Robert O’Donovan, one of the organizers of the meeting, said the disruption unfolded just as he arrived. He said one of his group was hit with a bicycle lock swung by one of the assailants, while another attendee was punched in the stomach. The incident lasted less than a minute because O'Donovan had previously alerted both the library staff and police to the possibility of trouble; consequently, there were extra police patrols in the area and an extra custodian was placed at the entrance of the library. Despite the precautions, the anti-racists still snuck in.
There is the possibility the anti-racists may have been aided by another group of young people in the library before the arrival of the assailants and that they acted as if they knew the assailants. But it has not been established whether it was just a social relationship, or whether they were aiding and abetting them.
Worcester Public Library Head Librarian Mark Contois condemned the attack, saying “Our position is that anyone using library facilities or library meeting rooms – regardless of their points of view – should have a safe environment.”
Anti-racist sources are celebrating the attack. One People's Project posted their own account, which also includes a post from something called Anonymous Antifascists. Anonymous Antifascists make their terroristic goals quite plain:
We believe in militant direct action to smash white supremacy, expose them to their communities, confront them at their jobs and homes, and disrupt their organization's ability to conduct meetings/rallies, distribute their hateful propaganda, and communicate on the internet. Those who want us in the gas chambers, who seek to take away our freedoms, deserve it not for themselves.
There's no doubt as to what is meant by "militant direct action"; it's a pseudonym for gratuitous violence. And when they say they will confront "racists" at their jobs and homes, they show that they are willing to inflict collateral damage upon anyone to accomplish their mission. Thus the term "terrorist" is apropos; their intent is to terrorize.
Anonymous Antifascists also brags about hacking the North East White Pride website, as well as other websites belonging to NEWP. They boast that they scarfed up hundreds of usernames and passwords. However, clicking on the NEWP link clearly shows that the effects were temporary.
Lastly, the reporter who wrote the story, Noah R. Bombard, comes under fire in the comments section for writing a fair and balanced piece without any editorialization of North East White Pride:
I'm sorry you have so much sympathy for self professed racists. First of all there had been a protest in response to NEWP before I believe it was covered by the T&G and Worcester magazine. Second, I really question Noah's motives with this article since he decided to tack on that these people could maybe have something to do with Tea Party counter protests with no facts to even support this. Three, and then you ask people to snitch??? Either you're a cop or a nazi bastard, which is it Noah?
To which Bombard responds:
We covered it as we would if any group were attacked at the library. I think if journalists only write about people being attacked that they liked you'd see a lot less coverage of crime and a lot less information out there about things that actually happen in the community. Is it a better rule to say "well, if it was an NAACP meeting that was disrupted it would be news, but because these guys represent something reprehensible we won't cover it?" I think that's a poor way to decide news.
It would be far more convenient if the victims were always good guys and the perpetrators were always bad guys. In my experience, that is not always so. And in this case, I will argue that anyone being attacked at the public library is something the public should be aware of.
The protests at the previous meeting of this group were very vocal, but were non-violent.
Didn't say it wasn't worth writing a story about just said you're sympathising hardcore. It's also very dangerous to say some unrelated group may have been part of it, when some kid gets beat by a bonehead because of you're misinformation it's on you. Also seems like NEWP thinks you're a good guy.
To which Bombard responds:
I'd be happy to take a look at any language in the story that you think is "sympathizing hardcore."
And I like to think of myself as a "good guy," though I can not control who else shares that opinion or opine on why they might think so. After 14 years of covering news in Central Mass I'm pretty "googleable." My past writing, editorials, video and work speaks for itself, I think. But I'll always take a closer look at a story when someone draws my attention to it.