(A) Different Kind of (A)narchy

Wayne Mellinger: Anarchy in the USA

anon – Thu, 2012-11-08 18:24
From Nooz Hawk – The only time we hear of anarchists in the popular press is when they have committed acts of violence and destruction. Hence, to many people the word “anarchist” means “bomb-throwing kook” or “terrorist.”The media present a disparaging stereotype of anarchists as black-clad youth with masks over their unshaven faces, fists raised in the air, typically behaving poorly and probably getting ready to smash some bank’s window. Historical research reveals this cultural representation has roots in the 19th century. Moreover, anarchy has come to denote the dog-eat-dog chaos that emerges when the State’s forces of social control are absent. “Anarchy” in popular media culture is typically violent street crowds getting away with murder and other forms of destructive lawlessness. So pervasive are these connotations that most would not associate anarchism with any utopian image of a future society that is just, equal and peaceful at all.

Recently, several major newspapers have reported the detention of three “self-described anarchists” in a federal facility near the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. The three have refused to testify before a grand jury and are suspected of damaging a federal appeals courthouse during the May Day protests in Seattle (Los Angeles Times, Oct.19). [This is inaccurate. Leah has since been released after, possibly, cooperating with the Grand Jury. ALL were granted immunity from prosecution in order to strip them of their 5th Amendment rights before being imprisoned for contempt…i.e. silence…something the state typically refuses to do for suspects/participants in a crime.]

Given our media portrayals of anarchists, one might never suspect that the most frequently cited living scholar in the world is Noam Chomsky, a noted MIT linguist, respected anarchist thinker and tireless social justice activist.

So what is anarchism, and what do anarchists believe?

Anarchism as a term means “no state” or “no rulers,” and anarchists are generally against all organized governments and the power that they have over us. Anarchism is a vision of a future without domination, a critique of hierarchical forms of social organization, and a mode of praxis guiding us on how we are to move forward in the present moment.

Anarchism provides a critique of all forms of domination. While classical Marxism provided many leftist political thinkers with much insight into the machinations of capitalism and class domination, from an anarchist perspective Marxism bought into an acceptance of the ability of the State to serve the needs of a populace.

Moreover, considering the issues of gender inequality, racism, ecological ruin, homophobia, etc., has led many contemporary activists and philosophers to think that, rather than attempting to salvage Marxism, we need a theoretical approach inherently concerned with all forms of oppression.

Anarchism, I believe, can allow us to examine all aspects of modernity, including many that are ignored by other strands of critical social theory. Anarchism questions the very premises of modernity, including our notions of progress, rationality, civilization, democracy, freedom and justice.

Anarchism is not merely a critique of domination in modern society. It provides a vision of what human beings are capable of becoming, how we might organize our lives and how our potential is squashed by hierarchical social relationships. Anarchism is a vision of a social world in which each person actively participates directly in the decisions that affect their own everyday lives. It is a vision of society without authority.

Seven key ideas of anarchism include:

» 1. mutual aid — voluntary reciprocal cooperation for mutual benefit;

» 2. anti-hierarchy — opposed to any system of stratification in which one group has power over another;

» 3. libertarian — individual liberty, especially freedom of expression and action, is upheld;

» 4. decentralization — power is dispersed among the populace;

» 5. consensus decision-making — a method of group decision-making that seeks consent, not necessarily agreement on laws and policies;

» 6. rejection of the idea that the ends justify the means;

» 7. direct action —  when a group of people take an action which is intended to reveal an existing problem.

Of course, there are many different definitions of these terms and many different varieties of anarchism, and not all would agree with my listing above. We live in times in which there are healthy debates in a lively anarchist political movement.

Anarchist modes of praxis involve “walking the talk.” This means that we cannot achieve liberating and non-hierarchical goals through oppressive and non-consensual forms of organizing. Anarchists, unlike some other radical perspectives, do not simply hope to grab power and force their way of doing things on others.

Anarchism provides a way to move forward through voluntary association, consensus decision-making, decentralized and non-hierarchal organization. “How we get there” is very important! Moreover, there is a carnivalesque, Dionysian and celebratory aspect to much of the contemporary anarchist social movement, in which politics is often infused with performance, poetry and parade.

By all standard indicators of a healthy country, the United States has fallen behind other industrialized nations. To many of us, it is clear that we are on the wrong path. The attempted reforms of the past 30 years have largely been offset by exacerbations in other social ills.

We need a new operating system — a new political economy built upon sustainability, fairness and justice. To me, anarchists are people who have given up on reform and are committed to major transformations in how things work. They have lost faith in the current system and in our ability to salvage it. Anarchists want a New American Dream, one built on social justice, economic democracy and environmental sustainability. Rather than vilifying them, I think we should thank them.

The next time you read or hear about anarchists in the popular media, know that many of these folks are peaceful, progressive activists working hard to bring about a more just social world and that most of them are largely law-abiding. And many of us are pacifists.

— Wayne Mellinger, Ph.D., is a board member of Clergy and Laity United for Economic Justice and is an active advocate for all those who suffer on the streets. He holds a certificate in alcohol and drug counseling from Santa Barbara City College.


Perhaps (A)narchists spend

anon – Fri, 2012-11-09 07:51

Perhaps (A)narchists spend too much time on whether the body politic acknowledges them and should focus on constructing a working community, no matter how insular?

This would involve some paradigm resolving how to live within a repressive society without becoming a part of it–living in a state of ‘grace’ something like the hill people in many nations do by utilizing elevation as their shield. Perhaps a combination of mountainous public lands, abandoned urban structures, and homeless encampments could become the matrix for such a coalition of the willing?

Altering the assumptions of the unenlightened is a hard slog. Best to teach by example rather than rhetoric. Plus, implementation, no matter how minuscule, has the advantage of simultaneously loosening the clutches of and starving the beast. After all, didn’t the Soviet Union collapse (at least in part) by what its denizens perceived (no matter how falsely) the benefits of capitalism to be? Example/Perception can be infinitely more powerful than rhetoric.

  • amicuscuria.com/wordpress
Ah, but that’s not to say all (A)narchists are enlightened either. Some of the very folks who demand their rights to associate/organize/deliberate/communicate be respected are the 1st to deny the rights of others to speak out, remain safe, own private property, etc. Moreover, they decry the existence of the state but are the 1st to use it through the auspices of state salaried college professors (e.g. @ TESC) to plot criminal ‘direct action’ such as smashing car/business windows, physically assaulting journalists, and promoting theft, robbery, and criminal conspiracies at state owned/funded institutions of higher learning such as TESC. 
While academic freedom is respected by the State, they use this as a shield to plot criminal acts. They (in theory) deplore force but effectively use tax dollars wrested from citizens by state force to plot more force/assaults/property destruction. Is this a great country, or what? The following excerpts from anarchistnews.org comments makes the point:

SDS are the type of people

anon – Fri, 2012-11-09 13:01

SDS are the type of people that will make fun of anarchists for not voting (an anarchist or anti-state individual will be referred to as “purist” for advocating a really basic idea of Anarchy or anti-state ideas.)


Again it’s different on each

anon – Fri, 2012-11-09 16:35

Again it’s different on each campus. One of the SDS coordinators at evergreen wrote a piece in the campus paper about how voting is bullshit, but seriously you only know what you’ve read online and in practice the current SDS community in Oly are basically a bunch of Anarchists using an institution to get radical events funded and scheduled. Yeah SDS as a whole is shit and is way less radical then it was, but not every chapter is a bunch of reactionaries. Fuck off.
“We will not sit quietly while the state kidnaps our comrades and close friends and locks them in cages. Now is not the time for silence and isolation. Solidarity means Attack!”-SDS evergreen


Why do you feel the need to

anon – Fri, 2012-11-09 16:38

Why do you feel the need to prove something (in writing) to a random @news commenter about this on an article about the grand jury investigation?

If folx are trying to do rad work under the radar, ZIP IT AND LET THEM


seriously shut the fuck up

anon – Fri, 2012-11-09 16:43

seriously shut the fuck up people and do not feed these stupid commenters. you know what’s up and I bet you didn’t learn it on an @news comment. use your fucking head. keep it on the DL. stay fucking shifty.


this is the problem of the

anon – Fri, 2012-11-09 18:49

this is the problem of the milieu and its stupid cult of virility. everyone wants to prove how anarchist they are, reaffirm their anarchist identity. people who got something to prove are fucking suspect.

And (in the ‘325 #10 – Out now!’ post) even more pointedly, from the same source:

 In these moments of chaos

anon – Fri, 2012-11-09 13:29

In these moments of
chaos it’s also possible to seize
resources for ourselves through
break-ins and armed robberies with
greater chances of success and it’s
possible to hit targets of particular
significance to us.

–favorite line ever ever ever 4 eva

go pack

This is one, of many, reasons these boards censor those with different more rational viewpoints or openly criticize their narrative. It also helps explain why federal authorities have labeled them (without sufficiently distinguishing differences under the covers) ‘domestic terrorists’ and ‘criminals’ using politics as a pretext/excuse.

Yes, some of the most violent underground elements are using State funded college campuses such as TESC to plan/conspire–effectively utilizing State facilities for organized crime. But, quietly, the feds are creating a snare and drawing the noose tighter around those privileged TESC professors at the center of this type of activity.

It would be relatively easy to simply capture the vacuous neophytes doing the damage on Seattle’s/Portland’s streets. The feds are aiming higher, fashioning their nets for bigger fish. You will see some of these professors ultimately indicted for criminal conspiracy under the State and federal RICO statutes. That may be as it should for those who, like some Dickens Fagin-like character, manipulate our youth into committing the kind of street violence intended to gather publicity and terrify citizens who rely on the state to prevent force & fraud…a low grade form of urban warfare and insurrection.

We Got the Guillotine

About admin

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

20 Responses to (A) Different Kind of (A)narchy

  1. tiqqun says:

    Anarchist being lead by bourgeois professors? No, I doubt it.
    TESC using state facilities for organized crime? Don’t think anyone is that stupid.
    Your inability to grasp the situation is quite comforting though.

    • admin says:

      You’re at a disadvantage if you haven’t known at least one of the professors involved for the past 45 years. It also helps to have attended the same events. The resources of TESC, a State funded public college, are being misappropriated for political instead of academic purposes–a violation of State law.

      • Tiqqun says:

        lol education about radical politics and know-your-rights worships are academic and it’s not a violation of state law. Read up, every SA group could be considered political. Academia itself is political.

        • admin says:

          Jill Stein gave a fantastic presentation. She was running for U.S. President and would make a good one. She was also plumping for expanding the Green Party. She was using a State owned lecture hall to do so. If the hall was ‘rented’, perhaps no violation occurred. If it was reserved under an ‘academic’ function pretext, maybe not.

          There are any number of examples of a more pernicious nature. Some (A)narchists (on their blogs) have admitted TESC’s SDS has evolved into a podium for their ‘affinity’ associates who utilize the school’s resources for the purpose (political) of overthrowing the government–and some advocate doing so violently. They not only advocate the violent overthrow of the government, they ENGAGE in it!

          The ‘movement’ (if that’s what it can be called) to overthrow government may indeed be larger than a few college professors, but the feds will start where they can.

          The irony is a collection of punk/anarchy faddists railing against force/oppression, but being the 1st to implement it whenever the opportunity presents itself.

          A number of candidates recently running for elective office in our State legislature have expressed concern regarding the use to which tax dollars at such institutions are put. Recall that legislators pass our laws. Any number of politicians have been brought up short for using state offices/facilities for campaigns or political purposes.

          SDS is no more immune to such laws than said elected officials. The boundary between ‘academia’ and ‘political’ may be a bit fuzzy, but it, along with certain TESC professors, has egregiously crossed that threshold.

  2. penname says:

    Your conclusion is laughable. You’re no better than the liberals on MSNBC. For once I am grateful that the authorities are not this stupid.

    • admin says:

      Time will tell. It’s doubtful all the players are going to sit it out in a federal prison either. The feds know this, they’ve decided on their priorities. The directive comes all the way from the top. Some Pacific NW profs are going down…can’t say when. But the pattern of how the feds are casting their net is there. And there won’t be any political capital spent in doing so. The numbers showing up for the support vigils of the Grand Jury resisters is disturbingly small. The combination of Ft. Lewis/Port of Olympia protests, assaults against journalists, Seattle May Day street violence, and little reported radical street violence in Olympia having a nexus to TESC has reached a critical mass in the thinking of federal authorities. They’re going to take it down. They’re going to offer forbearance to those who point fingers. The process has already, but barely, begun. If this could have been kept local (State), it would have blown over. The feds don’t invest this kind of money for nothing. They don’t invest this kind of money chasing a few kids. They’re chasing a network.

      • Tiqqun says:

        The network is deeper and more expansive than just some teachers.
        You have no fucking idea.

        • admin says:

          You’re probably right. Conspiracies are rarely transparent. On the other hand, you may have no idea how deeply the public’s antipathy to the violent overthrow of its government runs…which is why, of course, the machinations intended to accomplish that overthrow are kept hidden. If it had popular support, it would be running for President/elective office or attempting to build a political party. e.g. The Green Party

          It’s not difficult to judge intentions from furtive motions.

      • Tiqqun says:

        These “kids” are going to fuck your little white colonial world up.

        • admin says:

          Having absolutely NO idea of what that world consists of, now you’re talking through your hat. When is the last time YOU saved someone’s home, their children, their liberty?

          It’s been said, ‘liberals’ are those who profess to like people in general, just not in the particular. It sounds like you may fairly fit that definition.

      • lulzanok says:

        “assaults against journalists” lolololol you mad?

        • admin says:

          Are you unaware of who Tony Overman (photojournalist for The Olympian) is or the photojournalists injured by pole wielding (A)narchists in Seattle’s May Day street violence?

      • trveblack says:

        If your actions threaten the safety of others(ie taking a picture that could incriminate someone) then do not be suprised when people try to defend themselves and their comrades.

        • admin says:

          Don’t be surprised if force is met with force…or if the perpetrators end up in criminal court like Tony Overman’s assailant did. It’s not difficult to dial 911. The police DO cite/arrest the assailants.

          A very good reason for having photos/recordings/video of violently inclined street radicals is precisely these kinds of thinly veiled (or otherwise) threats/assaults/intimidation. No journalist is going to give you, et ux, a pass on 1st Amendment guarantees. If you have a case to make for photos plausibly placing you, et ux, at risk, take it to court. Of course you won’t because you know its a specious argument. There’s no expectation of ‘privacy’ in a public venue/space. This principle in law is well settled. You may not like it. Some don’t like gravity. It doesn’t alter the fact you’re overweight or stepping over a bright line.

          Hell, some (A)narchists argue against the existence of individual ‘rights’ at all. Is that YOUR position?

          It’s rational to anticipate the more threats/intimidation, the more documentation will be assembled. Investigatory photojournalists are familiar with how to go about this.

          BTW, before you get in a lather about privacy and ‘security’, (A)narchists have their counterparts (e.g. Drew Hendrickson) who spend their days combing through PUBLIC records (and trash cans) to discover individuals of interest to them regardless of the impact publishing the results of those searches might have on said persons. You, et ux, spend a lot of time whining about activities you, yourselves, engage in. Ergo, you fail the ‘clean hands’ doctrine.

          • Drew says:

            My name is not Drew Hendrickson, and I am not aware of anyone by that name who does what you describe. But my name IS Drew Hendricks, and I do many things which resemble slightly what you seem to think is dirty, or wrong, or something. Your argument is as fuzzy as I’m sure your logic is.

            Your seeming insider view to what the Feds intend regarding certain TESC professors begs a few questions about why they would share that insight with a goat herder in Mason County, and further questions about why that same goat herder would have insisted upon collaboration with the Drew Hendricks(on) he pretends now to barely know. Just so we’re all clear, I told you no then, and you insisted and I still rejected your offers.

            Now that you’re repeating the “vast Evergreen leftist conspiracy” meme, it’s obvious you were attempting to cozy up to me John Towery style. What’s your sponsorship, Mr Smith? Who’s greasing your wheels and talking in your ear?

  3. admin says:

    Spelling was never my strong suit. Or something? You’ll have to be more definitive. There’s no point in responding to vague allegations…if there’s any at all. Sources?…likely the same (minus the trash cans) as yours. You’ve made much out of an old invitation to establish common cause to expose the corruption in the judiciary. You stated you were under intense scrutiny and that was the end of it…or was it? Now you seem to suggest you deserve a medal. For what?

    The point made earlier was what’s sauce for the goose is good for the gander. You spend a great deal of time attempting to expose relationships…same here. You, and your pals, don’t like it. It’s certain others feel the same about you/them. It’s true, you’re not known here, nor do you know anyone here. The little that’s known is you no longer live at Media Island and haven’t for some time. You’re divorced and scrambled to find a place to live after that. If you’re concerned about ‘dirty’, wear overalls…never been close enough to you for your personal hygiene to matter. It *is* a little comical to read all the angst regarding ‘security’…like anyone here was your, et al, pal or confidante. Transparency and ‘PRESS’ badges go hand in hand, though neither is obligatory.

    Let’s recap what was said, more than once, earlier–this reporter is not an agent of the government/police and has absolutely no connection with them. And if you don’t believe that, go f*ck yourself! Do you understand?

    For anyone reading this, there’s no specific smoking gun about precisely who the feds are targeting next, only an educated guess based on a host of data, documents, and incidents surrounding the Grand Jury investigations into the (A)narchist community currently underway in the Pacific NW, hits/visitors to the Mason County Blog, et al, and familiarity with how the minds of prosecutors, judges, and detectives work. There’s more, but it’s premature, for now, to include.

    BTW, who’s greasing your wheels and talking into your ear, Mr. Hendricks? Mr. Towery and his ‘style’ aren’t known here. But, if his style amounted to nothing more than an invitation to accompany him to the courthouse to gather video footage, you’re a pretty easy lay. Courthouses along with the corruption found there are dangerous places, you’d agree? Your paranoia, justified or not, confounds efforts to establish LEGAL common cause to confront such abuse.

    The criticism your pals deserve is some don’t believe in the concept of individual ‘rights’. They believe street violence against persons and property are ‘legitimate’. They don’t believe in private property, so they say, and use this theory as a pretext for theft, burglary, even robbery. Ergo, they’re dangerous domestic terrorists/thugs and enemies of the people of this nation. When they’re observed engaged in these activities, that’s what will be published, nothing more…and nothing less. You/they can threaten, bully, intimidate, harass, but, the editorial policy will remain.

    Not only are the violently radical underground elements a menace to citizens, they emasculate the potential for constructive lasting meaningful change. They define ‘liberals’ (anyone that doesn’t agree with their empty thinking) as their ‘enemy’, but in so doing, define themselves as enemies. Thus, they should be recognized and treated as such. These particular (A)narchists engage in the rhetoric of hate and force. They’re no better than any other hate group. And, you’ve self appointed yourself as their agent. Let us know how that’s working out for you sometime. 🙂

  4. Drew says:

    Very odd, Mr Smith. You claim to be a paralegal, yet you write that someone who does not believe in the concept of individual rights, who recognizes violence against persons and property are effective, and who uses those precepts to excuse theft, burglary, and robbery is therefore a dangerous domestic terrorist, an enemy of the people of this nation. You’re describing the cops, Mr Smith. If you can point to anyone in the Anarchist movement over the last 50 years who has killed anyone, then please enlighten me. I can name Olympia Police Officers Paul Bakala, Mike Hovda, Charles Gassett, Jeff Jordan, Chris Cook, and Cliff Maynard as being involved in the deaths of their fellow citizens in just the last 20 years. I won’t go on at length about the millions of dollars in fines, forfeitures, and payoffs over the same period, nor will I detail the numerous services and items they have taken in order to be persuaded to look the other way, or lay off of the victim(s) of their attentions. These are commonplace observations of any thinking person in our society. Your focus is tellingly one sided, for someone claiming to want to expose corruption.

    Theft and Dissent, if one combines them, do not equal terrorism. If you had bothered to read the FBI’s definition of terrorism, it is true enough that it cannot be ascribed to the Government; their definition literally writes themselves right out of the possibility of being in the wrong when they use violence, and the credible threat thereof, to effect public policy or individual behavior. The primary difference between your self and the average Anarchist is that we don’t accept that definition, and apply the gander sauce to the correct (and more powerful) side of the social equation.

    Your speculation about my divorce – let’s be clear, that was in 2004 – and my subsequent place(s) of residence is also telling. Enlighten me, why is that relevant? Who wants to know where I live? Do you think there’s a subpoena waiting for me? Am I on some public payroll I don’t know about? Did I make some wild false claim of residence and then vote in the wrong precinct? Did I run for office?

    Your characterization of my mental state as “paranoid” is also telling. To be paranoid, I have to be wrong about your smelling like a cop, and acting like an agent. Yet you photograph people at public events and post their pictures on the internet and then they later get served with Grand Jury Subpoenas. Interesting coincidence, yes?

    As is your assertion of having “absolutely” no connection to the police. We both know that you called 911 and had the Washington State Patrol investigate another Occupy Olympia resident because he called you on your bullshit when a mother asked you not to photograph her child. That’s on your own web site, for pity’s sake. It’s not like it’s something I only discovered on my own. Though the fact that the WSP did not share the audio of your call is interesting in itself. (They did share the log of the call). You later claimed it was because he threatened you, but on your own recording of that call his threat happens after you called the police.

    So you tell me to fuck myself, and assert incorrectly that you have no connection with the police. A think you’re wrong, Mr Smith. I think you’re the one who has self appointed themselves as someone’s agent. How is that going, Mr Smith? Is that pocket full of angel’s pay going to extract you from the deep pit you’ve dug yourself into by opposing the powers that be, in Mason County?

  5. admin says:

    Mr. Hendricks,
    I’m afraid we’re going to have to agree on that point. i.e. Cops HAVE become militarized almost beyond belief with tanks, body armor, automatic weapons, grenades, and torture devices they defend as better than death. It’s also true that the average American citizen is 100 times more likely to die by cop than by terrorist. They’re also more likely to be robbed in a serious way by the state than the criminal element. Having said that, murder is no excuse for mayhem because it’s a greater offense. Citizens may justly abhor both warring street gangs and reject trading one violent master for another.

    You ask what ‘anarchist’ has ever killed someone. Tim McVeigh comes to mind. Others have been caught attempting to bring about similar results. Of course, as soon as a violent anti-government radical element is pointed out, you, et ux, will be quick to argue the (A) doesn’t apply. But that’s simply doublespeak. AND, you imply that so long as nobody dies, it’s not ‘terrorism’ or even unethical because the other gang of thugs (cops) are so much worse.

    Most Americans don’t want a police state. They don’t want a gang of self-congratulatory violent radicals controlling the streets either. While some might be pleased to watch the two groups kill each other off, it’s a mistake to welcome the cannibalizing of our children. It’s not a mistake to condemn those who send our children off to be destroyed, whether in Afghanistan or on the streets of Seattle.

    Whether YOU think editorial policy here is ‘balanced’ isn’t a touchstone. Rest assured this reporter gets lots of static from LEO’s and public officials. Not all have been reported in detail, but much has…right here on the Mason County Blog. It’d be great to call you an ignoramus who doesn’t know what you’re talking about when it comes to corruption in our justice system. Unfortunately, you’re correct. What you’re incorrect about is the level of corruption in the violently radical underground you admit serving–as their agent. BOTH are serious eminent/ongoing threats to the community. Nobody has been adequately investigating and defending the community’s rights/interests. This publication is dedicated to the proposition of changing that.

    At this point, perhaps it’d be useful to deflect the oft argued notion of how ill advised it is to argue over tactics when seeking to stop the violence, murder, corruption, and mayhem of the state. Proponents of non-violent resistance are derided as ‘liberals’ or ‘enemies’ by neophytes who couldn’t find Romania on a map. The truth is, violence begets violence. The ends don’t justify the means–the means become the ends! This is a fundamental core principle at work in every social/political transformation.

    Street violence does not alter the basic political algorithm/trap in which we’re mired. It’s not academic. Proponents of street violence, regardless of their pretexts, are as much the enemy as the cops. (At least some cops. ACAB is the argument of weak minds.)

    Endless jargon infested abstruse rhetoric doesn’t change any of these facts one iota. STOP eating our children!

    With respect to paragraph #2, you’re largely correct, except the sauce you welcome will cook both gooses. Dissent is legitimate–even necessary. Theft is not, and can, under some circumstances unrelated to the desperation of surviving, be part of ‘terrorism’. Reference the excerpt extolling the opportunity to steal (weapons?), rob, and destroy. The FBI’s definition of terrorism is neither here nor there. It’s simply the intent to frighten the public. There’s no argument the government has done so for decades, possibly forever. However, that doesn’t give YOU and your ‘comrades’ license to continue the strategy!

    There’s no ‘speculation’ as you claim in paragraph #3. It’s, as you often say, a matter of public record. It’s also a matter of public record you’re registered (last checked) to vote based on an address (Media Island) where you don’t live. You know this. And, other than citing it as an indicator of YOUR bonafides (since you’re fond of questioning others of theirs) *IS* irrelevant because what’s at issue here shouldn’t turn on ad hominem attacks. You’re the self appointed ‘snitch jacketer’ for your p(a)ls. Isn’t it chutzpah for you to decry mention of your history, personal or not? You don’t mind trading in that stuff when it comes to others. If you want to keep any argument confined to issues, then do so. You haven’t, and you probably won’t.

    Yeah, the feds are subpoenaing more persons of interest in the wake of Leah-Lynn Plante’s release AND well after y’all were photographed at the 9-13-12 Seattle federal courthouse demonstration in support of the Grand Jury resisters. For such a sleuth as yourself, you didn’t notice all the surveillance cameras in the courthouse plaza where the vigil was held?…or that the photos of demonstrators posted here were uploaded AFTER Pfeiffer became a target? He was at the demonstration and in full view of the surveillance cameras in the plaza too, btw. So while you & associates are in a dither, antagonizing the press, objecting to photographs on the basis of some imaginary right to remain in cognito in public, y’all prance in front of the surveillance cameras like they weren’t there. You’re not being criticized for doing so, just the mental disconnect. The fact is, even beyond the question of news worthiness, photographing you is valuable because so many of your ‘comrades’ are violent (assault journalists) and dangerous (vandalize private property, don’t believe in individual or property rights). If needed (to assist in the criminal prosecution of one of them) for assaulting a journalist, the photos would be invaluable. The pics also help establish familiarity with who all the players are so the story can be told/covered intelligently. Journalistic style and editorial policy regarding the same aren’t up for debate. The photos aren’t ‘sold’, but a number are published, or may be.

    As to any ‘pit’ in Mason County, the greater abyss appears to be in Thurston–your mileage may vary. Things in Mason are working out very well, thanks for asking. While there’s certainly corruption in Mason, it’s not as pernicious as in Thurston…IMO. The prosecutor here is hard nosed (wants to be the Gulliani of Mason County) but competent and doesn’t appear to support witch hunts like they do (Judge Gary Tabor when Thurston Dept. Prosecutor) in your neck of the woods. Briefs written by Amicus Curia in Mason are respected and have been quite effective. 95%+ of clients prevail…NEVER lost a case while self represented in any county including yours–more than a few! But the value (or lack thereof) of attorneys is a another can of worms for another time.

    Perhaps the angels have been more helpful here than you suppose because they’re respected. In fact, the County judges here are largely competent and respected, including by me. Thurston should do as well, though you have a couple of good ones. In any case, keep up the good work–best of luck (seriously) to you in your Towery law suit; leave our children/young adults alone and STF out of my face! No information on whether you’re due to receive a federal Grand Jury subpoena is available, but it’s doubtful you’d be too difficult to find to serve.

    Finally, what’s a good (A)narchist like you doing, registering to vote in the first place? Isn’t that against your ‘religion’?

  6. anok says:

    “Finally, what’s a good (A)narchist like you doing, registering to vote in the first place? Isn’t that against your ‘religion’?”
    Where I don’t personally see point in choosing a lesser of evils by voting and voting is a reformist strategy. Reformist actions such as voting can be used to better the immediate circumstances and as long as the persons who votes is still fighting against the rulers after they vote, than I don’t see how it’s not anarchistic.
    Caring about how an action is seen is important when talking about propaganda, but in the end the results of the action and the intention behind it are what matter, not the image of it.
    But alas, the spectacle holds us hostage.

Leave a 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.