Politicians send troops abroad to die. Then they bestow fake honor on them at home. It's called Memorial Day.
Chances are EVERY member of Congress will be back in their district, pontificating and posing as a patriot, who values the sacrifice of the fallen. Yet...
Last week an amendment to end legalized kidnapping failed in the House, 182-238.
And so began a long, detail-pregnant e-mail about Downsize DC's Repeal Indefinite Detention campaign. I understand that it's an issue people have legitimate concerns about, but that's not the point of this post.
The point is that you don't use deceased soldiers, some of whose bodies are still warm, to hustle your issue in a MEMORIAL DAY e-mail!
There are real families who have lost real loved ones and who are in real mourning this Memorial Day. Calling the Purple Hearts, Bronze Stars, and Medals of Honor "fake" is crass and gratuitous and spits in the face of each and every Gold Star Family.
May God protect each and every one of our troops as they "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." And may God grant comfort and the peace that surpasses all understanding to the widows, the mothers, the fathers, the brothers and sisters and the friends of our fallen heroes, especially on this weekend that we honor the brave men and women who "gave the last full measure of devotion" for their country.
And may we all take some time out of our busy weekends of barbecues, baseball, and fun-in-the-sun to thank a veteran and a military family and to remember that the freedom we enjoy comes with a great price.
Then, on Tuesday, we can get back to our Black Ops e-mail blasts about our pet bills.
It's not that complicated. Or it shouldn't be. But if you want to apply for a prestigious "Obama Organizing Fellowship," perhaps you should really wrestle and thoughtfully consider your answer to the question below. Even if you think you already know the answer because God gave you certain equipment at birth that makes the answer quite obvious to anyone with eyes and a lick of common sense, you might not know the answer. And lest you think that it's an easy test because there are only two possible answers, understand that Democrats live in a very complicated, confusing world. And as we've seen with Elizabeth Sacagawarren at Harvard, they like it that way because it benefits them and furthers their agenda of dividing our country into a million special interest groups, each with its own special rights.
Here's what young would-be community organizers are asked when they sign up to be Obama Organizing Fellows:
I haven't spent a lot of time worrying my pretty little head about this today, but my 40+ years on this earth apparently have not equipped me with the experience or knowledge base to construct a viable answer to the question of what "something different" might be. I probably don't want to know.
What the Democrats and race/gender/class/disability/ethnicity baiters cannot grasp is the complete contradiction in their commitments to both diversity and equality. They cannot mutually co-exist - at least not through artificial manipulation of the system.
Obama for America's application makes this obviously clear:
"Obama for America is committed to diversity among its staff, and recognizes that its continued success requires the highest commitment to obtaining and retaining a diverse staff that provides the best quality services to supporters and constituents. Obama for America is an equal opportunity employer and it is Obama for America’s policy to recruit, hire, train, promote and administer any and all personnel actions without regard to sex, race, age, color, creed, national origin, religion, economic status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, ethnic identity or physical disability, or any other legally protected basis. Obama for America will not tolerate any unlawful discrimination and any such conduct is strictly prohibited."
How exactly can an organization hire "without regard to sex, race, age," etc. and at the same time consciously be "committed to diversity among its staff" and "retain a diverse staff?" If Team Obama (or any other organization with a similar policy) is color-blind, gender-blind, sexual orientation-blind (?), and not regarding any of these characteristics in its hiring practices, we must ask how they're even aware that they're diverse.
The answer, of course, is that they are not blind to any of the differences between their fellow Americans. Indeed, they seek out the differences, as the question above demonstrates, because they win elections by continuing to divide our country and pit us against each other. For all the talk of wanting everyone treated equally, without regard to race or fad minority status, the professional left is the least likely to treat all equally and without regard to their "status" of one kind or another.
We need to make an issue of this intellectual dishonesty and remind voters that our side is the side that champions equality for all "without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin," as stated in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (a Republican bill, let's not forget). It is the ultimate conservative value to fight for liberty for all. The Democrats and professional left have owned this, illegitimately, for too long.
Despite their statements to the press and on their website attempting to distance the group from the five suspected terrorists who were members of Occupy Cleveland, their presence in court on Monday sent a different message. Members of the Occupy Cleveland community showed up in force today to support the "Cleveland 5" for their first day in court. According to Scene (a local hipster publication):
"By the time the hearing got moving, the rows in the courtroom were at capacity, the overflow against the walls. In the half hour or so before the proceedings began, the hallway outside the chamber was filled with about 60 people. And although adults were sprinkled throughout the group, the majority were young, most hovering around 25 and looking the part.
"It could have been a crowd waiting for a college lecture to start, coming in all the twentysomething shapes and sizes. Their haircuts ranged from tidy salon chops to slam pit shaves, ropey dreads to the watercolor shades of a kitchen dye job; beards both undergrad wispy and woodsy thick; skate shoes and loafers; a pair of handmade “Free the Cleveland 5” shirts; heart-a-gram decorated jean jackets; discount bin sport coats studded with slogan buttons; baggy graduation suits that would have fit a few years back; new dress shirts still vertically creased from where they were recently folded on a store shelf."
In addition, more evidence has surfaced tying the suspects to the group in substantive roles. Anthony "Tony" Hayne signed the lease on the $600/month, 2400 sq. ft. warehouse space the group had been leasing to shack up when they were not working a shift at the tent on Cleveland's Public Square (before the city revoked their permit this week).
Tony, the self-proclaimed anarchist, who posted as "Anthony8547" on the Occupy Cleveland Forum in February offered to pay the utilities himself, providing the group followed his strict rules (a neo-anarchist?):
RULES:
1. Dry camp
2. no more than 16 hrs at a time there.(resident occupiers will be doing 8 hr shifts at the info tent)
3: Clean up after yourself
4: Non- Violence
Good anarchists are hard to find these days. You can't make this stuff up.
Here's a video of Tony Hayne facilitating a "General Assembly" on 2/13/12. Tony, on the left hand side of the screen, wearing a black stocking cap and holding a cup of coffee, tells the group that they "got the warehouse" and that "today I brought the checks to the guy":
Below is a video showing bombing suspect Brandon Baxter leading a General Assembly on April 11th. The nice young man/community organizer has been keeping up on all the local protests, including those for Trayvon Martin, Justice for Janitors ("a cool day for us to be down here"), striking Red Cross workers, and three tax day protests (RED ALERT! He's a Tea Party member!!). Unfortunately, the sound cuts out about 5 minutes into the video, but it's clear that young Brandon is a leader of the pack:
As I documented here last week, these two have been members and leaders of this group from the beginning.
"This is a horrific example in terms of the arrests of how the movement itself failed to identify and understand the dangerous potential of people affiliated with it."
Doesn't he mean it's a horrific example of how HE failed to identify and understand the dangerous potential of people HE was aiding and abetting?
No word on whether Cummins was in attendance at the court hearing for the bombing suspects or if he is sporting a "Free the Cleveland 5" t-shirt at Cleveland City Council meetings.
Although Occupy Cleveland has a nice little statement on its website attempting to distance the group from the terror suspects who were active members of the group, directly below the statement is a video hailing the actions of suspected would-be bomber and Cleveland Occupy leader Brandon Baxter for his March 5th arrest. From the Occupy Cleveland site:
"On the morning of March 5th, Occupy Cleveland, in conjunction with labor and community organizations, marched from Public Square to the Justice Center. Every Monday morning, in a room on the first floor, there is a sheriff auction of foreclosed properties. Our aim was to shut it down. 5 very brave young men (Peter, Jonnie,Brandon, James and Ston) waited in the room where the auction was taking place for their cue...All five were arrested before they finished the mic check, but the demonstrators outside picked it up and made so much noise that people inside couldn’t hear what was going on. The demonstrators were eventually moved from the area right outside the sale, to the sidewalk, but we rallied on that sidewalk for approx. 2 hours. We may not have been successful in shutting it down completely, but we definitely brought a lot of attention to the issue, handing out flyers to everyone who walked by. The 5 were eventually cited for disorderly conduct and released. We celebrated their release, shouted “See ya next week!” to the Sheriff’s deputies, and marched back to the tent."
The Plain Dealer reports that Baxter was arrested for disorderly conduct, skipped his court appearance, and was arrested again the first week of April. He later pleaded no contest and was sentenced to 200 hours of community service. What? Occupying isn't considered community service? Couldn't fellow-Occupier, City Councilman Brian Cummins work something out?
Baxter said at the time:
"I took the risk of getting arrested because I feel the powers that be, whoever they might be -- on all levels of government and those who hold corporate power -- are not listening because not enough people are actually taking a stance" against foreclosures.
"I was hoping that this would be a great way to get Cleveland more involved by showing the potential that a small group of dedicated people can have in making an impact. Even though we are not in any government position or in Congress, we do have the power."
Apparently, Occupy Cleveland is so proud of their leader and his arrest for their cause that they don't mind featuring him on their front page along with their denouncement of his tactics. Ironic, isn't it?
Below are screen shots of the current Occupy Cleveland front page and the section of the YouTube video where Baxter appears (at the end). I've also embedded the full YouTube video of the protest at the end.
Cleveland Magazine has just posted an interview from the tents at Public Square in Cleveland with the shell-shocked reaction of the remaining Occupiers on receiving news that their comrades had been arrested for plotting to blow up an area bridge.
As I posted earlier today, the men have a clear link to the Occupy Cleveland movement and this article confirms that all five men were regular visitors to the Occupy Cleveland tent in downtown Cleveland.
“I know all those gentlemen – I don’t want to call them gentlemen anymore,” said movement member Robin Adelmann. Some of them spent time with him, manning the tent. “I never really expected that from any of them.”
One Occupier disputes the FBI account of the night of the October 21st arrests, when the FBI says the bomb plotters were trying to stir up violence in the crowd:
"Matthew Revelt, a Cleveland protester who said he was in Public Square on Oct. 21, said the affidavit’s description was accurate, except that the anarchists didn’t advocate violence. “They wanted to get people to get rowdy. They wanted to get people to get loud. They didn’t ask people to act destructive. We might’ve all turned on them [if they had]. They wanted people to get arrested that evening. They wanted to encourage that.”
Cleveland's New Channel 5 reports on the high level of their involvement:
What is perhaps most disturbing is that Cleveland City Councilman Brian Cummins, a vocal and active Occupy supporter, admits that he knew and worked alongside the suspects, even admitting that he knew they were anarchists:
“They wore their anarchist beliefs on their shirt much more than anyone else did,” Cummins said. Baxter and Stafford didn’t talk to him, probably because he was an elected official, Cummings said.
“None were very much involved with the strategy of the movement,” Cummins said. “They were more fringe members of the group. People were perturbed with them occasionally.”
Like the guys in the tent today, Cummins had begun hearing that Hayne was a “troublemaker, a pain in the ass.” The councilman noted that the Occupy Movement’s open, often leaderless nature makes it hard to kick people out.
Cummins, a member of the Green Party, has been an integral part of Occupy Cleveland's activities since the movement began. He was present on the first day of the "Occupation," offering advice about dealing with the city's laws and regulations and helping them to secure the required permits. In October he invited his Occupier comrades for a personal visit to Cleveland City Hall (I wrote about the field trip here):
"According to #OccupyCleveland, they were personally invited to Cleveland's weekly city council meeting last night by Ward 14 councilman Brian Cummins. He is the only non-Democrat among the 19 council members — he is a Green.
According to #OccupyCleveland, "Members of the group received a tour of the grounds and sat in on a City Council meeting that turned out to be mainly about them. The group received a rousing round of applause, as well as the endorsements of many key Council members.
"Cities are going into default, states are going into default, and yet when people go to Congress we're not too big to fail, only banks are too big to fail," says Westbrook.
"The #OccupyCleveland folks shared, "Councilman Cummins made sure to highlight the group’s excellent working relationship with the Cleveland Police Department and its relentless commitment to the consensus process. Councilman Jay Westbrook of Ward 16 expressed his delight to see such a diverse group engaging in their First Amendment rights. Councilwoman Mamie Mitchell of Ward 6 said that she is inspired by the way the movement is engaging in democracy. Councilman Zach Reed of Ward 2 stressed that Cleveland is an important place to see this movement prosper. He was especially impressed with #OccupyCleveland’s steadfast dedication to nonviolence and peaceable assembly."
"Mayor Frank Jackson was also in attendance, seen shaking hands and smiling for #OccupyCleveland’s live feed of the event. The group later received endorsements from Council President Martin Sweeney of Ward 18, Councilman Matt Zone of Ward 15 and Councilman Joe Cimperman of Ward 3."
Apparently, though, the FBI doesn't see any connection between the Occupy groups and the terror suspects:
"Let me be clear, the FBI and Department of Justice are not conducting an investigation of any specific group," said Steven M. Dettelbach, U.S Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio. "We do not investigate movements or groups, we investigate individuals."
Personally, as someone who sends her husband to work in Cleveland every day, I would like them to be a bit more curious...no...a LOT more curious about what is going on in these camps and how many more violent anarchists they are harboring among them. Someone needs to be asking the leaders of Occupy Cleveland a few basic questions about exactly what level of violence they are willing to tolerate and at what point they would be willing to contact the authorities. Would they have called authorities if they knew what "Tony, Connor, Brandon, Doug and Skelly" had been considering? I'm not convinced that they would have. I must repeat what I posted in my earlier post: there are known members of the group who are vocally opposed to turning criminals over to the police. From the Occupy Cleveland forum:
"Some of us are morally opposed to handing someone over to the cops and consider it a violent act…I can tell you for a fact that at least one other prominent Occupier is strongly opposed to calling police, for the same reasons stated here. Even when someone has committed violence, this person says, putting them through the criminal justice system only imposes more violence.”
Meet Cleveland Occupier Brandon Baxter. A few weeks ago he was one of the few remaining protesters manning the shabby Occupation tent on Cleveland's Public Square. Today he was arrested for plotting to blow up a major bridge in the Cuyahoga Valley National Recreation Area.
Anthony Hayne is another member of Occupy Cleveland. He was highlighted in an October, 2011 story in the Lakewood Patch about his work trying to spread Occupy Cleveland to the suburb of Lakewood.
This is my home turf. I grew up not far from the bridge they plotted to blow up and my husband works in downtown Cleveland, very close to the other potential targets this group discussed. I attended the original Occupy Cleveland event and reported it here at RedState and also reported the rape of a teen girl in the camp and the group's field trip to Cleveland City Council, where their received a hero's welcome. This is personal for me.
Make no mistake. These individuals were associated with Occupy Cleveland and the self-proclaimed anarchists have the EXACT SAME COMPLAINTS as the Occupy movement. The FBI complaint, which contains conversations between the suspects and an undercover agent are filled with the language of the Occupy movement and in fact, the suspects were originally identified at an Occupy event in Cleveland. Here are some details taken from the FBI complaint:
[CHS = Confidential Human Source UCE = Undercover Employee]
"Based on an initial report of potential criminal activity and threats involving anarchists who would be attending an event by a protest group, the Cleveland FBI directed the CHS to attend that event. On October 21, 2011, approximately 6:30 pm, and while the CHS was attending the event, the CHS identified four suspicious males with walkie-talkie radios around their necks. Three of the four men had masks or something covering their faces; one man did not. The men were wearing black or dark colored shirts, had black backpacks, carried the anarchist flags and acted differently than the other people in attendance. The four males were subsequently joined by three more males wearing scarves or towels around their heads. The whole group appeared to be together and was constantly moving throughout the crowd expressing displeasure at the crowd's unwillingness to act violently. During a briefing between the protestors and organizers, the organizers explained who would be arrested emphasizing that they wanted to conduct peaceful civil disobedience. One of the original four men turned away and said "f-k that" before the group of men walked away."
Here's a clip of the 10/21 protest in Cleveland (no time stamp):
Twenty protesters were arrested that night for violating the city's ban on overnight camping. Though I have been unable to track down the names of those arrested (The Cleveland Plain Dealer did not think it was newsworthy to report the names), there was a photo of the criminals when they appeared in court:
Are the terror suspects among those arrested? I don't know, but a couple of them bear a resemblance to those charged in the terror plot.
After the informant made contact with one of the anarchists he met at the 10/21 Occupy Cleveland event, he set up meetings with Doug Wright, and eventually, the other suspects. Here is some of the information gleaned from the investigation:
"Wright explained to the CHS that he and a group of anarchists Wright recruited had been discussing plans involving violence and destruction to physical property in a variety of ways in order to send a message to corporations and the United States government."
"The group of five to six men...wanted to knock the bank signs off the tops of the larger buildings in downtown Cleveland....they needed to make sure everyone knows that the actions was against corporate America and the financial system, and not just some random acts."
"Wright and Baxter decided that doing some kind of attack during the opening of the new Casino in Cleveland would make a good statement. Baxter went on to talk about the G-8 in chicago and the Republican convention in Tampa."
BAXTER: “Taking out the bridge in the business district would cost the...um...would cost the corporate bigwigs a lot of money not just because of structural damage to the bridge but because it’s going to stop a lot of people going to work.”
The conversation then switches gears on March 31st when Baxter, obviously distracted by his work as an Occupier/Community Organizer, complains about the City of Cleveland denying his request for a permit. He makes clear that there is overlap between the anarchists and the Occupiers:
"Baxter then discussed the fact that he believes the city of Cleveland is going to give him a difficult time about acquiring a permit for an upcoming festival. He wants to march on city hall. Baxter said, “I’m going to straight up tell the city we are not playing by your f--king rules.”
"He continued by saying he knew the city was trying to shut them down and that, “if you shut it down we will blow it wide open.” Baxter was also upset because he is presenting the festival as a family friendly event and the city will not support them. When asked about comments Baxter previously had made about how the last few days of the festival were going to get crazy, Baxter replied, “Yea, but they don’t know that.”
At an April 7th meeting, the group discussed blowing up a Klan or Nazi headquarters. The informant said he thought there was one in Wooster or Lodi, which is in "Southern Ohio," 45 minutes away (I will refrain from making comments about the state of public education in Ohio!). The group decided this wouldn't help their cause. Baxter "advised that it would not stop money flowing to the One Percent."
"Wright suggested getting a car that they can drive into the Federal Reserve Bank with C4, and blowing it up. Upon hearing Wright mention blowing up the Federal Reserve Bank, Baxter advised this is now higher scale, and wanted everyone to agree this was an open discussion."
Up twinkles if you agree this is a good idea?
The next meeting was on April 10th and they discussed other targets. They decided against the Cleveland Justice Center because they didn't want to harm "inmates" and anyways, there would be too much security. The next idea was to blow up a cargo ship in Lake Erie so they could "f--k up" some merchandise.
The group thought the Occupy May Day protest would provide not only a good distraction (police would be so busy with that nonsense they wouldn't notice a few random terrorists), but also an alibi:
“He suggested doing it during the “fest” or May 1st, because police will be downtown and not around the bridge. In order to create an alibi, Wright suggested they could be downtown and be seen, then get to the river to blow up something, and then go back downtown.”
Note that they understood that they would be "seen," implying that those at the protest would recognize them and later report they had been in attendance at the rally.
Much more damning is Baxter's confidence that he could lead the crowd away from the site of the explosion:
“Baxter stated that he is rallying in May Day so he could act as a decoy or diversion and move the crowd away from the river so that the police are removed away as well. He agreed that he could move them to another place such as city hall after Wright’s suggestion.”
Baxter was planning to use his position as a leader in Occupy Cleveland to divert attention away from the planned terror attack.
"Baxter stated that they may not have to drive downtown that day because there is talk about setting up a tent city."
In fact, Baxter and his fellow Occupiers were so enmeshed in the culture of Occupy Cleveland that they had to postpone the original pick-up time for the explosives in order to attend an Occupy "festival" in the city:
“Wright further told the CHS that the time of the delivery [of the C4] needed to be changed to either before the start of the festival on Saturday, or sometime on Sunday, April 29, 2012. Wright said that he, Baxter, and C.S. wanted to attend an event associated with the festival and could not make the meeting previously agreed upon.”
Ultimately, the group decided to blow up the bridge in the Cuyahoga Valley National Recreational Area.
Their plan was to use the May Day Occupy protest as their alibi:
“Wright said that Baxter, (C.S.) [Connor Stevens] and he would be downtown at the festival and should be seen there to help establish an alibi.”
On April 29th, they met at a hotel and purchased what they though was a duffel bag containing enough plastic explosives to take down a massive bridge:
"Approximately twenty minutes after Wright called the UCE, the UCE arrived at the location and the meeting was recorded. In sum and substance the UCE arrived and asked Wright, Baxter and Hayne for the money. Wright gave the UCE $450 and counted it quickly in front of him. The UCE gave Wright, Baxter and Hayne a duffel bag containing the vests, smoke grenades and gas masks. The UCE then opened the two black boxes containing two inert IEDs. "
Occupy Cleveland has the following statement on their Facebook page:
"While the group arrested Monday evening by the FBI were associated with Occupy Cleveland they were in no way representing or acting on behalf of Occupy Cleveland or the event that was planned for later today at the GE Lighting building. The May Day Event that was sponsored by Occupy Cleveland, the North Shore AFL-CIO, Cleveland Jobs with Justice, Fight for a Fair Economy and SEIU Local 1 has been cancelled because of the alleged actions of the autonomous group arrested last night. Occupy Cleveland has had affirmed principles of non-violence since its inception on October 6, 2011."
"Some of us are morally opposed to handing someone over to the cops and consider it a violent act...I can tell you for a fact that at least one other prominent Occupier is strongly opposed to calling police, for the same reasons stated here. Even when someone has committed violence, this person says, putting them through the criminal justice system only imposes more violence."
While I'm not at all suggesting that everyone associated with the Occupy movement is a terrorist or that many (or even most) are not dedicated to non-violence, it's now clear after today's event that it can and does harbor anarchists in its midst. Spend some time on their Facebook pages (and check out the profiles of the commenters) or read through their forums and you'll find that you can't swing a cat (or a dog if you're a Democrat) without hitting an anarchist. The Occupy movement's penchant for accepting everyone's viewpoints as equally valid and its unwillingness to say anything is wrong (except the 1% and the Republicans), creates a virile breeding ground for the kind of people who plot to blow up the bridges my husband drives over on his way to work in the morning.
We have to ask, how long before before one of these plots is successful? Though our law enforcement officials did an excellent job of conducting this investigation, it seems like it's only a matter of time until one of them succeeds. When a group like Occupy Cleveland considers turning violent criminals over to police an act of violence itself, they must be considered complicit in whatever results from their inaction.
