223

Link

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ClimateStalin@hexbear.net 51 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

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

[-] PorkrollPosadist@hexbear.net 82 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

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."

[-] ClimateStalin@hexbear.net 36 points 3 weeks ago

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”

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
this post was submitted on 22 May 2025
223 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13891 readers
864 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS