I think it’s a good statement, short and to the point. The replies are absolute poison though, hasbara bots really honing in on them. Feds will try and make something stick but it doesn’t sound like he was even a member.
I think it’s a good statement, short and to the point. The replies are absolute poison though, hasbara bots really honing in on them. Feds will try and make something stick but it doesn’t sound like he was even a member.
Honestly with the responses I almost wonder if “He was not a member but we support his actions” would’ve been a better statement
Like, obviously I understand why they didn’t do that, but everyone’s acting like they did anyway, so why bother downplaying? At some point just say “Killing Zionists is good, end of sentence”
Edit: Sorry to be very clear I’m not saying they should have done this. This is just a comment about how even when they say the polite and proper thing people call them terrorists anyway
eh, no need to self-torch an org, especially over reply guys
They could have omitted the do not support part entirely from the statement
Meh, whatever. For based akzione there is unity of fields (which was nearly shattered over minor actions), and americans are largely passive, so it’s not like even direct call to
from psl would increase anything material, they are not bla with infrastructure to do that sort of stuff (and bla was not that effective due to chosen methods being extremely obvious, but same is true here so besides the point)
Is Bla Red Army Faction?
black liberation army , of assata shakur fame wiki link
They didn’t say why they didn’t support it. If it was “we do not condemn ANY violence EVER” I’d agree with you. But the PSL does not support adventurism and they didn’t explicitly condemn it either.
PSL has nothing to gain by associating with this act, so why risk it at the moment?
Ehh, their lawyers probably said to put it in for good luck.
This is probably the right move. “Do not support” falls short of “condemn,” and now is absolutely not the time for them getting caught in the weeds explaining the nuances of how adventurism contradicts democratic centralism and posing hypotheticals like “this would be good if we decided to start doing assassinations in a committee.”
PSL leadership is probably afraid they’re going to be terminated the way Ferguson organizers were
Yeah like I said, I know why and I do think it’s the right decision but fuck seeing the responses makes me go “Why bother”
that would be a massive security liability, the state is already black bagging people just for op-eds.
And let’s be honest, with enough traction, they qill be branded a terrorist org by the us administration either way
Absolutely not. The risk of that outweighs the benefit.
Which, tbh, is none. Anyone saying they’d join this organization if they defended this guy or something is lying and if not is probably very immature anyways.
saying something like that would prevent many people from openly supporting the PSL out of fear of retribution, both from the past and in the future