Feds to Test Dissent-Crushing Powers: The St. Pats Four

by **Gouda** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:15 pm

The always brilliant James Petras alerts us to a precedent-setting trial to take place on Sept 19th in New York State whereby the Feds seek to intimidate dissenters by locking up four principled, peaceful anti-war protesters dubbed "The Saint Patrick's Four". They face up to 6 years in prison and a $250,000 fine for their act of civil disobedience at a military recruiting center. Petras explains their grievous "conspiracy" against the state: "On March 17, 2003, two days before the invasion of Iraq, four pacifists, members of the Catholic Workers movement, walked into a military recruiting center near Ithaca, New York and poured a pint of their own blood around the vestibule. They then knelt down, prayed for peace and awaited the police." <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/petras09162005.html">www.counterpunch.org/petras09162005.html</a> Please consider visiting the St Pats Four website to learn more and sign their letter of support, or more: <a href="http://www.stpatricksfour.org/">www.stpatricksfour.org/</a>

by **petron** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:47 pm

While I'm not a fan of vandalism, the punishment does NOT match the crime. And dissent is most definitely not a crime. I'll be keeping my eye on this.

by **AnnaLivia** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 5:17 pm

Gouda, not like this little item is important or anything...i'm just bumping it up for the hell of it

by **proldic** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 5:21 pm

<a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm10.showMessage?topicID=788.topic">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...=788.topic</a>

by **Inanna** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 5:46 pm

First of all, I am not understanding why when this was previously acquitted, the Feds are bringing it back up again and want to prosecute. Is this to send a message to all of us in advance? This is the first I'd even heard of this situation. Granted, maybe the blood was a bit much, but it was symbolic and I am sure they didn't dump quarts of it. I just find it very distressing. I shared this story on another liberal board, and only TWO people responded. Mind you, this other board is a busy board with lots of people. These people are smart, left-leaning analytical types who want to discuss and dissect things like..."should we pull out of Iraq?" (umm, yeah?!) rather than scanning the environment for threats out there and preemptively addressing them. Anyway, I just needed to vent a bit here. Sorry. Another interesting piece of information for anyone who might be interested...if you are not aware, Bush signed into law in August something called the National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting Act. This means that if you are a user of any prescription pain meds or other drugs, you can look forward to it be reported to the government within one week of dispensing it, along with your name, address and phone number. Our freedoms are just getting chipped away at one by one (or our rights to privacy our disappearing one by one) and I cannot even get the liberals I know concerned about it. It is me, my approach, or do people just not care? (rhetorical, since you don't know me. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"> )

by **DrDebugDU** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 5:58 pm

It looks like somebody wants to send a message against the anti-war movement. According to this story they will denied the right to defense <blockquote>Quote:<hr> H2O Man (1000+ posts) Fri Sep-16-05 11:43 PM Original message War protestors denied right to defense! Please read! Last night I posted a thread with information on the St. Patrick's Four. They are four people from the Ithaca, NY area who took part in a non-violent protest against the war in Iraq. They were originally charged with criminal mischief, and tried in the Tompkins County Court. When the jury heard their defense, based upon their religious and spiritual beliefs, and rooted in the history of civil disobedience in this great nation, 9 of 12 jurors voted to acquit them. However, the federal government has recently charged them with conspiracy. They will go on trial starting Monday, 9-19, in Binghamton, NY. I found out today that the federal court will not allow these four to present a defense to the conspiracy charges. This was reported in todays edition of The Daily Star (Oneonta, NY; see: www.thedailystar.com LTTE) The four face 6 years in prison and $250,000 fines if convicted. How in the hell can they not be allowed to put on a defense? I believe it is because the prosecutor knows that no jury would convict them if they hear the truth. For more information, see: <a href="http://stpatricksfour.com">stpatricksfour.com</a> / Please help. <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4798268">www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4798268</a> <hr></blockquote> > National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting Act Thanks. I wonder if they know about this old document... <blockquote>Quote:<hr> Hippocratic Oath I swear by Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia and all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfil according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant: (...) What I may see or hear in the course of the treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep to myself, holding such things shameful to be spoken about. If I fulfil this oath and do not violate it, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and art, being honored with fame among all men for all time to come; if I transgress it and swear falsely, may the opposite of all this be my lot. <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/doctors/oath_classical.html">www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/doctors/oath_classical.html</a> <hr></blockquote>

by **AnnaLivia** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:13 pm

<a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9402474/">www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9402474/</a> this is the only news i can find on today's beginning of the trial. didn't watch tv news. did anyone see it reported? seen any news of the nightly "after" gathering they had planned? this article says the judge spent the entire day in jury questioning. trial expected to last a week, but may run longer in light of slow beginning. i hope we'll keep each other posted in this thread as news comes available....

by **AnnaLivia** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:17 pm

are we following Scott Parkin's arrest and deportation from Australia? have i missed a thread on that one? i'll go google for an update on him now. know he must be back in the states, but have heard/read nothing more yet.

by **Gouda** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 1:33 am

Right, just the jury selection as far as I know. The official website indicates that Michael Moore has latched on. Not sure if that is good or bad. Another decent essay from the counterpunch crowd, which seems to be well engaged: author Leigh Saavedra: "The Case of the St. Patrick Four Today, the Anti-War Movement Goes on Trial" - <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/saavedra09192005.html">www.counterpunch.org/saav...92005.html</a> Signatures on the support letter are very numerous - there's got to be ten thousand at least - I see that Martin Sheen signed. Good to have Congressman Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) backing them up too. More info can be got at Binghamton Indymedia: <a href="http://www.binghamtonpmc.org/index.php">www.binghamtonpmc.org/index.php</a>

by **Gouda** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 2:44 am

But I've one small beef with the Saavedra essay in counterpunch. She writes: "My empirical bent does not allow me to be lax with conspiracy theories.” That sounds like a case of rigorous ignoramus to me. So, in light of the implications of this trial, Saavedra finds herself asking, "How safe is dissent?" She apprehends that this trial "throws open doors and windows that even the most cynical weren't truly expecting two years ago." Hmmmm. She rightly fears that a guilty verdict for the Four will have disastrous consequences, making all those who support them guilty by association. "And if we are, then our worst fears about the so-called PATRIOT Act have grown as real as a match held up to our Constitution.” OK, now had she really been empirically bent, she might have had less problem seeing what was coming two, three, four years ago. This conspiracy phobia handicapping most of the good-hearted but naive Left (including the best of the counterpunchers) can only perpetuate a situation whereby conspirators continue acting while those in an ivory tower are left miles behind, analyzing the chess board ex post facto (just as that White House advisor taunted) and forever protesting. The Left needs to bend a little (sinister?) and stop mutually excluding empiricism and “conspiracy theories”. Then maybe, just maybe, there’d be hope for more effective pre-emption of real terror.

by **AnnaLivia** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 3:57 am

Good CP article, yes, but I couldn’t agree with you more. the “left” is never going to get anywhere until they stop denying/rejecting and/or suppressing the plain damn truth about who the REAL conspirators are and what they’ve done. It’s the whole story of how I found RI in the first place…elsewhere were others who were terrified to get pasted with the label of nutcase…then ridiculing MY lack of “toughness”. They were the “warriors” and I was the deer, waiting to be preyed upon. It was too hilarious. Hey, was clicking on links and found photos of the day at johnros.com yes, the american legion was there to counter-protest. talk about good intentions completely duped... I loved this sign someone in support of the st. pats 4 made: <a href="http://www.johnros.com/wp-gal/file/photography/sp4%20weekly%20updates/monday%2019.09.05/ros_sp4_01_18.jpg">www.johnros.com/wp-gal/fi..._01_18.jpg</a>

by **AnnaLivia** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:30 am

<a href="http://www.houston.indymedia.org/">www.houston.indymedia.org/</a> there is no trial to monitor for Scott Parkin, so this shouldn't really interrupt this thread, but thought i'd post this link in case anyone wants to know more about his ordeal. another non-violent activist being persecuted simply for pointing fingers at halliburton and cheney. he may never be able to travel anywhere anymore, unless the Ozzies set this blatant injustice to rights. we're all earning PHD's, ya know. (Piled Higher and Deeper)

by **smiths** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 5:58 am

just like america and britain, australia has introduced totally intrusive and unnecassary laws and scott parkin was simply a guinea pig, how will it work, how will public respond. the really tragic thing from my point of view as an australian was that it didnt even register really as a political issue for the MSM, if you had have asked the average person they never would have heard of him and it is quite clear that he had done absolutely nothing wrong

by **Gouda** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 3:03 pm

Anyone else spot the subtle, divisive bias in this piece on the trial by NYT hack Michelle York? <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/21/nyregion/21protest.html">www.nytimes.com/2005/09/2...otest.html</a>

by **Dreams End** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 3:13 pm

I saw an article on Counterpunch urging civil disobedience during the march on Saturday in DC. I wonder what sorts of tricks the DC authorities have up their sleeves.

Feds to Test Dissent-Crushing Powers: The St. Pats Four

Feds to Test Dissent-Crushing Powers: The St. Pats Four

Re: Feds to Test Dissent-Crushing Powers: The St. Pats Four

wink wink

very important stuff

Just speechless

Re: Just speechless

jury selection begun and a congressional supporter on scene

and hey

Re: jury selection begun and a congressional supporter on sc

Re: jury selection begun and a congressional supporter on sc

Re: photo gallery

pardon my little sidetrack

parkin

NYT: great paper to read in central park sipping iced latte

Re: NYT: great paper to read in central park sipping iced la

Who is online