Chicago censorship II - cops shut down art gallery
Tommy the Terrorist
"I don't care enough about the cause to lose my home"
were the words of the artist, as he explained why the Benefit for the
Hemp Fest had been cancelled, and his gallery closed, in compliance with
the orders of the police.
His studio, at 1947 W. North, had initially planned to host some of the
vendors and bands who had been prohibited from selling or playing
amplified music in Grant Park, by a park district bureaucracy which
prefers to keep the Petrillo Band shell, as usual, silent, than to allow
it to be used for free, professional music when a dissident cause might
be promoted by it.
He was greeted this morning by two Chicago policemen, who entered his
place of business (which serves as a combination of home, painting
studio, and gallery for sale). They informed him that his business "did
not have sufficient bathroom facilities" and "lacked a license for a
gathering of this magnitude".
"There were cops everywhere", one witness said; and apparently the entire
Wicker Park neighborhood had been under increased patrol and surveillance
all the previous night as well.
The inflow of visitors did not exactly appear to be a disaster. As I
stood there prying answers from the nervous artist, a grand total of two
people showed up. Yet the business - Hemp Fest benefit and art alike -
was closed for the day, and I could see that he was becoming worried even
for having a few of us stopped to ask questions.
The artist appeared agitated and ready to blame the Hemp Fest people as
much as the police: "It was pumped up totally... I didn't know there'd
be people running around the Federal Building with megaphones... I did
this as a favor ... In Chicago the only rights you have are what you pay
a lawyer for ... I would rather go to jail for a smurf backsiding Nancy
than for a drug I don't even consume"
* * * * *
Meanwhile, in Grant Park, the non-permitted Hemp Fest struggled through
its second day. With the planned 19 bands and the distinguished set of
planned speakers prohibited from using the Petrillo Band shell, or in
fact playing *any* amplified music (unconstitutionally even according to
Federal court precedent, but 'the only rights you have...') and all
'vending' prohibited, the event was hard pressed to find entertainment.
Even yesterday's standby recreation, of small groups passing around an
occasional joint, was quite sabotaged by something like 50 cops roving in
clumps through the festivities. Not that yesterday's standby had been
particularly safe - one cop claimed 39 arrests had been made; and today I
saw at least four people in handcuffs myself, and who knows how many I
missed?
Just to make things more interesting, I've been told [2-3 persons
indirect] that one protestor had policemen twist his nipples and pull
some of his hair out, the explanation being given that there were some
kids seeing the hemp fest and "not understanding that pot is illegal".
Nonetheless, into the breach came the musicians - with drums and guitars
and tambourines and funny instruments that I don't know what they were,
they kept a rhythm going that seemed to unify the crowd and rally its
spirits. Some of them were actually quite good!
Some of us attempted to regale the cops with various facts concerning the
idiocy of making a plant illegal - or of the villainy of censorship - but
except for two of them on bicycles (high rank or what I don't know) who
started a brief set of arguments before peddling away, all the others
remained unresponsive. I saw one start to say something in response to
me, when a companion told him "not to start conversations with brain-dead
maggots".
I don't think the cops have free speech, either.
In short, unlike yesterday's impressive turnout and serious agenda, this
gathering frayed and crumbled (the rain didn't help), until there were no
more protestors than cops.
At that point, we learned something interesting. We were officially in
"Butler Field", which 'closes' (i.e. 'free assembly' has now expired) at
8 p.m., instead of 11 p.m. for Grant Park. This led to my Kafkaesque
journey around Grant Park, looking for Grant Park "Hey, ask a
policeman..." I thought. Oddly, none of them could give me directions to
Grant Park from "Butler Field".
The gathering duly evacuated to a wooded region near Buckingham Fountain,
where the last drummers and guitarists played better than ever,
surrounded by a small circle of adoring fans (and narks...) and a large
circle of Park Service security, Park Service security golf carts, and
two Park Service vans parked on the grass with "redneck" style
forward-illumination system throwing a bright light on everything.
* * * * *
The question we need to ask is, "How is Chicago different from Hong
Kong?" In Hong Kong, people are fighting for the right to demonstrate
without a police permit; the safety from imprisonment of political
activists for bogus and censorship offenses; the freedom from new and
official forms of censorship that would utterly destroy any freedom of
speech. Aren't these the same issues that we're fighting, with the Hemp
Fest, with the bogus trial of the "Chicago 5", with the CDA and 'local
obscenity' and all the rest?
If there is ANY difference between Klinton's Amerika and 'Red' China, it
can only be in some residual idealism or professionalism or activism,
shown by the spontaneous action of the people - not just as 'protestors',
but as pro bono lawyers, as HONEST judges, as RESPONSIBLE politicians, as
PROFESSIONAL policemen. It is a small thing, yet it makes an important
measure of difference - it is like a thing alive, unpredictable and
fragile. We could yet nurture this thing, into a spirit that would
restore our rights and overthrow the police state; or we could watch it
die, and with it, all potential for salvation.
What do you want to do?
* * * * *
Erratum: Yesterday I posted [chi.general only] that a vendor had been
arrested for selling hemp shirts while the police were taking away
marijuana from people without arresting them. While I spoke to one
person who claimed his marijuana had in fact been taken away from police
who didn't arrest him, I've been informed that the hemp shirt seller was
"ticketed" rather than arrested. Additionally, as I said, there were
quite enough marijuana arrests that day, even if some people were
incomprehensibly spared.
Also, come to think of it, in China it's legal to grow industrial hemp.
John B. Hines
sa...@xochi.tezcat.com (sarlo) wrote:
>Paul Montgomery <*pa...@logonchi.com> wrote:
>: Tommy the Terrorist <may...@super.zippo.com> wrote:
>: [huge merciful snip for those of us in the Center]
>: >What do you want to do?
>: I want to killfile you.
>: And I will.
>: Havva nice life...
>: Paul
>
>This is something I don't get.
>
>Before Paul, and infact, the rest of the silly assed self rightious
>nit-pickers on the channel "killfile" you, they have this bizzare urge to
>tell you that you're going in there. Much like a villian explaining his
>sinister plot before the destruction/overthrow of the world.
>
>As if it's some sort of punishment.
Its the ol' kids game, "I'm never, never ever, never ever going to speak
to you again".
Like the threat of legal intimidation that another is known for, its a
hollow threat, in that Paul won't stay away. Nobody that threatens to
walk away actually does so.
Pauly isn't secure enough to actually killfile someone, they might be
saying something about him behind his back.
>Paul seems to be batting 0's across the board. He tries to slap people,
>and he gets ragged on. Then he calls everyone a bunch of twits, that he
>feels sorry for them and that they're all horrible, stupid people.
>
>He complains about me not contributing anything to the group. But aside
>from his "You're going into my killfile" posts, as well as "You are scum
>and stupid", one wonders why he even comes here at all.
Its not because he has anything to say.
>Man. Paul must be the coolest guy on the face of the earth. With his
>flowery shirts, his BBS that's so cool you see *everyone* posting from
>it...he's like the Cool blonde guy in the movies, with the fast red car,
>the cool sunglasses getting all the babes in his flowery shirts and the
>cool BBS he runs.
He's a Karl wannabe.
Mike
In article <3378d7a...@news.enteract.com>,
jhi...@enteract.com (John B. Hines) wrote:
>sa...@xochi.tezcat.com (sarlo) wrote:
>
>>Paul Montgomery <*pa...@logonchi.com> wrote:
>>: Tommy the Terrorist <may...@super.zippo.com> wrote:
>>: [huge merciful snip for those of us in the Center]
>>: >What do you want to do?
>>: I want to killfile you.
>>: And I will.
>>: Havva nice life...
>>: Paul
>>
>>This is something I don't get.
>>
>>Before Paul, and infact, the rest of the silly assed self rightious
>>nit-pickers on the channel "killfile" you, they have this bizzare urge to
>>tell you that you're going in there. Much like a villian explaining his
>>sinister plot before the destruction/overthrow of the world.
>>
>>As if it's some sort of punishment.
Yeah.. the true twits are those that say things like that.
I doubt if he'll killfile anyone, otherwise where would he find anything
to post on. Certainly nothing to post on at his oh so shitty BBS.
I seem to remember a thread here in the past by the title of "Troubled
Paul Montgomery"
>Its the ol' kids game, "I'm never, never ever, never ever going to speak
>to you again".
Yeah, Pretty childish. Killfiles are the last resort of a true coward.
>Like the threat of legal intimidation that another is known for, its a
>hollow threat, in that Paul won't stay away. Nobody that threatens to
>walk away actually does so.
True they can't post anything that's even slightly humorous so they make
up for their lack of humor with their uptightness.
>Pauly isn't secure enough to actually killfile someone, they might be
>saying something about him behind his back.
Hehehehe... Not against troubled pauly, I never heard of such a thing.
>>Paul seems to be batting 0's across the board. He tries to slap people,
>>and he gets ragged on. Then he calls everyone a bunch of twits, that he
>>feels sorry for them and that they're all horrible, stupid people.
>>
>>He complains about me not contributing anything to the group. But aside
>>from his "You're going into my killfile" posts, as well as "You are scum
>>and stupid", one wonders why he even comes here at all.
>
>Its not because he has anything to say.
>
>>Man. Paul must be the coolest guy on the face of the earth. With his
>>flowery shirts, his BBS that's so cool you see *everyone* posting from it...
All those posts from logonchi.com sure are filling the news servers.
>>he's like the Cool blonde guy in the movies, with the fast red car,
>>the cool sunglasses getting all the babes in his flowery shirts and the
>>cool BBS he runs.
>
>He's a Karl wannabe.
Sure is... only thing is that karl is a much better computer geek.
Mike
mich...@anetx-chi.com no x to reply
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Remember that there is always one more son of a bitch than you
counted on." - Tom Snyder
Tommy the Terrorist
In article <3383c8a8....@gail.ripco.com> Paul Montgomery,
>And I will.
>Havva nice life...
Well, now I know what it takes to get "killfiled" around here: just post
some actual "news" from an imperfect but real conversation with a primary
source...
The nice thing about having HIM killfile ME, is that not only don't I
have to read his replies, I don't have to read anyone else's replies to
his replies. Which is a particularly good thing since a typical post of
his ('Villa Park News Sig' thread) reads
>[quoted text]
Dipshit.
[signature promoting his crappy bbs]
Tommy the Terrorist
In article <5laarb$5...@huitzilo.tezcat.com> Mark Anderson,
>>were the words of the artist, as he explained why the Benefit for the
>>Hemp Fest had been cancelled, and his gallery closed, in compliance with
>>the orders of the police.
>And he's right. A gathering of this size should not be held in someone's
>small studio.
And I suppose that by the same token, every retailer offering some
special event in conjunction with Jazz Fest or Blues Fest should be shut
down?
The point is that this artist was NOT holding Hemp Fest. He was holding
a benefit FOR Hemp Fest, located half-way across the city from it. He
probably would have had a crowd of people - it would have been good for
business of all sorts - but that's what MOST retailers, when political
censorship is not involved, would call a "good day"!
The 'appropriate' action for the police, if they were enforcing the rules
FAIRLY, would have been to keep an eye on the shop, and when too many
people appeared to be congested around and inside, go in and start
ranting on about how the fire code only allows <X> people and the rest of
them have to be cleared out.
That is NOT the same thing as CLOSING a business, because it MIGHT appeal
to some people at a political festivity, and "too many" MIGHT show up!
I mean, do you always support having businesses shut down for offenses
they MIGHT commit?
>This Windy City Weedfest has been deteriorating every year ever since
>it left Cricket park. Whoever organized this is smoking way too much
>pot and spending way too little time in the courtroom demanding these
>permits. Cricket park was a perfect place for this event; close to
>the lake and away from the general public. Unfortunately, the person
>who ran those fests ended up doing all the work while most of the
>other Hempsters got high and chilled and did their own thing.
This is blatant revisionism and you damn well know it. The "problem"
that Weed Fest had was that it got 'too big', and the powers that be
started ranting on last year about how all these people (might) violate
their laws and so they have to be shut up. That's WHY the city took such
extreme measures to ensure that things would be screwed up this year.
After all, how would Chicago "look" if the city permitted Hemp Fest, and
it turned out to be bigger than Jazz Fest? (I mean, it only makes sense
- I bet that there are more people who use marijuana alone, let alone all
hemp products combined, than there are people who like jazz) And yet
what they fail to realize is that there was a time when jazz music was
regarded by Anslinger, the head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, as
being some kind of degenerate negro music that couldn't be allowed.
Anslinger had a personal passion of keeping files on jazz musicians and
plotted for years to round up 10,000 all at once and end jazz as a form
of music, and would have if he'd gotten his way. At the same time, of
course, Anslinger and others promoted marijuana as a degenerate negro
drug that promoted disrespect for whites, miscegenation, and made angry
blacks so unstoppable it took a .44 caliber bullet to stop them.
Of course, we know better: WE know that "gangsta rap" is the real
degenerate nigger music, and crack cocaine is the degenerate nigger drug
that makes them so wild the police have no alternative but to shoot
them......
>The blame for the shoddy Hempfest protest lies with the organizers not
>the city. These arrangements should have been worked out well
>ahead of time. A well organized festival would have had all permits
>in place before booking bands and would have had a lawyer on hand to
>thwart any legal shenanigans that the city would attempt at the
>last minute. I'm sure Daley and company had a good laugh over this.
There was an attempt to get permits, and while EVERY story I read has a
different version of what happened, at at least one time it appeared
things were happening properly. There WERE lawyers on hand, the usual
lawyers that it seems like no act of public dissent would ever go
unpunished without, it's just that they're sort of harried, between
defending the organizers of the Festival of Life from six bogus felonies
while trying to fight for your right to sell politically relevant
materials despite "vending bans" (which HAS been upheld in places; but
only with repeated fighting) while also trying to track police spying and
camera-smashing and pepper-gassing in Wicker Park, and trying to stop the
police from getting an even freer hand for "Red Squad" disruption
tactics. I mean, they're doing a lot, but the bad guys can do however
much they want and get away with it and charge YOU for the privilege of
supporting them as a matter of tax edict.
sarlo
Clifton T. Sharp, Jr. <cli...@webspun.com> wrote:
: sarlo wrote:
: > Thank you, god of cable, for your bountiful harvest of 80's semi-stag
: > movies.
: > And thank YOU Paul. May a thousand more enter your kill files.
: Stag movies?
Old old old term form Porno movies. It usually was with some middle aged
man nude except for black (they coulda been red but its all in black and
white) with them prancing around and then eventually hopping on top of
some housewife augmenting her income while the husband is away at work.
Look 'em up. They're jerky and twitchy, but they have better acting and
more of a story line than todays.
--
sa...@tezcat.com - Sarlykins. | I was lying in bed, looking up at the
EXXON - Put a tiger in your | stars when I suddenly thought to myself,
tank! And while you're at it, | "Where the fuck did my roof go?"
toss in a few dead otters too. |
-EXXON Ad, 1989 | Alternatives: sa...@chinet.com
http://www.tezcat.com/~sarlo sa...@pyrotechnics.com
\||// sa...@2600.com
Don'tcha love bongo-.sigs? oO sa...@blight.com
()^() Pttht. sa...@ripco.com
U /~~~~~~ ro...@mcs.net
Mark Anderson
In article Tommy the Terrorist <may...@super.zippo.com> wrote:
>>And he's right. A gathering of this size should not be held in someone's
>>small studio.
>
>And I suppose that by the same token, every retailer offering some
>special event in conjunction with Jazz Fest or Blues Fest should be shut
>down?
The gist of the promo as posted here indicated that these bands
would be playing at North and Damen from 1pm - 11pm.
>The 'appropriate' action for the police, if they were enforcing the rules
>FAIRLY, would have been to keep an eye on the shop, and when too many
>people appeared to be congested around and inside, go in and start
>ranting on about how the fire code only allows <X> people and the rest of
>them have to be cleared out.
Perhaps that would be one way to handle it. They would, however, have
to clear the scene which could get ugly depending on how many agent
provocateurs were milling about. The way this so called "benefit"
was worded probably prompted them to take action ahead of time. I
can't blame the police for this one.
>>Unfortunately, the person
>>who ran those fests ended up doing all the work while most of the
>>other Hempsters got high and chilled and did their own thing.
>
>This is blatant revisionism and you damn well know it.
Well, I learned it from the person who organized that event and did
most of the work and that is how he portrayed it to me at the time.
He sometimes posts here so maybe he can embellish a bit on what
happened during the last Windy City Weedfest at Cricket park.
>The "problem"
>that Weed Fest had was that it got 'too big', and the powers that be
>started ranting on last year about how all these people (might) violate
>their laws and so they have to be shut up.
Cricket Park (Montrose and the lake) was plenty big for that crowd with
room to grow. There were parking problems (like a lot of people double
and triple parking) but they could've been solved by enforcing existing
parking regulations using tow trucks and such. If people can't figure
out how to find legal parking while visiting the lake then they shouldn't
show up. There are lots of spots to choose from if you're willing
to walk a bit.
>That's WHY the city took such
>extreme measures to ensure that things would be screwed up this year.
I don't know what measures those were. So far the facts indicate
the organizers screwed up by not securing the right permits. And
why did they choose Grant Park? The permits for that park are
probably the hardest to come by.
>After all, how would Chicago "look" if the city permitted Hemp Fest, and
>it turned out to be bigger than Jazz Fest?
It would have been forgotten in a week.
>There was an attempt to get permits, and while EVERY story I read has a
>different version of what happened, at at least one time it appeared
>things were happening properly.
Did they or did they not have the permits in hand? And if they did,
how were they taken away?
>police from getting an even freer hand for "Red Squad" disruption
>tactics. I mean, they're doing a lot, but the bad guys can do however
>much they want and get away with it and charge YOU for the privilege of
>supporting them as a matter of tax edict.
Perhaps it would be beneficial to name names and make a list of the
CPD management responsible for this so called "Red Squad." This
sounds like some kind of special unit that probably reports to
Rodriegez himself. Gotta get some dirt on these people and if they're
evil, dirt won't be hard to find.
Clifton T. Sharp, Jr.
sarlo wrote:
> Clifton T. Sharp, Jr. <cli...@webspun.com> wrote:
> : sarlo wrote:
> : > Thank you, god of cable, for your bountiful harvest of 80's semi-stag
> : > movies.
> : > And thank YOU Paul. May a thousand more enter your kill files.
> : Stag movies?
>
> Old old old term form Porno movies.
No no no no no no no! I meant "a thousand more people, or a thousand more
stag movies?"
I know what stag movies are. They're those awfully photographed, terribly
duplicated movies watched by a group of guys who are silent except when
commenting on the body parts of the men in the movies.
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Cliff Sharp | If tin whistles are made of tin, what do they make |
| WA9PDM | foghorns out of? --Lonnie Donegan |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Max Monningh
> Mark Anderson m...@xochi.tezcat.com writes:
[note that i've possibly got the attributions screwed-up; sorry.]
>>>The 'appropriate' action for the police, if they were enforcing the rules
>>>FAIRLY, would have been to keep an eye on the shop [...]
>>Perhaps that would be one way to handle it. They would, however, have
>>to clear the scene which could get ugly depending on how many agent
>>provocateurs were milling about.
Bottom line is that the guy holding the benefit caved in to threats. The cops
have been doing this for some time; people either have the huevos to proceed
or they don't. The artist foolishly, didn't realize the position
in which he was placing himself, the organizers didn't tell him, and he didn't
have the huevos required to persevere.
The lesson: intimidation works. Whether the CPD was justified in intimidating
the artist cannot be ascertained without posting the entire text of the flyer;
so until someone posts it, you two are arguing about angels and pinheads.
I will say that if the flyer implied alcohol or dope smoking would occur at the
benefit (a STUPID FOOLISH MORONIC thing to put in writing), the police didn't
have a lot of choice, and the organizers shot _themselves_ in the foot.
More to the point; the organizers have seen this sort of thing before. The fact
that they put someone unable to withstand the CPD's intimidation speaks poorly
of their mentation; they should have seen it coming. That they didn't plan
around this contingency is _their_ fault.
>>>>Unfortunately, the person
>>>>who ran those fests ended up doing all the work while most of the
>>>>other Hempsters got high and chilled and did their own thing.
>
>>>This is blatant revisionism and you damn well know it.
>
>>Well, I learned it from the person who organized that event and did
>>most of the work and that is how he portrayed it to me at the time.
>>He sometimes posts here so maybe he can embellish a bit on what
>>happened during the last Windy City Weedfest at Cricket park.
>
>There's a lot of interpersonal sniping in any so-called 'radical'
>political setting - it's what happens when there are enough agent
>provocateurs around. It's no good trying to guess who is right about who
>provocateurs around. It's no good trying to guess who is right about who
>screwed up what, when you don't know who's telling the truth.
Being the person to whom mark refers, perhaps i can shed some light on the
subject.
I quit because i got disgusted with the hippies. I found myself alone at
Cricket Hill, at 12:57 sunday night after the fest (Weedfest'95), still trying
to clean up the mess at Cricket Hill so we (IMI) could get back our clean up
deposit. I know the time because that's when i dove into my van and sped away
to escape the knife wielding gang bangers who accosted me. We lost the thousand
dollar clean up deposit.
I quit because my vending coordinator screwed up our festival: We had decided
to charge a fee to vendors for the privelege of making money at our event.
Because of our status and lack of merchandise, IMI had never needed a vending
permit; we didn't deal with them. So we told -- _I_ told -- our vending
coordinator to 'splain the following to vendors when they called up "We'd like
you to cough-up $50/day to IMI for the privilege of vending at Windy City Weed
Fest. It's not a vending permit -- if you want one of those, you need to
contact the city -- it's just the right thing to do for the people who will
bring 50,000 hippies past your table".
Unfortunately for everyone, the vending coordinator misrepresented the worth of
that $50/day, and the vendors sent us the money thinking they had Chicago
vendor passes. If you were there, you know the cops shut down the vendors
saturday; what you didn't see was the endless stream of $50 i was giving back
to the vendors Sunday morning after i realized what happened. Bottom line: the
vendors made lots of money Saturday and IMI didn't make squat.
I had several hundred dollars of printed material for rally goers to sign, that
we (IMI) were going to mail to local, state and national elected officials. I
had lists, names, envelopes, labels, etc. During the chaotic opening, some
morons decided to use the boxes of printed matter for beer disposal. All of it
ruined, two or three hundred bucks literally pissed away.
I had thirty staff shirts made up, and a body for each one. Yet when the
T-shirts were delivered, the "staffers" wouldn't get off their asses to unload
the car until they were told the staff shirts were here. Then they moved,
believe me! The staffers got so stoned that they couldn't function. Some of
them wore their shirts while working their own booths, but didn't have time to
help run the rally.
No one wanted to sell IMI's t-shirts nor our matchbooks -- my girlfriend, who
has nothing to do with IMI, saw what a disaster was unfolding and personally
sold $2.5K worth of matchbooks, $0.25 at a time. A couple of other friends
who were also NOT IMI members, manned the T-shirt table while IMI'ers, some
clad in staff shirts, wandered by stoned, unwilling to help run their rally.
So why did i quit? I quit because i got fed-up with the non compis mentis
hippie bullshit i got mired in.
There is no need for agents provac' when you have the kind of people that
I'm talking about here. These people are like something straight out of
a Partnership for a Drug Free America ad -- their (and the marijuana
movement's) own worst enemies.
So i bailed in the middle of my "five year plan". Weedfest _was_ too big
for Cricket Hill -- something i planned for, something i made happen.
Unfortunately, i discovered that i didn't have the cadre to successfully pull
off an event of that size. Mea Culpa. I'd only attracted quasi-amotivational
hippies. Mea Maxima Culpa, mea mega stupida.
Last year, IMI was given the choice of parking lots at Soldier Field or Navy
Pier. And, it was given the chance to charge admission (part of my plan)
[Asking hippies for donations brought IMI an average of $0.05 (a nickel)
per head at free rallys; thus the events never made any money]. I will leave it
as an excercise for readers to understand what tens of thousands of dollars
might potentially do for IMI's ability to effect the public debate...
> What I
>*DO* know is that the city denied the Hemp Fest the right to have
>entertainment and speakers you could hear, and that they did so on
>pretenses so flimsy that even the MASS MEDIA admits it was based
>primarily on political considerations.
Well, DUH!
By extension, the pretense was soooo flimsy, the park district
EXPECTED to lose in court; they _HAD_ to put a pro forma objection so they
could say to all the conservative antidrug types that they tried to stop the
fest. Believe me, the Park District was as surprised as anyone when their
flimsy tissue paper of objections stopped Hemp Fest dead in the water.
Mr. McDonald, acting as his own attorney, could have nuked the Park District's
objections all by himself!
>Why should I go around looking for X or Y who didn't pass out enough
>flyers or something, when I know full well that the reason why this Hemp
>Fest was screwed up was because of permits and the underlying censorship
>they imply?
I fully fault the organizers for screwing things up. I faced these same
problems and i never got mousetrapped by such a flimsy pathetic set of
objections.
The problem was that the organizers didn't do their homework. They did NOT
avail themselves to the ACLU early enough. They, the Hempfest organizers, are
the ones who screwed up. IMI had this problem every year, and every year we
got the courts to slap the park district into line.
The judge was perfectly within his rights to refuse to enjoin the Park
District. Rob McDonald knew, or should have known, better.
>No, I'm not talking about the size of Cricket Hill. I'm talking about
>the fact that enough people came that the media publicized it, some
>preacher from the Christian Denomination of Pharisees came by to demand
>arrests, columnists and broadcasters attacked the city for letting it
>happen, etc.
>Remember, you have the right to say anything you want as long as nobody
>listens.
That would be Father Fleger. The Hippies deserve all the blame on this one;
organizers couldn't legally keep him out; if the cameras got ugly film, it's
because the rally goers were too stoned to realize what they would look like
when channel two came through as Fleger's Sword.
Last year was the first year IMI had the chance to keep underage kids out --
remember that last year was the first time there was a fence -- but the hippies
thought it would be "wrong" and "unfair" to keep kids (say ... anyone too young
to vote or be drafted) out. What makes it worse is that they KNEW Fleger was
going to be there, but weren't smart enough to put 2 and 2 together and realize
there would be adverse media attention. I guess the editorials by Dennis Byrne
were too subtle.
I counseled the hippies to keep out anyone under 18, btw. Obviously i was
ignored. And obviously, as usual, i was right about the consequences of
failing to do what i recommened.
>>>There was an attempt to get permits, and while EVERY story I read has a
>>>different version of what happened, at at least one time it appeared
>>>things were happening properly.
They didn't get the ACLU onboard when they should have. They had an idiot as
a spokesperson (Rob McDonald.
>Look, it's not my fault that every account I hear disagrees. So far the
>Sun-Times has said that a) the protestors would hurt the grass, b) the Ad
>Hoc Coalition for Hemp Legalization wasn't a "recognized organization"
>(???), c) the person getting the permits was accused of unspecified
>"abuses" by the crowd at last year's Festival of Life.
Pretty accurate. The unspecified "abuses" were failing to stop people from
drinking booze at his open rally. As i said earlier, the objections were
like tissue paper against a tornado.
> What the judge
>said was that there wouldn't be enough time for the city to appeal if he
>allowed the Hemp Fest to occur.
Because einstein didn't come to the judge until two or three days before the
event. IMI always had the ACLU onboard by _March_, and we never had to worry
about timeliness, because the ACLU are pro's.
>Moreover, I should add that while the legal action to get the Hemp Fest
>through did start fairly late, there was a reason: you have a mere
>handful of lawyers in this city who are trying to legitimize every free
>speech activity there is [...]
Was this the entire ACLU office? No. Part of it? I don't think
so. No, the above complaint is bullshit. Pure and utter bullshit, and as an
excuse it's so lame that i could not believe i heard it when the story broke.
My spies in the media said the ACLU was wondering when they'd hear from these
guys, and that was about a week before the rally.
Based on what i heard out of Rob McDonald's mouth on the _Roe & Gerry Show_ on
WLS (AM 890) Friday before the non-event, i'm not at all surprised things
turned out as they did. McDonald was seven minutes late calling the station,
made a grevious factual error which he blamed on his source (three drunk cops
where he tends bar!!) and called Larry Hoover a victim of the drug war!
Additionally, he showed speech pathologies consistant with having smoked dope
in the 4 or 5 hours prior to the show (abruptly chopped off and restarted
sentences; rapid, large changes in topic). .
Nope, the City did what the City always does; it's the hippies who screwed up
by failing to take necessary and prudent actions. Rob McDonald and his fellow
hippies and yippies are the ones who botched Hemp Fest.
Hope this helps,
Max Monningh
Pres. IMI 93-95
Communications Dir. IMI 92-93.
mmon...@igc.apc.org
Mark Anderson
In article Tommy the Terrorist <may...@super.zippo.com> wrote:
>Jeez, the cops ought to hire somebody like you! You can tell somebody's
>stoned just from listening to him? It seems as likely that he overslept
>or something, explaining all problems as easily.
Roe and Garry's show is in the afternoon. I caught the end of that
interview and heard him say the Hoover line which totally screwed
up his credibility.
>Larry Hoover *is* a victim of the drug war, just as everyone caught up in
>the maelstrom of gangster life and corruption is a victim of the drug
>war.
Larry Hoover is a cold blooded murderer plain and simple. Perhaps
the drug war exasperated his murdering ways but to claim he's a
drug war victim insults the ~100,000 innocent people serving time in America's
prison system who *are* victims of the drug war. (Note: the 100,000
figure is an estimate that was hashed out during some discussions in
t.p.d awhile ago. The actual figure could be 73,000. There are well
over 1 million people incarcerated in federal and state prisons. Roughly
26% of them are for drug "crimes" and it was estimated that roughly
one third of those drug "crimes" were for simple usage.)
>Larry Hoover is by no
>means the most sympathetic case, but we need to remember where we stand
>on this one.
Larry Hoover is as much a victim of the drug war as Al Capone was a
victim of Alcohol Prohibition. This one is easy. Stand against
murdering thugs.
Tommy the Terrorist
In article <APC&1'0'8532d0ee'c...@igc.apc.org> Max Monningh,
mmon...@igc.apc.org writes:
>Putting on something like Weed(hemp)Fest is very much a game.
>You're probably thinking of Chutes and Ladders; try thinking
>Chess and Poker: You either get your pieces properly positioned
>before you make your move and know your game or you'll find
>yourself in the Fool's Mate. Poker lesson: don't try to bluff
>City Hall with a pair of threes.
I'm aware of Lenin's instructions to the revolutionaries to play chess.
But...
The problem with sitting down to this kind of game is that the government
has mandated absolute knowledge (for it) of every piece on the board -
they're literally designing public transit turnstyles and PARKING METERS
to require mandatory identification and tracking. Meanwhile, the
"freedom of information act" is a joke, scanning is virtually illegal,
encryption and anonymity going the same way...
You want us to play chess with Deep Blue - blindfolded.
I say this is a hopeless scenario, that the game is rigged, and that we
need to pay attention first and foremost to securing our most basic
rights of free communication, before we even start thinking about such
common sense as being able to grow plants without being hauled off to
prison for years.
>>in my perspective the legalization of marijuana is a secondary issue
>In the context of the failed hemp fest, i have to say that mj-law
>reform is pretty central -- it's the raison d'etre -- promoting
>changes the law is the reason for the fest. period.
I realize that's the difference between us. I can't even hold you to
blame for pursuing the cause you're promoting - but my emphasis is
different, and so we're doomed to have different priorities. I can only
be a "fellow traveler" as far as you're concerned.
To me, the PRIMARY PURPOSE of Weed Fest, or any other political activity,
is to expose the stupidity, corruption, and duplicity of the institution
of government; the censorship and indoctrination of public opinion; the
extraordinary efforts to which the bureaucrats will go to suppress common
sense.
>> While I don't really know, I *suspect* that one reason why the organizers
>> appear so lacking in "mentation" to you, is that they also hold something
>> of this frame of mind. To them, perhaps it is MORE IMPORTANT that people
>> claim their right to free assembly against the edict of the state ...
>Then mebbe they oughta have the Windy City Free Speech Fest.
The reason why "hemp legalization" is still an important conjunctive
goal, is that the people are in prison for possession of cannabis, the
politics is distorted concerning the issue of legalization; people need
to have BOTH the cause (censorship) AND the effect (mass imprisonment
over cannabis) brought into association with one another.
>WEEDFEST was top-down as much as possible. Weedfest is generally considered to
>be a success; Weedfest always had permits.
>Hemp fest was not top-down, it was hippy-dippy-circle-consensus; the results
>speak for themselves.
I feel that Hemp Fest - IN CERTAIN WAYS - had a greater success. I know
that seems odd to you, but the point is that it brought the protestors
into direct confrontation with the police establishment (and via the
picket of the prison). It does no good to slink off into a corner and
smoke pot. It's a shame about the vendors, but now a lot more people
understand how the city is screwing them over. Hopefully the hippy-dippy
consensus will be more competent for this instruction next time.
>Remember our discussion on Wendy Allen Ayres after Demcon? I
>live simply: never ascribe to malice blah blah blah. No, i don't
>believe in AP's, i believe in stoned morons when it comes to
>fingering the agents of chaos. WRT the marijuana movement,
>calling someone an agent provocateur is like calling someone a
>commie in the '50's or a witch during the dark ages. AP's
>certainly exist, but believe me, the mj movement can screw itself
>perfectly well without their help.
Look, the incident you described, of someone deliberately urinating on
literature - consider the odds. I've never seen anyone urinating in
public, *among* the people gathered, at the Hemp Fest. I've never
smelled any urine; I've never stepped in any urine. A ridiculous
overestimate would be that 50 people did it among 5000. The odds,
therefore, that you would be near the incident are less than 1 in 100;
the odds that whoever did it could conceivably be so stoned or randomly
malicious to deliberately go ON the pamphlets would be 1 in 10 or less.
Less than 1/1000 odds. By contrast, the odds of an agent provocateur
amid the crowd committing some hostile act are easily 1 in 10 - I mean,
that's what agents provocateur are FOR. And there would have been ONE
assigned to Weed Fest at some point in the past 10 years. (actually, I
think I'm lowballing with the 1 in 10 - for this sort of calculation I
usually use the traditional Jim Morrison "Five To One" figure). Combine
these probabilities - 1/1000 for random vs. 1/10 for provocateur, and
there's at least a 99% chance a provocateur did it. It's just the
logical conclusion to draw!
During the Dark Ages there were in fact "witches" - the indigenous
herbalists of Europe, who knew how to treat disease, make all sorts of
hallucinogenic drugs, poison animals and people. During the McCarthy era
there were in fact communists [and it sure is a pity that nobody fingered
Clinton for a Chinese agent before it was too late!]. As for disruption
of political movements, the use of such agents by the U.S. government has
been standard practice for at least 30 years, probably much longer. I
think that anybody who pees on the pamphlets to be handed out at the
rally can legitimately be called an agent provocateur - the only question
is whether he's tightly associated with or paid by some specific
organization.
>> To my way of thinking, banning kids would only have been the final
>> concession - it would be the organizers' way of admitting that yes, this
>> is just a group of people getting together to smoke pot, and it has
>> nothing to do with politics.
>BNZZZZT, thank you for playing.
>Getting rid of the people who have no right to vote would send a
>clear message that we only want VOTERS there, that we were
>serious about Changing The Law.
The problem there is that you're letting in people from other states,
foreigners, anarchists, and the majority of the people, who just don't
see any conceivable use for voting when all candidates support the same
NWO agenda 100%. And a 17-year-old is probably more likely to vote in
the next election than anyone else. "Voters" is a phoney explanation.
>It doesn't take a genius to see that having 15 year old stoners
>showing up in news footage of your event makes you look bad. Do
>you understand that?
The problem is, it's their right to look bad.
>In real simple terms, in the political areana Kids+Drugs=Bad. Got it?
Hell, in the political arena Drugs=Bad.
We're making a different point, and the honest-to-God fact is, a kid is a
lot better off if he smokes marijuana than if he starts drinking alcohol
and gets addicted - and tobacco is obviously worse than that!
>Now, 'splain to me how having a bunch of 15 year old tokers on
>the Channel 2 News at 6 is going to help the law reform process.
>You Can't.
You're accustoming people to the idea of 15 year old tokers, so that when
legalization is suggested the very concept that such a thing might happen
won't burn out their batteries. Better 15-year-old tokers than
15-year-old SMOKERS.
>So banning kids from a Weedfest isn't a "concession", it's
>responsible, it's the right thing, and it's smart politics.
Maybe it's "smart politics" for your media image today (unless they
realize it's just more "proof" the demonstration is just a pot party).
But it's not "smart politics" as far as people like me are concerned. I
mean, you're describing a political event where you're literally supposed
to not just pay money, but you have to SHOW STATE IDENTIFICATION just in
order to get past the gate, so you and your other carefully-identified
friends can hang out on the asphault smoking pot and getting videotaped.
I mean, I don't think I'd go in there at all!
FUCK the New World Order, and when hippies start demanding identification
cards so you can go to a political rally for pot legalization, that's
when it's time to give up on the country for good and always, and start
investing in the Christian Coalition and the Nazi Party in the hopes they
can destroy America as a civilized nation before it can do more damage.
I mean hell, in that light, hemp prohibition is a good thing - prison
uses up resources! And pot "criminals" let real murderers out on the
street!!!
I like to think half those Rainbow Family style hippies don't have any
plastic bearing the Mark of the Beast in their entire set of worldly
possessions.
>Larry Hoover a victim? He's a convicted murderer. Your schtick
>ain't gonna play in Peoria, and if you were clueful about
>changing marijuana law, you might be concerned about that.
Larry Hoover would not have been a murderer if not for Prohibition.
Someday, people have to start looking at those 13-year-olds they want to
execute for murder, and wonder, well gee, where do all these murderers
come from? To be a gangster, a useless person, a killer, a thug, this is
a sort of victimization. It's not as bad as the victimization of the
people killed, but it sure has a lot to do with it.
>Whining about impediments --snivelling about roadblocks-- doesn't
>get anything done. Seizing the initiative and circumventing a
>problem --or grabbing it and stabbing it in the heart-- and
>proceeding to your goal gets things done.
There are more causes than the ones you can get 50,000 people for - and
in order to allow them all a real chance, the roadblocks have to come
down.