Terrorist groups including ANTIFA prepare to “disrupt” police event

I’m not sure when the law enforcement agencies will stop following their puppet masters’ orders and put an end to the chaos and violence Communist groups like Antifa are premeditating, but I do know that as long as the media is silent and the cowards are allowed to wear masks and damage property and attack innocent people, eventually a much stronger force from the right will show up to one of their events and put an end to them once and for all. Veteran groups, active military, current and former law enforcement or even biker groups need to make a stand. Enough is enough!


Numerous ANTIFA and other terrorists are currently planning to “disrupt” the International Association of Chiefs of Police which will be taking place in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania from October 21 – 24, 2017. This is ironic as the media and law enforcement have protected them for many years and without police protection, they’d have never been able to leave their keyboards:

Confront the IACP in Philadelphia this October

This October, the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) will hold their annual conference in Philadelphia. This is a call for an ambitious mobilization to directly disrupt the conference, to publicly spread an explicitly anti-police position, and to attempt to open up space that is hostile to state control. We hope to do so using both coordinated and decentralized, autonomous actions in the area immediately surrounding the conference in Center City and throughout Philly.

The IACP brings together law enforcement agencies from throughout the world to “advance the science and art of police services” through international coordination, training, and policy work. Their 2017 conference will take place at the Pennsylvania Convention Center, with four days of workshops, an exhibition hall with corporate vendors, and a number of secondary events at other locations. Also, a “general assembly.”

This call for opposition comes from the perspective that policing is inherently a colonial, white supremacist project. From their inception, the police have had as their primary function the maintenance of a social order based on violent domination along lines of race, gender, class & ability; from slave patrols to strike-breakers and from vice squads to gang units. Opposition to the IACP presents a unique opportunity to advance a position that is absolutely against all policing, as a large part of the organization’s agenda mirrors that of those who would reform the institution. Body cameras, diversity in hiring, “trust and accountability,” and above all, “community policing” are all central themes of the conference and to recommendations for “21st Century Policing.”

As the Trump administration (universally endorsed by law enforcement unions during the election) bombastically seeks to reinvigorate the militarization of police, it is a crucial time to aggressively put forward an analysis that recognizes militarization and community policing not as divergent, but as complementary parts of a coherent strategy of domination.

Meanwhile, the hundreds of participating agencies and workshops starkly demonstrate the severe intersectionality of the violence the police have always carried out. Interlocking movements for black liberation, indigenous struggle against colonization, sex workers’ self-determination, resistance to ableist police violence, radical political movements resisting repression, queer rebellion, global anti-imperialism, migrant and refugee justice and no borders movements, housing justice, environmental struggles, and more, all have a stake in opposing the strategies and tactics that will be promoted at this conference.

The IACP conference puts on display what we know from our daily participation in diverse forms of resistance: that every struggle is a struggle against the police.

While all the departments involved have histories of (and foundations in) violence, many have also seen fierce resistance to that violence in the recent past. Participating departments from Albuquerque, Chicago, Milwaukee, Seattle, the Bay Area, and more have seen rebellions against them in the last several years. We hope to use this opportunity to build connections with those who carry these memories of antagonism towards the police and contribute to lived experiences of uncontrollable revolt.

A complete list of presenters, vendors, and workshops is available on the conference website, http://www.theiacpconference.org, but here is a small sampling of some notable participants:

• Peter Newsham, D.C. Metropolitan Police Department (who gave orders to kettle protestors on J20)

• Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office (speaking on their experience sending officers to repress resistance at Standing Rock)

• Robert Metzger, Chief of Pasco (WA) Police Dept. (presenting “Public Trust After a Police Use of Deadly Force Incident,” based on lessons on maintaining stability after the police murder of Antonio Zambrano-Montes)

• Local departments from Philadelphia, New York, Albuquerque, Seattle, New Orleans, Edmonton, Chicago, Las Vegas, El Salvador, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, Tempe, AZ, Tucson, AZ, Dubai, Portland, OR, San Diego, Los Angeles, Milwaukee, San Francisco, Vancouver, Australia, Raleigh, NC, Dallas, and many more.

• Federal agencies, including FBI, Border Patrol, ATF and USCIS.

Expect more information and specific calls soon. In the meantime, save the date, make plans, study some maps, learn the terrain and spread the word throughout the region and beyond. Here are some more detailed resources to get started:

Outreach Zine for Reading // Outreach Zine for Printing

Workshop Descriptions and Schedule // Conference Hotel Map // Special Event Schedule

Against White Supremacy // Against the Police

For a world without cops, prisons, or borders.


Court Issues Search Warrant for Antifa Website

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department is trying to force an internet hosting company to turn over information about everyone who visited a website used to organize protests during President Trump’s inauguration, setting off a new fight over surveillance and privacy limits.

Federal investigators last month persuaded a judge to issue a search warrant to the company, Dreamhost, demanding that it turn over data identifying all the computers that visited its customer’s website and what each visitor viewed or uploaded.

The company says that would result in the disclosure of a large volume of information about people who had nothing to do with the protests. Over 1.3 million requests were made to view pages on the website in the six days after inauguration alone, it said.

Dreamhost is fighting the warrant as unconstitutionally broad.

“In essence, the search warrant not only aims to identify the political dissidents of the current administration, but attempts to identify and understand what content each of these dissidents viewed on the website,” two lawyers for Dreamhost, Raymond Aghaian and Chris Ghazarian, wrote in a court motion opposing the demand.

William Miller, a spokesman for the United States attorney’s office in the District of Columbia, provided court filings in the case but declined to comment. The government’s filing declared that Dreamhost “has no legal basis for failing to produce materials in response to the court’s search warrant.”

The fight, which came to light on Monday when Dreamhost published a blog post entitled “We Fight For the Users,” centers on a search warrant for information about a website, disruptj20.org, which served as a clearinghouse for activists seeking to mobilize resistance to Mr. Trump’s inauguration on Jan. 20.

The website featured maps to organize blockades of intersections arranged around various themes — like feminism, gay rights, racial justice, climate change, immigrant rights, antiwar, and labor — and tips for legal observers. It offered printable protest signs, many critical of Mr. Trump, and afterward it posted pictures of protests.

Mr. Trump’s inauguration in Washington was the scene of massive protests. The large majority of the thousands of protesters engaged peacefully, some carrying signs and marching and others in civil disobedience, such as participating in sit-ins to block intersections.

But a smaller group of anarchists — sometimes called the “black bloc” of the so-called Antifa, or anti-fascist, movement — protested violently.

Rioting by a small group of anarchists has become common at broader left-wing demonstrations for the past generation, such as during anti-free trade protests outside World Trade Organization talks in Seattle in 1999.

During the Trump inauguration, such protesters broke the windows of shops and bus stop shelters, set a limousine on fire and threw rocks at police in riot gear, who fired tear gas at crowds. One masked man sucker-punched Richard Spencer, a prominent white nationalist, as he was being interviewed; a video of that assault was widely shared on the internet.

More than 200 people were indicted on felony rioting charges related to property damage and assault during the inauguration.

On July 12, Judge Robert P. Wertheim, who was appointed to the District of Columbia’s superior court in 1981 and retired in 1992 but still occasionally hears matters and was on duty that day, signed off on prosecutors’ request for the sweeping search warrant in pursuit of information about people who organized or participated in rioting.

Among other things it demanded that Dreamhost turn over “all records or other information” pertaining to disruptj20.org, including log files showing who visited the website, when, from where, and what they looked at, and all emails related to the website.

Dreamhost balked. And after inconclusive negotiations over the search warrant, the assistant United States attorney handling the matter, John W. Borchert, asked another superior court judge, Lynn Leibovitz, who is overseeing the rioting cases, to order Dreamhost to show cause for why it was not complying.

In court filings, Dreamhost argued among other things, that the demand was unreasonably broad, violating the Fourth Amendment, and could make innocent people afraid to view or communicate with websites containing political content, violating the First Amendment. But the government maintains that those constitutional concerns are inaccurate.

Lacy MacAuley, an activist who said she helped update and provide content for disruptj20.org, described herself as “very concerned” about the search warrant, portraying it as a tactic to scare opponents of the Trump administration.

“It’s legal to visit a website and it’s legal to attend a protest,” she wrote in an email, adding: “This search warrant is yet another intimidation tactic, but activists and our supporters should not be scared away from exercising their right to protest and dissent.”

Several civil rights groups criticized the Justice Department as going too far.

“People should be free to exercise their legitimate free-expression rights and explore new points of view without worrying that any digital footprints they leave could land them in a government database later,” said Sarah St. Vincent, a Human Rights Watch researcher and advocate who focuses on national security, surveillance and domestic law enforcement. “That could have a real chilling effect on web-based free speech.”

Judge Leibovitz had set a hearing for Friday. But late Tuesday, Mr. Miller said the court was rescheduling it to a later date, which was not yet set, and that it was instead expected to be heard by Chief Judge Robert E. Morin of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.