http://news.infoshop.org/article.php?story=20120501124227326
Knew one of these guys, and some of them were traveling kids.
Knew one of these guys, and some of them were traveling kids.
If the allegations are true, then they set themselves up with their willingness to take the lives of all the innocent people who would have died when the bridge collapsed.the fbi set them up absolute case of entrapment and coercion. the scumbag informant is a pos junkie.
If the allegations are true, then they set themselves up with their willingness to take the lives of all the innocent people who would have died when the bridge collapsed.
If the allegations are true, then they set themselves up with their willingness to take the lives of all the innocent people who would have died when the bridge collapsed.
The only reason no one was hurt was because they were too incompetent to see the plan through, and thankfully so. Unfortunately, few details about the incident were given but it would be pretty hard to blow up a bridge without risking the death of a few people at the very least, and likely a lot more if the bridge was also a road as many bridges are. There is no city in the country where bridges don't provide shelter to local homeless populations so there is simply no excuse for such a blatant disregard for human life. Their actions reflect negatively on both the anarchist and Occupy movements as a whole, so my perspective is one of calling out gross irresponsibility which threatens to discredit productive forms of political dissent. You know, the kind that is actually about helping people instead of furthering justifying the military police state.1. Its pretty presumptive that you assume anyone would have been hurt in a bridge collapse that didn't happen.
The bridge wasn't being built. It was already there. Attempting to blow up the bridge served the exact purpose you stated, giving a bad face to anarchists, not protecting local ecology.So the bridge being built wasnt a blatant disregard of animal life and the natural ecosystems around it?....Simply put, it was a setup to give a bad face to anarchists on MayDay to divert attention from all the other events that were going on.
The only reason no one was hurt was because they were too incompetent to see the plan through, and thankfully so. Unfortunately, few details about the incident were given but it would be pretty hard to blow up a bridge without risking the death of a few people at the very least, and likely a lot more if the bridge was also a road as many bridges are. There is no city in the country where bridges don't provide shelter to local homeless populations so there is simply no excuse for such a blatant disregard for human life. Their actions reflect negatively on both the anarchist and Occupy movements as a whole, so my perspective is one of calling out gross irresponsibility which threatens to discredit productive forms of political dissent. You know, the kind that is actually about helping people instead of furthering justifying the military police state.
Trumped up conspiracy charges, max 15 yrs, 10 yrs of that is for use of explosives which will probably get dropped in court. These kids will most likely all be home free in 5 yrs if not 18 months. Looks like two of them aren't even being charged. Sounds like they where talked into it for sure, but they still decided to go for it. Shoulda stuck with taking down some signs... I don't really see how blowing up a bridge was delivering a blow to capitalism. The state tends to hire private contractors (usually ones with old school connections) for jobs like that. Some good ole boy woulda made another million fixing that bridge and the taxpayers of Cleveland and Ohio woulda been even more fucked.
The dumpsters are gonna be pretty damn empty if they can't even get food on the supermarket shelves, still a little early for early crops in Ohio, longer commutes result in higher petroleum consumption... Guess I'm not really getting these kids' angle.
If you go back and actually read my posts you will see that there was no presumption of guilt. What I originally said was that, if the allegations are true, then the actions they took are indefensible. The act of blowing up a bridge serves no practical purpose whatsoever besides painting all anarchists as dangerous threats to society. Personally, I have witnessed green anarchists frothing at the mouth talking about how necessary it is to make attacks on the power grid in order to take down civilization. This statement went unchallenged by a large group of people back at the green anarchist conference back in 2003, and I find this perspective to be repulsive, not only because destroying civilization means there would no longer be engineers to prevent nuclear meltdown, thus ensuring widespread ecological catastrophe, but also because the number of people who are dependent on industrial civilization means that removing power supplies is equivalent to genocide. Of course, nothing these kids did remotely approaches the level of competence necessary to accomplish anything close to widespread destruction, but for some reason the ideology behind it is one that is still tolerated by many anarchists even while more practical solutions such as building ecovillages are ignored.Again, you have no knowledge of the plan, so your presumptions of guilt and your legitimization of state violence is unfounded....As far as homeless populations living under bridges being jeopardized; there is nothing to base that on. But lets assume for a minute that a homeless person was accidentally killed in the bridge explosion that didn't happen. Why would the blame automatically go to two kids who unwillingly killed a homeless person while unknowingly carrying out a plan originating from the FBI....And sorry if we don't show too much outrage over some kids getting condemned for accidentally killing a homeless man...
Actually; you have to look at things from perspective. These were just two teenagers; who would have effectively closed down a major bridge for a long period of time (months to years); disrupting the flow of capital at least somewhat.