July 31, 2006: Russell arrested

[Dave Ridley]

I don't think you can initiate force against the IRS  LOL

Not if you've ever had to pay taxes to them anyway.  Certainly one could go too far against them in the use of retaliatory force; and even that kind of force is best not used if at all possible.  I'm not even sure this qualifies as retaliatory force; the guy just tried to go into an IRS office with a piece of paper the Feds didn't like. 

[Dave Ridley]

ya, welcome to the forum michelle but what kind of reasoning is that?

You fly in here because you think russell is a hero and you're all inspired but ...You're going to leave the lot of us to our fate because of one activist you disagree with?   Becuase one of the six people who raced to his assistence with only a couple hours notice is merely brilliant rather than being both brilliant and doglike in support of russell?

that belongs on one of our Top 10 Lame Reasons I Can't Move to New Hampshire.   Actually I believe russell is compiling that list.   Russell when you get back can you add Michelle's excuse to the list? 

this is right up there with "there are too many trees for me to be able to practice 1000 yard rifle marksmanship in my backyard"

[user812006b]

Are you saying that a person should advocate what he doesn't believe in or at least shut up if he happens to belong to the same group?  Denis didn't arrest Russell, nor trip him, nor testify against him, he just happened to disagree with him and voiced that dissent.  Looks to me like he's been entirely supportive of the man, but disagreed with this one action, even though he has a great respect for him.

I'm pretty new to this site myself, but from my limited knowledge thus far, that's what I see.  Try not to be so hard on your fellows who are working toward the same end as you are; even if they are quabbling a bit over the means.

I'm in favor of free speech. He can say what he wants. However, I will shun him for being publicly critical of someone with the balls to stand up to the feds while that person rots in jail.

[Dave Ridley]

michelle i forgot to say thanks for your verbal support of russell!

[Follow]

Are you saying that a person should advocate what he doesn't believe in or at least shut up if he happens to belong to the same group?  Denis didn't arrest Russell, nor trip him, nor testify against him, he just happened to disagree with him and voiced that dissent.  Looks to me like he's been entirely supportive of the man, but disagreed with this one action, even though he has a great respect for him.

I'm pretty new to this site myself, but from my limited knowledge thus far, that's what I see.  Try not to be so hard on your fellows who are working toward the same end as you are; even if they are quabbling a bit over the means.

I'm in favor of free speech. He can say what he wants. However, I will shun him for being publicly critical of someone with the balls to stand up to the feds while that person rots in jail.

It has nothing to do with what you say, it has to do with what you do.  Feel free to shun him and say he's wrong if you'd like, I'd be a bit hypocritical if I said you had no right to that while supporting his right to do essentially the same thing.  But cancelling your plans to join the free state project on account of one person you disagree with is kinda silly.  That was specifically what I was speaking to in my original post.




Follow 

[Tom Sawyer]

Michelle,
Write Russell a letter in jail. Tell him how you feel, or anything you think will give him some joy.

Contact media outlets and ask them about this story.

I called the jail and asked some questions of their policies regarding mail etc.

The person said you can send photos. That is some of what I'm going to send.

[tracysaboe]

It is simply revisionist history to say that Russ was arrested "simply for handing out flyers". HE WASN'T.

Nonsense. They had no business trying to keep him from going inside the post office. They were the initiators. Keeping him from going into a place he has every right to go.

Tracy

[d_goddard]

Hi Michelle.

First and foremost, thank you.
I know you must be voicing an opinion that many people feel.
Sometimes it takes a new person without much "baggage" to say things. It is a good, productive, healing thing to discuss such opinons. Like the old saying goes about the FSP... "don't you people understand what will happen if 20,000 libertarians get within shouting distance of each other?"

I knew my opinions would not be popular, and worst of all could be hurtful to Russ and his closest family and friends.  That is crummy, and I hope I can avoid that as much as possible. Nevertheless, I do feel compelled to share my opinon, and it felt very good to finally state it fully above-board. It would have been duplicitous to know that my post was being used to rally support.

Again, I genuinely like Russell -- as does everyone who personally knows him.
I would also reiterate that he has truckloads of courage, giant cojones, the best of intentions, and has done truly herioc things in the short time I've known him. I just disagree with this particular act of CD. Not because it was directed at the IRS, but because of the details of how it was done. And that's always where the devil lies, right?

I have considered joining the Free State Project, but I have serious doubts after hearing of Russell's heroic, yes heroic actions, only to see you publicly attack him while he sits in jail.

Russell chose actions he knew would land him in jail. He did them specificaly knowing jail would be the result. It is wrong that he languishes in prison now, but does his incarceration elevate him, such that nobody may take his name in vain? It's an honest question: maybe it does. I'm not sure.

I publicly and repeatedly attacked this act while it was still in the planning stages. I have never attacked Russ -- just this specific act. And CD in general, though I've come to appreciate the power of CD when performed carefully. CD certainly is a hard tightrope for its practitioners to walk.

Were you present for Russell's arrest(s) at the IRS office? Did you hear Russell tell the cops he was going to "directly damage property" that day?

No on the first, yes on the second (not that day, but previously). Actually, several FSP members voiced our disagreement with this particular act, because of the references to the use of force.

How did he "directly initiate force"? If he only tried to step past the cops, how is this initiating force?

In light of previous statements about destruction of property, any such action just gets viewed in a different light. One reason I have called this particular CD as being a less impressive one than others, is that there was not the extra-scrupulous avoidance of any appearance of force that is so powerfully important in such situations.

And yes, I realize I'm armchair-judging something I would not myself have the guts to do. Is it morally wrong to critique a superstar athelete, even though you yourself will never play at the pro level?

I don't think I can join a group with this kind of public back-stabbing from a major player.

You may then indeed want to reconsider. People will oppose you -- hard -- no matter what course you take.

If you plan to come to NH to generally "cause trouble for the cops", then in my opinon, it's more conducive to Freedom if you please, just stay the hell away from our lovely home state. I am sure 90% of the libertarian-minded folks who grew up here feel similarly.

That said, if you let me, or anyone else, stop you, then you don't have the stength of convicion to effect change anyway.

[yamnuska]

  Would the upstairs where the IRS works normally be off limits? Do people go up there for appointments etc.? I ask because if it is not an area people are normally allowed then I could see why the feds would get anal (even though they should not as we pay their salary). If I go into a cafe I can go up to the counter and order but they would get mad if I went into the kitchen or an employees only area. I know that is private property and government property in theory belongs to all of us, but was that the case in this instance? I am just thinking for future actions if it would be better to for example, have stayed on the lower level and laid the flyers out in front of you then sat down. Media is more likely to stick to a story about a man who went into a post office, sat down and tried to hand out flyers than one about a man who tried to push past federal officers in a post office, even though saying push is pushing it. It will not be long before a fed has a fit and beats the shit out of a non-violent protestor because they don't fall for any of the feds taunts. I would not put any stock in a fed saying they like you or don't want to arrest you but have to. If my friend became a fed, arrested me, then told me he is sorry for doing so I would say one thing to him,

  "Go fuck yourself asshole. If this is bothering you so much why did you arrest me in the first place? Oh, I know, you have no balls, no convictions, no morals and no values aside from earning a bunch of fiat currency. Stop trying to justify your stupidity."

    Is Russell going to fast? Tell him thanks for having such big balls.

[Kat Kanning]

It was open to the public, which was brought out repeatedly in the trial.

[Lex]

I knew my opinions would not be popular, and worst of all could be hurtful to Russ and his closest family and friends.  That is crummy, and I hope I can avoid that as much as possible. Nevertheless, I do feel compelled to share my opinon, and it felt very good to finally state it fully above-board. It would have been duplicitous to know that my post was being used to rally support.

So, you do not feel that we should rally support for Russell? You say you don't think he should be in jail and then you turn around and say you don't want to support him? I'm sorry but you aren't making any sense...

I also don't understand the effect you are trying to achieve by posting your disappointment with Russell? You do realize I hope that he is currently in a concrete box somewhere starving and unable to respond to your complaints...

I have no problem with people disagreeing with Russells actions, but why is it so critical to go out of your way to berate him now while he can't defend his actions or choose to ignore the accusations?

I think your suggestions would be much more effective if right now you worked to get him out of prison and be supportive of him and later when he gets out have a chat with him face to face and tell him how you feel about it instead of announcing your disappointment in public behind his back. If you don't want to rally support for him are you saying you don't care what happens to him? In that case why are you bothering to post your disappointment?

I'm just trying to understand your position Dennis. I know you're a good guy but I just don't understand your intentions here.

[gone2gofish]

Here's my reply from the protestwarrior.com message board. And don't confuse me please. I'm not a republican anymore, and I support the free state project.

But...
He was being distruptive. ITs a principal of law thing. Oh sure, if Russel was the only man inside the building in the lobby handing out flyers he isn't actually distruptive. But if a precedent is established that says itsok for EVERYONE to do that INSIDE THE LOBBY, then without a doubt, all that will ensue is mass chaos if everyone decides to do that. There has to be some small degree of order.

Furthermore the judge and LEO's seem to have pointed out that if he merely demonstratedoutside the building and not in the lobby, they'd have had no reason to arrest him whatsoever.



Of coures, bear in mind, I'm young, (17 folks), and so, I'm sure that if you guys have a conflict or proof of some wrong thinking on my part, please feel free to correct.

Don't flame me, and I won't flame you.

[Lex]

He was being distruptive. ITs a principal of law thing. Oh sure, if Russel was the only man inside the building in the lobby handing out flyers he isn't actually distruptive. But if a precedent is established that says itsok for EVERYONE to do that INSIDE THE LOBBY, then without a doubt, all that will ensue is mass chaos if everyone decides to do that. There has to be some small degree of order.

But the point of Russells protest was to shutdown the place completely by convincing all the employees to quit. It won't matter if he establishes a precedent that it's okay to do that in the lobby.

[Rocketman]

Michelle and others:

I think you'll find that when Russell is released and reads or hears Denis's opinion of what happened, his reaction will be respectful and tolerant.  We're all on the same team up here, despite vast differences in the strategies we think are best.  

I don't think Russell should have gone about this the way he did, but yet I support him.  Russell thinks most of my current actions are a waste of time and energy, and yet I call him a friend.  That's just sort of how it works up here... in fact, the multi-pronged approach is the NH freedom movement's greatest strength.  Sometimes that stops being obvious for a few days here and there, but overall, it's absolutely the case.

[gone2gofish]

He was being distruptive. ITs a principal of law thing. Oh sure, if Russel was the only man inside the building in the lobby handing out flyers he isn't actually distruptive. But if a precedent is established that says itsok for EVERYONE to do that INSIDE THE LOBBY, then without a doubt, all that will ensue is mass chaos if everyone decides to do that. There has to be some small degree of order.

But the point of Russells protest was to shutdown the place completely by convincing all the employees to quit. It won't matter if he establishes a precedent that it's okay to do that in the lobby.

But see, your being narrowminded.

A precedent for one public building is going to apply to all others. Which means, that would you like if everyone demonstrated whatever they wanted inside of the courthouses? Thats why protestors ar eoutisde, and not inside.