@emptywheel hate to share this from Snowden but I'm curious how would these fall under "anti-terrorism" if they also "domestic"https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/830881477575528448 …
-
-
Replying to @digitalsista
Investigatively. To be charged they'd have to commit a terrorism related crime. But there's a set of enviro crimes that are.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
enviro crimes can be considered terrorism? that includes stopping a pipe line that will poison americans?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @digitalsista
There's this for animal rights: http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/tag/animal-enterprise-terrorism-act/ … And ELF got charged as terrorists for explosions/fires.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel @digitalsista
That's the thing, nothing water defenders are doing would by itself merit a terrorism enhancement. Or wouldn't in normal times
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
ok which is why I'm asking. explosions, fires that isn't nonviolent that's actually violence in determination of distinction.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Yes. The AETA stuff doesn't necessary require violence, but that's not the water defenders either.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.