OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) – Anti-Wall Street protesters up and down the West Coast are joining an effort to blockade some of the nation’s busiest ports fromAnchorage to San Diego.

Demonstrators are scheduled to gather at 5:30 a.m. to march on the Port of Oakland, which Occupy protesters successfully shut down in November. Marchers expect to descend even earlier on the sprawling port complex spanning Los Angeles and Long Beach as the work day begins. In Portland, Ore., the protest will get under way at 6 a.m.

Occupy groups in Seattle, Tacoma and the Canadian city of Vancouver are also planning blockades.

The protests being billed as action against “Wall Street on the waterfront” are perhaps the Occupy movement’s most dramatic gesture since police raids sent most remaining camps scattering last month. Demonstrators began forming those camps around the country about two months ago to protest what they call corporate greed and economic inequality.

Organizers hope to draw thousands Monday to stand in solidarity with longshoremen and port truckers they say are being exploited.

“Taking on and blocking the 1 percent at the port is also taking on the global issue of exploitation by capitalism,” said Occupy Oakland blockade organizer Barucha Peller.

Read more here.

Union activists aren’t backing off demands to work at a new Washington state grain terminal after hundreds of Longshore workers stormed the facility, overwhelmed guards and dumped grain.

U.S. District Judge Ronald Leighton issued a preliminary injunction to restrict union activity, saying there was no defense for the aggressive tactics used in recent days.

Workers have been battling for the right to work at the new terminal in Longview. Protesters twice blocked the pathway of a train carrying grain to the terminal at the Port of Longview on Wednesday, and on Thursday hundreds of carried out the aggressive raid, police said.

The dispute halted work at four other Washington ports, including Seattle, on Thursday as hundreds of longshoremen refused to show up or walked off the job.

The Port of Longview was quiet Friday and Longshore workers were back on the job in Seattle.

Scott Mason, president of the ILWU Local 23 in Tacoma, said some of his members have joined in the Longview effort, but he doesn’t believe they were involved in illegal activity. He blamed the company for provoking the response and warned that more activity could be coming.

“How long this fight has to go on is really in their court,” he said.

Leighton said he felt like a paper tiger because the International Longshore and Warehouse Union clearly ignored a temporary restraining order he issued last week with similar limits. He scheduled a hearing for next Thursday to determine whether the union should be held in civil contempt.

“The regard for the law is absent here,” the judge said. “Somebody is going to be hurt seriously.”

Read the whole thing here.

Hundreds of Longshoremen stormed the Port of Longview early Thursday, overpowered and held security guards, damaged railroad cars, and dumped grain that is the center of a labor dispute, said Longview Police Chief Jim Duscha.

Six guards were held hostage for a couple of hours after 500 or more Longshoremen broke down gates about 4:30 a.m. and smashed windows in the guard shack, he said.

No one was hurt, and nobody has been arrested. Most of the protesters returned to their union hall after cutting brake lines and spilling grain from car at the EGT terminal, Duscha said.

The International Longshore and Warehouse Union believes it has the right to work at the facility, but the company has hired a contractor that’s staffing a workforce of other union laborers.

Thursday’s violence was first reported by Kelso radio station KLOG.

Police from several agencies in southwest Washington, the Washington State Patrol and Burlington Northern Santa Fe responded to the violence to secure the scene that followed a demonstration Wednesday.

“We’re not surprised,” Duscha said. “A lot of the protesters were telling us this in only the start.”

One sergeant was threatened with baseball bats and retreated, Duscha said. “One officer with hundreds of Longshoremen? He used the better part of discretion.”

Read the whole thing here. This is why we take notice when union leaders, like Jimmy the Lesser, say they have an “army” and are going to “take people out.”

“I hope he [Weiner] comes after me. Look up my IP. Nothing to hide here. I’d voluntarily hand anything they want over. Check me and my IP. Anything. I did not post that tweet.”

Twitter user Dan Wolfe (known as @patriotusa76) has clarified several details concerning his involvement in the “Weinergate” scandal, insisting that a thorough investigation of the tweets in question will prove he did not compromise the verified Twitter account of Congressman Anthony Weiner (D, NY-9). In a series of direct messages on Twitter, Wolfe explains how he found the offensive image sent from Weiner’s Twitter account, his previous tweets about accounts followed by the Congressman, and his desire for law enforcement to investigate his online activity that night.

Asked whether he followed Congressman Weiner or the recipient of the controversial tweet, Wolfe states he “wasn’t following either of them ever.” He named several other twitter uses who he regularly communicates with, explaining, “Our twitter group mentions him a lot because he appears in media a lot and says things we hate a lot. If he wasn’t saying anything, we wouldn’t comment.” Wolfe claims that on May 27th, the date the tweet went public, he navigated to the @RepWeiner account by clicking on Weiner’s username on a retweet in his Twitter stream. The tweet in question was the much-discussed one where Weiner announced the time of his upcoming appearance on the Rachel Maddow show with the hashtag #Thats545InSeattleIThink. “I found the 5:45 tweet weird,” Wolfe says.

Describing his discovery of the lewd yfrog-image tweet, Wolfe states, “It was after [Maddow's] show and after the [Seattle] tweet that I had clicked on there– on his page, and he tweeted the pic to [redacted] and I clicked on it. I was shocked. I capped [screen captured] it. Capped the tweet, everything. That’s all. Then I RT [retweeted].” His retweet of Weiner’s account includes the same yfrog URL in screen captures and the TweetCongress archive of the original message. If Wolfe was not following both accounts, he would not have seen the tweet in his primary timeline, but if he was viewing Weiner’s profile, he would have seen the account’s latest tweets–even ones addressed to users Wolfe did not follow. By his admission of not following either account, Wolfe’s claim rests on a coincidence–that he was at the right place at the right time.

Several websites have deemed this coincidence suspicious in light of Wolfe’s mentions of Weiner before the “Weinergate” incident. Daily Kos blogger “Stef,” in a “smoking gun” update to a post claiming the tweet from Weiner’s account was a “Twitter Hoax” involving Andrew Breitbart, sardonically notes that Wolfe predicted a sex scandal involving Weiner and explicit pictures on May 11th, over two weeks before Big Government and Big Journalism first reported “Weinergate.” The author does not accuse Wolfe of hijacking Weiner’s account to post the photo, but she does point out the coincidence that Wolfe was the only real-time witness and retweeter of the alleged lewd message when, weeks earlier, he spread that rumor and asserted “@RepWeiner loves young girls.” Gawker author Max Read stated that the recipient of the “Weinergate” tweet, through her statement to the New York Daily News, “would seem to corroborate” Stef’s “theories,” adding that Wolfe “may be the person responsible for the Congressman’s errant Tweet.”

In response, Wolfe again cites his circle of like-minded Twitter contacts. “It’s not just me–see my regular buddies here [redacted] [redacted], etc. We talk about him because he is always around.” In Stef’s screenshot of Wolfe’s May 12th tweets, his linked screenshots of young women allegedly followed by Weiner belong to the yfrog account of one of the Twitter users he privately disclosed. Wolfe continues, “People noticed a pattern on him and our group, all of us–you can see ALL our timelines–not just me–we saw the pattern too.”

Contrary to Stef’s report, Wolfe first tweeted about Congressman Weiner and a sex scandal on May 5th, citing a friend’s report of a right-wing blog rumor. The rumor vaguely claimed that a high-profile, northeast-region Democrat was involved in a sex scandal with photo evidence. Wolfe speculated that the politicians who fit that profile were Charles Rangel, Anthony Weiner, or Barney Frank, and he asked Weiner and Rangel one after the other multiple times if they were involved in the scandal. One of Wolfe’s final tweets on the subject on May 11th said it was his “hope” Weiner was the politician in question “if [the] rumor is true.”

As for the insinuation that he hacked into Weiner’s Twitter account, Wolfe understands that it’s his word against the Congressman’s, and he is eager for law enforcement to investigate his online activity. Citing “tons of threats wishing me dead, murdered, etc.” in the wake of Daily Kos’s and Gawker’s articles, he states, “I wonder if I can call the authorities myself and ask for an investigation. It would clear me in minutes.” Wolfe also remarked to blogger Ace of Spades, “I hope he [Weiner] comes after me. Look up my IP. Nothing to hide here. I’d voluntarily hand anything they want over. Check me and my IP. Anything. I did not post that tweet.”

The recipient of Weiner’s controversial tweet has returned to Twitter and refutes any claim that she has accused Wolfe of hijacking the @RepWeiner account.  She also laments her continuing media attention: “I’m pretty sure it’s been 15 minutes; I’d like to fade back into oblivion now.” In the conflicting accounts and interpretations of the weekend’s events, one thing is clear: this mystery will be solved and the suffering of these two private citizens will cease most quickly with an official investigation of what IP address sent the controversial tweet from Congressman Weiner’s account.

That is the message of a new campaign launched this week by the Institute for Justice—the nation’s leading legal advocate for economic liberty. A series of studies called The Power of One Entrepreneur highlight the tremendous impact that a single entrepreneur can have on their family, employees, community, other entrepreneurs and beyond.

Consider Melony Armstrong of Tupelo, Mississippi.

Melony is an African hairbraider and a mother of four.  She is the owner of Naturally Speaking, a hairbraiding salon that serves her community and has employed dozens of women.  In addition, Melony has taught more than 125 individuals how to braid.

But before she could even open her doors, she had to battle through mountains of red tape. The state forced her to spend 300 hours in cosmetology classes.  And to teach others how to braid, she had to obtain a special license that required over 3,000 hours of additional classes.  Here’s the kicker:  In all of this government-mandating training, she received no actual instruction in hairbraiding.

In August 2004, Melony teamed up with the Institute for Justice to challenge these needless barriers that had the effect of keeping grassroots entrepreneurs just like her from being able to open their own businesses. Less than a year later, her case resulted in a new law that lifted the restrictions, paving the way for hairbraiding entrepreneurship throughout the state.

Chervy Lesure is a hairbraider who learned her skill from Melony.  She said that Melony has “given an opportunity to people who had the talent to braid but couldn’t and were on public assistance.”  Deborah Nutall, who owns a hairbraiding salon in neighboring Tennessee, understands well the importance of Melony’s impact on the region:

“She put up a fight, and that gives others courage to believe in themselves.  By standing her ground, she created an opportunity for others to lead a successful life—they don’t have to wait for a handout.”

Jackie Spates learned to braid from Melony and went on to open her own business:

“I took Melony’s braiding classes because I wanted to learn the professional way.  The experience showed me how to do it and gave me the confidence I need to run my own salon.”

In all, Melony Armstrong has created over 300 hairbraiding jobs.   She exemplifies the power of one entrepreneur, when simply cut free from needless red tape.  In a nutshell, people like Melony are the key to helping countless Americans improve their economic fortunes, and, more broadly, the key to our nation’s economic recovery.

Of course, Melony is not the only entrepreneur fighting big government to secure her American Dream. The other four reports released this week detail the following cases:

• Seattle-area bagel man Dennis Ballen donates nearly as many bagels as he sells, supporting nonprofit organizations across his region.  But Ballen’s thriving enterprise was almost driven out of business by busy-body bureaucrats: www.ij.org/Ballen

• Kim Powers took on the powerful funeral home and cemetery cartel in Oklahoma.  She went to dramatic lengths and fought a good fight, ultimately losing in court.  But that didn’t stop her.  Now she is back and more successful than ever:   www.ij.org/Bridges.

• Thane Hayhurst from Dallas helps businesses across the state keep their computers running at peak efficiency.  He also places workers from across the nation in hard-to-fill jobs and volunteers for local community centers.  Naturally, government officials are trying to shut him down: www.ij.org/Hayhurst.

• Hector Ricketts’ “dollar vans” have battled the politically powerful and heavily subsidized New York City public buses for years.  He serves the low-income areas that are routinely neglected by public transportation.  Despite overwhelming odds against him, Hector continues to grow his small business that takes—as well as puts—numerous people to work: www.ij.org/Ricketts.

For more on the Power of One Entrepreneur, check out http://ij.org/power.

The site, which has the address makenolaw.org, empowers grassroots activists from around the country that are standing up and saying no to unconstitutional attacks on free speech coming in the guise of campaign finance reform.  The site explains all the latest news and events going on in this increasingly complex area of law.  All of the writers are First Amendment attorneys and experts at the Institute for Justice (IJ)—the libertarian law firm dedicated to striking down campaign finance laws in state and federal courts.

The unfortunate reality is this:  Campaign finance laws are a way to regulate speech and silence speakers.  And they have seriously negative impacts on everyday Americans.

Consider Karen Sampson of Parker North, Colorado:

Karen and her neighbors opposed an effort to annex their town into a neighboring city because it would raise their taxes without providing them benefits.  So they printed up fliers and yard signs.  And then they got sued.

Under what basis?  Colorado’s campaign finance laws, which state that any group of individuals that spend over $200 magically become an “issue committee” that is forced to register with the state.  Further, they must track and report all their “contributions” and “expenditures” and disclose the identities of anyone who gives them money.

The result?  People took down their yard signs and stopped passing out fliers.

In 2008, a federal court upheld the lawsuit against Karen and her neighbors while admitting that Colorado’s campaign finance laws “had the effect of stifling political speech in violation of the First Amendment.”  The Institute for Justice appealed and is waiting for a decision.

In Seattle, Pat Murakami is fighting campaign finance laws that threaten grassroots activists with fines up to $10,000 for every act of free speech:

Pat heads up a diverse group of individuals that work together to fight eminent domain abuse.  She says that all the campaign finance laws do is “limit the political process to lobbyists and insiders.”  Moreover, they threaten her group’s very existence:

“For a volunteer organization like us, fighting to preserve our neighborhood is difficult and expensive enough as it is.  My organization cannot afford the time and lawyers necessary to correctly comply with Washington’s incomprehensible and complex law.”

36 states in America now use campaign finance laws to silence activism just like Pat’s.  And as bad as Washington state is, the situation is far worse on the east coast.  In New York such efforts are criminal, threatening people like Pat with four years in jail and several thousand dollars in fines—the exact same punishment handed out to arsonists.

Down south, campaign finance laws treat activists like Pat the same as people who kidnap children:  Alabama law says $30,000 in fines and 20 years behind bars.  [For more statistics, check out the report Mowing Down the Grassroots.]

The bottom line is that free speech on political matters is vital to our form of government.  And the right to talk about and participate in local politics is at the core of what the First Amendment was designed to protect.  Campaign finance laws don’t just affect politicians.  They restrict everybody’s speech, silencing the grassroots through red tape, regulations and punishment for speaking.

That is why we need to work together—which is where the new free speech site comes in. According to IJ campaign finance expert Paul Sherman:

“We are really excited about Congress Shall Make No Law.  It’s so important to bring the community of activists together.   For everyone interested in helping to protect free speech, there are four quick things you can do right now:  Bookmark, read, comment and share.”

That is:

1. Bookmark makenolaw.org
2. Read a few posts
3. Comment on them
4. Share with others

Sherman continued, “Our success in bringing together and educating people on free speech really depends on our activists.  Working together, with their help and support, we can save free speech from the regulators.”

The only thing Americans should need in order to speak out about politics is an opinion.  Join the free speech community and help IJ—along with grassroots activists from around the country—preserve our most cherished liberties.

Progressive-Marxists hate the G20, and have declared it illegitimate.

The actions started with a raid on the University of Toronto campus, where “street weapons” were found, as were the black ‘uniforms’ of the Anarchy faction of the Progressive movement known as the “Black Bloc”.

More than 600 arrests as G20 protests swell

The day had begun with a raid during which security forces made 70 arrests at the University of Toronto campus in the early-morning hours. The Integrated Security Unit said they seized a “cache of weapons” including bricks and other “street weapons” as well as black clothing.

Here is another account of the University of Toronto’s role in the violence:

Student Union Provides Housing For Out Of Town Anarchists

Toronto Police raided the building and took about 70 people into custody.

“We’ve seized bottles with unknown substances inside, we’ve seized black clothing, bricks, sharpened sticks, items that you definitely do not need to spend any time in Toronto,” Constable Rob MacDonald said.

That’s the same type of weapons and clothing that violent protesters used in the downtown core.

The Toronto police have announced that they found weapons stashed along protest routes. They said they will be displaying them soon.

Here is a video of the Progressive Anarchists setting fires, rioting, and destroying property.

Here is a rather sympathetic video report from Russia Today about the violent tactics of the Progressive-Marxist rioters:

From Seattle, to St. Paul, to Toronto, the Progressive Left has their very own Black Bloc of violent rioters, yet the Conservative Tea Party movement is the threat to peace and security?