Why Grand Jury Subpoenas are issued:

Posted on September 5, 2012 by admin

Billed as GRAND JURY RESISTANCE & KNOW YOUR RIGHTS, the public has been invited to attend a panel discussion of recent events surrounding the Seattle May Day street violence and the justice system’s reaction to the same. Those targeted by the Grand Jury subpoenas protest their ‘rights’ are being violated (presumably their 1st Amendment rights) in what amounts to a political witch hunt for ‘anarchists’ and their associates. Yet the rhetoric exposed on Facebook pages belies this claim as activists openly threaten investigatory reporters & photojournalist seeking to cover this news as part of the public invited to attend.

The following are pertinent excerpts from that exchange from Mike Coday’s Facebook page created for the purpose of organizing and promoting it. The content of much of that rhetoric serves to reinforce the antipathy much of the public holds for those being investigated.

A panel discussion about the recent raids and subpoenas targeting activists in the Pacific NW

Event is free, open to the public and disability affirmative!

Join your community allies for a discussion about the federal grand jury process and how it is abused to repress political
movements and activists. The past few years government witch hunts went after activists in Minneapolis, Chicago and Oakland. Now in the past month, NW activists have been targeted by the FBI;having their homes raided, computers seized, as well as being
served grand jury subpoenas to testify against their fellow community members. Find out how you can resist political
repression and support activists.

Lauren Regan is the founder, executive director, and staff attorney of the Civil Liberties Defense Center (CLDC). She has worked with targeted communities and hundreds of activists confronted with federal grand jury threats over the last 15 years. The CLDC
educates and defends activist engages in radical or progressive social change in order to empower effective activist and organizers working to confront the current repressive political climate. Knowledge is power, know your rights in order to powerfully advocate for the change you want to see in the world.

We have camera gear reserved from TCTV through Media Island and plan to capture the event on video. It does seem like an important topic and I would like to commit that we will be able to produce an informative video (or series of short videos) on grand jury resistance, but we capture a lot of footage and are only occasionally able to release a finished product. Usually hours and hours of video-editing for a couple of minutes of video. It’s time-consuming work. MaybeMarylea Coday and I have some future video project saved to disk, a record of Oly political action, that will allow us to weave minutes from many events into a big project. May have time for that when I retire from work force. All that said, we would like to get out a rough cut of this event to get the word out. Also willing to share the footage if there are video editors out there with time on their hands.
 ·  ·  · Sunday at 9:26am

  • Amanda Coday likes this.

    • Sammy Harvell make sure that the people you film are down with being on camera please.
      Sunday at 9:50am ·  · 4

    • Benjamin SittingBull That sounds like a bad idea I wouldn’t disscuss anything of legality with someone recording
      Sunday at 10:54am via mobile ·  · 1

    • Christy X Mpaa Rating ‎@Mike -As a documentary filmmaker, I would personally choose to not shoot this presentation – out of respect for everyone involved, I would make a different choice. I agree with the comments above – Assuming you have produced other sensitive work (involving legal issues), posting a public note/letter of the taping sounds appropriate. I’m not sure what you mean about “only being occasionally able to to release a finished product”. Why would you shoot anything without the intention to release it somewhere/somehow? Just asking.
      Yesterday at 12:04am ·  · 2
    •  Amicus Curia So, is this presentation for 9-7-12? It’s a small venue, but more people could make plans if they didn’t have to guess which Friday it will be held. So long as the owner of the venue (Traditions is PRIVATE PROPERTY–I know, a 4-letter word for some) permits taping, it’s really an editorial call on the part of the journalist. I can help and might bring my own tripod to film this. But it’s also important not to set people up for retribution or even Grand Jury subpoenas. Recall the reporter working for NPR who got fired for being seen participating in an Occupy Washington, D.C. event when her bosses saw her on a news clip?

    • Sammy Harvell yo but for real. it’s called consent. and if people don’t give it to you, you shouldn’t film them. there are other ways you can make an informative video.
      Yesterday at 12:42am ·  · 5
    • Perhaps those who have reason (or belief) to fear could have their faces edited or even wear dark glasses and other facial masking apparel? I’d favor this approach because it *IS* true that the authority goons do use such photos and clips for intelligence, just as they did in the late 60’s during the anti-war demonstrations as they took photos of the participants from rooftops. Not so much later, those young men found draft notices waiting for them in their mailbox. It’s naive to think government agents who are scouring major media news photos and urging citizens to call their snitch line or offer any photos they have won’t be utilizing THIS footage for their agenda. It’s a given the system is corrupt. I would urge those sensitive to this issue who plan to speak or attend to mask their identities–I doubt the Traditions proprietor would object under the circumstances. The thought police are out in force.
    • Christy X Mpaa Rating 

      I’m really not sure why any tried and true media professional (with integrity) would want to film anything that could be used against a stranger/civilian for any legal purpose/intention – true journalism or filmmaking doesn’t require the exploitation of people, or require them to cover their faces in a crowd during a public gathering that is panel based, and not a protest or action (where they might CHOOSE to cover up for their own reasons). Work that is based around a “building” and not the comfort level and respect of the people is questionable in my book. The word “permit” was mentioned in one of the above posts and I always shoot with one – If a filmmaker, videographer or journalist is serious about even protecting their own ass, (let alone the folks they are filming) they have one.
      Yesterday at 1:07am ·  · 1
    • The media/press has no more ‘rights’ than anyone else. They also have no less! In a public venue, the law certainly allows for filming/photographing whatever is visible, in general. The ‘ethics’ are somewhat more nuanced. I agree that filming where it is obvious a subject may be persecuted for their beliefs/statements is dicey–ethically. But the technology for hidden cameras/video is well developed and the government certainly isn’t above using it. I wouldn’t count on a lack of VISIBLE cameras offering any real security to participants against an oppressive administration. As far as a ‘permit’ goes, I’m not certain what you’re suggesting. I usually go as far as asking the OWNER of a private venue (or their agent) if they object to my taking pictures there. If it’s a PUBLIC venue, I don’t require (legally) anyone’s permission. As far as ‘safety’, that’s a 2-edged sword. You threaten/assault a journalist, you will likely be prosecuted. The reason people are being subpoenaed NOW by the Grand Jury is some engaged in criminal conduct IN PUBLIC. Your argument suggests a journalist would do well to document all material facts, faces, identities to serve as protection to (as you put it) cover their own ass. Intimidating/threatening journalists is the height of folly under the circumstances. It’s also cut from the same warp & weave as virtually every fascist/oppressive regime that ever existed. Not all journalists are going to share your sentiments/values. That’s the risk we all take when we enter the public arena. Moreover, journalists may not be as transparent as you’d like–ask the folks who were filmed netting dolphins…or ramming sick cows with forklifts…or Abu Graib (prison) for that matter. There’s plenty of examples of subjects being filmed in the midst of a newsworthy event without their knowledge/consent. You think the journalist who took the famous photo of the S. Vietnames officer summarily executing a young Viet Cong suspect with a pistol to the side of his head (the shot caught the moment of the bullet’s impact) ASKED the executioner for his ‘permission’ before he snapped the picture?? Your implication regarding a journalist needing to ‘protect their own ass’ simply compels most people to believe the Grand Jury investigations are justified.

    • Wombat Fancypants Fuck the law. If anyone in attendance doesn’t want the event to be filmed I will ask that the event not be filmed. If anyone feels they cannot respect a request to not film or photograph, as one of the panelists, I will ask you to leave the event.
      Yesterday at 8:50am via mobile ·  · 6
    • And I will report just that and document it as best I can. I serve as the eyes and ears of the public who have expressed an interest in this event. Some have said they’re unable to attend and hope to be able to see film of it after the fact. The proprietor (or their agent) of the private property has given permission. If you don’t want to be filmed or photographed at a public event, don’t show up. If you don’t feel you can abide by the law in public, I’d ask YOU to leave! You’re video taped and recorded every time you board a public bus around here, or enter many intersections for that matter. Deal with it! Your right to privacy doesn’t exceed anyone else’s, despite how radical your politics may be. Wear a ski mask, I don’t care. You don’t have the RIGHT to deny the public access to a public event. Reporting, filming, photographing, recording are all part of that access. Just what do you think makes you so special? You’re on video every time you walk into a courthouse. Complain if you like, but you won’t stop the practice there and you’re way out of bounds demanding it in any other public venue as well. Cops in this State have tried to prosecute people based on your theory, and they’ve been shut down by our appellate courts. Accept it and get on with what is. News coverage is part of our democracy. You’ve been forewarned there will be filming. Attend, or don’t. Mask your face, or don’t. Wear dark glasses, or don’t. It’s up to you. It is NOT up to you to bridle the civil right of others or the public.

    • Black Rose-Infoshop Someone should 86 this bro if he shows up, just saying.
      Yesterday at 8:20pm ·  · 1

    • Benjamin SittingBull This is why we as activists dont open up to the media, because of poor boundaries. I was involved in the Seattle and oly action and I will not be coming because of this insensitivity. The threat from the FBI is real and I dont want to mask up for this it presents a challenging image to the public. Mabey if you want to film you should ask people to be part of your own documentary instead of trolling anothers event
      Yesterday at 8:31pm ·  · 4

    • Benjamin SittingBull Thanks to those organizing even though this is coming up the event is a good idea..but please listen to us we are your actavist community and we are most deffinetly under threat and attack
      Yesterday at 8:37pm ·  · 1
    • Look, I’m not making a ‘movie’, I’m reporting a newsworthy event at a venue the public has been invited to. You’re right about one thing…you have an image problem with the public. (e.g. The comment and attitude Black Rose’s remark projects.) Journalists covering events during the trashing of Seattle streets on May Day were deliberately injured by some of the perpetrators. THAT is an ‘attack’ on the public and the public’s right to know what is going on in their city and midst. The irony of some radical elements claiming they’re under ‘threat and attack’ while threatening/attacking the eyes & ears of the public is so thick you can’t cut it with a knife. Government agents understand the PR mechanism at work. Clearly many of the most radical elements under scrutiny do not. The argument of not wanting to ‘mask up’ for fear of creating a confusing/negative image in the public’s mind is raised. But threatening/attacking/intimidating journalists is considered trivial. Think about it. If anything, the radical elements are their own worst enemies in this conflict between government and themselves. Solidarity? Hah!…with WHO? You don’t achieve ‘solidarity’ by smashing out people’s car windows and trashing their streets. Try reading Saul Alinsky’s RULES FOR RADICALS.

    • Black Rose-Infoshop Try reading go the fuck away doofus

    • Black Rose-Infoshop and boom goes the dynamite
      Yesterday at 9:58pm ·  · 1

    • Benjamin SittingBull If we wanted media why wouldn’t we have one of our trusted own create it instead of an out of town paralegal affiliate. Fuck this bs I’m out and passing that sentiment to my commerads if more do the same you won’t be filming anyone of importance and probably just each other so have fun.
      Yesterday at 10:00pm via mobile ·  · 1
    •  Amicus Curia It also comes to mind that those who act out such sentiments are largely responsible for putting their ‘friends’ and neighbors in the middle when those acquaintances are subpoenaed by the Grand Jury.
    • Because it’s not a PRIVATE venue! Public events do not get to pick and choose who covers it. They can invite who they like. But the right to cover public events belongs to the PUBLIC, not those who are the legitimate subjects of the public’s interest. It’s not a private press conference. It’s a public event where the public has been invited. To reiterate an earlier point–mainstream media is criticized for toadying up to corporate and government interests. Your answer: enlist your own toadies. A genuine reporter is INDEPENDENT of the subjects he/she is reporting on! (duh)
    •  Amicus Curia Why would you need a ‘public’ event to release your own propaganda?

    • Black Rose-Infoshop lolz we’ll see
      Yesterday at 10:06pm ·  · 2
    •  Amicus Curia How ironic this is posted under the title: KNOW YOUR RIGHTS. When someone who does speaks of them, you’re quick to squelch the notion. Perhaps it should be titled: KNOW OUR RIGHTS (the ones WE choose, not yours)

    • Black Rose-Infoshop People should able to decide (especially if they are one of the speakers at this presentation) whether or not they want to be filmed. Despite everyone’s objections, you seem intent on pushing it which.. just guessing.. will end up with you getting kicked out.
      Yesterday at 10:09pm ·  · 3

    • Black Rose-Infoshop But do keep going, I bet you’re going to say you’re being oppressed next. I can’t wait.
      Yesterday at 10:11pm ·  · 2
    • I believe it was announced early on by Mike Coday there were plans to film this event. I don’t expect leopards to change their spots. I’ve read about the assaults on Tony Overman. I’ve read about the assaults on journalists covering the Seattle May Day demonstrations. None of the intimidation surprises me at this point. But it is being noted. I simply report what I hear and see. You’re the one with the story that needs to be told. Your reactions are predictable and ignore the fundamental truth that public events belong to the public. It’s not some proprietary movie right.
    •  Amicus Curia Tell ya what: Why don’t you try suing me for violating your copyright? 🙂

    • Black Rose-Infoshop errrday i’m lullzing

    • Benjamin SittingBull Uh smelling like fucking bacon in here I’m out for good peace
      Yesterday at 10:26pm via mobile ·  · 2

    • Yesterday at 10:28pm via mobile ·  · 1
    • Swaneagle Harijan 

      Sadly, the glaring LACK of support i am witnessing for those under scrutiny is damned dangerous. I am deeply disturbed by the widespread ignorance around the IMPORTANCE of well educated and supported activists which is failing to happen around Grand Jury hearings and especially for those subpoenaed. It is to the benefit of us all to have this event documented and available to everyone to see. The way Leah from Portland and her friend have made press releases and public statements about their position is the way to go. Hiding from the essential need to widely educate people is part of the suppression agenda. I find the lack of openness around all of this to be a indicator of just how effective suppression has become. Media Island is devoted to maintaining justice and truth. I have worked with them since the mid ’80’s. This should be supported, not reviled. Anyone who does not want to be filmed make sure you aren’t. We desperately need this information to get out there. Ignorance serves no one, especially those being targeted. I find many young activists to be highly undereducated and easily manipulated. This has to change.
      11 hours ago · Edited · 
    • I agree. I’ve asked Richard Fellows (a friend and client) to attend. I also agree with Pete Bohmer’s (a panelist and friend of 45 years) assessment that regardless of the nature of the allegations involved, the Grand Jury system *is* being 

      abused in this process. It’s being used for a fishing expedition. That’s not (in law) supposed to be allowed when a warrant is sought. The Grand Jury shouldn’t be used as a substitute for a fishing expedition that is prohibited by law. Addressing Harijan’s point: I invited a young disabled mother I’ve known all her life to this event. She asked what it was about. I told her it was to be a discussion of the issues surrounding the issuing of Grand Jury subpoenas to those being targeted and believed to be somehow connected to the property (“minor” according to Pete Bohmer) destruction and street violence in Seattle’s May Day demonstrations. Her immediate response: “I don’t know that I have a problem with that!” The lack of public support for those currently targeted, I’m finding, is stark. Members of that public are likely to end up on whatever criminal jury is selected for upcoming trials. The arrogance of some of the more radical elements at public events is their Achilles heel. It has been announced the event is public, that it will be filmed & documented. Many unable to attend have requested to view the film(s) of it for their own enlightenment and are supporters of those targeted. It’s probably a given the event will be attended by government agents who are busy scouring whatever intelligence they can gather–I doubt they’ll skip this one. Harijan is correct–at this point, transparency is more important (educating the public) than erroneous visions of ‘solidarity’. That’s done through MEDIA. Any genuine reporter isn’t going to give up editorial control to the subjects he/she is covering. Reporters are INDEPENDENT–or certainly should be. Objecting participants have been invited to disguise their identities. Some have refused. Another possibility might be very dim lighting or harsh back lighting so only their silhouettes might be seen on tape. I’m down with all that. I’m not down with only selected toadies being allowed to cover the news. My approach is I report what I see and hear (including here). I let the chips fall where they may. Having said that, given a choice (that doesn’t include stifling the news) I try to take steps to minimize the vulnerability of those exercising their 1st Amendment rights to attack. That doesn’t mean I’m a ‘co-conspirator’ or in ANYBODY’s camp. It just means that I’ll take steps to smudge a face or not use a person’s name (especially when politically targeted or vital to the person’s safety). So there’s room for all parties to be accommodated in this controversy. In the end, the public needs to be included in the dialogue else the government will manipulate its biases to the detriment of those seeking relief from a witch hunt.
      7 hours ago · 

    • Mike Coday Won’t film if folks oppose. Solidarity first!
      4 hours ago ·  · 5

    • Bekah Wolf Im not even in washington, but fyi Amicus is dead wrong: if they are a member of the press, they cant release publicly video of the event without consent of people filmed. Thats why (real) filmakers get release forms signed
      4 hours ago via mobile ·  · 3

    • Benjamin SittingBull Thanks mike! I want to be clear I think this is a good idea and I appreciate the people helping and organizing. I personally just feel put off when someone comes into my community and tells me and my friends “I’m going to film you deal with it” there is a more diplomatic consensual way to go about things that’s my point. Thanks to every one putting forth the effort
      4 hours ago via mobile ·  · 2
    • No Mike, perhaps a political radical’s mantra is ‘solidarity’. A journalist’s is the 1st Amendment. Bekah Wolf doesn’t know what she’s talking about. News footage film clips are made countless times every day without ‘releases’. We’re not talking about a ‘movie’ (at least I’m not) but news coverage. There is NO expectation of privacy in a public venue. Perhaps Bekah is unfamiliar with Washington State privacy laws and our courts’ interpretation of the same. I’m not. Nor do I, at this stage, feel like attending to Bekah’s remedial education on the point.
      4 hours ago · 
    • I’m put off by self styled activists who threaten and assault journalists. e.g. Tony Overman. This is cut from the same warp & weave. You get up on that gazebo stage in Sylvester Park to jam or make a speech, no member of the public requires a ‘release’ to film that. I also film stage events at Olympia’s farmers market, similarly without seeking ‘releases’. Sometimes I inform those who ask what I will be doing with the footage (posting it on a community/news blog). End of story (at least on this point). If you don’t get it, perhaps I can find time in the future to spell it out. Until then, search amicuscuria.com/wordpress and look for ‘photographers rights’ and other related search terms. There’s some great educational material there for the untutored from which many in this forum could clearly benefit.
      4 hours ago · 

    • Swaneagle Harijan Over recent years, many people have become uncomfortable with being photographed or filmed. I do believe those people have a right to not be. It is really important in these times to find ways to accomplish goals without being intrusive. Otherwise, the domination continues one way or another. Best plan is to have respect all around.
      4 hours ago ·  · 1

    • Swaneagle Harijan BUT the information NEEDS to get out there. Way late in coming at this point. Too many are in hot water with no info. Way too many.
      4 hours ago ·  · 1
    • Harijan, this ‘right’ by various subjects in a public venue you allude to NOT being photographed–care to cite your source and authority? Or is this just speculation on your part on how you’d order the world if you created it? Care to square that with all the other photos and video conducted in public (including public transportation, malls, streets, intersections, courthouses, banks, etc) that don’t require ‘releases’ or ‘permission’? I think the language in the 1st Amendment is clear enough on this point. If not, the case law certainly is.
      4 hours ago · 
    • Read the local anarchist web sites around the Puget Sound. They’re in hot water because of their arrogance surrounding public demonstrations and the few who chose to egregiously violate the law and the rights of others. That’s also the root

       of why so little sympathy, in general, is coming from the public in response to the machinations of the Grand Jury. Like my friend and the young mother said when informed about the issues and subpoenas targeting those suspected of involvement or being material witnesses, “I don’t know that I have a problem with that!” That *is* the overwhelming and abiding sentiment of the vast, vast majority of the public. You can remain in denial if you like, but those are the true facts.
      4 hours ago · 

    • Dana Walker A note on filming: If the Machine wants your picture they will get your picture. There’s no hiding from them anymore and our only defense is to get enough numbers that there are too many of us for them to do anything.
      3 hours ago · 

    • Swaneagle Harijan 

      All i am saying, with no authority other than my own experiences, that many people do not like being photographed whether it be traditional Indians, people who have been hideously abused or those who simply are not comfortable. That is all 

      i am talking about. Basic human respect which i agree is terribly lacking among the radicaler than thous who also lack openess and education around some pretty critical issues impacting their own DOT peeps.
      2 hours ago ·  · 1

    • Swaneagle Harijan 

      Overall, i am really sick of dogma dueling and competition among those humans who think they are right such as white males in Seattle who claim to be into nonviolence but are terribly racist and sexist which has as much to do with anything …See More
      2 hours ago ·  · 1

    • Swaneagle Harijan Respect is really essential for any kind of successful resistance to the forces killing all of life. Too many used to power of some sort trample anyone who doesn’t totally agree with them. So patriarchal, old, oppressive and time to call in basic human respect.
      2 hours ago ·  · 2

    • Sammy Harvell 

      I think that there are other means to get this information out. Saying that filming this event is the only way or that it’s so important that without it the information would be irrelevant is BS. Also I would be fine with filming the panel 

      with their consent or filming anyone for that matter with their consent, but your absolute refusal to not only hear and understand people but to respect them is appalling. People don’t trust you and they are right in that. Without trust of the people you sure will make a shitty journalist. Also I want to point out that journalism is never neutral. Every journalist has their own personal beliefs and opinions which no matter how hard they try, will taint their story. Your personal beliefs and opinions REEK in your responses. From things as varied as property damage to basic respect of others, to even your overall respect towards consent, to your absolute belief in the legal system. You are a man who sure loves your laws. People don’t sympathize to certain causes because society has brainwashed us into believing that if certain social norms are not kept, if people don’t do things a certain way they are bad. If everyone is doing X,Y,Z and you decide to do it W,O,X suddenly you are bad. So if you decide to use property damage to get heard instead of getting petitions signed and lobbying ect. you are the bad person. Just like if you are a poor person of color who can’t find work because the economy is bad and no one want’s to hire someone who’s brown. Welfare doesn’t pay all the bills. So you sell drugs or rob that bank and don’t hurt anyone but still get 10+ years cause the system and our laws are FUCKED UP. but you can’t see that cause you are all wrapped up in YOUR arrogant self and can’t accept the fact that people DON”T GIVE A SHIT if your feeling are hurt cause they don’t want you to film or that you feel like your RIGHTS are being violated. Just because it doesn’t say on a fucking little piece of paper doesn’t mean other people don’t have rights too. AND THE RIGHT TO CONSENT TO WHATEVER trumps you.
      2 hours ago · 

    • Emmeline Mead I don’t know that I’d have a problem with someone spraypainting this Amicus person’s camera lens. true fact.
      2 hours ago ·  · 2

    • 2 hours ago ·  · 1

    • 2 hours ago · 

    • Swaneagle Harijan Fabulously funny utmost necessity.
      2 hours ago · 
    • Sammy, it’s been said a reporter has no friends…or shouldn’t have if they’re any good. Moreover, I’ve come to the conclusion I DON’T WANT ANY ‘FRIENDS’ when I’m covering a story. You’re a good example of why not. ‘Friends’ make demands, want editorial control, and the journalist loses all objectivity they might otherwise have had along with any INDEPENDENCE. ‘Consent’ isn’t required to report/film or record an event in a public venue or where the private property owner has consented to such coverage. My ‘feelings’ have nothing to do with it. I could care less whether YOU (or anyone else) ‘likes’ me or my philosophy of journalism. Mike Wallace and Hunter S. Thompson are my journalistic idols. Wallace was the master of ‘ambush’ interviews or coverage. Thompson was the father of Gonzo journalism. We can agree or not about what’s ‘appropriate’, polite, ethical, or whatever. But the one defining boundary is our system of laws, which you apparently disdain. My beef with half-baked radicals is they seldom even have so much as a theory of government, much less understand it. We have laws and government because almost everyone except a select few elitists want them. There are far more effective methods for social/political change than assault, robbery, theft, and vandalism. But your argument smacks of justifying robbing the local liquor store because your poor old maiden aunt needs an operation or because you’re black/brown/red/yellow/female/poor/oppressed. And those who agree with you and acted on that belief in public are precisely why we’re where we’re at today with respect to the Grand Jury subpoenas. Or at least in part. Admittedly the Grand Jury is being used improperly for a fishing expedition and a tool of suppression. Still, I’m not your ‘authorized’ biographer, your ‘pal’, your co-conspirator, your propagandist, or your guest. I’m not invoking *my* right, but the public’s to cover a news event in a public forum. Your hostility to our system of laws is consistent with your scoffing at enshrined Bill of Rights guarantees. When you voice disgust at the flaws and corruption in our current system, what do you suggest? Are YOU (and your pals) an example of the alternative? Benjamin Franklin was possibly more concerned about the corruption in the people than the government itself when he responded, “A Republic, Madam…if you can keep it!” Sammy, you’re a classic example of the kind of corruption in the people Franklin worried about in a democracy.
      56 minutes ago · 
    • Emmeline, I’d have a problem with that and will have unannounced witnesses with me precisely because your threat is exactly the kind of assault launched on Tony Overman. In my view, Mr. Overman should have tackled his assailant and held them until the police arrived. Your advocacy of violence & assault is why most of the public is unconcerned what happens to you and those of your persuasion. It’s also why you, et ux, wish to hide your identities. Criminals always prefer the dark and anonymity. Your remarks belie the claims that those being investigated for the kind of acts you recommend are persecuted or ‘victims’ of the system. Peter Bohmer’s encouragement of young street demonstrators to attack Tony Overman has been roundly criticized and condemned by other professors at TESC. YOU (and those like you) are the true enemies, more than the system, of those rights and freedoms we still have. I denounce your suggestion and you for making it. If you attacked a journalist covering an event in a public forum, I’d condemn you for it. I condemn your rhetoric and what it implies about your character. It’s nothing more than urging criminal behavior.
      43 minutes ago · 

    • 28 minutes ago via mobile ·  · 1

    • Sammy Harvell 

      I’m just painfully aware of how oppression works in this country. Which you obviously aren’t. Not all laws or policies are created justly or fairly. I mean look at stop and frisk laws, or citizen united. And you make an assumption of a lot 

      of my politics and beliefs based on my very few responses to you. You have no idea who I am or my beliefs. You assume that I’m a radical or anarchist because I advocate for basic respect? Sweet! Then radicals and anarchists sound like my type of people. And you get pissed when people tell you that you won’t film (saying that folks control hungry or some shit), but we tried to dialog around it. People have said repeatedly that folks don’t mind as long as there is consent. But you are the one running up in this forum like a fascist elite prick, or a fucking cop telling us what is gonna go down in regards to filming. I get that the government films me all the time. I have no control over that. But I do demand respect from the people around me. And I do think that everyone has the right to protect themselves whatever that means is.
      26 minutes ago · 

    • Sammy Harvell but for real this guy is probably a cop.
      25 minutes ago ·  · 1

    • Sammy Harvell or at least really really painfully ignorant.
      25 minutes ago ·  · 1

    • Sammy Harvell we could just do some non violent stuff. Maybe bring a banner and make sure it’s infront of this guys camera at all times. I mean really what is he gonna do? shove us out of the way?
      23 minutes ago · 
    •  Amicus Curia No, just record what he/she sees, your comments & actions. Just as these comments are being posted on a community blog to serve as a warning just how physically dangerous is the environment and certain elements of the crowd. The ‘system’ doesn’t have to do very much given you appear to be your own worst enemies. Nobody is forcing you to attend this public forum. Yet you want to control it and the news coverage of it. There’s little enough difference in the sentiments expressed and any fascist government you care to name.

About admin

Opposed to politicians who equivocate about air quality & BioMassacre
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Why Grand Jury Subpoenas are issued:

  1. Bruce Wilkinson says:
    September 7, 2012 at 2:38 am

    Dear Amicus,
    I am rather appalled by some of the comments. These same few folks have used bullying tactics on other people online before and in group discussions. They have targeted me on a few occasions. Keeping this in mind I would like you to take their comments with a grain of salt, or a whole heaping spoonful of salt. They think that speaking that way is an effective form of activism when most would see that it clearly is not. Perhaps in certain rare situations of intentionally violent and overt oppression it might have it’s place although I can think of reasonable ways that would still be better. I would like to see you there and for it to be filmed but I understand that you might be worried to do so. It seems a rather ridiculous thing and far off topic. Understand that the majority of people at the event will not feel that way. Please consider blocking on FB the people who are harassing you, it has improved my mood to do so and saved me time arguing with people who have an extreme aversion to criticism that upsets their dogma.

    Reply
  2. admin says:
    September 7, 2012 at 3:43 am

    Bruce,
    Thank you–you’re a breath of fresh air. I’m not a young man or in the best of health. But I’ve been beaten by experts in my life, including a FEMA guard in Dec, 2007 for (no joke) criticizing the competency of FEMA when I reached for my cell phone to dial 911. I was clubbed to the floor, then illegally arrested by a local deputy sheriff. He was too poorly trained to realize I was on federal property under exclusive federal jurisdiction, even without considering the merits, and the local court had no jurisdiction. The judge dismissed the charges he (Rhoades) trumped up as lacking probable cause, a minuscule hurdle. So I’m familiar with the landscape of corruption in the judiciary many times over.

    I’ve been prosecuted in Thurston County for assisting a young disabled mother I’ve known most of her life when I remonstrated with a juvenile probation officer in the hallways of the Family Courthouse for repeatedly refusing to allow her to be accommodated due to her brain injuries she sustained in an accident that nearly killed her and did kill her passenger. In the end, I kicked their @ss (metaphorically) without even going to trial. Sometimes, if you’re interested, I’ll share the details–or you can read about it here if you search for ‘good Samaritan’ and related references. BTW, I’ve never lost a case (and there have been more than a few) where I’ve represented myself. Being a paralegal committed to basic concepts like fairness and Constitutional guarantees has helped.

    It’s not part of my nature to yield to bullying, threats, or intimidation. I think I’d rather die than give up my 1st Amendment rights. It’s at the core of my being. But I’m not passive (despite my heart condition, diabetes, and being on blood thinners) and WILL *fight* if I’m assaulted–even if it kills me. But my goal is not to get into a brawl. I feel a strong duty to provide what, in many instances, the community cannot provide for itself.

    Ironically, I’m fond of these young people who feel passionately about a just cause even though I find the more vacuous or obtuse very frustrating. I prefer one-on-one discussions with young folks and genuinely wish them the best–sometimes I try to afford a step in that direction. I can’t say the violence doesn’t frighten me, but I’d never have made it this far if I allowed myself to give into that kind of fear. I’m pretty happy with every day life has to offer me and each one is a good one.

    I’m pleased you reached out to contact me and look forward to meeting you this Friday evening at Traditions.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Bruce Wilkinson Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.