gettyimages.com/photos/los-angeles-protest?mediatype=photography&phrase=los%20angeles%20protest&sort=mostpopular https://www.gettyimages.com/photos/los-angeles-protest?media... If you could show me a similar wide-angle shot with thousands of protestors, the majority of whom are engaged in violence, obtained from a reputable source, I would 100% be willing to reconsider my position on the issue. That way we can all get on the same page and work on coming to a reasonable conclusion about how we should feel about this issue moving forward.
  - jeffrom 6y ago
    What’s kind of funny is they are on good grounds w that definition of domestic terrorism. Plenty of environmental activists sitting in prison on terrorism charges for burning portapotties at construction sites etc
    - phobosanomaly 6y ago
      I immediately thought to myself 'man, this guy is full of shit' and then I looked it up and was, uh, not vindicated on that one. You're 100% right. That's really depressing. "Domestic terrorism is the unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States or Puerto Rico without foreign direction committed against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives." https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005#:~:text=Domestic%20terrorism%20is%20the%20unlawful,civilian%20population%2C%20or%20any%20segment https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-20...
manigandham 6y ago
Anyone committing violence for ideological and political motives qualifies as domestic terrorism. Rioters lighting buildings on fire (often with people inside), destroying private property, and attacking uninvolved civilians is a clear example. It's pretty clear that violent rioters are the targets here, not the more numerous peaceful protestors. It's also a fact that violence is increasing, and not acknowledging that and saying it's always peaceful isn't useful to anyone. As for your examples, a molotov cocktail is far more dangerous than rubber bullets and tear gas, and there seem to be no reports to corroborate your claims of disappearing people.
refurb 6y ago
Domestic terrorism is the alt-right creating militias to abduct governors (yesterday) Do alt-right groups typically post videos with anarchist symbols in the background? Where did you get alt-right from? In a YouTube video from May, Caserta claimed in a 30-minute diatribe that "the enemy is government." Caserta recorded the video in front of an anarchist's flag and a map of Michigan. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/whitmer-conspiracy-allegations-tied-boogaloo-movement-n1242670 https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/whitmer-conspiracy-al...
- McGlockenshire 6y ago
  Mr. Caserta also followed Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro, two common gateways to the "alt-right." https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/10/men-who-allegedly-plotted-to-kidnap-michigan-governor-celebrated-violent-far-right-extremism/ https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/10/men-who-alleged... This doesn't mean that he was part of the alt-right or identified as being part of the alt-right, but the "he was an anarchist" thing is a right wing echo chamber talking point being used all over the internet now to attempt to distance these domestic terrorists from the right. It is extremely disconcerting to see these talking points repeated here uncritically on HN.
  - refurb 6y ago
    You'll have to excuse me, but using Mother Jones as a source isn't exactly convincing. They are about as unbiased as Foxnews. My point was less around "this is a left wing group!" and more around the lazy journalism that likes to bucket things as simplistically as possible. "Oh, they listen to Jordan Peterson? Must be alt-right! My job is done." I wouldn't say alt-right groups (what does "alt-right" even mean?) are known for adhering to overthrowing the gov't.
  - nailer 6y ago
    > Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro, two common gateways to the "alt-right." That's like saying left wing news sources are gateways to Antifa and domestic terrorism. Something either supports a white ethno state (as the creator of the term 'alt right' does) or they do not.

philwelch 6y ago

The FBI defines domestic terrorism as follows: > Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature. Now, a peaceful protest that spontaneously turns into a riot probably shouldn’t qualify, but when the same people show up night after night over 100 nights in a row to engage in premeditated violent and criminal behavior based on political and ideological motivations—it meets the standard, as does the plot against Gov. Whitmer and so on. It is an extremely low-intensity form of terrorism, but it is the illegal use of violence for political purposes. Check your facts yourself before making excuses for this behavior.

ineedasername 6y ago
Most of the people showing up aren't there to cause violence or criminal behavior. If you want to call the violent arsonists "domestic terrorists" that's one thing, but the protests as a whole do not have violence as their purpose, nor most of their members, so labelling the protests as a whole "domestic terrorism" is an over reach of the term. A few dozen criminals with lighter fluid and matches don't turn the other few thousand people into terrorists.
- philwelch 6y ago
  I generally agree with that. When the same protest in the same place every single night turns to violence 100 nights in a row though, and when the violent people deliberately use peaceful protests as a smokescreen for their behavior, it does start to get suspicious why a peaceful protester would show up for that kind of thing night after night.
  - ineedasername 6y ago
    If they had another way to push back against the societal diminishment and dehumanization from subtle, and sometimes not so subtle sources. So they go out and try to keep awareness of the issue high. If others only want to destroy, and others who would seek to intimidate them and deny a problem exists-- if they show up as well, the protesters are both blameless and helpless to do otherwise unless they give up their cause. If you were the target if oppression, would you give up your cause when people with no sympathy showed up and caused trouble? Think of it in simpler terms. You're at work and someone shouts you down every time you try to say something. Are you to blame that their shouting disturbs the office? Should you stop trying to speak? Except at work, if management refused to act to fix the situation, you could at least try to find another job. Finding another society is rather more difficult, and the best way is usually not by finding another place, but by changing the one you have into the one you want.
  - xrd 6y ago
    You are absolutely wrong that at the "same protest in the same place every single night turns to violence 100 nights in a row." The reason people like me showed up multiple times to these protests is because these issues matter and we Portlanders don't want the narrative to be that our end goal was to be violent. I've got kids that are biracial who will be impacted by police brutality, I've got relatives that have been impacted, and I have friends who have dealt with the issues we are protesting. What else should I do beyond peaceful protesting en masse? Did taking a knee for four years like Colin Kaepernik did result in substantial changes to the system? You can suspect all you want. You could consider that perhaps those causing violence are attempting to brand these protests as something else. That's not my intention nor the intention of the people I know who are there, nor the other people of Portland I know who support these protests. And, that should not be my problem to fix. You could consider that to be your problem of your perception or a problem of your understanding, and do something about that, like talk to the people protesting, instead of reading the "news" which, I dunno, could be slightly biased. Have you engaged with people protesting and asked them: why are you there night after night? You know my answer now. Otherwise, you are getting your answers from people who aren't there, or who might have an agenda different than mine.

rglover 6y ago

Just last night: https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1314216315113009154 https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1314216315113009154 https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1314031953146863617 https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1314031953146863617 These are not right-wing boogeymen: this is reality. I constantly hear "check your facts" in the face of clear objectivity. You're using classic "whataboutism" to ignore reality. In essence, you're proving the exact argument I'm making above. Speaking to the point you're making, all I can say is: play stupid games, win stupid prizes. People want to LARP as revolutionaries and now they're learning what that means. That doesn't make it right, it's just reality.

jeffrom 6y ago
Careful of the source folks: Andy ngo is a grifter who is close with the proud boys, an organization whose members are currently facing charges or charged across the US with violent crimes ranging from battery to murder. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vice.com/amp/en_us/article/d3apyv/super-awkward-for-right-wing-blogger-andy-ngo-to-make-a-cameo-in-video-of-plot-against-antifa https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vice.com/amp/en_us/article/...
- rglover 6y ago
  Andy Ngo didn't film it, another person did. He just shared it.
  - jeffrom 6y ago
    Just pointing out your source has ties to a violent rightwing hate group. Not sure how what you wrote is a response to that.
    - rglover 6y ago
      He’s not the source. You making that association for others was a character attack trying to undermine the credibility of the information I posted. A common psychological manipulation tactic to distract people from valid information. I don’t know much about these guys but based on their stated tenets they don’t sound like a hate group: https://proudboysusa.com/tenets/ https://proudboysusa.com/tenets/.

lawnchair_larry 6y ago

No, it’s literally the textbook definition of domestic terrorism. This is the reality on the ground. It is not a fox news narrative. The bullshit narrative going around is that they are abusing peaceful protesters. The fact that you attempt to minimize it by pretending it’s a garbage can on fire and that you pretend that police are opening fire on peaceful protesters is so far from reality I don’t know how anyone can still even pretend that is the case.

phobosanomaly 6y ago
There is no way that anyone will make any sort of progress by debating this way. You will not convince anybody of anything. If you have numbers that objectively compare the number of people committing property crimes with the number of peaceful protesters and clearly show that these were overwhelmingly violent riots not peaceful protests, please share them, along with the source. For example, here is a collection of photos from getty images showing large numbers of people protesting in Los Angeles. They appear to be overwhelmingly peaceful, with small pockets of violence that are not representative of the event as a whole. https://www.gettyimages.com/photos/los-angeles-protest?mediatype=photography&phrase=los%20angeles%20protest&sort=mostpopular https://www.gettyimages.com/photos/los-angeles-protest?media... If you could show me a similar wide-angle shot with thousands of protestors, the majority of whom are engaged in violence, obtained from a reputable source, I would 100% be willing to reconsider my position on the issue. That way we can all get on the same page and work on coming to a reasonable conclusion about how we should feel about this issue moving forward.
- jeffrom 6y ago
  What’s kind of funny is they are on good grounds w that definition of domestic terrorism. Plenty of environmental activists sitting in prison on terrorism charges for burning portapotties at construction sites etc
  - phobosanomaly 6y ago
    I immediately thought to myself 'man, this guy is full of shit' and then I looked it up and was, uh, not vindicated on that one. You're 100% right. That's really depressing. "Domestic terrorism is the unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States or Puerto Rico without foreign direction committed against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives." https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005#:~:text=Domestic%20terrorism%20is%20the%20unlawful,civilian%20population%2C%20or%20any%20segment https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-20...

manigandham 6y ago

Anyone committing violence for ideological and political motives qualifies as domestic terrorism. Rioters lighting buildings on fire (often with people inside), destroying private property, and attacking uninvolved civilians is a clear example. It's pretty clear that violent rioters are the targets here, not the more numerous peaceful protestors. It's also a fact that violence is increasing, and not acknowledging that and saying it's always peaceful isn't useful to anyone. As for your examples, a molotov cocktail is far more dangerous than rubber bullets and tear gas, and there seem to be no reports to corroborate your claims of disappearing people.

refurb 6y ago

Domestic terrorism is the alt-right creating militias to abduct governors (yesterday) Do alt-right groups typically post videos with anarchist symbols in the background? Where did you get alt-right from? In a YouTube video from May, Caserta claimed in a 30-minute diatribe that "the enemy is government." Caserta recorded the video in front of an anarchist's flag and a map of Michigan. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/whitmer-conspiracy-allegations-tied-boogaloo-movement-n1242670 https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/whitmer-conspiracy-al...

McGlockenshire 6y ago
Mr. Caserta also followed Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro, two common gateways to the "alt-right." https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/10/men-who-allegedly-plotted-to-kidnap-michigan-governor-celebrated-violent-far-right-extremism/ https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/10/men-who-alleged... This doesn't mean that he was part of the alt-right or identified as being part of the alt-right, but the "he was an anarchist" thing is a right wing echo chamber talking point being used all over the internet now to attempt to distance these domestic terrorists from the right. It is extremely disconcerting to see these talking points repeated here uncritically on HN.
- refurb 6y ago
  You'll have to excuse me, but using Mother Jones as a source isn't exactly convincing. They are about as unbiased as Foxnews. My point was less around "this is a left wing group!" and more around the lazy journalism that likes to bucket things as simplistically as possible. "Oh, they listen to Jordan Peterson? Must be alt-right! My job is done." I wouldn't say alt-right groups (what does "alt-right" even mean?) are known for adhering to overthrowing the gov't.
- nailer 6y ago
  > Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro, two common gateways to the "alt-right." That's like saying left wing news sources are gateways to Antifa and domestic terrorism. Something either supports a white ethno state (as the creator of the term 'alt right' does) or they do not.