Dangerous Propaganda Distributed At Occupy Phoenix

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

This is just some of the advice dispensed in a flier titled "When Is It OK To Shoot A Cop?":

Basic logic dictates that you either have an obligation to LET “law enforcers” have their way with you, or you have the right to STOP them from doing so, which will almost always require killing them. (Politely asking fascists to not be fascists has a very poor track record.)

To be blunt, if you have the right to do “A,” it means that if someone tries to STOP you from doing “A” –even if he has a badge and a politician’s scribble (“law”) on his side – you have the right to use whatever amount of force is necessary to resist that person. That’s what it means to have an unalienable right. If you have the unalienable right to speak you mind (a la the First Amendment), then you have the right to KILL “government” agents who try to shut you up. If you have the unalienable right to be armed, then you have the right to KILL “government” agents who try to disarm you. If you have the right to not be subjected to unreasonable searches and seizures, then you have the right to KILL “government” agents who try to inflict those on you.

Most of the incomprehensible atrocities that have occurred throughout history were due in large part to the fact that most people answer “never” to the question of “When should you shoot a cop?” The correct answer is: When evil is “legal,” become a criminal. When oppression is enacted as “law,” become a “law-breaker.” When those violently victimizing the innocent have badges, become a cop-killer.

The next time you hear of a police officer being killed “in the line of duty,” take a moment to consider the very real possibility that maybe in that case, the “law enforcer” was the bad guy and the “cop killer” was the good guy. As it happens, that has been the case more often than not throughout human history.

That's right, if you think it's okay to yell FIRE! in a crowded movie theater and an officer of the law attempts to arrest you for it, you should become a cop-killer.

The flier in question was on a table with other pamphlets and papers available for Occupy Phoenix protesters and anyone else visiting Cesar Chavez Plaza. The police are unsure if they were left there by a protester and no credible threats have been issued to police, but they're currently investigating. State officials were also contacted.

This isn't the first time questionable material has been passed around Occupy protests. Occupy Baltimore passed around a flier informing protesters who are victims of sexual assault to contact their internal security team first instead of the police. They confirmed that it was drafted and distributed by people within their own group. And while they say they won't discourage anyway from going to the police, they also state they want to try and handle issues within their own camp before involving police, including providing counseling for the ABUSER. (How about the ABUSED?)

Where is the line drawn between freedom of speech/freedom of the press and endangering the welfare of others? Do you see any merit in either type of material? Is it better to take care of problems internally when involved in protest groups rather than to the police? What if the problem escalates?

Comments

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

The flyer in question was earlier posted on June 28th, 2011:
http://www.copblock.org/5475/when-should-you-shoot-a-cop/
Looks like someone printed it out.

This isn't the first time questionable material has been passed around Occupy protests

For example right wing blogger Evan Coyne Maloney was caught red handed on film handing out bongs and rolling papers with images of Che on them with the hope of discrediting the protesters.



Your kind of slanderer, eh mivida?

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

Your kind of slanderer, eh mivida? -- Not going to answer to a personal attack.

[lilenth.livejournal.com]

I agree he's full of bullshit, but slander is spoken, the word you want is libel for written bullshit, or defamation which can apply to either.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Your kind of slanderer, eh mivida?

Apparently he's yours though.

(frozen) (no subject)

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Looking more into the evil flyer in question, its author is Larken Rose. He's a tax dodger.

He has a very anarcho-libertarian, anti-government youtube creation:



Here is his website: http://www.larkenrose.com/




His most recent book:

(http://www.amazon.com/Most-Dangerous-Superstition-Larken-Rose/dp/145075063X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1319869548&sr=8-1)

Quote: "It is a very important book, important the way Atlas Shrugged -- or Tom Paine's Common Sense -- are important."

LOL.

Ms. Loca, you have latched onto a flyer written by a lone tax dodger (http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2003/07/americas_oddest_tax_dodge.html) that found its way to a table and rushed a post attempting to discredit the OWS in whole. At least you've moved on up from fake pictures!

You could probably find some LaRouche's suckerfishing onto the occupy protests too if you try hard.

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

He has a very anarcho-libertarian, anti-government youtube creation:

I suppose we can expect a lot of propaganda like this on OWS. Especially the way the Right Wing talking heads are going to be using stuff like this to discredit OWS.

Notice the URL from the link points to a Clear Channel, Inc. source. They are a global corporate conglomerate themselves that carry a lot of these types of talk show programs. That's how they make their money.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

Implanted saboteurs? Why am I not surprised? Countdown to the Fox outrage: 4, 3, 2...

I'm eager to see the next obscure "evidence" that the OP will dig from deep under. It's getting ever more interesting.

(frozen) (no subject)

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

'you have latched onto a flyer written by a lone tax dodger that found its way to a table and rushed a post attempting to discredit the OWS in whole. '

Kinda like the Tea Party?

I'll never get this tactic of people on the left hating on cops and soldiers when it's convenient then pretending as if it's all lies when called on it. It's like with Ted Rall. Everyone loved the guy when he made passive anti-military comics but the second he starts calling them fools and criminals he's just dropped quietly and pretended as if he was never popularly embraced. Same with Cindy Sheehan.

You just have to accept that some times your side is the worst when it comes to something by the standard you use to criticize the other side.

Anti-soldier, anti-cop, anti-semetic, or anti-American propaganda is not unheard of at these lefty rallies.

(frozen) (no subject)

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

Again, not answering your personal attacks. If you have something legtimate to ask, then do it without being condescending.

(frozen) (no subject)

[new-wave-witch.livejournal.com]

Funny how this seems to be a trend with this particular poster.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

rushed a post attempting to discredit the OWS in whole.

You're mind reading and creating an intention that isn't available from the post itself. The post to me looks very neutral actually, so maybe you need to check your own biases.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

I hope you're not drawing a parallel between some nutbar giving away crazy stuff to people and peaceful protesting.

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

I presented the facts as they were reported, including that the police don't know if it was distributed by a protester at this time. People can draw their own conclusions.

[jerseycajun.livejournal.com]

"Where is the line drawn between freedom of speech/freedom of the press and endangering the welfare of others?"

Not here. And no, I do not agree with the message.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

While I disagree with the conclusion the question asked is a legitimate one.

At what point do the police stop being public servants and start being public enemies?

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

You know, there was a report that someone at Occupy Seattle was arrested with not only a gun, but the ammo for it. I certainly didn't bitch then. People have a right to carry arms, it's when they make very specific threats that it becomes a problem.

I'm curious to know why you expect me to bitch about every single little thing that has a connection to the Tea Party when I'm not part of the Tea Party? Did anyone within the Tea Party threaten or assault a police officer? Were riot police ever involved in crowd control with the Tea Party?

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

The next time you hear of a police officer being killed “in the line of duty,” take a moment to consider the very real possibility that maybe in that case, the “law enforcer” was the bad guy and the “cop killer” was the good guy. As it happens, that has been the case more often than not throughout human history.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say there's zero evidence to support that.

[udoswald.livejournal.com]

That sounds far more like some right-wing, sovereign citizen bull than anything I've heard a liberal say. For all we know that was planted there by right-wing spies (there have been several documented cases of O'Keefe types attempting to infiltrate Occupy protests to make them look bad including that whole supposed attack on the Air and Space Museum that turned out to have been entirely orchestrated by a right-winger).

[devil-ad-vocate.livejournal.com]

Now OWS haters are attempting to slam the marine vet wounded in Oakland. He apparently had a personal blog entitled IHATETHEMARINECORPS. I find this really amusing. I don't think ANY soldiers went a single day without saying "I hate this fuckin' Army". I assume Marines reserve the same right to be disgruntled.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

When Ku Kluxers rally together with Tea Party rallies and people hold signs saying racist slurs that has nothing to do with the Tea Party and all the conservatives and libertarians here would flock against such assertions to deny them. But one flyer here and this is the entire movement and there is no way it would not be the entire movement. Sincere outrage my hairy white ass, this is just tu quoque.

[lilenth.livejournal.com]

Clearly everytime any Tea party/republican/conservative either does something or yet against incites bigotry against minorities (Some of them are very fond of mental illness related slurs in particular) it's unfair to hold them accountable for being the party that fosters and approves of such shit (for all they claim not to, their actions don't back it up).

But if a random leaflet of unknown providence turns up and is claimed to be a OWS thing, then every liberal everywhere is immediately party to that.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

We should probably outlaw dangerous speech. Think of the children.

[harry-beast.livejournal.com]

Ordering victims of crime to run it by some protester committee is a terrible idea. The probable outcome is that the victim will be pressured to recant, or at least to keep things quiet. This sort of thing will doubtless be presented as a measure to avoid discrediting the movement. Putting victims of sexual assault in this situation is unconscionable.

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

This exactly!

[oportet.livejournal.com]

Say something, anything, about abortion - and I think this one goes over 500.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

How has something that was debunked in the first post reach 400 comments?

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

People love their drama.

What I don't get is even if the pamphlet were legit, who gives a fuck? It's hardly the craziest thing to ever be said at a protest.

[taiki.livejournal.com]

What a beautiful way to end the month of October. Snow on the ground, drama on Livejournal.

Anarchists invading OWS? I distinctly remember seeing a pic of some anarchists marching with an anarchy flag... Also some Randian tool is trying to copy the movement for his "decentralize everything" nonsense. This is the reality behind big tent movements. There's enough room for everyone. Even the nuts.

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

Drama is what happens when two or more people are talking past each other; talking at each other, as opposed to with each other. It's when a number of people on both sides have constructed some preconceived premises of theirs, and they'd never take even one single step back from their convictions, no matter what. And when someone tries to put a dent into that wall of stubbornness, the response is a stream of passive-aggressive wharrgarrrbl, which in turn gets responded to with still more of the same, and shit starts sliding down the hill.

All the conditions for drama were here; add a poorly presented hot issue, and you've got the perfect mix.

And while some were drawing delight from the whole thing, and others were just "Meh", there are those of us who cringe at every subtle insult that's being hurled around. Now all that's left is to talk about... kittens.

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

Maybe it's just my opinion, but I do think you've been trying too hard to find something, anything, to discredit the OWS - or at least make it look bad, if only just a tiny bit.

This has inevitably put you in a couple of embarrassing situations, so maybe you'd like to give it some rest and wait for something real to come up? We don't want this to become like the story of the boy who cried wolf, do we?