DaveCinzano
WATCH OUT, GEORGE, HE'S GOT A SCREWDRIVER!
It's also true - it really is a terrible bookgood first line.
It's also true - it really is a terrible bookgood first line.
That's one way of looking at it. Another way is:Fuck me this thread is grim reading. One page is enough. Humanity fucking stinks at times.
That's one way of looking at it. Another way is:
"There is no one single humanity
There is a humanity of classes
Slaves and Masters "
I know this site has an aging userbase and all, but I'm nearly sure we don't have any posters who were publishing stuff in 1926.Yours?
Shocking but not entirely sure what to do with the protests, civil unrest and riots
There’s Sasaferrato but I don’t think he was ever an anarchist, even in his late middle ageI know this site has an aging userbase and all, but I'm nearly sure we don't have any posters who were publishing stuff in 1926.
There’s Sasaferrato but I don’t think he was ever an anarchist, even in his late middle age
There's been some thought that it was done on purpose. Whether it was a suicide "bombing" or a garden variety suicide isn't clear. I-95 is pretty important infrastructure, and it was hit in a key location that will shut down traffic for months. I don't know if I would classify this is a theory or a conspiracy theory.
hitmouse is on the money. And I'm not that bleedin old.Yours?
I-95 is definitely burning...
Dan Baker is out, you can donate to his/their post-release funds here:Might as well go here as anywhere else - Dan Baker, first new antifascist prisoner of the Biden era, just got a three and a half year sentence because after January 6th, he made internet posts encouraging resistance to any similar shit that might happen in his area on inauguration day:
Man found guilty in ‘Call to Arms’ at Florida Capitol sentenced to 3.5 years in prison
Daniel Baker has been sentenced to 44 months in prison and three years of supervised release.www.wctv.tvDaniel Baker sentenced to federal prison in Florida Capitol threat case
Daniel Baker, an Army veteran turned overseas militia member, had posted online calls to rise up to confront\u00a0\eu.tallahassee.com
And from one of the other articles:In a press conference announcing the charges, the prosecution maintained that Georgia law is written in such a way that people don’t have to know each other to participate in a conspiracy; all that is necessary is that they work towards the same goal. This construes “criminal conspiracy” so broadly as to provide the grounds to implicate practically any participant in any social movement of the past decade in violating the RICO act.
In the indictment, prosecutors emphasize that the defendants are being charged simply for opposing the construction of the police militarization center:
Defend the Atlanta Forest does not recruit from a single location, nor do all Defend the Atlanta Forest members have a history of working together as a group in a single location. Nevertheless, the group shares a unified opposition to the construction of the Atlanta Police Department Training Facility, construction companies associated with the project, and companies associated with construction properties in the around surrounding the forest.
“Defend the Atlanta Forest is made up of three primary ideologies,” the text continues—an “anti-law enforcement ideology,” “protection of the environment at all costs,” and “an anarchist ideology.” It is ideas that are on trial here.
Without citing sources, the prosecution attributes the most outlandish statements to “the organization” as a whole—for example, “Tortuguita died trying to kill a cop in defense of the Weelaunee forest.” This statement directly contradicts the narrative about Tortuguita’s murder that prevails throughout the many movements that seek to preserve the forest.
Early in the indictment, fully five pages are given over specifically to the three defendants accused of association with the Atlanta Solidarity Fund. Their names recur over and over throughout the indictment. In addition to criminalizing “anarchism,” opposition to police, and concern for the environment that all of us depend on for survival, another of the central goals of the prosecution is clearly to set a precedent for criminalizing the legal support of people arrested for protest activity.
Likewise, the indictment explicitly frames “distribut[ing] flyers,” “occupy[ing] a treehouse,” and being present in a forest “with camouflage, camping gear, and living supplies” as overt acts advancing a conspiracy.
The indictment repeats a previously debunked assertion about the supposed “terrorist” status of the movement to defend Weelaunee forest, claiming that
The United States Department of Homeland Security has classified the individuals as alleged Domestic Violent Extremists (DVE).
In fact, according to DHS themselves,
The Department of Homeland Security does not classify or designate any groups as domestic violent extremists.
To justify the “terrorist” label, the indictment cites a DHS bulletin—but this bulletin simply echoes the earlier claim of Georgia prosecutors that the defendants are “domestic violent extremists” while adding the qualifier “alleged” to call that claim into question. Georgia prosecutors are attempting to repeat a lie until it becomes true.
In 2020, DHS was one of the federal institutions that Donald Trump relied on in his bid to subdue protests, notably in Portland, Oregon. It is hardly known for hesitance to support repression. The fact that there is apparent friction between Georgia state prosecutors’ representation of DHS and statements from DHS itself only illustrates how far Georgia state prosecutors are prepared to go out on a limb here.
The indictment includes one act that simply involved writing some letters on a piece of paper: “On or about January 18, 2023,” the indictment reads, an activist “did sign his name as ‘ACAB.’ This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.”
The sheriffs group has railed against gun control laws, COVID-19 mask mandates and public health restrictions, as well as alleged election fraud. It has also quietly spread its ideology across the country, seeking to become more mainstream in part by securing state approval for taxpayer-funded law enforcement training, the Howard Center for Investigative Journalism found.
Over the last five years, the group has hosted trainings, rallies, speeches and meetings in at least 30 states for law enforcement officers, political figures, private organizations and members of the public, according to the Howard Center’s seven-month probe, conducted in collaboration with the Arizona Center for Investigative Reporting.
The group has held formal trainings on its “constitutional” curriculum for law enforcement officers in at least 13 of those states. In six states, the training was approved for officers’ continuing education credits. The group also has supporters who sit on three state boards in charge of law enforcement training standards.
Legal experts warn that such training — especially when it’s approved for state credit — can undermine the democratic processes enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and is part of what Mary McCord, a former federal prosecutor and executive director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown University, called a “broader insurrectionist ideology” that has gripped the nation since the 2020 presidential election.
“They have no authority, not under their state constitutions or implementing statutes to decide what’s constitutional and what’s not constitutional. That’s what courts have the authority to do, not sheriffs,” McCord said.
“There’s another sort of evil lurking there,” McCord added, “because CSPOA is now essentially part of a broader movement in the United States to think it’s OK to use political violence if we disagree with some sort of government policy.”
Nearly 9 in 10 Oregonians live west of the Cascades along the Interstate 5 corridor, namely in the cities of Portland, Eugene and Salem, the capital. But the western region accounts for a small fraction of the land, which unfolds east from the Cascades in expanses of sere high desert, lush pasture and thick forest.
Four state senators represent the east — less than a fifth of the chamber’s total — and earlier this year they were part of a six-week walkout to protest the terms of abortion rights and gun-control legislation. It was the longest such boycott in state history.
Gilson, who is 47, said the Greater Idaho movement is in part a way to head off future armed threats in a deeply disaffected region.
“We’re not angry, and we do not want this to come to violence,” Gilson said. “We want to do this peacefully, but there is no doubt there is a lot of anger out there. This movement can be a release valve.”
The political makeup of who has moved to Idaho is eye-opening. It is, as the Idaho Capital Sun news site called it, a “Republican fever dream.”
Of about 119,000 voters who relocated to Idaho in recent years, 65% signed up as Republican. That’s significantly higher than the partisan makeup of the state already, which is 58% GOP.
Only 12% of the newcomers registered as Democrats. About 21% picked “unaffiliated” and 2% chose a third party such as Libertarian.
The data explodes the myth that liberals, untethered due to remote work, might be moving to Idaho or other red states from San Francisco and Seattle and potentially turning the interior more purple. The exact opposite is happening — people are segregating into like-minded, polarized, geographical camps.
“Mara Gay, what do you say to the Republican candidates’ argument that this should be — the voters should have the say and not the courts?” MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough asked.
“Why are you standing with Confederates who betrayed this country? And this is what they are standing with is the spirit of those Confederates rather than the Americans who came together after a long and brutal civil war that was fought to keep the union together,” Gay said.
“And clearly saw a threat in ex-Confederates running for office, so much so that they amended the Constitution to prevent those traders from running for office.”
“That should send a message that our election system, our electoral system can be used for nefarious purposes against the democracy itself.”
“It’s clear as day.”
Oregon walkout: Court says 10 GOP state senators can’t run for reelection
SALEM, Ore. (AP) — Last year’s boycott lasted six weeks — the longest in state history — and paralyzed the legislative session, stalling hundreds of bills.
It’s a riddle that economists have struggled to decipher. The U.S. economy seems robust on paper, yet Americans are dissatisfied with it. But hardly anyone seems to have paid much attention to the whirlwind experience we just lived through: We built a real social safety net in the United States and then abruptly ripped it apart.
Take unemployment insurance. The CARES Act, passed in March 2020, included the largest increase in benefits and eligibility in American history. It offered people “a sense of relief,” said Francisco Díez, senior policy strategist for economic justice with the Center for Popular Democracy, which organized unemployed people in the pandemic. “A feeling like they could breathe and figure out what they could do.”
LaShondra White was one of them. When she was furloughed from her job at a Kohl’s department store in Detroit in March 2020, she started receiving more than $600 a week. It was “my chance to get out of this situation,” she told me last year, a situation in which her pay was “horrible.” She had always wanted to own her own business, so with the extra money she fixed her credit score, rented out a commercial space and opened an eyelash studio. Her studio is still open and largely booked.
In 2019, unemployment insurance kept 500,000 people out of poverty; in 2020, that figure was 5.5 million. Yes, the program was riddled with problems, particularly technological ones, that made it difficult for many people to get enrolled quickly. But once they were covered, “They saw something close to the actual level of benefits that they deserve,” Mr. Díez said.
It was short-lived. By July 2020, the extra $600 in benefits had lapsed, and it wasn’t until December 2020 that Congress approved $300 payments with new restrictions. By May, some states started opting out, leaving their residents with the paltry benefits they would have gotten prepandemic.
"Take unemployment insurance. The CARES Act, passed in March 2020, included the largest increase in benefits and eligibility in American history."In those states, “There was a real sense of terror and concern and fear and abandonment from the politicians who chose to cut the benefits off early,” Mr. Díez said. “It really harms whatever faith they had in the nature of government as an institution that can actually see their struggle.”
A secret RCMP report is warning the federal government that Canada may descend into civil unrest once citizens realize the hopelessness of their economic situation.
“The coming period of recession will … accelerate the decline in living standards that the younger generations have already witnessed compared to earlier generations,” reads the report, entitled Whole-of-Government Five-Year Trends for Canada.
“For example, many Canadians under 35 are unlikely ever to be able to buy a place to live,” it adds.
The report, labelled secret, is intended as a piece of “special operational information” to be distributed only within the RCMP and among “decision-makers” in the federal government.
A heavily redacted version was made public as a result of an access to information request filed by Matt Malone, an assistant professor of law at British Columbia’s Thompson Rivers University, and an expert in government secrecy.
Describing itself in an introduction as a “scanning exercise,” the report is intended to highlight trends in both Canada and abroad “that could have a significant effect on the Canadian government and the RCMP.”
Right from the get-go, the report authors warn that whatever Canada’s current situation, it “will probably deteriorate further in the next five years.”
In addition to worsening living standards, the RCMP also warns of a future increasingly defined by unpredictable weather and seasonal catastrophes, such as wildfires and flooding. Most notably, report authors warn of Canada facing “increasing pressure to cede Arctic territory.”
Postmedia Network - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Hmmm, the story's also reported on CBC:Is the National Post a reliable newspaper?
Secret RCMP report warns Canadians may revolt once they realize how broke they are
Opinion. National Post. Mar 20, 2024 https://archive.is/uiZpn
The Supreme Court announced on Monday that it will not hear Mckesson v. Doe. The decision not to hear Mckesson leaves in place a lower court decision that effectively eliminated the right to organize a mass protest in the states of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas.
Under that lower court decision, a protest organizer faces potentially ruinous financial consequences if a single attendee at a mass protest commits an illegal act.
It is possible that this outcome will be temporary. The Court did not embrace the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit’s decision attacking the First Amendment right to protest, but it did not reverse it either. That means that, at least for now, the Fifth Circuit’s decision is the law in much of the American South.
For the past several years, the Fifth Circuit has engaged in a crusade against DeRay Mckesson, a prominent figure within the Black Lives Matter movement who organized a protest near a Baton Rouge police station in 2016.
The facts of the Mckesson case are, unfortunately, quite tragic. Mckesson helped organize the Baton Rouge protest following the fatal police shooting of Alton Sterling. During that protest, an unknown individual threw a rock or similar object at a police officer, the plaintiff in the Mckesson case who is identified only as “Officer John Doe.” Sadly, the officer was struck in the face and, according to one court, suffered “injuries to his teeth, jaw, brain, and head.”
Everyone agrees that this rock was not thrown by Mckesson, however. And the Supreme Court held in NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware (1982) that protest leaders cannot be held liable for the violent actions of a protest participant, absent unusual circumstances that are not present in the Mckesson case — such as if Mckesson had “authorized, directed, or ratified” the decision to throw the rock.
Indeed, as Justice Sonia Sotomayor points out in a brief opinion accompanying the Court’s decision not to hear Mckesson, the Court recently reaffirmed the strong First Amendment protections enjoyed by people like Mckesson in Counterman v. Colorado (2023). That decision held that the First Amendment “precludes punishment” for inciting violent action “unless the speaker’s words were ‘intended’ (not just likely) to produce imminent disorder.”
The reason Claiborne protects protest organizers should be obvious. No one who organizes a mass event attended by thousands of people can possibly control the actions of all those attendees, regardless of whether the event is a political protest, a music concert, or the Super Bowl. So, if protest organizers can be sanctioned for the illegal action of any protest attendee, no one in their right mind would ever organize a political protest again.
Indeed, as Fifth Circuit Judge Don Willett, who dissented from his court’s Mckesson decision, warned in one of his dissents, his court’s decision would make protest organizers liable for “the unlawful acts of counter-protesters and agitators.” So, under the Fifth Circuit’s rule, a Ku Klux Klansman could sabotage the Black Lives Matter movement simply by showing up at its protests and throwing stones.
Hmmm, the story's also reported on CBC:
And the actual report's here:
DocumentCloud
www.documentcloud.org
Anyway, came on this thread to post about this, which sounds... not good?
The Supreme Court effectively abolishes the right to mass protest in three US states
It is no longer safe to organize a protest in Louisiana, Mississippi, or Texas.www.vox.com
owned by the same people as the national enquirer
i'm going to say its a rag
Can a passing canadian confirm