Kelo Report, Part 2

[Russell Kanning]

I was wrong!!!

They're organizing another rally for this Sunday at 1pm.? I hope this one will be big!

They're going to use the press conference, radio shows, etc. to get the word out.? Of course, it's not that easy to organize a successful rally.? It requires a lot of groundwork to get people off their butts and into the streets.? Let's see if they can do it.?

I'll be there.? Does anyone want to carpool?

So Doug did not call you up to cancel the rally?
We are not sure that we can make it.

[SethCohn]

You need to have him saying "Well we can talk about that now, it's top secret.  But know the forces for good are working on it behind the scenes."

Except I never said that.

[Kat Kanning]

Paraphrase.

http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=793.msg15336#msg15336

The forces of good are already at work to fix the problem...

http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=1665.msg26913#msg26913

What have we done so far?  The NHLA's done a lot... much of quiet and still in process... and I refuse to list it all, because of that...

Wasn't too hard to select from many examples.

[Russell Kanning]

any news?

[Michael Fisher]

any news?

Here's an LTE from Avner "Gandhi" Gregory of Fort Trumbull:


Protester A Welcome Addition To New London
http://www.theday.com/eng/web/news/re.aspx?re=C0A1AFD6-45A5-44EC-AE03-202EAFCFD18C

Published on 9/28/2005

Letters To The Editor:
New London's reckless government still rains national disgrace upon our city. First it was the brazen theft of homes to placate a massive corporation. Three of our citizens engaged in civil disobedience then, and helped redeem our collective consciousness. Now an outraged American has moved to New London to confront the local despots. But our judicial system has strayed so far from its roots that it treats as criminals those demanding the law be upheld. Let's review the facts:

Lauren Canario moved to Fort Trumbull to support the Fifth Amendment right to own private property. The City Council denied her First Amendment right ?to petition the government for a redress of grievances? by speaking before them. She then sat on the floor.

When imprisoned, she asserted her Fifth Amendment right not to ?be compelled . . . to be a witness against h[er]self.? For such temerity, the judge doubled Ms. Carnario's bail, violating the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against ?excessive bail.?

Judge Hillary Strackbein should be removed from the bench. A judge who lashes out in rage at a citizen for exercising her rights is a grave threat to our liberties. It is the duty of every person to oppose by every lawful means injustices directed against themselves and their neighbors by our government.

Lauren Canario was slapped with a minimum of 19 days in prison. She is an inspiration to us all. I welcome her to our city and am proud to call her a New Londoner.

Avner Gregory
New London


GO LAUREN!!! 

Yeah, like president said earlier, instead of letting her go because she's guilty, they should just stop prosecuting her.

Nolle prosequi - A formal motion by the prosecuting officer in a criminal action, which states that he "will no further prosecute" the case. The court would grant the motion in order to dispose of the case.

They've violated every right in the book.  They should let her go NOW!

[FTL_Ian]

Wow.. great letter.   

[Michael Fisher]

So Doug did not call you up to cancel the rally?
We are not sure that we can make it.

He did, but then he e-mailed me after and said they were "definitely" going ahead with it. ?

I'm happy to see their efforts to connect Lauren's imprisonment to the cause rather than distancing themselves from her. ?

[Kat Kanning]

What is it with women named Hillary?    

[Michael Fisher]

Judge Hillary Strackbein should be removed from the bench. A judge who lashes out in rage at a citizen for exercising her rights is a grave threat to our liberties. It is the duty of every person to oppose by every lawful means injustices directed against themselves and their neighbors by our government.

Did the judge lash out at Lauren in rage?  Now THAT is an interesting fact if it's true.  Very interesting.

[Kat Kanning]

Means she's getting to them.

[Michael Fisher]

Fox could take the lead on this story nationally---why has nothing been said?? Can anyone get it into Drudge Report?

We also need people to spread the news about Lauren to liberty-oriented forums all over the country.  Does anyone want to take this and run with it?

[ethanpooley]

I just read this whole thread after being absent from the boards for quite a while. Wow, I missed a lot! Anyway...there is one thing I would like to say:

Most real people, libertarian and otherwise, have feelings of violent outrage at times. When someone says "I alternate between {one thing} and wanting to kill everyone," or words to that effect, they are not being unusually violent but merely unusually honest. Obviously the press will have a field day with it, but I'm not sure that the answer is to back off from the statement. He DID feel that way. Why back off? Why distance ourselves? Why pretend it is unusual? No psycologist our counselor would be surprised by such a statement. And surely it was emotions of this magnitude that drove our country to revolution long ago. Free men feel utter rage when confronted with injustice. It is fitting and proper that they should do so. If they act with indiscretion then it becomes a problem, but emotions and the expression thereof should not be taboo.

No grass-roots movement is going to be clean and shiny and press-ready. We can choose to react to that by apologizing for ourselves and validating the general notion that if we step out of line the tiniest bit we become kooks and weirdos, not to be listened to or followed; or we can react by defending ourselves -- our seething anger and our ragged edges -- and by asking people why we shouldn't be emotional, why we shouldn't be, essentially, a group of angry men and women. And then we should ask them why they want to talk about such things when people are being driven from their homes by the state.

[Kat Kanning]

Well said.

[SethCohn]

Paraphrase.

Then don't say I said it.  Cause your words are not MY words.

What have we done so far?  The NHLA's done a lot... much of quiet and still in process... and I refuse to list it all, because of that...

I continued:

Ian knows full well how often I complained about discussing things before they are ripe.  But we have made progress in public areas, and the Liberty ratings and bill tracking were no small feat... nobody else does stuff like this, anywhere... on this scale.  (And the next gen will be more impressive and do more... the bar is set higher each year)

That's far from 'oh, top secret'.  One is hidden, the other is 'it's not ready to be widely public yet'.  Sadly, too many on this board have shown little ability to distinguish the difference in the past, let along the lurker or troll sort who make nasty phone calls against even carwashes (true story, as Kat is well aware) so the answer more and more will likely become 'sorry, read about it in the papers'   This is a public forum, not private discussion.

As for the 'good guys' remark, it's "Me good, Opponent bad."  Those who attended the most recent political science 'class' held by the NHLA learned that most politics has that as one element at the core.

[Pat K]

I just read this whole thread after being absent from the boards for quite a while. Wow, I missed a lot! Anyway...there is one thing I would like to say:

Most real people, libertarian and otherwise, have feelings of violent outrage at times. When someone says "I alternate between {one thing} and wanting to kill everyone," or words to that effect, they are not being unusually violent but merely unusually honest. Obviously the press will have a field day with it, but I'm not sure that the answer is to back off from the statement. He DID feel that way. Why back off? Why distance ourselves? Why pretend it is unusual? No psycologist our counselor would be surprised by such a statement. And surely it was emotions of this magnitude that drove our country to revolution long ago. Free men feel utter rage when confronted with injustice. It is fitting and proper that they should do so. If they act with indiscretion then it becomes a problem, but emotions and the expression thereof should not be taboo.

No grass-roots movement is going to be clean and shiny and press-ready. We can choose to react to that by apologizing for ourselves and validating the general notion that if we step out of line the tiniest bit we become kooks and weirdos, not to be listened to or followed; or we can react by defending ourselves -- our seething anger and our ragged edges -- and by asking people why we shouldn't be emotional, why we shouldn't be, essentially, a group of angry men and women. And then we should ask them why they want to talk about such things when people are being driven from their homes by the state.

Very nice post Eathen.