Talk is Cheap But It Can Still Buy a Long Stay at Club Fed These Days, Which Ultimately Reminds Rory of Another Frickin' Steve Earle Song

Rory read about the Federal arrest on February 23, 2006, of a so-called radical environmentalist, Rod Coronado, for demonstrating how to make a "destructive device." Basically, he held up a partially consumed jug of apple juice and told people you could fill it with gas, put a stick of incense in it as a fuse and cause a fire.
Ah, but Coronado has been convicted of interfering with a puma hunt in Arizona and did several years in Federal Prison for torching an animal research facility in Michigan. Coronado is an unapologetic Yaqui Indian and Earth Liberationist: i.e. someone the Feds want to nail as a "terrorist." So when he talks about flaming juice bottles, the Feds listen. And now, they apparently want to lock him up for years for holding up a jug of apple juice and talking about a a firebomb. First let Rory say this about that, to paraphrase one of the great firebombers of history, Tricky Dick "Napalm" Nixon: Rory condemns violence for any purpose or cause other than immediate personal self-defense or defense of another in accordance with the accepted law on that subject. That being said, it appears that the newest charges against Coronado are flaming feces. What's next? Is the little-known anarchist Kiplinger Suggs liable to lenghty incarceration if he holds up a dog turd and says, "Well, folks if this were a piece of depleted uranium and you attached a piece of explosive and blew it up, you'd have yourself a dirty bomb?" Apparently so, according to the new Anti-Terrorists. Why, it could make you downright reluctant to express yourself about the subject at all, even with the best of intentions. It's a lot easier to go after the talkers than the doers, though.



The statute being used to tie Coronado to the grate for his flogging was used to lock up a teen-aged webmaster by the name of Sherman Austin.
There has been a fair amount of excellent writing about the Austin case, albeit not enough, and Rory will provide links at the end of all this. But, radically summarized, Austin was sent to prison for being a web host who provided a link to a page that had bomb making instructions.
He provided the hosting space and server and somebody else posted a page with the bomb making instructions, which at least one commentator has pointed out were pathetically rudimentary. But Austin's site was the infamous Raisethefist anarchist site. It's free-wheeling, free-speechifying, indy-media style site dealing with what some would call "radical politics" and issues, such as corporate rape of land and people, police brutality, unjustified war, and other topics which the government would like to suppress. You can go there right now and post an article yourself. Federal Agents and various agents provacateurs do it regularly. So, again, Sherman was dubbed an "enemy of the people" and lost a year of his freedom (and much more due to harassment, surveillance, ransacking of his possessions and dwelling, etc.) for hosting a web site manifesting anarchy itself. There is a lot of crap spouted there, just like every other electronic public square. Repression only further radicalizes and escalates the situation, however, regardless of what one things of some of the posts. By the way, the site now carries the disclaimer shown here.

All of this makes Rory extremely curious about

this wacked out (phony Fed??????) bomb-making page?

Why no prosecution? Is it run by White Supremecists? Is it run by the Federal Government itself, seeking to entrap or create "terror" suspects. Is it posted to justify tagging people as suspicious for visiting or downloading? It sounds so fucked up and out there that one really suspects that the "webmaster" responsible for this one must be some cackling madman mindlessly spanking the thought monkey while making up this lameass bullshit. Still, isn't the best counter-approach to this sort of crap education, condemnation of the message, derisive laughter, etc? I mean look at this drivel:


Clearly, if Sherman and Rod can be locked up for their transgressions, he or she who downloads and communicates the contents of the manuals advertised here should be in equal jeopardy. Ah, it's all about the intent, some might say. Well, it sure as shit didn't seem to matter in Sherman's case, for example. He had no intent regarding the use of the crap that was posted. Probably was some frickin' hard-wankin' argument made by hair-splitting lawyers over hoary rules of construction (ironic word that, eh) concerning intent being manifest by a probability of knowledge that someone could likely use disseminated info about bombs for nefarious purposes. In other words, the law that fucked Sherman over and that is just beginning to display its engorged member behind Rod Coronado can be wielded totally arbitrarily. Does that make it unconsitutional? Rory would think so. But what Rory thinks don't mean jack squat. What will Alito and his boys say when Gonzo Gonzales tells 'em the statute is a necessary tool to protect the nation from terrists? That's what's gonna make the difference. Talk about terror. Can we trust the powers that be to use this law responsibly, rationally, fairly? Not according to what we are seeing every day now.

All of which makes me feel like hearing another Steve Earle song from The Revolution Starts Now. You know, the one with these words:

F the CC

I used to listen to the radio
And I don’t guess they’re listenin’ to me no more
They talk too much but that’s okay
I don’t understand a single word they say
Piss and moan about the immigrants
But don’t say nothin’ about the president
A democracy don’t work that way
I can say anything I wanna say

So fuck the FCC
Fuck the FBI
Fuck the CIA
Livin’ in the motherfuckin’ USA

People tell me that I’m paranoid
And I admit I’m gettin’ pretty nervous, boy
It just gets tougher everyday
To sit around and watch it while it slips away
Been called a traitor and a patriot
Call me anything you want to but
Just don’t forget your history
Dirty Lenny died so we could all be free

Is Steve Earle correct when he says "I can say anything I wanna say?" Used to be anything except that which causes a true clear and present danger of violence. That is apparently not the case right now. And is Steve under scrutiny for advocating sexual violence against a governmental agency as a result of this song? Oh, my God, and Rory posted the text of the song that could be construed as advocating mass sexual action against governmental agencies. Is there a statute yet providing for 20 years in Club Fed for advocating sexual intercourse with an agency engaged in counter-terrorism? After all, someone out there might read the lyrics and actually try to do it.

sherman austin on sherman austin and domestic spying

counterpunch on sherman austin

arizona indy media on Rod Coronado arrest