Er…About Those Thugs?

Along with my friends at True North, I’ve spent a good chunk of the last year getting primed to deal with the hordes of “anarchist” thugs – generally upper-middle-class college kids or twenty-somethings – who plan on coming to Saint Paul this fall to cause mischief.

This blog has spent lots of time and effort documenting their statements of intent, and their actions.

While I support everyone‘s right to free speech, and am perfectly willing to ascribe 90% of the things the Anarcho-fops are saying to “post-adolescent drama-addiction”, there are enough of them out there who do intend to cause serious trouble – vandalism, rioting, assault and mayhem – that I plan on doing what I can to protect my city from their depredations.

And when I’ve mentioned this in mixed-politics forums – like the “E-Democracy” Saint Paul discussion group – the resopnse, almost to a person has been an ignorant “riiiiiiight” at best, and a denial-clogged “the Republicans are just as likely to get violent” at worst.

One of the people who’s given us plenty of both was Grace Kelly of the local leftyblog MNBlue. Kelly, a 9/11 “truther”, is shocked, shocked, to notice that some of her fellow protesters are up to planning no good!

While nearly every peacemaker group has focused on elections, one small group, Protest RNC 2008 has been focussed on protesting the Republican National Convention(RNC), which is normally a good activity except this time.

(Which is a sentence that makes perfect sense except for this time)

I wrote of the importance of nonviolence and peace pledge previously. Now all groups who are participating with this group are being asked to commit to a unity pledge

Let’s be clear, here (since Grace Kelly doesn’t state it very clearly); it’s the “Protest RNC group” that’s proposing the pledge below. Kelly herself proposed a pledge – one of those “unicorn in every garage” pledges, all full of high expectations and dreamy assumptions that are the peacenik’s only useful tangible intellectual product – and is somewhat upset that the other guys’ pledge is getting more traction among the anarkids.

And – this kills me – she’s surprised that the anarkids want to pledge people to… (Kelly’s responses are in parentheses below; mine will be in square brackets):

  • respect the diversity of tactics (ignore the people who state on public email lists that violence to property like throwing bricks through windows is ok

[Or on MPR, or in the Minnesota Daily, or…]

  • >separate activities (please don’t stand next the person throwing bricks or you too will probably get arrested

[we’ve been through this one before; this is part of the art of psychologically priming people to help create a riot against their will]

  • don’t criticize publicly (like I am doing right now, no free speech, no request for peace pledge, no request for a standard of non-violence, no openness, no transparency)

I get a kick out of this; Kelly, like many dozey peaceniks, is actually surprised that people whose intellectual and ideological roots trace back to Lenin, Mao and Stalin would actually stifle free speech.

The horror of it all! Who knew?

  • don’t cooperate with police (like my pledge to point at the person throwing bricks)

Of course, Kelly’s a 9/11 Truther – so even though the intent to commit mayhem against both the city and the convention and her fellow “peaceful” protesters is right there in black and white, we all know whose fault it really is…:

Well I looked at this unity pledge and I thought, all that Bush has to do to shut down protests is join the groups protesting as “George Bush, Tactic – Iraq War and Group – US Government” and to live by the unity pledge, the protests could say nothing.

And there is more, to even sign up to go organizing meeting of the “umbrella” of groups planning for the peace protest, you have sign a pledge of endorsement – which means the group’s name can be used, basically associated with all the “diversity” of tactics used and dragged through media mud.

Gosh. D’ya think.

The Protest RNC 2008 and RNC Welcoming Committee had a “community” meeting, which I came to represent St Paul. They only collected questions and then promised to answer question later if we came to the organizing meeting.

Hm. Where have we heard this before?

Oh, yeah. From conservative bloggers who’ve been “covering” the fops for the past year.

I came to that meeting and was requested to leave because I advocate for the community, the peace pledge and non-violence. I am not “one” of the them. Exactly, I am a peacemaker. I am a member of several peacemaker groups, all of which have declined to be involved.

No kidding!

We on the right have been warning you about exactly this since the very beginning.

Many peacemaker groups have long experienced activists who know the history of people who join groups to cause difficulties. The question is what happens to groups advocating for peace, who do not have that experience. Will they unknowingly sign on and take the unity pledge? Will people’s unwillingness to question tactics of people who seem to work for the same cause get them in trouble?

Clearly we need a separate non-violent peace pledge committed group to organize a separate peaceful protest.

No, Grace. Clearly, what “you” in the “peace” movement need is to rise up and condemn those who advocate violence; you need to make them feel unwelcome in the Twin Cities. You need to actively reach out to Law Enforcement and make sure that thugs, mayhem-seekers and other degenerates get the welcome they deserve from Saint Paul.

But y’all aren’t gonna do that, aren’t you?

Because you still think “pledges” and the unicorn-in-every-garage rhetoric of the “peace” movement actually carries any weight among your movement’s degenerate wing!

Mark my words; the anarchofops are going to be here; they don’t give a shit about your motivations; they will actively seek to disrupt the convention and life in this city. They may be a tiny minority of those protesting, but they will get the vast bulk of the press coverage. They will vandalize. They will destroy. And, if some of their rhetoric is to be believed, they will attack anyone who gets in their way.

And the “peace” movement will do nothing about it, because the “peace” movement is only about taking the easy moral stands.

Which means that they are utterly worthless at either making peace or dealing with aggression.

Fops: You’re in my town, now.

32 thoughts on “Er…About Those Thugs?

  1. I think you’re ignoring the danger of an al Qaeda attack, Mitch. Not to mention Saddam’s roving poison-gas trucks. So much to fear, so little time!

  2. As I’ve stated many times before, the anti-Republican-Ameican wackjobs who will be in St Paul next year are going to give Norm another Wellstone funeral boost.

    In his speech after winning in November, Normie should say “and most of all, I’d like to thank Dave Thune for bringing in and housing domestic terrorists during the recent convention.”

  3. Be careful Frops, there’s a new sherrif in town. Mitch, you’ll have to regail us with the hundreds of hours and dozens of days you spend watching TV, I mean patrolling the streets keeping us safe. Then, perhaps you can explain your vigilanteism to the courts, and join Posse Comitatus.

    BTW, nice use of profanity, good thing you rightie-blogs don’t do that. And while the anarchy nuts may not be facists, neither are they liberals and you know it. While I think they’re pretty odd, I’d take them in a New York minute over the trash-the-country, get your corporate hand-out and move to Bermuda Beluga Billionairres who’ve done far more damage in one day to this country’s future than the anarchy goofs have done in 10 years. The difference is, I (and other Democrats) condemn them (the Anarchists) whole-heartedly, while you suck up to the Beluga, Bermuda Billionairres.

    As far as easy moral stands go, let’s remember that you waived-off when it came to standing up against violations of habeaus corpus, the 14th amendment, the 5th and 6th amendments, because “it’s war.” And then you dishonestly conflate someone who stands for peace (you know, those pesky christian values) with someone who abides rioting and destruction. That’s just an unproven lie, and pretty low. I’m pretty certain AC, and I know I sure as hell, would want anyone tossing rocks at cops or buildings, prosecuted and put in jail. On the other hand, setting up barricades 500 yards from the Republican Convention to keep the poor rich folk from hearing the protests, no, Mitch, that’s suppression of free speech, and it’s yet another failure in your test to stand up for difficult moral values. I think WWII showed pretty well that people of character, people who value peace, CAN and HAVE and WILL stand up against aggression too. Can you please define for me which act of terrorism Iraq took against the United States? Can you please remind me of how you STOOD UP AGAINST AGGRESSION when you opposed action in Bosnia to stop Slobadon Milosevic? When you wore buttons DURING WARTIME that said “Not my President, not my war!” when we took action to stop genocide? (You personally may not have Mitch, I don’t know – but I suspect you did, but you know damned well that you neo-nutzies did). So your hollow claim that peace-movement supporters don’t have the stomach to handle war is just so much (additional) BS. The American people, whom you so frequently and profoundly insult with claims that we lack the will to fight the good fight, in fact stand up for what’s right a lot, and a lot more than I’ve seen here. The issue is, it needs to be what’s RIGHT – what’s decent, fair, moral, and appropriate. Killing 600,000 (or 300,000) Iraqis, to secure access to their oil, to bungle and create a civil war, as an oblique response to 9/11, THAT’S WRONG. get it? Putting people in jail for FIVE YEARS without charge, access to family, or hope, based on the word of some corrupt Afghani Warlord who got paid $5000 to name ANYONE without having to show one ounce of evidence, THAT’S WRONG, get it? So when you phumper about MAKING PEACE at the end of a gun, please remember that historically you have taken the wrong turn, made the wrong choice, over and over and over again. Your belicose treatment of civilians, i.e. paying the price needed in war, nearly LOST Iraq – and it was only because of political defeat that you brought in the adults – (Patreaus) and changed. It wasn’t steep moral fibre, it was political opportunism. So pardon me if I find your boasts a bit hollow, find your condemnation of supporting peace and claims of moral rectitude, a bit flat. You’ve failed the tests of moral decency, of stating issues in a way that was fair and encouraged debate, just as you’ve done so here, so many times, it cannot be taken seriously.

    The good part is that there are quite a large number of non-neo-nutzies in St. Paul who will put idiots in jail AND allow for proper protest. So while you are strutting around in your bravado, trying to get to yell/beat/harass legitimate protestors – the police of St. Paul, a decidedly liberal town, will be actually arresting people and protecting people, including YOU, and if you step out of line with your self-aggrandized threat, arresting YOU – because, you’re in THEIR town now.

  4. I’m not sure where anyone would get “violence” and “threats” out of what I wrote, unless they have Berg Derangement Syndrome…

    …oh, yeah. That.

    Never mind.

  5. Sorry, but the only violence will be self-inflicted as despondent delegates do swan dives out of their hotel windows.

  6. These are the same people who smashed up Seattle a couple of years ago. Clownie mocks Mitch, yet his city kept a firm hand when they visited. Tim has erotic fantasies about RNC delegates killing themselves and Peebs just has erotic fantasies about outdoing Mitch in the logic department.

    Great contributions, folks.

  7. Peev,

    The only parts of your little screed that aren’t delusions are the parts that are pulled, to put it in the original latin, De Anus.

    I might respond to some of it later.  Not that any of it is worthy of a serious reply, but I might have something in the oven later on.
    Carry on.

  8. The anarchists of the stripe that hit (literally) Seattle and NYC and many other places are many things, but trivializing them and airily calling them “goofs” shows that you don’t understand the situation, peevish. Whatever blowhard rhetoric is always out in the breeze, and however often these gatherings amount to nothing, this is going to be a very specific kind of gathering, in a fairly small area – with a certain number of people who are making no bones about the fact that they want to cause mayhem in our city. This is sufficient cause for law-abiding citizens who live nearby to at least arch an eyebrow, I think.
    The anarchists may not be “lilberals” – but they are almost certainly far-left totalitarians, apparently brooking little dissent. That’s something mid-lefties really ought to meditate about.
    And personal attacks are not supporting arguments, peevish. Get it?

  9. How to approach a Peevish comment?

    Point out logical fallacies? Try to untangle run-on sentences? Attempt to track the theme as it swerves like Christian Slater on I95 after a weekend coke-and-whiskey bender? Or just ignore the whole thing?

    I’ll try all three.

    Don’t try this at home, folks. I’m a professional.

    Be careful Frops, there’s a new sherrif in town. Mitch,

    Fops. Sheriff.

    you’ll have to regail us with the hundreds of hours and dozens of days you spend watching TV, I mean patrolling the streets keeping us safe. Then, perhaps you can explain your vigilanteism to the courts, and join Posse Comitatus.

    Statement based on facts not in evidence; I watch vastly less TV than most people. As to what I do during the convention – well, stay tuned.

    VigilanTISm is a pretty loaded phrase, Peev. You imply that I’ll be doing something illegal. Would you care to elaborate, if you can?

    As to the Posse Comitatus – I covered the aftermath of the Medina Shootout, which happened up the street from the station I was working at at the time. My high school pal’s dad treated Yori Kahl; another pal’s brother-in-law was one of the cops on the scene; I know one of the deputies who was wounded.

    I’ll chalk your comment up to your writing rhetorical checks that your command of the facts can’t cash, rather than something a lot more malevolent. You’re welcome.

    BTW, nice use of profanity, good thing you rightie-blogs don’t do that.

    So?

    And while the anarchy nuts may not be facists, neither are they liberals and you know it.

    Fascists.

    And I don’t care what label you put on them; they are thugs, they detest democracy, freedom of speech, civil society.

    I’ve interviewed them; they are narcissists who believe they are above our petty little rules and restrictions.

    While I think they’re pretty odd, I’d take them in a New York minute over the trash-the-country, get your corporate hand-out and move to Bermuda Beluga Billionairres who’ve done far more damage in one day to this country’s future than the anarchy goofs have done in 10 years.

    Well, you go ahead and do that!

    The difference is, I (and other Democrats) condemn them (the Anarchists) whole-heartedly, while you suck up to the Beluga, Bermuda Billionairres.

    No, you (plural) don’t. Oh, you (plural) pay it lip service, but that’s about it. You say you oppose the thugs – but that’s as far as it goes. The local left is doing very little to make these people feel ill-at-ease in this metro area.

    As far as easy moral stands go, let’s remember that you waived-off when it came to standing up against violations of habeaus corpus the 14th amendment, the 5th and 6th amendments, because “it’s war.”

    Well, that’s a very broad – let’s be honest, a hamfisted – way of referring to my beliefs on the matter.

    And then you dishonestly conflate someone who stands for peace (you know, those pesky christian values) with someone who abides rioting and destruction.

    Er, no, I don’t. Merely point out the former’s blind spots.

    That’s just an unproven lie, and pretty low.

    Also completely incorrect, not that that’s ever stopped you.

    I’m pretty certain AC, and I know I sure as hell, would want anyone tossing rocks at cops or buildings, prosecuted and put in jail.

    Well, good for you!

    And you just keep on sucking up to AC. Really.

    On the other hand, setting up barricades 500 yards from the Republican Convention to keep the poor rich folk from hearing the protests, no, Mitch, that’s suppression of free speech, and it’s yet another failure in your test to stand up for difficult moral values.

    Really?

    And where have I said word one about where the “barricades” are going to be set up?

    Try to get your facts straight – for once, ever, on any subject – before you try to impugn my “moral values”, because you are not qualified!

    When you wore buttons DURING WARTIME that said “Not my President, not my war!” when we took action to stop genocide? (You personally may not have Mitch, I don’t know – but I suspect you did,

    Peevish? Eat shit and bark at the moon. Seriously.

    That “I suspect you did” is cowardice covering ignorance. You have no idea what I believed about Bosnia; suffice to say, whatever you think I did, you’re wrong!

    but you know damned well that you neo-nutzies did)

    Neo-nutzie?

    You’re making a Nazi alliteration and allusion?

    Wow. Good one.

    . So your hollow claim that peace-movement supporters don’t have the stomach to handle war is just so much (additional) BS.

    Where did I make any such claim? Show us.

    The American people, whom you so frequently and profoundly insult with claims that we lack the will to fight the good fight, in fact stand up for what’s right a lot, and a lot more than I’ve seen here.

    You are a deeply deluded person.

    The issue is, it needs to be what’s RIGHT – what’s decent, fair, moral, and appropriate. Killing 600,000 (or 300,000) Iraqis,

    Or 150,000? Or 75,000? Or 37,500?

    What the…?

    So pardon me if I find your boasts a bit hollow

    Pardon me if no rational person cares what you think about me!

    The good part is that there are quite a large number of non-neo-nutzies in St. Paul who will put idiots in jail AND allow for proper protest. So while you are strutting around in your bravado, trying to get to yell/beat/harass legitimate protestors

    Where did I say anytyhing about harassing or beating legitimate protesters?

    Tell you what, Peevish – you make a lot of really low-rent, dirty attacks on my character, based on claims that I’ve never made. Not once.

    And you do it all anonymously.

    You say – when you’re not claiming I’m some TV-sodden armchair general – that I’m planning violence, based on…what? Nothing I’ve ever written. So I guess I’ll remind you that if you don’t have the facts on your side (and you never, ever do), you need to knock off the defamation, and quit lying. I have never advocated violence at these demonstrations.

    – the police of St. Paul, a decidedly liberal town,

    …that you know virtually nothing about.

    will be actually arresting people and protecting people, including YOU, and if you step out of line with your self-aggrandized threat, arresting YOU – because, you’re in THEIR town now.

    No, actually, the police and I are in OUR town.

    Now, mister anonymous bigmouth – show us where I threatened anyone, or apologize for your casual, anonymous defamation.

    Now.

  10. “Or just ignore the whole thing?” — Your best option listed

    I would have chosen E) Delete his crap and ban him (again). But it’s your blog.

  11. Mitch, I hope you may know what high comedy your response to Peebs is. If He (she, it?) didn’t exist it might even be a worthwhile creation. Much like our adoptive Doug, the illustration of the difference between cogent thought and spittle flecked invective advances the education of the public.

    I suspect you take these attack screeds somewhat personally, since you engage them in response. Then I think you must laugh them off with all the regard they deserve.

    Peebs is an example of, shall we say, unusual pathology? Given the opportunity to sit back, sip an adult beverage and engage in conversation with either you or PB, I think your readers would respond unanimously. But I’m just a “neo-nutzie” so my opinion may be somewhat tainted.

  12. I suspect you take these attack screeds somewhat personally, since you engage them in response. Then I think you must laugh them off with all the regard they deserve.

    All the world’s a stage, and we merely the players.

  13. Peev warned: “Be careful Frops, there’s a new sherrif in town. Mitch,”

    Mitch corrected: “Fops. Sheriff.”

    Sharif don’t like it. Rock the Twinkies, rock the Twinkies!

  14. I know, it just encourages Peev when you comment on his deranged rants, but:

    On the other hand, setting up barricades 500 yards from the Republican Convention to keep the poor rich folk from hearing the protests, no, Mitch, that’s suppression of free speech, and it’s yet another failure in your test to stand up for difficult moral values.

    Means that PB thinks ‘freedom of speech’ includes the right to force people to listen to you.

  15. Er, I was writing way too fast when I got this, and missed revising:

    the Medina Shootout, which happened up the street from the station I was working at at the time.

    I meant to write “up the road”, not up the street. Medina was 35 miles west of Jamestown on I94 – the next significant town down the road.

  16. Oh dear God… by merely glancing at Peev’s comment (brief for him) I experienced time dilation. My watch suggests that I lost somewhere near a fortnight.

  17. Any comment that has even one 42-line paragraph is obviously so poorly written and reasoned as to be instantly routed to the bit bucket.

    Next discussion, please. Perhaps we could discuss AC’s location during the last GOP convention, as we can be fairly certain peeve’s consciousness, if not his body, was orbiting somewhere out near Uranus.

  18. We need hope! Likw I hope the bad guys don’t knock down the Empire State building too. I hope the don’t blow up the Statue of Liberty. I hope they don’t detonate a dirty bomb in the heart of Manhattan.

    President Obama will bring us all hope.

  19. “Satire is as dangerous as bombs, don’t ya think?”

    I don’t think you need to tell that to the Jyllands-Posten, AC. Just ask them how dangerous satire is.

    RoP my ass.

  20. Let’s see,

    Mitch writes 100000 words describing why he’s a tough guy, and those Fops should ‘watch out’, and I write 1000 words in reply. Neither commentary is well written, though Mitch’s has better grammatical style. Sychophants of the world UNTIE!

    Bluntly, I don’t much care if the length, structure, grammar, or syntax bothers you all – Mitch wasted 20000 good words on a nonsense issue, while wrapping himself in bravado and claiming to defend liberty when he can’t even artfully craft a reason to take him seriously about defending anything except the GOP backside and the 2nd amendment. If that offends you, then pluck out your eye.

  21. I asked you a question, Peev. Where did I threaten anyone? Where did I mention violence?

    Cough up the answers before you waste any more time. You made a pretty defamatory statement – that I’m calling for violence – pretty deliberately, from your anonymous cover.

    Do you have the cojones to support your own “argument”, or are you just flapping your gums?

    I don’t much care if the length, structure, grammar, or syntax bothers you all

    Actually, I think I speak for the entire audience when I say that we’d forgive them all, if you could find a way to temper arrogance with coherence.

  22. For us to notice a newfound coherence would require a radical restructuring of the peeve’s style. Who’s up for trying to follow an incoherent, rambling post in a comment thread? It’s much more fun to mock it for the poorly reasoned brain fart it is then to even begin to analyze it.

    BTW, peeve, you only used 788 words. Mitch’s original post had 738 of his own words, much more organized into coherent thoughts and paragraphs, each covering a topic. Yours was one giant rambling diatribe, went off on rants about foreign wars under two different presidents, individual freedoms, came close to invoking Godwin’s Law, contained numerous direct personal attacks and you are reduced to wondering why your style is mocked and your content insulted? Perspective man, perspective!

  23. Well, what a surprise that Peev’s too gutless to answer a direct question.

    He truly is the Nick Coleman of this blog.

    Think about it.

    Peev took a swipe at Strom the other day just like Coleman did in one of his lack-of-gas-tax-hikes-caused-bridge-collapse screeds. However, the Tax Payers League at least answered their phones after being levied with such an asinine charge. And Strom is available every Saturday morning on AM 1280 for all the public to call. Yet kooks like Coleman and Peev never answer objections to their inane diatribes.

    Weasels.

  24. That’s the problem with anonymous commenters. Unlike Strom and I, they are never held accountable for their petty, irresponsible defamations.

  25. Pingback: Truth v. The Machine » Archives » This just in: Obama wins black vote

  26. Pingback: Shot in the Dark » Blog Archive » Talking Point Watch

Leave a Reply