The Latest From The Private Bradley Manning Support Network-Free Bradley Manning Now! -Day Two of the Bradley Manning Trial In Depth: Notes from a Courtroom Viewer in Bradley Manning’s Article 32 Hearing

Click on the headline to link to the Private Bradley Manning Support Network for the latest information in his case.

Day Two of the Bradley Manning Trial In Depth: Notes from a Courtroom Viewer in Bradley Manning’s Article 32 Hearing

December 17, 2011: Bradley Manning Support Network sent a representative into the courtroom to take notes for the public on what happened at Bradley Manning’s hearing. No recording devices (like cell phones or audio recorders) were allowed, so all these notes are hand-written and as accurate as written notes and memory allow. Notes were taken by Rainey Reitman, any omissions or inaccuracies are entirely her fault and not reflective of the Support Network positions. Please send corrections to rainey@bradleymanning.org

See day one here.

Getting to the Courtroom

Fort Meade, Maryland Today was just as chilly and grey as the yesterday, about what you would expect for December in Maryland. The hearing was scheduled to being at 10:00 AM and I arrive a bit after 9:15 AM. Knowing that the majority of the Manning supporters would likely be drawn to the rally outside the gates, I assumed (correctly) that it would not be difficult to get entrance. I was right; I was able to get into the courtroom and there was room to spare. As yesterday, our bags were searched and we went through metal detectors.

The military police have designated a heated trailed with folding chairs for us to wait in during breaks. Today, they added a folded table, more chairs, and two water coolers with cups.

The Article 32

10:34 AM Bradley Manning entered with David Coombs and his two military-assigned attorneys. When the investigating officer, Lt. Col. Paul Almanza, arrived, he appeared to be chewing something (maybe a lozenge?). The IO reviewed the court room rules again, advising the spectators not the interrupt or have cellular phones or they could be subject to removal.

Almanza then began by asking Manning’s two military-appointed JAGs, Blouchard and Kemkes, whether they were both certified by military law and authorized to represent Bradley Manning. Blouchard and Kemkes confirmed they were.

Special Agent Toni Graham

Things moved much more quickly on day two of the pretrial hearing. The government called their first witness, Special Agent Toni Graham. S.A. Graham was in Hawaii, and unfortunately the connection was not ideal. The government spent time fiddling with the podium equipment in an attempt to call her, then pulled in a young military support technician with ear studs to help fix the issue. When at last Graham was on the phone, the connection was static-filled and her voice was nearly incomprehensible. She was asked to stand and raise her right hand, then swear to tell the truth, and then warned that if she needed to disclose sensitive information that she should note that and wait before making the disclosure.

Her confirmation was hard to understand at best. Media representatives and public spectators (myself among them) exchanged incredulous looks at the technical difficulties. Almanza interrupted, stating that he was having difficulty understand her response to a question. He asked whether she was on a cell phone or a land line, and Graham admitted she was on a cell phone but offered to move to her office so she could talk from a landline. The defense urged the court to ensure that Graham was in a place where she would be able to speak freely.

A recess was called, mere minutes after the hearing began, so Graham could make the thirty minute trip to her office line.

11:30 AM Everyone returned to their places, and Almanza quizzed the government about whether the technical difficulties were addressed. The lead attorney for the government, perhaps a bit chagrined, stated that the issue was resolved and it had been a problem with the courtroom connection. However, they’d switched to a different phone and had already called the first 2 witnesses to check the audio quality.

Toni Graham was again introduced and sworn in. Her position in the 102nd Military Police detachment was reviewed, and she stated she was in a place she could speak privately and with freedom. She admitted to having the AIR she had produced (ref number 00000184-190) on hand, but agreed upon defense request to set it aside and notify the court if she needed to refer to it.

Graham was a CID (criminal investigations) agent. In the Manning case, her primary duties were to protect, collect, and preserve digital device evidence. The prosecution asked her about her experience, and she said she worked on perhaps 100 cases per year. She was serving on a battalion in Baghdad on 27 May 2010 when she received instructions from her headquarters based on information from a confidential informant. She then received a search warrant from a military magistrate and developed a team, including Thomas Smith, a counter intelligence agent, and another individual.

Graham was charged with collecting the personal computer and additional digital devices related to the Bradley Manning investigation. She also canvassed acquaintances and collected his personal, SCIF computers, and 2 SIPR computers.

Graham also searched the Containerized Housing Unit (CHU) where Manning resided. She took a personal computer, hard drive, cell phone, 10 DVDs, and 1 CD marked with the word “secret: in a U.S. postal shipping package. She testified that there were perhaps 100 yards between the SCIF and CHU. She also took digital devices from the supply section, since she learned Manning had recently been reassigned to supplies. From the supply area she took another SIPR computer and one other computer. She also obtained a computer belonging to a Captain Bigalow, as allegedly Manning had used this computer. She also found out that Manning had used a secret scanner on two occasions, and so she collected that computer.

Graham testified that she’d received authorization to seize and search the devices via her commander, as well as with consent from Bigalow, and also through formal search authorization granted to her.

On June 11, 2010, the investigation was transferred to the Computer Crimes Investigating Unit (CCIU). That is because CCIU has additional technical expertise, and all of the evidence in this matter was computer-related. Graham described the evidence being moved to CCIU through a “controlled transfer” – physical evidence hand delivered and additional evidence sent via registered mail. Evidence was thus hand delivered to Kuwait, then to Virginia.

At this point the prosecution rested and defense attorney Major Matthew Kemkes stepped forward. Kemkes has a respectful, somewhat solemn, strikingly earnest style in his courtroom delivery. He came across as thoughtful, and seemed somehow more restrained than Coombs.

Kemkes began by asking Graham if she was the first lead agent in the investigation, which she confirmed. He then noted that it seemed she was a truly central figure in the investigation, since she was serving now as the government first witness. He asked whether she had been asked to attend the proceedings in person, and why she had not done so. She responded that she was in Hawaii and needed to seek approval in order to travel for the proceedings.

At this point Almanza halted the line of questioning, his voice hoarse, and asked about the purpose of this questioning. Kemkes replied with candor, reiterating earlier defense arguments about the need to have important witnesses on site for the proceedings for in-person cross-examination. Almanza was unconvinced, referring to his early finding about this issue.

Kemkes proceeded quickly. After a quick review of her credentials and history, Kemkes confirmed with Graham that she had received search authorization from a military magistrate before searching the CHU. He asked whether she had signed the 5/29/10 affidavit which stated that Bradley Manning had sent classified documents to outside sources and would share more. Graham responded that she had indeed signed the affidavit, and in fact had reviewed it recently (within the last 2 weeks). She confirmed that the affidavit did state the Manning had released TS-SCI information and cables onto the Internet. Upon questioning, she admitted that much of her affidavit was based on information from commanders at Ft. Belvoir who had received intelligence from a confidential informant. The affidavit also specifically mentioned an article in the Stars and Stripes military publication called “A Wiki for a World of Secrets.”

Kemkes was methodical in questioning the contents of the affidavit Graham provided. But he was quickly able to hone in on her primary reason for filing the affidavit: because she knew that the Apache helicopter video showing Reuters journalists was confidential information and that millions (5 million? 5 billion? she asked) of “unauthorized individuals” had viewed this document. She did mention that “There were other reasons that I did not provide in the affidavit,” but admitted that the primary ones were those listed in the affidavit itself, especially the release of the Apache helicopter video.

Kemkes asked whether Graham stood by the affidavit she signed, and she confirmed, stating that TS/SCI had been leaked onto the Internet.

Kemkes then asked how she would feel if she found out that the video in question was unclassified, if in fact the 8 million people who saw it had seen an unclassified video. Graham struggled to answer this question, and was skeptical of Kemkes’ assertion that the video was unclassified. Kemkes asked how Graham has heard that the video was classified when she filed her affidavit, and Graham said the information had come by way of the confidential informant

Kemkes then picked apart another statement Graham made in her affidavit. He noted that her affidavit stated Manning had been penetrating .mil and .gov accounts for over a year. Kemkes pointed out that the affidavit was produced in May 2010, and that Manning had only been deployed since November 2009. How, then, could Graham be sure that he was penetrating systems for over a year?

“I can’t say for sure he was going it for over a year,” Graham admitted. This information was also something she had gathered by way of the confidential informant’s report.

Kemkes asked Graham about a box containing DVDs she had collected on 7/12/09, including one disc labeled “secret.” He proceeded to ask about whether she had searched and inventoried other items beyond digital media? She said she had not. He asked whether she knew that Manning might have gender identity disorder, and she said in fact she had. Kemkes asked whether Graham has discovered any evidence about this issue when collecting evidence for the case. She could not recall. He asked if she had found anything like that, including medical pamphlets or articles printed from the Internet. She could not recall. Kemkes asked about a specific medical pamphlet from Canada that reviewed options for dealing with gender identity disorder, including changing one’s dress, hormone therapy, facial surgery, and gender reassignment. Graham again could not recall.

At this point the prosecution objected, asking for the relevance of the questioning. The objection was overruled.

Upon further questioning, Graham admitted that she had seen “several things about homosexuality” when collecting evidence from Manning’s CHU. Kemkes asked what Graham had done with these things. Graham replied “I left it in his room.” Kemkes now asked a few incredulous questions, asking how often she had encountered similar situations where soldiers had copies of Flight Into Hypermasculinity. Almanza admonished Kemkes, urging him to “try to focus on the thoroughness of the investigation.”

Asked again what she did with evidence about Manning’s sexuality, Graham said she “set it to the side.” She then said plainly that “we already knew before we arrived” that Manning was a homosexual. She added, awkwardly, “I don’t know if the proper term is transvestite.” [NB: based on the context, I don’t believe Graham was confused about the difference between a transvestite and a homosexual. Rather, I believe she was certain Manning was gay but uncertain whether other factors might also make him a transvestite. She might also have been searching for the word “transgender.”]

Graham explained that in the course of her evidence collection she had conducted 5 interviews and canvassed other people who knew Manning. All interviews were conducted face to face. Kemkes asked if she would agree that Manning didn’t have a lot of friends in the unit. Graham agreed. She was asked about his relative popularity, but the prosecution objected.

Kemkes defended his questioning to the IO, stating that these all helped better understand that situation and stating that “what is going on in my client’s mind is very important.”

Kemkes asked whether there was a belief noted in the interviews that Manning was gay. Graham said no, that it was not brought up. There was no mention in these interviews of behavioral issues or mental disturbance.

Kemkes noted that Graham’s affidavit was that major piece of documentation affecting the pre-trial confinement hearing of Bradley Manning. He asked Graham if she was now comfortable with that affidavit being the basis of his pretrial confinement. She statement merely “That was the information I had at the time.”

Here Kemkes stepped away from the speaker phone for the telephone next to the IO and briefly conferred with the defense team. At last he sat down, and the government stepped up for a brief round of questioning before the group broke for recess.

The government stepped up for a quick line of questioning, following an argument pattern the government seems keen to identify: that procedures were appropriately followed. The government asked whether, at the time Graham signed her affidavit, she as aware that TS/SCI information had been compromised. She said she was. [NB: a section of this questioning is unclear from my notes. Apologies.] She briefly discussed the confidential informant who provided them with information, noting that he was in direct contact with the FBI.

The government asked Graham whether there was evidence to suggest that the Apache airstrike video came from a classified system. She said there was. Graham explained that she had interviewed Captain Morton, who had recently returned from R&R. [NB: Graham at first could not remember Captain Morton’s name but remembered it after a moment.] According to Graham, Morton had apparently learned about the airstrike video from Bradley Manning. Morton was skeptical about it, but Manning pulled it from SIPRnet and sent a copy to her.

Now the prosecution was finished. Almanza reminded the prosecution that this was their chance to authenticate documents, at which point the defense objected. In the words of Kemkes, “The defense doesn’t believe you need to remind the government how to do their job.”

The objection was overruled.

[NB: I did not catch whether this witness was temporarily or permanently excused. If you caught that, please email me at rainey@bradleymanning.org]

Special Agent Calder Robinson

1:25PM The next individual called as a witness by the prosecution was Special Agent Calder, who also appeared telephonically from Germany. Robinson was with the Computer Crimes Investigative Unit (CCIU) in Germany, and in fact was in charge of the Europe Branch office for CID. He was asked to stand and raise his right hand, then swear to tell the truth. He was asked to put aside any notes he might have and admonished against disclosing classified information without first making the court aware. He confirmed that he was alone and could speak freely.

The government first established that Robinson was a competent CCIU agent. He had accumulated over 350 cases since he became a CCIU agent in March 2006, and he had received over 660 hours of training including training in forensic examination.

Upon questioning, Robinson related that he had received a call on 29 May 2010. Based on the information in that call, he traveled to Baghdad to take control of digital evidence, conducted a preliminary forensic examination, and then transported it elsewhere for further forensic examination. He traveled to Camp Liberty in Baghdad, which was considered the best nearby place to collect the data and conduct a preliminary forensic analysis. Robinsons main role was to obtain forensic images of the evidence and conduct the preliminary examination. He was asked what physical evidence specifically there was, and he had to refer to his notes.

After a moment looking at his notes, Robison related that he had dealt with

•a laptop belonging to Bigalow,
•the personal laptop and hard drive of Bradley Manning,
•several optical discs including one marked secret,
•2 SIPR machines (1 the assigned work station of Manning and 1 from the supply area),
•1 SIPR machine from another soldier
NB: I did not hear a mention of a cell phone being included in this list, even though a cell phone was previously alluded to. If you have notes from the hearing and noted a cell phone in this list, please email me at rainey@bradleymanning.org

Robinson explained that he imaged the hard drives and did a preliminary forensic examination. Imaging, he explained, was creating a bit-by-bit copy of the data on a device so that it could not be lost if the device was lost or damaged. The thoroughness of the imaging was verified because he created a secure hash of the data on both the original machine and the imaged copy, and compared the two hashes. If they were identical, he knew the copy was complete and identical. He used EnCase to image all of the computers and the 1 optical disc marked “secret.”

At this point, the prosecuting attorney finished up and defense attorney Captain Paul Blouchard stepped up to the speaker phone to address Robinson.

Blouchard reiterated that Robinson had collected hard drives from the digital devices. He then asked if Robinson knew if these computers were used by people other than Bradley Manning. Robinson hedged slightly, noting that this would be made clear in a full forensic analysis (which he didn’t do).

Upon request from Blouchard, Robinson explained the difference between imaging and forensic analysis. He said that imaging just meant creating a copy, whereas forensic analysis was a scientific process that could take weeks to months. Robinson was not involved in the full forensic analysis of the devices.

Blouchard asked if his certification was up to date at the time in question, and Robinson confirmed it was.

Blouchard then asked about the preliminary forensic analysis he conducted. Were the devices cat-card accessible? Robinson was unsure. Blouchard asked if the devices were password-protected. Robinson said that all but one of the devices was password protected – the exception being Bradley Manning’s personal computer.

Blouchard then asked about someone named Captain Turetko [NB: I am unsure if I have the spelling of this name correct. If you have a verified spelling, please email rainey@bradleymanning.org] Blouchard asked if Captain Turetko was involved in one image, and Robinson said he was not. Blouchard asked whether Robinson had instructed Turetko in obtaining network logs, and Robinson said someone from his unit had done so. He added that this was “typical” and that often a tech contact on location would collect network logs while CCIU was remote. Blouchard asked if Robinson had sent software or instructions to Turetko, and he said not that he recalled.

Blouchard then asked whether Robinson had come across any information in the preliminary forensic examination to indicate that Manning wanted to create an alter ego named Brianna Manning. Robinson, who had proved himself throughout to be an unflappable and somewhat reticent witness, said that he was familiar with the name but that it did not come up in the analysis. He was questioned about evidence around Manning’s emotional state, and Robinson mentioned that in the chat logs Manning referred to himself as “fragile.”

Blouchard asked if Robinson had seen evidence that Manning was gay. Robinson said he had not.

Blouchard asked about GAL (“Global address list”) but Robinson responded in the negative. Finally Blouchard asked whether there were other user profiles on the computers he worked on. Robinson said that Manning had a profile. When pressed about other profiles, he said that he did not recall.

At this point the defense rested. The prosecution asked Robinson a few clarifying questions. Honing in on the issue of Captain Turetko, Robinson confirmed upon questioning that Turetko obtained network logs for them. Network logs are, he explained, are the digital communications between computers. He confirmed that Turetko did not image anything.

At this point, Robinson was permanently excused from the pretrial hearing. He was warned against discussing the case with anyone.

Special Agent Mark Mander

1:47 PM Finally, at 1:47 PM, the government called a witness to appear in person. Mark Mander, a dark-haired man balding a bit, wore a dark suit and spoke with confidence.

The prosecution began by reviewing Mander’s credentials. He was from the Army Computer Crimes Investigative Unit. He had been with CIE since 1994 and had been with the CCIU for 4 years. He had taken over 300 hours of training in computer evidence collection, etc, and had worked on an estimated 20 cases. He had been involved as a case agent in the Manning proceedings since the evidence was transferred to Camp Liberty in Badghdad.

In describing how he’d ended up on the case, Mander explained that typically the CIU closest to the location of the alleged infringement would take the case. However, since there weren’t federal agents available in Iraq, there was a need to transfer the case to CCIU. Also, the technical subject matter of the case made it more suitable for CCIU.

On June 11, 2011, Mander personally took custody of the evidence.

Mander said that he obtained chats from Mr. Lamo; specifically, an agent from Mander’s office travelled to Adrian Lamo to obtain the Lamo’s computer and hard drive. Mander noted that it was his understanding that a copy of the chat logs in question were also found on property collected from Bradley Manning.

[NB: my notes here are slightly unclear, so have been omitted]

Mander described how CCIU attempted to go over SIPRnet to obtain a copy of the Granai airstrike video but was ultimately unsuccessful. Thus, they sent agents to Florida to obtain log files, folders, files, and documents in person. Lt. Col. Schmidtl (sp) provided background information about this video and a password. The file name in question was BE22PAX.zip

Mander described how Lamo had related that an individual he was acquainted with had been in contact with another person who was “bragging” that they were part of the effort to decrypt the Granai airstrike video. According to Mander, after several days of follow up, it was ascertained that the individual who was “bragging” was Jason Katz, previously employed at Brookhaven National Labs. Per Mander, Jason Katz had worked there from February 2009 to March 2010. He was then terminated from Brookhaven due to issues around misuse of computers. Brookhaven was able to obtain a forensic image of his work computer as well as his personal computer which had been connected to the work network.
When asked how Brookhaven was able to obtain these images, Mander explained that Katz had waived his rights away by signing an agreement as part of his employment at Brookhaven. Thus he had consented to having his computer searched and seized. Additionally, Mander said a search warrant was obtained. Through this, they were able to identify a file called B.zip on Katz’s computer [NB: unsure if personal or work computer] and within that folder a document titled BE22PAZ.wmv. Mander explained that this file was encrypted and password protected. When Mander provided the password given to him by Schmidtl, the file opened. It appeared to be the same video as the video of the Granai aistrike.

In the second week of June, 2 CCIU agents went to the State Department and obtained log files of people who accessed the State Department network. They also obtained “Firewall logs.”

[NB:My notes are a little unclear here and so have been omitted]

Mander also explained that Intel Link was like a search engine that allowed an individual to search documents on SIPRNet.

Mander noted that in the investigation they were able to collect an IP address that corresponded with Bradley Manning’s work computer.

Mander’s unit also collected logs from the CIA. They were particularly interested in keywords that had been search out. They also collected “centaur logs” also known as “F-Flow logs” which are basically connection logs, to show which IP address connected at exactly when and the traffic load.

On 18 June 2010, Mander described contacted Deborah van Alstyne of Potomac, MD – Manning’s aunt. Mander was accompanied by 4 other agents from CCIU an Department of State. In this initial visit, they discussed Manning’s childhood and family life. Van Alstyne stated that in one of the contacts she had with Manning in Iraq, he had asked about the public reception of the 2007 apache video. After his arrest, Mander said that Manning asked van Alstyne to make a post on his Facebook wall referencing the video.

Mander testified that they searched the home of Deborah, specifically a basement room where Manning’s things were. They were particularly looking for digital media. They also collected a computer that van Alstyne said belonged to Manning and was kept on and connected to the Internet, though she did not know what it did.

But this was not the end of Mander’s time with Manning’s family. A few months later, Mander returned. When Manning was apprehended and held in Kuwait, the government collected all of Manning’s items and placed them in a container. Manders said they made every effort to get a military magistrate to authorize a search or the container, but before it was resolved the container was shipped to van Alstyne’s home (Manning’s home of record). Mander went back to van Alstyne to see if he could obtain the container.

It turned out that Manning’s aunt had saved the box. It was intact and unopened, and she surrendered it to Mander. Van Alstyne also allowed Mander to conduct a second search of the basement. This second search was fruitful, in part because the basement had been organized and all of Manning’s effects had been placed in plastic boxes. On this second search, they were able to find memory cards, a hard drive, optical media discs. The most significant finding was an SD memory card with various bits of information, some of it classified.

As they identified the digital media, they would photograph it in its original location and then place it on the bed. Then van Alstyne verified that the items in question belonged to Manning.

More coming soon! Unfortunately, I got a late start transcribing my notes tonight and didn’t finish everything. I’ll try to add more before I go into court tomorrow, but if I don’t have time I’ll add to it tomorrow evening when I do my daily update. Still remaining was the defense cross-examination of Mander, the testimony of Special Agent Troy Bettencourt, and the lengthy testimony of Captain Steven Lin, who served with Manning in Iraq.

I’d also like to invite individuals curious about the trial to come down to the courtroom tomorrow; we start at 9 AM.



Resources

EnCase http://www.guidancesoftware.com/forensic.htm

Geanai airstrike https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granai_airstrike




News articles

Bradley Manning Pre-Trial: Live Blog, Day 2

http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2011/12/17/bradley-manning-pre-trial-live-blog-day-2/

Bradley Manning Defense Reveals Alter Ego Named ‘Breanna Manning’

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/bradley-manning-defense-reveals-alter-ego-named-brianna-manning/

Testimony in Manning’s WikiLeaks case shows breadth of evidence

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-wiki-manning-20111218,0,918767.story

Private Bradley Manning court martial: investigators found classified information in bedroom basement

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8963882/Private-Bradley-Manning-court-martial-investigators-found-classified-information-in-bedroom-basement.html

Private Bradley Manning wanted to call himself ‘Breanna’ on Twitter, US military court is told

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8963582/Private-Bradley-Manning-wanted-to-call-himself-Breanna-on-Twitter-US-military-court-is-told.html

WikiLeaks lawyers protest at denial of full access to Manning hearing

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/17/wikileaks-lawyers-protest-manning-hearing?newsfeed=true

Prosecution to Present its Case Against Manning

http://www.salon.com/2011/12/17/prosecution_to_present_its_case_against_manning_3/

The Latest From The Private Bradley Manning Support Network-Free Bradley Manning Now! -Bradley Manning Trial In Depth: Day One-Notes from a Courtroom Viewer in Bradley Manning’s Article 32 Hearing

Click on the headline to link to the Private Bradley Manning Support Network for the latest information in his case.

Bradley Manning Trial In Depth: Notes from a Courtroom Viewer in Bradley Manning’s Article 32 Hearing

December 16, 2011: Bradley Manning Support Network sent representatives into the courtroom to take notes for the public on what happened at Bradley Manning’s hearing. No recording devices (like cell phones or audio recorders) were allowed, so all these notes are hand-written and as accurate as written notes and memory allow. Notes were taken by Rainey Reitman, any omissions or inaccuracies are entirely her fault and not reflective of the Support Network positions. Please send corrections to rainey@bradleymanning.org



Getting into the Courtroom
7:35 AM
Manning’s pretrial hearing (called the Article 32) began on December 16, 2011 at Fort Meade in Maryland. The weather was chilly and grey, but lightened as the day progressed. Members of the public and media who wished to attend the trial were processed through the main visitors entrance. Fort Meade prepared for an enormous turnout — designating a soccer-field sized parking lot for trial attendees and setting up an overflow spectator theater with video feed from the trial that could hold 100 people.

I was one of the first dozen individuals from the public to arrive in the visitor processing area, reaching the courthouse shortly after 7:30 AM. The courthouse was cordoned off with metal gating with guards at possible entrances. Individuals who wished to go in were told to leave electronic devices in their cars and then sent to a heated trailer to wait on folding chairs for security screening. Everyone who entered the facility went through a metal detector and had purses and bags individually searched. Of those in the trailer seeking entrance, the majority appeared to be Manning supporters coming from far and wide to attend — Toronto, New York, Boston, San Francisco.

Two of Julian Assange’s lawyers (see last page of notes) were also present, as was a citizen journalist from WLCentral.org.

Twenty members of the public were eventually processed and held in a small outdoor enclosure just outside the court. After perhaps twenty minutes, we were allowed entrance and settled quietly into the back of the room.

The Article 32
Bradley Manning sat on the left side of the courtroom, his back to the public viewers. He spoke with quiet animation to the military-appointed attorney by his side, though his words were inaudible to us. At 8:55 AM, Manning’s second military-appointed attorney arrived with David Coombs, his civilian attorney and the leader of his defense team. In the first row of seats behind Manning sat the rest of the legal defense team, including a computer forensics expert and David Coombs’ wife.

There were 9 members of the press present (7 taking notes and 2 sketch artists). It is possible additional members of the media were present but not clearly distinguishable.

At 9:04 AM, Lt Colonel Paul Almanza, the investigating officer presiding over the Article 32 hearing, entered the room. He moved quickly and carried a large sheaf of documents.

The hearing began with Almanza reading carefully from notes regarding the appropriate conduct of public attendees. He reiterated that cellular phones and interruptions were forbidden in order
“to protect the dignity and decorum of these proceedings” and warned that failure to follow these rules would result in an individual being removed from the courtroom.

Almanza spoke softly and carefully, displaying no sign of self-consciousness in these early moments of the proceeding. His eyes moved from the paper in his hands to Manning and back, not flickering over to the spectators. He began his interactions with the defense team by establishing that Manning had been appropriately notified of the pretrial hearing on November 28, 2011, and that the defense counsel had offered witnesses and evidence to include in the hearing.

Almanza then asked Manning whether he had the charge sheet in front of him. Manning, in his first spoken public statement since his arrest 18 months earlier, said “Yes sir, I do.”

Manning was then asked a series of other questions about whether he understood his rights and other administrative matters, to which Manning offered affirmative, respectful responses. His voice was unchanged except when questioned about his legal team and whether he was satisfied with his current legal representation. His answer again was “Yes, sir,” but here his voice changed in tone, adding emphasis and depth.

Almanza reviewed Manning’s rights, including his right to be present in the court throughout the length of the proceedings, the right to cross examine witnesses, the right to provide information as part of the proceedings, the right to legal counsel, the right to call witnesses for the investigating officer to examine, and the right to be silent or to speak in either sworn or unsworn statements. Unsurprisingly, any statements Manning makes in the pretrial can be used against him in the trial.

At this point, Almanza reviewed his own status in the case. A Department of Justice employee, he admitted to seeing some media coverage of the Manning case prior to being detailed to the position. The government did not have additional questions about this matter, but Coombs had a number.

Coombs rose for every statement he made in the court, and for questioning the investigating officer he actually stepped out from behind the table and approached the investigating officer. Coombs was particularly interested in learning how the convening authority had become aware of Almanza’s name. Almanza was unable to answer that question, stating that he’d received a call in August 2010.

Coombs also questioned whether Almanza had taken a course with Coombs in school (Almanza was not sure). He also questioned Almanza’s experience. Almanza had tried 6 court martials, in which all defendants plead guilty, one of which was a mixed plea. Almanza had prosecuted about 20 cases from 2002 to 2004.

Upon questioning by Coombs, Almanza also acknowledged that the Department of Justice (his employers) has an ongoing investigation around WikiLeaks. Almanza asserted that he hadn’t spoken to anyone at the Department of Justice about the investigation.

After the initial round of questioning, Coombs became more aggressive in his questioning of the investigating office. Oddly, as the questions became more probing, Almanza became more soft spoken and slightly less organized in his responses, correcting himself several times. Coombs was particularly keen on the exact dates on which Almanza was detailed to investigating officer of the Manning case, and when he left the DOJ. Almanza admitted that he was detailed on 12/2 but continued to work in his civilian position at the Department of Justice until 12/12, but stated that he did no more work for the DOJ after that. (NB: this issue comes up later (see below), when Coombs states that the defense received an email from Almanza after 12/12 from Almanza’s civilian Department of Justice email account, thus indicated Almanza was still “wearing the hat” of the DOJ.)

Coombs also questioned what impressions Almanza had formed about the case before stepping in as investigating officer. Almanza admitted he had read articles about the case, but that after he had learned he would be detailed to the case had avoided reading articles whose headlines indicated they were about Manning. Almanza said that, when he heard about he case, his initial impression was that if the allegations were true, this was a serious matter. But he insisted that he did not form an opinion based on what he read in the paper because the paper isn’t always accurate and isn’t always the full story.

At the point, Coombs outlined his full argument against Almanza and asked Almanza to recuse himself from the trial. Speaking eloquently, with broad gestures and stepping back and forth across the court room, Coombs argued that there were four primary reasons that Almanza must recuse himself from the proceedings:

1.Almanza’s position at the Department of Justice, which has an open investigation into the matter of Wikileaks, could bias him in the proceedings. As a career prosecutor at the Department of Justice, a reasonable person could see that Almanza might be biased in the case against Manning. Additionally, the Department of Justice has not ruled out taking over the trial of Bradley Manning altogether. And furthermore, Almanza had denied Coombs’ request to access information about the Department of Justice’s investigation into Wikileaks.
2.Almanza’s one-sided approval of witnesses. The government submitted a list of 20 people to be called as witnesses. It was merely a list – no explanation provided for why those individuals were called. Every one of those witnesses was approved by Almanza. The defense called 48 witnesses, providing a multi-page document explaining why each witness was important to the case. Of those, 10 were in common with the government and were approved. Of the remaining 38 witnesses called by the defense, only 2 were approved. NB: statements made by Almanza later in the proceedings seemed to indicate another 2 were later approved, after the original request was made and upon receiving additional legal counsel.
3.Refusal to close the hearing during certain sensitive portions. Coombs requested that the hearing be closed to the public during a limited portion of the proceeding while discussing information that he felt could damage his client’s ability to receive a fair trial. Almanza refused.
4.Accepting unsworn statements against objections. Coombs explained that the government had delayed the hearing again and again in order to allow for a review of certain classified information by two witnesses who could speak to how the information was classified and the potential harm it may have caused. Coombs felt it was extraordinarily important that the defense be offered the opportunity to question these witnesses in person during the proceedings. But Almanza rejected the request, allowing these two witnesses to provide unsworn statements as part of the hearing. Coombs cited RCM 405, stating that unsworn statements were inadmissible as evidence over objections.
Here Coombs spoke more broadly and passionately about the case, noting that Manning was facing the death sentence over these issues. He urged the court to let him cross examine these witnesses over the appropriate classification of documents, noting that this was of primary importance to the trial because this was the real issue. Coombs asked “Where is the damage? Where is the harm?” Without the opportunity to cross-examine these witnesses, the public and the investigating officer would never know.

Concluding his arguments, Coombs handed a rather thick typed sheaf of papers to the prosecution and Almanza, a motion asking that Almanza be removed. He sat down again, sipping water.

Almanza asked if the prosecution would like to respond, and the prosecution said it would first need to review the documents. Around 10 AM, a recess was called.

At 11:32 AM the court reconvened, Bradley Manning again escorted to his seat flanked by attorneys who towered above him. As before, he did not turn to face the audience at any point; the audience was able to catch a glimpse of his face only as he was brought in and out of the court room.

As the court reconvened, the defense asked that the investigating officer seek contact the Chief Trial Advisor for a recommendation on the issue.

The government was then allowed to question the investigating officer. The questions were simple and the answers brief. Had Almanza reviewed any material about Bradley Manning or WikiLeaks in his position at the Department of Justice? No. Had he conversed with anyone at the Department of Justice about Manning or WikiLeaks? No. Had he followed procedures in agreeing upon the 15 witnesses, considering the difficulty or expense of bringing them to the proceedings and what they would add? Yes. Had he prepared a written finding of his witness list? Yes. Had he consulted with a legal advisor on this matter? Yes. Did he consult with a legal advisor on his interpretation of the rules regarding unsworn witnesses and objections? Yes.

The government created several themes in their questioning and later arguments for keeping Almanza as investigating officer: that procedures were followed, that written findings were created that could be reviewed by judge or appellate court in the future, that legal advise was sought on important matters.

The government asked Almanza whether he felt he could serve as an unbiased judge in this matter, to which Almanza said he could. The government summarized the answers that Amanza had provided and finished by asserting that Almanza could continue to serve as an unbiased and impartial judge.

At this point, Almanza hesitated, then corrected the prosecuting attorney, stating that the standard was not whether he was unbiased but whether a reasonable person, knowing all the facts, could believe that he was not likely to be biased. The prosecution parroted Almanza’s language back to him, stating that the prosecution believed a reasonable person would find Almanza to be free of any potential bias.

David Coombs was quick to argue the issue of perceived bias, noting that Almanza’s interpretation of the standard (“that a reasonable person, knowing all the facts, would believe”) and asserted that no reasonable person would believe that someone working for the Department of Justice would be free of the specter of bias. In fact, Coombs noted that the defense had received emails from Almanza from the Department of Justice email address even after 12/12. Almanza countered that the Department of Justice was large and he worked in an area focusing on child exploitation and obscenity, not anything to do with WikiLeaks.

Coombs responded that the standard did not take into account whether the Department of Justice was large, merely whether or not a reasonable person could believe, knowing the facts, that Almanza could be biased. Coombs then pointed out that the media was already questioning the possibility of impartiality.

He noted that the defense had received emails from Almanza from the Department of Justice email address on 12/12 and after, indicating the Almanza was still wearing the hat of the DOJ.
Almanza also noted that he was not a trial attorney currently, focusing on policy and legislation in his current position. He restated his concerns about closing the trial for “very limited pieces of information that could taint my client’s ability to get a fair trial.” And Coombs noted again that the case “rises and falls” on whether information is correctly classified.

Coombs was passionate in his defense, perhaps indicating that his courtroom style would be expansive, well-organized arguments that constantly related the trial of Bradley Manning to larger issues of government secrecy. At one point, he turned and spoke directly to the courtroom behind him. Almanza quickly interrupted, “Mr. Coombs, who are you addressing?”

“The public,” replied Coombs, “Because this is a public trial.”

After this mild reproof, Coombs kept his eyes forward in addressing Almanza. The court broke for another recess, Coombs ending by urging Almanza to recuse himself and mentioning that he would in fact be asking Defense Appellate Division Army Court of Criminal Appeals (ACCA) to review the case. He asked Almanza to stay the hearing until Defense Appellate Division ACCA could make a decision.

We were recessed again, and would not have another lengthy speech from Coombs today.

1:38 PM We reconvened briefly. The rules for behavior in the court were reviewed. Then Almanza dove right in.

He explained that the Chief Trial Judge wasn’t able to be reached. They defense team urged Almanza to hold off on deciding whether to recuse himself until speaking with the Chief Trial Judge.

Almanza then denied the request to recuse himself. He stated that he would prepare a written documentation of his decision and send that the Defense Appellate Division ACCA along with a full transcript of the morning’s proceedings. The prosecution had to call for the full transcript to be prepared (apparently only a summarized transcript had been previously called for), and that the verbatim transcript would then go to the Defense Appellate Division for their consideration. This transcript wasn’t going to be available to the public, unfortunately, only to Defense Appellate Divisin ACCA and only for the portion of the proceedings up until this point.

We recessed. At 2:17 PM, David Coombs stated there would be at least 10 more minutes of recess. At 2:47 PM, Coombs again said there would be at least 10 more minutes of recess.

At 3:06 PM, we reconvened very briefly for Almanza to state that we would not recuse himself and summarized his earlier points: that while he was a deputy chief of the Department of Justice, he worked in child exploitation and obscenity and not on matters related to WikiLeaks; that he had spoken to his legal advisor and added witnesses based on a more-informed understanding of the legal rules; that he felt a reasonable person, knowing all the facts, would not believe he was biased. He concluded that a verbatim transcript was being prepared for the writ only.

Another recess.

At 3:25 PM, we reconvened for the last time that day. Almanza may have been a bit flustered; he left his charge sheet in the judge’s quarters and had to go get it. Almanza reiterated that his sole function was to serve as an impartial judge in these proceeding. He reminded Manning of his rights, and asked Manning if he would like the charges read aloud.

Manning declined.

As the hearing drew to a close, Almanza brought up the issue of classified documents. He stated that certain classified information might be brought up in the course of the hearing and that a determination would need to be made about whether to close the hearing at that time. He specifically mentioned, but did not elaborate upon, “three protective orders.”

The proceedings ended. Alamanza asked for the hearing to begin again on Saturday at 10 AM. Individuals who sat through many long hours of recess seemed reluctant to leave, lingering in the pews. One Manning supporter, a veteran named Nate Goldschlag, shouted as he left the court room “You’re a hero.” Manning didn’t turn around but the others in the room shot nervous looks to the military police, who did not visibly react. One of the MPs followed the man outside and asked him not to return the next day. See video describing incident: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYj5Bi_Kg_Q

Other things to note: Two lawyers for Assange were in attendance. At some point during the proceeding, they filed a writ for extraordinary relief or access to the proceedings. The document is here at the Center for Constitutional Rights (HT Kevin Gosztola for finding the writ online).

Additional Resources:
David Coombs’ blog
http://www.armycourtmartialdefense.info/
Bradley Manning Support Network blog:
http://www.bradleymanning.org

News Coverage:
Guardian: Bradley Manning hearing: defence lawyer turns fire on military accusers
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/16/bradley-manning-hearing-defence-lawyer?newsfeed=true

Hearing officer in Manning case is a Justice Department employee in civilian life
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/hearing-officer-in-manning-case-is-a-justice-department-employee-in-civilian-life/2011/12/16/gIQAMZN1yO_story.html

Manning’s lawyer asks military to stop WikiLeaks hearing
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/breaking/bs-md-bradley-manning-20111216,0,3698797.story
Investigator in WikiLeaks Case Refuses Recusal
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/17/us/bradley-manning-accused-of-aiding-wikileaks-will-appear-in-military-court.html?_r=1

Bradley Manning Trial: Lawyer wants judge removed
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/70560.html

Bradley Manning Pre-Trial Hearing: Live Blog
http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2011/12/16/bradley-manning-pre-trial-hearing-live-blog/

The Latest From The Private Bradley Manning Support Network-Free Bradley Manning Now! All Out In Support of Bradley’s Pre-Trial Hearing On December 16th Vigil &17th March And Rally At Fort Meade, Maryland

Click on the headline to link to the Private Bradley Manning Support Network for the lates information in his case.

From the American Left History blog, dated March 17, 2011

Why I Will Be Standing In Solidarity With Private Bradley Manning At Quantico, Virginia On Sunday March 20th At 2:00 PM- A Personal Note From An Ex-Soldier Political Prisoner

Markin comment:

Of course I will be standing at the front gate to the Quantico Marine Base on March 20th because I stand in solidarity with the actions of Private Bradley Manning in bringing to light, just a little light, some of the nefarious doings of this government, Bush-like or Obamian. If he did such acts. I sleep just a shade bit easier these days knowing that Private Manning (or someone) exposed what we all knew, or should have known- the Iraq war and the Afghan war justification rested on a house of card. American imperialism’s house of cards, but cards nevertheless.

Of course I will be standing at the front gate to the Quantico Marine Base on March 20th because I am outraged by the treatment of Private Manning meted to a presumably innocent man by a government who alleges itself to be some “beacon” of the civilized world. The military has gotten more devious although not smarter since I was soldier in their crosshairs over forty years ago. Allegedly Private Manning might become so distraught over his alleged actions that he requires extraordinary protections. He is assumed, in the Catch-22 logic of the military, to be something of a suicide risk on the basis of bringing some fresh air to the nefarious doings of the international imperialist order. Be serious. I, however, noticed no "spike” in suicide rates among the world’s diplomatic community once they were exposed, a place where such activities might have been expected once it was observed in public that most of these persons could barely tie their own shoes.

Now the two reasons above are more than sufficient reasons for my standing at the front gate to the Quantico Marine Base on March 20th although they, in themselves, are only the appropriate reasons that any progressive thinking person would need to show up and shout to the high heavens for Private Manning’s freedom. I have an addition reason though, a very pressing personal reason. As mentioned above I too was in the military’s crosshairs as a soldier during the height of the Vietnam War. I will not go into the details of that episode, this comment after all is about soldier Manning, other than that I spent my own time in an Army stockade for, let’s put it this way, working on the principle of “what if they gave a war and nobody came.” Forty years later I am still working off that principle, and gladly. But here is the real point. During that time I had outside support, outside civilian support, that rallied on several occasions outside the military base where I was confined. Believe me that knowledge helped me through the tough days inside. So on March 20th I am just, as I have been able to on too few other occasions over years, paying my dues for that long ago support. You, brother, are a true winter soldier.

Private Manning I hope that you will hear us, or hear about our rally in your defense. Better yet, everybody who read this join us and make sure that he can hear us loud and clear. And let us shout to those high heavens mentioned above-Free Private Bradley Manning Now!
******
And, of course, I will be standing in support of Private Manning December 17th.
*******
Army schedules Dec. 16 pretrial hearing for PFC Bradley Manning
November 21, 2011.

Bradley Manning Support Network.

Today the United States Army scheduled an Article 32 pretrial hearing for PFC Bradley Manning, the Army intelligence specialist accused of releasing classified material to WikiLeaks. The pretrial hearing will commence on December 16 at Fort Meade, Maryland. (Army News Release PDF)

This will be PFC Manning’s first appearance before a court and the first time he will face his accusers after 17 months in confinement. In a blog post this morning, Manning’s lead counsel, David Coombs, notified supporters that the pretrial phase is scheduled to last five days.

Here is the full text of his update:

“The Article 32 hearing for PFC Bradley Manning will begin on December 16, 2011 at Fort Meade, Maryland. The hearing is expected to last approximately five days. With the exception of those limited times where classified information is being discussed, the hearing will be open to the public.

The primary purpose of the Article 32 hearing is to evaluate the relative strengths and weaknesses of the government’s case as well as to provide the defense with an opportunity to obtain pretrial discovery. The defense is entitled to call witnesses during the hearing and to also cross examine the government’s witnesses. Each witness who testifies is placed under oath; their testimony can therefore be used during the trial for impeachment purposes or as prior testimony should the witness become unavailable.

Our office is committed to providing the best representation for PFC Manning during this upcoming hearing. Achieving this goal is the sole focus of the lawyers, experts, and administrative staff working on this case. Given our focus, we will not be granting any media interviews or responding to any media inquiries. However, recognizing the public’s interest and the growing support for PFC Manning, we will be issuing regular public releases. The goal of these releases is to keep PFC Manning’s supporters informed and to assist the media in providing accurate information about this case.”

Supporters will be present outside Fort Meade when he arrives on December 16 and as part of a day of action on his 24th birthday, December 17.

“The charges against Bradley Manning are an indictment of our government’s obsession with secrecy,” said Daniel Ellsberg, who released the Pentagon Papers and accelerated the end of hostilities in Vietnam forty years ago. “Manning is accused of revealing illegal activities by our government and its corporate partners that must be brought to the attention of the American people. The Obama administration lacks the courage to confront the crimes and injustices that now stand exposed.”

Manning’s supporters assert that the information he is accused of making public was wrongly and illegally classified, and that whoever leaked the information should be protected as a whistle-blower. The WikiLeaks revelations include the “Collateral Murder” video, which shows the killing of Iraqi civilians and Reuters journalists, as well as diplomatic cables that have embarrassed governments and corporations around the world. Another cable related to the cover-up of a war crime contributed to the early exit of troops from Iraq by the end of this year.

PFC Manning’s confinement conditions drew strong reactions and protests from legal scholars, politicians, and human rights advocates from around the world. He was confined for ten months at a Quantico Marine base, where he faced extreme conditions in which he was forced to stand naked and was kept in isolation. P.J. Crowley, then-spokesperson for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, was forced to resign after he called Manning’s treatment “ridiculous, counterproductive and stupid.” Juan Mendez, the United Nations’ rapporteur on torture, still seeks to meet with Manning, unmonitored, as part of an official investigation of evidence of abuse.

The Bradley Manning Support Network will continue to provide updates as they become available.
************
Vigil for Bradley, attend the pre-trial hearing

VIGIL FOR BRADLEY
START OF COURT MARTIAL PROCEEDINGS
ARTICLE 32 PRE-TRAIL HEARING

Fort Meade Main Gate
Maryland 175 & Reece Rd
Fort Meade, MD 21113 (map)

Rally for Bradley at Fort Meade leaflet PDF

VIGIL (or attend the hearing)
Friday, December 16th, 8am to 5pm

RALLY & MARCH
Saturday, December 17th, Noon to 3pm

The Fort Meade Main Gate is located in Odenton, Maryland, 25 miles northeast of Washington DC, between Washington DC and Baltimore, Maryland.

DEC. 17th MARCH
After a rally and vigil, supporters will march via the sidewalk along MD 175/Rouse Pkwy/Annapolis Rd, one mile, to Maryland 175 & Llewellyn Ave (the military court room is located on Llewellyn Ave one mile from the gate). Afterwards, we’ll march back to the main gate.

MARC TRAIN
Shuttle van will be made available from the Odenton MARC train station, located on the MARC Penn Line between Washington, D.C. and Baltimore, MD. It is 2.5 miles from the Fort Meade Main Gate. The station is on Amtrak’s high-speed Northeast Corridor; however, Amtrak does not stop at this station.

DRIVING
From Washington, DC: Go to MD-295 N towards BALTIMORE to US 175 EAST. Follow 175 EAST until you come to the Reece Road intersection (there is a traffic light). From Baltimore, MD: Go to MD-295 S towards WASHINGTON to US 175 EAST. Follow 175 EAST until you come to the Reece Road intersection (there is a traffic light).

SUPPORTERS ATTENDING THE PROCEEDINGS
Those wishing to attend the proceedings should go to the Visitor Control Center (near the intersection of Maryland 175 & Reece Rd, Fort Meade, MD 21113) when it opens at 7:30am (and certainly no later than 8:15am). All other gates are for military I.D. card holders only.

You do not need to pre-register. Each person will need a valid state or federal photo ID such as a driver’s license or state photo ID card.

Anyone driving on to Fort Meade will be required to submit their driver’s license, vehicle registration, and printed (not digital) proof of insurance. Your vehicle will be subject to search. Consider walking on base if there are any questions at all regarding your vehicle and paperwork.

The proceedings are likely to start at 9am daily at the Magistrate Court, 4432 Llewellyn Ave, Fort Meade, MD 20755. The court room is 1.5 miles from the Visitor Control Center. The pre-trial hearing will break from Friday, December 23 until January 2 if needed.

MEDIA ATTENDING THE PROCEEDINGS
Contact the Fort Meade Public Affairs office for information at 301-677-1361

INFORMATION FOR SUPPORTERS
Contact Courage to Resist at 510-488-3559

From The “West Coast Port Shutdown” Website-This Is Class War, We Say No More!-Defend The Longshoremen’s Unions!-Defend All Our Unions- Take The Offensive

Click on the headline to link to the West Coast Port Shutdown website.

Markin comment December 13, 2011:

We know that we are only at the very start of an upsurge in the labor movement as witness the stellar exemplary actions by the West Coast activists. As I have pointed out in my remarks below this is the way forward as we struggle against the ruling class for a different more society. Not everything went as well, or as well-attended, as expected including our rally in solidarity in Boston but we are still exhibiting growing pains in the post-encampment era.
***********
Remarks prepared for the Speak Out in defense of Occupy Boston, Occupy West Coast and in solidarity with the West Coast Port Shutdown action at Boston City Hall Plaza, December 12, 2011:

I will read from prepared notes. Let me explain why. In the old days, my old street corner agitator days, I could whip up a speech off the top of my head. But of late, before the fresh breeze of the Occupy movement blew across the Boston waterfront, I was more used to sitting at tables in small, over-heated rooms. Or participating in small marches, rallies, and vigils where such oratorical skills were not in much demand. But let me get to my main point.

Sisters and brothers, brothers and sisters, no question, no question at all that the recent police occupation at Dewey Square was a big defeat, a big if temporary defeat, for our struggle for freedom of expression and assembly in the public square. In response, over the past few days not a few younger or newer activists, not used to the ebb and flow of the political struggle, the class struggle, have been disheartened and expressed a sense of defeat.

Today though I bring you glad tidings. The sleeping giant of the labor movement has begun to stir. The long night of despair and disorientation is beginning to lift. At the beginning of this year when the struggle of the public workers unions in Wisconsin heated up I, among others, proposed a general strike and solidarity rallies in order to beat back the anti-labor attacks. We were written off as mad men and women, old-time leftists gone off their rockers. General strike, shut down, no, that was okay for those Greek workers who seemed to strike every other day, or those French workers who struck every day. In America, never. And then came the mass actions in Wisconsin, the shut down of the Port Of Oakland on November 2nd, and today’s actions. Now we can quibble over whether such events are real general strikes or not but now the language of general strike and shutdown is firmly etched on labor’s political agenda.

The old Polish socialist scholar, Isaac Deutscher, once remarked back in the 1960s heyday of the anti-Vietnam War movement that he would give up all the endless marches, rallies and vigils for one dock strike against the war. He was right. We have to hit the war-mongers, the capitalists where it hurts-their profits and power. And today’s West Coast actions are proof of that proposition. If the age of the Occupy encampment has passed so too has the age of endless marches, rallies and vigils. They certainly have their place but now we must take the offensive. Now every action must be thought out to measure the effect on breaking the power of the one percent.

I had, several weeks ago, proposed to various people that we shut down the Port of Boston today in solidarity with the West Coast. That proposal was premature considering the situation in the Boston movement. But someday, someday soon, we too will be marching to shut down the port. To shut down GE in Lynn. To shut down the Bank of America. To shut down their government. And maybe not to just shut them down for a day either. I will leave you with this thought. We created the wealth-let’s take it back. Working people and their allies must rule!
***********
An Injury To One Is An Injury To All!-Defend All The Occupation Sites And All The Occupiers! Drop All Charges Against All Protesters Everywhere!

********
Fight-Don’t Starve-We Created The Wealth, Let's Take It Back! Labor And The Oppressed Must Rule!
********
A Five-Point Program As Talking Points

*Jobs For All Now!-“30 For 40”- A historic demand of the labor movement. Thirty hours work for forty hours pay to spread the available work around. Organize the unorganized- Organize the South- Organize Wal-mart- Defend the right for public and private workers to unionize.

* Defend the working classes! No union dues for Democratic (or the stray Republican) candidates. Spent the dough on organizing the unorganized and other labor-specific causes (example, the November, 2011 anti-union recall referendum in Ohio).

*End the endless wars!- Immediate, Unconditional Withdrawal Of All U.S./Allied Troops (And Mercenaries) From Afghanistan! Hands Off Pakistan! Hands Off Iran! Hands Off The World!

*Fight for a social agenda for working people!. Quality Healthcare For All! Nationalize the colleges and universities under student-teacher-campus worker control! Forgive student debt! Stop housing foreclosures!

*We created the wealth, let’s take it back. Take the struggle for our daily bread off the historic agenda. Build a workers party that fights for a workers government to unite all the oppressed. Labor and the oppressed must rule!

The Latest From The “Further Left Forum” Blog

Markin comment:

I am not that familiar with this blog but it always has many videos from important events on the left so I like to check it out every once in a while. And you should too.

The Latest From The “Occupy Oakland” Website-This Is Class War-We Say No More- Take The Offensive- Defend Our Unions!-Defend The Oakland Commune!

Click on the headline to link to Occupy Oakland website for the latest from the Bay Area vanguard battleground in the struggle for social justice.
****
An Injury To One Is An Injury To All!-Defend All The Occupation Sites And All The Occupiers! Drop All Charges Against All Protesters Everywhere!
********
Fight-Don’t Starve-We Created The Wealth, Let's Take It Back! Labor And The Oppressed Must Rule!
********
A Five-Point Program As Talking Points

*Jobs For All Now!-“30 For 40”- A historic demand of the labor movement going back to the 1930s Great Depression the last time that unemployment, under-employment, and those who have just plain quit looking for work was this high in the American labor force. Thirty hours work for forty hours pay is a formula to spread the available work around. This is no mere propaganda point but shows the way forward toward a more equitable distribution of available work. Work that would be divided through local representative workers’ councils which would act, in one of its capacities, as a giant hiring hall where the jobs would be parceled out. This would be a simpler task now than when it was when first proposed in the 1930s with the vast increase in modern technology that could fairly accurately, via computers, target jobs that need filling and equitably divide up current work. Without the key capitalist necessity of keeping up the rate of profit the social surplus created by that work could be used to redistribute the available work at the same agreed upon rate rather than go into the capitalists’ pockets. The only catch, a big catch one must admit, is that no capitalist, and no capitalist system, is going to do any such thing so that it will, in the end, be necessary to fight for and win a workers government to implement this demand.

Organize the unorganized is a demand that cries out for solution today now that the organized sectors of the labor movement, both public and private, in America are at historic lows, just over ten percent of the workforce. Part of the task is to reorganize some of the old industries like the automobile industry, now mainly unorganized as new plants come on line and others are abandoned, which used to provide a massive amount of decent jobs with decent benefits but which now have fallen to globalization and the “race to the bottom” bad times. The other part is to ratchet up the efforts to organize the service industries, hospitals, hotels, hi-tech, restaurants and the like, that have become a dominant aspect of the American economy.

Organize the South-this low wage area, this consciously low-wage area, where many industries land before heading off-shore to even lower wage places cries out for organizing, especially among black and Hispanic workers who form the bulk of this industrial workforce. A corollary to organizing the South is obviously to organize internationally to keep the “race to the bottom” from continually occurring short of being resolved in favor of an international commonwealth of workers’ governments. Nobody said it was going to be easy.

Organize Wal-mart- millions of workers, thousands of trucks, hundreds of distribution centers. A victory here would be the springboard to a revitalized organized labor movement just as auto and steel lead the industrial union movements of the 1930s. To give an idea of how hard this task might be though someone once argued that it would be easier to organize a workers’ revolution that organize this giant. Well, that’s a thought.

Defend the right of public and private workers to unionize. Simple-No more Wisconsins, no more attacks on collective bargaining the hallmark of a union contract. No reliance on labor boards, arbitration, or bourgeois recall elections either. Unions must keep their independent from government interference. Period.

* Defend the independence of the working classes! No union dues for Democratic (or the stray Republican) candidates. In 2008 labor, organized labor, spent around 450 million dollars trying to elect Barack Obama and other Democrats (mainly). The results speak for themselves. For those bogus efforts the labor skates should have been sent packing long ago. The idea then was (and is, as we come up to another presidential election cycle) that the Democrats (mainly) were “friends of labor.” The past period of cuts-backs, cut-in-the back give backs should put paid to that notion. Although anyone who is politically savvy at all knows that is not true, not true for the labor skates at the top of the movement.

The hard reality is that the labor skates, not used to any form of class struggle or any kind of struggle, know no other way than class-collaboration, arbitration, courts, and every other way to avoid the appearance of strife, strife in defense of the bosses’ profits. The most egregious recent example- the return of the Verizon workers to work after two weeks last summer when they had the company on the run and the subsequent announcement by the company of record profits. That sellout strategy may have worked for the bureaucrats, or rather their “fathers” for a time back in the 1950s “golden age” of labor but now we are in a very hard and open class war. The rank and file must demand an end to using their precious dues payments period for bourgeois candidates all of whom have turned out to be sworn enemies of labor from Obama on down.

This does not mean not using union dues for political purposes though. On the contrary we need to use them now more than ever in the class battles ahead. Spent the dough on organizing the unorganized, organizing the South, organizing Wal-Mart, and other pro-labor causes. Think, for example, of the dough spent on the successful November, 2011 anti-union recall referendum in Ohio. That type of activity is where labor’s money and other resources should go.

*End the endless wars!- Immediate, Unconditional Withdrawal Of All U.S./Allied Troops (And Mercenaries) From Afghanistan! Hands Off Pakistan! Hands Off Iran! Hands Off The World!

*Fight for a social agenda for working people!. Quality Healthcare For All! Nationalize the colleges and universities under student-teacher-campus worker control! Forgive student debt! Stop housing foreclosures!

*We created the wealth, let’s take it back. Take the struggle for our daily bread off the historic agenda. Build a workers party that fights for a workers government to unite all the oppressed. Labor and the oppressed must rule!

From #Occupied Boston (#Tomemonos Boston)-No Mas- The Class-War Lines Are Being Drawn-There Is A Need To Unite And Fight-Random Sights From Life At Dewey Square-A Last Look-#10

Click on the headline to link to updates from the Occupy Boston website. Occupy Boston started at 6:00 PM, September 30, 2011. I will post important updates as they appear on that site.
**********
Markin comment November 18, 2011:

Josh Breslin didn’t know what to expect this time as the streamlined subway car that he was riding was approaching the South Station stop on the MBTA Red Line in Boston. He half-expected to see some multi-colored hand-made poster proclaiming this stop as “Occupy Boston,” something with stenciled and silhouetted clenched fist, or something like that, proclaiming this newly sacred ground, this fetid, dank subway stop, in the name of the people. Hell, just like back in the old days, the old 1960s times of blessed memory, when no wall, no public wall anyway, was safe from revolutionary pronouncements, or off-hand midnight-crafted graffiti. He had certainly seen stranger signs plastered around the Occupy encampment the last few times that he had come over from his home in Cambridge on the other side of the river. Stuff from Thoreau and Gandhi, naturally, but also odd-ball wisps of wisdom about being kind, not being greedy, corporate greedy or otherwise, not being sexist, racist, homophobic and the whole litany of politically acceptable Don’ts scripted out since those ‘60s that seemed almost self-explanatory and in not need of proclamation in this microscopic social experiment, this exemplar of the “new world order,” leftist-style.

Ya, these times definitely call for some outlandish statement in bright day-glo colors something, he mused amused, to confuse the touristas who were making the Occupy site a “must see” stop on their vacation itineraries. Something to throw them off the scent when they asked their infernal questions- “What are the kids up to, why all the tents, why all the black flags (really not many but that black flag of anarchy, like the red one of communism, spooked people, made their deepest fears surface, and in the old days rightly so),” and on and on. Like he, Joshua Breslin, known far and wide back in the day under the moniker, Prince of Love, a magical mystery tour merry prankster, music-and-drugs-are- the-revolution, west coast communal living madman knew what was on the kids minds today, except they were getting the short straw in the game of who gets what in the social game.

Just then he reflected, flash-back reflected, that a lot of what he had seen and heard on those other occasions when he had crossed the river of late, maybe four or five by now, echoed some long ago, half-forgotten signs and totems from the times when he was searching for the blue-pink great American West night back in the late 1960s and had wound up in People’s Park in Berkeley out in wayward California. And had been wounded and tear-gassed, Prince of Love renown notwithstanding, for his efforts when things got twisted and the deal went down. Yes, this was just exactly what it was like and now he had a “theme” for the notes that he was feeling pressed to take on this trip now that he had a “feel” for the situation. Although this time, unlike back then, he was not expecting, not expecting in his on-coming dotage, to be wounded or tear-gassed. He frankly admitted to himself after his last visit to the camp site a few days before that he was not up those rigors now, those shake-them-off-and-come-back-swinging-youth- spunks that he had had in great quantity as he headed barrel-assing out west from his old hometown, Olde Saco up Maine way.

The train then stopped jarring him in mid-thought, opened its air-pressurized doors, and its sullen passengers decamped for seven winds places. No, Josh noticed, no sign at the subway level anyway that occupyitis had expanded to the cavernous underground. On surfacing in the Dewey Square sunlight though, another mercifully warm late October day starting to break through, his ears were immediately accosted by the ranting, there was no other name for it, of “Syllable Slim,” a name that he had coined for this vagabond prince standing kitty-corner in front of him when he first heard him holding forth on the perfidies of the Democrats, democrats, Republicans, republicans and anyone else who held the whiff of power, or wanted it, at Park Street Station years ago. Now Slim was the “king” of the Dewey Square day and night having moved either uptown or downtown, Josh was not quite sure of the geographic relationship between the two subway stops, with a new audience to ignore, or try to ignore, him. What was also perfectly clear was, uptown or downtown, Slim would be hard-pressed to describe what was going on at his Occupy kingdom. His spiel did not depend on such trivials The city, any city with size, produces its fair share of drifters, grifters, and midnight shifters and they, like lemmings to the sea, have heard of the glad tidings emitting from Dewey Square (read: food, shelter, and no hassles-the famous “three squares and a cot” from “on-the-road” jungle camp lore) and have come forth. And Slim is their king.

Josh, by the way, was here, here on assignment, not much pay but an assignment anyway, his first since he “officially” retired from his onerous editorial duties a couple of years back to be able to sit back, kick back, and write that great sex/drug/political/musical/ hail fellows well met/digger commune 1960s explosion novel he had been putting off since, well, since he “got off the bus” in 1971 and headed back first to Olde Saco and then drifted down to various Boston area spots. See the pay part was required, no, demanded by Josh, in order to give his employer a real “feel” for the flavor of what was going on at Dewey Square to the “soccer moms and dads” who might be wondering what they were missing while waiting, SUV-waiting, for their little Ashley or Samson to finish up their suburban kids soccer league workouts, or one or another of twelve other possible organized kid "to do" things for their resumes, the kid’s that is. A few random notes to titillate the rubes, and move on. No sweat. He, moreover, was going to parlay those skimpy notes into working order for his now great Tom Wolfe-ish sociological sex/drug/political/musical/ hail fellows well met/digger commune 1960s explosion novel. And in Josh Breslin’s mind Syllable Slim was already slated, with a big intro, to lead off this 21st century magical mystery tour, merry prankster gig, warts and all. We merely get his leavings here.
********
“Hey brother, can you help me put this tarp over my tent? It got cold as hell last night and the winds were blowing fierce,” yelled a cherub-faced male, almost too youthful to be here but such are the times, although it was later learned that he was now a few weeks-seasoned Occupy Boston grizzly veteran resident to a middle-aged man casually walking by. “Sure thing, let’s get to it” replied that passer-by. Was the passer-by some wayward tourist looking for the next thrill in the city night life, a career gawker, or just one of many unnamed “volunteers” who have sprung from the woodwork (okay, okay suburbia) in response to the news that something more than nine-to-five and white picket fences might be in the air?
********
“Can you bring this hot pot of soup to the kitchen? Some lady, a lady who would not give her name and would not acknowledge anything but thanks, drove up on the Atlantic Avenue side and asked me to unload some stuff for her,” said one young woman in shorts, short shorts thereby showing off her firm athletic legs for one and all to see to another young woman dressed in long pants, maybe jeans, getting ready for colder climates. Shortly thereafter the “laundry lady” tooted her horn looking for help in unloading a trunk-load of everything from towels to sleeping bags. And our two young women again “hit” the Atlantic Avenue curb for this “angel.” See the angel’s kindly thing, her matronly, middle-aged, unnamed kindly thing, was to come by on Tuesday for dirty laundry and return on Thursday with everything Seventh Generation bright and clean. Said “laundry lady” is also unnamed like our tent-fixing passer-by and soup lady, but clearly one who has come out of the woodwork on the news of the glad tidings.
********
“If you want a meal, a nice hot meal, could you wash some dishes to help us out,” barked, barked above the din of the dozen assorted humans in line in front of him, a man who has daily volunteered to help out in the makeshift kitchen. A kitchen whose primitive dishwashing apparatus entailed the familiar rubber soul dish pan, some lukewarm water, a little oily from the leaving of some off-hand meal, Joy detergent, and rinsing tub, dishcloth and done. Primitive like back in kid time doing after supper dishes before being released in the teenage be-bop dark streets night. And a couple of older guys, older guys who knew the streets and the lore of the streets backward and forward, stepped behind the tent and got to work on a stack while the third passed on the request. When the hot meals came on deck all three got a meal, no questions asked, but somewhere, somewhere deep inside his career vagabond heart that third man knew he was not built for this new world a-borning. Not for social solidarity dishes cleaned. Meanwhile our kitchen master chef, master of the artful tuna sandwich and of the slabbed peanut butter and jelly (grape just then) variety as well answers an older man’s inquiry about what was pressingly needed for the next day’s “menu.” That older man, a man who did not look like he had the means to do so, and could have very easily passed for a “resident” of this tent city, had been coming daily with perhaps one hundred dollars worth of whatever our master chef told him the kitchen needed. Angels, apparently, come in all sizes, shapes, and circumstances.
********
Jesus, the logistics of this encampment is simplicity itself. A few rows of tents, sleeping tents, mostly good firm weather-conditioned tents in all colors, mainly blue or the feel of blue though. Unlike those watered-down Army olive drab pup tents that I made do with out in ‘Frisco when Butterfly Swirl and I were a thing traveling up and down the West Coast in the summer of love, 1967. Of course then love drove the be-bop great western night and we probably could have made due with some newspapers under our heads. But that’s a story for another time. Then, moving along, several tents at each end of the encampment for special tasks like media, the library, and the “information desk.” A few odds and end here and there but mainly kept up nicely, city urban vagabond nicely. Fit for any well-fed college student out on an urban adventure to place his or her head on, and not have mother worry too much. And at the far end, the end away from the subway station a huge granite gray slab of a building, something to do with the "big dig” project that created this space, officially the Rose Kennedy Greenway, in its aftermath. The side wall of that big slab now serves as the main poster board for any political messages that people have the energy (and magic marker) to proclaim. And in front of that wall a few chairs, a mike, and various other equipment for those who want to harangue, humor, or hum the crowd. That fleeting chance at fifteen minutes of fame for the soul-weary, for the voiceless, and for the voiced-over. Let’s listen in for bit and jot down a few of the things said.

“Karl Marx was right, this capitalist system has got to go and we need to make a new world,” sing-songed a middle-aged man, seemingly some kind of college professor out doing missionary work this day, who then proceeded to spend his fifteen minutes expanding on his scheme to have Congress vote to limit the amount of profit each corporation can make, using some sort of exotic formula that only he had the pass code to unravel. I missed that idea when I read Marx long ago but maybe I missed one of the footnotes the probable source. Our professor didn’t. This place, every time I come, at least during the day is loaded down with professors and others from the myriad local colleges and universities that dot the Boston skyline and each brings his or her own panacea with them, usually some third-rate variation off of Marx or some other 19th century thinker dressed up to wake up the texting-enchanted modern listener.

“This place is a Potemkin Village,” chanted another younger speaker a little later to a wandering, wavering crowd audience of about seven. “The people who run this thing go home at night to their nice warm beds while we stay here and keep the faith, the real faith,” he added. This inflamed black flannel-shirted youth finished up with this epistle, “Besides half the tents are empty and the tents that have people in them are just drifters and bums who don’t know anything about what we are trying to do here. They are just trying to keep warm and away from getting hassled by the cops.” I had heard that sentiment expressed before, more than once, from political types and kind of dismissed it out of hand but this guy seemed to be speaking from some truth experience. I reminded myself to come back in a few minutes and talk to him when he was done. However when I went back about ten minutes later he was gone. But his plaintive plea stuck with me and I will have to keep on the trail of that strand.
********
Later that same day at the same wall-

“Man, play us a Hendrix tune on that thing, ‘cause you are smokin’, man” earnestly requested a young, red-bearded man, obviously a student, an ardent musical student from the look of him. “Okay man, if you play a little drum behind me,” came the reply from the reincarnation of Jimi, complete with tie-dyed headband to hold his head together. And for perhaps fifteen minutes they held it together like some aura out on the 1960s be-bop night, their fifteen minutes of fame on the Dewey Square main stage for their resumes. And the crowd that swelled to listen in knew they had heard some old phantom primordial from the womb sound, and liked it. Another group this time a guitar, harmonica, drum combination trying to bring a blues riff together sends most of the crowd wandering in all directions. Such are the hard facts of the fame game from Broadway to tent city. Hopefully some more harmonious society will have more room for the fringes of that game.
*********
“Say, can I have cigarette, man, I’m out?” said another older man weary, street weary, getting ready to enter a tent to catch a few winks. “I’m rolling Bull, okay?” answered a red-headed dread-locked young man. That cadging of cigarettes, factory-made or from the pouch, between and among the young is somewhat strange after the righteous lifetime drumbeats of foul smoking. Not all messages get through.

Such were, are, will be the random sights and sounds of the Occupy Boston encampment on any given day, or any given minute if you can be in seven places at one time, as the camp continues to organize itself in the tradition of the old westward pioneers seeking that great American west blue-pink night, and still are seeking it generations later.
********
“Hey man, don’t be cheap give me a fucking cigarette, I’m all shaky,” shouted out a razor-edged guy, obviously working off some hang-over, although not necessarily an alcoholic or drug one. “I’m down to my last one, what the fuck do you want from me,” came the surly reply. The tension spiked then passed away in the midday air. In that same midday air came this from one of the tents, voiced by an unseen man, a gruff-voiced man, not young “Fuck, give me my space, my free space, don’t be all around me.” And that voice too went to ground, unresolved.
*******
“This place is neat, three squares and a cot, and nobody hassles you and you don’t have to work for your grub, or nothing,” murmured a street veteran, shabbily-dressed, rough edge- bearded but of sober expression to no one in particular in a crowd of suburban tourists who have made the site at Dewey Square a place on their “must see” map. A young man came up to a clot of that same crowd to discuss the Occupy theme. A question was asked about the shabbily-dressed man’s comment. “Oh, ya, most of the residents are street people, a few of us like me stay to keep the peace but most of the politicos go home, or back to the dorms when the General Assembly is over. We opened the space to anyone who followed the simple rules of the camp so here we are.” One tourista smirked the smirk of someone who “knew, just knew” this thing was not going to work, not with bums, hell no. We shall see.
********
“Out of the tents, into the streets, Out of the tents, into the streets” yelled a tall dark-haired young man dressed in black, Black Bloc black, meaning black everything black, from boots to jacket, topped off with the de rigueur black bandana handkerchief covering the bottom part of his face as some kind of security blanket measure. This youth is known to me so that there is only a little affectation in his dress to be in touch with his anarchist heart. Others’ motives I am not as sure of as they flaunt their garb like wearing the “uniform” would cast away all sins and black purify their corrupted souls. Such acts would guard against turning into a stinking bourgeois baddie like daddy.

This sight, the nightmare sight to every protective mother guarding her young against the travails of the world and the bane of every government seeing spook shadows behind the dress, is however here among the tents just another guy with a cause. He repeats himself several times as he tries to rouse the denizens of the new world tent city to come out and march on behalf of any number of causes, this one in solidarity with the shutting down of the Port of Oakland by Occupy Oakland on this early November day, the vanguard action city of the whole American movement and one that has been increasing under attack, under police attack almost nightly.

A few younger comrades also dressed in black, head-to-toe black as well, heeded his plea and stirred from their tents, stretching the stretch of the huddled or prone to ready themselves for the couple of mile walk on this cold but clear evening. Mostly the camp residents ignore the plea and go about their business of fixing tents, heading to the kitchen mess tent for supper or just pretend that our big-hearted black-attired anarcho-mad monk of an activist will gather his troops and leave. And here is where the funny part comes in as I think back to a guy I heard up on the “main stage” a few days back who kept yelling about this occupation site being a Potemkin Village. [Markin: For those not in the know about Russian history or are unfamiliar with the term it signifies all front, no substance. Allegedly one of Russian Empress Catherine the Great’s lovers back in the 18th century, Potemkin, ordered beautiful villages build with only the facades so his honey would have pleasant sights to see when they went riding by. Ya I know, lame but that is the story.] And today that seems true, at least to my eye, as the vast majority of the three hundred or so marchers were not resident “occupiers,” or had the now signature drawn-out slightly dazed sag look of occupiers. In any case we are off, as I have decided to express my solidarity with the sisters and brothers in Oakland (a place I know well from back in the day).

Naturally the black-suited sisters and brothers are up front leading this thing chanting solidarity slogans centered on the defense of Occupy Oakland ("From the East Bay to Back Bay-Defend Occupy Oakland"), the ubiquitous “Banks got bailed out, we got sold out” that is something of a national anthem for the movement now, and to show the tenor of militancy this night this little beauty, “What’s the solution?: Revolution, What’s the reaction?: Direct action." All in a day’s work out in the protest march world though. What makes this one a little unusual is the march route. See the line of march on this one, perhaps reflecting some super-black dream kick, is deliberately planned to go helter-skelter, one assumes to “throw off” the bicycle police and other law enforcement types who are “guarding” the march.

Of course the only ones who are confused by all this are the few marchers who are rare rookies to this scene, trampling on others' shoes we travel zigzag (and they, the rookies zigzag) up the wrong way on Winter Street or Congress Street stopping already stopped rush hour traffic with our pleas for solidarity and a whole range of other concerns. Eventually we get to the State House on Beacon Street then march down to Charles Street and move against the waiting traffic before heading back to Boylston Street and then to Downtown Crossing for the now obligatory “die in” (a momentary sit-in, if you are not familiar with that term) a few “mic check” shout-outs and then more chanting back to camp. Done, finis, chalk up some more march miles on my protest-o-meter. A spirited march, a necessary march, no question, but I hope that I was just being jittery when I got that feeling in my spine at the end of the march that something was out of joint, that those who wish to “lead” a revolution, a black-encrusted revolution, were heading up the wrong street with their antics.
********
“You had better stay the fuck away from my woman, and stay way away,” threatened a young guy, a young white guy, not a street guy, not a student but just the kind of guy who drifts in and out of things. “Fuck you and your woman,” came the reply from a young Spanish-looking dude who had daggers in his eyes as the two nearly came to blows. Just then someone yelled “rainbow” and several people appeared to calm the situation down. Not too quickly calmed it down by the way.

This too is a part of the “new world a-borning” as not everybody is quite ready yet to shift gears, or just has too much, much too much, baggage from old bourgeois society to make the leap of faith just yet.
********
Voices overheard while waiting for a rally or march against or for something to start, a Free School University lecture to begin, a this or that meeting to proceed, a just plain old ordinary passing through the camp or the thousand and one other things waits at the Occupy Boston site at Dewey Square.

“See, this is the way it works,” said a tall, red-headed curly-haired young man, dressed in an “approved” regulation Occupy resident garb, fatigue jacket, denim jeans, a rakish hat, and this warmish evening wearing shoes with no socks to a small, middle-aged, graying woman dressed in some outfit worthy of high hippie times in the summer of love, 1967 but who was having a hard time getting around the various concepts involved in participation in a General Assembly (GA) show-up, the central decision-making body of the Occupy movement, although she liked the idea in theory as she made plain to tell her “tour guide” at the start.

The red-headed youth, let’s call him Red for short although no inference should be drawn about his political allegiances from that, continued, “Somebody brings an idea they, or their group, want to have heard, discussed, and voted on by GA. Let’s say, for example, an action like having everybody turn in their saving and checking accounts at the big banks like Bank of America and transfer the money to credit unions or small neighborhood banks on a certain day. They come here, get their point put on the agenda and when their turn comes up they can motivate it. Then people can discuss it, discuss it from all angles, sometimes unto death practically, I’ve seen that at GA, and periodic “temperature checks” can be taken on the favorability of supporting such an action.”

“What’s a temperature check?” asked our somewhat bewildered ancient flower-child.

“That’s a sense of the meeting on some point and instead of the crowd yelling and screaming a response you just wiggle your fingers on one hand, or two, in the middle, or down. It doesn’t mean a thing about whether the thing, the idea being presented, will pass or not,” young Red answered, answered in the patient low-key monotone that he had either spent many moons perfecting in secret or came naturally to him. I suspect the latter from other times I have seen him give his spiels at GA. “After the proposal is presented then people can approach the facilitator, or the assigned “stack” person, and ask to speak on the matter, in turn. Okay, so far?”

He continued, “After full discussion that can, like I say, take the whole evening there is a vote, a vote if there is a quorum left at GA by voting time. Sometimes there is not, more so recently. Then a bunch of procedures come into play that I don’t always understood about dissent blocks and mortal dissent blocks that can kill a proposal even before a vote if somebody thinks it is a small or big danger to what the Occupy movement is trying to do. And others agree after a vote, if it gets that far. Usually though that doesn’t happen because the stuff we deal with isn’t that weird. The quorum thing will more likely delay action on a vote and the thing is tabled until a later GA. If nothing gets in the way though it can be voted that night by consensus."

“What?” asked the starting to get glazed-eye woman, who seemingly no stranger to the in and outs of grassroots participatory democracy, is taken back by our Red’s use of the word.

“Okay, okay in the corporate world things get done by majority vote, right. So a lot of people can be losers even if the vote is close so to guard against that tyranny of the majority everything is done by consensus. Someone explained it to me this way and it made sense to me. You raise your hand in approval if you can live with the proposal. On the credit union thing that would be easy but on some other stuff maybe not.”

“So what if you don’t get consensus but have a majority? Our fair lady asks. “No go, go back and work on your proposal or give it up,” shot back Red, for the first time a little annoyed with a question like the idea of consensus was automatically the best way to do things in a democracy and how could anyone, especially an anyone who came from 1960s land, object. “Thanks, for your help” our hippie lady, our perplexed hippie lady on that last point, told Red as she meandered around the camp looking for the kitchen area, or maybe just to think over what had suddenly perplexed her.
***********
“How long have you been coming here?,” asked the white-haired old man, neatly although inexpensively dressed, a man who seemingly had seen many struggles in his time, not all of them political, but enough of them to know that he had some political thoughts hidden among those white hairs. “Oh, I started camping out here on Day 1 in September and stayed for a few weeks but then I had to go back to my dorm at Boston University because there was too much noise here at night for me to study and anyway I got kind of bored just hanging around a lot being gawked at by tourists and everybody else who wanted to see what was going on here at the beginning,” forthrightly answered a fetching young brunette who did not, frankly, look, strictly from appearances, like she belonged here for one day never mind weeks but that is the beauty of what has been churned up this fall by the tide of the Occupy movement in the face of overwhelmingly social discontent.

The wizened white-haired man moved slowly away to speak to others he had met, especially a couple of Veterans For Peace supporters whom he had come to know fairly well, at the site when the young woman reached out, tugged at his coat and said “Wait, I have more to tell you.” A little startled the old man stopped in his tracks and asked to hear more. She continued “I’ve seen you around camp before, talking to some people I know about the 1960s and about the funny stuff that went on then, and you look like you might have been a hippie or something so I think I can tell you stuff.” “What stuff?” answered the now red-faced old man waiting for the young damsel to pore out her heart about the indignities of life, boy-friend problems, some unknown addictions, or some such thing.

“I just didn’t leave because I couldn’t study or was bored although that was part of it. Mainly it was because I feel this movement has lost direction, lost direction in a big way, by spending all its time and energy here defending and winter fortifying the camp and getting isolated from trying to reach out to people. I’m studying about social movements in school and this one seems to be going away from what groups like the black civil rights movement and anti-war movements were trying to even if they made a lot of mistakes. My boy-friend and I almost broke up over it because he likes the camp life, he’s still here, and he doesn’t want any demands raised, period, and thinks that if we just show a good example people will gravitate to see things our way. He was furious when I said nobody was watching, or not enough were. We made up after I left and went back to my dorm room but I still think after over a month that the encampment has been here that I was right, although we avoid talking about it. What do you think?”

The white-haired man laughed, laughed good-naturedly explaining that he did not expect in his fairly frequent stops at Dewey Square that he would be performing Dear Occupy Abby services to the lovelorn. She gave half a smile to that notion. He continued, “We too made every mistake in the book back in the day, especially in going out of our way to alienate every possible person who disagreed with us until, like some light bulb going on, we finally got it that such things were self-defeating and changed tack. I too share your reservations about getting isolated out here in the middle of nowhere, even if it is the center of the Financial District, but an old radical, and old communist actually, told me back in the day that each generation must find its own ways to drive the struggle. And he was basically right. At least some of us did learn and I am living proof that not all mistakes are politically fatal. Things are still fresh yet so talk to your boy-friend, and keep talking about the need to break out of the camps. Okay?” She nodded the nod of the half-believer and walked away saying she hoped to run into our wizard again.
**********
“Hey, what time is the Women’s Caucus march starting?, asked, asked softly and politely, a young, maybe mixed spanishblackwhiteindian, woman dressed in what I would describe as modern young women casual elegant, student division, but what do I know of such North Face fashion trends, as I approached the tent full gravel walkway entrance that leads into the Occupy Boston encampment on the kitchen side. I answered softly and politely not out of instinct, or mannered effect, but from hoarsed-out chanting-“Whatever we wear, Wherever we go, Yes means Yes, No means No!” – “Consent in the sheets, Dissent in the streets!” – “We are unstoppable, another world is possible!,” words that rang in the streets that Sunday afternoon as the Women’s Caucus and their allies, including me, marched through Boston. A little change of pace from the generic national anthem-like “Banks got bailed out, we got sold out” slogans of late, but necessary to show, show manly show, solidarity with the women of this encampment who have led the struggle against male chauvinism and sexual harassment in general-and, disturbingly, in the camp.

“Sorry, you just missed it, we are just finishing up,” I told her. She responded that she thought the thing started at two (another of those snafus that are intrinsic to makeshift social movements, even movements hard-drive driven by modern computer technology), it said so in the Occupy Daily Calendar and she had rushed over here to make it in time. “That is when the music and poetry was listed to start. In fact they are underway down at the main stage now. I’ll walk you down” “Oh, I hope I didn’t miss Letta Neely reading her poetry, that is really why I came. She speaks to me, speaks to me a lot” I replied that I was not familiar with this woman’s work. “Oh she is a sistah, a black beautiful lesbian sistah who writes about stuff I feel, feel deeply, being a mixed race, mixed-up, bi-sexual woman.” I gulped, and smiled, smiled inside, not at what she said but at what infinite number of words would have to go into righteously describing her with that added information, and her space. I gave up as we approached the main stage and listened to a woman who described herself as PuertoDom ( I hope I am spelling this right, Puerto Rican and Dominican, okay) reading her poetry. Very sharp, witty, and politically to the point poetry. Then Letta Neely came on. Check this out:

From Juba:poetry/by Letta Neely, Wildheart Press, copyright 1998

juba

for renita

u be a gospel song
some a dat
ole time religion
where the tambourine git goin
and the holy ghost sneak up
inside people's bones and
everybody dancin and shoutin
screamin and cryin
oh jesus, oh jesus
and the people start to clappin
and reachin back to african rhythms
pulled through the wombs of
the middle passage
and women's hats start flying
while the dance,
the dance they do gets hotter and holier
and just the music has brought cause for celebration
yeah, u be a gospel song, girl
like some a dat ole back in the woods, mississippi river kinda
gospel
and i feel the holy ghost when you is
inside me
and the tambourines keep goin
and folks is stampin they feet
and oh no,
it's the neighbor knocking on the door
askin is we alright
say we was screamin
oh jesus, oh jesus
and i heard us but i
didn't hear cuz
i was being washed in the gorgeous wetness of
your pussy
being baptized w/ole time religion
the oldest religion there
is
2 women inside the groove
of each other
we come here
we come
we come here
to be
saved

I an old white man who spend his 1960s drug-drenched be-bop nights summers of love chasing women (young girls really as I was ayoung boy) and running away from my old working-class Olde Saco, Maine oceanside white bread roots am probably separated by entire gulfs of time, of age, of politics, of means streets, hell, of sexual preference, kind of, but know this, my new-found young mixed woman friend was right. Letta Neely is a sistah.
************
From the Occupy Boston Daily Digest:

Saturday, December 3

10:00am Occupy Movement Day of Action (Neighborhood specific locations);11:30am Occupy ICE – Ocupa la Migra;12:00pm **Corporate Negligence and Bhopal, India: An Ongoing Disaster (FSU);12:00pm Faith & Spirituality WG Meeting;1:00pm Unity Rally (Copley Square);2:00pm Winterizing meeting;3:30pm Women’s Caucus;4:00pm General Assembly (Copley Square);5:30pm Anti-Oppression Working Group meeting
6:00pm Alperovitz: America Beyond Capitalism (FSU Economics Forum – Offsite)
6:30pm Safety meeting.

Sunday, December 4

12:00pm **Teach-In on Secure Communities (FSU); 12:00pm Occupy Boston Women’s March; 12:00pm Davis Square Carolers; 12:00pm Faith & Spirituality WG Meeting
1:30pm Catholic Mass;2:00pm **Occu-Stock- Women Spoken Word (see Description for line up);2:30pm Peace Action Working Group Meeting;3:00pm POC Working Group Meeting (People Of Color);3:00pm Media Working Group Meeting;3:00pm (CANCELLED) Publicly-Funded Elections & Repairing Representative Government (FSU Discussion);3:00pm **Concert: Occu-Stock Concert -Erica Russo and Lauren DeRose;4:00pm Facilitation Working Group Meeting;4:00pm **Middle East and North Africa Solidarity Day;4:00pm Socialist Caucus WG Meeting;4:30pm Peace Vigil
5:30pm Queer/Trans Working Group Meeting; 6:00pm General Assembly; 6:30pm Safety meeting; 7:00pm MENA Solidarity Day Plan.

Monday, December 5

Take Back the Capitol;9:00am MAMLEO – Food Drive Drop Off;10:00am FOOD BANK DROP OFF12:oopm Health And Safety Improvement Festival!;2:00pm Community Wellness Working Group Meeting;4:00pm Radio Meeting;4:00pm Direct Action Meeting4:00pm Street Theater Working Group;5:00pm Facilitation;6:00pm Finance and Accountability Working Group Meeting;6:00pm Climate Action, Sustainability and Environmental Justice Working Group;6:00pm Food Tent Working Group Meeting6:00pm Houseless And Allies Community Working Group;6:00pm Outreach working group meeting;6:30pm Safety meeting;7:00pm Occupy Boston Social;7:00pm InfoTent Working Group Meeting
********
“Josh, I am feeling a little overwhelmed by all the meetings and events that I am committed to going to here when I come down for two or three days of heavy political work,” sighed Bonnie Bream (nee Stein) a long-time activist whom I had met a few decades ago while fighting the good fight over Ronald Reagan’s crazed war policies in Central America. Bonnie, then a bright young student at Harvard, was the darling of that movement because she threw herself, absolutely threw herself, into the work, including a couple of stints down in the fields of Nicaragua. I had seen her a couple of times since then down in D.C. or New York fighting the good fight against one or another Bush war policy but it had been a while when I ran into her a couple of weeks ago here on a Sunday afternoon. Like I say Bonnie is an activist, a hard-core activist, and that remained true even when I heard through the grapevine that she had moved up north with her husband to Maine in order to help him with his dream deferred, deferred in support of her social justice dream, of setting up a seashore restaurant in Belfast or Camden, I forget which one. As she told me when we met that first Sunday when she saw and hear about the Occupy movement’s encampment down here it was like lemmings to the sea, she had to come. And so she has come down to work a few days a week before trundling home to serve lobsters, clams, and whatever to hungry ocean-starved touristas in summer and “real food” to the townies off-season.

As she spoke those words I could see just the slightest air of resignation, of a certain tiredness maybe, a certain confusion, perhaps, about which way the winds were blowing here and the flat-out possibility that just too many damn things were going on and it was wearing people down. I had heard such inchoate mutterings before from some younger activists tired of the endless this or that cause marches. But when Bonnie Bream says stuff like that then you know there are some troubled waters stirring so I wanted to hear more.

She then went on, “I don’t mind the work. Or the too many committees with too few people, or two few same people on about six committees. You know I live for this stuff. I don’t even mind, if you can believe this Josh, the disorganized, haphazard way things are run, especially meetings that resolve nothing. But what bothers the hell out of me is when things that are scheduled don’t occur. Like this last Sunday. I knew it was going to be a big long day what with the Women’s Caucus march through the streets of Boston. That was fun, just like in the old days when we tried to roust the slumbering masses having their tea and coffee at Fanueil Market. And the music and poetry performances on the main stage after were great. But then one of the working group meeting which was scheduled failed to materialize, a socialist caucus meeting that I dearly wanted to attend since they had previously met on Fridays when I am not here was wrongly placed on the daily schedule, and then a peace vigil I planned on attending hoping to run into some old UJP [United For Justice with Peace, the local pre-Occupy umbrella activist organization] folks I used to run with never happened for reasons unknown to me. So I spent a lot of the later part of the day just talking the talk to the same people that I always see here on Sunday (or Saturday or Monday the other of my three chosen days). Hell I could just have easily done that at some pokey UJP event.”

I had no answer to her plea just then, and said so. We then went on to other subjects, more personal subjects that need not detain us here. Except later when thinking about it as I was making my own exit from the camp to head home for the evening I stopped for a moment to reflect on this conversation. When the Bonnie Breams of this “new world” feel adrift in this big old amorphous movement then sunny days do not lie ahead.
*******
“Give way, give way we are carrying this tent and it is heavy, give way,” abruptly, and with no apologies in his voice, yelled a burly, black-haired, wisp of a beard, young Latino man as the group of four of five young men with him walked their way down the gravel stone Dewey Square path from the kitchen area to a waiting U-Haul truck parked by the main stage. “Watch your feet, please, watch your feet,” with a delicious sing-song voice chanted a young flaming black-haired, red-ruby-lipped, determined young women, at first glance certainly a college student, who was carrying a load of materials in a Rubbermaid basket from Logistics. “Where do these books go” plaintively asked a short, pert, winter-hatted to protect her head young woman, clearly not a student although not far removed from that venue either, to another unseen woman inside the Library tent. “Put them in that basket marked Celeste they are going to her house for safe-keeping,” answered a voice from the bowels of that tent. And that voice added “We will need them for our next location, wherever that is.”

The sights, sounds, and groans of people moving, moving from the Occupy Boston encampment now that some judge, some Superior Court judge, has in her Solomon-like “wisdom” parsed the facts in favor of the City of Boston’s side of the legal case and determined that while, of course, whatever on earth was going on at this encampment was profusely constitutionally protected speech except that the speech part was trumped by the occupied nature of that expression. Like this whole exercise in plebeian rudimentary democracy, well or badly done, was just another sanctified imperial adventure “land grab” in the on-going American saga. So all about me now are comings and goings as the main frame of the camp is broken down to be placed somewhere, or nowhere else. The whole atmosphere, including the one hundred and one malingerers just hanging around and merely commenting on the spectacle while the few actually worked, was like some gigantic moving day at some college campus. Except for the tents. And just like that scene on that moving day many are bewildered, bewildered however unlike in that college scene, because they are not sure why they are moving. Or just flat-out want to stay, stay despite the Mayor’s order to “cease and desist” by midnight this very night, this December 8th night.

As darkness descends on the unlit camp, unlit except for the ten-thousand lights from the many office buildings that surround the site, the street lights of Atlantic Avenue, and the twenty -thousand automobile lights now heading home turned on in the early winter day turned night voices begin to openly map out “plans.” “Let’s defend this place to the death, like our forebears did,” I heard one old man, who could perhaps have been with those same forebears at Valley Forge from the look of him, proclaim to all who would listen, and many nodded in agreement. “Let’s dance our way out of here,” jokingly non-joking exclaimed a young brown-bearded man, a long-time tenant-at-will resident of the camp, to the approval of several college students near-by, a group whose collective ages would perhaps not equal that old Valley Forger’s but who had a determined look to defend something in their eyes. “Let’s put on a media campaign in the newspapers, especially the suburban newspapers, to get our message out, it doesn’t cost much,” chimed in a young up-and-coming unconscious ad executive-type , or some such, to a more frosty reception. Several other plans, endless plans, were endlessly discussed, almost as many proposals as participants, but in the end through exhaustion, or the need of the hour, the notion of civil disobedience held sway and so the now half-emptied tent camp will be defended against Czar Menino’s storm-troopers.

As it turned out there were many voices heard that night, that cold clear night, but not those of the police screaming their epitaphs at rebellious citizens. Rather, in a small victory way, chants to ward off the evil spirits were heard and then, as the drums began their incessant beat and as people took heart in their resolve, that dance into the future idea took on a life of its own.
*******
December 11, 2011:

“What will we do now, now that they have taken our camp away, taken our freedom of assembly, taken what we have fought for away ?,” asked a young woman, near tears, but holding them back knowing after ten weeks that this was not the time for tears, not public tears anyway. She expressed those dearly won sentiments at the old Parkman Bandstand, the traditional spot for protest rallies, vigils and the start of marches in this city, and the spot where the Occupy Boston was cradled while waiting for the General Assembly (GA) in exile to start this cold, clear Saturday night.

A young man beside her, although not her companion, in the de rigueur all black Black Bloc all black answered “Fuck the system, we will be back, back bigger than ever.” But something in his voice betrayed a sense that a serious defeat had been taken with the successful nighttime police raid of Occupy Boston at Dewey Square early that morning, and that maybe that heavily bundled young woman’s almost tears, almost public tears, were closer to the heart of the matter. Her look, her somewhat startled look at his response spoke eloquently to that fear.

A second young man, an obvious student, with an obvious trying-to-to be-wise-beyond- his-years wisp of a beard attempting to deepen his face and demeanor posed it another way for the now head down woman. “GA tonight will figure out what is next, we will figure out what is next, and if we all work together now when things are tough we will pull through this and next spring we will come back stronger than ever.” Something in his manner and his words brought the woman’s head up, momentarily, as if in recognition that this whole adventure had gone beyond her wildest “new world a-bornin’” dreams anyway and that if she could just keep the dream alike through the winter that wise, bearded young man might just be right.

Standing a few away from this trio, this remnant trio of the good fight, the good American Fall fight, stood an older man, graying, maybe a professor or some kind of teacher, but no “generation of ‘68” guy battle-scarred from fighting racist monsters in the black civil rights South, or against the bombs of American imperialism Vietnam, or even drawing away from conventional bourgeois society and heading to the hills of old Vermont to create a new society away from city madness. He just stated this proposition to his trio audience. “Study history a little, the history of social struggles, revolutions, poor people’s marches, national liberation struggles, rent strikes, eviction parties, fights for freedom for class-war prisoners, struggles against American imperialism. Study them hard and you will notice that they all go through this growing pain thing that we are in right now. Sure we have taken a defeat, a big defeat, on the freedom of assembly question but the camp issues, stay, go or half-stay were starting to drown out what we are here for-tame, or get rid of, the capitalist monster on our backs. So it’s okay to have a minute tear but now we have to get off our knees, dust off our knees, and get back to the struggle. We will rise from the ashes just like the phoenix. Bet on it.” And, you know maybe he was right because that young woman stopped putting her head down for the rest of the evening. .
*******
As I have written my words along the way this past ten weeks or so I have continued to put this last sketch from early on in October when the world was new the end and here at the end of my song it seems right to stay.

Five minutes ago the sidewalk along the Atlantic Avenue side of the encampment was deserted, a lonely yellow-jacketed cop shifting back and forth on his heels to make his duty time pass more quickly. Now the first sign of the day, “Tax The Rich,” along with it human holder, here a well-dressed, well-preserved older woman, a woman who looked like she has seen many battles for social justice in her time hit the sidewalk. And her action acted as a catalyst because then came a couple of young students carrying a banner-“Banks got bailed out, we got sold out,” one of the anthems of the Occupy movement, to stand beside her. They smile, she smiles, nothing more is needed as they banner understand each other completely.

Then a convoy of about twelve middle-aged and older Universalist-Unitarians from out in some suburban town, who have rented a bus for the occasion, begin filling in the sidewalk a little farther up the street with their “peace, this,” “peace, that,” “good-will toward all” signs. Upon investigation this group had made a solemn decision, as only U-Uers can, to come weekly to Boston to stand in solidarity with the efforts in Dewey Square.

A few minutes later, from out of nowhere, came a nomadic resident of the “village” with a plateful of cookies, chocolate chip perhaps, and offers them to those “working the line” on Atlantic Avenue.

Later, an older model automobile, frankly a heap, driven by a menacing-looking man in lumberjack jacket with fierce flashing eyes like some crazed survivalist stopped just in front of the Atlantic Avenue entrance to the encampment and yells out, “Hey, when do I put these sleeping bags, tarps, shovels, and pots? I can’t stay but I am with you, with you all the way.” Of such acts by such desperate looking men, revolutions are made, big-time revolutions.

Toward late afternoon the Atlantic Avenue traffic gets heavier, bumper to bumper, as people try to leave the city, and city cares behind. A guy in a big dump truck, a flat-top hair cut showing yells out, “Get a job” at a group of street people standing on the avenue. Later a pedestrian muttered to that yellow-jacketed cop on duty, who was still rocking his heels, about how he paid taxes and isn’t it a shame what these people are up to. The call of the day though goes to a guy, a light-skinned Cuban-looking guy in a late model cherry red sports car driving on the far right lane away from the encampment, who yells out, “Commies, go back to where you came from.”

Ya, I know, not everybody got the news about what happened about twenty years back, not everybody gets what is going on now, and not everybody, despite the sleek street slogan of ninety-nine percent, is with the Occupy movement. But just remember that guy, that lumberjack jacket guy in that old heap, who gave what he had, and gave it for keeps.
*******
An Injury To One Is An Injury To All!-Defend All The Occupation Sites And All The Occupiers! Drop All Charges Against All Protesters Everywhere!
********
Fight-Don’t Starve-We Created The Wealth, Let's Take It Back! Labor And The Oppressed Must Rule!
********
A Five-Point Program As Talking Points

*Jobs For All Now!-“30 For 40”- A historic demand of the labor movement. Thirty hours work for forty hours pay to spread the available work around. Organize the unorganized- Organize the South- Organize Wal-mart- Defend the right for public and private workers to unionize.

* Defend the working classes! No union dues for Democratic (or the stray Republican) candidates. Spent the dough on organizing the unorganized and other labor-specific causes (example, the November, 2011 anti-union recall referendum in Ohio).

*End the endless wars!- Immediate, Unconditional Withdrawal Of All U.S./Allied Troops (And Mercenaries) From Afghanistan! Hands Off Pakistan! Hands Off Iran! Hands Off The World!

*Fight for a social agenda for working people!. Quality Healthcare For All! Nationalize the colleges and universities under student-teacher-campus worker control! Forgive student debt! Stop housing foreclosures!

*We created the wealth, let’s take it back. Take the struggle for our daily bread off the historic agenda. Build a workers party that fights for a workers government to unite all the oppressed. Labor and the oppressed must rule!