True Facts, Keep it Silent, Never Sweat Or Bend: Notes on Leah Lynn-Plante From a Resister

  • Posted on: 5 November 2012
  • By: worker

<table><tr><td>From <a href="">Puget Sound Anarchists</a>

Leah broke, to what degree remains uncertain, but we know that she at least cooperated in someway with the grand jury investigation. She broke the wall of silence anarchists in the northwest had tried their best to craft for about four months. Leah broke the silence of refusal, and has still refused to comment on the conditions of her release. She has spoken with the state but has refused to speak to her (former) comrades and supporters.

Let's be realistic here, it has been over two weeks since she has been released and she refuses to release a statement about the conditions of her release. Maybe I was naive, but I really did have faith that those who pledged to keep silent would, and it breaks my heart that this is no longer the case. As said already, we don't know the conditions of Leah's release, we don't know how much was said. But we do know that she isn't saying anything right now. You might be out Leah, but the subpoenas are still coming in. My friends are still in cages, and my life has still been entirely uprooted from pretty much everyone I know. Leah not only broke the silence, she broke the solidarity.</td><td><img title="solidarity" src=""></td></tr></ta...
To me the broken solidarity is what hurts the most. As many anarchists have said before, we strive to offer solidarity not charity, we seek affinity and the furtherance of a shared struggle. Much of the support Leah has received from anarchists all over the world has not been solely based on people feeling sorry for her or offering her sympathy. Anarchists worldwide have seen a connection between the grand jury resister's silence of refusal and their own personal struggle to destroy domination and spread anarchy. People did not donate thousands of dollars to Leah simply because they felt sorry for her, there's lots of people in the world to feel sorry for. The reasons why people have destroyed cop cars, held noise demos, done banner drops, smashed out bank windows, attacked court houses, torched security cars is not simply because people feel bad for her. It's because many people found the resisters actions inspiring.

I understand that prison is really rough, I imagine it's horrible place, but what about all those who risked the same fate by torching a security car to further the shared struggle against domination and exploitation? Or those who tampered with railroad tracks (an automatic felony) to show solidarity to the resisters? People put themselves out there for the resisters, and Leah's silence to all those who have supported her thus far should be seen as a betrayal until she choses to clarify the conditions of her release.

If Leah really does believe that she doesn't owe anybody anything, then she's dead fucking wrong. She owes people who donated money to her based on her non-cooperation thousands of dollars, she owes an explanation to all those who have put their own neck on the line to further the struggle, and she owes an explanation to all those who have put in hours and hours of support based on her vow of non-cooperation.

To those anarchists weary to withdraw support from Leah, you call can what you want. I'm not trying to dictate who individuals should or should not support, I'm just trying to point out that Leah breaking the silence and then refusing to comment is not something to be taken lightly. People really showed up for Leah, more than any of the other resisters and for her to not clarify the conditions of her release is something that breaks our solidarity.
"The State thinks it is a black hole that can destroy whatever it wants." When the wall of silence comes tumbling down and Leah offers no explanation, it must only reinforce that opinion.

Still a Resister


"I understand that prison is really rough, I imagine it's horrible place"


I can kind of see why people don't want to talk to *you* after they get released.

You are an asshole.

Love to you, OP, and all of the silent ones.

I agree wholeheartedly. Love to all the silent ones that have never experienced prison. Like the OP.

Truly those are the ones most deserving of love.


Did you think for a minute that OP might have PTSD, and is therefore not accountable for what they say and do?

Oh gosh. I guess that means I shouldn't mock their privileged judgement using my sarcasm.

Oh no wait I totes can. It means a community of hilariously absurd people shouldn't snitch-jacket them with zero evidence because they didn't like it when I said they were hot.


maybe they let her out to start epic flame wares in the terrible community i mean @news

This is unnecessary, for the terrible community trolls itself more than enough.

yeah i totally agree. not sure OP can sign themself "still a resister" when if fact this person isn't in jail as a grand jury resistor. disingenuous.

it's relatively common knowledge that this person fled the area after finding out there was a subpoena out for them, they will most likely not be able to return home till the end of the investigation. that's resisting you fucking moron. what the fuck is disingenuous about that?

This article was so unnecessary, the author didn't say anything here that hasn't been said in a million other articles or comments on here. What is it everyone is trying to gain from this shit. We get it you hate her Cuz She's pretty, or you don't cuz she's pretty, that's the only reason for any of this shit. People talk. Deal. Get tougher friends, just leave it the fuck alone. She's not around anymore to worry you're already over paranoid delusional over riteous self.

what a pedestrian fiction.

Hey freebirdreaming I liked your longer diatribe that got posted as an article, you are an excellent comedian

Actually if this was written by an actual g.j. resistor I think this is the only valid opinion expressed so far.

And so the roast of Anarchopunk Barbie continues... now tell me kids what did you enjoy most? Her rise, her stardom, or her fall?

how the witch hunt coming along these days?? not very well, eh.

Are you kidding me? Got 2 birds in da hole, one out flyign around n a couple more pigeons on the way. I think we're doing pretty well for ourselves.

All of the blame, obviously, lies with Leah, and none with a totally unrealistic trial strategy.

this leah story was really exciting for them both, since it involved (hopefully!) getting to torture a beautiful woman, drag her through the mud, and "be" her without understanding her at all -in fact being pretty much the exact oppsosite of her and her position---then claiming fake empathy and getting some fake pity!!!

munchaussen syndrome by proxy, my friends. we pray they took those little ones away. it ain't pretty.

"totally unrealistic trial strategy" you don't get this at all do you. If people who espouse things like this are actually within the anarchist milieu I wish they would say this kind of shit publicly rather than anonymously on the internet so we could all know which assholes to avoid.

What don't I get? Groupthink? Within half a week, one out of three "resisters" was no longer "resisting". Kinda sounds a bit like people chose a very ambitious strategy that turned out to be way more difficult than they thought.

Sorry if I sound like a dick, but I've spent over a decade now watching my friends dragged into courtrooms for being anarchists and doing what I can to get them back. The "legal advice" being espoused here is nothing but bullshit and bravado.

Actual resistance requires strategies for dealing with repression which don't assume everyone the state chooses to target will be willing to do years in jail for the sake of symbolism.

"years in jail."

That's a lot to ask, but is it really too much to think that someone who said they would never talk might last longer than 3 days?

yeah up to TWO YEARS of prison. wahhhhhhhhhhh! How totally unreasonable that someone would think that two years in prison is worth not betraying all of your loved ones! It's totes symbolic to not cooperate. It's not like the legal system has any material effects on the lives of others when you cooperate. just ask marie mason!

Giving your name doesn't really affect co-defendants. Giving their names does. Giving an alabai doesn't. Disproving their alabais will. Get the idea?

Cooperation =/= snitching.

I'm not saying she didn't snitch. I haven't seen anyone claim this yet. I've seen about a hundred state assertively that she did, while it's pretty fucking clear this, at best, a guess. I call bullshit. This isn't an academic debate, this is a person and a case that's still active. Talking openly of lynchings is a really fucked up way to treat people singled out for repression. They don't need to walk out of one trial and into another.

As for saying that sentences of two years or less ain't serious... I find it pretty funny how so many supposedly die-hard opponents of the justice system look at a year of hard time as something to be shrugged off. Have you actually done a bid like this?

I get the idea.
No I have not.

"Giving your name doesn't really affect co-defendants. Giving their names does."

And you really think Maddy's name wasn't mentioned by her?

You are either a cop or an idiot. Keep your own mouth shut and quit snitchjacketing.

I'm having a harder time than usual telling cops from idiots.

Snitch jackets keep snitches warm, dry and safe. It's the best thing that can happen to infiltrators and informants, because it makes ensures nobody will take any particular allegations very seriously, and sooner or later people won't listen at all. This is why snitches snitchjacket so much, and why snitchjacketing is such a good indicator that somebody's actually a cop.

I wish people would just do us all a fucking favour and get "I love snitches" tee-shirts instead. Because that's what snitchjacketing says.

"Even worse than the police employing this technique [snitchjacketing] to break up communities is when communities use this technique themselves when speculating about those involved with a state investigation."

If it was he would have been served with an arrest warrant, not a subpoena. Also, it's possible she was issued a Gag Order. It's commonly what happens when they release someone and an investigation is still ongoing, violating that order if one has been issued could get her in serious trouble. My law savvy friend who explained this to me said that it's possible that her and her lawyer went over the questions they planned to ask and determined that she could answer "I don't know" to every question without leaving herself vulnerable to prosecution for perjury, and without giving any useful information to the state. And perhaps the Gag order is in place to keep those locked up and those yet to be subpoenaed from realizing that maybe this third option exists and doesn't involve snitching or doing time. This scenario starts to seem even more likely because of the fact that it's been over two weeks and no one has been arrested or charged. They probably aren't biding their time, these investigations are expensive and tie up a lot of resources, everyday that goes by without an arrest or charges filed is another day the "bad guys" they're after can destroy evidence, corroborate each others alibis, go on the run, commit more crimes, etc. If she gave them something they could sign a warrant on they would most likely have issued it by now, and if there was a raid, we'd have heard about it.
Sexual assault, in the form of threats and intimidation as as well as physical harm on the body is rather common place in state detention. Perhaps after enduring this for 9 days (possibly with the lights on and loud scary noises outside her cell to disorent and scare her and deprive her of sleep and sanity) of hell she and her attorney determined that saying "I don't know" was just as good as saying nothing at all. Granted, when evaluated within the rubric of ideological purity this form of "cooperation" does not stand, but maybe she evaluates her choices differently. Maybe she determined that the only difference in material consequence between saying "i don't know" and 'nothing at all' is that she gets to go home instead of suffering in prison for an abstraction.

This could not be the case at all. I don't know this person. Maybe she gave them everything they needed and now everyone's fucked. None of us know right now.

I've seen anarchist circles form themselves into angry hysterical lynch mobs against individuals in their midst with a depressing frequency over the years. We judge denounce expel and crucify each other all to readily as a means of affirming that we stand on the righteous side of whatever issue.

At the risk of sounding like a total wimp i'm going to suggest that maybe in this situation, empathy and benefit of the doubt might be more useful than snitch jaketing and paranoia mongering. At least until we know what she actually did or did not say.

"it's possible she was issued a Gag Order. It's commonly what happens when they release someone and an investigation is still ongoing."

Are you sure? A little internet research indicates to me that this is probably rare and only possible in certain states. Even then, I doubt the gag order would include a prohibition against saying "I have a gag order." Plus she left town. OK we don't know what she said but it doesn't look good. And did she really spend 9 days in jail? Looks to me like she went in on the 14th and came out the 17th. If they tortured and/or threatened her, she really should say so. Or do you think there's a gag order against that too?

Come on, I'd love to believe she didn't cooperate but we have to use our heads here. It does matter if an anarchist gives testimony to a grand jury investigating anarchists. It really looks bad that she hasn't said anything.

Is she an anarchist? Has she ever claimed that title, or does she just hang out with sub cultural types whose social circles overlap with anarchist social circles, i've known a lot of punks and hipsters without much in the way of political opinions who wind up at protests because like any large gathering of young people 'in the know' this could be a good place to see and be seen, do some social networking. Some have made it sound like this is the case with leah

Answering "I don't know" to everything is NOT snitching. Snitching is answering the questions, not refusing to answer, not saying "I didn't know", nor feeding them a nice fat pack of lies.

I'm not trying to make a point here, but I'm honestly trying to shift through the heaps of second and third hand statements I've read about this. Do we have any sort of proof that she did cooperate or is all this just an educated guess? Have there been any cases in the history of grand juries where people were released this quickly without cooperating? I can think of hypothetical situations where someone might be released without cooperating, but then again I've only just begun doing reading on the subject.

Has this exact comment been posted before? Have the same questions been asked? Were they answered? Could anyone who answered them before spend some more time explaining everything to me? How did I get here? What are my fingers even doing?

No. Yes. No. No. You didn't. Picking your nose.

I feel like you would not be this much of a dick to someone who asked in person for more information about a complicated and important topic.

There is no certain proof; however it's weird they let her out and not the other two. There is a possibility that it was a case of snitchjacketing, i.e. where they released a non-cooperator in order to create tension and suspicions within the movement, but if that is the case, it seems like Leah would have released a statement of some sort by now instead of leaving town and disappearing.
The FBI has used snitchjacketing in the past -- cointelpro used these tactics against certain black panthers. Again I don't think that's very likely here though since she didn't come forward to set the record straight.

I don't get it. With no confirmation that she cooperated, Leah's still getting the bulk of the attention. Two are imprisoned, one more is likely to be in a couple days and others are still sought, and yet our communities attention is still drawn to speculating the unknowable instead of support and solidarity. I don't disagree that she may not be a good target for support currently, given both the lack of facts and the fact that she isn't in prison and facing this shit anymore, but till we know more, can't we focus on those that need support?

No anarchy like the manarchy.

"I'm looking at something about Leah so therefor something about Leah must be the only thing that exists." You know most people develop object permanence at around age five.

...five months, that is. Either way you're a bit behind the curve, eh?

i learned something today

i have to say that i have misgivings about my entry into this thread. above all i support those that are hanging in there and i didn’t say that up front. i should have.

the only thing i was 'defending' is the value of acknowledging connectedness that goes missing in the moral fundamentalism of capitalist society, a society whose demented sense of ‘justice’ is in terms of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ judgement-based ‘purificationism’. in other words, an activist held hostage and 'gotten to', by the state, however badly she/he screws up, and screws others up, IF such becomes the case, is still part of the relational weave of community, and who can say that it is not our screwed up society where such screw-ups are born?

however ‘absolutely’ we hold people responsible for maintaining idealistic standards, the record is clear that many people who participate, for the best reasons, in anti-sovereigntist/anti-capitalist activism, are unprepared for the psychological manipulation that comes with being 'cornered' by the unrelenting absolutist machinery of the sovereigntist colossus.

in the same vein, captured soldiers coerced into divulging information that results in deaths/injuries of their brothers are not psychopaths. the system that is doing the coercion is psychopathic. that is where anger needs to be directed moreso than to individuals who may be [temporarily or permanently] broken by the psychopathic system.

the state does not proceed from the assumption that 100% of a group they ‘hold hostage’ are going to be ‘unbreakable’. they proceed from the established fact that we are all made differently and have differing psychological vulnerabilities, some of which have been found to be exploitable by psychological techniques; e.g;

“The Stockholm syndrome, or capture-bonding, is a psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and have positive feelings towards their captors (who intermittently harass, beat, threaten, abuse, or intimidate them), sometimes to the point of defending them. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims, who essentially mistake a lack of abuse from their captors for an act of kindness. The FBI’s Hostage Barricade Database System shows that roughly 27% of victims show evidence of Stockholm Syndrome. Stockholm syndrome can be seen as a form of traumatic bonding, which does not necessarily require a hostage scenario. Battered wife syndrome, military basic training and fraternity bonding by hazing are examples of activating the capture-bonding psychological mechanism.”

its sovereigntist/capitalist society that's psychopathic.

all those who suffer the misfortune of being 'pulled from the crowd' to be 'made examples of' and who have to endure psychological harassment deserve our unswerving support.

i hold the people who glamourised and defended (still!) their unrelenting oppressive and psychopathic actions towards someone who was in a weaker position than them, both emotionally and socially, responsible for their behavior. i have taken (more than enough!!!) responsibility and 'punishment' for my own mistakes. my violence went 'up', and, of course, that is the 'more punishable crime' - it is also the more anarchist one.

Best comment that's come out of this whole ordeal.

People ignored Matt and KteeO when Leah was subpoenaed, they ignored them when she was thrown in jail, and now they're ignoring them to mourn their fallen hero. What the fuck ever. People would rather waste their time pointing fingers than showing solidarity to the ACTUAL resisters, and I bet the feds are sitting back and cackling with glee right now.

Yeah, Matt and KteeO need a return to the kind of direct action support they were getting before this started. Whatever may or may not have happened with Leah Lynn Plante, Matt and KteeO need our continued support and our continued direct action

there are two ways to think of community, as a collection of things-in-themselves, or as a connected/interdependent relational web. in aboriginal justice and in the ‘restorative justice movement’, community is understood as an interdependent relational web.

in the restorative justice movement, morally judging the individual as a thing-in-itself is superseded by the view that conflict has arisen in the community. the relational tensions in the web may ‘get to’ an individual and his/her behaviour derives from those relational tensions. the quest to restore harmony in the community does not, therefore, apply absolutist judgements of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ to the individual whose behaviour is ‘non-normative’. it seeks transformation or ‘healing/reconciliation’ that resolves the tension.

the good-and-evil based justice system; i.e. standard western justice, is not interested in ‘healing’. on the contrary, it seeks to prevent healing. it applies the offender-victim breakdown to the community-sourced conflict and its machinery is activated by ‘the committing of a crime’. if the victim wants to forgive the offender, that is of no interest to the machinery of western justice, because as it sees things, a crime has been committed and justice is based on punishing crime; i.e. it is a system of ‘institutionalized vengeance’ rather than ‘reconciliation’.

conflict has arisen within the puget sound anarchist community with respect to an apparent ‘defection’ on the part of leah and the choice the author of this article has made is to couch it in ‘offender-victim’ terms; i.e. leah is the offender and the anarchist community is the ‘victim’.

perhaps leah feels remorse for being a mere mortal and would like to participate in a ‘healing session’ with the puget sound anarchist community. can the anarchist community arrange for leah to do that with ‘impunity’? evidently not. something called ‘the state’ is blocking the path of healing/reconciliation by putting absolutist laws devised for imposing peace in the community [over top of unresolved tensions] into a primacy over direct action that seeks to cultivate, restore and sustain community harmony through reconciliation.

the puget sound anarchist community, if it seeks reconciliation with leah, should be prepared to guarantee her safe passage in coming to sit in the ‘healing circle’. if it is unable to do that, it should hold its tongue or perhaps express understanding for how the devious massive power of the state can control and shape one's behaviour, though not necessarily one's spirit --- as is ongoing with millions of colonized aboriginals whose overt belief-based behaviours capitulated (e.g. chief joseph's) but whose spirits have continued to source decolonizing activity as best they can while under the powerful state behaviour-controlling matrix. those of the nez percé that saw joseph as a defector for not holding their solidarity intact and gave their lives in war against the 'state' that was herding them around and telling them what they could and couldn't do, made a great contribution but so did joseph who chose to succumb on issues of behaviour though not in spirit.

in the state's forceful herding [treaty-breaking] of the nez percé, when their 1855 treaty reserving 7.8 million acres of land in washington,idaho and oregon, was arbitrarily decimated to .78 million acres in imposed treaty of 1863, joseph had the following comments that preceded his resistance to the overwhelming power imposed unjustly on his people by the state;

“Perhaps you think the Creator sent you here to dispose of us as you see fit. If I thought you were sent by the Creator, I might be induced to think you had a right to dispose of me. Do not misunderstand me, but understand fully with reference to my affection for the land. I never said the land was mine to do with as I choose. The one who has a right to dispose of it is the one who has created it. I claim a right to live on my land and accord you the privilege to return to yours.”

“If the white man wants to live in peace with the Indian he can live in peace. There need be no trouble. Treat all men alike. Give them the same laws. Give them all an even chance to live and grow. All men were made by the same Great Spirit Chief. They are all brothers. The earth is the mother of all people, and all people should have equal rights upon it. You might as well expect all rivers to run backward as that any man who was born a free man should be contented penned up and denied liberty to go where he pleases. If you tie a horse to a stake, do you expect he will grow fat? If you pen an Indian up on a small spot of earth and compel him to stay there, he will not be contented nor will he grow and prosper. I have asked some of the Great White Chiefs where they get their authority to say to the Indian that he shall stay in one place, while he sees white men going where they please. They cannot tell me.”

chief joseph did his best but eventually 'capitulated' to the power of the state, not in spirit, but in complying with the state-imposed edicts on behaviour [where one can or cannot go].

today, the question remains as to where the great chiefs of the state get their authority to say to the 99% that they shall stay in one place while the 1% can go where they please. the state still does not answer such questions.

so, though people who oppose the massive power of the state may capitulate on the 'behavioural' front, this does not equate to their spirit 'being broken'.

the nez percé did not doubt that while joseph had 'let go' of his behavioural stance of direct opposition and thus 'broken solidarity' with many of his brothers, his spirit was unbroken.

respect for this 'spirit' in spite of one's having to 'let go' of one's behavioural stance of direct opposition is important to the continuing cultivating of ferment leading to decolonization.

thus, for the anarchist community to do OTHERWISE than hold its tongue or express understanding and support for 'leah's spirit' even where it does not support her behaviour, is to abandon the values of 'restorative justice' and to opt instead for the path of absolutism; i.e. the path of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ moral judgement as its preferred brand of 'justice’.

There are two ways to think: thinking and not thinking, aka posting on anews.

yes, well at least emile's 'mere mortals' get to be human beings!! their victims sure weren't.

So emile's a snitch apologists. Good to know.

lots of brave words are coming in from people not in leah’s situation. if the anarchist community stands by in impotence watching its own members be captured and tortured/coerced by the state, is the appropriate action then to condemn them and shoot them as collaborators after the fact of an outcome that arises from their own impotence? if syrian rebels are unable to protect the residents of their ‘stronghold’ from the state forces, does it then execute those residents who were ‘gotten to’ by the state and who were, with the sword of state force hanging over their head, pressured to collaborate with the state?

what responsibility does the anarchist community have to protect its members from capture and torture/coercion by the state. is it limited to standing on the sidelines and shouting words of support as the member is seized and then following up by mailing care packages? the louder the brave words of the bystanders, the better cover for their own impotence. is that what ‘mutual aid’ means?

what kind of ‘community’ is it that behaves so? apparently it is a community that feels it is good to condemn and execute, from time to time, a front-line fellow combatant who breaks the rules of engagement, so as to ‘encourage the rest’. as Voltaire said of the British in Candide, mocking their hanging of their own fellow front-line combatant [admiral byng] for ‘breaking the rules of engagement’; Dans ce pays-ci, il est bon de tuer de temps en temps un amiral pour encourager les autres »

Short and sweet. I liked this one emile.

All this bullshit about how it was really hard for her. And it ISN'T hard for Matt, Kateeo, and Maddy? You realize every time you give excuses for her behavior you're shitting on them, essentially claiming that she had it worse. No actually. She had it the same or better if you count all the extra support she got.

And she has it easier every day that goes by without being in prison while others are.

I don't think you know what the word essentially means.

Each individual handles hardship differently.

If she did talk, I imagine that she might not be enjoying her freedom as much as you think. She might even be...regretting it.

In the end that's the only moral authority there is, anarchists. Not prisons, not anonymous @news commentors, not God almighty. Just yourself.

"true facts"

ROFL brah

We have to watch out for untrue facts always vigilant towered those unknown knowns. How could anyone at least not agree to disagree?

Currently working on a captcha system so impervious to spam not even people recognize the characters.

Is this thing on?

^ No. You put comedy in my anarchy. This is serious. Fuck you!

why not loosen your pit-bull grip on leah and lighten up. the record shows that ‘there, but for fortune, go you or i’ [in fact, everything is speculative at this point]. sure it is great to have the stamina/endurance not to ‘break the rules of engagement’ and don’t we all hope, from the outset, before we are the ones that are actually caught in the jaws of the state machine, that we will be able to ‘go all the way’ without backing off, whether we get water-boarded or something else that may, to us, be equivalent [our individual makeup is different and the particulars of our relationships bear on our power to ‘stay the course’].

why not loosen your vengeful grip and stop presenting anarchism as something dark and lacking in humanity. there is a place for ‘humor in anarchy’. it is the absolute judgement and mechanistic force approach of the state that is humourless. why would anyone want to be infected by such degeneracy?

it must be nice to be a 'mere mortal'!!!!!! oh these poor mere mortals around here....i hope that all of the pain you both caused comes back to you tenfold.

the ONLY reason they stopped is because I threatened their job. that is THE ONLY REASON. and that I do not regret that, because what they, you, were doing was fucking sick and wrong, and has had devastating effects on my psyche and life. FUCK YOU.

they are NOT kind empathetic people. dont make me laugh. you and the two of them (three??) - all the people who stood jeering on the sidelines to a bunch of sexist racist fucking lies (oh yeah, i've definitely become an increasingly worse person for it, for sure!!!) ....they only reason all of you have stopped is bc I threatened your JOB. 'true facts'...those are them. I will never forgive any of you.

do they care about hurting and exploiting people ("non-humans")? : no

do they care about the toxic environment they created? : no

do they care that people are being stalked and manipulated and brainwashed? : no

do they care that they're actually harming the people they are supposed to be "helping"? : no

do they care about being "shamed"? no, they just create more lies and propaganda...

do they care that they are being sexist and racist? : no

what do they care about? their JOB. that's all they care about. my only regret is that i didn't do it sooner.

you will never be forgiven.

I for one agree with you, emile.

Dear Majority of Commenters:

You have not been subpoenaed & you are not a target!!!

Have some solidarity with those who have been subpoenaed & have not cooperated. They're the ones who deserve the support and all of the <3<3<3's. And for anarchism's sake!!! have some solidarity with those who are targets. These people have been thoroughly bruised by Leah's actions & there is nothing that can reverse that damage.

Have sympathy not solidarity for Leah, & don't justify her actions because they CANT be justified. There is not one valid argument i can think of that proves that what she did what was OK or best for the resistors or herself. Her cooperation is leaving the door wide-fucking-open for being questioned & subpoenaed again. Have sympathy for her because she fucked up BIG TIME.

>end rant<

i don’t disagree with anything you say here and, to be clear, my above comments were in no way intended otherwise. my argument was with lynch mob attacks on those who falter ‘as a means of encouraging the rest’. the best support that can be given is 100% unqualified support towards keeping up the spirits of those who ‘are’ staying the course. i.e. the support should not come 'lined with a dark threat' that says, 'know this, ...if you don't stay the course, you are a low-life suck that deserves our contempt, if not bigtime payback'.

Do your best to make sure the environment is more tolerant of cooperating with the feds, that way when you get your subpoena, emile, it will be a safer environment for you to squeal too. Nevermind that what you tell them will put your friends and loved ones at risk (you likely have none anyway). No matter how smart you like to pretend you are; giving information people who want anarchists imprisoned is never a good idea.

an environment of intolerance is a poor substitute for an environment of heartfelt support

Will global warming contribute to the environment being more tolerant towards beings that cooperate or less? Should I recycle or not?


Tbf, if emile did talk to the feds, they'd still be emile, and so there'd be no danger of them communicating anything the cops could understand. I reckon a good strategy for defeating grand juries in future would be to just send emile in there to talk and talk at them until they couldn't take any more and gave up.

Best tactic ever. Love you Emile!

"You have not been subpoenaed & you are not a target!!!"

I got the suggestion from the title and the article itself that the author was subpoenaed and/or is a target of the grand jury. So maybe you should take seriously what it says with that in mind.

You must have missed the "Dear Majority of Commenters" part of that post.

You all are being disinformed and disarmed. Get over it and move on. What does it matter if it was shitty jail conditions or machinations of the state which resulted in her release? The effect seems real enough on solidarity.

holy shit, shut the fuck up about Leah already people. who cares? There's people still in prison. Did she break your anarcho-punx hearts?

Obviously. This is obsessive.

As far as I'm concerned, it seems that she is responsible for putting Maddy in prison. I feel a little bit more than a heartbreak.

Either quit snitchjacketing or go join the police force so you can get paid for this.

WTF tyhe ios nope fuickion reasonm smnitchiun fuckinm traiytor ytheis nope fiucklin escuise yta fuckion be a weakl peace ofg shiyt to teh fiuckion aiuthortitaroianm fucklin poigs.,.,8ball

When the asshole that posted this crap provides anykind of evidence that Leah Lynn Plante is cooperating with the authorities, then I will eat my hat.Why dont you shut the fuck up until the facts are out, and not burn witches? Even if you are right, which you probably aint, you are doing a worse act by publishing the shame, by disrupting the community and shitting on it's face with your weakness and impolitic stupidity. Again, shut the fuck up. Use your brain you fucking retard.

You should be treated like an information gathering trick. The obscene responses that this article calls for are not fit for publishing.

When you say "facts" do you mean anything other than her word? Why is her word worth anything? Her word is all you'll ever have in terms of an account of what went on inside the grand jury and unless she's incredibly honest (unlikely) she's either going to never make a statement or make a statement in which she lies about what she said to make it not sound so bad.

You can't base grand jury things on what someone claims they said, because it's all secret. And that's why non-cooperation is the only strategy. Now i'm sure you're like "Well what, so we don't trust each other?!" Well for anyone thinking that, I bet you don't even know Leah, so why would you trust her? Furthermore, the entire reason we have the information we do about how she cooperated and has left Portland for "safety concerns" etc. is because of things she obviously said to people she did trust to some degree, who were friends of hers, who were alarmed enough to make the information public because when you friend betrays you and everyone else, you don't irrationally defend them and make excuses.

So let's say she makes a statement and says "Yeah I cooperated but I only answered these unimportant questions that couldn't have possibly endangered anyone and I didn't write for 3 weeks because i'm traumatized by comments on the internet and you're all misogynists for thinking I'm a snitch." Then what? Why should you believe her? She has given us no reason to believe her and has only given us many reasons, through her actions, to not trust her. You all are just in denial of the obvious situation right in front of you and can't face the very real facts of the matter.

"Furthermore, the entire reason we have the information we do about how she cooperated and has left Portland for "safety concerns" etc. is because of things she obviously said to people she did trust to some degree, who were friends of hers, who were alarmed enough to make the information public because when you friend betrays you and everyone else, you don't irrationally defend them and make excuses."

What friends have made a statement? Put up or shut up. Cop.

"After delaying giving any answers to people, Leah left Portland. Most people do not know where she went. She has since made one statement to CAPR, in which she said safety concerns prevented her from saying what happened during the grand jury at which she appeared."

CAPR = people she trusted to some degree.

I've put up, now you shut up, cop.

Oh yeah. An anonymous tumblr post that says not even the editors of a-news would have on the site. Good one.

Keep supporting the other prisoners. If she snitched, it'll come up.


Nothing here is certain. None of us know what happened in that prison or in that courtroom. It is frightening that you are so quick to throw Leah to the wolves, considering the fact we do not have any information regarding the reasons/conditions of her release. Look, the state wins when they convince us to tear each other apart over nothing more than pure speculation. There's two people still in prison. Act on what is relevant.

thats not true at all. what the op was trying to highlight in this text is only what IS certain. Leah cooperated, in some way with the gj, we don't know whether she said "i don't know" or whether she said something more, none the less she DID cooperate in at least some way, the article does not say she snitched, it says she cooperated.

it also says that she refuses to speak to people about her conditions of release, that is certain. she hasn't said anything, she refuses to talk about it...

so please, how is "nothing here certain"?

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.