US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC :
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | View comments | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
News ::
Anarchists Against The DNC - Corrected (english)
06 Oct 2003
Modified: 11 Oct 2003
Meeting to plan opposition to the Democratic National Convention. All anti-authoritarians are welcome.
Correction: This meeting is NEXT Wednesday, the 15th, NOT TOMORROW. (Meetings are regularly scheduled for the 3rd Wednesday of every month for the time being.) All information below is accurate.


Wednesday, October 15th there will be a meeting to plan out resistance for the Democratic National Convention. This meeting is open to all anti-authoritarians. At the meeting we plan to (among other things): finalize an initial call to action, organize for a February consulta, and secure convergence space.

If you are interested please attend. We will meet on the steps in front of Boston University's Tsai Performing Arts Center (on Commonwealth Ave.) at 7pm. Then go inside to find a room to use. If you are interested but unable to attend please contact someone who is attending so that your ideas can be represented or at least drop an email at nodnc04 (at)

Once again, all anti-authoritarians are welcome.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact nodnc04 (at)

Add a quick comment
Your name Your email


Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.


We Are Interested in Your Views (english)
08 Oct 2003
As you know, at the STARK Corporation, our job is to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. We do that in many ways.

Sometimes, we develop new knowledge to inform decisionmakers without suggesting any specific course of action. Often, we go further by spelling out the range of available options and by analyzing their relative advantages and disadvantages. On many other occasions, we find the analysis so compelling that we advance specific policy recommendations.

Today, STARK's work is exceptionally diverse. We now assist all branches of the U.S. military community, and we apply our expertise to social and international issues as well.

Your organization has been identified as a source that may be able to provide dynamic suggestions as we navigate through these troubled times.

This most recent open invitation is of particular interest to us and we would like to learn more about it, as well as the views of all people in leadership roles. This is an unprecedented opportunity for you and your group to help shape the domestic security policies of the future.

Under current federal law we are required to notify all organizations before we assign analysts to attend a specific event, the purpose of this correspondance is to comply in full with that directive.

Additionally, in order for us to achieve a more full understanding of your platform, we would welcome the opportunity to personally interview all the members of your directorate.

If this exercise in academic study is also of interest to you as well, please contact me to shore up meeting dates and times.

Very truly yours,

Jack Steele
Director of Security Policy Analysis
STARK Corporation
9800 Savage Road
Ft. Meade, MD 20755-6248
Advice concerning the above post. (english)
08 Oct 2003
Anti-authoritarians often give away free the rope that will hang them by refusing to use available tools to prevent infiltration. Taking the proper steps may compromise, to a degree, our anti-authoritarian principles, but is it not possible that we suffer even more by refusing to use the existing system as a tool against itself? In a revolutionary struggle, would you refuse to use a weapon stolen from your enemy simply because it was not union made? Those that have observed real revolutions know that even the enemies weapons are useful in the hands of comrades. Now, to the point.

There will be attempts to infiltrate our meetings. The open call for a meeting was an open call to all "ANTI-AUTHORITARIANS" and, therefore, not really an open call. The call implies that AUTHORITARIANS are not welcome. Why not formalize this with a legal document that must be signed when attending? Specifically, I propose the following:

Ask a member of the NLG to create a document stating that the signatory swares to being an anti-authoritarian and, furthermore, is swares not to be a member of law enforcement, an agent of law enforcement, a representative of a corporation or any entity that provides advice or intelligence to law enforcement, military organizations, or intelligence organizations. The contract should include a strong penalty for violation. Let's say, $1,000,000.00 to be donated to Food Not Bombs, the National Lawyers Guild, the Anarchist Black Cross, or some other similar group.

This may disuade some law enforcement/spy types from going to the meeting. Should they go anyway and we later discover their mission, it may be of financial benefit to an anarchist organization.

Signed, an anarchist not too snobby to take practical steps to impede infiltration.
That doesnt sound like wise suggestion (english)
11 Oct 2003
Although I agree with your suggestion that our meetings may me infiltrated by law enforcement types and authoritarians, but there is really very little we can do about that. Forcing people to sign a contract in order to attend a meeting is authoritarian and exclusionary. If we stand on sound principles and have something valid to present, then the presence of infiltrators is not really a concern.

"The contract should include a strong penalty for violation. Let's say, $1,000,000.00 to be donated to Food Not Bombs, the National Lawyers Guild, the Anarchist Black Cross, or some other similar group"

Such a document would be illegal. It contains a statement of liability which is not connected to a legal entity. One cannot enter into an agreement with one entity, then include a penalty which benefits another one. Liability including a payment can only be legal in a service agreement where money is exchanged. Arbitration of such contracts could result in penalties being levied against the contractor as well.

I submit that you are either a potential infiltrator yourself, or are perhaps too paranoid. Perhaps you should attend our meetings just to see what its like, and remember: NO DRUGS