you’re obviously literate, try to respond to what i actually wrote.

and um, when people blow themselves up, they can’t exactly keep working for their cause, can they? because, you know, they’re dead and everything. logic, hmm.

and if you graduated so long ago, why bother trolling the undergrad student paper? you’re obviously above all of this, and the discussion itself was perfectly intellectual and civilized until you decided that the best way to display your post-grad maturity would be through generalizations, assumptions, and petty insults.

“journalists were, in fact, and important part of the action”

Again you’re still seeing journalists as part of your movement, which is why you feel offended when they expose the lame inner workings of your operations. Journalists should not be part of any action, because when they do become part of an action, they are no longer journalists, they are PR reps.

And is the suicide belt comment not germane? You claim to want to overthrow the state through lawless revolution. If you really cared about that, and were not just a poseur, you would strap on a suicide belt and take out some cops or relaxed-fit chinos, whichever it is that you’re so angry about.

And no I’m not in college. I graduated a long time ago. Which is exactly why I can see your group for what it is. A bunch of college kids looking to rebel who have grasped upon the empowering self-gratification of radicalism. Like I said, hopefully the worst thing you’ll face is a night or two in jail, which will be great essay fodder for your law school application once you move beyond your youthful rebellion phase to your “I’ll rebel within the system phase” which will soon pass into the mortgage payment phase. And before you know it, you’ll be engaged in some pointless discussion with some wide-eyed college student who will use phrases like anarcha-feminist and totally not be kidding, which will be incredibly amusing to you.

also, i said specifically that journalists were, in fact, and important part of the action, and that my only qualm was their unannounced presence leading to legal vulnerability.

and as for the suicide belt comment, as badass as that might have seemed when you wrote it, that has nothing to do with this discussion at all. while you’re at it, go ahead and tell me that i hate your freedom.

and then, look up gentrification, neoliberalism, and racism. you’re in college, right? those are good terms to know.

Ha ha indeed. That is how it works; it’s just that your house is not equivilant to a church basement. By open, I don’t mean “unlocked”; I mean it in the sense that all the public accomodation laws are written. Besides, journalists are allowed even freer range than the distinction between public and private. But then again, you don’t seem to like the idea of journalists period. You’d prefer propagandists; ones dedicated to your cause and subject to your editorial preferences. Hmmm, what current President of the United States does that remind you of?

And I didn’t say the legal system was perfect. I said it has come up with a pretty good definition of violence, which explicitly excludes the ridiculous notion that private property is equatable to a brick-to-the-head.

“not, i would guess, people of color, working class people, or anyone else who is systematically targeted by the police force.”

Are you fucking kidding me? You show me a resident of Ward 8 that doesn’t want more cops on his street. Of course there is a need to constantly be on guard for police brutality (e.g. the Rawlings case), but good luck finding anyone in Anacostia that doesn’t want a forceful police presence in their neighborhood.

“and if it’s so blatantly obvious, then, please enlighten me as to what the hell the message or purpose could possibly be of a “protest” or “act of resistance” which is only carried out under the compromise and supervision of the very entity that the participants are supposed to be protesting or resisting. explain that. ”

I couldn’t possibly explain it because I think your entire effort is a complete waste of time and DC’s resources. What’s the differnce between holding a sanctioned demostration and attempting a completely ridiculous attempt to “rebel” against Ambercrombie, or whatever. Neither will accomplish anything but to make the participants feel better about themselves. At least the former has the slightest glimmer of a chance of convincing people of the merits of their argument (but it won’t). The latter will neither achieve revolution nor convince anyone of any point other than the fact that too many middle class white kids have a guilt complex and have read too many misguided books that offer to assuage that guilt through the invigorating catharthis of fundamentalism. As in all fundamentalist groups, it is those lacking a strong sense of identity that fall most prey to the allure of brotherhood through confrontation.

Just be glad the worst you’ll ever be asked to do is spend a night in DC jail, not strap a suicide belt on.