I'm growing extremely tired of these "black-clad, masked protesters" ruining everything

[arcane1]

I'm a non-violent person by nature, but I won't intervene if I catch someone else beating the shit out of them. If you hide your face and wave around these ridiculous anarchy symbols, you're a flaming asshole:


(05-01) 06:46 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- Broken glass littered several streets in San Francisco's Mission District after protesters vandalized cars and buildings Monday night, including a police station.

The vandals were in a group that marched from Dolores Park shortly after 9 p.m., following a rally in advance of Tuesday's planned Occupy general strike, police said. Traveling down 18th Street and onto Valencia Street, the black-clad, masked protesters smashed windows with crowbars and signs, threw paint on buildings and spray-painted anarchy symbols on the hoods of parked cars.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/05/01/BAQF1OBH55.DTL#ixzz1tdc0irIR

[may day 2012]

1. Maybe they are NOT from Occupy

Maybe they are agent provocateurs...

And maybe you're just a big old shill...

[arcane1]

6. I never mentioned where they are from, just that I hate them

Welcome to DU

[may day 2012]

11. Welcome to fascism.

It's already here, by the way. The fact that DU is so lukewarm about Occupy (no doubt because they refuse to pick "parties&quot is a testament to their lack of conviction.

[arcane1]

15. Ture, you've been here for a couple of hours now, so you're an expert

[redqueen]

28. It's already gone.

[arcane1]

35. Good riddance!

[jberryhill]

13. Signed up today, just insult people, eh?

[arcane1]

26. "maybe you're just a big old shill" is a relevant point? n/t

[G_j]

31. sorry! I missed that, too much in a hurry..

[arcane1]

33. No worries

It's been a rough day

[G_j]

36. for sure

I'm at the library and have limited time to read all I would like to. Have a great May Day!

[freshwest]

18. Thanks MIRT for taking out this 'agent provocateur.'

[Rex]

30. And maybe you are just a little old troll

that is pretending to be something else...

[freshwest]

2. It is the peaceful, thoughful people who get hurt by this, but apparently they don't care.

[RZM]

3. One unfortunate thing about assholes

It only takes a few to ruin everybody else's good time.

'One bad apple' has a lot of truth to it.

[Warren Stupidity]

4. Me too.

[RZM]

7. Where was that picture taken?

It doesn't look like the US.

[independentpiney]

10. That's from Egypt, nt

[RZM]

22. Thanks n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

34. The thugs in black with masks are the same all over the globe.

[villager]

5. Growing tired of the undercover cops ruining everything, you mean?

n/t

[Hell Hath No Fury]

8. Black Block up to their same ol' bullshit.

For 20+ years I have watched them try to latch onto/fuck up just about every protest I have gone to.

They need to be punched in the nuts.

[independentpiney]

9. Who benefits from them ruining everything? That's their employer nt

[pinboy3niner]

12. Eyewitness report raises questions about who the vandals REALLY were:

Posted in Occupy Underground Group by Luminous Animal:

Eyewitness account from an SF Occupier to last nights vandalism (and he's not happy).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12522465

[arcane1]

17. Thanks for that, a great read!!!

[saras]

14. If you mess with them, take the masks off FIRST, so videos get their faces...

[arcane1]

20. Amen to that! n/t

[Luminous Animal]

38. So, you'd try to take a mask offf of someone who is threatening you with a metal pipe?

Sure you would.

[Zalatix]

41. I would. I'd bring a bigger metal pipe.

Fortunately the black block doesn't even show up in my area.

[Luminous Animal]

43. Occupiers are non-violent and peaceful.

[Zalatix]

46. So were the Syrian protesters. And the protesters in China.

How are they doin', by the way?

[saras]

47. I said "if you mess with them..." if you don't want to, then do something else.

But if you ARE going to risk whatever you're risking by messing with them and holding them for the police, there's no sense in letting them remain anonymous through the project.

And while I am nonviolent, I make a distinction between violence and force which Occupy doesn't share, which is why I don't go to protests.

[Scuba]

19. The real Occupy members don't wear masks.

[mike_c]

32. they should...

...at least when the police violence begins-- masks, goggles, and helmets protect from tear gas and from "crowd control" projectiles. They also offer some anonymity, which is necessary in today's panopticon world.

[Luminous Animal]

45. Many do. I know at least one woman who was fired from her job after being identified

from Occupy news photos. And masks protect against tear gas.

[Rex]

21. They get paid to 'ruin everything'!

That is their sole intention!

[annm4peace]

23. why are people afraid or hate people with masks ???

it is a why for cops to infiltrate.. but you can often pick out the cops due to their behavior.. but not always.

another thing is the bandanas are often soaked in apple cider which cuts the tear gas and pepper spray that is often used by cops unannounced.. so it is a protection.

[2pooped2pop]

39. true dat

but these guys wear masks when no gas or projectiles r coming. This looks to me like an attempt to justify the bullshit they are going to do to the peaceful protesters.

Could they somehow manage to not catch a single one of the problem makers but will effectively pepper spray and arrest hundreds of the the peaceful protesters the next day? Sounds fishy to me.

[mike_c]

24. are you OK with these black-clad thugs...?

Ultimately, this is the institutionalized violence that begets the black bloc, whose violence is a response to oppression. Not everyone has the stomach for nonviolence in the face of institutionalized brutality. Nor should they, frankly.

More and more, when I see pictures of police violence, I believe that some measure of violent response will be necessary in the end. These pigs treat people with legitimate grievances as targets and baton fodder. They represent institutions with unbounded greed and utter disdain for human rights and egalitarianism. I ADMIRE those willing to sacrifice themselves nonviolently-- and at my age suddenly find myself with few other options, frankly-- but I also respect those who meet oppression with forceful resistance.

Somebody has to do it.

[EFerrari]

40. When I saw them club Robert Hass and drag Celeste Langan by the hair

my 100% commitment to non-violence pretty much ended, right there. Fuck the police.

[Zalatix]

42. The police in Greece get violent, too, but the Greeks also tend to retaliate:

[img]http://cdnimg.visualizeus.com/thumbs/f6/35/2008,anarchy,fire,greece,molotov,police-f635f23b21659bb5380996961d45d08a_h.jpg[/img]

[G_j]

25. From Starhawk and friends, key figures in the global justice movement,

(They know plenty about civil disobedience and protest!)

Open Letter to the Occupy Movement: Why We Need Agreements, (Alliance of Community Trainers)
http://trainersalliance.org/?p=221

Open Letter to the Occupy Movement: Why We Need Agreements

This entry was posted by sa2011er on Tuesday, 8 November, 2011
From the Alliance of Community Trainers, ACT

The Occupy movement has had enormous successes in the short time since September when activists took over a square near Wall Street. It has attracted hundreds of thousands of active participants, spawned occupations in cities and towns all over North America, changed the national dialogue and garnered enormous public support. It’s even, on occasion, gotten good press!

Now we are wrestling with the question that arises again and again in movements for social justice—how to struggle. Do we embrace nonviolence, or a ‘diversity of tactics?’ If we are a nonviolent movement, how do we define nonviolence? Is breaking a window violent?

We write as a trainers’ collective with decades of experience, from the anti-Vietnam protests of the sixties through the strictly nonviolent antinuclear blockades of the seventies, in feminist, environmental and anti-intervention movements and the global justice mobilizations of the late ‘90s and early ‘00s. We embrace many labels, including feminist, anti-racist, eco-feminist and anarchist. We have many times stood shoulder to shoulder with black blocs in the face of the riot cops, and we’ve been tear-gassed, stun-gunned, pepper sprayed, clubbed, and arrested,

While we’ve participated in many actions organized with a diversity of tactics, we do not believe that framework is workable for the Occupy Movement. Setting aside questions of morality or definitions of ‘violence’ and ‘nonviolence’ – for no two people define ‘violence’ in the same way – we ask the question:

What framework can we organize in that will build on our strengths, allow us to grow, embrace a wide diversity of participants, and make a powerful impact on the world?

‘Diversity of tactics’ becomes an easy way to avoid wrestling with questions of strategy and accountability. It lets us off the hook from doing the hard work of debating our positions and coming to agreements about how we want to act together. It becomes a code for ‘anything goes,’ and makes it impossible for our movements to hold anyone accountable for their actions.

The Occupy movement includes people from a broad diversity of backgrounds, life experiences and political philosophies. Some of us want to reform the system and some of us want to tear it down and replace it with something better. Our one great point of agreement is our call for transparency and accountability. We stand against the corrupt institutions that broker power behind closed doors. We call to account the financial manipulators that have bilked billions out of the poor and the middle classes.

Just as we call for accountability and transparency, we ourselves must be accountable and transparent. Some tactics are incompatible with those goals, even if in other situations they might be useful, honorable or appropriate. We can’t be transparent behind masks. We can’t be accountable for actions we run away from. We can’t maintain the security culture necessary for planning and carrying out attacks on property and also maintain the openness that can continue to invite in a true diversity of new people. We can’t make alliances with groups from impacted communities, such as immigrants, if we can’t make agreements about what tactics we will employ in any given action.

The framework that might best serve the Occupy movement is one of strategic nonviolent direct action. Within that framework, Occupy groups would make clear agreements about which tactics to use for a given action. This frame is strategic—it makes no moral judgments about whether or not violence is ever appropriate, it does not demand we commit ourselves to a lifetime of Gandhian pacifism, but it says, ‘This is how we agree to act together at this time.’ It is active, not passive. It seeks to create a dilemma for the opposition, and to dramatize the difference between our values and theirs.

Strategic nonviolent direct action has powerful advantages:

We make agreements about what types of action we will take, and hold one another accountable for keeping them. Making agreements is empowering. If I know what to expect in an action, I can make a choice about whether or not to participate. While we can never know nor control how the police will react, we can make choices about what types of action we stand behind personally and are willing to answer for. We don’t place unwilling people in the position of being held responsible for acts they did not commit and do not support.

In the process of coming to agreements, we listen to each other’s differing viewpoints. We don’t avoid disagreements within our group, but learn to debate freely, passionately, and respectfully.

We organize openly, without fear, because we stand behind our actions. We may break laws in service to the higher laws of conscience. We don’t seek punishment nor admit the right of the system to punish us, but we face the potential consequences for our actions with courage and pride.

Because we organize openly, we can invite new people into our movement and it can continue to grow. As soon as we institute a security culture in the midst of a mass movement, the movement begins to close in upon itself and to shrink.

Holding to a framework of nonviolent direct action does not make us ‘safe.’ We can’t control what the police do and they need no direct provocation to attack us. But it does let us make clear decisions about what kinds of actions we put ourselves at risk for.

Nonviolent direct action creates dilemmas for the opposition, and clearly dramatizes the difference between the corrupt values of the system and the values we stand for. Their institutions enshrine greed while we give away food, offer shelter, treat each person with generosity. They silence dissent while we value every voice. They employ violence to maintain their system while we counter it with the sheer courage of our presence.

Lack of agreements privileges the young over the old, the loud voices over the soft, the fast over the slow, the able-bodied over those with disabilities, the citizen over the immigrant, white folks over people of color, those who can do damage and flee the scene over those who are left to face the consequences.

Lack of agreements and lack of accountability leaves us wide open to provocateurs and agents. Not everyone who wears a mask or breaks a window is a provocateur. Many people clearly believe that property damage is a strong way to challenge the system. And masks have an honorable history from the anti-fascist movement in Germany and the Zapatista movement in Mexico, who said “We wear our masks to be seen.”

But a mask and a lack of clear expectations create a perfect opening for those who do not have the best interests of the movement at heart, for agents and provocateurs who can never be held to account. As well, the fear of provocateurs itself sows suspicion and undercuts our ability to openly organize and grow.

A framework of strategic nonviolent direct action makes it easy to reject provocation. We know what we’ve agreed to—and anyone urging other courses of action can be reminded of those agreements or rejected.

We hold one another accountable not by force or control, ours or the systems, but by the power of our united opinion and our willingness to stand behind, speak for, and act to defend our agreements.

A framework of strategic nonviolent direct action agreements allows us to continue to invite in new people, and to let them make clear choices about what kinds of tactics and actions they are asked to support.

There’s plenty of room in this struggle for a diversity of movements and a diversity of organizing and actions. Some may choose strict Gandhian nonviolence, others may choose fight-back resistance. But for the Occupy movement, strategic nonviolent direct action is a framework that will allow us to grow in diversity and power.

From the Alliance of Community Trainers, ACT

Starhawk
Lisa Fithian
Lauren Ross (or Juniper)

[Poll_Blind]

27. These folks have been fucking protests up in Eugene for the last 15...

...years, at least.

They're anarchists or agents provocateur or...whatever, it almost doesn't matter.

They show up at protests, clearly geared up for physical confrontation, vandalism and violence. They're almost immediately ostracized at any sizable protest by the protesters, themselves, before the police even spot them.

PB

[sabrina 1]

37. They are not part of Occupy and hopefully someone will grab one of them and

hand them over to the police, unless they ARE the police, which many people believe. As in Canada. That is my theory and until someone proves me wrong, I keep remembering the Canadian protesters exposing them when they were doing exactly the same thing.

[2pooped2pop]

44. + 1000

if u get ur windows broken by who u are led to believe r occupiers, you wouldn'f support occupy. u also won't complain when the police gas, beat, and and arrest them either.

These guys may or may not be part of occupy but it is historcally a police tactic used. Breaking windows and destroying property is a childs game. Either do something or go back to your parents house, I say to them.

Posted from phone so please excuse errors.

[sabrina 1]

48. Yes, and if anyone can show me video of a General Assembly where the consensus was to break windows

and destroy property, I will be happy to give them a reward.

I was writing about OWS from the beginning and from the early days, protesters spotted police mingling with the crowd, dressed casually. They sometimes got them on video, like the two who got out of a van, mingled with the crowd, but didn't quite fit in. Following their instincts, a few Occupiers kept their eyes on them and later followed them when they left. The got into a police car.

On another occasion, right at the start, trained to spot provocateurs, Occupiers noticed another two guys who also didn't seem to be quite comfortable mingling with the crowd. They followed them also, right to the nearby Federal Building and watched as they let themselves in with a key. Everyone had a good laugh at how easy it was.

Then there was the guy who had been hanging out with the Occupiers almost every day. No one susptected him until he walked through the Park one day dressed in his cop uniform with his buddy. When someone said 'you're a cop'?? he smiled, didn't really answer and kept walking. Later he wrote a blog post claiming that he was not trying to fool anyone, that he supported Occupy and was there on his own time. I don't think anyone believed him.

So right from the beginning they were infiltrating the movement.

[BiggJawn]

49. They're cops.

Saw a picture last year of a couple of "hoodlums" wearing the same boots the SWAT bois had on.

[backscatter712]

53. That was from a protest in Quebec.

But yeah, many of these characters are either cops or corporate Pinkertons.

[flvegan]

50. Judge folks by their actions, not their attire.

Not everyone that dons a balaclava deserves your hate.

[Xedniw]

51. Black Bloc: Chris Hedges warned about these guys

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_cancer_of_occupy_20120206/

The Black Bloc anarchists, who have been active on the streets in Oakland and other cities, are the cancer of the Occupy movement. The presence of Black Bloc anarchists—so named because they dress in black, obscure their faces, move as a unified mass, seek physical confrontations with police and destroy property—is a gift from heaven to the security and surveillance state. The Occupy encampments in various cities were shut down precisely because they were nonviolent. They were shut down because the state realized the potential of their broad appeal even to those within the systems of power. They were shut down because they articulated a truth about our economic and political system that cut across political and cultural lines. And they were shut down because they were places mothers and fathers with strollers felt safe.

Black Bloc adherents detest those of us on the organized left and seek, quite consciously, to take away our tools of empowerment. They confuse acts of petty vandalism and a repellent cynicism with revolution. The real enemies, they argue, are not the corporate capitalists, but their collaborators among the unions, workers’ movements, radical intellectuals, environmental activists and populist movements such as the Zapatistas. Any group that seeks to rebuild social structures, especially through nonviolent acts of civil disobedience, rather than physically destroy, becomes, in the eyes of Black Bloc anarchists, the enemy. Black Bloc anarchists spend most of their fury not on the architects of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) or globalism, but on those, such as the Zapatistas, who respond to the problem. It is a grotesque inversion of value systems.

Because Black Bloc anarchists do not believe in organization, indeed oppose all organized movements, they ensure their own powerlessness. They can only be obstructionist. And they are primarily obstructionist to those who resist. John Zerzan, one of the principal ideologues of the Black Bloc movement in the United States, defended “Industrial Society and Its Future,” the rambling manifesto by Theodore Kaczynski, known as the Unabomber, although he did not endorse Kaczynski’s bombings. Zerzan is a fierce critic of a long list of supposed sellouts starting with Noam Chomsky. Black Bloc anarchists are an example of what Theodore Roszak in “The Making of a Counter Culture” called the “progressive adolescentization” of the American left...

Solidarity becomes the hijacking or destruction of competing movements, which is exactly what the Black Bloc contingents are attempting to do with the Occupy movement.
“The Black Bloc can say they are attacking cops, but what they are really doing is destroying the Occupy movement,” the writer and environmental activist Derrick Jensen told me when I reached him by phone in California. “If their real target actually was the cops and not the Occupy movement, the Black Bloc would make their actions completely separate from Occupy, instead of effectively using these others as a human shield. Their attacks on cops are simply a means to an end, which is to destroy a movement that doesn’t fit their ideological standard.”

[arcane1]

52. Those who Start Shit are assholes, that's my philosophy

In the end it doesn't matter if it's a half-dozen cops or a half-dozen idiots. The result, and my response, is the same.

[G_j]

54. well stated, and quite a quote from Derrick Jensen

who is also an amazing writer. It makes sense they would know each other.

[Monk06]

55. Funny how the Black Blockers never get arrested and walk through police lines like they're invisible

[NuttyFluffers]

56. it's almost like there's some sort of collusion or something

things that make you go, "hmm..."