Why The Media Must Be Assaulted…(A)

Increasingly violent young Anarchist dilettantes are advocating attacking journalists while vandalizing property during street demonstrations. Their screeds can be found on numerous local area blogs dedicated to promoting destruction of property, threats, intimidation, and assault. The following article was posted on pugetsoundanarchists.org, a blog whose participants insist on speaking only to themselves…anonymously…preferring to ban/block opposing viewpoints. It’s a toss up as to whether journalists today are at greater risk from street elements (including the homeless), police ignorant of the laws they’re sworn to uphold, selective law enforcement, or those engaging in the politics of destruction–i.e. Anarchists. Comments will be interlaced as the particular blog site would otherwise censor such critical remarks.

Seattle Anarchists 5-1-12

Wed, 05/09/2012 – 9:49pm — Anonymous (of course)

Although the author of this piece believes that members of the main-stream media should be assaulted *strategically* at any place and time, this piece was heavily influenced by what I saw occur on May 1st 2012 in Seattle Washington. As an anarchist in Seattle, this is written mainly for a Seattle audience although hopefully there are some things people from other places will be able to take away from it. (Such as attacking/injuring those who serve as the eyes & ears of the community, an informed electorate being necessary to any functioning truly democratic society?)
The main-stream media will never be on our side. We don’t even need to get into which company owns what media outlet, let’s leave all that aside, they are scum and we know this. Beyond this, almost all forms of media that are not “our” media will almost never be on our side. (What you seek isn’t ‘reporting’, what you require is approval and advertisement/propaganda.) Luckily, in the radical scene in Seattle, this is something nearly everybody already knows. There is frequent talk of how the media lies to the public and a common understanding that they will intentionally distort our “message” . (Your “message” is abundantly clear and speaks volumes for itself right here.) While this is an accurate analysis, it does not run deep enough. This analysis places the media in a role that is much more passive than the actual role they fulfill. Many of us have seen the images and videos from the G20 in Toronto, or the Vancouver hockey riots, or most recently the London riots. Those of us who have seen these images are also probably aware of the way that the state attempted to identify people who they perceived to have commit crimes. (The State/Anybody is at liberty to gather evidence from public sources/streets to hold those who commit such crimes accountable. If a vandal doesn’t want to be seen/filmed committing such crimes in public, then don’t commit such crimes in public.) While much of this footage came from security cameras (which should also be smashed as frequent as possible, obviously(?)), in each case there was also a good deal that came right from the media reporters who were present at all of these actions. (Imagine…reporters actually doing their job gathering information/photos and covering a story instead of taking dictation at the hands of government press officers!) In several cases the media either gladly handed over the footage the cops were interested in, or simply broadcasted the crimes in real-time, giving open access to anyone who had a desire to review the footage. (Yes!–That’s what reporters do: They report! They are NOT your ‘co-conspirators’. They do not require your permission to  report on events in public venues.)
The media is not a passive enemy, but a quite active one. The presence of the media at our demos does not only distort our views or delegitimize our struggles and confrontations, it puts people in jail or prison. (Where would you have those who wantonly destroy property and assault/attack journalists put? Those who commit such crimes are not tried by the press, but a jury of their peers–is your ‘message’ being distorted here, or is it simply and painfully obvious? What you advocate is ‘blinding’ the public in order to avoid responsibility. Recording images in public venues is a fundamental liberty interest belonging to all citizens, not just members of the ‘press’.) All of the major media outlets in Seattle were just handed a subpoena endorsed by Detective Ric Hall, stating that they had to hand over any material or footage they have from May Day, they are specifically interested in the footage in which people appear to be committing crimes (go figure). Although, as of now it is unclear whether or not the outlets will comply with this request, they probably will. (You’re volunteering to serve their jail time for contempt if they refuse?) However, even if not all the outlets complied, there is already information floating around that KIRO has already given all of their material to the police, and it is currently being reviewed. While we can certainly hope for the best, realistically it will not be a shock if they end up indentifying people from these videos and charges end up being filed. (Good to hear there will be no ‘shock’ when vandals are ID’d and charged. Perhaps the 9/11 terrorists shouldn’t have been filmed either? Just what gives YOU, et ux, the ‘right’ to destroy anybody’s property? Mind publishing your address and vehicle license # so victims can return the favor?)
We have already seen the way the media has portrayed May Day, day where the anarchist terrorists brought mayhem to our peaceful little green city. (Truth will out. And pictures are worth a thousand words. The public can SEE the windows being smashed by black clad anonymous figures. So that’s ‘distorting’ your “message”? And whose car was that with the smashed windows?) After all, what’s to say one of those windows couldn’t have been your living room, or the doctor’s office where your elderly mother was attending her appointment. So we can only assume that this trend will continue, and that they want to see us “held accountable” for our terroristic actions. (That’s a fair assumption.) They will most likely offer any information they have to the police, aiding in the apprehension of the criminals. (Not necessarily true, but an assaulted journalist almost certainly will.) Once, again even if in some miraculous turn of events they don’t hand over all of their raw footage, the stuff shot live still exists, and the police will probably not have too hard of a time accessing it.
The police claim that they were well prepared for May Day. However, it is rather hard to imagine why they would let the federal court house (among other things) be attacked on a day where they were (allegedly) so well-prepared. They are eager to identify people and charge them with these crimes. (Shouldn’t they be?) They must be feeling beyond embarrassed about all of the property damage that occurred, and they also have the downtown business association breathing down their neck to apprehend those who destroyed their property. We must assume that they are going to go to pretty great lengths to try to get some convictions. (That, too, is a pretty fair assumption. But then this kind of rhetoric will mollify potential jurors, yes?) The task force has already been set up, and if they don’t already exist, I don’t think special snitchlines and websites are very off. (They won’t need them. Most citizens would be eager to assist the police in apprehending those responsible. Journalists may be among the few exceptions–unlikely, though, if they’ve been personally victimized.) They feel embarrassed and need to prove to “the public” that this type of behavior will not be tolerated and that the consequences will be very real.
(Possibly 20-30 years, yep.) This is why the media must be assaulted, there is a very real chance that people will end up in jail because of the footage taken. (This is why the media may need to take up arms/concealed handguns to provide for their own self defense. They have that right. The rhetoric here lends credence to the need.) However, many in Seattle did do a great job at scaring away some of the more timid reporters (props to all those who used their flag-bats for the right purpose). (So the Seattle Mayor was correct, after all, in declaring an emergency and ordering the confiscation of such weapons?) Several of the reporters were assaulted by those in the bloc, and a few of them even had to run away because they felt too unsafe. Reporters were paint bombed, struck with flag-bats, punched, kicked, and slapped. (The language of tyrants!) Over all I would say the this particular march was not very a peaceful atmosphere for reporters, despite what that guy over at the stranger said. We cannot shame them away. Yelling can be good and invigorating, but it will not do enough, we must treat them like the lap-dogs they are and physically remove from the area. Although this could be done without violence, it would probably take a lot longer, and let’s be honest they definitely deserve it. (Really? Only the youngest most naive sophists would accept your argument–your intended audience. Those with no theory of government make the easiest targets for Fagin.)
If we are successfully able to remove the media from core areas of our demos, or at the very least severely limit their access, there is much better chance of incriminating footage not winding up in the hands of the pigs. At this point, it is kind of a given that there will be at least some cameras around while the crimes are being committed, those who are choosing to document this stuff need to be very particular about the way they do it. (Should they bring a note from their mother?–or you, perhaps?) I would say that it helps if people actually know who you are and have a relatively clear conception of why are there holding a camera. (Or possibly more helpful still would be for you, et al, to have a chat with their brothers, Smith & Wesson.) However, don’t be surprised if anyone shows any hostility to you for trying to capture images or film, because in most cases it’s obviously for the better if our crimes don’t get caught on film. (Better for you, maybe–not all.)
If the media is going to be actively complicit in putting us in cages, then they must be actively attacked. (And defended! Your rant should convince any/all to volunteer whatever information they have to stop such assaults on the community as injury to one is injury to all. The legislature should pass a law enhancing penalties for hate crimes targeting journalists.)


Fri, 05/11/2012 – 1:48pm — Cascadia_21 #

Rule 1: Don’t get caught.

Rule 1: Don’t get caught.
Rule 2: Don’t film the Black Bloc.
Rule 3: Don’t film bloc-ing up or de-blocing.

One thing that was not clear enough in your statement is that it is NOT okay for BB to film itself either. For instance, there was some guy in Seattle that was in BB that was taking pictures of everybody… it doesn’t matter what they’re wearing, if they have a camera in hand, they aren’t welcome near the BB. Most photographers understand and respect when you tell them to move and shut down – but some are stubborn. This is when it is appropriate to 1.) Cite Washington Wiretap laws “You do not have consent of these people to film them.” (None is required and you should read what you cite. Not even cops have an expectation of privacy in public spaces. Click HERE to see a short ACLU video clip on the issue.) and/or 2.) Disable the camera and/or (Extremely dangerous for all concerned!) 3.) Physically remove them from the area. (Equally dangerous) There cannot be any exceptions. If I see another camera within the black bloc, I’m going to curb stomp the equipment. (People engaging in this type of behavior have been curb stomped themselves.) I don’t care how much you want to film epic badassery, it is not worth potentially criminalizing and de-anonymizing your comrades. EVER. (Who are you calling ‘comrade’, white man? It’s been said a reporter has no friends–or at least they shouldn’t have…if they’re any good. Reporters certainly don’t want violent thugs as ‘comrades’. If such lunacy is what’s being offered as the ‘alternative’, folks are well advised to support the status quo. They already know that. It’s time for you and your ‘comrades’ to wake up and smell the coffee.) 

And as always, ACAB


This is the kind of wanton destruction that prompted ethnic Korean store owners to arm themselves in past years during civil disturbances in their LA (Calif.) shops. Seattle, et ux, retail owners should take note and defend their property/livelihood. If the police aren’t up to the task, then that’s what the 2nd Amendment is for. Journalists may have to follow suit. Citizens not only have the right, but the duty to defend themselves.

The murder of American newsman Bill Stewart in Nicaragua was an act of barbarism that all civilized people condemn.

Journalists seeking to report the news and inform the public are soldiers in no nation’s army. When. they are made innocent victims of violence and war, all people who cherish the truth and believe in free debate pay a terrible price.

I know the American people share my sense of outrage and loss at the death of this gifted, dedicated young man. On behalf of all Americans, I want to express my deepest sympathy to Bill Stewart’s wife and family for their suffering and loss. –Jimmy Carter

Note: The correspondent was killed by a member of the National Guard after he approached a government maintained street barricade in Managua. He was in Nicaragua to cover the fighting between the government forces and members of the Sandinista National Liberation Front.

Citation: Jimmy Carter:”Bill Stewart Statement on the Death of the ABC News Correspondent. ,” June 21, 1979.Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley,The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=32505.

Read more at the American Presidency Project:

Jimmy Carter: Bill Stewart Statement on the Death of the ABC News Correspondent.http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=32505#ixzz1uvnNsmiR

About admin

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

2 Responses to Why The Media Must Be Assaulted…(A)

  1. photo man says:

    Photo’s not safe either

  2. pinbalwyz says:

    Blac Bloc Anarchists issue Fatwah against photojournalists:

    In the interest of documenting the threats and violence some anarchists insist on using to target photojournalists…seriously raising the potential for injury or fatality to either/both parties, the follow demented screeds are excerpted from the pugetsoundanarchists.org website as examples of why journalist must take their own defense seriously:

    Thu, 05/17/2012 – 10:54am — LegalizeFreedom #
    Help me understand..
    I don’t understand how you can say “Total Freedom” while infringing on the freedom of other people. Information is freedom. Being able to document and share events is freedom. By going targeting people with cameras or destroying their property to keep your actions a secret is the opposite of freedom..
    I am a total ACAB type of person but I just don’t understand your logic here.
    Also, it’s not illegal to record in public, so the wiretapping comment you made isn’t legit. Corrupt police officers threaten people with these laws.. why are you sharing the same type of mentality? Corrupt cops tell you to shut the cameras off because they don’t want people witnessing their actions. You are advocating the same thing.
    If you really want “total freedom” than you cannot advocate harming another person or destroying their property just because they are witnessing you in public.
    So help me understand the rationale behind your thinking because I am obviously missing something.
    Log in or register to post comments
    Thu, 05/17/2012 – 11:09am — yoyoyoyo #
    Actually when you think about
    Actually when you think about it in terms of the safety of those at a protest, it is the media that infringes on freedoms because media footage is used and has been used frequently to convict people at demonstrations of crimes that they commit at demonstrations. So, the easy way around this would be for those who wish to film to be conscious of what they are filming in order to not take any incriminating footage. If someone asks you or tells you not to film them, then don’t. They have their own basic freedoms at stake as well that are not equal to the entitlement that many journalists feel toward others bodies and actions.
    Also, the mainstream media is not neutral either so when referring them think about that in the terms you think about “ACAB”. All cops are bastards because they fulfill the roles that they play as cops not as individuals. In the same way the media is not to be trusted nor respected nor given space because they also fulfill a role as journalist that is already set by their bosses, companies, society, etc. The media functions to maintain the status quo. They have a monopoly on information in the same way that the police have a monopoly on violence, together the two form a united front in maintaing the social order.
    Log in or register to post comments
    Thu, 05/17/2012 – 11:54am — LegalizeFreedom #
    You want to break laws and violate protected freedoms in the name of… freedom?
    “it is the media that infringes on freedoms because media footage is used and has been used frequently to convict people at demonstrations of crimes that they commit at demonstrations”
    This is called Freedom of Press.. Freedom of Press is critical in an open society. Yes, much of the mainstream Press sucks.. but your reasoning still doesn’t make any sense to me.
    Cameras have also been used to catch corrupt cops and help out people who were wrongfully accused of things..
    Clearly you have a much different view of “freedom” than I do. I don’t like cops and I hate government because they want freedom for themselves but not everybody else.. and that’s exactly how you’re coming across when you advocate harming other people or destroying their property to cover up your actions.. that’s no better than a cop!!
    Log in or register to post comments
    Thu, 05/17/2012 – 12:09pm — yoyoyoyo #
    In theory, the idea is that
    In theory, the idea is that you are destroying or harming other people to cover up your actions because your actions are illegal. Since, in theory, you do not believe in the law, the government, the authority of those individuals or their institutions then you do not want nor respect the presence of their courts which are based on their authority and ideaologies and therefore have no problem in breaking their laws and also would prefer to not end up in their jails so you might obscure the view of a journalist (who works for their system anyway) from helping to put you or your comrades in their jails which are based on the government and the cops ability to restrict everyone’s freedoms in a material way known as a jail cell.
    Log in or register to post comments
    Thu, 05/17/2012 – 12:12pm — maps #
    “If you really want “total
    “If you really want “total freedom” than you cannot advocate harming another person or destroying their property just because they are witnessing you in public.”
    As yoyoyoyo said above, it’s not as simple as them just witnessing you in public. Their witnessing may land someone in jail or prison, introducing any number of hardships to that person for the rest of their lives.
    Is a photojournalist free to take a photo so that they can make the headlines the next day when a single photo could disrupt my life forever so that I may not qualify for housing, education, jobs, loans, etc?
    Really, who’s freedom is more important here? Sure, photographers have the freedom to take photos, but that does not negate the freedom I have to defend myself and my friends.
    For them, it’s just a story. But for me, this is my life.
    Log in or register to post comments
    Fri, 05/18/2012 – 12:11am — Endymion #
    Maps brings it home, as usual
    Maps brings it home, as usual. FUUUUUUU
    Log in or register to post comments
    Thu, 05/17/2012 – 7:22pm — All Power To Th… #
    Tighten Your ‘Rules of Engagement’/Bring Your Own Photographer
    1. An “embedded” photographer who is WITH BB can be helpful for future studies of strategy and tactics vs. kkkops/DHS/libturds/right-wingers/’superheroes'(lol)/etc.
    2. An “embedded” photographer who is WITH BB is good for indentifying reactionaries and kkkops who interfered with the BB for future punishment.
    3. Most radicals like “riot porn”; even stoopid-ass Trots. Feed our fetish, God Dammit! Lol.
    4. Because of the above ‘fatwah’ and also how kkkops will also snatch photographers and cameras, whoever this is will have be super discreet.
    5. If this is to be the ‘new’ policy, in particular the penalty side of it, then it should be universally applied to any and all anarchist activities, both ‘legal’ and ‘extra-legal’. Because…
    6. We are surrounded by backward, reactionary, amerikkkan a$$hats who, for the most part, know nothing but cowardice, opportunism, ‘magical’ thinking, dogmatism, snitchcraft, vigilante-ism, hypocrisy, and savagery. And most of them are ARMED.
    Therefore, they must be shown, repeatedly, that the BB means ‘business’ and that ‘mercy’ is NEVER on the agenda vs. any of them. Their choices must be narrowed down to “join the BB”, “stay out of the way of the BB”, or “get punished by the BB”.
    7. This needs to be made ‘common knowledge’ in a very short period of time.
    8. On a side note, I would also like to ask for an indefinite moratorium on the BB punishing private vehicles.

    “Wake Up, God Dammit!”

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.