Activists on terror lists

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by questor

We do have crime in this country..and home-grown terrorists, and murders. William Ayers comes to mind. These people blow things up and kill people.

Questor, you appear to be claiming that William Ayers – who readily admits to having been involved in the blown up many things, perhaps most famously a women’s lavatory on the fourth floor of the Air Force wing of the Pentagon – has killed or been involved in the killing of a human being.

Is this your intention? If so, can you back up the claim that Ayers or any other member of the Weather Underground Organization of which Ayers was a member was responsible for the death of anyone other than three of their members in the March 6 1970 Greenwich Village townhouse explosion?

I don’t mean to be confrontational in this request, but gather that you are better acquainted than I am with right wing writing that might contain such claims, and would like to know if and where such claims appear.

Originally Posted by questor

When activists gather, how are the police to know if they will blow things up or are just gathering peacefully?

Although I’m not a police officer, nor do I know any who are involved in crowd control decision making, I suspect that US police operate under the assumption that people at large gatherings will not blow things up because there is, to the best of my knowledge, almost no recent history of this occurring.

Because of incidents such as the 1999 “Battle of Seattle”, I suspect police are wary of and prepared for large scale vandalism and looting. From conversations with DC Park, Capitol, and Metro police (there are an amazing number of overlapping police jurisdictions in Washington, DC, these three being in my experience the most communicative), I understand that they consider bombs to be more likely to be directed against large gatherings of protesters than by them, and focus much attention and training toward the detection of a bomb such as the 7/27/1996 Atlanta Olympics bombing, which killed 2 and wounded 111 in a crowd of spectators (not protesters). Like the act of domestic 4/19/1995 Oklahoma City bombing (the most destructive and fatal act of domestic terrorism in US history) the Atlanta bombing was the act of a US Army veteran with an undistinguished military career. Thus, I’ve been told, police are more worried about terrorist acts against anti-war protestor than by them.

Originally Posted by questor

I would assume that when they stage their gatherings they are looking for publicity? Why not have them on a list or even publish it in a newspaper?

Having been involved in organizing several protests, I can attest that the one of the primary purposes of most protests is to attract media attention. Although I’ve read advertisements for protests in such newpapers and the DC City Paper and Takoma Voice, I’ve never been involved in the planning of a protest that took out a newspaper add. The primary reason for this is financial. Effective event advertisements in large circulation newspapers is very expensive, and the protests in which I’ve been involved had essentially zero budgets, depending entirely on individuals to do such things as produce, photocopy, and distribute fliers. Since the widespread popularity of the internet in beginning in the late 1990s, websites and email word-of-mouth distributions are, I understand, an even more cost effective organizing technique.

In short, most protest organizers would be delighted to have huge multi-page adds in major newpapers, but unless newpapers adopt a polity of charitable donation of such adds, are unlikely to be able to afford them.

Originally Posted by questor

Has their presence on the list harmed their life in some way? I would think they have recourse to have their names removed unless they actually commit a crime.

This depends very much, I think, on what list you’re name appears. Since many law enforcement watch lists contain only names, it also depends on what your name is – if you have the misfortune to share a name with someone who’s activities resulted in the placement of your name on many of these lists, you will be subjected to the same law enforcement handling as that person.

The most significant US watch system, AFAIK, is the US TSA’s CAPPS. Details of this list, including whether you are on it, and how to get off it, are considered national security secrets, and difficult to obtain. Consequence of being on it range from being subjected to more than the usual security checks before being allowed to board a commercial airliner, to being unable to travel by commercial airline at all, consequence I would describe as mildly to very harmful.

It’s also important to understand that these watch systems employ criteria other than your name or other identifying information appearing on a list. In particular, as late as July 2006, a personal friend and former coworker of mine related to me that he’s almost always subjected to lengthy pre-flight screening, usually including one or more interviews, and has been told the reason for this is because of his last name, which is Hussein (the same as the executed former president of Iraq, Saddam Hussein). On several occasions, this resulted in delays so long that he was required to stay overnight – at his own (eventually private company reimbursed) expense – and resume screening and interviews the next day. As he is a IT project manager who, when I worked with him, traveled several times a month from Maryland to California, this was an appreciable financial burden both to him, and to the people and companies who worked with him.

When he inquired with TSA and DHS officials, and ultimately offices of the DHS and State Department, he was eventually told that the only way he could avoid this was to legally change his last name, which for personal reasons, he was unwilling to do. He joked, however, that were he actually a terrorist, he surely would find it worthwhile to legally change his name, or use forged ID.

Originally Posted by questor

Frequently these gatherings result in fires, property destruction and personal injury, I see nothing wrong in knowing who they are.

Again, questor, I’d like to see your sources for the claim that US protest gatherings “frequently” result in fires, property destruction, and personal injury. How many such gatherings occur each year? How many of them result in the damage you claim? How does the incidence of such damage compare for protest gatherings compare to that of gatherings such as sports events and spring break?

Another issue is that, in the case of most large and small protests, no organizer possesses in advance or after the event a list of attendees, or in most cases even an accurate estimate of their numbers. Because attendees are neither employees nor paying customers of organizers, no legal requirement for such lists exists. Even cooperating with police, organizers are often unable to estimate attendance numbers for large events with better precision that +/- 25% (for example, see the October 16, 1995 “Million Man March”, which Park Police estimate had 400,000 attendees, organizers 1,500,000 to 2,000,000, and a academic team of researchers 837,000 +/-20%).

Originally Posted by questor

I look with disfavor on having them block public streets and hiways to carry on their protest.

Having been caught up several times not only in blocked street but in overwhelmed mass transit while commuting to work in Washington DC, I can relate to your disfavor. However, even when protesters have no intention of creating congestion, with large gatherings, it’s largely unavoidable, like adverse weather, and one of those things that urbanites simply must learn to live with.

I’m unaware of a US protest ever physically blocking a limited access highway, other than by causing backup of cars exiting the highways, or causing rubbernecking slowdowns. Again, questor, if you can cite an instance of this occurring, I’d find it informative. Otherwise, I must regard such a mention as unfounded and disingenuous.

[questor]

I am not opposed to free speech. I am opposed to large gatherings of people who come to make a party from this privilege and force the taxpayer to clean up after them. I am opposed to gatherings that use confrontation and civil disobedience to make a point, who subject the police to personal danger and the public to inconvenience. If they have a point to make, why do they need over 10 or 20 people? Is it to be a civil request for policy change or a threat by virtue of crowd size to force their own solution? If you live near DC, I'm sure you are aware of the Million Man March which cost thousands of dollars to clean up even though it was a peaceful gathering. It also resulted in denying public use of the Mall during the march. On the destructive side, what about the two IMF demonstrations in which there was substantial property damage and violence.

This Fall, tens of thousands of people will converge once again on Washington, DC to militantly reject capitalism and capitalist institutions like the World Bank and IMF. The people of Washington will turn out to reject the politics of power and will take collective action to reclaim their lives. You can find out more starting with this page.

and

Mobilization for Global Justice
Come protest, demonstrate, dance, make music and make your voice heard with tens of thousands of people in the streets of Washington D.C. Sept. 25 to Oct. 2 to denounce the exploitative and destructive policies of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

Link to both above quotes: Fighting the Octopus: 2002 World Bank and IMF Protests - Washington, DC

As I recall, these events resulted in rock throwing, confronting police and numerous arrests. I see no reason why the right to express yourself has to be corrupted by violence, property damage and blocking public rights of way.

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by questor

I am not opposed to free speech. I am opposed to large gatherings of people who come to make a party from this privilege and force the taxpayer to clean up after them.

You are then, questor, opposed to “the right of the people peaceably to assemble”, which is guaranteed by the First Amendment.

It’s illegal to litter, vandalize, or otherwise make a mess of public property in Washington DC. Nonetheless, whether by attendees of an organized event such as the 10/16/95 “Million Man March” or not, littering and vandalism occurs, and must be cleaned up after. Your suggestion that laws should be made prohibiting peaceable assembly because it results in increased cleanup labor suggest to me that you badly misunderstand the intent and usual legal interpretation of the First Amendment.

Also, as you often do, you’ve made many claims in this thread that you’ve not backed up with links or references, even though I’ve specifically asked you to do so, in compliance the site rules. Speaking as a moderator, I must ask you to stop doing this. If you don’t, you will likely find that your right to post at hypography – which is not guaranteed by the First Amendment or any other relevant legal document – will be abridged.

Many of your claims, such as

Originally Posted by questor

It [the “Million Man March”] also resulted in denying public use of the Mall during the march.

I know to be false – in the case of this one, because I was there, and was able cross the Mall with no difficulty – though my right to throw Frisbee there was infringed upon.

[questor]

Here is what I said..

I am not opposed to free speech. I am opposed to large gatherings of people who come to make a party from this privilege and force the taxpayer to clean up after them. I am opposed to gatherings that use confrontation and civil disobedience to make a point, who subject the police to personal danger and the public to inconvenience.

Here is what you said..

You are then, questor, opposed to “the right of the people peaceably to assemble”, which is guaranteed by the First Amendment.

How do you segue from what I said to what you consider to be my belief?

How was the traffic and the parking at the Mall during the March? How many days did it take to clean up the mess?

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by questor

Here is what I said..

Here is what you said..

How do you segue from what I said to what you consider to be my belief?

I've bolded some phrases in the above quotes. questor, our knowledge of your beliefs is limited to what you type on this forum.

“the right of the people peaceably to assemble” means that people have a Constitutional right to "use confrontation and civil disobedience to make a point". To think otherwise would seem to suggest a disfavor of peaceful assembly.

How was the traffic and the parking at the Mall during the March? How many days did it take to clean up the mess?

What does traffic and litter collection have to do with the topic?

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by questor

Here is what I said..

Here is what you said..

How do you segue from what I said to what you consider to be my belief?

You stated that you are opposed to large gatherings to which certain condition other than being “peaceable” applies, such as “coming to make a party” or “forcing the taxpayer to clean up after them”. You have stated, therefore, that you oppose some peaceable assemblies of the people, from which I inferred that you oppose “the right of the people peaceably to assemble”.

That the First Amendment guarantees peaceable assemblies of the people, regardless of their purpose, is an important point of interpretation of the Constitution. There is no requirement that a protected assembly be only for the purpose of, say, supporting a candidate for office, or, as is included later in the Amendment, only “to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” The First Amendment not only protects the right of the people to, say, assemble to protest a war or celebrate the inauguration of a President, but also to discuss baseball cards or walk around in silly hats.

That said, the Constitution doesn’t guarantee that the US government will provide a nice place for large demonstrations and/or celebrations. The National Mall is a national park, administered by an agency of a Cabinet office of the Executive, the National Park Service. Though such regulation would be required to undergo a process determined by public law, which includes public review and comment, if the NPS director were to conclude that large organized gatherings on the Mall were messing the Mall up too badly, he could prohibit them, just as he is able to limit the maximum number of campers allowed into Yellowstone. He or a subordinate can also, I know from personal experience, require organizers to post a cash or other bond as assurance that no unreasonable harm is done a particular park – though I’ve seen several instances of NPS making, then withdrawing, a bond requirement at the mere threaten of suing in civil court over it. Congress could even eliminate the NPS altogether, leaving such matters to local government and private landowners – though such action would likely prove unpopular with their constituencies, and disadvantageous to their political careers.

Originally Posted by questor

How was the traffic and the parking at the Mall during the March?

There are only a few dozen parking spaces actually on the Mall side of the streets bounding it, and only a few hundred on the other, “museum” side, so, except on non-event weekdays, parking at the Mall is always hit-or-miss. On 10/16/1995 (if I recall those long-ago events correctly) parking was temporarily prohibited, as is usual for large events. Good tree-hugger that I and mine are, we almost always take the Metro, so are little concerned about parking.

However, even if a peaceful gathering were ruinous to parking, the Constitutional guarantee of it is unaffected. We, the people, are guaranteed the right to peaceably assembly. No such guarantee exists concerning the right to ample parking.

Originally Posted by questor

How many days did it take to clean up the mess?

I don’t know. I wasn’t back in the area ‘til 4 days after the event, at which time everything looked tidy. AFAIK, the event didn’t impact the budget or staffing plans of NPS, DC or the federal government, or any of the many police departments, all of whom are pretty good at the pre, during, and post for such events.

In your general mentions of “the taxpayer expense” of events like the Million Man March, questor, I think you overlook that local DC and surrounding MD and VA business and the people in them – who are substantial local and federal taxpayers - depends significantly on tourism. Far from feeling abused by such gatherings, we like, welcome, and encourage them. A million marching men or women, regardless of their politics or lack thereof, are also a million buying, hotel/motel staying customers.

[questor]

To clear up some misconceptions..
William Ayers and Bernadine Dorn..

Questor, you appear to be claiming that William Ayers – who readily admits to having been involved in the blown up many things, perhaps most famously a women’s lavatory on the fourth floor of the Air Force wing of the Pentagon – has killed or been involved in the killing of a human being.

Is this your intention? If so, can you back up the claim that Ayers or any other member of the Weather Underground Organization of which Ayers was a member was responsible for the death of anyone other than three of their members in the March 6 1970 Greenwich Village townhouse explosion

30-Y.O. Unsolved SF Murders Reopen (Bernadine Dohrn suspect in murders of two police officers?)
KRON 4 ^ | 10-10-2003 | KRON 4

Posted on Thursday, October 09, 2008 11:36:06 AM by jrooney

The unsolved murder of two San Francisco police officers has languished as cold cases for 30 years until now. A federal grand jury has been looking into the murders.

And now, sources tell us, those investigators have identified potential suspects: former members of two militant groups in the '60s and '70s -- the Weather Underground and the Black Liberation Army, people who've been out of the spotlight for decades. The most prominent among them is Bernadine Dohrn, a former leader of the Weather Underground and now a law professor at Northwestern University in Illinois.

In the early '70s, some of of the group led by Bernadine Dorhn escaped to the west coast. Dohrn was on the FBI's 10 Most Wanted list. J. Edgar Hoover called her "the most dangerous woman in America."

link:30-Y.O. Unsolved SF Murders Reopen (Bernadine Dohrn suspect in murders of two police officers?)

also..

Bill Ayers the wonderful Marxist murder co-conspirator.
October 6, 2008 by Colonel Robert Neville
Filed under Op-Ed

This (left) is Police Officer Waverly Brown, a fifteen year veteran and the only black man serving in the NYACK Police Department in 1981. In that year, Officer Brown and his partner Seargent Edward O’Grady were murdered by freaks from the Black Liberation Army and the Weathermen, Bill Ayers old Glee Club.

The BLA and the Weathermen were friends in terror. They first robbed a Brinks van and murdered the guards. Later they were approached by Officers Brown and O’Grady. The two Policemen were then murdered by members of the BLA and the Weathermen.

Ever get the feeling that all those boring, stupid and narcissistic radical fakes of the 60’s and 70’s knew their parents and their own affluence would bail them out in the end? And it has. Just as it did entirely the repulsive Patty Hearst. Thus Bill has much in common with Peppermint Patty. They both were active members of pointless unproductive groups of mostly affluent brats who believed in murdering anyone including successful black people to make the world a er, “better place”. Ah, you mean Marxist Hell hole, don’t cha? I know ya do. But not for them though, eh?

This (right) is Bill Ayers, the charming Weatherman terrorist. Unlike more than ten Police Officers, Bill was not murdered by middle-class misfits and ghetto bottom feeders. “Guilty as hell, free as a bird. America is a great country”, he [Ayers] said.” August 2001, Chicago Magazine [article: No Regrets

and...

Shortly after the Days of Rage riot, the Weathermen risibly “declared war” on the United States. The sheer pretentiousness of these junior Bolsheviks was vaguely laughable. But they were deadly serious. Dohrn constructed and planted an anti-personnel bomb containing heavy metal staples and metal projectiles on the window ledge of a police facility, killing one officer, Bryan V. McDonnell, and severely wounding and permanently blinding another, Robert Fogarty. Their families never recovered. Ayers laughingly and emphatically admitted his participation and Dohrn’s skill in placing the fatal bomb

link: Family Security Matters » Publications » Exclusive: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn – Friends of Barack Obama

These people are now college professors and friends of Obama

[questor]

Recent violent protests..

September 2, 2008
Republican Convention protests turn violent as 250 arrested.
link: Republican Convention protests turn violent as 250 arrested - Times Online

Violence Breaks Out at Anti-War Protest in St. Paul
Email
Share September 01, 2008 4:49 PM

UPDATE: As of Tuesday morning, police have arrested more than 280 demonstrators throughout the downtown St. Paul area, according to the Associated Press.
link: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalra...nce-breaks.htm

[questor]

“the right of the people peaceably to assemble” means that people have a Constitutional right to "use confrontation and civil disobedience to make a point". To think otherwise would seem to suggest a disfavor of peaceful assembly.

Does the dictionary now define ''peaceful'' as confrontational or legally disobedient?
People who assemble have NO right to litter, confront, obstruct, attack or infringe on the rights or space of others. They have no right to attack policemen or vandalize cars and buildings. They do have what is written in the Constitution..the right to PEACEFULLY ASSEMBLE.
I have no statistics on how many gatherings are held each year. I'm sure most are peaceful, such as the Million Man, but there are many others which are violent or confrontational and make the news.

I believe strongly in the first amendment, but I do not believe in violence and civil disobedience. I also live in the DC area and am very aware of what large gatherings on the Mall produce, even when peaceful.

[REASON]

Originally Posted by questor

To clear up some misconceptions..
William Ayers and Bernadine Dorn..

link:30-Y.O. Unsolved SF Murders Reopen (Bernadine Dohrn suspect in murders of two police officers?)

also..

link: Family Security Matters » Publications » Exclusive: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn – Friends of Barack Obama

These people are now college professors and friends of Obama

Nice job producing real evidence, questor.

The speculation continues.

Keep in mind, Bill Ayers turned himself in to the police in 1980 when Barack Obama was attending school in Los Angeles.

By 1987, the evil terrorist Ayers had earned three degrees in education, including early childhood education, from Bank Street College and Teacher's College at Columbia University, not from prison.

Currently, the horrible domestic terrorist is a distinguished professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, College of Education.

This attempt to link Obama to Ayers in an effort to caste him as some sort of terrorist sympathizer, is baseless smear, and will only appeal to Right wing-nuts who easily succumb to speculation and inuendo over truth, evidence, or facts, particularly if it damages their political enemies or supports their precious party affiliation.

We can only hope that the general American public is wise enough to see through these shameful tactics. Based on current polling data, that appears to be the case.