The author goes on with a critique, claiming we would discourage citizens from informing to the police about possible assassination attempts against the president or other "violent criminal conspiracies." This probably stems from our blurb about habitual dumbass white supremacist Hal Turner, who attempted to use his status as an FBI informant as leverage while defending himself against charges of threatening federal judges in Chicago. While we did say "fuck Hal Turner for working with the FBI," that didn't necessarily mean we were endorsing some racist skinhead piece of shit to off the man your Mama calls Obama. Turner was exhibiting classic snitch tactics, using his status as a rat to weasel his way out of his own legal situation. For that (and plenty of other reasons), he should be condemned. Do you really think a white supremacist podcaster from North Bergen has access to credible, dangerous threats against anybody? No, man. Not even the paranoid FBI believed him. Fuck that guy. Hal Turner is an attention whore attempting to grab headlines.
This goes a little deeper. Further questioning of our ethics as to whether "violent criminal conspiracies" should be investigated "through constitutional procedures" can again be rebutted through commentary on Turner. SnitchWire admitted that even with our anti-snitch ethos, we wouldn't exactly be in the throws of self-loathing failure and depression should Turner's activities as an informant lead to the imprisonment and/or extermination of neo-Nazi scum. By all means, we are happy to endorse a five-point plan that eventually leads to fascists being flung en mass into major active volcanoes or used as fertilizer at communes. SnitchWire functions on principals of non-aggression, self-defense, and direct action; principals which should not be confused with the mayhem, violence and pointless, petty hatred people like Hal Turner revel in.
Clifford goes on to criticize our aesthetic further as well as our sense of humor:
"Violent retribution against government spies."
Then there’s SnitchWire’s wink-and-nod encouragement of violence against government informants. The subtitle of the site is so you get what’s coming to you – with an obvious double meaning.
The site also advises, “Individuals pursuing a ’snitches get stitches’ policy do so on their own accord and are in no way affiliated directly with this publication.” That’s not a discouragement of violent retribution against government spies. It’s just a legal disclaimer.
If we want the government to follow the Constitution and stop spying against us, then we need to follow the Constitution as well – and the laws established under it. Nobody should be above the law – including activists who criticize illegal government activities.
Yeah. We certainly wouldn't frown on it. You caught us! When mother of two Marie Mason gets 22 years in prison from the State for acts of righteous property destruction that didn't hurt anyone, excuse us for hoping her snitch ex-husband Frank Ambrose gets recognized in a dark part of town by a sleeping ELF cell. While the "terrorists" of the RNC8 are nervously awaiting trial for organizing the fucking logistical elements of a counter-summit, the snitch Andrew Darst is saved from possible felony charges after kicking a door down and beating two people in the middle of the night because the State wanted to make sure his testimony would still be credible. Or how about when Brandon Darby set up a couple of kids with Molotov cocktails that weren't ever even used? Should we go on? Does anyone need anymore examples of these disgusting vermin (because we got quite a list)? Is it so wrong to wish the pain they've inflicted upon entire communities could be directed at them? Is it so wrong to fight back?
But that's where we differ, liberals. Keep on dreaming that the government will "follow the constitution and stop spying on us" and we'll keep wiping our asses with it. Your government is a "violent criminal conspiracy." The laws are unjust, the punishments obscene, the State illegitimate. So you can have your Cindy Sheehans, Pelosis, Obamas and Reids, and we'll happily root on the Tarnac 9, the Greek insurrection, and the anti-globalization movement. Endorsing the capitalist class and throwing effort behind it only betrays everyone under the thumb of the ruling elite. Simply acting within the boundaries of the law is futile, because the State doesn't listen and it's only a matter of time before total co-option. They set the boundaries of the law for a reason: because they can control everything operating inside of it.
In many circumstances (and in our opinion), the stakes are far too high to allow informant activity and infiltration to go unchecked. Don't honestly think that for a second, if you're in even the most peaceful, hands-off kind of activism, you aren't watched. They figured you out. They can counter peace marches and petitions and lobbying. The 60s scared them all to death and Nixon had to figure it all out. If you don't think Dick Nixon figured out that whole protest thing, let's schedule a luncheon and we'll do some schooling.
So for those engaging in a diversity of tactics to become a puss-spewing, irritating thorn in the side, we salute you. Empires are brought down through many means, and the smartest thing to do is never put your foot in your mouth when your fists might have to fight. We'll support those communities and individuals, and provide them the information they need to avoid spies. That's what we're committed to. We write with a humorous bent on occasion, and that's that. Enjoy your world of endless compromise, Clifford, but there are still people with some fight left in them.