Working on this new server in php7...
imc indymedia

Los Angeles Indymedia : Activist News

white themeblack themered themetheme help
About Us Contact Us Calendar Publish RSS
Features
latest news
best of news
syndication
commentary


KILLRADIO

VozMob

ABCF LA

A-Infos Radio

Indymedia On Air

Dope-X-Resistance-LA List

LAAMN List




IMC Network:

Original Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: ambazonia canarias estrecho / madiaq kenya nigeria south africa canada: hamilton london, ontario maritimes montreal ontario ottawa quebec thunder bay vancouver victoria windsor winnipeg east asia: burma jakarta japan korea manila qc europe: abruzzo alacant andorra antwerpen armenia athens austria barcelona belarus belgium belgrade bristol brussels bulgaria calabria croatia cyprus emilia-romagna estrecho / madiaq euskal herria galiza germany grenoble hungary ireland istanbul italy la plana liege liguria lille linksunten lombardia london madrid malta marseille nantes napoli netherlands nice northern england norway oost-vlaanderen paris/Île-de-france patras piemonte poland portugal roma romania russia saint-petersburg scotland sverige switzerland thessaloniki torun toscana toulouse ukraine united kingdom valencia latin america: argentina bolivia chiapas chile chile sur cmi brasil colombia ecuador mexico peru puerto rico qollasuyu rosario santiago tijuana uruguay valparaiso venezuela venezuela oceania: adelaide aotearoa brisbane burma darwin jakarta manila melbourne perth qc sydney south asia: india mumbai united states: arizona arkansas asheville atlanta austin baltimore big muddy binghamton boston buffalo charlottesville chicago cleveland colorado columbus dc hawaii houston hudson mohawk kansas city la madison maine miami michigan milwaukee minneapolis/st. paul new hampshire new jersey new mexico new orleans north carolina north texas nyc oklahoma philadelphia pittsburgh portland richmond rochester rogue valley saint louis san diego san francisco san francisco bay area santa barbara santa cruz, ca sarasota seattle tampa bay tennessee urbana-champaign vermont western mass worcester west asia: armenia beirut israel palestine process: fbi/legal updates mailing lists process & imc docs tech volunteer projects: print radio satellite tv video regions: oceania united states topics: biotech

Surviving Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: canada: quebec east asia: japan europe: athens barcelona belgium bristol brussels cyprus germany grenoble ireland istanbul lille linksunten nantes netherlands norway portugal united kingdom latin america: argentina cmi brasil rosario oceania: aotearoa united states: austin big muddy binghamton boston chicago columbus la michigan nyc portland rochester saint louis san diego san francisco bay area santa cruz, ca tennessee urbana-champaign worcester west asia: palestine process: fbi/legal updates process & imc docs projects: radio satellite tv
printable version - js reader version - view hidden posts - tags and related articles

View article without comments

Whoever Doesn't Really Try, Consents.

by Guerilla Science Monday, Aug. 01, 2005 at 4:07 PM

Mass symbolic, sanctioned marches that do nothing to actually change the status quo serve as painless absolution rituals, that allow the participants to “bear witness”, to “speak truth to power” and to “wash their hands of the blood of empire.” Marches, with their biting satire and snazzy costumes, do not provide a real means for stopping the carnage they deplore. A “functioning” democracy needs some form of sanctioned, orderly protest to stimulate discussion, and if the current regime were really “that bad” they wouldn’t allow big demonstrations, right? Ineffective activism, like regulated marches, actually provides a façade of healthy interchange and is welcomed by the status quo. The majority of demonstrators are aware well in advance that their actions will likely have no tangible effect on the negative of the empire, but they go to a huge rally and can sleep better at night having chanted out their guilt. Just as it can be said qui tacet consentive videtu (whoever is silent consents) it can also be said “whoever doesn’t really try, consents.”

Whoever Doesn't Really Try, Consents. By Dan Zarrella
Published by The Guerilla Science Press

Mass symbolic, sanctioned marches that do nothing to actually change the status quo serve as painless absolution rituals, that allow the participants to "bear witness", to "speak truth to power" and to "wash their hands of the blood of empire." Marches, with their biting satire and snazzy costumes, do not provide a real means for stopping the carnage they deplore. A "functioning" democracy needs some form of sanctioned, orderly protest to stimulate discussion, and if the current regime were really "that bad" they wouldn't allow big demonstrations, right? Ineffective activism, like regulated marches, actually provides a façade of healthy interchange and is welcomed by the status quo. The majority of demonstrators are aware well in advance that their actions will likely have no tangible effect on the negative of the empire, but they go to a huge rally and can sleep better at night having chanted out their guilt. Just as it can be said qui tacet consentive videtu (whoever is silent consents) it can also be said "whoever doesn't really try, consents."

I'm not going to attempt to convince the reader that U.S. imperialism exists and is a deadly policy, because frankly if you aren't aware of that at this midnight hour it would take the bulk of this critique for me to change your mind (if I was ever even able to do that). I'm speaking to that loose collective of people who already understand the need to save the world from American neo-colonialism, and I expect that the huge majority of people who will read this will already be a member of that group. Limiting my audience like this allows me to define the goal of an "effective" resistance as the end of the physical, financial and environmental violence of the military-industrial complex. If we agree that the problem of empire and its attendant violence is systematic and cannot be reformed, we also agree that the ultimate goal of the resistance should be revolutionary change: the complete eradication of the murderous system of global capitalism. To discuss the necessity of revolutionary change without debating the merits of reformist actions may appear to be putting the carriage before the horse, but again I'm choosing to limit my audience in the interest of focus.

The next logical step in my analysis of anti-neo-colonial tactics is to understand the criterion by which the effectiveness of resistance tactics can be judged. In this, it is important to differentiate tactics that are impotent by design and those may be effective but have failed in specific instances. If we accept the aforementioned goal of the anti-imperial resistance, we can thus also accept the assertion that a successful action is one which either directly or indirectly obstructs business as usual in the empire, prevents the forces of neo-colonialism from expanding or maintaining their conquered territory, contributes to the destruction of the empire, or encourages others to engage in actions such as these. We must remember that while this last goal is equally as important as the others (because of its ability to increase the resistance exponentially), an easy problem to fall victim to is to create a "movement" that does nothing other than recruit. There are plenty of effective tactics that can be undertaken by individuals or small groups, and to put off organizing and executing these actions until the resistance has an overwhelming majority is to wait for something that will never happen - at least not until it appears we are winning. As we will note later, movements of impressive size and power are almost always motivated through the potent actions of a small minority.

Most actions that are ineffective by design are symbolic, and even in the most successful instances of symbolic resistance, the real power of the tactic came from the direct impact the popular reaction and led to little more than a few reformist concessions. The morality of symbolic actions in a time when the heaps of dead the empire is leaving around the globe are anything but symbolic, speaks for itself. The primary redeeming quality of symbolic tactics is the ability to make people question the status quo and, ideally, join the resistance, either by indicating the problem or demonstrating that fighting back is possible. When the vanguard groups of the old left attempt to argue that the vast majority of permitted marches and demonstration rallies do in fact meet this "recruiting" criteria of effectiveness, we must remember the difference between actions that really increase the resistance, and those that function as little more than "bearing witness" (seeking absolution simply by publicly washing your hands of the blood does nothing to save anyone's life and so is nothing but selfish). A big state-sanctioned march is useful as an uplifting or comforting experience for those involved (especially the organizers), but for the most part actions like these preach solely to the choir. While they may occasionally receive mass media attention outside of the usual activist circles, they almost never create any new popular reactions through which the numerical or intellectual strength of the resistance may be substantially increased. This is not to denigrate the importance or value of such tactics, but merely to indicate that they are not effective tactics of resistance by way of recruiting.

Gandhi's Salt March in 1930 is one of the earliest, most celebrated acts of non-violent civil disobedience. After a twenty-three day march to the seashore, Gandhi bent down, picked up a handful of mud and sand, boiled it in seawater, and thereby illegally bypassed Britain's monopoly on salt production - an offense Gandhi would later be arrested for. The true power of this protest was to be found not in what he had done as an individual that day, but in the popular reaction: thousands of Indians began to illegally manufacture and sell salt (an extremely lucrative commodity that was required by most people in India, especially rural farmers working in the heat). This was a direct blow to one of the most important financial pillars of English imperialism in India and was supported by widespread boycotts on other British goods in the colony. The Salt March protest formed such a dangerous problem economically for the colonial powers that by the end of the month over sixty thousand people were incarcerated for their involvement in the action. It is obvious in this case that the symbolism was merely the spark that started a wave of direct action. This popular reaction was where the strength of real resistance resided. Critics of Gandhi will argue that even after the effects of the Salt March forced the British to hold a conference to explore the Indian congress's demand for independence, nothing substantial was achieved because the negotiations solved nothing.

Another commonly cited example of effective symbolic action was in 1955 when Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on a Montgomery public bus. Again in this case this "symbolic" action was only the spark; the true threat to the status quo was the enormous city-wide boycott of the public bus system that followed, and lasted for over a year. The economic damage was so severe that segregationists tried to use the legal system to stifle both the organizers of the boycott and the "private taxi" system that emerged to allow boycotters to get to and from work. Eventually opponents of the boycott resorted to violence, bombing one of the organizers', Martin Luther King Jr.'s, house. In the end, the activists' demands were met when the Supreme Court ruled that segregated buses were un-constitutional.

In February 1960, four well-dressed students at the Woolworth lunch counter in Greensboro started a wave of viral sit-in protests at segregated lunch counters that by 1971 had spread to over seventy thousand protestors and resulted in over three thousand arrests. The symbolic action of the courteous activists is widely credited as popularizing the use of sit-ins as a non-violent integration tactic. Perhaps more importantly was the effect it had on previously moderate and often uninterested people. After witnessing the upstanding and respectable students engaged in lunch counter sit-ins and the violent uncouth opposition they faced, many moderate individuals were inclined to join the struggle for civil rights. One of the first things this new wave of concerned citizens did was join in nation-wide boycotts of companies that were segregated in the South. This struggle eventually led to the integration of lunch counters and other public places.

In more recent history, symbolic actions have taken the form of mass mobilizations and marches, the most famous and possibly the most successful of which was the "Battle of Seattle" against the WTO meetings in November of 1999. While the media played their normal sensationalist game and focused heavily on the property destruction done to corporate targets by the black bloc, other civil disobedience activists actually managed to shut down some of the opening ceremonys, winning one of the largest victories for the resistance in the entire meeting series. Perhaps, however, a more lasting effect of these protests was the issue of property destruction as violence. These WTO meetings saw the emergence of a new kind of anarchist resistance tactic: the Black Bloc, a group of masked and black-clad activists who took it upon themselves to inflict minor symbolic financial damage in the form of broken windows of various corporate storefronts, most notably Starbucks. While the police were largely unable to contain the dynamic Black Bloc, many protestors promoted themselves to the level of corporate defenders, and either placed themselves between the windows and the anarchists, or actually went so far as to physically accost those trying to smash the corporate state in a slightly less symbolic fashion. The larger crowd demonstrated their misinterpretation of the ideals of property destruction by chanting "No violence, no violence" at the window-smashers, and thus was born a major schism in the activist community. The obvious question to raise here, (Ward Churchill has done it often in many ways), is: why were these pro-Starbucks protesters willing to put their bodies in harm's way to protect corporate windows when they would never dream of doing the same to protect an elderly woman's head from the baton of a riot cop? Did these self-appointed peace marshals consider protecting a Starbucks more moral than protecting a fellow protester, or was it just safer to be on the corporation-state's side?

The largest worldwide day of protest took place on February 15th, 2003 when more than ten million people gathered around the world to express their unhappiness with the impending war on Iraq and to bear moral witness to the atrocities that were about to be committed, publicly and symbolically washing their hands of the innocent blood that was going to be shed. These were weekend protests, largely sanctioned by the authorities, and most remained remarkably peaceful and orderly, especially on the part of the protesters. Scattered incidents of police violence were reported as usual, raging from tear gas to police horse charges. These actions were not designed to interrupt business as usual or provide any direct interference or damage to the system that was about to murder countless innocent victims; on the contrary, they were exactly the kind of peaceful and gentle demonstrations that those in power consistently call for and regard as the most civil way of expressing dissent. Other than getting some media coverage of the colorful costumes and clever satire (which was surprisingly quiet considering the fact that this was the largest international protest ever), these gatherings did nothing to stop the war. The forces of empire did not feel sufficiently threatened to have had to resort to more repressive crowd control measures to ensure the ineffectiveness of these actions; the impotence of the protests was scripted in from the earliest stages of planning.

The 2004 Republican National Convention protests were marked by a number of record-sized events: the largest Critical Mass bike ride in NYC (which has prompted the beginning of New York City police repression against the ride since the convention), one of the largest single days of protest in NYC (500,000 people in one huge column marching past Madison Square Garden in a weekend march on the 29th), and the largest number of arrests at a political convention in United States history (the majority arrested on the 31st, a day designated for civil disobedience). The media coverage of this event has, predictably, focused on the 1,800-odd arrests, most of which were made shortly after the various actions started and then led to the arrestees spending upwards of 30 or more hours in a toxic, condemned bus depot and in various jail cells in Manhattan. The goal of the mass civil disobedience on Tuesday was to disrupt business as usual in general, and to interfere with the convention specifically, as contrasted with the mass absolution the participants in Sunday's giant symbolic march were looking to obtain. They wished to spell out their discontent with the genocidal policies of the Republicans' wars of empire, but they ignored the fact that the Democratic party was equally guilty of espousing the imperialist agenda, and didn't protest the DNC. However, in all but a very select few instances no major disruption was caused on A31; for the most part the police were totally prepared for the actions and the activists played right into their hands. Even in the less scripted "spontaneous" street-party style actions (as opposed to the die-in actions) the protesters did very little to resist arrest and were mostly herded with orange roll-out fencing like good little sheep. In actions like, these the participants accept that they are going to be arrested and the police arrest them easily, as part of the agreement of how civil disobedience should work, to provide as little trouble for the powers that be as possible. For our part, those arrested on A31 helped the cops ensure that this was the case.

There is a paradigm in evaluating a range of tactical choices that greatly limits most large-scale (and especially symbolic) demonstrations (of course this debate is only occurring in places that aren't already under the imperial axe and have the luxury to consider pacifism). The crux of the illogicality that most "non-violent" critique presents is due to a mis-definition of the idea of violence. For moral, logical and tactical reasons, violence should be understood as the initiation of repressive force, whether physically, socially, or economically. The financial violence of classism begets violence in low-income communities, and given the sheer number of victims, we should recognize the economic violence as a cause of many of the other problems. Adherence to a policy of non-violence should not be misconstrued as something that avoids the violence of the empire; if you become a dangerous threat to its power you will be dealt a blow of equal violence if you are a pacifist or a supporter of self-defense.

If we can agree on this definition of violence in the term "non-violence," then we can easily understand that self-defense is not violence, at least not in a moral or tactical sense. Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. both advocated suppressing our natural self-defense mechanism (at least in the immediate self-preserving physical sense) for two reasons: moral and tactical. It is a strict and unnatural moral code (and some would argue a senseless one) that frames self-defense as immoral; on the other hand, the tactical considerations consisted mostly of capturing the public's imagination as a valiant martyr on the six o'clock news. By now mass media has carried countless images of these kinds of brave suffering protesters to nothing more than vapid stares for too long, and we must not underestimate the People. It is widely agreed up that most if not all politicians are corrupt, and that to protect their bosses sometimes the police resort to brutality. It would be naïve to think that more video footage of non-violent protesters getting beaten would "wake" us up to this fact and make us want to do something about it. We are paralyzed by the feeling of domination the sheer power and weight the establishment can wield; it is more effective in today's world to show each other that we leave the victim/martyr game behind and joyfully smash the state.

The concept of smashing the state brings us to my next point: property destruction as non-violence. From a Proudhon-thumping anarchist point of view this is an easy assertion to agree with, but perhaps a more widely acceptable and understandable anti-capitalist framing of this issue comes with the idea of property destruction as self-defense. If we understand that the empire is constantly waging a class war with their financial weapons against the working classes, the image of a smashed Starbucks window as a strike back against the attacker becomes clear. Not only can this sort of action provide a small (and in most cases, practicality only symbolic) amount of economic damages to their targets, but it can manifest itself in other, less perceptible ways, not the least of which is as an empowering message to other activists, letting them know that they to can "take matters into their own hands."

The problem with most small Black Bloc-type property destruction actions is that they are, in the bigger picture and the longer run, not very effective, especially in contract with the amount of risk assumed by the participants. The actual economic damage done to the targets is largely minuscule, and perhaps a day or two at most of business as usual is interrupted. As can be said about the public's desensitization to protesters suffering willingly at the hands of the riot cops, so can be said of its reaction to masked and black-clad roving rioters. We've seen all we can on TV, and no matter if it was real or fake, we've lost touch as a population to its human counterpart; nothing will reach us through the television to catalyze the resistance; we must focus on what effect we can actually have on real human needs. Agit-prop was an important tool to reach people, but again at this late stage in the game there are enough people who understand the problem to fix; it is now a matter of motivating those people into useful action, and this message will not come from the mass media (its very existence belies its inability).

A situational possibility that exists is the recent dismal performance of the U.S. military's recruiters: various reports have indicated that given the military-industrial complex's current operational trajectory more troops will be needed, and all branches have had some problems in the past year meeting their goals for incoming soldiers. The counter-recruitment push has recently garnered a fair amount of corporate and independent media attention, and for as much as it can be assessed so early, it is an effective tool in preventing individuals from filling the military's quotas for fresh meat. This is a very direct weakness in the plans of empire to impose military superiority on a large scale in many places at the same time (at least until they develop more automated killing machines along the lines of the drone planes). Counter-recruiting also has the benefit of being a directly effective and personally rewarding low-risk tactic, though it is time-consuming and requires something of a long-term commitment. We must also not forget that there are plenty of people suffering from capitalism-enforced starvation in this country: programs like food kitchens and Food Not Bombs are possibly the most direct and close-to-home tactic for actually providing for the most basic of human needs. It was reported that J. Edgar Hoover understood and commented on the Black Panther Party's Breakfast for Children program as a dangerous threat to the status quo. Cooking and eating together are also very social actions for humans so a side benefit of these programs is the great human interaction and community building. Even un-permitted food distribution projects are also very low-risk, relatively low commitment and require only a small investment of time.

The most basic method of breaking the machine of empire is to emulate the Luddites and throw a proverbial wrench in the works. The crux of effectiveness here is in carefully choosing small actions that utilize timing or other situational conditions to magnify the impact. There are several environmental organizations and other groups that have successfully and not-so-successfully used these sorts of tactics. (The intricacies of specific tactics is not the focus of this critique and the details of their tactics can and do make up many several books.)

Of course the most time-honored and effective economic tool that the resistance can wield is the striking power of the labor movement. The roots of the American May Day tradition are planted in the 1886 general strike, this struggle led to the one of labor's most history win, the eight-hour day. Of all the modern anti-empire movements, unions are the last to employ symbolic protest, because they are direct-action based entities; they get what they want by flexing their collective muscles and making the machine come shuddering to a halt. This great power has led to fierce repression both by private and governmental forces, indicating that they understand the dangerousness of the "ultimate veto power" one big union could have. The destruction of empire would probably have to be linked closely to bread and butter issues for the full brunt of the labor movement to be behind the action, but a serious call put out for a general strike is very frightening to the powers-that-be.

The biggest advantage the resistance always has is the initiative, the power to make the empire react to our actions. When we have a permitted march we are giving this strategic superiority up in every tactical aspect including the media. The corporate media is exactly that, corporate and it is the corporate empire we are fighting. We should understand the reality of a symmetrical brute type of resistance and perhaps take a few lessons from the American Revolution in all of its mythic proportions about "fighting like a man".

Report this post as:

stop paying taxes

by Hex Monday, Aug. 01, 2005 at 7:23 PM

it's our taxes that feed the system - a real way to cause change is to stop the flow of money the system depends on to survive

but doing this threatens our lifestyle

by not being willing to change our lifestyle and stop feeding the system we are actually doing nothing effective otherwise, excepting feel-good activities that only serve our own needs to make it ok to actually effectively be doing nothing

most activists aren't even willing to break any laws at all that risk thier own personal concerns and effects, like say illegal broadcasting, then have the gall to look down upon and exclude the very few who do, showing that the social dynamics of the activist movement are really just a mirror of society at large -

Report this post as:

Taxes = community

by Sheepdog Monday, Aug. 01, 2005 at 9:47 PM

Whether it is paying an amount of your labor or some of your recourses, it comes down to contribution to the system to the benefit of of your community. We all live in an infrastructure that has been crafted originally to provide a peaceful, stable environment which allows the commons to enjoy the affluence of a healthy society.

At any level it is good to contribute.

The majority of people don't mind giving to the benefit of the weakest among us such as the sick, old, the young and even the poor. This was original liberal and progressive ideals until the words became a target of slander.

We have been told millions of times, the same lie.

News... Bulletin from Sheepdog:



Socialism and liberals are the only hope for the continued survival of this particular naked ape. The awful truth being we as a species can never allow such obscene power to be wielded by so few sick individuals ever again. We must learn to live on this holy ground that we belong to in harmony.



Fair taxation would, in my opinion, be applied to the national average and the hidden wealth in trusts, holdings, off shore accounts, etc, would be audited. Only personal wealth above a midpoint would be taxed. No sales taxes.

Referendum driven legislation!

Report this post as:

see you DO live off of SS

by Hex Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 12:42 AM

if you ever bothered to study cultural anthropology you would realise tax and taxation has not even existed for most of mankind's history

that care of the poor, elderly and feebleminded rests with cultural values, not forced taxation so you can afford your DSL and yet remain ignorant so you can collect and post flake shit faster than I can keep up with it on dialup as a diversion and waste of time for your contribution to society while other's have to work for a living so a cut of my paycheck can be forcibly stolen to pay for your lazy ass doing so

yeah I really enjoy taking time away from work I have to do to keep a roof over my head to waste on lies and games you just walk away from, in order to repeat over & over again on my dime

you're little better than fresca, you simply put a pseudo-technology, pseudo-science face to the same type of game..

and let's not forget your attention span - if it's not flake shit your span is barely enough to even get through this

a destructive wasteful feebleminded trickster playing at being knowledgable or an even normal person

surely the thousands of dishonest mulitible handle unwanted flake posts compare with fresca's thousands of multible handle unwanted hate posts

truth has about as much value to you both too - virtually nil

and under the banner of science we're not only expected to believe any wild claim you make, but even worse NOT believe establisted facts and laws - and when persons post who remind of those laws defend them, *they* are the one's to be held under suspicion for simply quoting basic and textbook laws of science

NOT the admitted multible liar and game player making the fantastic claims in the first place...

so now you want to influence social order in a way that continues the world-wide exploitation and ruin of the earth's population simply so you can maintain your own comfortable parasitic lifestyle

yes - you ARE a lot like fresca



Report this post as:

fresca?

by Sheepdog Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 12:46 AM

I thought You were fresca... what a world.

Report this post as:

I'm melting - what a world

by Hex Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 1:38 AM

right - fresca posts thousands of death-kill-hate

I've never said I hated anything or anyone - ever

(the worst I've ever said is I strongly dislike - specifically avoid using the word hate just so no one can ever come back and say I ever even used the word)

but speaking of which *where is fresca* ?

noticed she dissappeared since Ned's little prank phone call game was exposed - and how angry and hateful she was about it - the emotional attachment she displayed..



I strongly dislike paying payroll taxes only to be treated to having my time wasted playing games with the proceeds - and your advice consists of recommending I keep paying them so you can

see - no hate



Report this post as:

well my good friends...

by Sheepdog Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 2:46 AM

As in my Sheepdog's Rules of Order, only the AFFECTED will pay ANY taxes. You make above the national average? Hmmmm?

Report this post as:

your "rules" have no bearing

by Hex Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 4:34 AM

on reality - current tax law has working people even in poverty wages (the working poor) paying into a system they will never see any benefits from because the system is going broke while people who are getting benefits now get 5 times (due to inflation) more than they put into it themselves

so maybe you think your fairy tails are cute but when I look at my paystub those fairy tales of yours *do not appear as a credit or gain on it* while the REALITY of what your doing DOES - as a cut in my pay so I take home less money that I WORKED FOR

I am fair enough to realize that of the taxes I'm charged only a small percentage actually goes to SS (most goes to the war budget and covers what big business doesn't pay)

but it's still an additional burden that I will never get back - while the original beneficiaries are getting back five times what they paid into it...

highly unfair

Report this post as:

where's you beef?

by Sheepdog Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 4:57 AM

you keep telling everyone how poor you are,

Report this post as:

LOL

by fresca Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 5:21 AM

So this shitbird site is finally up and running again and what do I see but my two favorites goofs fighting with one another.

Hey hex, still waiting for you to explain your feeble attempts at cyber id'ing and your several different conclusions as to who I am.

Fuckin' dummy.

ANyway, it's good to be back.

Report this post as:

ah darn look what the rat dragged in

by Hex Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 6:38 AM

and to think I was getting ready to post that I don't miss fresca either..



SO been silently ghosting have you

Sheepdog - look at your DSL bill

see the TAX on it ? (phone line *and* DSL) Multiply that by 12 and post the total please

Now I'll tell you what my tax is

0

(not my phone line, not my internet account - I cannot go into detail but suffice to say *no one's* paying either one)

your *tax alone* comes up to what - $ 70 a year for JUST telephone and internet ?

hey fresca - want some more Ned follies and DIRT ?



Report this post as:

some individuals are rather thick

by Sheepdog Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 12:31 PM

what part about no sales tax did you not get?

No taxes below a national mean. Pay attention.

Report this post as:

what part of pipe dream did you not get ?

by Hex Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 9:05 PM

besides even if you DID set single baseline above which all tax load is carried and below which is tax free, a massive shift in declared income would follow - to just below that line

if you adjusted the line downward the shift would continue to follow eventually reaching the point of spreading out across how successful peoples efforts are to *hide their income*

a "thick" individual can see through your THIN thinking instantly

which I can list multible instances of..

NOW, besides the California flag, *how many instances can you list of me* ??

(don't include where you applied "whizzard" only to turn out to be wrong - like even the spelling of Wizard for example)

your pie-in-the-sky, thin and fragile pipe dreams do not appear on my paystub, but your useless lifestyle does

Report this post as:

Absolutely

by fresca Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 9:38 PM

" hey fresca - want some more Ned follies and DIRT ?"

Absolutely.

But who am I now.

You claim I'm Ned, some woman named clara, daveman and a couple of others.

Who have you sluethed that I am now?

I missed this fun.

Report this post as:

did you weite this?

by Sheepdog Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 10:30 PM

-a massive shift in declared income would follow - to just below that line-

Please explain this statement. You mean the rich would divest themselves from wealth in order not to pay taxes? Or LIE about their income? Really.

Now what part of audit did you not understant?

Report this post as:

something v nothing - more v less

by Hex Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 10:44 PM

"claim I'm Ned", no I didn't - unless of course by that you mean using his handle on here

using handles seems to be getting confused with actual real names -

Ned and Clara Lyle, Gary Bowers and Noory Kalimi Shaolian, Chris Huff and George Klass, Jerry Lawson

real names of real people doing real bad things

which handle are you posting under today - which handles have you used in the past isn't important

Those real names are

again you do nothing - death threats, hacking or kiddie porn

have nothing - no website, forum, hotspot or radio station

and know nothing - except maybe baseball and cooking WOW excitement is yours

All the key players have been identified and the whole operation sandbagged

But you have nothing TO bury - nothing to gain or lose

Running one's mentally defective uneducated mouth as a troll doesn't quite compare to what we all do - even I have web pages, IRC, e-mail and now a forum, a network, a public hotspot and both a main and extra radio stations (spare transmitters and antennas)

We are expanding - adding more nodes more people more services more streams more songs more movies

The operation you have your head stuck up is SHRINKING, less traffic less members less reach less power less hacking less threats less anonymity

and you can thank your hero the "untouchable expert" for that

...and me :)



Report this post as:

please argue useless shifting pipe dreams

by Hex Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 10:55 PM

> Please explain this statement.

T-A-X S-H-E-L-T-E-R

T-A-X F-R-A-U-D

do you have any idea how much it costs to *audit everybody* or how rampant tax fraud is because of it ?

I'll state for the last time -

1.) NO taxes

2.) your fairy tales are not printed on my paystub but the cost of supporting them is

Report this post as:

again for Mr. Whizzard

by Sheepdog Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 11:01 PM

If you had bothered to read, you would have remembered I proposed that ALL holdings would be audited. And evaluated for taxes. Pay attention or take notes, please.

Report this post as:

And as to this...

by Sheepdog Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 11:16 PM

' do you have any idea how much it costs to *audit everybody* or how rampant tax fraud is because of it ?'

If you have an income or financial holdings above a mean, it would be in the interests of the treasury to audit. If you are referring to an average house hold this is what a 1040 does. The reason audits are difficult is because of the erroneous 13th amendment clause attached to corporations when their books should to open according to charter.

Where's the beef?

Report this post as:

Trusts and Other Holdings

by Sheepdog Tuesday, Aug. 02, 2005 at 11:27 PM

And just because the wealthy have invented ways to hide their holdings doesn't mean that they can't have the choke chain pulled on their assets. Ask the Bush family about Union Bank.

Report this post as:

Uh, yeah you have

by fresca Wednesday, Aug. 03, 2005 at 12:56 PM

""claim I'm Ned", no I didn't - unless of course by that you mean using his handle on here"

Uh yeah you have, as the old posts I put up recently showed.

You've "identified" me as numerous individuals of both sexes. NOT claimed I've posted as them. Firthermore, these personalities you've concocted don't even post here so the idea of me spoofing them is meaningless. And the bottom line is that I always post as fresca anyway.

Nope, you're nailed on this one.

Exposed again as an ass and a fraud.

Report this post as:

a troll with no balls - only plays with other's

by Hex Wednesday, Aug. 03, 2005 at 6:39 PM

> these personalities you've concocted don't even post here

how would YOU know ?



> I always post as fresca anyway.

Both yourself and others have confirmed otherwise - besides, why would *anyone believe anything you say* ?



> Exposed again as an ass and a fraud.



Exposed ?

Post my name then

And where's Gary - where's Jerry ?

Why have they ran away ?



Once more the only reason you're here is because *you do/are/know NOTHING* - you have nothing to track down, no reason to, and represent NOTHING. You have nothing to threaten - nothing to shut down or contain, you threaten nothing, no death threats, you do nothing by yourself, you're a follower not a leader so you have no fuel to ignite, no balls to ignite it with - you depend on people with balls to do things which you then only play with.

Come to think of it that's what you do in real life too - play with balls..



You represent NOTHING - except of course these "concoctions" that you are *emotionally connected with*, that you get angry about when I bring up, *that you know about* - "don't even post here" - yeah that's right, they DON'T post here ANYMORE (except you)

They USED to (well not Chris or George - Chris simply agreed to allow server space/BW and his partner George agreed as well) but that makes them INVOLVED PARTIES as they helped hide the server in doing so.

Look back a few years when you'all were *heavyly spamming* both here and the main IMC posting death threats, posting BS on *most every thread*, posting dozens of times a day.

Now you're all that's left - and even you now rarely post as you have nothing to say by yourself on your own - you always used the others as moral support as a source of subjects to ride on, to manipulate, to *inject troll hate spam into*, to inflame, to disrupt, to discredit, to distract..

Without the reassurance, wellspring of ideas and subjects you're practically powerless and clueless as a troll all by yourself...

Because you DO NOTHING AND KNOW NOTHING

You depend on other's - depended on Gary & Jerry for supply and KPC & Sheepdog for demand.

You're a piss-poor troll on your own

Report this post as:

Gotcha again

by fresca Wednesday, Aug. 03, 2005 at 9:41 PM

"You have nothing to threaten - nothing to shut down or contain, you threaten nothing, no death threats, you do nothing by yourself, you're a follower not a leader so you have no fuel to ignite, no balls to ignite it with"

Oh man, I keep casting and you keep biting.

You've claimed on several occasions that I was the owner of a computer sho, which could certainly be threatened. That I was the WIFE of a computer shop owner. That I was your nemesis Kobe. And you've also pegged me as some guy named Jerry.

NOW, all of a sudden, when confronted with this nonsense and exposed as a fraud, you claim that I'm just some anonymous troll.

How convenient.

Nope. I'm still fresca (the only handle I ever use contrary to what your "sources" say).

This is just too much fun.

Gotcha again.

Report this post as:

KPC & Sheepdog

by ?name dropper Wednesday, Aug. 03, 2005 at 10:01 PM

Those rascals.

Not at all like fresca and Hex.

...

Report this post as:

all of my replies come at a cost

by Hex Wednesday, Aug. 03, 2005 at 10:52 PM

> I was the owner of a computer shop

no Ned is and yes CLARA the wife

You have used kobe handles - have used several handles which *is not important*

.



"nemesis"

How could Gary is my nemesis when I'm a complete GHOST to him ? He's no threat to me at all - in any way. I could be a nemesis to him though..

.

> pegged me as some guy named Jerry.

Wrong - at best you used his handle - he never posted using his real name, and you've never posted using yours, but you've both posted using his handle - just as you posted last week using Ned's handle - BA

.

> exposed as a fraud, you claim that I'm just some anonymous troll.

Exposed with *what proof* ? More lies and games ?

Anonymous troll is exactly what and ALL you are - your "proof" consists entirely of lies stacked on top of NOTHING - no real names to compare with.

I traced down real people and posted real names..

You continue to post only as an anon handle and simply claim anything you want and that's supposed to compare to or neutralize the REAL NAMES I TRACKED DOWN

.

> contrary to what your "sources" say

my "sources" IS YOU - admitting it in old posts - NOT THAT IT MATTERS since all we're talking about is one handle or another - not a REAL NAME..

.



> Gotcha again

You don't have anything - just lie upon lie - all you can claim is you lied again

You have no credibility, no validity, no honesty.

Just word games -

"look I'm lying some more - see these lies prove the truth isn't - gotcha !"

lies handles and games are ALL you have - and they MEAN NOTHING

no website no forum no death threats no hotspot no station

All the people whom I posted REAL NAMES for have one or more of these things

YOU HAVE NOTHING



Ned and Clara Lyle - owner and wife of computer shop which hosted kobehq while death threats were being made to public officials, and who allowed his personal e-mail account to be used for said death threats



Gary Bowers and Noory Kalimi Shaolian - the owner of kobehq AND his "FRIEND" who continued to make death threats and hacked several websites and hosted child porn on his server which the FBI came and took his HD's looking for, which he *barely* removed in time before they did - then lied about it to the other members

Chris Huff and George Klass, agreed to help hide the kobe website on thier pipe via VPN tunnel with full knowledge of kobe's illegal activities



Jerry Lawson, posted huge amounts of hateful troll bait on the main IMC and here (like you once did) as a member of lgf and other right-wing-nut websites



So "friend" you still hang on because you have nothing better to do yet are afraid to go back into full swing because you know the heat it will bring down on your buddies - the only reason why you're here is because you do nothing/have nothing/are nothing.

You don't pull the strings you simply play with them - it's not you that will go to prison since all you've ever done is run your mouth under an anon handle, so you can afford to hang on. BUT you've never amounted to anything more than a slightly annoying troll and depend on conflict and a receptive audience to get your attention fix.



If KPC, Sheepdog and I ignore you that leaves you with nothing at all

Efforts are underway to do JUST THAT

my cost is I post real names and their crimes which is indexed by search engines and noticed by people in position to take legal action - not to mention the bad publicity for the businesses involved -

Aero Arc, Probe, and ComputersNLA support criminal activity ! Here's the proof ;

Death threats to former Governer Davis, Congresswoman Cynthia Mckinsey and others from Gary Bowers

Evidence Gary Bowers had child pornography on his server

Chris Huff and George Klass of Probe Industries and employees of AeroArc accomplises to death threats and child pornography with the FBI investigating

gotcha !





Report this post as:

© 2000-2018 Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Running sf-active v0.9.4 Disclaimer | Privacy