Warning to Anarchist: "Young Persons Called to Private Grand Jury for Owning Books"

Article title, not mine.

an FBI team with stun grenades, battering rams, and assault rifles needed to burst into their homes in the wee hours of the morning

involving some 60-80 officers.

I will be the first to say, the article has an extremely liberal bias. And seems to leave out some pretty important info.
Such as what evidence if any, was gathered.

All this is because someone vandalized a Seattle courthouse

If one or both of the defendants is guilty of vandalism I certainly have less sympathy for them.
However the points highlighted in this story are worrisome.
Making the hearings private

a move unprecedented since the McCarthy era.

and

During the proceedings of a Grand Jury, the defendant is not allowed an attorney to represent her or him.

thesoundandnoise.com...
The article includes interesting info on how the feds spot anarchist trouble makers.

educated persons of various backgrounds, often students.

Everyone better fall in line or else!
(Should this be in the political madness forum? If so please move.)

Oh no! Those darned college campuses, I just knew they were running amok with anarchists! Down with higher education! Down with literature! Down with young adults!

This is absolute madness, the fact that this is even happening should be extremely alarming for people in the United States.

I have seen on other sites where people commented things like "she never said she wasnt non-violent so therefore she agrees with violence" and other dumb statements.

The fact is, it is not illegal to be an anarchist. It is not illegal to own books about anarchy or other "anti-political" books (whatever that means).

This 24 year old might spend the rest of her life in jail over this?! It's crazy...

Better start burning all my books or end up maintaining my silence in a cell forever.... pretty insane what this world is coming too. Don't understand how we have gone so far down the rabbit hole yet no one seems to care apart from a few, and not a very vocal few at that. Very unfortunant I fear for what tomorrow brings most days.

SaneThinking

Originally posted by SaneThinking
Better start burning all my books or end up maintaining my silence in a cell forever.... pretty insane what this world is coming too. Don't understand how we have gone so far down the rabbit hole yet no one seems to care apart from a few, and not a very vocal few at that. Very unfortunant I fear for what tomorrow brings most days.

SaneThinking

Yep, for most people it is like the boiling frog effect.
but
I think those anarchist out west care, and they are being pretty vocal to say the least.
I followed the links in the article and found this.

we attacked a Bank of America. One ATMs card slot was glued and screen smashed, and 3 windows of the bank smashed.

an Italian yuppie restaurant had several of its windows liberated.

we sabotaged a railway track north of New York City.

Glass etch cream was thrown all over the front windows of the Community Policing Centre

This was done in solidarity with Matt Duran and the other grand jury resistors

On one hand I'm happy to see people stand up for what's fair and just. On the other hand it saddens me to think we are so far gone that violence is the only recourse.
The tomorrow you fear is here today.

The way I saw it go down is they weren't looking for people who owned anarchist books because they owned the books, but because the people who did the vandalizing claimed to be anarchists. How would you investigate that?
Look for obvious signs of being an anarchists to narrow down the perps?

But they did overreact imo because the state fears anarchists more than anyone, because they cannot be controlled by BS politics and propaganda.

They controlled the threat of working class socialism by turning it into liberalism. They can not control anarchists other than claiming they are dangerous violent criminals. Anarchists are only a danger to the state, not to citizens.

reply to post by wrdwzrd

"she never said she wasnt non-violent so therefore she agrees with violence"

Right, when you put it that way, I'm thinking, Salem Witch Trials.
Making a grand jury hearing private is beyond suspicious.

Were is the link? Who, how, what where, which century? Link or are you just trolling?

Originally posted by garygnu
Were is the link? Who, how, what where, which century? Link or are you just trolling?

I'm not sure if this question is directed at me but,

(link)
We are talking about this story;
thesoundandnoise.com...

(who)
It involves two young idealist;
Leah-Lynn Plante and Matt Duran

(what)
They may be getting a raw deal.

(where)
In Porland Oregon

(what century)
2012

(trolling?)
I assure you, I am not trolling.

As far as the "how" goes, well, welcome to the conversation.

Originally posted by ANOK
The way I saw it go down is they weren't looking for people who owned anarchist books because they owned the books, but because the people who did the vandalizing claimed to be anarchists. How would you investigate that?
Look for obvious signs of being an anarchists to narrow down the perps?

But they did overreact imo because the state fears anarchists more than anyone, because they cannot be controlled by BS politics and propaganda.

They controlled the threat of working class socialism by turning it into liberalism. They can not control anarchists other than claiming they are dangerous violent criminals. Anarchists are only a danger to the state, not to citizens.

Of course.
Headline sensationalism is annoying and pervasive, sorry about that. I tried to give a little warning.

I agree with every point except the "not a danger to citizens" part.
I don't think they would set out to be dangerous to the public but when you sabotage things like rail lines there is always the possibility of an accident.
Or,
Would you allow a child to play anywhere near anarchist that are "making a point"?

Originally posted by tanda7
I don't think they would set out to be dangerous to the public but when you sabotage things like rail lines there is always the possibility of an accident.
Or,
Would you allow a child to play anywhere near anarchist that are "making a point"?

Well if they are really doing that I would not support that action. I would not support anything that is a risk to someones life. Back in the 70's and 80's when I was active we would not do any harm to any person, destruction of property is a different matter, as long as it has a point and is not just mindless vandalism of course.

But anyone can claim to be anything they want. Anyone can call themselves an anarchist, doesn't mean I'm going to agree with them.

I would expect parents to keep their children well away from any anarchist, me included. Seriously though, huh?
There are lots of things children should not be allowed to play near. Does everything have to be child safe now or something?

reply to post by ANOK

There are lots of things children should not be allowed to play near. Does everything have to be child safe now or something?

I know the anarchist philosophy or ideology is not dangerous (to citizens) in and of itself, I'm agreeing with you there.
And I know the playing child example is a bit dramatic.I'm just trying to make a point and that sprang to mind.
But mayhem, even calculated mayhem can be dangerous to citizens. I'm not even saying I am against what they do, Extreme situations call for extreme action sometimes. I just hope for everyone's sake no innocents get hurt, it could be the trigger that turns public sentiment against them.

Leah-Lynn and Matt have since been subpoenaed and ordered before a Grand Jury hearing, which is a private hearing used to determine if there is sufficient evidence to indict someone with a federal crime. During the proceedings of a Grand Jury, the defendant is not allowed an attorney to represent her or him. This means that a Grand Jury is essentially a group of twenty-four jurors, a prosecutor looking to indict someone with a felony, and Leah-Lynn Plante, vegan. A Grand Jury is also secret, so we do not know and are not allowed to know what is going on in the courtroom.

Leah was first called before a Grand Jury back on August 2. She refused to co-operate with the jury proceedings, giving them only her name and date of birth. She refused to answer any other questions and explicitly stated she would not talk about any other people. Historically, the Grand Jury process was intended to protect citizens from slanderous or malicious prosecution. However, Grand Juries have been used to isolate members of political activist groups and use the fear of imprisonment to gain information about other groups and persons. Leah was re-subpoenaed, and returned to court yesterday, where she again refused to co-operate. She has been re-re-subpoenaed without yet receiving a date for her next hearing.

All this is because someone vandalized a Seattle courthouse on May Day. Leah has publicly stated that she does not endorse what happened on May Day, and that she was not in Seattle during that time. She has made it clear that her refusal to co-operate is not a strategy to protect criminals, but is rather a protest against a legal system which is unconcerned with the civil rights of citizens. Considering that she could be held in contempt of court and sentenced to jail time, we should take what she says seriously. Matt Duran, also subpoenaed and brought before a Grand Jury, has already been held in contempt of court and is currently in U.S. Federal custody. His contempt hearing was made private by the presiding Judge, a move unprecedented since the McCarthy era.

This is terrifying, it essentially indicates that it is now illegal to be a dissident. The woman claims she was not in Seattle on May Day so instead of allowing her to prove her innocence in court (wait, I thought it was innocent until proven guilty, doh) they just keep summoning her to a Grand Jury? And her friend because he won't name names is held in contempt and remains in Federal Custody? What happened to being charged with a crime and the prosecution having to prove your guilt?

It appears based on this blog, anyway that these two were arrested simply because they're anarchists so therefor must know the ones that participated in the vandalism of a Court House on May Day. Is this not akin to 'thought crime' as well as a denial of the Constitutional Right to freely associate?

Let's please try to remember we are talking about VANDALISM, which I don't condone but WOW no one was hurt or killed. Vandalism is a misdemeanor.

Domestic Terrorism are you f****ng kidding me!?
Newly Released FBI “Domestic Terrorism” Training on Anarchists, Environmentalists, Show COINTELPRO Tactics

Originally posted by tanda7
I just hope for everyone's sake no innocents get hurt, it could be the trigger that turns public sentiment against them.

I think the state has already achieved that goal.

I hate violence but you have to realise the state is violent, and does far more harm to people than any anarchist has ever done. Revolutions are violent because the state only knows violence, and nothing else can change it.

Even the mostly pacifist anarchist movement in the 80's started to question it's non-violent stance, because the more we protest the more violent the state becomes.

The anarchist band Crass were extremely none-violent at first but even they started questioning that stance.

"By letting it happen without a fight...
You're already dead, You're already dead.
With your endless debates about wrong and right...
You're already dead, You're already dead.
Nothing's going to change if you're not prepared to act,
There's no point complaining after the fact,
Content to be a number, branded X and neatly packed...
You're already dead, You're already dead."

I am not advocating violence as I am not prepared to act violently myself, but I think it's inevitable because the state is not going to give up without a serious fight.

reply to post by ANOK

I'm sad to say I think you are right.
I'm curious,
Hypothetically speaking, what would the conversation be like when a group were discussing objectives? Let's take the yuppie Italian restaurant example.
Is there intel about the owners specifically or is it just because it's a symbol?

Is there discussion about the the peripheral impact of vandalizing a specific target?
Is there a criteria that a target must meet?

reply to post by ANOK

The reason I ask is because I have always paid the bills by restoring, repairing, and fabricating. It's pretty much the opposite of vandalism. I live in a historically significant city, and occasionaly I've had to repair that sort of damage.
So it's hard for me to really wrap my head around random destruction.

I want to believe they would have good reasoning behind their choices.

reply to post by tanda7


Sorry for not replying I got stuck in the 911 forum.

I don't support wanton vandalism, it's stupid.

I would not support vandalizing a restaurant. Small time business owners are not the problem, big corporate companies like the oil companies, the banks, the military industrial complex are.

Back in the 70's and 80's when I was active we did things like super-gluing bank locks. We attacked symbols of state and economic authority, not high street stores. We wanted to wake people up to the problems, not alienate them.

Personally I think educating people does far more than protesting and breaking things.

Update;
"Third anarchist jailed for refusing to testify before secret grand jury "
rt.com...

The courts are not backing down. They put this young woman in jail for not answering questions before a private grand jury.

Leah-Lynn Plante, a mid-20s activist from Seattle, Washington, was ushered out of court by authorities on Wednesday after refusing for a third time to answer questions forced on her by a grand jury — a panel of prosecutors convened to determine if an indictment can be issued for a federal crime.

In an earlier post I wrote;

Right, when you put it that way, I'm thinking, Salem Witch Trials.
Making a grand jury hearing private is beyond suspicious.

From the article;

“They are trying to investigate anarchists and persecute them for their beliefs. This is a fishing expedition. This is a witch hunt,” she (Ms. Plante) says this week.