| ▲ | arjie a day ago |
| It's pretty straightforward that if someone tells you to hide something because they've been arrested and they think it ties them to some criminal act, and then you hide it, you're an accessory to the crime. 30 years for that seems harsh though I anticipate they will be pardoned by the next Democratic Party President. Describing such an act without the obvious context is a pretty good way to point out that it's partisan text and likely misrepresents other things. Listen, we've all been on the Internet a few decades. This kind of understatement of things is not new to any of us. "Oh so just because your country thinks it's not a big deal for someone to go to America to fly a plane means it should get bombed?" No, champ, it's the flying of the plane into the WTC and subsequent sheltering of the guy who planned it that does that. |
|
| ▲ | fn-mote 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| 30 years for an accessory charge? For someone who did not attend the event? Sounds excessive. |
| |
| ▲ | will4274 an hour ago | parent [-] | | "The event" was an ambush of police officers with intent of mass murder. Just about the most criminal event possible under our laws. | | |
| ▲ | protocolture 15 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | >"The event" was an ambush of police officers with intent of mass murder. The event was raiding a fascist detention centre to free people unjustly imprisoned. That some pigs were in the way was their choice. | |
| ▲ | ndsipa_pomu 36 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Is there actual evidence of "intent of mass murder"? It seems speculative at best. | | | |
| ▲ | brewdad 23 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | They still had zero involvement until after the fact. 30 years is excessive. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | fakedang a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| If it costs 30 years for transporting zines, how much is treason and conspiracy to overthrow the government worth? |
| |
|
| ▲ | jrflowers a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > No, champ, it's the flying of the plane into the WTC Sir, a second zine has struck the south tower |
|
| ▲ | lovich a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Was the speech illegal? Not giving my email to this site so I can’t read the rest but it seems odd that any sort of speech gets multi year sentences much less multi decade unless it was direct calls to violence. |
| |
| ▲ | ndriscoll a day ago | parent [-] | | I don't think there's even a claim the speech is illegal. Rather, it's that "transporting zines" when your spouse gets arrested on suspicion of crimes related to a designated terrorist organization is about as legal as "arts and crafts" (i.e. shredding documents) when your spouse is arrested for fraud. It's the obstruction of justice part that's illegal, not the possession. As far as I know she could be fully acquitted and he'd still be on the hook for trying to conceal evidence. | | |
| ▲ | cbarnes99 19 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It's worth noting that the average sentence for murder in the US is 15 years. And it is not actually a "designated terrorist organization". The government is claiming they are a "domestic terrorist organization" which isnt a thing under US law, additionally, there is no organization to speak of. | | | |
| ▲ | lovich 21 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | that's a plausible and convincing argument to me other than that its 30 years. Murderers can get less than that. I don't see how that's anything other than trying to chill the idea these people had based on the connection to speech. I am also not a proponent of absolutist free speech if you check my comment history, but I cannot imagine a realm where the details linked in the small part of the article that's not walled off and the details in this thread don't align to the government trying to prevent bad thought. I am open to more detail if anyone has some to provide |
|
|
