6 plead guilty to ELF arsons and pledge to help government

thought ELF's (or at least EF's) motto was:

"No Compromise ...."

were these people plants to begin with?

or were they not strong enough to defend Mother Earth, cracking under "Justice"'s torture and plea bargains?

we here in Proletarian-Land are doing the best we can to fight The Genocide Regime as it rages on...

The prosecution recommended sentences of 15 years for Meyerhoff, 10 for Gerlach, and five years for Savoie, who remained free on bail.

Jeff Barnard - Associated Press

No they weren't strong enough. These people broke and there is no excuse.

"No compromise" is dead, or dying.

A critical mass of broken activists, idealists, and would-be revolutionaries have fallen into this terrible chasm of failed solidarity, panic, and isolation, and they may drag the remaining hold outs down with them. How could it have come to this?

To the remaining; Prove Your Innocence, or beg for leniency.

The row of dominoes have begun falling and we can blame the first one to fall, each one that has fallen, and/or the government that is pushing them down, but the question remains; what are we going to do about this? What can we do?

sadly, it's not as dramatic as people being plants to begin with, or people cracking under the pressure, or being tortured...like 99% of activists (i've watched this phenomenon unfold over the years) these people consider themselves to have "moved on" from the days when they were involved with activism, etc...they have jobs in corporations that pay as much as 6 figures, a house, stuff, kids and college funds for the kids, etc. and simply dont want to go to jail and "lose all this"--meaning, the life they created as post-activists. they do not feel any connection to themselves in the past, and therefore do not feel a connection to or responsibility for any others they were in solidarity with...i know of one of these people through a grapevine and she feels no guilt or remorse about anyone else...she just personally doesn't feel she could stand being in jail because she's such a free spirit (like no one else is?) and therefore shouldn't have to suffer confinement, so she will do whatever anyone wants to save her skin.

anon,
Just remember that many activists fit into the category that you define as what non-activists lives are like.

"they have jobs in corporations that pay as much as 6 figures, a house, stuff, kids and college funds for the kids, etc. and simply dont want to go to jail and "lose all this"--meaning, the life they created"

Many activists have kids, jobs (maybe not the 6 figures), a house etc.. Some of the most committed activists I know are in this category.

But I do see what you are saying.

I agree with all of the above! BUT, here's what we can do, these two amazing people are fighting for their innocence. They could use words of strength. Especially now. They are scared, waiting to hear what fictional stories these strangers have come up with. Could you imagine being in solitary confinememt for 23 hrs. a day and then seeing your lawyer and hearing a new story for the first time ever? And the kkind of person the story comes from??? From some weak minded 'free spirit' who has probably manipulated her way through life as it is. Nathan and Joyanna love art, especially getting postcards. I don't know them as being activists, but are true to themselves. Please, in this time of rage that we are all boiling with, remember these two. Be sure to view the rules of Lane Countys letter writting.
Strength!

Nathan Block #1663667
Lane County Jail
101 W 5th Ave.
Eugene, OR 97401
USA

Joyanna Zacher #1662550
Lane County Jail
101 W 5th Ave.
Eugene, OR 97401
USA

None of the folks who pled Thurs and Fri have cushy corporate jobs, drive fancy cars or are paying large mortgages. They are activists who crossed the line by committing crimes. Most of them faced mandatory life or 30 years in prison. The cases against them was strong. They faced up to their mistakes by pleading guilty and at the same time insured that they would see the light of day one day. They decided not to become martyrs for the movement like Jeff Luers.

Those of you taking potshots from the sidelines are hypocrites of the worst kind. You expect these folks not to take deals, fight their cases, and serve the rest of their lives in prison. You want them, and the remaining defendants, to take a bullet for the movement. What have you done for the movement? Did you ever stick your necks out like these defendants did from 1996-2001? Or did you simply sit back and say "right on" when you read about ELF actions? At least these defendants had the courage of their convictions. It seems to me their critics never have.

Who cares if they had cars or owned property which actually some of them did. Who cares if at one point they had courage and convictions. They don't any more. Why don't you stand up for the people who still have those things, people like Daniel McGowan, Jonathan Paul, Nathan Block, and Joyanna Zacher and stop making excuses for the people that sold them out.

what is the meaning of your statement here, "Wisdom"?

because it runs opposite to the claimed mission of ELF and other, less-direct environmental groups.

as does the statement: "...face up to their mistakes". What "mistakes"? Do you mean that, they were careless enough to "make mistakes" which caused them to "get caught"? Or that they chose the type of 'Earth Liberation' actions to participate and commit in the the first place?

were you perhaps intending to say that the *legal system* in which the accused are now ensnared is *powerful* and has potential to extensively punish them?

Explain yourself.

I have really been outraged by the self-righteous, anti-plea bargain chest thumping displayed on this site lately. It only exposes those who practice it as the irrelevant sideliners they are. Afterall, who among you has participated in acts of the type the "green scare" victims are accused of. If you can honestly answer positively, I can only say that you are incredibly foolish posting your commentary for public perusal.

If nothing else, the events of Operation Backfire should demonstrate to us that this (resistance) is not some adventurous game, there for the vicarious fantasy of smug pseudo-philosopher barflies. And while I would never dream of judging the merits of actions taken from a personal place of despair, anger, and youthful ambition, it is (and long has been) plainly obvious that guerilla eco sabotage is not some kind of propaganda-by-deed spark that will ignite "revolution."

Now, a number people stand accused (not convicted, I may remind some of you) of actions that would land them in prison for the rest of their lives. Undoubtedly, their families and friends have been threatened, a confusing and ceaseless barrage of interrogation tactics has muddied their understanding of the situation. And if they are "guilty," the enforcers have no doubt supplied a bare minimum of evidence to let them know they are had.

As pointed out, many of the accused had "moved on" (oh lord forbid!) to actually live lives as healthily as they could in this world. So what. I personally find the culture that surrounds twenty-something radicalism stultifying and petty, and to some extent have moved on to other things. However, that doesn't mean that my thoughts, heart, and even some portion of my life aren't committed to liberation. To the contrary, I (and many I know) could never sustain our hopes and beliefs in the environment of radical scene-making. My desire is mine (and yours is yours)
and doesn't belong to any movement. It's that kind of greater good sacrifice crap that future tyrants always forward as the moral code of the new order, and that always murders the actual rebel.

Anyway, here's an article of some relevance that y'all should read:




Security Culture and its Discontents
by The Brilliant

Operation Backfire, the FBI operation that has led to the arrest over the past few months of dozens of so-called eco-terrorists has had a dimming effect on the direct action movement. The idea that of property destruction, without injury or loss of human life, had a certain cachet as threading the needle between the Weatherman movement of the 1970's and the protests of the tree-sitting and sign carrying variety. In America this idea was clearly naive as murderers are often given much lighter sentences than drug offenders.

After the burning of the Vail ski resort on October 18, 1998 there could have been no doubt that the government would launch a major investigation against the ELF and associated environmental groups. At least twelve million dollars of damage was caused in one evening and at least one agency suffered a black eye as a result. The insertion of the now infamous Anna into the protest movement should be seen for what it is, a reconnaissance mission, not the primary attack.
The ability of Anna to act as a street medic, a journalist (on several Indymedia sites), and eventually the bait to entrap several young radicals does not represent a problem with how porous our communities are. It demonstrates how inexperienced our generation is with real government attack.

This has been further demonstrated by the surprise and horror that supporters of the Operation Backfire prisoners have had when the accused became complicit with their captors. Many of the accused had moved on with their lives and away from radical politics. During the actions that they are being accused of, many of them were very young and new to radicalism. Many were reaching far beyond their grasp and upon realizing this retreated away from the positions, choices, and groups that informed the property destruction they are accused of. People cannot stand up to torture, isolation, or even social pressure forever.

The surprise should be that anyone stays around obscure radical circles or holds the line against forces of repression at all. Many of us have seen what the science of control technologies and the realities of prison life does to strong people. Propaganda creates social isolation and the sense that even simple positions are aberrant. While there is a certain dignity in obscurity and pride in exclusivity, what is the cost?

We are sick of hiding in shadows!

We do not believe that anything, or nearly anything, that we do is truly hidden from eyes that are looking in our direction. We believe that if they want to find us they are more than capable. We are too few and they have too many resources to bring to bear. We do not believe that anything that we do, except the most blatantly scandalous, should be hidden behind false names, secret communication, and indecipherable jargon. The only secrets should be secrets and not the possible existence of secrets.

We believe, in our heart of hearts, that our security culture friends embarrass us. Security culture is the half-assed practice of confusing our desire for a different world with a tree house that doesn't allow those with cooties. Our pretensions of illegality and danger look exactly like what they are, children at play. As long as anarchists remain children we will be treated like them, by our potential allies, by our enemies and by ourselves.

If we really were planning to wage war upon those in power, rather than just have it waged upon us, we would need people from all walks of life to understand where we were coming from. We would need the brilliance of our vision of a better world to shine so brightly as to suffocate thoughts of this one. Our ideas are ideas of transparency, individual capability, and solidarity. Why should we hide these ideas? Even if the only expressions that we can offer of our choices are of petty theft and marginal living why should we live in shame? No one chooses to live in shame for long. Shame will kill us faster than the State will ever find us. An atmosphere of secrets and group-think isolates us into sub-culture that includes only our peers.

Our ideas are brilliant. We deeply believe that the majority of the world basks in the light of the same sun that we are shielded from by the State and Capitalism. We survive on a fraction of what is possible. Those who shield us feast upon the bulk of the sustenance. From below, above and without we have another solution. Be gone interlopers! We will wear no masks when we tear your creations asunder. They stand in our way. They stand in the way of the brilliant!

Some have stated that there's nothing wrong with someone turning in former comrades because they (might) have kids or a mortgage or whatever. Bollocks! Tell that to the people of the global south who've fought for their freedom, many of them have kids or a farm to tend in addition to be born into extreme poverty, and they still risk their lives. They also know that solidarity isn't a slogan, it means when each others lives are on the line that's when their commitment to each other is the strongest. Unfortunatly these sellouts are nothing more than typical Americans looking out for number one, while going through a breif "phase" of caring about the world in their youth.

Thanks for posting this. It was good to read it. I'm getting tired of the smug superiority from people who do not know, and never will know, what it's like to be in their position. Theory is so pretty when you don't have to wade in the muck.

My heart goes out to our comrades. All of them.

people who decide to dedicate (a portion of) their lives to movements such as ELF need to remember, and consider beforehand the full possible consequences of that choice. In the meantime support of political prisoners will continue unabated in this movement and others.

as for the 'plea bargains' and "facing up to their mistakes", well.... whatever.

Quote from "The Brilliant":

"If we really were planning to wage war upon those in power, rather than just have it waged upon us"

as soon as you committedly decide upon the former, LMK: I'll be there. Walk your talk.

Until then, every scrap of rhetoric about 'waging war against the Regime' and 'our Masters' will remain as impotent as it currently is.

The case "Operation Backfire" was never strong. The case was the testimony of a few people trying to save their own hides.

I disagree with the posts condemning the cooperators and the posts pleading for forgiveness. I don't condone or condemn what they did. The condemnation of cooperators reads as childish, and is usually hidden by moderators while the posts expressing sympathy with cooperators are kept up. While the immature "chest-thumping" is counter-productive, I do resent people saying that none of us know what it's like to stand up to pressure. Those of us who know the remaining defendants know the pressure they're facing. We're all human, and it is inevitable that some people cannot withstand pressure. But PLEASE remember, be sensitive, defending these people is to endorse their actions which aim to put some of our loved ones away for much longer than 15 years. You can call these actions human and understandable, but stop calling me a "hypocrite" because I object. I object because people are pleading not guilty. Let's do our best to help them prove their innocence. Let's put the focus on helping them through this difficult time.

We ARE wading through the muck with our friends who are suffering through these indictments and massive legal fees. Trust me, it's mucky. For a moment, imagine what this week has been like for THEM. I feel like defense of the cooperators totally ignores the innocence of these four people, and when people in the movement
fail to defend your innocence - what can you expect the government to believe?

I certainly hope I don't come across as smugly superior. I'd like for there to be a real understanding between those of us who want to see Daniel, Jonathan, Nathan and Joyanna free and those of us who, at this time, seem to have prioritized defending those who will be testifying against them.

No, I don't think you come across as smugly superior. This is a difficult question and I'm not suggesting that taking a position against pleading out is in and of itself thoughtless/superior/etc. Principled people can obviously disagree. And I'm frankly not sure where I stand on the issue, at least in this case. But I'm infurated by the many people speaking to this issue who are acting as though the matter is simple, who are acting as though they understand everything that has happened even though the plea agreements are sealed and there is a lot of information that the defendants and their counsel and supporters cannot make public. They're acting in a way that's simplistic and dismissive. "Turn your back on the movement, and the movement turns its back on you." For a start, since when do they get to decide who "the movement" is and how "the movement" will respond? What is with this activist swagger? Every day we make decisions and compromises about how we are going to live in a world that we find politically repugnant. Every time I pay rent to a landlord, I compromise my principles. Every time I type something on this computer, knowing the damage to the workers who manufacture its components, I compromise my principles. Every time I eat food that's been grown by a migrant worker, I compromise my principles. We're fooling ourselves if we act as though the compromises we make every day affect only ourselves, whereas the defendants are somehow different because their actions affect others. All of us make compromises that negatively affect others EVERY SINGLE FUCKING DAY. Often we do so as a matter of comfort and privilege. If you think that pleading out was wrong, fair enough. But anyone whose posture is that the people who have pleaded out are somehow beneath them, beneath contempt, can frankly kiss my ass.

This idea that the folks who pleaded it out are somehow stupid because they "failed to think through" the possible consequences of their actions is a bit much. Who among us in 1998 anticipated what a post-WTC US political/judicial climate would have looked like?

EXACTLY to that last sentence there. This point has not seen enough discussion.

the US was a particularly democratic or free country before 9/11 now was it. COINTELPRO happened before 9/11!

None of these people are what anon describes except Jen Kolar whose an executive at a big software company (not Microsoft). The rest aren't rich and don't have yachts or fly everywhere first class. But all of them including the four going to trial are a trajedy. They have ruined there lives and hurt there familys and loved ones. They have hurt our movement and damaged there own cause. They deserve our pity and sympathy but they are not martyrs or saints. Just people who made very bad mistakes in their youth.

The four going to trial are going to trial because they are NOT GUILTY.
I fail to see how you could lump them into the statement you made.

I don't know how many times people need to be reminded that:
Nathan Block, Joyanna Zacher, Daniel McGowan and Jonathan Paul
are pleading NOT GUILTY.

That means when you write about them, stop inferring or implying that they are guilty of the crimes they are accused of.
They are facing life in prison,
Please extend this small courtesy.
It is the very least you can do!