Like whats the root cause here?

To clarify, I mean stuff like spying on foreign adversaries and uncovering saboteurs and spies.

Hey y'all! Here we are reading and discussing Sections E.0-E.1 of AFAQ this week! We're starting the new (short) Section E which is about what anarchists think causes ecological problems!

Happy reading!

• Section E.0 : https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionD.html#sece0
• Section E.1: https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionD.html#sece1

There is also an EPUB version of AFAQ, courtesy of @irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com: here

If you'd like to join, please comment and we'll ping you next post.

Link to last week's read: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/66964149

PS. Feedback request: How did you find last week's reading pace? Fast/Slow/OK/etc.?

What should we think of other people’s religions, if our biggest concern is equality?

This question is answered by a western "reality as objective" anarchist mindset, and by radically inclusive anarcho-antirealism.

Mirror: https://scribe.rip/@viridiangrail/real-anarchists-vs-unreal-anarchists-on-religion-2d9685faf741

Cross-posted from "This programmer wants to use your phone to fight ICE" by @return2ozma@lemmy.world in !technology@lemmy.world

Our images of the Roman Empire are dominated by the monuments and lifestyles of wealthy urban elites. An important new history shifts our attention to the 90% of Rome’s population whose brutally exploited labor made it all possible.

The horrifying revelations of César Chávez’s widespread sexual abuse of young women and girls were in part rooted in the culture of unquestioning loyalty and top-down dictation that Chávez established in the United Farm Workers.

Hey y'all! Here we are reading and discussing Sections D.10-D.11 of AFAQ this week! This is gonna be the last week of Section D:)

Happy reading!

• Section D.10 : https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionD.html#secd10
• Section D.11: https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionD.html#secd11a

There is also an EPUB version of AFAQ, courtesy of @irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com: here

If you'd like to join, please comment and we'll ping you next post.

Link to last week's read: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/66565265

PS. Feedback request: How did you find last week's reading pace? Fast/Slow/OK/etc.?

cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/8166487

cross-posted from: https://news.abolish.capital/post/40164

This article by Elio Henríquez originally appeared in the April 3, 2026 edition of La Jornada, Mexico’s premier left wing daily newspaper.

San Cristóbal de Las Casas, Chiapas. The main victim of the current stage of capitalism is the nation-state, which now has no decision-making capacity, stated Captain Marcos of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN).

He added that “in our opinion, we may be wrong, but the reconstruction of the nation-state is not possible because it no longer has fundamental bases.”

Marcos expressed the above during the second day of activities of the April 2026 Seedbed: The Storm Inside and Outside According to the Zapatista Communities & Peoples, which is being held in San Cristóbal with the participation of 418 people from some thirty countries, including Germany, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, the United States, France, England, Iran and Italy, in addition to members of the EZLN.

Captain Marcos of the EZLN in an archive photo. Photo: Cuartoscuro

Speaking this Friday [in discussion entitled], A Peephole into the Storm in the World: Nation-States Under Attack, he said that “the Nation-State is born for capitalism, that is, the bourgeoisie needs a State, a territory, a currency, laws, a geographical delimitation, a coat of arms, a flag. And so nation-states are born.”

In fact, he added, “in Europe, where feudalism was displaced and revolutions began to form the nation-state, that is where capitalism found its breeding ground and began to develop. It developed so much that the nation-state became an obstacle, and capitalism, the system, needed goods to circulate, to be sold quickly, and to generate the greatest profit as quickly as possible.”

He pointed out that “national currencies, the national legal structure, the governance they call it—that is, the form of government and the entire legal system—are obstacles to them. Then, free trade agreements come along, and borders open up for investments and goods but close down for human beings.”

Marcos reiterated that “the nation-state has no decision-making power. Sovereignty is a bad joke. They can’t say that Mexico is sovereign, even if they say so on the Mañanera, if it can’t even decide whether to send oil to Cuba. It can’t be. In a developed nation-state, that decision belongs to the government: to say who to give or sell to, or who not to. It’s no longer possible.”

“The entire offensive under the names of (Donald) Trump and (Benjamin) Netanyahu is related to this. Israel thinks it is defending the nation-state, but that is not true. As long as the people of israel do not understand that Palestine is the home of the Palestinians, that they will always want to return, and that they carry the key to their land with them wherever they go, until they die, are killed, or disappear, this will not stop.”

In reality, he elaborated, “Netanyahu isn’t defending the State of israel, that’s a lie. He’s conquering territory, but the Palestinians aren’t going to surrender. I don’t know how many years it will take; they’re not going to surrender. There’s something deep within the Palestinian people that I can’t explain, and I don’t know if anyone can: Why, with everything against them, do the Palestinian people continue to resist? Why are the Cuban people preparing for an invasion? If they’re supposedly under a dictatorship, why don’t they take to the streets and say: Yes, invade us and liberate us?”

He added: “Why did the U.S. military enter Venezuela to kidnap Nicolás Maduro and Cilia—it was funny how the media didn’t want to say kidnapping and said they went to arrest them—and if they [the opposition] won the elections, why didn’t anyone take to the streets to welcome them? They had to make a one-way trip. It’s not that they had almost no casualties; they didn’t have any because the U.S. military uses mercenaries for that. These mercenaries don’t exist; they’re paid, and if they’re killed, that’s it, but they’re nameless. So, the U.S. military casualties during the kidnapping in Venezuela don’t appear on the lists, and the major left-wing analysts, including those from Cuba, take it for granted that what Trump says about them having no casualties is true. They did. What happened is that they used mercenaries. Just like Putin had to use them in Ukraine. Even a country’s national army can no longer sustain a war as a nation. They have to rely on other resources.”

Subcomandante Moisés

Marcos asserted that in the US and israel’s war against Iran, the big oil companies are the ones who benefit because the price of oil has risen. “That’s what needs to be discussed: who is profiting from these wars?”

He said that “we also need to delve deeper and specify who benefits from Netanyahu’s war against Palestine. Who benefited from the United States’ attack on Venezuela, and who will benefit if they attempt to invade Cuba, which won’t be the same, you know? The Cuban people were born in resistance. They’ve been doing it for over 60 years. It won’t be as easy as they think.”

Subcomandante Moisés, who spoke about A Window to Zapatismo: A Window to Government Counterinsurgency Programs in Territories of Zapatista Indigenous Peoples, expressed that the migration of Indigenous people and peasants to the United States has caused lenders to keep their lands because they cannot pay the loans they took out to emigrate.

“Because of poverty and migration, some people mortgaged their land in exchange for loans. They left, some died, others returned, but they have no way to pay, and the lender keeps the land,” he said.

He added that the fact that “the five, ten, or twenty people who mortgaged or sold their two and a half hectares has led to the emergence of small landowners. Within the ejido, a small or medium-sized landowner has now emerged with 100, 200, or 300 hectares. Before, it was communal land, plots of 20 hectares, and now two, three, or four people own 300 or 400 hectares. The community has been erased. Now it’s just an empty shell.”

• 

  News Briefs

  President Sheinbaum: Unlikely the Right Wing Will Return to Power in Mexico

  April 4, 2026

  The Mexican President indicated that the financial outlook is positive for the country, which demonstrates the viability of its economic model.

• 

  News Briefs

  EZLN: The Nation-state No Longer Has Decision Making Power

  April 4, 2026

  “Sovereignty is a bad joke. They can’t say that Mexico is sovereign, even if they say so on the Mañanera, if it can’t even decide whether to send oil to Cuba.”

• 

  News Briefs

  Social Programs Will Cushion Impact of Global Chaos in 2026: Mexico’s Finance Secretary

  April 3, 2026April 3, 2026

  By 2026, social program spending will reach nearly one trillion pesos, with the goal of sustaining the well-being of the majority of families.

The post EZLN: The Nation-state No Longer Has Decision Making Power appeared first on Mexico Solidarity Media.

From Mexico Solidarity Media via This RSS Feed.

Hey y'all! Here we are reading and discussing Sections D.6-D.9 of AFAQ this week! (They're short, so it's probably better to pack them together.)

Happy reading!

• Section D.6 : https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionD.html#secd6
• Section D.7: https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionD.html#secd7
• Section D.8: https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionD.html#secd8
• Section D.9: https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionD.html#secd9

There is also an EPUB version of AFAQ, courtesy of @irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com: here

If you'd like to join, please comment and we'll ping you next post.

Link to last week's read: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/66169004

PS. Feedback request: How did you find last week's reading pace? Fast/Slow/OK/etc.?

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/45417155

Say, about eight conspire to harass someone for racist reasons or someone bombs a plane for whatever reason and dozens are injured, not to mention family members of the dead? IIRC restorative justice involves the victims talking it out with the perpetrator, but here that would be a bit of a power imbalance. And one-on-one-ing with each one at a time from so many people would be, I think, tiring to the point of blocking catharsis.

Is it one-on-one for a few of the people who then convince the rest of their "people" (swap this word out with either "perpetrators" or "victims"), if you get what I mean? (in other words, is restorative justice with a few of the group enough for social propogation of the justice within the group, ergo justice with the whole group achieved?) Are we appointing some moderator power to somehow sort through the mess of such a session without making the larger side groupthink "they're unreasonable and this is of no help" into leaving? Should the perpetrators be expected to one-by-one with each one at a time to achieve catharsis with that one, and vice versa?

(Why would they do it? Not sure. Remnants of racism before anarchism finishes dismantling such animosity? Unrealistic brain chemical deficiencies like extreme psychopathy or a psychotic episode that somehow lasts long enough to when victims start planning restorative justice? Or you can think of better motives.

I am aware that usually the true perpetrators lie in the factors that fostered the motivation but my question is what to do with the people under restorative justice. I am aware the restorative justice is not literally "one-on-one"; I'm using this term more broadly to refer to the associated conversation dynamics as compared to "large group vs the outnumbered". I am aware that restorative justice is about common understanding and not justice through revenge, and the former is what I mean by "justice" here. I am aware that restorative justice is only one popular answer to justice under anarchism but I really like it and want to philosophize over how it'd work out, and couldn't think of a better place than here, other than the dead-looking !anarchism101@lemmy.ca.

I am aware that I may be overcomplicating this...)

Edit: Corrected devastating word confusion. "transformative justice" now Ctrl+F, Ctrl-R'd with "restorative justice".

Hey y'all! Here we are reading and discussing Section D.5 of AFAQ this week which about what causes imperialism!

Happy reading!

• Section D.5: https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionD.html#secd5

There is also an EPUB version of AFAQ, courtesy of @irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com: here

If you'd like to join, please comment and we'll ping you next post.

Link to last week's read: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/65766753

PS. Feedback request: How did you find last week's reading pace? Fast/Slow/OK/etc.?

This is just the first draft, so it’s still quite bare-bones. After regaining access to the first email account I ever had, I began adding quotes from those emails to an existing timeline I’d created to better understand why a nomadic, anarchist life appealed to me in my youth—and how that path has led me to where I am today.

For a smoother, more enjoyable reading experience, feel free to instead read the essay that inspired this title, I Was a Teenage Luddite.

Also, I still consider myself an anarchist, just maybe less individualist these days.

cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/8020057

cross-posted from: https://news.abolish.capital/post/36750

For two weeks in a federal courtroom in Fort Worth, Texas, the government attempted something extraordinary: to transform a noise protest outside a detention facility into a domestic terrorism conspiracy.

On July 4th, 2024, a group of people gathered outside the Prairieland Detention Center in solidarity with those held inside. One person fired a weapon. Nine people now face decades in federal prison after being found guilty on a list of federal crimes.

That is the case, stripped down to its bones.

And it should make every single one of us stop and pay attention. Because what was put on trial in that courtroom wasn’t nine individuals. It was the act of showing up at all.

After days of testimony riddled with contradictions—no breach, no coordinated plan, one shooter—the jury, selected entirely by the judge, still returned sweeping guilty verdicts against all nine defendants.

Seven others had already pleaded guilty in late 2025 and are awaiting sentencing. All nine now face decades in federal prison while simultaneously fighting state charges alongside eight additional defendants.

What unfolded in that courtroom wasn’t just a trial.

It was a test case. And now, it is precedent.

The Verdict

Batten, Evetts, Hill, Morris, Rueda, Song, Soto, and Soto were each found guilty of:

• riot
• providing material support to terrorists
• conspiracy to use and carry an explosive
• using and carrying an explosive

Song was additionally convicted on three counts of discharging a firearm during a violent crime. Song was also convicted of attempted murder of an officer.

Rolando Sanchez-Estrada and Rueda were found guilty of conspiracy to conceal documents. Sanchez-Estrada was also convicted of corruptly concealing a document.

Several defendants were acquitted on other serious charges:

• Hill, Evetts, Morris, and Rueda were found not guilty of discharging a firearm and attempted murder
• Song was found not guilty on two of the three attempted murder counts

One Shooter. Nine Convictions.

By the government’s own admission, only one person discharged a firearm that night. That fact never changed. What did change was how far prosecutors were willing to stretch the concept of responsibility to make the numbers work.

Some defendants were not in any planning communications. Some arrived late or left early. At least one never exited their vehicle. Cell phone data placed one defendant nowhere near the scene. Another, Autumn Hill, had allegedly already left before the shot was fired.

None of that mattered.

All nine were convicted, not because the government proved what each person did, but because it argued they should have known what someone else might do.

The legal mechanism was Pinkerton liability, a doctrine that allows the state to hold an entire group responsible for the actions of one person if those actions were “reasonably foreseeable.”

In practice, that meant attending the same protest, being in the same group chat, or sharing the same politics could be enough to make you responsible for someone else’s choices.

That isn’t accountability.

It’s a trap.

And now it’s been tested, and it worked.

Some of the people convicted in this case were barely present at all. People who never approached the facility. People who stayed in their cars. People who were leaving. People whose only connection was knowing the same people or existing in the same political orbit.

The government collapsed all of that into one thing: guilt.

Ownership of literature became evidence. Zines became evidence. Stickers became evidence. A printing press became evidence. None of it illegal. All of it reframed as proof of intent.

Daniel “Des" Sanchez-Estrada, a Green Card holder who now has an ICE hold and is facing deportation, was convicted for transporting zines from one place to another, or, according to the indicting document, “a box that contained numerous Antifa materials.” Des was not even remotely close to the noise demonstration, but rather was arrested two days later after getting a call for familiar support from his incarcerated wife, a Prairieland defendant.

Some of the zines Des transported

This is what it looks like when the state stops trying to prove what you did and starts prosecuting who you are.

When Evidence Fails, Ideology Steps In

The prosecution’s factual case was shaky from the start. Their own witnesses undermined it.

An officer testified he drew his weapon first and aimed it at someone running away. He couldn’t identify any defendants. His statement was written weeks later with legal guidance. Other officers confirmed there was no breach, no coordinated movement, and no meaningful damage to the facility. One officer contradicted his own report on the stand. Another admitted to conducting an illegal search.

Although it was acknowledged in court that the officer drew his weapon first, the defense was still barred from using self defense as an argument.

The “explosives” described in court were fireworks—the kind used in celebrations across the country every Fourth of July. Fired mostly into the air. No structural damage. No injuries.

But language did the work evidence could not.

Fireworks became “explosive devices.” A scattered protest became an “attack.” A demonstration became “terrorism.”

Rather than grapple with the contradictions, prosecutors pivoted. If the facts wouldn’t carry the case, ideology would.

Jurors were shown zines, pamphlets, antifascist artwork, a printing press, and a sticker reading “Make Amerika Not Exist Again.” None of it illegal. Every witness admitted as much, as did the judge.

That wasn’t the point.

The point was to equate shared beliefs with shared intent and demonize the defendants.

The government’s “antifa expert,” Kyle Shideler of the Center for Security Policy—designated a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center—has a documented history of Islamophobic fear-mongering and far-right political alignment. His own methodology was acknowledged to be non-scientific and with no direct evidence of planning. And yet his testimony sat at the center of this case, framing a community's politics as evidence of a conspiracy. At one point during the trial, defense asked Shideler if this case was good for his career, to which he responded “I guess it will depend on how it goes.”

At one point, an FBI agent admitted he had to Google what an “antifa flag” looked like.

Another FBI agent, who was responsible for reviewing the phone calls between Sanchez-Estrada and Rueda, was incapable of translating even the most basic Spanish phrases, and yet his translation was used as the basis to convict on conspiracy to conceal documents. The jurors were not provided a transcript of the call and instead were forced to rely solely on the agent's review of the conversation.

This is the expertise used to prosecute people for terrorism.

The Cooperators: Pressure, Deals, and Manufactured Narratives

If the evidence was weak, the government had another tool: cooperators.

And cooperation in cases like this doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It is manufactured.

Witnesses described being held without adequate medical care, under extreme stress, facing unclear and escalating charges, and even tortured. They were presented with deals and told, in effect: give us the story we need, or face what comes next.

Some testified they did not write their own plea statements. That key language, like “antifa cell,” was written for them. One witness said they were told they had to “snitch, even if I have to make shit up.”

What the cooperators actually said often contradicted the prosecution’s narrative. One described the event simply: a noise demo. Another testified firearms were present defensively, not as part of a plan. One said they radioed others to leave when officers approached, undermining the idea of a coordinated attack.

But by then, the framework was already built.

Let’s be clear about what this is.

It is testimony produced under pressure, shaped to fit a theory the government could not prove on its own.

This tactic is not new. Informants and cooperators have been used for generations to fracture movements, from labor struggles to Black liberation organizing to environmental activism.

You can understand the pressure without excusing the outcome.

The damage is real.

And it worked.

This Is Not New. But It Goes Further.

None of these tactics emerged from nowhere. From the Haymarket affair to the Red Scare, to COINTELPRO, to the Green Scare, the pattern is consistent: when the state feels threatened, it expands conspiracy law to criminalize movements, not just actions.

The J20 inauguration protests attempted—and ultimately failed—to use that same framework, arguing that protesters could be convicted simply for wearing black bloc, turning clothing into evidence of conspiracy. The Red and Green Scares similarly show how the state repackages political organizing as an existential threat whenever it needs to justify repression.

More recent cases suggest that strategy is evolving, and succeeding.

In 2024 in San Diego, a jury found Brian Lightfoot and Jeremy White guilty of conspiracy to riot, as prosecutors argued they had acted not as individuals, but as part of “Antifa” treated as a criminal organization. Defense attorney Curtis Briggs warned at the time: “I think the door is wide open to now hold lawful protesters in violation of conspiracy law.”

Just three months later, journalist Alissa Azar was convicted of felony riot after defending herself while covering a demonstration countering Proud Boys in Oregon. For weeks in court, the focus of the trial drifted away from her actions and toward her political alignment.

The Prairieland case borrows from all of them, but it goes further.

It refines the playbook. It proves the state can secure convictions not despite weak evidence, but alongside it, by filling the gaps with ideology, informants, and fear.

Here, the government didn’t just target organizers. It swept up friends, acquaintances, people who shared rides, people who stood in the same field.

It argued that proximity is guilt.

And it won.

This case also marks the first time that people have been convicted of material support to terrorists who are not alleged to be part of designated foreign terrorist organizations.

None of this began with Donald Trump. But under his administration, it has been accelerated, formalized, and openly embraced.

What was once quieter repression is now explicit policy.

The administration has repeatedly framed this as the first legal case against “antifa,” while directing federal law enforcement to prioritize antifascism as a domestic terrorism threat under National Security Presidential Memorandum 7. At the same time, federal officials publicly labeled the defendants “antifa-aligned anarchist violent extremists” before the trial had even concluded.

These weren’t just political statements. They were prejudicial signals, ones that made the possibility of a fair trial increasingly impossible from the outset.

What was once done through infiltration and surveillance is now stated outright: antifascism is being framed as a domestic terror threat, and the legal system is being used to make that framing real.

That shift signals not just repression, but confidence.

Confidence that the courts will allow it.

The National Lawyers Guild stated that this is all taking place against the backdrop of the ongoing “Antifa Scare,” which paints those who oppose fascism as the problem, instead of fascism itself.

What This Verdict Actually Does

This is the precedent, written plainly:

A protest can be reframed as terrorism.
Political beliefs can be introduced as evidence of intent.
Group chats can become conspiracies.
One person’s actions can justify decades in prison for many.
You do not have to commit violence to be convicted of it.

The judge acknowledged that political speech is protected.

And then allowed a case to proceed that criminalized it anyway.

That contradiction is the point.

What We Do Now

The nine defendants are awaiting sentencing while fighting additional state charges. They remain incarcerated. They are not abstract symbols. They are real people who need real support.

When letter-writing information is released through the defendants’ support committee, use it. Write. Show up. Donate. Share accurate information. Challenge misinformation.

Isolation is one of the state’s most effective tools. Breaking it matters.

But this moment demands more than support for nine people.

It demands attention.

The J20 defendants weren’t acquitted because the state showed restraint. They were acquitted because people organized—through media, court support, fundraising, and sustained public pressure that made the government’s narrative harder to maintain. Just like they did during the Stop Cop City RICO cases where 61 defendants had their charges dropped after years of organizing and noncooperation.

That kind of collective defense matters.

And it is not optional now.

Because what this case establishes is a blueprint: identify a political moment, target a loosely connected group, inflate one act into a mass conspiracy, fill the gaps with informants and ideology, and secure convictions.

The state now knows this works.

It will use it again.

This was not a legal misunderstanding.

It was a political prosecution carried out successfully.

They put dissent on trial.

They got a conviction.

What we build in response, the solidarity, the defense networks, the refusal to be isolated or silent, is what determines what comes next.

Because there will be a next time.

And whether this precedent expands or collapses depends on what happens outside the courtroom.

We don’t disappear. We don’t shrink ourselves into safety.

There is no version of being quiet enough to avoid a system willing to criminalize association, belief, and presence.

What exists instead is each other. And whether we act like it.

Sentencing for the defendants is scheduled for this upcoming June. We will continue to update as necessary. Defendants are planning to appeal this unjust outcome.

Recommended Reading:

We recommend reading through the detailed notes published by the support committee for an in-depth look into the trial, which can be found here-

[First Week of Landmark Prairieland Trial Exposed Contradictions, Weaknesses in Government’s Case, Trial Resumes Tuesday - Support the Prairieland Defendants

Cross-Examination of Government Witnesses Leaves Defendants’ Supporters Feeling Confident as Trial Enters Second Week, Despite Attempts by the Prosecution to

Support the Prairieland Defendantsprairieland

](https://prairielanddefendants.com/press-release/first-week-of-landmark-prairieland-trial-exposed-contradictions-weaknesses-in-governments-case-trial-resumes-tuesday/?ref=wewillfreeus.org)[The Federal government coerced several Prairieland Defendants to take Plea deals through vile treatment at Johnson and Tarrant County Jail*.

Now they are propping them up as trophies to break public support In July 2025, a group of people were arrested after holding a noise demonstration outside the Prairieland Detention Center. Origina…

Dare to Struggledaretostrugglenyc

](https://daretostruggle.org/2026/03/10/the-federal-government-coerced-several-prairieland-defendants-to-take-plea-deals-through-vile-treatment-at-johnson-and-tarrant-county-jail/?ref=wewillfreeus.org)

Ways to Support:

International Day of Solidarity with the Prairieland Defendants is on April 4th, 2026:

Write to the defendants-

[Write to the Defendants - Support the Prairieland Defendants

Many of them have been incarcerated since July—let them know they are not alone! This page has addresses and guidelines to help ensure that your letter gets

Support the Prairieland Defendantsprairieland

](https://prairielanddefendants.com/write-to-the-defendants/?ref=wewillfreeus.org)[ZINES ARE NOT A CRIME!

ZINES ARE NOT A CRIME!

](https://freedes.net/?ref=wewillfreeus.org)

Donate:

[Support DFW Anti ICE Protesters

Please visit our website at https://prairielanddefendants.com/ for more updates, articles, and letter writing information.Español abajo Support DFW Anti ICE…

GiveSendGo

](https://www.givesendgo.com/supportDFWprotestors?ref=wewillfreeus.org)

From We Will Free Us via This RSS Feed.

Part of the underground group's communiqué reads:

“On 20th March 2026, the Earthquake Faction struck the epicenter of the Israeli weapons industry in Europe. In Pardubice, Czech Republic, Elbit Systems' "Centre of Excellence" was newly built in collaboration with LPP, to service the global expansion of Israel's biggest weapons producer.

Whilst the development, production and training center was empty, The Earthquake Faction intervened to destroy its equipment and set the factory ablaze. No one was harmed.

The site is used to develop weaponry used by the Zionist entity to massacre people daily in Palestine, Lebanon, Iran, and across West Asia.

The Earthquake Faction is an internationalist underground network that targets key sites critical to the Zionist entity. We aim to destroy all limbs of empire from within, by any means effective."

The Earthquake Faction's full communiqué and more videos/images are on their website: https://earthquakefaction.net/

The group's action was also posted on Telegram at t.me/earthquake_faction