Notes on ambiguity of Leah, and excerpt from upcoming text

  • Posted on: 2 November 2012
  • By: worker

<table><tr><td>The following is an excerpt of an incomplete text mapping the psychology of awaiting trial. It is written to elucidate nothing other than the fear of boredom and jail, the horrific nightmares of the unknown, and the pathetic affects of such thoughts. During its construction, a particular topic was launched into popular discourse that could not escape its own timeless saliency. Before previewing the excerpt, I felt it necessary to attempt at adding to this discussion (at length). The topic which slouches lazily on the wall of current intellect is none other than the fictitious link between madness, or mental instability, and cowardice, ie snitching. Among the frightful speculation of whether or not that punk girl has cooperated, grows the insidious connection made between her proclaimed emotional limitations and the prospect of her talking. The trajectory is as follows: her supporters seem to suggest that because of her weakened mental state, she has no obligation to the people with raised eyebrows and pens in hand awaiting either sympathetic or condemning remarks (not to mention individuals whose lives could be altered by such an act of betrayal), and on the other hand speculators who suggest she has snitched, turn to her mental disarray as a reason she should have never been involved in the first place, and as such the foundation for the flip. And in between are confused individuals all over the internet and elsewhere, unsure of whether or not they are being insensitive by asking for more information because, after all, she has quite clearly been put through a lot. </td><td><img title="trigger warning" src=""></td></tr>...

To be clear, it is and always will be my position that being a coward and a snitch has nothing to do with mental instability, and is rather a reflection of weakness in character and a general lack of integrity. No one betrays because they have anxiety or depression, these qualities are not intrinsic to one another in any way. Anxiety is purely a physical manifestation of fear—whether subtle, imagined, or intensely grounded in reality. I often get anxiety attacks gnawing on me with fear of jail, fear of my friends being jailed, illness, or my family's demise under a shit economy. But this is life. For some the fear is quiet, or rarely present, and for others it is all they can see. No insanity is inherently linked to choosing one's own safety over another's; no madness is the cause of confusion as to whether or not this is snitching or that is snitching. Perhaps ignorance in regards to the legal system, perhaps stupidity and disbelief or naïve thoughts of being smarter than the state, or maybe a pathetic and selfish desire to remain “free” at the expense of another- but strictly not being mentally stable? No. And the most basic proof of this is the fact that “mental stability” in a society such as ours—with its abstract mode of relating to the world—is <em>necessarily subjective</em>. It is always already unstable, merely varying levels of fantasy and fiction. To butcher a quote I read somewhere: for anyone to deny that they are mad in a world as mad as ours, is simply another form of insanity.

There is a difference that needs to be reiterated —a line that must be drawn—between emotional distress and disloyalty. When we talk about snitching and mental illness, it is just that. Snitching <em>and</em> mental illness. Not snitching because mental illness, not snitching and therefore mental illness. Just as any other behavior or act. To attempt this categorization—of defining and painting the psychology of a snitch—is to first of all play the role of patronizing doctor and secondly to mimic the work of police. It creates a discourse with a flimsy foundation and therefore any theoretical offspring started from this point will have stunted growth and mutated concepts. Mania, depression, compulsion, obsession, etc are all categories that have been created around a scientific fairy tale, they are identity-based boxes made of air and smoke. They are attempts at taking emotions—moment by moment—and making them more legible and moldable. Any one of you reading this could diagnose yourself with the exact traits of any disorder previously mentioned, yet are you weak because of this? Cowardly? No, you <em>feel</em>, and this makes you the ever-evolving subject of psychology.

That is not to say that active informants don't have behaviors that can be identified, but this is another affair entirely and better suited for a security culture workshop.

Snitching—flipping—is a vague weakness, for different reasons every time but due to a basic vulnerability that never grows beyond itself. We will not—EVER—be able to predict who doesn't have the strength and integrity to withstand repression, so making sweeping statements about how people who are that fragile shouldn't be here in the first place, etc, is pointless and dangerous. We are all emotionally fragile in one way or another; we are all affected by society and capitalism and the violence done to our bodies and minds, but nothing about this fact makes us more susceptible to collapsing under pressure from our enemy. And if we deny this fact that we are fragile, or affected, what exactly is it we are striving for? Perfect robot complexions of the mind? That cold, detached nihilism incapable of movement because nothing really matters? That's garbage; we are messed up and injured, and this is often where our true strength comes from. Having the ability to betray comrades or friends or random people to the police is some nasty demon, but it is not madness.

As for this particular situation, if anyone puts themselves near a life-style such as the anarchist milieu's, in which it is common knowledge that “We do not talk to the police, ever”, their emotional imbalance does not change the way they have to relate to that community or its genuine need for particular types of information and transparency. It doesn't matter who you are, what you are, or <em>how you are doing</em>, if you consider yourself in any way aligned with us—you <em>have</em> to give a solid, affirmative “No, I'm not out because I cooperated.” Period. If you put your picture up saying “I will not talk” in a thousand different places, you owe it to the people seeing that picture to confirm that you did, in fact, not talk. And once that's confirmed, take care of yourself, be your biggest priority from here on out and cuss out misogynists when they objectify you. But it doesn't matter how bad things are for you. Things are bad. We know. We live in this fucking world too. What we need is a simple one word answer, and we need it 2 weeks ago.

I guess my basic desire for interjection in this matter is as follows: Mental illness does not have, and has never had, a causal relationship with cooperation. Nor is it an EXCUSE for cooperation or opacity regarding one's possible cooperation! Cognitive, emotional, and behavioral dysfunction is not the same thing as cowardice; nor is it a “get out of jail free card” for cowardice. A snitch is a snitch is a fucking vile vermin and that's all we can really say about it with any certainty. There is no way to calculate what type of selfishness, what kind of fear, or what form of weakness will result in betrayal and there is certainly no way to excuse it when it happens.

That's my long comment on the matter, and I hope more than anything that it is rendered obsolete by the forthcoming knowledge that no one has talked or cooperated.

And now a glimpse at my own overly dramatic lunacy.

Preview of: Sitting at the Feet of Foreverrrrr

“...that needn't offend you when you consider that I don't care at all what the outcome of the case is, and that I would only laugh at it if I were sentenced. Assuming, that is, that the case will ever come to a proper conclusion, which I very much doubt. Indeed, I fancy that it has probably been dropped already or will soon be dropped, through the laziness or the forgetfulness or it may be even through the fears of those who are responsible for it. Of course it's possible that they will make a show of carrying it on, in the hope of getting money out of me, but they needn't bother, I can tell you now, for I shall never bribe anyone.”

"Joseph K." The Trial

It began as a loud roar echoing off every wall of my head and covering the landscape of my life with its obtrusion. Over time, this has transformed into a static that I can't always hear but prevents a particular kind of silence from settling. Silence that quiets fear and allows courage to take shape; that pushes away the image to make room for the unknown. The silence that has abandoned me is not still, it is not calm; it is an open and chaotic way of life that has been drowned out and suffocated by the white noise of Trial.

The threat of jail no longer sends me into a panic. No, what keeps me awake until dawn and feels like cellular vertigo is the threat of <em>waiting forever</em>. Even if I await freedom, it is never freedom. In being temporarily captured by enemy forces, I have been permanently sent down a road of questioning myself and weighing every moment on a scale of worthiness. Is it <em>worth</em> it? Everything is worth it and yet nothing is.

A few years of this and already I feel half wasted away. Telling others to go on without me and to please not wait, because waiting is torture as much as any other form. But now I wish they would turn back, slow down just a little bit in their lives that rush farther and farther away from my psychological confinement. Fear conquers my body; I know that <em>They</em> are winning because I am neutralized but I can't seem to quiet the voice reminding me of potential consequences for every little thing I could or could not do. And I recognize this as defeat, as much as I recognize the face of a friend or the smell of my own home.

I feel as if I am always about to go to work.

Waiting has taken every joint in my body and dislocated them so that overall I feel fragmented and hindered to the point of near-paralysis. I have images of before and after dancing in my mind, shaming me for feeling the impact. Because being affected, perhaps, makes me weak or pathetic. That is subjective. But we do know boredom as a well-known enemy. Sneaky, always ready to possess willing minds. It is the inability to desire, waiting around. Evil.

Waiting assumes progress, and this fact is what made me realize I am living a nightmare. Relying on an image of the future to play out as planned is like sitting still day after day, anticipating the moment of death.

I wait so much and so hard, I think the postponed event of trial or dismissal or anything has become a fetishized object in my head. I take reality for granted because it doesn't yet house this drama that is both invisible and omnipotent in my daily life. I am obsessed with the ending. Infatuated and absorbed by the idea—the fantasy—that it could one day just not exist. But I am a different person because of it, it cannot not exist.

I have beaten back such an integral part of myself to make room for this fear, for the monstrosity of apprehension. Bruises cover my sense of self and worth; if courage inhabited its own body inside of mine it would be bloody and raw. But even I, in all of my anxiety and torment, am incapable of betrayal. This alone gives me strength to laugh in the face of such a hellish situation. It matters not how wounded I am, all I need to do is yelp and a whole pack of fierce wolves will run towards the sound of my cries to defend my safety. That is power, not defeat. Were I to allow isolation to overcome me, I would merely be weak and frightened and caught in the same web that Joseph K. found himself stuck in, but I know that I am never truly alone.



Stopped reading after holier than thou "I experience anxiety so I can say what other people's anxiety is like and what it does to them."

I'm curious how saying that anxiety does not make someone a snitch means this?

"I'm curious how saying that anxiety does not make someone a snitch means this?"

So true that! Loyalty is a force of nature not a personal condition or vendetta.

That's not a real comment.

ditto. actually i stopped earlier when they referred to mental illness as 'madness'. good job reproducing 19th century biopower's discourse bro. anarchist scene in the u.s. has been notoriously shitty at dealing with mental illness despite the efforts of such as the icarus project. the bold 'rebel singularities' have seen fit to eject from their midst some of the most brilliant and singular rebels for their mistakes rather than to organize or provide any care or any concept of mental wellness that extends farther than that determined by modern capitalism. and yet some dare to call it a 'community'? for shame.

Well, had u kept reading instead of drawing whatever freaky conclusion you would like to, you would have realized the above text critiques the modern techniques of goverment at work in psychology. Its main premise seems to be: dont conflate a gesture to a "trait". As much as its problematic to see bretrayal as a "sin," its worse to see it as a characteristic of this or that set of people. And this has been the discourse through out the internet discussions about that women who was released without any statement. Its been subtly concealed as security precations for anarchists who want to act together, but as the text states it does its own police work. Did u really miss the Foucault in this?

Maybe you intellectually lazy motherfuckers should finish reading a text before you blab on with your stupid opinions.

i guess i did because i took another look and still all i see is that it reeks of contempt for the 'insane' all the way through. police work indeed.

you all win...i stopped reading after 'notes on'

100% agreement. The author is talkin bad ass smack about something she/he has never had to deal with.

Let the author deal with 4 years of constant harassment and pressure from the FBI and Popo and never say a word and THEN I'll listen to the chest beating machismo like it has some authenticity. Barring that, as in the situation now...the talk is just that, smack talk. Big words from someone whose never been there.

This is not a "text mapping" of the psychology of awaiting trial, this is some dude universalizing his own experiences.


You don't have to be a dude to be boring, dude.

We are agreed on at least one point, dude.


not a dude.

"During its construction, a particular topic was launched into popular discourse that could not escape its own timeless saliency."

Is there one word that succinctly expresses the phenomena of writing that becomes hilariously verbose--to the extent of meaningless--as the author tries to sound smarter?

yes, emile.

as someone who is not a fan at all of this piece, i actually fail to see what your criticism is supposed to get at, or what you think is wrong with that sentence, other than maybe that you had to look up 'saliency.' oh god, 3 seconds of your life spent going to

I like you, stay strong.

cheers, comrade. wasting away indeed. hang tough, we'll be together soon!

Not all that familiar with the story, but is this Leah girl mentally ill? Because if that's the case, it seems as though her friends might have gently talked her down from the front lines of whatever was going on, maybe gotten her some help, no? It surely doesn't seem prudent or at all kind to stand by and allow somebody suffering from mental illness to become the poster girl du jour, or to be first in line for arrest.

Depends on how you define "mentally ill." Sounds like she has PTSD or something like that from her time in jail/the raid, which is mental illness, though not in the sense I believe you're thinking of. In any case, I'm pretty sure she wasn't even in town when the events under investigation went down - they're trying to get her as a witness (presumably as someone who knows the local anarchist scene), not as a suspect.

Another round of speculation is about to come. I must refuse to put up with it.

Leah-Lynn Plante -according to this source has asked "that people do not jump to wild conclusions about her release because they do not apply." Yeah, that's ambiguous enough to anybody. Not well-written. Bullshit. But it does not imply she indeed cooperated, so perhaps it stands for what the author calls “No, I'm not out because I cooperated.” We shall wait and see.

Another suggestion: Be silent, and wait for her clarifications. At this point, especially if she were a bloody snitch, it would be so much easier for her or others to circulate big-time bullshit to "the public opinion", in particular to media vultures that loyally serve the police in case you haven't already noticed.

Our deepest fear here might be: "Are they keeping something from us?" Well, obviously; but we don't know the fucking reason. If someone makes a wild guess and claims the reason for this kind of silence is indeed her cooperation, then someone chooses not to support Leah ever again, from now on. And that's that.

But how exactly can people give so much respect and support at the beginning, and then feel betrayed without something to call upon? How can people be so eager to withdraw their support because unconfirmed as of yet rumors spread, and moreover in such a dirty case as grand jury secret inquisition? I don't get it.

We don't give a damn about somebody's "lunacy"; that's cheap talk anyhow. Forget about it. Focus on confirmed facts only.

Past snitches should have their bones broken. Lets not add more snitches to the long list, yet.
As Matthew “Maddy” Pfeiffer says, after he was subpoenaed for grand jury: "I knew my fate right away: 18 months in SeaTac Federal Detention Center. Matt, Kteeo and Leah have all been imprisoned for their refusal and I will be the next. Despite the urgings of lawyers, agents and judges, I only have one option: non-cooperation. Any other option is unthinkable. I am being asked to testify before a Grand Jury on November 7th and will likely be detained on that date for refusing to cooperate. The vultures of the state will try to imprison my comrades and me until we give in. We will never give in."

Focus on that date. November 7th.
Give back all her thank-yous to Kteeo in any possible way, and share your strenght with Matt, too (and chip in for postage and their expenses).

The struggle cannot be suspended. In silence, we roar.

There is no reason she couldn't have said "I did not snitch" (unless, of course, she did) and there is no reason we should be silent. She needs to come out and say, as succinctly as she'd like, what actually happened, and telling us "not to jump to conclusions" doesn't count. I must ask: how would we expect someone who HAS flipped to behave?

What's the reason that she couldn't she say "I did not snitch" even if she did?

Because then she would be lying? Obviously she's physically capable of it, the point is that she's using weasel words.

There are actually THREE things that could explain this behavior:

1: she snitched

2: She appeared before the grand jury and fed those pig a big pile of lies. She could NOT say that except from ouside the US or underground

3: They picked her up, hauled her before the grand jury, asked no questions, then let her go with a warning that any mention of this meant another subpeona or worse-just to snitch jacket her.

My advice to her if #2 or 3 is true would be to exit the US and clarify the situation from someplace that would never extradict. If this is not possible, QUIETLY get word to participants in the action being potentially investigate, but NOT here or in any other public forum.

This is a good post. I did not consider #2 or #3. However, strictly speaking, neither of those really constitutes snitching, so she could still answer, honestly, in the negative. She could say, "the situation is fucked up. I can't provide details, it's complicated, but in essence, I did not snitch."

I don't think this would violate any laws according to #3, and on #2 would still be accurate, since pretending to snitch is not the same as snitching.

Actually, on #2, if she made that statement, it could be construed by the authorities as evidence of perjury or whatever.

However, I'm not sure what the law is on making false public statements, and if she could simply defend by saying she lied about not snitching. That is, if she admits to lying to the Grand Jury, that's a serious penalty, but if she lies and claims that her public comment was a lie, I'm not sure if that is indeed illegals, since I'm not entirely sure of how it works between under-oath statements and public statements about what was said under-oath.

What about option #4? I mean it's just as likely that the government planted a micro chip in her head that prevents her from giving us details. Or what about option #5, that the government threatened to use their HAARP weather machine to create a Sandy like hurricane in the PNW if she didn't turn on her comrades. WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

ha ha...

You know uses the word "Sheeple" alot ?

9/11 Truthers and Holocaust Deniers

Damn, I don't know who to believe. Young Jeezy or Pimp C. I like them both!

Just remember, as you wade through the defense and condemnations of 'the media' (you) - the first Vulture was The State; that is who began this unnecessary and unjust stalking, harassment, and resulting Inquisition.

"But how exactly can people give so much respect and support at the beginning, and then feel betrayed without something to call upon?"

Indeed, that seems to be the game, doesn't it. It's an argument without a conclusion, a joke without a punchline, a road

And I think this is enough, get it? It is plenty, enough, SUFFICIENT grounds for skepticism, firstly, which justifies official public support, and secondly, which individually, we might want to reconsider who this person is we once supported.

As the article suggests, if she cannot provide a simple yes/no response to the question, did you snitch, then it is best, at least in practice, both public and private, to err on the side of snitch.

Now, if you would like to address the issue of Whom that comes after that, then by all means...

correction: justifies official withdrawal of public support.


Actually, if she had snitched, she would say that she did not. A snitch would deny being a snitch, so why is everybodyt hung up on whether she makes a comment or not. It is irrelevant to the issue.

"Leah-Lynn Plante -according to this source has asked "that people do not jump to wild conclusions about her release because they do not apply.""

I agree wild conclusions like she was set up to look like someone who cooperated most likely do not apply. Most likely she didn't want to stay locked up and provided information about anarchists to the grand jury. That seems likely and is not a wild conclusion to come to especially after weeks of silence from her since her release.

What snitches had their bones broken? That would be awesome if it had actually happened.

This is garbage. Enjoy your 18th-century psychology. "Character," give me a fucking break.

It would be funny if Leah wrote this article...

Funny, or very very sad?

thanks for deleting that - i was told not to do these things oops ;)

SPREAD WIDELY Ariana Tanabe is confirmed to have cooperated with a grand jury harassing local vegans and those associated with the local animal rights movement.

It is confirmed by attorneys that Ariana Tanabe has cooperated with the active grand jury, ostensibly investigating a 2008 arson on the property of UC-Santa Cruz vivisector. In reality, the grand jury was convened as a fishing expedition to harass local activists and destroy our movements and networks.

She plead the fifth at her first hearings. But when the government threatened to hold her in contempt, she acquiesced and testified. It is unclear what questions were asked. Collaboration with the state is never acceptable.

Solidarity means you support your comrades even when they get broke in jail, think it couldnt happen to you? Why do want to do the cops job for them?

solidarity = snitching?

what are we? In the joint together? This is not a gansta video, this is real life. cops threaten and break people, people just like you. stop playing cops 'n robbers and be a real human being that cares more about your friends who are being threatened by cops than who's in or out of your clubhouse. Keep making these rules, laying down these ultimatums, puffing up your chest and talking like a tough guy, and you'll find yourself on the receiving end of it soon enough wondering who your real friends are. Wake the fuck up.

so many perch on pedestals of superiority face their own demise. conditional solidarity is fake. what the state does is horror beyond belief, this we know.

yea lol @ snitches get stitches.

i gotta say i agree - we can buy all the $15 shirts we want but the court fees and life impact of this shit (imagine if you had a kid or was someone's caretaker and dragged into jail just for questioning) --- most people here wont ever endure. like how are these people we're supporting and criticizing SO HARDCORE paying for their legal fees and shit? all these coalitions are suspending their support but how are they using the funds we give them? how much are they even getting? is it enough to help out the people in jail now? anyone ask this shit or do we all assume it all is being used well?

posts about leah get the most hits, comments, and traffic - but the people still IN THERE? not so much.

I say that in general.

but for leah?

leah positioned herself squarely as a martyr for the movement if she had no interest in this level of publicity she wouldnt have made videos with soft music playing behind it, talked about her tattoos or made all of her statements about her (when all of her comrades are still locked up). if you suspected you may turnn, make all of your statements about the movement and your fellow man and remove yourself from the mass social media publicity you were getting. dont make it about you and your problems. I listened and read her statements early on and she kept talking about her mental health and also started to hear that she wasnt even around when these events occurred (uh how do people even know that?).... it was like wow, none of ya'll saw this coming?

law enforcement probably saw how obsessed the movement was with this person (who kept saying she was ill, anxious, depressed) and did a classic divide and conquer so people would pay LESS attention to the others still incarcerated and infight over some bullshit.

Like forget Leah ok it is DONE - we have what, 3 people still in there? Can we focus on the people who matter?

Solidarity means you would cut your own throat to still your tongue before you would snitch and condemn many other people to jail and possible death. If Fergerson had done this, Avalon would not have had to kill himself!

But there has to be SOME kind of spectrum.

Ferguson gave detailed accounts and wore a wire in order to stay out of prison. We have to recognize that that is different than someone breaking under torture. That is also different from cooperating with a grand jury but only answering "I don't know." That totally isn't smart or desirable, but is leagues away from snitching in the way Ferguson or Brandon Darby did. If we don't recognize those difference, not only does the word "snitching" lose some meaning, but were probably going to be less effective in dealing with repression because people WILL break and WILL fuck up.

Most of us do not know how we'd deal with this kind of situation - we can say what we would or would not ever do, but we have no idea until we're in it.

"someone breaking under torture"

Uhh, how is this relevant in this conversation? In modern America, anarchists do not have information tortured out of them. Being jailed does not count as torture, sorry. Our comrades in other countries (In Latin America for example) are regularly tortured or raped in prison and police stations. And when it comes to serious torture, EVERYONE will break. That's a very different situation that is very foreign to our current situation in the U.S. and anyone trying to claim Leah was "tortured" by being in jail for three days is in effect spitting on our comrades around the world that actually have to deal with a much more brutal side of the state. That is not to say we are "more privileged" or some bullshit, we're just in a different situation.

Sorry, but Leah had no right to complain about being in jail for three days. This is the same amount of time many people are held from just being arrested for minor offenses. Fucking suck it up. You don't hear Amelia Nichol whining in Denver do you? No, because she's a fucking revolutionary, not some anarcho-scenster that rolls over on her friends after three days.

Torture exists and is utilized in US prisons. Not speaking to the conditions of leah's specific time in. But let's be clear, torture is used in US prisons. Rape, assault, isolation, medical neglect (this runs from cancer to denial of care for pregnant inmates), withholding of food and water, imprisonment under insane conditions- outdoors holding. It happens, it happens here.

absolutely true.

I've read statements from Amelia and really hesitate to call her "a fucking revolutionary."

oh stfu

This is not true. Ariana Tanabe has not cooperated. Please do not spread untrue rumors on such a sensitive subject. Lets keep focused on the real issue here.

What he means by mentally ill here is being an American boy or girl just a few years out of the lovely, secure utopia of childhood and mummie's loving embraces, running with a seemingly cool and Marlon brando-like bunch of wild bunch attitudinals (my god, it's like Sid never died!), then getting smacked square in the mouth with the large and nasty baton of American power and learning all too quickly that even in mid 20's you are not superhuman - not really Mother Jones or Rosa Luxemburg - and by the decrees of martin luther's nasty imperialist protestant angry god, if you continue to do as you have done you will join the legions of the decisively broken with no more access to E tickets in Disney World.

For a white unconsciously hyper-priviledged American, that can be very traumatic - seeing it all pissed away for a bunch of what may now seem to be life-shattering, lunatic and smellyfringe ideals held by the likes of L'Anarquista. Failure to exit the bubble of booj and privilege in USAville at the age of 20 something might be considered mentally ill by some but just looks like kids being kids to me.

I too was a posing hipster for years. For we Gringos it truly takes a walk through the fire to see what actually comes out on the other side.

And yes, the lady is quite lovely, which makes all the ridiculous fawning porn-like worship from the "anarchists" somewhat understandable. From across the oceans I can hear it now: "At last the great turning! Me, I, once a slacker, might be able to get a real anarquist hottie!"

Ha. Dumbass.

The Lesson is thus: If she doesn't look like Emma Goldman, it's probably a con. Best of luck in the future.

wow that really NOT the lesson

And the lesson is -- ?? Read the book before you review it?

If only we could be so lucky...

ITS BEEN TWO WEEKS. Listen, every stupid article and half though out ststement debases thr gravity of the situation. I agree with suspending support for her, and it sounds like you've got 100 problems of your own, but its better to know exactly what was said and if need be make it known as calmly as possible that this person is a security risk than giving the illussion of mass pandamonium and freak her out so that you never know what was said.

That or she's a selfish cunt and nothing will ever reach her because her ethics amount to nothing more than lip sevice.

I like how this is written, but I also like French cinema so my opinion just got dissmissed. But can you wait a few weeks before we've decided to start using her as an example. Let it sink in.

And until we can verify whether or not she's a security risk....this only has to do with people possibly directly involved. She isn't michael Jackson. For our own health we need to break the celbrity culture paradigm. CAPR suspended support and hopefuly people are informed enough to distance themselves and make it known that until the PNW Anarchist community is met with and toldnto what extent she might have cooperated she shouldn't be allowed round these parts or whatever.

No! The show trials never end!! Anarchy!

I'll tell you this much. She's not welcome in NYC.

What are there.. 5, 6 anarchists in nyc who even know who she is, or would care that she told a grand jury that someone named 'Fields' wore a purple scarf on may day?? lmfao

Actually, she's very much welcome in NYC right now. Speak for yourself, because I'm speaking for many more who don't hang out on the internet making FBI-caliber comments that try to paint some stupid divide that doesn't exist in real life.

Not that I expect her to ever come to NYC, but mark my words, she will be dealt with severely by many people if she comes here.

Yeah cause NYC anarchists are on point when it comes to effectively dealing with shit.

my, what big teeth you have!

who would want to go there, though

Is anybody else really tired? I'm so tired.

I think reading this crap everyday is making us tired. And people still think Oakland is the coolest most radical of all states even though the fight to reclaim space, everyone has given up. There is nothing radical going on. No occupation. No attempt to challenge authority or even organize and attack.

We've been reduced to an internet movement where we're all bound together united in slavery by the internet. I never dreamed that slavery would go this far. So they give us articles to read to calm us down and it makes us feel very revolutionary at the end of the day stirring our imaginations and filling the void with in our souls. We don't do shit anymore but read a bunch of crap. That's as far as anything radical gets these days.

Meanwhile every capitalist is getting their money on laughing all the way to the bank, LITERALLY! We may as well be stuck in the movie THE MATRIX cause when you think about it, what there is no fucking difference 99% of the time. No difference between this and living in computer animated dream world. 99% that's all we fuckin do.

Oakland went from street warriors to internet nerds. It's just not cool anymore of here. That might be why you're feeling so tired. Reading all this stuff fills you full of energy and no where to release it all. No where to put your imagination into action. This place serves to nothing anymore but to give someone a mental breakdown.

We're 99% slaves 1% warriors.

99% of the time we read bullshit.
1% of the time we actually fight back before running home to out computer.



If no one is organizing in Oakland than how come I still have to go to so many fucking organizing meetings?


people are organizing in oakland, just not the way they'd like to see.

not enough riot porn!

Unless there's teargas and rubber bullets, apparently nothing is happening in Oakland, amirite?

pix of overturned squad cars or it didn't happen!

Oakland = "state"

yeah, man! the fight to "reclaim space" - lead by white people and middle class radikewl people of color who've lived in oakland, tops, 5 years! way to 'reclaim'!

i can't believe people are still idealizing the shit that went down in oakland, what a joke.

This guy writes like an 18th century philosopher. I felt like I had to decode what he was talking about and didn't really get what this is even about. Cole's notes please!

I couldn't even get past the first paragraph. you added so many unnecessary words to make it sound fancy that it was simply impossible to follow. It read like Socrates's work, too verbose and convoluted.

So now people are musing about her mental health and making open threats.

Gee, I wonder why she isn't talking?

People have been spouting this paranoid bullshit since the first day she was released. Let's be honest, if even of of these trolls had a single link that actually gave evidence that she "snitched", somebody would have posted it among the hundreds of comments here and elsewhere. Since nothing but the same over-tumblred article have appeared, I'm inclined to believe that at least 98% of those making accusations have no direct knowledge of what she said or didn't.

Snitch-jacketing: #1 way to spot a poseur at an Occupy rally.

You are willing to bet 98% of people don't know what she said at the grand jury....hmmmm, you don't say? I mean maybe that's what the whole controversy is all about?

See you at the ... phkssdtHA HA!...excuse me, OCCUPY RALLY!

Again, if she had provided damaging information, the first thing she would have done was make a statement denying she had said anything.

(i) Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.

(ii) Never use a long word where a short one will do.

(iii) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.

(iv) Never use the passive where you can use the active.

(v) Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.

(vi) Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

Thank you. Can i have another?

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
Enter the code without spaces.