Occupy Activists’ Bomb Plot Foiled

Arnold Ahlert is a former NY Post op-ed columnist currently contributing to JewishWorldReview.com, HumanEvents.com and CanadaFreePress.com. He may be reached at atahlert@comcast.net.


Pages: 1 2

Pure coincidence? The aforementioned media spokesman for OWS Cleveland, who admitted the men attended group events, insisted that they “weren’t affiliated with or representing the group.” Yet it is being reported by the Cleveland Plain-Dealer that Brandon Baxter “had for months attended Occupy Cleveland protests, actions and [had been] sitting at the group’s tent on Public Square,” and that he was also arrested with other movement members. Breitbart.com is reporting that Anthony Hayne “was organizing the information session” for the October 21st Cleveland protest. And three men named, Brandon Baxter, Anthony Hayne and Joshua Stafford, appear to have Facebook accounts listing #OccupyCleveland as their occupation or place of employment. Facebook photographs picturing two of the men look exactly like those of the plotters posted by the FBI, although whether or not those Facebook accounts belong to the suspects remains unconfirmed.

Perhaps most tellingly, the Cleveland OWS May Day rally was cancelled following news of the arrest. OWS Cleveland released a statement claiming the cancellation was due to “the alleged actions of the autonomous group arrested [Monday] night,” adding that “Occupy Cleveland has … affirmed principles of non-violence since its inception on October 6, 2011.”

Yet the cancellation raises an obvious question: if the would-be bombers had no real association with OWS Cleveland, then why cancel the protest?

Debbie Kline of Jobs with Justice claimed it would have been in “bad taste” to go on with OWS Cleveland’s plans to “occupy” the GE Lighting building. She then inadvertently offered the ultimate rationale for dismissing all of the despicable behavior that’s been associated with the OWS movement. “When you’re in a movement, you can’t kick people out when they are volunteers,” she contended. “These five were acting on their own, they didn’t have any part of the greater movement. There are ‘fringey’ people all over the place,” she added.

It’s a rather large “fringe.” From the movement’s beginning in New York City on September 24, 2011, through April 26, 2012, there have been 6,990 documented arrests in 114 cities across the nation directly associated with the OWS movement. Yesterday, protests yet again turned violent in Oakland and Seattle. In San Francisco, cars and property were vandalized Monday night.

And now in Cleveland, a domestic terror plot was hatched, aimed at inflicting al-Qaeda-like casualties Americans.

OWS can attempt to disavow connection with such a plot, but thousands of arrests in hundreds of cities, coupled with instances of anti-semitism, sexual assaults (including rape), vandalism, and even murder can hardly be attributed solely to “fringe” or “rogue” elements “hijacking” an otherwise peaceful movement. The OWS movement’s reason for existence is to disrupt the normal course of everyday life at every opportunity and to turn “one percent” of Americans into literal enemies of the nation. The notion that they can accomplish such objectives, especially the latter one, “non-violently” is ludicrous. The bomb plotters did nothing more than engage in ideological one-upmanship. They followed the logical progression of a movement dedicated, despite all their faux high-mindedness, to one over-riding idea: Us against them.

It is a template tailor-made for the kind of trajectory that leads directly from bombast to bombings.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Pages: 1 2

  • nathan

    They obviously weren't Occupy protesters, because they said the non-violent movement wasn't violent enough for them.

    • Rifleman

      And then you woke up…

    • tagalog

      You mean like when the Weathermen left SDS back in 1969 because SDS wasn't violent enough, they stopped being an offshoot of SDS?

    • kasandra

      Hey, just because they said on their Facebook pages that they are "employed" by Occupy Cleveland, what are you going to believe – what they said about themselves or your opinion?

    • mlcblog

      …sort of like Ayers when he explains on the Weather Underground video on the internet that the bombs they made wouldn't hurt anybody, that they very carefully placed them so no one would get hurt?

  • nathan

    OCCUPY CLEVELAND CONDEMNS BRIDGE BOMBING PLOT
    http://www.wkyc.com/news/article/243461/3/Occupy-

    • GLasker

      Nothing in that article even comes remotely close to a condemnation.

    • mlcblog

      They always do this. One takes a different stance to make the other one look more innocent.

  • SCREW SOCIALISM

    Now they are going to occupy jail cells for a LONG TIME.

    • Maxie

      Morelikely they'll be given ring-side seats and a standing-O @ the MarxiCrat national convention

  • ObamaYoMoma

    It's amazing how when Dhimmicrats are in power we get all these nonsense reports from our Justice Department and also from leftwing institutions like the Southern Poverty Law Center warning Americans of imminent and impending right wing terrorist attacks. Yet, it always turns out to be delusional leftists that resort to terrorism instead. Leftism is a severe mental disease.

    • kafir4life

      muslims do the same thing. It's called projection.

      • ObamaYoMoma

        muslims do the same thing. It's called projection.

        No, not really. Muslims never ever perpetrate terrorism for various political causes, as that would be un-Islamic and therefore blasphemous, which is a capital offense in Islam. I mean to believe that garbage, you'd have to believe that Islam is not the problem and that Islamic extremists, i.e., so-called Islamists and radical Muslims, are the problem, but that's pure utter nonsense.

        In fact, the entire premise of the so-called War on Terrorism is ludicrous, which is why both Iraq and Afghanistan inevitably turned into the two biggest strategic blunders ever in American history. Of course, you will never understand that if you swallow the garbage the lamestream media is selling at the behest of the federal government.

        The reality is jihad and terrorism are two completely mutually exclusive and very different and distinct manifestations altogether. As jihad is holy fighting in the cause of Allah against non-Muslim unbelievers to make Islam supreme and constitutes total warfare that employs both violent and non-violent means of jihad. As a matter of fact, covert and deceptive non-violent jihad, such as mass Muslim immigration to the West that is really covert and deceptive non-violent jihad for the purpose of mass Muslim infiltration and stealth demographic conquest, is employed by the Islamic world against the West astronomically far more prevalently and in fact constitutes an exponentially far greater threat to the peace and security of the West relative to violent jihad, which per the dictates of PC multiculturalism is unfortunately always conflated and morally equated as being terrorism.

        In addition, Jihad is not a product if Islamic extremism or Islamic extremists, as ALL MAINSTREAM ORTHODOX MUSLIMS on earth, per the sixth and most important pillar of Islam, are obligated to fight jihad in the cause of Allah. No exceptions. Therefore, ALL MAINSTREAM ORTHODOX MUSLIMS ON EARTH are jihadists. A tiny minority of them are violent jihadists, while the vast overwhelming majority of them are covert and deceptive non-violent jihadists, and the few that are not jihadists are not Muslim at all, but instead blasphemous apostates that per the dictates of mainstream orthodox Islam must be executed.

        Meanwhile terrorism, on the other hand, as its name implies is always only violent, is perpetrated by non-Muslim political extremists for various political causes, and indiscriminately targets civilian non-combatants.

        Contrast jihad with terrorism and you can easily see the differences. As jihad employs both violent and non-violent means, but astronomically far more non-violent means relative to violent means, in stark contrast to terrorism, which always only employs violent means. Jihad, whether of the violent variety or the non-violent variety, is only fought by mainstream orthodox Muslims, while terrorism, unlike jihad, is always only perpetrated by political extremists. Jihad is always fought in the cause of Allah to make Islam supreme, while terrorism, on the other hand, is perpetrated for any number of various political causes. Finally, Jihad targets either non-Muslim civilian non-combatants as in the Madrid Train Bombings or non-Muslim military combatants as US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, as opposed to indiscriminately targeting civilian non-combatants as in the case with terrorism.

        Hence, Muslims don't do the same thing and it is not projection, as again jihad and terrorism are two entirely mutually exclusive manifestations and two very different and distinct things altogether. Indeed, you need to learn to stop conflating and morally equating violent jihad with being terrorism, because it causes you to totally ignore covert and deceptive non-violent jihad, which constitutes an exponentially far greater threat to the peace and security of the West relative to violent jihad.

        • mcwrath

          It may well be that non-violent jihad poses a greater danger to western civilisation but it is surly a mistake to think that violent jihad and terrorism are not one and the same thing. just because you define jihads sole pourpose as furthering the 'cause of allah' does'nt exclude it from comming under the category of terrorist action. In point of fact it is an political action when islam is seen as more than a religion since those fundamental precepts demand that socity be structured with islamic law. Islam is a politico/religious ideology. ( the lousiest of ideologies) but those extremests are doing exactly what it says on the tin. mosque and state cannot be divided. It is a political issue.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            but it is surly a mistake to think that violent jihad and terrorism are not one and the same thing

            Even though conflating and morally equating violent jihad, that is total warfare that employs both violent and non-violent means of jihad, as being terrorism, which as its name implies is only always violent, per the dictates of PC multiculturalism, and in which enables covert and deceptive non-violent jihad, such as mass Muslim immigration that is really covert and deceptive non-violent jihad for the purpose of mass Muslim infiltration and stealth demographic conquest, to occur today throughout the West and the un-Islamic world totally uncontested and unopposed, since if it isn't violent, it isn't construed as being terrorism, and if it isn't construed as being terrorism, then it isn't contested or opposed.

            Please re-read the paragraph above that starts with: “Contrast jihad with terrorism and you can easily see the differences,” if you are still confused or are still too married to PC multicultural lunacy.

            just because you define jihads sole pourpose as furthering the 'cause of allah'

            I don't define anything, but that is what jihad is per the dictates of Islam and specifically the sixth and most important pillar of Islam. I didn't create Islam.

            does'nt exclude it from comming under the category of terrorist action

            The only reason jihad is always conflated with being terrorism is because of the cult of PC multiculturalism, which always morally equate all civilizations, cultures, and societies along with their idiosyncrasies together to insinuate that they are all equal and the same. However, jihad is specifically and only a manifestation of Islamic civilization, as it is intrinsic to Islam only, and terrorism, which can be for any number of political causes and also indiscriminately targets civilian noncombatants, is un-Islamic and therefore blasphemy, which is a capital offense under Islam. Indeed, Muslims readily denounce terrorism and terrorist attacks, but then again jihad and terrorism are two entirely different things altogether.

            In point of fact it is an political action when islam is seen as more than a religion since those fundamental precepts demand that socity be structured with islamic law.

            Islam isn't a religion, as there is no faith in Islam because Islam is 100 percent totalitarian. In fact, Islam is a supremacist theo-political totalitarian ideology that masquerades as being a religion to dupe the gullible societies it intends to subjugate into a very draconian form of Islamic totalitarianism via the imposition of Sharia. Indeed, the first and foremost tenet of Islam is that all Muslims must totally, completely, and unconditionally submit to the will of Allah where the freedom of conscience is forbidden, and Islam enforces that first and foremost tenet, by making blasphemy and apostasy capital offenses.

            Islam is a politico/religious ideology. ( the lousiest of ideologies) but those extremests are doing exactly what it says on the tin. mosque and state cannot be divided. It is a political issue.

            Excuse me but mainstream orthodox Islam is the problem, not so-called Islamic extremists, i.e., so-called Islamists or radical Muslims, as per the sixth and most important pillar of Islam, all mainstream orthodox Muslims are obligated to fight jihad in the cause of Allah against non-Muslim unbelievers to make Islam supreme. No exceptions

            Hence, all mainstream orthodox Muslims on earth as opposed to so-called Islamic extremists are jihadists. A tiny minority of them are violent jihadists, while the vast overwhelming majority of them are covert and deceptive non-violent jihadists, and the few that aren't jihadists are not Muslim at all, but instead blasphemous apostates that per the dictates of mainstream orthodox Islam must be executed.

    • Jim_C

      What about Tim McVeigh and the Norwegian dude? Righties, baby! And awfully effective, compared to their lefty brethren, wouldn't you agree?

      It takes all kinds…of losers to make a terrorist.

      • poppakap

        Timothy McVeigh was an anarchist, much like these guys and the broader Occupy movement. The Norwegian guy embraces socialism and fascism, which in terms of economics, is a leftist ideology despite the myth perpetuated by academics and the lame-stream media.

  • Amused

    25 TO LIFE -NO PAROLE

  • Amused

    These are terrorists , no more connected to the left than Timothy McVeigh was connected to the Right .Both suffering from the same "severe mental disease " .

    • kafir4life

      You could say the same about *any* of Stinky's (aka BO) supporters, not just these.

    • davarino

      Ayers, Dorn,…..etc.? Have they been disavowed by the left?

      • Amused

        Ayers and Dorn were NEVER part of the kids who were called hippies , counterculture , anti-war protesters .They were terrorists who should have remained in jail .OWS did not co-opt these 5 punks , but you'll do it for them ? You and Alhert are all wet.

        • poppakap

          Really? That's an extraordinary logical stretch that splits the thinnest of hairs for the sake of argument and nothing else. When the 1968 Chicago riots took place, hippies, anarchists, and counterculture leaches all took part. Since they were all working for the same end (US withdrawal from Vietnam), they were conspirators, brothers-in-arms who didn't spend a lot of time asking each other whether their various methods were orthodoxy.

          How do I know this? Because my parents, regrettably, took part in those God forsaken protests. Fortunately, as they matured, they recognized the destructiveness of their early radicalism and are angry that so many US citizens have minimized the ugliness of word and deed from the likes of Ayers and Dorn and their impact on the policies/thinking of BHO.

  • kafir4life

    If Nancy Pelosi had a son, he'd look like the fellow on the top left of the picture.

    These are Obama's core supporters. Let his people go. They need to get ready to vote.

    • davarino

      No, they need a shower : )

      • WilliamJamesWard

        Severe water pollution would occur and Gaia will be upset with you, besides Harvard still
        has no bathing requirement for it's "Hero's of the World Forum"……………William

  • Schlomotion

    I wrote these kinds of articles for two years for fun. Arnold, you are not good at doing this. First you have to choose a local Occupy Group and its affiliated campus and anarchist and soci.alist groups and infoshops, get down the names of all their members, join their mailing lists, and monitor all their communications. Then you can intercept actual communiques and write a real article attempting to link terrorists to a group. If there IS no link, then you can't actually link them. The only time it works is if they are actually linked, they deny it, AND you have the communiques. OWS is lightyears ahead of you even in their dog-drawn cardboard wagons. This is the most miserable and factless amateur hit piece I have ever read.

    Furthermore, your feeble attempt to smear OWS using the latest headline is lame because THEY DON'T READ YOU. Do you think the populist movement reads Arnold Ahlert and feels tarnished by the accusations of terrorism and antisemitism? You don't even do the necessary legwork to slander a group of people. You cobble something together from Drudge Report. I doubt if you even have enough ammo now to go against Debbie Kline. I should write Debbie Kline a letter telling her that you are attempting to smear her.

    (P.S. C4 for $50 a POUND?!?! Hahahaha! Right).

    • SCREW SOCIALISM

      Must be another example of racism.

      Those WHITE guys where TRICKED by "The Man" because of the color of their skin.

    • reader

      Are you trying to boost your troll ratings now? Such creativity. That you troll a lot, we already know.

    • kasandra

      Oh, I get it. They aren't members of an "Occupy" group because they didn't have membership cards and secret decoder rings. Where can one get a list of members of Occupy? Is it on the Internet?

      • Schlomotion

        They might very well be members. If Ahlert had any skills or inclination, he might have been able to prove they were even core organizers. He is satisfied, instead, to do the usual thing which is to take a little press tattle and try to weave it into a net to cast over FPM's political enemies. It's weak, halfhearted, and ineffectual. It makes me think he doesn't even really want to take out "the left," he just wants to write articles about "the left." The left is his meal ticket, as they are for this cottage industry of bad books and lecture tours about how Leftism is causing the slippery slide to Islam. It's all a big crappy book deal and some halfhearted cutpasting.

        • reader

          And yet, somehow he's doing better than your trolling – outside your troll-head, that is.

          • Schlomotion

            Actually not. The metric is whether somebody resigned, somebody was arrested, somebody disbanded, some venue was revoked, or some action was prevented by Ahlert's scattershot accusation. None was.

          • SCREW SOCIALISM

            I hope those arrested moron aren't Muslims, because if they are, it would give Islam a black eye.

          • reader

            You have a point here. Common sense was arrested after your every post, troll.

        • Jim_C

          Ahlert is OK on the financial stuff. He's clearly phoning this piece of twaddle in just to be pro forma.

        • poppakap

          Once again Slomo tries to convince us of his importance and written rhetorical skill. Illusions of mediocrity at its finest, and hilarious to boot. Granted, he's a troll. But the humor (unintended) in his trolling always provides moments of levity.

          Sidebar: I wonder whether Komrade Soros believes the ROI is sufficient in the case of Slomo?

    • wsk

      They don't know how to read… they're products of the public indoctrination, uh, education system.

  • Robert Pinkerton

    Already this case raises a legitimate question of PROVOCATEURISM by the FBI.

    • SCREW SOCIALISM

      Actually a legitimate example of Socialism ruining minds.

    • reader

      Already this case raises a legimtimate question of PROVOCATEURISM by the Obama White House and his 1% supporters, such as Soros.

    • poppakap

      Of course, the FBI pushed the C4 into the hands of these losers. Just like they caused the AIDS and crack epidemics.

      If nothing else, we can always expect pinkos to blame others for their failures. At least they're consistent.

  • Phillip Ley

    The thing I like most about you, Schlomotion, is the open cowardice your anonymity exposes…..man up, sir.

    • Schlomotion

      As a Pseudo-Patriot, what do you intend to do with my personal data? Argue in favor of my lynching? This isn't Mississippi, you know.

      • reader

        You were the one condoning lynch mob going after Zimmerman just the other day, weren't you?

        • Schlomotion

          No, I wasn't.

          • reader

            Yes, you were.

      • mrbean

        I am only interested in what is good for you so I am recommending you for a frontal lobotamy. heh heh heh

        • shmomotion

          I'd rather have a bottle in front of them than a frontal lobotomy.

          • shmomotion

            I, burp!, meant, bottle in front of ME!!!!, (gotta stop boozing and blogging!)

  • BS77

    Any doubts left about what OCCUPY really is? A steaming pile!! See the morons in their "exciting" little black outfits smashing bakery windows and working people's cars and businesses…..yeah, real heroes. Occupy is for LOSERS. Occupy SUCKS. I detest these creepy cowards throwing bricks and bottles off roofs and running away like scared little girls…. Hey OCCUPY guys….you are garbage.

  • http://www.maghrebchristians.com Youssef

    Twenty people have been killed in clashes between protesters and assailants near the Defense Ministry premises in Cairo early Wednesday.

    Read more: http://www.maghrebchristians.com/2012/05/02/egypt

    Youssef

    • SCREW SOCIALISM

      And on the first anniversary of the neutralization of osama bin laden.

      THANKS!

      • Amused

        Egyptians will always be ………..Egyptians .

  • WilliamJamesWard

    Looking at the pictures of the these hapless miscreants and would be destroyers of the American
    life I wonder which one is the real brain behind their exploit. Seems I have observed them
    at one time or another or people identical to them standing next to 50 gal. drums burning
    garbage. As it is we must be to clean and should leave some garbage out for them to have
    something to do. I could be wrong, they may meet at the barrels to discuss their higher
    education successes and future plans, maybe to study abroad like Bill Clinton a Roadkill Scholar.
    Going to jail for years will just be a bump in the road but may be that they will have time to
    meditate on life's mysteries of the unexplained and why people see them as stupid or how
    could society so egregiously fail them………………………………………………………….William

  • dalgray

    Anarchists? This is an overused word for people who are imbued with socialism/communism and the fantasy of a future under such a system. Violence is the prime marker of totalitarianism and most terrorists fall into that political pot; it is as well that they were so stupid that they were caught long before the fantasy became some reduced reality.

    These people are for absolute government by violent means, the idea that they are anarchists is absurd their political ideas at best are inchoate and at worst a precursor of the Gulag society. They deserve all that comes their way; the only good thing is that most of these people will now be paranoid about the possibility of a “Fed” being within their wicked little cliques.

  • kasandra

    What I think is amusing is that these idiots claimed to be anarchists yet wanted to attack the convention of the party of small government but not the convention of the party of omnipresent government. What does this suggest? Maybe that those "anarchist" demonstrators in San Francisco, Oakland, Seattle, etc. actually are (wait for it) leftists of the variety we used to call "communists."

  • UCSPanther

    If these idiots want to bring their lame attempts at either causing a bolshevik-style revolution or just creating anarchy, then all I can say is

    "Bring it on, maggots".

    • mrbean

      Hmmm …… Bring it on maggots……good idea…… make it a culling time to improve the DNA.

  • BS77

    The Occupy jerks need some old fashioned justice. After a good thrashing by the police, these rioters and vandals would be sent away to toil on the chain gang, digging ditches from dawn to dusk….tough love , yeah baby. They won't be so eager to break windows after a year of hard labor.

  • Jim

    Remember the Tea Party. They were attacked also but for being racists. Was that charge true.

    Anarchists have been around for a long time.

    Unlike our beloved President the so called occupiers or anonymous has been helping the pro democracy movement in Iran by attacking the Iranian governments communication systems and aiding the democracy movements communication abilities.

    Anarchists do nothing except scare people.

  • tedder

    25 years to life is what I'm thing is appropriate. Their Idealism will have worn off by the first ten years or so, and they'll have to confront the truth that it was Liberalism that destroyed their lives.
    Ha.

  • umustbkidding

    This is what leftism breeds. By baby steps we have gotten here. Malcontents and the unbelievers are considered the ones with vision these days.

  • wsk

    Looking at those photos, it seems that society took a huge dump and they were the results…

  • http://www.handsoftime.com kit

    These FBI stooges couldn't blow their noses let alone a bridge. Nobody's failing for this kind of propaganda and we are tired of tax money being used to finance phony baloney agit prop schemes.

  • Stephen_Brady

    Because revolutions never happen without violence. Make no mistake, OWS is merely a visible tip of a revolutionary iceberg.

  • Maxie

    Why do little brats throw their oatmeal on the floor?