Jump to content

Wealthy/Cherry Street businesses vandalized


joeDowntown

Recommended Posts

About 10 years ago we had a fairly high level drug dealer and prostitution ring leader move onto our block, right across the street from my family. One night at about 3 in the morning I heard a horrible noise. My new neighbor was in the front yard of his house beating a girl in the head while holding her hair. I called the cops. They came and he was arrested. As the police were taking him out of the house, this guy was screaming and yelling at the top of his lungs, "This is my neighborhood! Whoever called the police, I am coming for you as soon as I get out. Do you hear me? This is my neighbor hood and no one calls the cops on me."

Needless to say my wife and I were scared to death. I thought I had done the right thing. Now I was worried for my wife and kids. We contemplated moving. Honestly, we did not know whether or not we should share with our neighbors the fact that it was me that called the police. Who could we trust? Eventually I did share it with a few neighbors. They were all supportive. We banded together and even formed a neighborhood watch. We had a few meetings, block leaders were chosen, and flyers were disbursed giving out information about how to report things to the police. The flyers had our name and number on it, along with three other block leaders.

Our neighbor that was arrested had a few new guys move into his house while he was gone. High profile thins were moved in and out of the house like TV's, racks of fur coats, etc. They did not appear to be selling anything illegal out of the house, but they were storing a lot of stuff there and there was certainly were a lot of girls coming and going, all dressed to the nines.

About 3 months later the guy who was arrested came back home. I was pretty nervous. Sure enough a few days after he was home, I was sitting on my porch reading, he came over and knocked on the door. I tried to remain calm and asked him to have a seat. I had never met him or had a conversation with him. He looked me dead in the eye and said, "Why the hell did you call the police on me?" I tried to remain calm and said, "I didn't" He said, "I had my lawyer, through the Freedom of Information Act get all the records of what happened that night and the report said the call came from your address." Thinking fast, I said, "Well as you know there is a neighborhood watch on this block. Maybe someone was afraid and used my name when they called." The guy changed his tone and explained to me what happened. He said that he was just a small business owner. I asked him the name of his business. He told me. Eventually he left. A couple of months later, he moved.

We never had another incident on our block. About four years later, I picked up the GR Press to find a photo of my old neighbor on the cover. He was arrested for running a high profile prostitution ring out of his Walker home.

The A-holes that sent this letter are trying to drive good neighbors out of the community. As scary as situations like this are, neighbors need to get mad and band together. There is strength in numbers. I hope and pray people do not leave because of these threats. I hope and pray the GR Police and federal authorities catch them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Oh, OK. I wasn't sure if the letter was sent to only the townhouses, or the entire neighborhood block.

That's quite a story, Dave. Thanks for sharing!tough.gif

Local terrorism campaigns never, ever work. I'm pretty optimistic they'll be caught. I just hope no one gets hurt in the meantime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, OK. I wasn't sure if the letter was sent to only the townhouses, or the entire neighborhood block.

That's quite a story, Dave. Thanks for sharing!tough.gif

Local terrorism campaigns never, ever work. I'm pretty optimistic they'll be caught. I just hope no one gets hurt in the meantime.

I know community patrols and stakeouts have been set up. Somebody out there must have a pretty good idea of who did it. I have my suspicions.

When you sit down and try to understand the logic behind it, you feel a tinge of insanity coming on. Prostitution and drug dealing I can understand. Violence because an area is being presumably gentrified? (where there isn't even proof that there is)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a recent immigrant (last Oct) to the East Hills area, I'm am a bit shaken by the brazen nature that this whole thing has taken. Right now they are targeting these town houses because they are obvious places where people are moving into from the "outside".

However, what will happen if they deiced to widen their terror campaign to any place or home that has recently sold? How hard will it be to look up for sale listings and target those people? What if they start torching cars, terrorizing pets or sending a "stray" bullet through a window?

I can literally see the townhouses from my window. That's how close I am to these nuts. I hope the cops can take these punks down before they smoke a little too much of the wacky weed and really cause some harm.

Oh btw, form my perch there appears to be a news truck and cop car in front of one of the homes, so I can assume there will be a news story regarding this in the near future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The disturbing thing here is that this is presumably not coming from a bunch of street thugs and toughs. Those who are behind this appear to be decently educated, and probably have college degrees or at least some college. That, or they are some of the most literate and well-spoken "non-college" people I have ever seen. That said, they didn't quite finish at the top of the class, either. To wit:

  • "... we, a group of anti-gentrification militants attacked an unfinished condominium."
They're clearly trying hard, what with the "we, ..." bit, but they don't quite get the punctuation right. Still, there's something to be said for getting "4 a.m." correct. That's stylistically correct, whereas most would make an error there such as "4AM" or something. Then there's this gem:
  • "This attack was not isolated, nor will it be the last."

No offense to the local thuggery, but I don't see them using the word "nor" as a conjunctive. The person the cops are looking for is likely neither some drug dealer on the corner, nor a young and stupid high school kid angry about a bunch of WASPs moving into his neighborhood. That said, some of this is a bit badly crafted:

  • "The eviction/resignation of all lease-agreements ... and their occupants forced back..."

It's rather hard to evict or resign a lease agreement. Lease agreement also don't tend to have occupants. The leasehold has an occupant, and a person might have a right to occupancy under a lease, but the way this is crafted is rather awkward.

Now, why am I bothering to grade this guys letter like a piece of homework? Simple -- The way this is put together can potentially reveal a great deal about the perpetrator. I would suppose their education is somewhat higher than high school, and that they probably attended either a local community college and did rather well, or if a private college, presumably did rather poorly. That said, given the quality of writing I've seen coming out of even some graduate institutions, I could be wrong.

I think this important, because if you assume that the "old neighbors" were to a significant extent lower income, largely uneducated working class minorities (as old demographic information seems to indicate), the signature of "The Old Neighbors" may be a bit disingenuous. This person just doesn't sound like that. This sounds more like the work of people who may have come from that background, and perhaps used to be neighbors, or whose parents were neighbors, but who are themselves not representative of the actual old neighbors as a class.

If my assumptions are even close to correct, it would be highly troubling that some jerk is threatening violence in the name of people who are almost certainly good, decent, hardworking people. I really hope they catch this loser and throw the book at him. Five years would be too few. This isn't some stupid firebug lighting garages on fire because he likes fire and is slightly deranged. This is a thoroughly disgusting and calculated attempt to spread fear and hatred through threats and acts of violence.

I know community patrols and stakeouts have been set up. Somebody out there must have a pretty good idea of who did it. I have my suspicions.

When you sit down and try to understand the logic behind it, you feel a tinge of insanity coming on. Prostitution and drug dealing I can understand. Violence because an area is being presumably gentrified? (where there isn't even proof that there is)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The disturbing thing here is that this is presumably not coming from a bunch of street thugs and toughs. Those who are behind this appear to be decently educated, and probably have college degrees or at least some college. That, or they are some of the most literate and well-spoken "non-college" people I have ever seen. That said, they didn't quite finish at the top of the class, either. To wit:

  • "... we, a group of anti-gentrification militants attacked an unfinished condominium."
They're clearly trying hard, what with the "we, ..." bit, but they don't quite get the punctuation right. Still, there's something to be said for getting "4 a.m." correct. That's stylistically correct, whereas most would make an error there such as "4AM" or something. Then there's this gem:
  • "This attack was not isolated, nor will it be the last."

No offense to the local thuggery, but I don't see them using the word "nor" as a conjunctive. The person the cops are looking for is likely neither some drug dealer on the corner, nor a young and stupid high school kid angry about a bunch of WASPs moving into his neighborhood. That said, some of this is a bit badly crafted:

  • "The eviction/resignation of all lease-agreements ... and their occupants forced back..."

It's rather hard to evict or resign a lease agreement. Lease agreement also don't tend to have occupants. The leasehold has an occupant, and a person might have a right to occupancy under a lease, but the way this is crafted is rather awkward.

Now, why am I bothering to grade this guys letter like a piece of homework? Simple -- The way this is put together can potentially reveal a great deal about the perpetrator. I would suppose their education is somewhat higher than high school, and that they probably attended either a local community college and did rather well, or if a private college, presumably did rather poorly. That said, given the quality of writing I've seen coming out of even some graduate institutions, I could be wrong.

I think this important, because if you assume that the "old neighbors" were to a significant extent lower income, largely uneducated working class minorities (as old demographic information seems to indicate), the signature of "The Old Neighbors" may be a bit disingenuous. This person just doesn't sound like that. This sounds more like the work of people who may have come from that background, and perhaps used to be neighbors, or whose parents were neighbors, but who are themselves not representative of the actual old neighbors as a class.

If my assumptions are even close to correct, it would be highly troubling that some jerk is threatening violence in the name of people who are almost certainly good, decent, hardworking people. I really hope they catch this loser and throw the book at him. Five years would be too few. This isn't some stupid firebug lighting garages on fire because he likes fire and is slightly deranged. This is a thoroughly disgusting and calculated attempt to spread fear and hatred through threats and acts of violence.

Interesting observations. I too have been analyzing the letter since it came out. As someone who works with and looks at a lot of writing, and who has a wife with an English degree, :whistling: a lot of things caught my attention as well. There are a few glaring grammatical errors, but generally it was written by someone with at least a bachelor's degree (or studying for a bachelors).

) Think about the downward spiral of grammar and writing lately, particularly with the explosion of social media and 140 character twitter. This letter flies in the face of that. Using words like "suburbanite", "cul-de-sac" (properly hyphenated), "incendiary" (that's not an easy word to spell for most), "nor" (my wife would have loved the correct use of nor in a sentence to express two different thoughts), "we announce with great volume..", "material possessions", and the the best of all, using "including, but not limited to:..."

Based on that, the author is most definitely a writer. I wouldn't be surprised if they have written similar thoughts about gentrification online somewhere; maybe even videos (although I haven't found anything yet).

) I bet the person is pissed they used the words "Our demands are not implausible," which makes no sense whatsoever. The person is probably someone who likes to show off their intellectual abilities, and were digging for a 50 dollar word when a quarter word would have done. But they had already used the word negotiate, so using "Our demands are non-negotiable" would have been repetitive and uncreative.

) The fact that they indented both sets of demands, using hyphens (and not bullet points like you'd see in MS Word) tells me that they probably used an old computer (?) Maybe using Microsoft Works or Notepad or something? If you do an indentation in the most recent versions of MS Word, even if you use a hyphen and not one of their default bullets, it automatically adds about 5 spaces behind the hyphen. The author's are only separated by the hyphens by one space. I can duplicate that almost exactly in Works. Again, someone who has an old computer sitting around that they use a lot.

) As you said x99, the "eviction/resignation of all lease agreements" is telling. The fact that there are For Sale signs and "Pending Sale" signs out in front of several of the units tells me they have no understanding of home ownership and how real estate sales works. Most people with any business sense or who have looked at homes to buy know that they are condos and not rentals, I would think. I would bet this person has never owned a home before, probably renting somewhere in the area. Plus, you can't just take an existing project and just wave a wand and make it "affordable." Again, I'll bet this person has never had a business class; most likely a History, Psychology, Poetry, Art or some other liberal arts major.

) The fact that they signed it "Old Neighbors" leads me to believe that they no longer live in Uptown. Perhaps were forced out of their space for some reason or another.

) I'm betting too that this author is female. Don't ask me why, it's just a hunch.

As I said, big clues to who did this reside on the internet somewhere. Either on a blog or in a comment section somewhere. Don't worry, I'm planning to share my ideas with the authorities.

I also plan to go through several of the threads on UrbanPlanet using a couple of keyword searches (and the thread of Fairmount Square).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting observations. I too have been analyzing the letter since it came out. As someone who works with and looks at a lot of writing, and who has a wife with an English degree, :whistling: a lot of things caught my attention as well. There are a few glaring grammatical errors, but generally it was written by someone with at least a bachelor's degree (or studying for a bachelors).

Huh. To me it doesn't sound like a college education, but someone who picked a few things up and is trying way too hard to appear intelligent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh. To me it doesn't sound like a college education, but someone who picked a few things up and is trying way too hard to appear intelligent.

Well I did say their intelligence was limited. :whistling: Maybe I'm subjected to so much poor writing that I'm taken aback by coherent sentences and mostly proper punctuation and spelling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The meeting was interesting, almost like a lunch & learn considering ICCF's marvelous snacks. (Cranberry popcorn. I will have to go source that stuff.)

I felt bad for the reporters downstairs. No one wanted to go on camera, including me (I live several blocks away).

If memory serves, the Unibomber brother recognized a few key phrases and word strings. Nowadays we have Google to do that, and I'm sure that Kevin and Greg are all over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh. To me it doesn't sound like a college education, but someone who picked a few things up and is trying way too hard to appear intelligent.

I think there's no way. This smacks of someone with at least some college education or college-level work experience. It's hack grade work, to be sure, but good hack work. GRDad picked up another good point that I didn't mention: "including, but not limited to..." This is a legal jargon, and seldom appears outside legal, government, or other similar work. It's purely verbal clutter, but necessary clutter when you're moving in certain circles. It's not a phrase I ever used in high school, and one I seldom used in college. Since I rather highly doubt a lawyer would do something this stupid--bar cards are just too expensive to waste for garbage like this--I think you could be looking at someone who has had some extensive exposure to government-related work, or with reading legislation. Just a hunch, but I'm thinking possibly someone who has written a grant proposal or two, or perhaps a policy position, something like that. People who use this phrase tend to use it reflexively--it becomes a matter of (bad) habit.

I will say one thing, though. I doubt this is actually much of a group of people on the "office" end of it. Whoever wrote that didn't have an editor, or took great pains to make it appear as if they didn't. Another possible option is someone who usually writes much better than this, but cranked it out in angry haste. That doesn't seem likely, given the gravity of what they were doing, but it's a though.

In any event, I certainly home I'm wrong about all of this. Hopefully it really is just some foolish 16 year old kid who doesn't fully grasp the magnitude of the crimes he has committed and will get juvenile detention instead of prison time when he is caught. But I doubt it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there's no way. This smacks of someone with at least some college education or college-level work experience. It's hack grade work, to be sure, but good hack work. GRDad picked up another good point that I didn't mention: "including, but not limited to..." This is a legal jargon, and seldom appears outside legal, government, or other similar work. It's purely verbal clutter, but necessary clutter when you're moving in certain circles. It's not a phrase I ever used in high school, and one I seldom used in college. Since I rather highly doubt a lawyer would do something this stupid--bar cards are just too expensive to waste for garbage like this--I think you could be looking at someone who has had some extensive exposure to government-related work, or with reading legislation. Just a hunch, but I'm thinking possibly someone who has written a grant proposal or two, or perhaps a policy position, something like that. People who use this phrase tend to use it reflexively--it becomes a matter of (bad) habit.

I will say one thing, though. I doubt this is actually much of a group of people on the "office" end of it. Whoever wrote that didn't have an editor, or took great pains to make it appear as if they didn't. Another possible option is someone who usually writes much better than this, but cranked it out in angry haste. That doesn't seem likely, given the gravity of what they were doing, but it's a though.

In any event, I certainly home I'm wrong about all of this. Hopefully it really is just some foolish 16 year old kid who doesn't fully grasp the magnitude of the crimes he has committed and will get juvenile detention instead of prison time when he is caught. But I doubt it.

Hmmm, interesting. Maybe someone who works or worked in civil rights, or in a civil rights law office, or for a housing non-profit. I use the phrase "including, but not limited to..." But you're right, it's only in contracts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another interesting thing that struck me x99. The letter states "Our demands are not implausible, and are expected to be carried out within a two-month period." Are expected to be carried out? The author seems to be a spokesperson for someone else who will carry out the actions?

Otherwise the author would have said "and we will carry these out within a two-month period" or "you can expect these to be carried out over a two-month period."

I could be totally spit-balling. Should've gotten a job in forensics. :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the letter again for anyone else to see if they spot anything that seems familiar.

post-2672-0-05706700-1298991925_thumb.jp

The chief of police mentioned that the arsonist who was hitting the Southest Side last Summer was caught because of a tip from someone who knew the guy, and remembered him saying something strange years earlier, and that he lived in the arson areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another interesting thing that struck me x99. The letter states "Our demands are not implausible, and are expected to be carried out within a two-month period." Are expected to be carried out? The author seems to be a spokesperson for someone else who will carry out the actions?

Otherwise the author would have said "and we will carry these out within a two-month period" or "you can expect these to be carried out over a two-month period."

I could be totally spit-balling. Should've gotten a job in forensics. :ph34r:

The author or his group isn't carrying anything out. They're expecting the city/homeowners/landlords/whomever to carry these instructions out "or else."

Anyway, this whole thing is pretty disturbing. If I lived in the neighborhood I'd be buying a gun, but that's just me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The author or his group isn't carrying anything out. They're expecting the city/homeowners/landlords/whomever to carry these instructions out "or else."

Anyway, this whole thing is pretty disturbing. If I lived in the neighborhood I'd be buying a gun, but that's just me.

Ah, that makes more sense. As much sense as insanity can make I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off: Profiling this individual on quality of writing alone doesn't say much about them, or their level of education. The only thing that's patently obvious is that the writer is trying really hard to appear intelligent and rational. He/she knows this isn't a tweet or a Facebook post and probably spent a good chunk of time making sure it sounded right. So regardless of the writer's level of education, it isn't hard to sound smart by pulling out big words and using spell/grammar check. Legal phrases like "including, but not limited to" and "failure to comply" are pretty common on forms and documents these days, and, again, if you're trying to sound smart and rational, easy to pull out of your butt.

That being said: This is a fun game! Lemme play! yahoo.gif

> "Our demands are not implausible" - I think what the writer meant to say is, "Our demands are not unreasonable," and just brain-farted out the wrong word. It happens.

> "eviction/resignation of lease agreements" - Agreed. Clearly not experienced in home ownership. But I also don't think the writer expects it to actually happen in that time frame. What he/she wants is a culture of fear in the neighborhood to scare people away.

> "The Old Neighbors" - I'm not convinced the writer has a connection to the East Hills neighborhood; people on crusades like to think they're speaking on behalf of the people they're supposedly fighting for, and this signature strikes me as an overt attempt to connect with the neighborhood's former low-income residents, as opposed to actually being one. Especially since the vandalism in December indiscriminately hit businesses that were established a long time ago, when this "old neighbor" would have been living there.

> The threats (destruction, muggings, kidnapping, burglary) - Also not convinced the writer's bite is any worse than the bark, as far as physical violence is concerned. A willingness to destroy property has been clearly demonstrated, but hurting a person is a major step up which hasn't been shown yet. Now, obviously, I'd rather see this person caught before my theory is put to the test. And, relatively benign events like setting an empty building afire are still dangerous and could still end up with people getting hurt... Which is why these people need to be caught right away.

Overall, this is a local terrorist. The townhouses were targeted first because they are the biggest, clearest symbol of the neighborhood's direction. I suspect the intention is to move on to other businesses and rehabbed homes; he/she knows the residents won't move out right away, but wants to instill a culture of fear so that they'll at least start looking elsewhere, and keep new residents out. As with most local campaigns, it's only achieved the opposite effect; people are pretty unified in standing their ground, and now this has the attention of the Feds... And one thing they know how to do is catch people.

I'm also inclined to suspect college-level education (though not necessarily a graduate), but just because that fits the profile of a local radical activist to me, not because of the quality of writing. However, to tell you the truth, that's not much; I really have no idea, and neither does anyone else here. If this person does have a bachelor's, I gotta tell ya, that academic institution has some explainin' to do...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the letter again for anyone else to see if they spot anything that seems familiar.

post-2672-0-05706700-1298991925_thumb.jp

The chief of police mentioned that the arsonist who was hitting the Southest Side last Summer was caught because of a tip from someone who knew the guy, and remembered him saying something strange years earlier, and that he lived in the arson areas.

Does anyone else think that this whole ordeal sound like a copy cat of the online group calling themselves 'Anonymous', but instead of hacktivists we have arsonists?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off: Profiling this individual on quality of writing alone doesn't say much about them, or their level of education. The only thing that's patently obvious is that the writer is trying really hard to appear intelligent and rational. He/she knows this isn't a tweet or a Facebook post and probably spent a good chunk of time making sure it sounded right. So regardless of the writer's level of education, it isn't hard to sound smart by pulling out big words and using spell/grammar check. Legal phrases like "including, but not limited to" and "failure to comply" are pretty common on forms and documents these days, and, again, if you're trying to sound smart and rational, easy to pull out of your butt.

Agreed. I have no college-level language training beyond EN101, but that does not prevent me from being able to write out such sentences and use such words. While high education may be likely, it is by no means a definitive conclusion. The assumption about the computer, as well, could be wrong; I use a fairly powerful computer yet still use Notepad for many documents due to its efficiency and speed in loading, saving, and closing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off: Profiling this individual on quality of writing alone doesn't say much about them, or their level of education. The only thing that's patently obvious is that the writer is trying really hard to appear intelligent and rational. He/she knows this isn't a tweet or a Facebook post and probably spent a good chunk of time making sure it sounded right. So regardless of the writer's level of education, it isn't hard to sound smart by pulling out big words and using spell/grammar check. Legal phrases like "including, but not limited to" and "failure to comply" are pretty common on forms and documents these days, and, again, if you're trying to sound smart and rational, easy to pull out of your butt.

That being said: This is a fun game! Lemme play! yahoo.gif

> "Our demands are not implausible" - I think what the writer meant to say is, "Our demands are not unreasonable," and just brain-farted out the wrong word. It happens.

> "eviction/resignation of lease agreements" - Agreed. Clearly not experienced in home ownership. But I also don't think the writer expects it to actually happen in that time frame. What he/she wants is a culture of fear in the neighborhood to scare people away.

> "The Old Neighbors" - I'm not convinced the writer has a connection to the East Hills neighborhood; people on crusades like to think they're speaking on behalf of the people they're supposedly fighting for, and this signature strikes me as an overt attempt to connect with the neighborhood's former low-income residents, as opposed to actually being one. Especially since the vandalism in December indiscriminately hit businesses that were established a long time ago, when this "old neighbor" would have been living there.

> The threats (destruction, muggings, kidnapping, burglary) - Also not convinced the writer's bite is any worse than the bark, as far as physical violence is concerned. A willingness to destroy property has been clearly demonstrated, but hurting a person is a major step up which hasn't been shown yet. Now, obviously, I'd rather see this person caught before my theory is put to the test. And, relatively benign events like setting an empty building afire are still dangerous and could still end up with people getting hurt... Which is why these people need to be caught right away.

Overall, this is a local terrorist. The townhouses were targeted first because they are the biggest, clearest symbol of the neighborhood's direction. I suspect the intention is to move on to other businesses and rehabbed homes; he/she knows the residents won't move out right away, but wants to instill a culture of fear so that they'll at least start looking elsewhere, and keep new residents out. As with most local campaigns, it's only achieved the opposite effect; people are pretty unified in standing their ground, and now this has the attention of the Feds... And one thing they know how to do is catch people.

I'm also inclined to suspect college-level education (though not necessarily a graduate), but just because that fits the profile of a local radical activist to me, not because of the quality of writing. However, to tell you the truth, that's not much; I really have no idea, and neither does anyone else here. If this person does have a bachelor's, I gotta tell ya, that academic institution has some explainin' to do...

I'm always surprised by the horrible writing skills of a lot of college grads. Especially the misuse of "I seen," and "your" instead of "you're" or "you are", and the biggie, mixing up "there", "they're" and "their." Those are the kinds of things that usually aren't picked up by spellcheckers or grammar checkers in Word and other word processing software.

I'm not saying I'm right about any of this. The perpetrators unfortunately probably won't be caught by the police, which can't possibly be everywhere at all times. They even said that last night. The target area is pretty large, stretching from Wealthy and James over to Cherry/Lake/Diamond. They will most likely be brought in by a tip and will cave under pressure.

The fear is working, in some ways. One townhouse owner last night asked what he should do if no one is caught in the next two months. Move out? Another is getting ready to close on one Friday and was questioning whether he should do so.

But there was also a lot of community organizing and support going on, and the venue was standing-room-only. It's surprising hearing some of the episodes that people like KC Calienda and Guy Bazzani have been through over the years of being pioneers in that area (like LighthouseDave's story earlier).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone else think that this whole ordeal sound like a copy cat of the online group calling themselves 'Anonymous', but instead of hacktivists we have arsonists?

Oh, I know where I've heard their name: the group Anonymous was looking at hacking the website of Westboro Baptist Church.

http://wobblygoblin.wordpress.com/2011/02/28/why-more-anarchists-should-get-involved-with-anonymous-announcing-anonymous-anarchist-action/

In the mere fact that they are anarchists? Perhaps. But there are tons of anarchist groups around the country (and in Grand Rapids).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.