Seattle's "Outside Agitators 206" & why they want to drive a wedge between BLM and Democrats

[FourScore]

Sun Aug 09, 2015 at 04:36 PM PDT
Seattle's "Outside Agitators 206" & why they want to drive a wedge between BLM and Democrats
by Lefty Coaster

We shouldn't judge an important movement like Black Lives Matter by the the excesses of a radical faction within the BLM movement. The instigators of a strident protest who drove Bernie Sanders from a stage yesterday were from a group named Outside Agitators 206. They created a Black Lives Matter Seattle facebook page just 2 days ago. Outside Agitators 206 seems to be a group that regards electoral politics as a inconsequential. They focuses on BLM and driving a wedge between BLM Movement and the Democratic Party. Their facebook page links to a site named Black Agenda Report run by a man named Glen Ford that included this reveling passage:

To succeed, the Black Lives Matter Movement must transform the politics of Black America. By definition, that means declaring war on the Democratic Party, and forcing Black politicians and activists to choose between the Party and the people’s struggle.

As usual, the Democrats will try to make Black people more angry at the terminally racist Republican Party than at the police and local administration of their (typically) Democrat-run city. Hillary Clinton is already making noises of empathy with Blacks suffering under the urban police state. However, the Black Lives Matter movement has no institutional stake in the victory of either party, but is, in fact, locked in mortal political struggle with other Black people in the Democratic Party. These Black Democrats will insist on a truce, a cessation of agitation against national or local Democrats, until after the election.

Hat tip to kbman for his diary.

When I heard of the group's first disruptive protest against a Christmas Tree Lighting event in front of a downtown shopping mall my reaction was BOOYAH! What a great target for a BLM protest to select.

Now they've broadened their targets for protest to include the Democratic Party (Hillary not so much?). At this point anyone suggesting Bernie Sanders is neglecting the BLM issue is either not paying attention or lying. Apparently the Republican Party isn't in their sights because of its limited appeal to people of color.

I think this strategy is a recipe for disaster.

Electoral politics does have consequences.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/09/1410408/-Seattle-s-Outside-Agitators-206-why-they-want-to-drive-a-wedge-between-BLM-and-Democrats

[Hydra]

1. BLM main Leadership needs to let us know they don't support the action taken

Otherwise we have to assume they support it. If they are intent on driving a wedge through the efforts of social and economic justice (as they have indicated they are) then they are doing a disservice to the people who have died at the hands of the police that they claim to be advocating for.

Do NOT stand on peoples graves to advance your own power. That's GWB level crap.

[Triana]

9. +1 n/t

[pnwmom]

2. Outside Agitators are likely one of Seattle's numerous anarchist groups.

Anarchists are not leftists. They want to dismantle government, not make it work, like Bernie does. They are as opposed to his socialism as they are to every other form of government. They don't want a "nanny state." They don't think we need ANY state.

They have a lot more in common with libertarians than with Bernie and other progressives. Of course they want to undermine him. He's a huge threat to their agenda.

[suffragette]

3. They do seem in that zone

They reference anarchist material on their resource page:
https://outsideagitators206.org/resources/

[pnwmom]

4. Thank you! I hadn't seen those links, but I'm not surprised. nt

[suffragette]

8. Consistent with some of what's on their 'who we are' page

And with them flipping off the media when asked questions after the rally as well.

https://outsideagitators206.org/who-we-are/

[GreatGazoo]

13. Anarchy indeed -- their leader explained how they work in this earlier performance:

She loves scolding people for not being anarchists.

[tblue37]

27. Her body language is interesting, and as a person with severe hearing loss, I

pay close attention to body language.

She uses face, hand, arm, and finger gestures associated with aggression and, perhaps more important, dominance. She uses facial/mouth, and head movements associated with dominance and condescension.

And she also uses self-pointing gestures associated with narcisism. Many of those gestures are the same ones a body language expert has described in his analysis of Trump's and Cruz's gestures.

Here is his site, if you are interested:
http://www.bodylanguagesuccess.com

The study of body language is in its infancy, but it is interesting, and some of what this guy describes is pretty obviously true. Humans are a scial and hierarchical specues, so we are by our very nature "experts" at using and decoding facial expressions and body language, even if most of us never raise our use of these signals to a conscious level.

[GreatGazoo]

30. I have studied handwriting analysis

which is similar in that you are looking for the physical expression of emotions and attitudes. There are some parts of handwriting analysis which seem obvious when pointed out. For example, Trump's signature looks like a saw blade with no loops n the lower zone "p", is nearly illegible and shows a lot of pressure on the pen -- respectively: sexual anxiety, anti-social traits and anger/aggression.

I studied some body language when helping my brother prepare for an acting role (an anti-smoking PSA) and in dog training. For dogs, body language is #1. I had a deaf dog and learned sign language for her. Now I use it with my hearing dogs because it works so well.

The anarchist woman talks and moves like a tyrannical grade school teacher (potty mouth aside). She first refers to the other members of the public at that hearing as the "audience" which is very telling.

I'll check out the body language site as I find the subject fascinating. Thanks for that.

[Marr]

64. What I find most interesting about that video...

is that it has no comments, few views, and the council (according to the description) voted 7-0 to do the thing she was opposing.

This is a person who is all about getting attention and playing badass, but for whom actual policy is just a stage prop.

[AngryAmish]

67. Is she too black for you?

[joshcryer]

20. The question is can they be considered part of BLM.

Since the primary figures of BLM have not denounced them in any way, I think the conclusion is obvious. In that vein I think it is incorrect to try to separate their actions from BLM because that reeks of condescension.

Until Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi say something about it I think it is wrong to play these games. Especially because Garza and Cullors have both been advocates for going after the Democrats.

[snagglepuss]

53. Cullors has come out voicing her support for their leadership

and states that the are part BLM and says no apology will be issued.

[joshcryer]

66. Sounds about right.

Everyone saying they are not BLM are not listening.

[TBF]

21. It's those damned anarchists

It couldn't possibly be swift-boating from the right wing. Nope, authoritarian regimes rock!!!

[pnwmom]

23. An anarchist group is closer to libertarianism than any other party. Just a matter of degree.

It hasn't occurred to you that the rightwing could easily infiltrate groups like that?

[TBF]

25. Most serious anarchists are not going to have

any involvement in electoral politics. What I am saying is that this is coming from the right wing. Period. They did it to Gore, Kerry, and now Sanders. No big surprise.

[robertpaulsen]

34. I believe the controlling entity's interest is financial as much as it's ideological.

Perhaps because the corporate entity propping these "anarchists" up has some connection with the Pharmaceutical-Industrial Complex and has a vested interest in making sure a candidate calling for single-payer has no chance of winning?




These screenshots were captured before the whois data was changed to private.

[TBF]

35. There's a shocker -

thank you.

[Go Vols]

37. TY

[ljm2002]

38. Very interesting!

Thanks for posting that information.

[Warren DeMontague]

39. LA LA LA

I CANT HEAR YOOOOOUUUUU

[uhnope]

40. Debunked, I think

https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/3gi8ii/outside_agitators_206_who_caused_the_seattle/ctydwao

[robertpaulsen]

44. Interesting comment at that link.

ireadrslashnew [score hidden] 2 hours ago

I would check a more up-to-date databse, it looks like Amazon AWS owns this IP now which would make a lot more sense.

Check it here, and you can see that the database from April shows Merck, but the new database shows Amazon: https://www.iplocation.net/

I'm not tech-savvy enough to verify, but if this poster is correct, Merck did own the IP as recently as April.

https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/3gi8ii/outside_agitators_206_who_caused_the_seattle/

So what was Merck doing with it then, and why is it now being used by these Outside Agitator trolls?

[jeff47]

45. IPs are not like buildings. They can be sold and bought instantly.

Owning the IP in April is meaningless today.

[robertpaulsen]

46. Thanks for clarifying that.

Just curious, do you know how to determine what date it was sold? If Merck sold it to Amazon, did it happen in May or July or August?

Again, just trying to make myself more tech-savvy in my research if you could explain it. Thanks.

[jeff47]

47. Most likely it always was and still is Amazon's IP address.

Amazon Web Services (AWS) is a massive operation hosting tens of thousands of web sites and "cloud applications". They have a lot of IPs, and will let you use one for a small monthly fee.

You literally click a checkbox on a form, and you have the IP in seconds. If you decide you don't need it anymore, you uncheck the box, and Amazon can sell the IP to someone else.

What they are doing above is showing an old DNS record for that IP. DNS is what translates between democraticunderground.com and 216.158.28.196. The new DNS record points to a different entity, a "privacy" company that hides the real name and address of the person who registered the domain.

Btw, such "privacy" listings are extremely common. I have a domain name. I use a privacy company so my home name and address is not on the DNS record. If someone were to sue me or a government were to prosecute me, the privacy company will hand over my name and address. But I don't want to hand out my home address and phone number to everyone on the Internet.

[robertpaulsen]

48. Could Merck and Amazon own the same IP address simultaneously?

Because, according to http://www.ipligence.com/, Merck did own that IP as of 4/22/15.

[jeff47]

50. No, but again the IP can be transferred in seconds.

Check a box, you have an IP. Uncheck a box, you don't have that IP anymore and it's someone else's IP.

[nadinbrzezinski]

49. While true, sometihng like a top tier corp

is not usually one that is just handed out like candy... because it could lead to these misunderstandings. Amazon, OTOH, is quite frankly your service provider.

[jeff47]

51. Keep in mind it probably was a "cloud application"

And may or may not have been used for development or testing before the "real" application went live.

[nadinbrzezinski]

52. It is cloud but the site went live under the Merck domain

I think they are going to try to swat it down, and it is easy to swat down, since this is way too ahem technical. (I own a website, under wordpress by the way, which like Amazon is what it is). Amazon is also in Seattle so it makes sense they are the ISP of choice for the cloud.

In my experience large corps are not handed out... but I am one.

[jeff47]

54. Large corps usually buy the IP directly for their main sites.

But if someone needed an IP to do some development or testing for the next version of some Merck cloud app that's in AWS anyway, it is likely they used an "Elastic IP" - they're cheap, it takes two clicks in the AWS console to get one, and the developers/testers don't give a damn who uses the IP 4 months later.

But they'd still use a Merck DNS name, because you can't pick up a DNS name on a whim.

The "real" application would have an IP that Merck bought directly, still hosted within AWS.

Then whoever posted that picture tried to conflate the old DNS info with the new DNS info.

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. Point, but the site went live before the IP changed hands,.

that is what is having me go... hmmm

Regardless this is one of those that is not beyond the readers of Ars Technica, but it is beyond most normal humans. We both know it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

57. Jeff, this is the community calendar for Jan 2015

https://outsideagitators206.org/events/2015-01/

This I doubt was transferred, the site went live well before.

And just an aside, Merck is based in NJ...

[jeff47]

58. Problem is you can't rely on pic of the DNS record.

We already know that pic has false information - data from April instead of current data. We can't know that the IP that is now outsideagitators206.com was outsideagitators206.com in April based on that pic alone.

[nadinbrzezinski]

59. Why I said this is beyond normal humans

this is way too technical for most folks.

But there are way too many things on this that raises my Altwater\Rove\ et al rats. This is oh so 1970s it is not even funny.

I agree with you insofar as the jpeg... unless something else was changed and proving that would be the kind of forensics that neither you or I are going to do, or pay for.

[jeff47]

60. IMO, it comes down to Merck isn't that stupid.

"Let's set up a front organization to go after liberals....but put our company name all over the public records!"

You hand the cash to your agents, and they go off and do their thing. There's no need to put Merck's name on the DNS record. GoDaddy will happily register the new domain without a big corporate name attached.

[nadinbrzezinski]

61. nail hits hammer

why I think they were involved somehow. And when they realized what was going on... yank it.

The GOP would not be this stupid either, remember the Bush server scandal? This is what this reminds me off to a point. Yes, that level of beginner stuff. They rely on most folks have no idea what a DNS is, or an active vs passive IP... and for the record that includes whoever set up the website for the group. Most folks have no idea about that stuff either.

[jeff47]

62. Except putting the Merck name on it is harder than not putting the Merck name on it.

The beginner mistakes are done in the name of making it easier. This made it harder.

[nadinbrzezinski]

63. Correct, which leads to who created the website to begin with

And for the record, neither of us could try to put this beyond speculation... becuase whoever did this, already cleaned their tracks. Again, I go back into the kind of forensics neither of us is going to pay for. (Or have the legal authority for either)

[robertpaulsen]

68. Thanks for the link.

After sifting through these bits and pieces, my opinion is: I don't see a fire. But there's a whole lot of smoke that makes me suspicious.

[nadinbrzezinski]

69. Exactly and the smoke

To use fire language, is hard to pin down, as to the point of origin

[nadinbrzezinski]

41. Now the WHOIS data says this

Email

Dates Created on 2014-12-14 - Expires on 2015-12-14 - Updated on 2015-02-13
IP Address 54.68.196.65 is hosted on a dedicated server
IP Location United States - Oregon - Portland - Amazon Technologies Inc.
ASN United States AS16509 AMAZON-02 - Amazon.com, Inc. (registered May 04, 2000)
Domain Status Registered And Active Website
Whois History 6 records have been archived since 2014-12-15
IP History 3 changes on 3 unique IP addresses over 1 years
Hosting History 1 change on 2 unique name servers over 1 year
Whois Server whois.pir.org
Website
Website Title Outside Agitators 206
Server Type nginx/1.6.2
Response Code 200
SEO Score 78%
Terms 488 (Unique: 261, Linked: 184)
Images 1 (Alt tags missing: 1)
Links 48 (Internal: 42, Outbound: 5)

[jeff47]

42. Uhh....not according to ICANN.

http://whois.icann.org/en/lookup?name=outsideagitators206.org

[nadinbrzezinski]

43. And amazon at domain tools

http://whois.domaintools.com/outsideagitators206.org

[HooptieWagon]

26. I agree.

One problem with a leaderless organization like BLM (or OWS) is that it's easy for the group's goals to be hijacked by people with a different (often self-serving) agenda.

[Control-Z]

5. Hillary not so much?

Really? You just had to add that? My, my. That one line says more than your entire post.

[FourScore]

6. In case you missed it, BLM hasn't proested a single Hillary event.

That's what the author means by saying BLM protests Democratic events (Hillary not so much.) What in heaven's name do you find offensive about that statement? It's a fact.

[pnwmom]

24. How could they? Hillary has Secret Service protection and doesn't go to events like this anyway.

She's been concentrating on small lunches and dinners at this point. And when she does have rallies, they'll be controlled, like Bernie's second event in Seattle that day.

[cali]

32. lol.

Of course they could. Code Pink has demonstrated against people with Secret Security and so have many, many others.

[pnwmom]

33. Code Pink hasn't gotten into closed fundraisers, and as even you know (and have probably

complained about), that's what she's been concentrating on -- small lunches and dinners for fundraising.

And, as you also know, the Secret Service would never allow a Code pink protester (or any other unknown) to get on the stage with Hillary Clinton and grab her mic.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

36. Yelling from the back of the room, inaudible, for 15 seconds before being escorted out

A fart in the wind.

[bemildred]

10. This is all so sixties. nt

[malaise]

11. They always know when to dig up the template

Thankfully many of us learned from those days

[bemildred]

12. I hope so.

It's so obvious that we are "there" again.

[TBF]

22. Right? I feel like I'm back in 1968. nt

[KoKo]

28. It is...

Many issues the same...some different.

Can we learn from mistakes of that time...Can we find a better way to make lasting, positive change, this time.

We have to hope so. I sure don't relish revisiting the 60's at this point in my life. But, we don't get to choose the circumstances of times we live in.

[GreatGazoo]

14. what does the "206" refer to? n/t

[nonpareil]

15. Seattle's area code is 206. Perhaps that's it. n/t

[joshcryer]

17. Area code.

"Outside agitators" was appropriated because Ferguson anger was blamed on "outside agitators" and used to justify killing more black men. It's also a term known to be used for murdered civil rights activist Jonathan Daniels.

http://crimethinc.com/texts/r/agitators/index.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Daniels

[tk2kewl]

16. funny how Bernie's stated goal is virtually identical although not 100% AA focused

"forcing... politicians and activists to choose between the Party and the people’s struggle."

Hell, he isn't even a real member of the Democratic Party according to many on this site.

[ismnotwasm]

18. Yawn.

[SoCalDem]

19. Counter-productive nose removal

I understand their frustration. but I wish they could concentrate their fervent dissatisfaction by registering and motivating people to vote OUT republicans..

By "proving" that they are rude, unruly , belligerent screamers, they do their cause no good, and just provide soundbytes for their true enemies

[Vinca]

29. Okay, so let's say all the black voters do not vote for Democrats. Where does that leave them?

Whether they vote for the Republican candidate, or don't vote at all, they are bringing any civil rights progress that has or will be made to a screeching halt. The GOP - orchestrated by ALEC - is doing all it can to make sure minorities and poor people are unable to register to vote. If you can't vote, then who's to say the next police chief in town won't be a Grand Wizard of the Klan? If you regard your vote as unimportant, the consequences can be pretty grim.

[azurnoir]

31. Marrisa Janae has a twitter page LSF Thot, where she describes herself as

Radical Christian Mullatanist. Full time agitator. Lifetime lover of black people. Co-founder of Black Lives Matter Seattle.

https://twitter.com/rissaoftheway

and no I have no idea of what Mullatanist means

[HooptieWagon]

56. If she is a "full time agitator"...

Then she's on a payroll. I doubt Seattle is cheap to live in.

[Zorra]

65. She's just an inexperienced, mixed up kid. Ignore her, and she will go away. nt