Transcript from Maddy’s Grand Jury Appearance

  • Posted on: 8 November 2012
  • By: worker

<table><tr><td>From <a href=" Political Repression</a>

Maddy Pfeiffer’s Grand Jury Appearance

Here are the notes from the Grand Jury hearings. Personal information has been redacted including the names of people asked about by the Prosecutor.

Prosecutor Michael Dion: What is your Name?
Maddy: Matthew Pfeiffer

Prosecutor Michael Dion: What is your Birth Date?
Maddy: (gave birth date)

Prosecutor Michael Dion: What do you do for work?
Maddy: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.</td><td><img title="" src=""></td></t...
P: What is your Address?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Do you intend to answer that for every question?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Did you live at (address redacted for privacy)?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Did your lawyer advice you about Immunity?
M: Yes.

at this point in time, the prosecution showed the room a statement posted to the committee against political repression’s website, attributed to Maddy

P: Are you familiar with the committee against political repression?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Are you aware that the Federal courthouse was vandalized on May 1st?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Were you present at the courthouse on May 1st?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Do you know Person 1 (name redacted)?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Was Person 1 in Seattle on May 1st?
M:I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Do you know Person 2 (name redacted)?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Was Person 2 in Seattle on May 1st?
M:I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Do you know Person 3 (name redacted)?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Was Person 3 in Seattle on May 1st?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Did anyone tell you about vandalizing the courthouse?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Do you know what a black bloc is?
M:I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Have you ever been in a black bloc?
M:I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Have you ever possessed a road flare?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Do you know a man named ____________ (name redacted)?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Do you intend to answer “ I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.” to all questions?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: You are due upstairs in 10 minutes and have another subpoena on the 20th of November.

Maddy went before the judge then was sent back down to the grand jury for a second appearance

P: Has your position changed since talking to Judge Jones?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Are you going to continue to answer “ I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.” to every question?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Have you ever met Person 1?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Have you ever been in a black bloc?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Were you there on May 1st?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

P: Did anyone say anything to you about the damage to the courthouse?
M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments

P: Okay, we’re done here.


"were you there on may 1st"

M: Where?

"In seattle at the courthouse"

M: I am exercising my state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

I wish the conversation would have went like that.

That would have implied that if the "where" had been somewhere else, he might have answered. That would have implied that whether he was at the courthouse or not was something in particular he did not want to answer, as opposed to some other innocuous question. That would have been a stupid thing to do.

I wonder if it would have been worth it to entertain you and other spectators.

He should have been evasive not just on that question but all of them. Not for our entertainment but for his.

No, Maddy should have done exactly what they did.

Maddy uses THEY. Calling them "he" supports the same bullshit state violence you are supposedly against

No. Saying 'he' instead of 'they' does NOT support state violence, you fuck. It is just disrespectful.

Coercively classifying people's genders based on their genitalia at birth, and enforcing it throughout institutions their whole lives IS STATE VIOLENCE. Just look at a fucking state license. There's no option for anyone outside the gender binary.

I suppose understanding this depends on understanding the difference between institutional and interpersonal violence, though... something folks on a-news aren't the best at...

accidentally using the wrong pronoun is pretty much the same as systematically imprisoning people! LET'S ALL GET SUPER BUTTHURT ABOUT IT!

No - it's obviously the same exact thing as drone strikes against schoolchildren in Pakistan.

This is state violence you liberal piece of shit:

Stop exaggerating every little thing to get people to pay attention to you. NO ONE has implied that Maddy shouldn't be able to use "they" if they want to and it's only an honest slip-up if someone says "he". That's all it is. I absolutely guarantee that you have never experienced actual state violence in your life. Because if you did, you would never compare it to verbalizing a pronoun. Furthermore, stop derailing the conversation to talk about your petty bullshit. The important thing to talk about with Maddy is that THEY'RE GOING TO PRISON. That's the state violence they're experiencing, not from comrades of theirs making supportive statements on the internet, you liberal fuck.

More importantly, solidarity to Maddy!

Indeed, prisons are intended as instruments of violence and terror by the state. So violence in kind will end it? That's just shuffling the deck but continuing the same game.

And that game, which you seem to be implying is the "root" of what we need to end is....."violence"?

The game of violence? Really? That's the cycle we need to get out of? So what we need are Foucauldian prisons and police that only control through mental manipulation?

you obviously did not understand whatever foucault you read

go away liberals

people overreacting to people overreacting.

By arguing on @news you have succeeded in creating your own state imprisoning and murdering me. I blame you personally for maddy being targeted.

Hey, I didn't know that, having not met personally and the other commenter probably didn't either. Relax.



Just a Panda Bear expressing their Second Amendment rights !!!

Git er dun !

solidarity from pablo sandoval

:D TROLOLOLOLOLOL excellent form, good show!

Is Maddy Pfeiffer a part of the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) ?

They were last year.

Why the fuck would you answer this? The prosecutor can't get any information out of them in court, for which they might go to jail, but some anonymous idiot blurts out a question about their associations and you just type out an answer for the whole world to see like it's no big deal. This sounds exactly like a question they would be asked in court and REFUSE to answer. Thanks for helping the grand jury investigation, you fucking dolt.

"Maddy, who goes by they/them pronouns, is an Evergreen student, a brilliant and skilled organizer, and a good friend to many of us. They are also a former coordinator of Students for a Democratic Society here at Evergreen."


ha ha. Everyone got all paranoid but then after seeing this question I did a google-search and this page came up with a statement that Yes, Maddy is a former coordinator of Students for a Democratic Society.


Yeah, the information is on CAPR so it can be googled. That doesn't make it less creepy/stupid that people are asking and answering questions in comments on an article about someone who is refusing to answer similar questions asked by the state. The state also asked him several other questions he refused to answer that they could answer themselves by Googling, e.g. do you know what CAPR is?

Do you know who the Students for a Democratic Society are ?

Liberals pretending to be Anarchists.

Students for a "Democratic Society", what is this 20 year old anarchists training to be 30 year old green party organizers and, onward to 40 year old Democrats ????

P.S.- Maddy prefers to go by "they/them" not "he"...not trying to be rude, just respecting their pronoun choice/identity etc.

lol seems like you haven't been to an SDS meeting in Oly

ugh, not the right thing to say. I wish there weren't comments on this site sometimes.

"Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) is committed to building a strong organization and growing a popular movement for student power to unite the youth of America and save this country from disaster. We are going to take back our schools, our communities, and our nation - and we are going to win, because millions of people are stronger than millions of dollars. This is the fight of our life!"


Not sure why Anarchists would be interested in taking "back our schools, our communities, and OUR NATION..." Sounds like a Liberal Nationalism.

SDS new wave has been pretty legit countrywide. I don't really understand though why they didn't start something completely new. Never makes much sense to me.

nope it was taken over by FRSO long ago and most anarchists left it

lololol don't see how you came to that conclusion. SDS currently super decentralized and is different in each place I've been. Some are liberal fuckwads, but mostly I've seen it taking liberal funds and giving them to anarchist causes and using school resources to make zines and flyers and shit.


The National Coordinating Committee (*ewwww*) is run by Stalinist pigs. People who defend Kim Jong-Il, Castro, Qaddafi, and other statist pieces of shit. They also tell you to vote for Obama (not even any of the 3 socialist parties that were on the ticket, lol).

-a former member from the midwest

Well fuck that centralized bullshit anyway.
It seems chapters are breaking free from there control though ;)

SDS people are some of the sweetest people I know, but when they refer to themselves as being Anarchist or Anarchistic, I cringe. There's a reason why well-known members like Tom Hayden eventually became politicians and other kinds of authoritarian bureaucrats.

SDS are the type of people that will make fun of anarchists for not voting (an anarchist or anti-state individual will be referred to as "purist" for advocating a really basic idea of Anarchy or anti-state ideas.)

Why do you feel the need to prove something (in writing) to a random @news commenter about this on an article about the grand jury investigation?

If folx are trying to do rad work under the radar, ZIP IT AND LET THEM

seriously shut the fuck up people and do not feed these stupid commenters. you know what's up and I bet you didn't learn it on an @news comment. use your fucking head. keep it on the DL. stay fucking shifty.

this is the problem of the milieu and its stupid cult of virility. everyone wants to prove how anarchist they are, reaffirm their anarchist identity. people who got something to prove are fucking suspect.

Or trolling through boards on the internet looking for someone to talk to, cause they are lonely as fuck.

Seriously. In my case boredom plays a large part. But gosh am I lonesome. :( :(


zip it, you fucking dum-dum!

I have, and I completely concur that it is liberals pretending to be anarchists. Not that this should have anything to do with Maddy getting support, which they deserve an incredible amount of.

Yes yes, full of liberals and black bloc is full of middle class skinny white males. Yes yes, quite so. No reason to think otherwise. Let's keep it at that.

it's funny how liberals is just as much of a constant epithet for some of guys as it is for the christian right.

not really when liberals are a fucking problem

If the answer was already obvious to anyone who read the SDS solidarity statement. I don't see why you're freaking out. It's not like an anon comment on an anarchist website that simply states already confirmed information is going to do any harm. Calm down and think for a second. Maddy answering questions in a courtroom is different then anon commenters answering questions that were already confirmed.

Ummm...I wouldn't give the FBI quite so much credit for common sense. Also, they're not interested in the truth so much as innuendo. So it's valid to suggest not pointing out the obvious to them because they ARE that dishonest & corrupt.

As an investigatory reporter, I didn't quite know who 'Maddy' was until he was identified online in these forums. I'd met him (when I covered the 9-13-12 Seattle federal courthouse demonstration supporting Leah, Matt, KteeO, etc.) and didn't like him much. He was arrogant and, like some of his (A)narchist peers, attempted to bully/intimidate the press by demanding to know why they (I) were/was taking photos and what would be done with them. He reacted badly when informed this wasn't information that need to or would be shared with result of the antagonizing of the press on 9-3-12 at the Olympia Traditions Cafe event/presentation advertised as open to the public promising it would be filmed.

Nevertheless, the abuse of the federal Grand Jury system for political/ideological repression doesn't turn on personalities or popularity contests. While in this instance, KteeO, Matt, Leah, and no Maddy are being victimized, in a larger sense, we all are. This has become a MUCH bigger issues than simply the fate of (A)narchists, whether they know/did something or not. This really represents the slippery slope into the abyss of totalitarianism--nothing less! That (A)narchists now have the opportunity to be the spearpoint of resistance to such blatant totalitarianism can be seen in a certain light as a blessing.

I don't known that they deserve this mantle of sacrifice for a just cause because I find too many stunningly impudent and ignorant. But it is what it is! Many are called but few are chosen. History is replete with examples (Joan of Arc comes to mind) champions of humble origins. (e.g. The gauchos of S. America during the Simon Bolivar revolution)

So while I personally resent the unselective attitudes of some of the GJ resisters I've met, I understand the natural fear/paranoia this kind of persecution inspires and envy their opportunity to speak in such a publicly visible way from the belly of the beast. Few who have been devoured by it have been provided such an opportunity to remind us of how vulnerable we are to the corruption in our judiciary.

- -

blah blah blah i'm a member of the press anoint me with fine oils the rest of you (P)eople are just arrogant pricks with pronoun preferences i'm going to completely disregard

Fuck you "amicuscuria"
Here's a fb post from him: Amicus Curia Overlooked point: I *never* accused 'all' anarchists of being violent. Nor did I imply it. But I certainly pointed out there are enough of them to get the public's attention (they *are* attention whores) and lead it to draw its own conclusions. I've been to enough meetings, read enough anarchist online screeds, and seen enough news reports to recognize the violent anarchists don't belong on the streets but somewhere the public can be kept safe from them. Ironically, I admire their youth and their passion, if not their folly. I wish they could aspire to more while I'm still around to see it. They're too involved in mental masturbation to make a meaningful difference. No rational citizen wants to follow a bunch of lemmings running off a cliff. September 8 at 2:51am

i have more of these nasty tidbits he wrote when some people called him out for insisting on filming anarchists against their consent/will at a "know your rights/gj resistance" event. He even once called the washington state police because someone angrily told him to stop filming a young child against their mother's will. That is how much of a scumbag this is. there's copwatchers watching this guy.

he's a menace
really, fuck this guy

Simply posting the audio of the meeting you're referencing seems in order, along with the threats preceding it. As previously stated, the 'know your rights' meeting was amply advertised as a PUBLIC one (the public was invited) that WOULD be filmed. When the 'press' showed up on that basis, the whining started. "Journalism is printing what someone doesn't want published. Everything else is public relations" -George Orwell-

The same attitude quickly bubbled to the surface via none other than 'Maddy' Pfeiffer, for one, at the 9-13-12 demonstration before the Seattle federal courthouse. It was met with the same resolute defense of 1st Amendment principles. That so many violently radical underground elements calling themselves (A)narchists don't get it simply dilutes their credibility.

Go ahead, antagonize the press...always a brilliant strategy. Oh, and do it publicly--PLEASE! And BTW, it will ALWAYS be public (it being assaults/intimidation against the press) on the Mason County Blog. Calling 911 when being assaulted beats simply shooting the assailant, though the 2nd Amendment permits it when it rises to self defense.

Some of you guys are your own worst enemy. It's little wonder why Leah didn't feel like rotting in isolation on your behalf. You've been told repeatedly there's no connection between and the government in any form whatsoever. And if you don't believe that?...well, go fuck yourself! (Though you seem to be doing a good job of it already) pretty much spells it out including the caveat that nobody over hear was your co-conspirator, your handmaiden, your PR guy, there for SOLIDARITY purposes, or would report anything from a public event/venue but the truth...letting the chips fall where they may. Thank you for demonstrating what's has been consistently reported about your version of (A)narchy, all along. Judging from how you act and tell it, the vast vast majority of the people would see YOU as the enemy, and they'd be right. Go smash your head against a wall while you're busy 'smashing' the state.

- -

You're not the press, you wannabe. The press laughs at you, just like we do, but you can't stop wanting to be one of them, or frequenting our websites. "Someone please, PLEASE pay attention to my important long-winded opinions!" You're sad.

Gandhi argued the truth should be stated even if only 1 person (or none) could hear it. What's sad is idealistic youth being sacrificed by senior mentors as political cannon fodder indifferent to the loss. "It's better to light one candle than to curse the darkness." -The Franciscans-

The 'press' is anyone who chooses to tell/cover a story and tell it. It's a right belonging to the public, not to any individual or group. The press has no more rights than anyone else. It also has no less. Nor does it require anyone's 'approval', including yours.

The 'approval' you seem to think is required or the driving force is what motivates kids/young adults still trying to find a group to fit into. Your paradigm doesn't fit those who've grown past that. It's modeled in Maslow's hierarchy. (gasp!--there's that word) You can find it in Wikipedia. Check it out. There are those who don't need the acknowledgment, status, gratitude, or affirmation you assume. A writer writes because he/she must. A poet/musician composes, an artist paints whether they sell a piece or not. (van Gogh)

Another dynamic you may be blind to is the act of disputing controversies sharpens ones professional skills in a field dependent on them. While YOU may engage in toeing the party line to ingratiate yourself with your peers, others are indifferent to that motive. A sculptor doesn't create art to endear him/her self to anyone, but to make a statement and for the beauty of that statement. So it is with truth/philosophy. The logic/beauty of the construct is, in itself, enough.

why are you still here

get out

This douchebag also has pictures all over his website of individuals just sitting around outside the court. Like, not demonstrating, just checking their phones or whatever. The only plausible reason for this is to identify and record who was there--obviously suspicious. Oh, besides his obvious like for creeping on pretty girls in dresses and snapping their photos. I hope he finds those violent anarchists he's always talking about--or they find him, rather.

I can't seem to get the link to his website to work. but is should also be noted that an Amicus Curiae is literally a 'friend of the court', or someone who willingly provides testimony in order to help in the deliberation or prosecution of a case. This guy seems hella sketchy.

Amicus briefs can go either way.

If you'd check his website, you'd find he's a paralegal as well as an investigatory photojournalist.

It's a shame labeling takes precedence over critical verifiable fact based thinking here.

Some so called radicals wouldn't know an (A)narchist if they were poled in the face by one.

If you check this comment, you'll find that it was written by the pathetic "Amicus" himself, but as if it was someone else defending him. You can tell because

-he is the only person who would call him an "investigatory photojournalist" when he's just a wingnut wordpress blogger.

-he is the only one who "checks" his cumbersome dumb blog

-he is the only dork who spells "(A)narchist" with a circle-a every time he writes the word

-the insult that ends this post is nearly identical to the one he used in an above comment and uses over and over again whenever he needs anarchist attention to stroke his pitiful ego

-And finally, as he readily admits, he doesn't have friends, so there's no one else to defend him.

And doesn't WANT any. BTW, how strange for 'anon' to criticize the use of anonymous postings? No one can tell you're a dog on the internet. Deal with it.

"how strange for 'anon' to criticize the use of anonymous postings?" Actually how strange for a douche who whines about anarchist hiding behind anonymity and brags that he doesn't want friends pretending to be someone else and defending himself in the third person as his own make believe friend. Way to miss the point.

There are plenty (though some haven't been published, at least yet) of photos of the demonstrators at the 9-13-12 demonstrators outside the Seattle federal courthouse objecting to Leah, et ux, subpoenaed by the grand jury. Some are attractive. There's no journalistically/philosophically police here opposed to publishing the fact, with or without ANYONE's permission from a public venue.

Incidentally, some of the young men are equally attractive. The photos aren't all from this reporter's camera, however. A number are from the very (A)narchists who object to photojournalists publishing the same kinds of pics from even the same events. This kind of censorship won't be tolerated here, EVER!

So...what've you got against pretty women or their pictures? You think a photojournalist needs a contract in a public venue? Dream on. It's not going to happen. Strangely, the King 5 photojournalist who arrived and took video of the same crowd wasn't even approached. When asked, "Hey, do you ask for these people's permission before you shoot them?" he responded, "No!" Neither do I.

If you want to take issue with that, you can contact me personally (the info is public) and we'll resolve it, I guarantee you--though maybe not in the way you'd like. And yes, I will hold you personally responsible/accountable to the fullest extent legally permissible. But knowing your habits, it's not expected you'd be as transparent as who you're criticizing. Imagine that. Kinda clarifies the respective positions, doesn't it? C'mon, tough guy--into the light.

- -

this is not very hard to understand: our safety from the police is MUCH more important than your career or whatever. I hope someone beats you up when you try this

Maybe you? Another good reason to be taking photos at public events. It makes the identification lineup easier. "Do you recognize the perpetrator?" Of course journalists (like Olympia's Tony Overman and Seattle photojournalists covering Seattle's May Day street violence) have already been injured/physically assaulted. Tony Overman admits sitting up with his shotgun in his lap after being stalked, ultimately to his home and having it, along with his vehicle vandalized.

In the 60's, the Mexican government literally machine gunned street demonstrators. It's a dangerous game you're promoting. There were heavily militarized police @ the 9-13-12 Seattle federal courthouse demonstration with automatic weapons. In the 1965 Watts riots, orders to shoot looters on sight were issued to the national guard deployed. You're too young to remember Kent State. I fully expect to read in the news details of how the police shot some pole wielding young hoodlum smashing windows in Seattle, et al. Then you, and your ilk, will engage in a lot of hand wringing about all the wickedness, like some latter-day carpet bagger.

If I can have even the smallest prophylactic effect against your perversion, I'll take satisfaction in that. Our children are much more important than your vacuous ramblings about 'revolution' and 'smashing' the state. Like cockroaches, you can't handle the light.

- -

Why do you think there isn't massive armed revolt right now? It's obviously a loosing battle.
Does anyone have pictures of this fuck. If you do post 'em to anokchan or something. I fucking live near this fucker.

" It makes the identification lineup easier."

okay yeah you get it. we are enemies. I don't think there's anything more to discuss, so go back to your blog or whatever

Yeah, right, the Creepshots defense. It's legal! It's public! Funny you would ask me to come into the light with you when you're the disgusting cockroach. You wonder why the press wasn't approached like you were--have you noticed that the grand jury resisters are (occasionally) using the publicity? The difference is that you are not the press, you are a wannabe pervert with a camera who hides behind a make-believe press badge because you have a blog.

Spoken like a true statist demanding 'credentials'. The 'press' doesn't require any. Yes, your crowd admittedly seeks publicity. That's why the street violence is committed publicly. That's why permission to photograph in public venues isn't sought--it isn't required. And, I often take shots of what I feel like. I'm indifferent to whether you like it or not. I'm indifferent to whether the cops like it or not. Editorial control here is autonomous. It has been and will continue to be defended to the max. You views on the matter are an example of why the alternative (if you're it) to what rights we continue to have, isn't attractive.

Frankly, your about as (A)narchistic as Hitler's Youth Corp. or Mao's Cultural Revolutionaries. The inalienable right to self defense enshrined in the 2nd Amendment gives individuals the right to bear defend against ALL enemies, both foreign and domestic. You ARE the enemy--a petty domestic terrorist.

Those pursuing peaceful organized street demonstrations (and possibly genuine (A)narchists) would be better served pointing you and your violent comrades smashing windows, assaulting journalists on the streets, out to the police and aiding in your immediate arrest. If that had been done, the guilty could have justly punished summarily without furnishing the state a pretext to detain and persecute the innocent.

So, as a 'fatwa' to those who recognize the pernicious effects of gratuitous street violence, I urge them to aid in the immediate arrest and seizure of the perpetrators. If you are among the ones caught red handed, so much the better!

So you like Gandhi, but oppose targeted property destruction and economic sabotage...what the fuck do you think the whole salt fiasco in India was about....gosh darn backwoods wingnuts with internet access thinking they're all that.

"et ux"? You keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

I doubt YOU know what it means.

So they're sexist tooo...great....

Seriously this person has trolled out dumbass responses to make his blog remotely interesting and is threatening the security of people.
Hope they get what's coming to them.

I think you do this to personally antagonize us. To bully you would only give you what you want. I think to acknowledge what your job/existence amounts to with the proper response would be most fitting. I.e. ignore you.

THAT would be a lot safer, legally, that the trend I've reported.

BTW, as an investigatory photojournalist, I *DO* record/document/videotape/shoot events and conversations in a public venue all the time, sometimes (as a courtesy) announcing the same, more often not. I've openly declared this countless times. My purpose? It's just as you say, to reveal the truth. The truth, in this instance, is the dangerous violent elements that comprise some (A)narchist communities (but in no way ALL) and the trivializing of property destruction and theft by senior respected members of the greater community who often are State salaried professors.

This isn't done to advise the police--far from it, but the PUBLIC! Nobody ever said this reporter was your 'friend' or at these events for SOLIDARITY. It's been said a reporter HAS no friends--at least they shouldn't if they're any good. And after even brief seasoning, a reporter discovers they don't WANT any friends, especially while they're working or covering a story.

The public demonstrations are only part of the story. The various conversations, encampments, meetings, e-mails, facebook posts, and 'fatwas' are part of the story too. If I can evoke that part with my interaction, I'll do so in search of the truth. Hunter S. Thompson (father of gonzo journalism) and Mike Wallace (master of the ambush interview) are my journalistic heroes. You don't like it?--tough! History AND the law have settled the issue. Anything else is nothing more than gang warfare, street hooliganism and will be reported as such.

What you fear most isn't one reporter, but being discovered/unmasked for who you are.

- -

"What you fear most isn't one reporter, but being discovered/unmasked for who you are."

This right here is all you need to know about this scumbag enemy of all anarchists.

indeed. so why not just stop engaging them? let their authoritarian psuedo-journalistic-logic fall by the wayside here. PLEASE.

more mad libs. it's whacky!

investigate this! It will tell you all the identities of everyone who was ever in a black bloc!!!!

oh, fuck you. the truth is like mad libs to you people. just fill in the blank with a political ideology or historical figure.

chomskyian linguistics? maybe that does have relevance after all. what kind of rote madness is that?...I think it's been proven what people's real fears are in regard to the language. And how deep it runs.

hold on to the truth. stay strong.

chomsky's big thing is free speech. get it? lol

manufacturing consent tho

I am gumshoe!!!!1!11
Look at me I has blog!!!11!!
I has no fr1endz!!1!!1

have you read the society of the spectacle? this society is already totalitarian, and as a journalist you are part of that.

Not really. Got a valid link? What's to recommend it?

Journalists do have a kind of public trust. For that reason, I don't serve as an extension of the state, the police, or any special interests either. Unlike Amy Goodman's (who I respect) advocacy journalism, I don't use that style. I prefer gonzo journalism with truth/accuracy as my talisman, not 'solidarity'.

In some ways (as a paralegal) I *am* part of the system in that I derive income from those attempting to negotiate its legal labyrinth. But over the years, I've come to recognize why we have a need for due process and protection from force and fraud. Those who advocate street violence are the antithesis of this natural need.

Try reading How The Irish Saved Civilization. It give a pretty good account of why folks gave up some autonomy for a degree of safety. Truth be told, I'm much more of a practical (A)narchist than you. But I have a better sense of history and the reasons why Tyrannicide begets more tyrants, just as a nation of sheep begets a government of wolves.

What's at work in this argument is your assumption that truth is a popularity contest. It's not. When 'smashing' the state is interpreted by dewy eyed neophytes as permission to engage in street violence, I see any hope of meaningful change slipping away. The revolution in Egypt, and some years ago in Romania or the Philippines was rooted in concerted peaceful protest like the U.S. Civil Rights movement in the 50's & 60's and Gandhi's revolution in India.

Try reading The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates by John Milton (1649). Tyrannicides have an poor record of achieving their intended outcome. Caesar's death, for example, failed to bring a return to republican power, and instead led to the Roman Empire, but it galvanized later assassins like Booth. Several of Caeser's successors were also killed for their tyrannical actions, including Caligula, who was stabbed in 41 by Cassius Chaerea and other Praetorian Guards,[17] and Domitian, stabbed in 96 by a steward of Flavia Domitilla named Stephanus. Many attempts on Commodus's life in the late 2nd century failed, including the one instigated by his own sister Lucilla, but he ultimately fell victim to his own excess by a successful murderous coup.[19] After the fall of the Roman Empire, tyrannicide continued in the Byzantine Empire when Emperor Andronikos I Komnenos, was tied to a pillar, beaten, and dismembered by a mob in 1185. The trouble with killing one tyrant is another seems always waiting in the wings to succeed his/her predecessor.

Perhaps the answer isn't in 'smashing' the state, but to create a fundamental change in the body politic. "I have seen the enemy, and is is US!" -Pogo-

"The revolution in Egypt, and some years ago in Romania or the Philippines was rooted in concerted peaceful protest like the U.S. Civil Rights movement in the 50's & 60's and Gandhi's revolution in India."
Hahahahaahahahahaha fuck off.
"Those who said that the Egyptian revolution was peaceful did not see the horrors that police visited upon us, nor did they see the resistance and even force that revolutionaries used against the police to defend their tentative occupations and spaces: by the government's own admission, 99 police stations were put to the torch, thousands of police cars were destroyed and all of the ruling party's offices around Egypt were burned down. Barricades were erected, officers were beaten back and pelted with rocks even as they fired tear gas and live ammunition on us. But at the end of the day on 28 January they retreated, and we had won our cities.

It is not our desire to participate in violence, but it is even less our desire to lose. If we do not resist, actively, when they come to take what we have won back, then we will surely lose. Do not confuse the tactics that we used when we shouted "peaceful" with fetishising nonviolence; if the state had given up immediately we would have been overjoyed, but as they sought to abuse us, beat us, kill us, we knew that there was no other option than to fight back. Had we laid down and allowed ourselves to be arrested, tortured and martyred to "make a point", we would be no less bloodied, beaten and dead."
From here.
I don't think Watts was that peaceful either.

"What's to recommend it?" Oh, I don't know, maybe that The Society of the Spectacle has been a cornerstone of ultra-left thought on media culture and mediation for the past 50 years? The primary theoretical text of the Situationists, who were a big driver behind the May '68 insurrectionary upheaval in France, and who exert a huge influence on many contemporary anarchists? Still some of he best thought available on how mediation and spectacularization of culture has transformed society?

Oh hey, for the lulzes, you should pick up Anti-Oedipus and A Thousand Plateaus by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari. As long as, you know, we're talking about French theory and stuff. I'd like to see the look on your face while you tried to read that.


Nope, YOU will! Rocking chair radicals will be the 1st to go. In fact (in case you haven't noticed) they're already going!

"rocking chair radicals"? that's a new one.

Yeah fuck all those human elements involved. Maybe if you stood "with us," instead of playing with your phone like a jerk off you'd contribute something meaningful. But....

Dear Anarchists, stop pointlessly trying to police the press. Its futile, counterproductive and embarressing.

Dear Amicus, we get it: you have a tumbler. Congratulations.

...and stop with the fake me's, Truthers and all....

I don't think so, but then I'm unsure of just what a 'tumblr' is?

The miracle of the internet is today, freedom of the press no longer belongs exclusively to those who own one. Technology has democratized the process. I'd think genuine (A)narchists would welcome this process.

yeah Maddy and KTEEO are annoying Olympia PC kids/career activist whiners. don't know them super well but my experiences have always been bad, that being said, this isn't about who I like, how anybody smells or confusing gender pronoun they've adopted for the past 6 months (and will no doubt drop as soon as they "grow up"). I'm not confused about who my real oppressors are. these things require solidarity, not the predictable activist infighting and back biting. I hope these assholes support me if I ever go down on whatever fake ass, trumped up charges some agent dreams up

Oi Worker can you remove this comment for security's sake?

Shut up, "Amicus". "Shut up?! Me?! Help, HALP! I'm being censored by HOOLIGANS!"

Who the fuck wants to know and why?

Worker, delete this fucking thread. It's end effect will be reactionary and damaging to comrades.

It's too late. It's been mirrored.

This is only according to Pfeiffer since the grand jury is secret. He was *released* and told to come back a few weeks later .... like Leah was

ZOMG! Yr rite! Itsa conspricarcy!

Hopefully this isn't going to end the way her story did... with the running away back to New Hampshire to live the life of a normie and pretending this all didn't happen.

RE: Leah...Must be nice--having the privilege to arrange your life/affairs that way. From here, it seems like (as always) the most likely to buckle are inevitably those with the most to lose--the bourgeois. Perhaps the 30/30/30 rule should be crafted: don't trust anyone over 30 or who receives (in any form) over $30k/yr or are LOOKIING at 30 years!...or who owns a home/real estate for that matter. The most likely candidates to stay the course are those who have already been totally ripped of by the state. That wouldn't include the state paid college professors or poor little rich kids (with or without PTSD). In fact, folks with emotional/mental issues are not good confidantes. But telling this inconvenient truth to neophytes is like Galileo explaining celestial mechanics to the Pope!

not that I know Leah that well (or, at this point would even consider her a friend), and not that facts matter when it comes to internet comments BUT I'm pretty sure Leah grew up poor, hasn't been making 30k a year (unless her etsy site really blew up) and isn't 30 or over. I have no comments about the mental and emotional health stuff.

grew up poor? she herself has publicly said she's from upper valley new hampshire and it was 'the most boring 18 years of my life,' probably because it's a typical suburbia-type area with no PUNXXX culture. She obviously had money to spare in order to move down and create a new life, how does one do that at 18/19 without a good chunk of money, most likely given to her by her parents? please, tell me which area of Upper Valley has a projects or low income apartments/rental homes?
she hinted she moved away for a guy she met on the internet (very vague probably because she doesnt want to admit she adopted her views from a male ex-lover.)
All of this info I wanted to keep in the closet in hopes she would tell us what happened (well most is in her livejournal and tumblr too). but now its clear she broke and is ashamed. she will ditch this identity forever for a new one.... as soon as it stopped being fun, he beliefs disappeared and we didn't matter anymore.

"All of this info I wanted to keep in the closet in hopes she would tell us what happened (well most is in her livejournal and tumblr too). but now its clear" that you are an asshole.
Who cares about this stuff?

Who cares? Probably the people closest to her who were informed not to contact her. It turns out the reason why was so she could leave without a trace.
Even people who don't know her on a personal level but were supporting her as if she were their own friend are pretty bitter about this whole situation.

What does being over 30 have to do with anything? I'd rather run with an over-30 lifer than a college kid or anyone with a future.

right? At least you know someone over 30 isn't trying to be trendy/ glamorous... they're in it for the long haul

third that shit. tons of kids dabble with this shit and are gone by 25.

Lifelong activists over 45 or so with zero career history have no way back to the middle class and a lifetime of activism to throw away by snitching. No potential gain, big potential loss from snitching. At my age, I think about "legacy" and could care less about any "future" that means turning my back on my life's real work.

Students in high-priced private colleges and mountains of debt are the group I would not want to share information with, as are high school students with "good" grades. Too easy the road back to career and suburbs if they snitch-or just leave on their own and are then called in for questioning.

Young people WITHOUT fancy schools and good grades are the people with the most to win in this fight. Those who capitalism will try to "declare surplus" as the ecology rots and climate change accelerates will have nothing at all to lose and nothing less than their own lives to win by fighting back.

There were times in the defense of Turtle Island against invasion from the sea that people in one tribe or another would find themselves with their families trapped, no escape, and the invaders bent on massacre. Their warriors would then put forth their utmost, win or lose, in a last chance to save their families.

With what is now happening to the climate, we may all soon find ourselves in that exact situation, facing climate catastrope so extreme as to risk total human and mammal extinction. In that kind of fight, there is nothing left for anyone to lose and the middle class burns anyway.

Anyone can be a fucking snitch man but by sll means go on living in your self-created bubble of false security if it makes you feel better.


Thankfully the CAPR are not as fucking stupid as you are. You are a fucking asshat.


you trolled someone on a-news. congrats.

*golf clap*

He was released and immediately went to his friends and comrades and told them what happened, then released a transcript of the proceedings. So no, this is just about the exact opposite of what Leah did when she was released and said nothing about it to anyone, including the presumed targets facing indictment. She spoke to the state and was silent to her comrades.

Listen you stupid fucker, Maddy's lawyer argued that he needed enough time to prepare his arguments due to the severity of the case at hand. The judge agreed and gave him two weeks and the gov a week to respond. That's three weeks. Then we hit Thanksgiving and blah blah lawyers being busy and the next court date was set for the 14th. There were like 30 people in the courtroom who can attest to all of this. So eat shit maggot.

THEY not HE dooooooood

They (Maddy) were not 'released', they were never in custody. The judge, at the contempt hearing, found their attorney's request for a continuance realistic, the reasons given were that their attorney had only be retained for a short period, had only received the state's position the day before, and the 'seriousness of the matter'.

The state was more than eager to get it on with the process and throw them in jail, the judge felt more time was needed, and then scheduling overlaps piled up, pushing it back to mid-December. All of this was in the public portion of the contempt hearing.

Leah's situation was a bit different, they simply ran out of time for the contempt hearing. Her release from the FDC is still unclear, though obviously we have reason to suspect (perhaps at this point stronger language is necessary) cooperation.

The tone of your comment is basically unproductive, likely contrary to practical security culture

'Cept Maddy's case is completely different and I don't have to say why, because it's obvious and fuck you.

Uh, like KTEEO and Matt were in the beginning too, right? Because they don't immediately haul you off to jail, they have a contempt hearing... which was rescheduled... and THEN they haul you off.

This person is facing serious prison time, now is not the time to pre-emptively accuse them of anything.

Jesus, how hard is it to call them "they"??? Seriously! I don't get along with Maddy, haven't for quite some time, but that has nothing to do with providing them support as a resistor. And for fuck's sake, you can't support someone by misgendering them, which disrespects them on a profound level.

Also, please think about what it means to respect someone's right to self-identification and the ways they, as a genderqueer person, are experiencing & will experience violence specific to their identity throughout this whole process. Please think about whether that's something you want to support or fight against, and how respecting their gender identity relates to that.

Exactly! Maddy goes by THEY/THEM

God gender politics are so boring. Call me back when you've managed to abolish penises and vaginas.

can we abolish yours first?

Call me back when the anarchist scene has become safe for/in full solidarity with trans people...

that is the worst security culture zine.

I actually think it's the best for general use. What do you think is better?


what, no rollover?

I'm glad someone else noticed, all these comments that were not about the glaring omission of the roll over were driving me crazy.

And furthermore, why isn't "Society!" a choice for the poll?



I assumed worker was exercising his state and federal constitutional rights including the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments.

another quote from amicuscuria, i have so many of these: Amicus Curia Xxxxxx, it's been said a reporter has no friends...or shouldn't have if they're any good. Moreover, I've come to the conclusion I DON'T WANT ANY 'FRIENDS' when I'm covering a story. You're a good example of why not. 'Friends' make demands, want editorial control, and the journalist loses all objectivity they might otherwise have had along with any INDEPENDENCE. 'Consent' isn't required to report/film or record an event in a public venue or where the private property owner has consented to such coverage. My 'feelings' have nothing to do with it. I could care less whether YOU (or anyone else) 'likes' me or my philosophy of journalism. Mike Wallace and Hunter S. Thompson are my journalistic idols. Wallace was the master of 'ambush' interviews or coverage. Thompson was the father of Gonzo journalism. We can agree or not about what's 'appropriate', polite, ethical, or whatever. But the one defining boundary is our system of laws, which you apparently disdain. My beef with half-baked radicals is they seldom even have so much as a theory of government, much less understand it. We have laws and government because almost everyone except a select few elitists want them. There are far more effective methods for social/political change that assault, robbery, theft, and vandalism. But you argument smacks of justifying robbing the local liquor store because your poor old maiden aunt needs an operation or because you're black/brown/red/yellow/female/poor/oppressed. And those who agree with you and acted on that belief in public are precisely why we're where we're at today with respect to the Grand Jury subpoenas. Or at least in part. Admittedly the Grand Jury is being used improperly for a fishing expedition and a tool of suppression. Still, I'm not your 'authorized' biographer, your 'pal', your co-conspirator, your propagandist, or your guest. I'm not invoking *my* right, but the public's to cover a news event in a public forum. Your hostility to our system of laws is consistent with your scoffing at enshrined Bill of Rights guarantees. When you voice disgust at the flaws and corruption in our current system, what do you suggest. Are YOU (and your pals) an example of the alternative? Benjamin Franklin was possibly more concerned about the corruption in the people than the government itself when he responded, "A Republic, Madam...if you can keep it!" Xxxxx, you're a classic example of the kind of corruption in the people Franklin worried about in a democracy. September 5 at 10:13pm

It's so funny that this wingnut thinks he's a reporter. He doesn't want any friends--I'm sure that's easy for him. Unfortunately (for his reporters) his same insufferable qualities result in him having no readers. Then again this is probably the kind of nut that enjoys talking to himself most of all--oh, and the police.

He's a bully, ignore him. Who cares. Out him as a stalker and be done with it.

". Get a picture of this amicus guy in circulation if you feel he's becoming a security threat. Make alerts. Discredit him like he's going out of his way to do to us. Let him get another hobby.

but don't engage with this schmuck. Just publicly out him the same way he does us and be done with it. Don't give him fodder or hell make a fucking life out of this. Beats friends and family amicus. Ever talk about the fear prevalent in a community of 20 somethings amicus or isbthis just creepy old guy pretending to reenact some Orwell-like fantasy of leftistsbcriticisms on his own where you have nothings constructive supportive or original to say amicus.

Don't engage with any media period. You can't bully a vulture. Vulture feed off of peoples fear and will always come back for more. If your going to be there your going to get your picture taken. And if you're not they'll get your picture somehow anyway. Focus on what's important, supporting G.J. resisters.

It's true. Privacy (if it ever existed) in public is dead. Fact is, an underground railroad needs to be constructed to spirit Grand Jury resisters out of the country. A fugitive can't rely on buses or trains (airports are obviously a no, no) to travel because they all have video cams today.

When you're in public, your photo is taken several times or more per day whether you realize it or not. The best strategy is go force the snake to eat its own tail. Why so many fugitives remain within the U.S. is a mystery.

*> Fact is, an underground railroad needs to be constructed to spirit Grand Jury resisters out of the country*


Hunter S. Thompson never would've sought to out militant elements of a counterculture unless they fucking rolled him like the Hell's Angels did, and those guys consented to him being around and writing a story. This fucking parasite wouldn't know gonzo journalism if it shoved a two-thumbed fist down his throat and strangled his esophagus internally.

Have you ever talked a Hell's Angel out of raping you at The Hell's Angels house? I have. True story.

There's all kinds of pics...he wears a large 'PRESS' badge to events. What do you think you'd accomplish. He's not looking for support from you, and you pretty much take care of discrediting yourself.

Maybe pool your money and hire a PR guy? Isn't that what you want?

Ha ha you must feel really ganged up on when you have to start pretending to be your own third party defenders. Who is taking advantage of anonymity now?

In writing/reporting, the 3 first person pronouns should be studiously avoided whenever possible...especially in forums given to ad hominem attacks.

Oh, in that case:

The poster reads your comment. He laughs. What a pitiful old man, he thinks to himself. He posts another comment making fun of you. He thanks you for the writing tip.



"he wears a large 'PRESS' badge to events."


Why don't you just go ahead and off yourself just like your hero.

why don't you dicks grow the fuck up and quit acting like lord on the flies all up in here. there's a war going on! you're worried about the press? if this person has never snitched on anyone then shut up. if you think press and lawyers will not be needed for you war you are stupid as hell. sounds like you DO need to talk to your parents as revolutionary praxis!

Sounds like you just got here and have no idea what is going on. He's not the press, he's some old pervert with a camera and a blog.

oh,'ve never "snitched" because nobody lets you near them in the first place. Calling the WSP on anyone you get into a verbal altercation with and accusing them of threats/assault, emailing the WSP after that to make sure they are pursuing the person, constantly photographing against their consent activists who are already being persecuted.... fuck off already nobody wants you around

oh, anonymous asshole...this ain't amicus. and people who beat up any old person, woman, or black person who comes around these parts is mighty telling.

People who beat up any old person, woman, or black person who comes around would be really, really busy. Do they kick baby seals and fart on disabled children, too?

Punching your own ticket, under the right circumstances, is a rational legitimate choice. Some years ago, an inmate escaped from Texas' death row. The hunted for him for days before discovering his wounded body in a nearby creek. His end was a blessing considering the alternative. Similarly, the guy sought for the shooting death of the lady ranger at Mt. Rainier was found frozen beneath a snow drift in an icy mountain stream.

Death is always our companion. Strange you should mention him. Patience, child...yours will come soon enough.

This is a nice aside and all but let's get back to the point: kill yourself, Amicus, like your hero Hunter S Thomspon.

Go away. Anarchists despise you but you can't stop writing platitudes on their websites. No one wants to hear it. You have a blog, use it.

Great link. Is it all anarchists' position that humans don't have 'rights', as the article seems to suggest?

We actually don't give a fuck about the 1st Amendment or any laws the US has made. We just do what we can to fight. We roll with the punches. And we can do whatever the fuck we want(in a non-oppressive way of course...unless we're oppressing an oppressor...).

here's a similar transcript of the questions from the GJ investigating Bradly Manning:

Point being, this isn't Maddy being clever, this is *what you should do*.

^serious business^
If the comments bother you that much. Don't fucking read them. Nothing will probably come of what's said here. And if it does it's probably, because someone was reacting to a comment and said something they shouldn't have. For fucks sakes, don't feed the trolls or take the bait.

Hey you shouldn't have redacted the names of the people, or at least I hope someone is contacting em and letting them know they're being hunted.

Yeah, redacting the names was a good idea, but hopefully the people mentioned are being informed about it.

Everyone who was talked about has been informed.

Woo, go team.

Way to go, Maddy! Let's be totally firewalled, so that no filthy legal crooks shall pass!

you mean the deluded, fanatical "free-speech" lovin' ambush journalists?

Look, it's working! He can barely make sentences any more! Don't stop now, you have him on the ropes! TROLL HARDER!

shouldn't you be at hot topic picking out a new outfit for the next awp? priorities!

this is probz the most attention amicus has gotten in years, having no friends except wordpress readers and all.

ha ha he does not have wordpress readers

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
Enter the code without spaces.