Jump to content
The Education Forum

Steven Gaal

Members
  • Posts

    4,661
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Steven Gaal

  1. West Coast Scientists: Many animals on sea floor looking sick or dead — “Everything’s dying… Dead, dead, dead, and dead” — Experts investigate what’s killing sea urchins and cucumbers in Pacific Northwest — “Seeing things never previously observed” (PHOTOS)

    National Geographic, Nov 17, 2014 (emphasis added): Urchins and cucumbers seemed to have escaped the ill effects of the virus until now. But in recent weeks, reports have started to come in that they too are dying along beaches in the Pacific Northwest, Hewson said… [He and his team are] studying the urchins and sea cucumbers that are already dying to see if the same killer is responsible.

    Dr. Bill Bushing, kelp forest ecologist, Nov 2, 2014: I’ve mentioned before that [in Southern California] our starfish and sea urchins have been dying… I’ve recently seen sea cucumbers that appear to be diseased as well… I’ve also observed strangely colored sea hares (big shell-less snails) in the park. The red algae they normally eat seems to have died out… Divers also report seeing far fewer of the sea hares this year.

    Ronald L. Shimek, PhD, marine biologist, Nov 10, 2014: Jan Kocian, diving photographer extraordinare… has been actively surveying several marine subtidal areas in northern Puget Sound for some time… [During a Sept. 18] dive… on Whidbey Island, Washington… he started seeing things he had never previously observed.… there were many animals lying exposed on the sandy sea floor, looking limp, sick or dead. Red sea cucumbers were flaccid and dead… Aleutian Moon snails were in odd postures… pink/yellow worms [were] another rare or unusual sight…. Nuttall’s cockles were on the sediment surface with their siphons out, instead of being buried… 22nd September, the area containing dying animals was not only still present it was spreading; whatever seemed to be the cause was still doing its dirty work… 25th September [many] red sea cucumbers… were lying fully exposed, and apparently dead… 29th of September… A few living Cucumaria were acting oddly, not quite dead, but just slightly responsive to touch… Numerous green sea urchins were found with their spines in abnormal postures, definitely not looking healthy… The full extent of the dead area, and the reason for the mortality, remain indeterminate.

    Captions to photos taken by diver Jan Kocian: (3) Death of the sea urchins; (4) [Red sea cucumber] Cucumaria miniata dying and decomposing [alt text on photo: "Everything's dying"]; (5) Dead, dead, dead, and dead – or dying

    =============

    See all of the published photos from the dive surveys here

  2. BOSTON UPDATE: Third Tsarnaev Friend Convicted For Lying to Feds

    Oct 29, 2014 by James Henry

    Robel-Phillipos-convicted-on-two-counts-

    Robel Phillipos, convicted on two counts of making false statements. (YouTube)

    Few have been paying attention to the “supporting actor” trials now paving the way for the main act in the prosecution of America’s largest terrorist act since 9/11, the Boston Bombing.

    They’re worth paying attention to, for what they demonstrate about how the government is ensuring that the official story will stick all the way through to conviction.

    The latest development in this blockbuster drama came during the trial and conviction of Robel Phillipos, friend of accused Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. A jury on Oct. 28 convicted him on two counts of lying to investigators, for which he now faces up to 16 years in prison.

    Jurors found he’d made false statements during two interviews with the FBI within days of the April 15 bombing. Specifically, he was convicted for lying about his whereabouts on the night of April 18. Phillipos, 19, said he was “stoned out of his mind” on marijuana at the time, and that’s why he gave the conflicting statements, according to his defense attorney.

    This trial fits squarely with the particular public image of the Tsarnaevs and their friends that has arisen from media coverage and the government pronouncements in it. Anyone remotely involved with the brothers is immediately judged to be part of a nest of conniving terrorist sympathizers. That’s certainly no presumption of innocence. Phillipos undoubtedly faced this added burden in his trial.

    Taken together with a steady stream of leaks about the bombing investigation, it’s clear the government wants to ensure it will have a slam-dunk case against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev at his trial in January. Yet it doesn’t have to go the extra mile, thanks to a tried-and-true FBI method that was on display in Phillipos’ trial.

    Testimony during Phillipos’ prosecution elicited obvious contradictions in the government’s case, and demonstrated how the FBI’s interviewing methods stack the deck in its favor, every time.

    First, let’s take a look at the discrepancy in the government’s case, which surfaced during FBI Agent Timothy Quinn’s testimony. Quinn, who interviewed Phillipos, told prosecutors when he testified on Oct.15 that the defendant told him he wanted to help the FBI “nail the mother***ker,” referring to Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Quinn then stated that he didn’t believe Phillipos.

    That story only lasted until the cross-examination by Phillipos’ attorney, when Quinn said the defendant was highly cooperative. (In point of fact, Phillipos agreed to be interviewed multiple times without a lawyer.)

    Off the Record But Don’t Argue It

    There was another disparity in the facts that arose, which was central to Phillipos’ case and to understanding how powerful FBI interviews are as prosecutorial weapons.

    The dispute hinged on when Phillipos arrived at Dzhokhar’s dormitory room, and who was with him. Prosecutors pointed to a written confession in which Phillipos said he showed up with two Tsarnaev friends. Yet Phillipos’ attorney pointed out that the trial had already established that one of those people was in the room long before the defendant arrived.

    What does all that mean? That Phillipos’ confession had factual errors. Moreover, it suggests that the written statement was coerced or included false information colored by what Phillipos’ interrogator told him. At the very least, it does lend credence to the notion that he does not accurately remember the night’s events.

    It also tells us something about the tricky issue of “making false statements.” As Phillipos’ defense attorney pointed out numerous times, none of the FBI interviews were recorded electronically, either with video or sound. There’s no way for a third party to verify what actually went on in those interviews.

    Hard to believe that in this day and age, right?

    ***

    Boston area defense attorney and civil liberties advocate Harvey Silverglate has written extensively on the FBI’s non-recording policy and its potential for abuse. He summarizes the inherent problem with the FBI’s policy this way:

    FBI agents always interview in pairs. One agent asks the questions, while the other writes up what is called a “form 302 report” based on his notes. The 302 report, which the interviewee does not normally see, becomes the official record of the exchange; any interviewee who contests its accuracy risks prosecution for lying to a federal official, a felony.

    So, as Silverglate points out, something as simple as arguing an FBI agent’s interpretation of what was said, or what they think they heard, opens up an individual to threats of prosecution similar to what Phillipos faced.

    Not only that, juries must place their faith entirely in the honesty of the testifying agent. Yet lying under oath by law enforcement is so common it’s been given its own name: “testilying.”

    Regardless of what transpired in those interviews, 16 years behind bars seems extreme for the charge of “making false statements.” Even The Boston Globe, not known for its evenhanded coverage of the Marathon bombing, recently ran an editorial questioning the wisdom of putting a young man behind bars for that long because of what appeared to be a stupid mistake.

    What could possibly be worth the state expending so many resources to prosecute and then incarcerate this individual for as long as 16 years?

    Silence, perhaps?

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    Boston Bombing Prosecutor: Witnesses ‘Afraid’ to Testify

    Nov 18, 2014 by Joseph L. Flatley

    116-300x187.jpgThe Boston Marathon bombing is much more important than has been acknowledged, principally because it is the defining domestic national security event since 9/11—and has played a major role in expanding the power of the security state. For that reason, WhoWhatWhy is continuing to investigate troubling aspects of this story and the establishment media treatment of it. We will be exploring new elements of the story regularly as the January trial of the accused co-conspirator Dzhokhar Tsarnaev approaches.

    ***

    The defense witnesses in the Boston Bombing trial certainly have reason to be afraid to testify, given the long official intimidation campaign against them.

    Yet, ironically, it is now the government that is claiming its witnesses are scared and even unwilling to testify. Unsurprisingly, the judge overseeing the trial against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has agreed with the prosecutors.

    Since the Boston Marathon bombing last year, WhoWhatWhy has reported on a pattern of intimidation towards people associated with the accused bombers, Dzhokhar and his late elder brother, Tamerlan. Those connected to the case have been intimidated, deported, jailed, and even killed.

    It got so bad that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s defense asked U.S. District Court Judge George A. O’Toole Jr. for permission to conceal the names of individual witnesses until the day before they’re due to testify. That’s because, the defense argues, they fear the witnesses will be subject to further FBI harassment.

    Unusual Request

    Judy Clarke, a member of the defense team, admitted it was an unusual request. “We don’t want to do it,” Clarke told the court. “We’re already struggling to get people to talk to us. We are really worried about losing the slim list of real potential witnesses we have.”

    The government countered that it was having trouble convincing bombing victims to cooperate. They are “afraid, if not unwilling, to testify against the man accused of dismembering or traumatizing them in a terrorist attack.” Further, the prosecution argued, keeping Tsarnaev’s witnesses under wraps would hand him an unfair advantage.

    On Nov. 12, O’Toole sided with the prosecution, ordering the defense to disclose its preliminary witness list by Dec. 29. He also announced that jury selection will begin on Jan. 5, when an initial 1,200 prospective jurors will be called in to fill out questionnaires over the course of the next three days.

    Leaving aside the question of Tsarnaev’s guilt, which has been officially presented as a foregone conclusion with little outside critical analysis of the investigation, his chances at trial are numerically slim.

    The Justice Department’s latest statistics show a criminal conviction rate of 93 percent.

    #####################

    #####################

    Boston Carjacking Unravels 1

    Mar 11, 2014 by Russ Baker

    “Danny”

    An exclusive WhoWhatWhy investigation has found serious factual inconsistencies in accounts provided by the only witness to the alleged confession of the Boston Marathon bombing suspects.

    Why does this matter? Because this witness is the sole source for the entire publicly accepted narrative of who was behind the bombing and its aftermath—and why these events occurred.

    In case we’ve forgotten how convoluted and murky the story initially seemed, let’s recall how:

    -Tamerlan Tsarnaev, on a US security watch list since 2011 after the Russians provide a warning to American intelligence, goes overseas and allegedly exhibits further problematic behavior.

    -In April, 2013, a savage attack is unleashed at the Boston Marathon, disrupting an iconic American event. Innocent people lose limbs and lives, America is traumatized anew, and a large American city is “locked down” while normal processes and procedures are abandoned. We are told that Tsarnaev and his younger brother are responsible for all this–and for the cold-blooded execution of a campus police officer several days later.

    Yet our sense of certainty that the Tsarnaevs did this—and did it alone without America’s security apparatus knowing a thing—is actually dependent largely on the say-so of one person, one witness. While we’ve been told that authorities have definitive proof, including a video showing the brothers leaving the backpack with the bomb, we’ve never actually seen it.

    Thus, the problems we have uncovered with the witness’s testimony (as represented by law enforcement) now raise questions about almost everything concerning what has been described as the largest terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11.

    Truth and Its Pants

    As the classic saying goes, “A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.” That is perhaps even more true in these days of Twitter and Facebook and instant blogging. When a big news story breaks, the first reports are often rife with misinformation based on a combination of innocent mistakes, sloppiness, conjecture, and poor communication.

    Yet it’s also true that during those first 24 hours, pieces of inconvenient truth may emerge that will soon be denied or even suppressed as the messy facts get neatly fashioned into an “official story.”

    Such was the case with the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy: sheriff’s deputies converging on the Texas School Book Depository in Dallas reported finding an entirely different type of gun than the one ultimately said to have been the murder weapon. And doctors at Parkland Hospital claimed initially that a shot had hit President Kennedy from the front, before they were told in no uncertain terms that they were mistaken, and a narrative formed around all the shots coming from behind—and only from the Depository.

    Truth seekers know, from experience, to pay close attention to how a narrative changes in the first hours, days and weeks following an event of significance. That would be especially apt when the one whose story is changing is the principal witness.

    Meet “Danny”

    The identification of the alleged Boston bombers, now a virtually unchallenged “fact,” is based largely on a single event: the supposed carjacking of a young man whose identity is still masked from public scrutiny. The public’s understanding of what took place is based on this anonymous person’s oft-cited claims to have witnessed a dual confession from Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who purportedly boasted of having committed both the bombing and a later murder of an MIT police officer.

    According to the widely accepted story of the horrific events of April 15-19, 2013, three days after the Marathon bombing, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology campus police officer was shot and, within minutes, a young man in a Mercedes SUV was carjacked, across the river in the Brighton section of Boston. Police and media accounts have Tamerlan Tsarnaev abducting a young Chinese national (known publicly only by the pseudonymous first name “Danny”). In these accounts, Tsarnaev tells Danny that he was responsible for both the Boston bombing and the MIT shooting.

    260413genboston1_18nkdrb-18nkds6-300x180

    The alleged carjacking led to a law enforcement shutdown of the greater Boston area, a huge manhunt, and subsequent confrontations in which Tamerlan Tsarnaev was shot and killed. His younger brother, Dzhokhar, was seriously wounded by multiple gunshots while hidden in a boat, before being apprehended by police.

    In the current “official” narrative, the Tsarnaev brothers took Danny on a wild 90-minute ride that traversed the Boston area and involved stops to extract money from Danny’s bank account and then to buy gas for the brothers’ planned escape from the Boston metro area.

    It was during a stop at a gas station, the story goes, that the younger brother went inside to pay for the gas. While the older brother was momentarily preoccupied with a GPS device, Danny made his escape and was soon sharing with law enforcement his claim that he had heard the crucial confession.

    But a 10-month investigation by WhoWhatWhy has found major inconsistencies in Danny’s story — inconsistencies that call into question whether the authorities now prosecuting Dzhokhar Tsarnaev for murder are leveling with the American people.

    The Consensus Narrative

    The consensus narrative of the Boston Marathon bombing and its aftermath, which began appearing in the media as early as the morning of April 19, goes something like this:

    For several days after the violence of Monday, April 15—which killed three people and injured another 264—an uneasy public waited nervously for word of who was behind the savage attack. The authorities were under intense pressure to produce results. The hours and days ticked by.

    Then, suddenly, action! At 5pm on Thursday afternoon, the FBI released pictures of two suspects. At approximately 10:20, violence exploded anew, in a different and wholly surprising direction. On the quiet nighttime streets of Cambridge, Massachusetts, an MIT campus police officer, Sean Collier, was apparently executed in cold blood by the panicked Tsarnaev brothers in a botched effort to get his gun. And then another newsflash: a young Boston man had been carjacked—and after a bizarre, circuitous drive around the area, escaped to tell an astonishing tale: his captors had confessed to him their responsibility for both the Marathon bombing and the killing of Officer Collier.

    That turn of events ushered in a cavalcade of developments almost too rapid to follow. It justified the unprecedented military and law enforcement “lockdown” of Greater Boston and the intense manhunt that riveted the world and brought the Boston bombing story to a quick and dirty conclusion. In the early morning hours of April 19, Tamerlan Tsarnaev was killed when he was shot in a firefight and then run over by his younger brother, Dzhokhar. The brother escaped, but was discovered that evening hiding in a boat parked in a backyard, and was apprehended in critical condition after authorities fired a barrage of shots into the boat.

    This frontier-justice resolution of a national tragedy eventually led to a huge rally featuring the vice president as the key speaker, praising the bravery and responsiveness of the security state. A specialty beer and a charity event were fashioned around the tragic young officer, bike rides and a host of tributes to the “first responder” followed. In the end, everyone could feel good about their country, about the “heroism” of the lowly, underpaid campus cop, about the vaunted efficiency of their law-enforcement agencies. Stressed-out Bostonians, and Americans everywhere, could be reassured that all was well in the land.

    That is the generally established narrative. But after studying the various accounts provided by “Danny” to the media and law enforcement, WhoWhatWhy has found substantial inconsistencies on a range of points—that are too drastic to be explained as the usual variations that arise in retelling.

    Taken together, those inconsistencies demonstrate at minimum essential unreliability, and perhaps something much more troubling…from a key witness offering damning life-or-death evidence in the worst terrorist attack since 9/11.

    Is Danny some pathological xxxx seeking fame? Or is he someone more sympathetic and perhaps vulnerable—a foreign-national entrepreneur, with an uncertain immigration status, being squeezed by law enforcement to help quickly tidy up a messy disaster that caught our multi-billion-dollar-a-year national security apparatus off guard?

    Where was Danny Carjacked?

    Danny said: Brighton Avenue, Allston (across the river from Cambridge)

    Conflicting version: 3rd Street, Cambridge, the Middlesex County District Attorney initially said.

    How Long Was Danny Held Hostage?

    Danny said: 90 minutes (reported by The Boston Globe, NBC and CBS).

    Conflicting version 1: 30 minutes, according to a joint statement by Middlesex acting district attorney Michael Pelgro, Cambridge police commissioner Robert Haas and MIT police chief John DiFava:

    “Authorities launched an immediate investigation into the circumstances of the shooting. The investigation determined that two males were involved in this shooting.

    “A short time later, police received reports of an armed carjacking by two males in the area of Third Street in Cambridge.

    “The victim was carjacked at gunpoint by two males and was kept in the car with the suspects for approximately a half hour.”

    Conflicting version 2: “a few minutes,” according to the Boston Globe and this report by the Associated Press, citing the Cambridge Police Department:

    “Police said Friday at a Watertown news conference that one of the brothers stayed with the carjacking victim for a few minutes and then let him go.”

    Pervaiz Shallwani of the Wall Street Journal, one of the very few who was able to see at least part of the Cambridge police report, supports this shorter time span when he writes:

    “Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the brothers accused of the bombing, crossed the Charles River into Boston and stole a Mercedes SUV at gunpoint, briefly holding the driver hostage, according to an excerpt from the Cambridge Police Department report filed by the driver and reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.”

    How Did Danny Gain His Freedom?

    Danny said: He escaped when Tamerlan, seated next to him, was momentarily distracted, according the Boston Globe, NBC and CBS.

    Conflicting version 1: He simply got out of the car when both brothers were outside the car, having left him alone, according to WMUR.

    Conflicting version 2: The Tsarnaev brothers never held Danny as a captive, according to the Associated Press and Cambridge Police Department. They simply detained him for a few minutes, then left him by the roadside, essentially confiscating his vehicle. In this scenario, he had almost no interaction with the brothers, raising questions as to whether they would have confessed to the two crimes before taking off with his car.

    Tamerlan’s Location When Danny Escapes?

    Conflicting version 1: Tamerlan was at the gas pump.

    Note: the conversation below includes paraphrasing of Danny’s comments in an ABC (WMUR) interview with Nick Spinetto, April 22, 2013. We replaced the paraphrases with Danny’s actual comments whenever they were flashed on the screen—presumably from a transcript of Spinetto’s interview with Danny. While they are very similar to Spinetto’s paraphrasing, we used the on-screen comments from Danny for greater precision.

    Spinetto: (On camera) Well, the carjacking victim is actually shaken to the core after being taken hostage by the Boston Marathon bombers. Today, he and I spoke at length. For safety reasons, he asked us not to reveal his name, but he did describe in vivid detail his capture by the wanted terrorists, those brutal minutes he thought he would die and, ultimately, his brave escape.

    Spinetto: (Voice over scene) Shortly after MIT police officer Sean Collier was killed, authorities received reports of an armed carjacking only minutes away. Monday, that carjacking victim was ready to tell his story, but not ready to do an on-camera interview. The man says it was Thursday night around 11, he was in his car pulled over to the side of the road, when a man approached holding a gun to the passenger side window.

    The victim said: “the man asked if I knew about the Boston bombing explosion. He said: ‘I did that.'”

    Court documents released Monday afternoon state: “the man with a gun forced the victim to drive to a second location, where they picked up a second man. The two men put something in the trunk of the victim’s vehicle.” The contents are thought to be the ammunition and explosives used in a battle with police later that night. The carjacking victim says he was forced into the front passenger seat as one brother drove. Now a hostage, he says: “They asked me where I’m from. I told them I’m Chinese. I was very scared. I asked them if they going to hurt me. They say they won’t hurt me. I was thinking, I think they will kill me later.” But if that was their plan, they wouldn’t get the chance. The victim told us: “My car is running out of gas, so they want to have some gas.”

    Spinetto: (On camera) The carjacking victim says that he drove, here, to this Shell station on Memorial drive. While one brother went inside to pay for the gas, the other pumped and that’s when the victim took off.

    Spinetto: (Voice over scene) Of his daring escape, he says: “I thought it was a very good chance for me to run. So, I made a judgment. I use my left hand to unbuckle my belt, my right hand to open door… I jump out of the car, run away— across the street. The guy… outside the car tried to catch me… use his hand. Tried to catch me but I ran very fast. Couldn’t capture me because I run very fast. I heard them— they said (expletive) when I get to run. I’m still… I can’t stop recording that moment when I was running out of the car… I was running… I was worried. It was very scary at that moment. For me, I’m so lucky.”

    Conflicting version 2: Tamerlan was in the car.

    Note: This version comes from an interview with Danny by CBS News’ John Miller.

    Miller: So, when you get to the gas station, tell me what everybody does. Who does what, first, and then what happens?

    Danny: Okay, so, when we get it to the gas station… hm… Jahar [Dzhokhar] get out of the car, he took my… credit card, trying to pump using my credit card. I was very lucky, the pump, it was only cash only. So, he look, looked at my window, say, asked me, [he] say: “It’s cash only!” So, Tamerlan asked him to pay some cash inside.

    John Miller: So he has to go in the store.

    Danny: Jahar has to go into a store.

    John Miller: So now it’s you and Tamerlan in the car.

    Danny: I was with Tamerlan, so, I think it’s a very good chance for me, you know, there’s only one person in the car right now… and uh, I was, uh, trying to watch what, uh, Tamerlan is doing… uh, I was trying to find the gun… I didn’t see the gun because the gun was put in the pocket of the, of the door.

    John Miller: Now, is Tamerlan sitting next to you in the car? Is he standing outside the car?

    Danny: He was sitting next to me. He was on the, uh, driver’s seat, I was on the passenger seat.

    John Miller: So this, you think, this is your chance.

    Danny: This is my chance. So, I was… struggling, you know, should I do this? Should I do this? Becau [sic]… another good thing for me is the door was unlocked. The only thing I have to do is, use my left hand to unfasten the seatbelt, use my right hand to open the door.

    John Miller: So, the thing that you’ve been rehearsing in your mind, three steps, is now down to two.

    Danny: Down to two, yeah. So, that’s [unintelligible] I found that Tamerlan used both his hands, like, play, like, doing some GPS thing, or something. So, I think it’s very good for me.

    [CBS News report: first of 5 clips refers to Tamerlan “fiddling” with GPS.]

    John Miller: So he’s got, he’s got the gun in the side pocket of the door, he’s got a GPS, his brother’s in the gas station, and you say… the time is now.

    Danny: Yeah, yeah…the time is now, you know.

    John Miller: So how do you do that in your head? Do you say, 123…?

    Danny: I was, I was counting- I was counting, I went, 1234. And I… just do it! And ah, I did it.

    John Miller: So what happens?

    Danny: I jump out of the, jump, jump out of the, the vehicle, and I close the door, and I can feel, Tamerlan was trying to grab me, he didn’t touch me, but I could feel him trying to grab me.

    John Miller: And now you’re runnin’.

    Danny: I was run. I was runnin’, I was running.

    Conflicting version 3: The New York Times version

    As if it weren’t enough to discover these totally incompatible versions of whether he was carjacked at all, and if so, for how long, and whether he escaped or was released, there is yet another variation, courtesy of the “newspaper of record,” The New York Times, the preferred go-to place for official leaks.

    The article appeared on April 20 under the bylines of two Washington-based, veteran national security reporters. In the piece, almost entirely based on a narrative delivered to the world’s most influential news organization by an unnamed source identified only as a “senior law enforcement official,” the official explains that

    “It was only after the suspects decided not to kill the owner of a sport utility vehicle that had been carjacked and instead threw him out of his car around 1 a.m. — a decision that ultimately undid their plans to elude the authorities — that they re-emerged on the authorities’ radar.”

    It is certainly interesting that in this interview, presumably viewed as crucial, and conducted within a day or so of the carjacking, a highly briefed official would get “wrong” such a central fact as Danny’s manner of parting with the brothers.

    The Times account may have been the first “official” story of what happened. It would be many days before Danny’s revised account of a dramatic escape would emerge. (If the Times ever published an explanation of how it got this so “wrong” in comparison with the eventual official narrative, we could not find it.)

    Also, in Danny’s revised account, there is no mention that the suspects “decide[d] not to kill” him. Indeed, he said they made clear from the outset that they would not harm him. Putting together elements of these two different accounts, one could conclude that, in fact, the hijackers always meant not to harm him but only to use his car to escape what they took to be their own certain deaths if they remained in town during a police manhunt spurred by a “cop killing” that they had reason to think they would be accused of.

    ***

    Spinetto’s interview with Danny tracks with the New York Times’ version, and it is based not on a second-hand account from an unidentified law enforcement source but on a direct interview with Danny. So we thought it essential to ask Spinetto what he made of all this.

    Yet when WhoWhatWhy contacted Spinetto, he told us he could not speak with us unless the station manager at the Hearst-owned WMUR, Alisha McDevitt, approved. In an email, McDevitt wrote: “We will not be able to approve this request.”

    To sum up, we see three very different versions.

    Version 1: Danny was essentially let go by his “captors”

    Version 2: The brothers cared so little about him that he was left alone in the car, and then “escaped.”

    Version 3: He “bravely” escaped when Tamerlan let his guard down and was momentarily distracted.

    The one thing we notice about the evolution of the Danny narrative is that the original story did little to support the notion that the brothers were cold-blooded, ruthless killers. Simply put, the story that is now cast in stone makes much more sense if the goal was to create an impression of the brothers as ideologically driven terrorists and the murderers of an innocent police officer.

    First Report of a Confession—and to One or Both Crimes?

    The first “dual confession” report we could find, from the Associated Press, came early on the afternoon of April 19, from Edward Deveau, police chief of Watertown, the scene of a wild car chase during which Tamerlan Tsarnaev allegedly lobbed explosives at his pursuers before being gunned down.

    Later that night, NBC also reported the dual confession, attributing it to “sources”:

    The carjacking victim was released unharmed at a gas station in Cambridge, sources said. He told police the brothers said they were the marathon bombers and had just killed a campus officer.

    By the next day, more news outlets (see this and this) were picking up the dual admission.

    However, the Criminal Complaint, filed on the 21st, which states that Tamerlan admitted to Danny their role in the bombing, notably says nothing about an admission to having killed Collier.

    The man pointed a firearm at the victim and stated, “Did you hear about the Boston explosion?” and “I did that.”

    On April 22, Nick Spinetto interviews Danny for WMUR and ABC. Interestingly, Spinetto has Tamerlan admitting to the Marathon bombing, but, as with the Criminal Complaint, there is no mention of killing Officer Collier. This omission seems highly newsworthy on its own.

    On April 25, late in the evening, the Boston Globe published on boston.com an article based on an interview with Danny by its reporter Eric Moskowitz, the most detailed account to date—an account that has subsequently become the “official” carjacking narrative. It characterizes Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s actions as follows:

    “Don’t be stupid,” he told Danny. He asked if he had followed the news about Monday’s Boston Marathon bombings. Danny had, down to the release of the grainy suspect photos less than six hours earlier.

    “I did that,” said the man, who would later be identified as Tamerlan Tsarnaev “And I just killed a policeman in Cambridge.”

    In interviews a few days after the Globe article, Danny’s story had gelled. His account to CBS’s John Miller is substantially similar to a contemporaneous interview with NBC’s Matt Lauer.

    The question is, what happened between Danny’s first interview and the subsequent ones that led to the changed narrative?

    Research assistance: James Henry

    ###########################

    ###########################

    Boston Carjacking Unravels 2

    Mar 13, 2014 by Russ Baker

    Police Perimeter near MIT in Cambridge, photo: Joe Spurr

    In part I, we reported significant discrepancies in the story of the key witness in the Boston Marathon bombing-MIT police officer killing. These discrepancies cast doubt on his credibility—and therefore on the entire public narrative around those events.

    We have been told that the witness was carjacked by the brothers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, and that Tamerlan confessed to him their guilt in both crimes.

    Here, in Part II, we take a closer look at that witness, who has publicly remained anonymous, known only by the pseudonym “Danny.”

    Why “Danny” Matters

    The carjacking victim is an important figure in this singular national drama—and presumably could be a key witness if Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s case comes to trial.

    With Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to seek the death penalty, it is a good bet that the government is looking for the younger Tsarnaev to settle for a guilty plea in return for avoiding execution. If that comes to pass, we may never hear his testimony on what took place and why. Even if he does end up testifying, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev may find it prudent not to tell the whole truth, since he will surely be intent on engineering a sentencing deal. Under the more likely plea-bargain scenario, the mysterious carjacking victim, known to the public only as Danny, may never have to testify either. With one brother dead, the other presumably trying to avoid execution, and another potential person of interest, a friend of the Tsarnaevs named Ibragim Todashev, shot dead while in FBI custody, the prosecution may have no need to put Danny on the witness stand. In that event, the story he has already told—or, rather, the dominant narrative of several he has provided—will remain the final word on who committed the bombing and the MIT homicide.

    Clearly, this witness’s unique role makes him worth scrutinizing.

    Why Is Danny Still Anonymous?

    On April 25, 2013, the Boston Globe published what became the most complete account of Danny’s involvement in the events of April 18. The article recounted how the Chinese national, a male, age 26, with an engineering Masters from Northeastern, returned to China after getting his degree, then came back in early 2013 and co-founded a tech startup. He lived in an apartment near MIT with a roommate, had a new Mercedes SUV, and liked to go for nighttime drives in and around Boston to unwind.

    In an exclusive interview, Danny told the Boston Globe’s Eric Moskowitz that he had been working late on April 18, and then went for a drive, which was for him a customary way of blowing off steam. He was in his leased SUV, which he’d had for just two months since returning from China, and which had only 2500 miles on it. After driving for about 20 minutes, he saw police heading toward MIT. He said that his housemate, a female, texted him in Chinese that something was going on at MIT. But he ignored the text. He finally stopped to check the text, in the Brighton neighborhood of Boston at 60 Brighton Avenue, across the river from Cambridge.

    At that moment, a car pulled in behind him, and a young man wielding a pistol approached. Danny was forced to let the assailant (and soon, a second young man) into his car. He drove them around the greater Boston area, provided cash from his bank account, and then, while one brother was paying for gas, managed to escape and tell his story to police.

    In a situation like this, one might think that Danny would welcome a chance to tell his story. At a minimum, many people would admire him for his bravery in escaping from armed carjackers. It also seems like it would have been a priceless promotional opportunity for Danny’s new startup. It’s hard to think of someone with a budding business who wouldn’t embrace an opportunity to get his brand out everywhere. Furthermore, the downside seemed minimal. One of his carjackers was dead, and the other badly wounded and in custody.

    So why not be identified?

    In his first interview, with ABC affiliate reporter Nick Spinetto, Danny indicates that personal safety is the rationale for his wanting anonymity:

    Today, he and I spoke at length. For safety reasons, he asked us not to reveal his name, but he did describe in vivid detail his capture by the wanted terrorists, those brutal minutes he thought he would die and, ultimately, his brave escape.

    In a subsequent interview with the Boston Globe, on the other hand, Danny indicates that modesty was the rationale for his anonymity:

    Danny, who offered his account only on the condition that the Globe not reveal his Chinese name, said he does not want attention. But he suspects his full name may come out if and when he testifies against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

    “I don’t want to be a famous person talking on the TV,” Danny said, kneading his hands, uncomfortable with the praise he has received from the few friends he has shared the story with, some of whom encouraged him to go public. “I don’t feel like a hero…I was trying to save myself.”

    However, when I later had a chance to interview Eric Moskowitz, the Globe reporter who produced the most detailed account to date of the carjacking, he provided me with yet another reason why Danny wanted to remain anonymous: that he didn’t want his mother to be worried about him. Danny’s father, he had explained to Moskowitz, knew about the carjacking, but his mother didn’t—and he hoped to keep her from finding out by masking his identity in news stories.

    It’s not clear how his mother and others close to him back in China would not at least wonder given press reports that identified the carjacking victim as Chinese, aged 26, recently returned from China, with an engineering Masters from Northeastern, a new Mercedes SUV, and a tech startup. They are also the very details, after all, which made it possible for Moskowitz to locate Danny in the first place.

    A few days later on the Today Show, Matt Lauer summarized Danny’s reasons for wanting to remain anonymous:

    “Well, even now that he knows that…uh…you know, that they’re both, one is dead and one is in custody—as you can see, he didn’t want his identity revealed, he has said he will testify in the trial—gladly—and he knows he’ll be identified at that time, but for now he wants to stay under the radar.”

    Danny’s desire for anonymity became even muddier when he offered an entirely different explanation in a CBS News interview. In that exchange, Danny’s face was obscured and his voice altered. CBS Senior Correspondent John Miller addressed the identity issue in a post-interview chat with a program host:

    “I asked him about why he wanted to be disguised, and he said, you know, I don’t know if there is anyone else out there from this plot, if these guys have friends, if I’m going to be a witness at some trial, but at this point I’d rather keep my identity concealed.”

    Miller, himself a former FBI spokesman who practically coached Danny through his interview, must have realized how silly this sounded and pointed out that he knew of no witness who had been targeted by terrorists.

    “And that’s certainly understandable, although in the history of terrorism, I can’t think of a case where the terrorist organization has targeted a witness.”

    This in itself was something of a red herring since, according to the official account, the Tsarnaev brothers were “lone wolves” without any confederates on the loose.

    A Media Strategy for Danny

    In my attempts at sorting out some of the ambiguities surrounding Danny, I turned to the Globe’s Moskowitz, who had probably interacted the most with the mysterious source. Although he initially indicated he was too busy to see me, my persistence eventually won me a meeting with the reporter on May 22 in the Globe’s cafeteria.

    I was particularly interested in learning how it was that Danny’s story, rather than being shared with all journalists, ended up being essentially curated by a handful of reporters from large, establishment news organizations. I was also interested in sorting out numerous confusing and conflicting elements of Danny’s tale.

    What follows is a detailed accounting of my efforts to understand the whys and wherefores of the key witness in “settling” the Boston Marathon bombing mystery.

    First, I asked Moskowitz what he could tell me about the “story of the story.” Here is what he said:

    Within 48 hours of the carjacking, producers for the major TV networks had obtained Danny’s license plate and then somehow traced it to him—although how is unclear since it was a leased vehicle owned by a dealership. Danny declined to talk to the TV people but, unsure how to handle the media inquiries, he reached out to his former master’s adviser at Northeastern University. The adviser consulted Ralph Martin, Northeastern’s general counsel, who happened to be a former District Attorney of Suffolk County, which includes Boston.

    Martin advised that if Danny was seeking fame, he should give interviews to TV. But if he wanted thoroughness, he should talk to the Globe. Danny’s academic adviser then spoke to a friend of his, an urban planner for the city of Cambridge, who had a longstanding relationship with Moskowitz (Danny’s thesis adviser knew Moskowitz, too), and the planner contacted him on the Monday after the carjacking.

    That is how the sole print journalism access to the key witness in this extraordinary event was handed to a junior Globe reporter with no real investigative or crime experience, rather than to one of the veteran gumshoes who populate the Globe newsroom.

    It was nice of the Globe to let Moskowitz keep his scoop. From a pure morale standpoint, this reflects well on the paper’s management. But given the serious questions that should have been asked of Danny—and weren’t—it probably has not served the larger interest. Of course, Globe editors probably made a correct calculation that the situation was so delicate that, rather than lose it, they would cooperate with the scenario as it was unfolding, rather than demand a switch to a more senior, potentially more hard-nosed and skeptical reporter.

    ***

    Danny’s thesis adviser told Moskowitz that Danny would call him. But he didn’t.

    After an internal debate at the Globe about whether it was worth antagonizing a prized source, Moskowitz set out to identify and locate Danny himself. Moskowitz says he provided the sketchy biographical details about Danny to his brother, who knows Mandarin—and who found Danny’s comments about matters of interest to Chinese students on a Chinese language website. The comments included his name and email address. Another friend got him into Danny’s apartment building and he knocked on the door.

    There was no answer at first, but then the door cracked open. The reporter identified himself and asked for “Danny” by his real Chinese name. The man at the door said, “He’s here,“ and Moskowitz says he responded, “I’m just glad you’re OK.”

    Danny let him in and the two talked, as Moskowitz tells it, “about everything other than the event. I kept him talking.” They discussed Danny’s master’s thesis and how Moskowitz knew Danny’s professor from his reporting on urban issues.

    Moskowitz told me he dared not broach the subject of an interview at the time, but did so later by email.

    ***

    Moskowitz said he found Danny extremely skittish, in general. He chalked it up to his essential nature, maybe to cultural differences. “If he’s embarrassed or thinks he will disappoint, he disappears,” he said.

    =

    Danny, however, was in command enough to want a mentor on hand—even one he barely knew. That mentor was another Northeastern professor, a criminologist named James “Jamie” Fox, an often quoted and media-savvy fellow with his own blog on the Globe website. Purportedly also introduced to Danny via the thesis adviser, Fox quickly offered himself as an intermediary to the media. He would become a key figure in this story—present and active when Moskowitz interviewed Danny for the Globe.

    One of Danny’s conditions for the interview with Moskowitz was that Professor Fox would be there.

    According to Moskowitz, some of the lack of clarity in his account of what transpired on the night of April 18 may have resulted from frequent interruptions by Professor Fox and by what seemed to him to be interview-steering by the criminologist.

    As for Danny, Moskowitz described him as “guileless.” “He told me his ATM password,” he said.

    Fox Guarding the Henhouse

    Moskowitz told me he didn’t feel comfortable introducing Danny to me, but that Fox might be able to arrange it.

    If Danny was guileless, Fox was anything but.

    In my brief dealings with the professor, and my attempts to get him to arrange an interview for me with Danny, I found him consistently determined to control access to Danny. He told me he would “try” to arrange it, but that it would be up to Danny, and then insisted that if an interview were to take place he would probably need to be present. And, after promising to make a concerted effort to arrange such an interview in the short window of time before I had to leave Boston, Fox appeared to lose interest. He ended up ticking off a series of laughable excuses.

    Finally, he got back to me. He said that Danny was reluctant to meet with me. He said that Danny had read some of my early writing on the Boston case, and was displeased because I had noted how several of the young characters in the story appeared to drive expensive cars.

    Mostly, though, Fox said that “Danny” was just nervous about meeting with me—and Fox seemed to me a bit nervous about “Danny” meeting with me, too. The long and short of it is that I have never heard from Danny, and never again from Fox.

    The Case of the Incurious Criminologist

    Troubled by Fox’s role in the story, which hardly squared with what one might expect from a criminologist—whose principal concern is studying crime, not squiring mysterious witnesses—I researched his statements on the bombing story.

    In this CNN video, Professor Fox, like some kind of Boston Zelig, is standing beside the only other carjacking witness, an immigrant gas station attendant to whom “Danny” ran for help. This is during an interview of the attendant by CNN’s Piers Morgan—it is not clear why Fox is standing next to this man.

    Fox turns out to be less the investigator than the fiery orator.

    In one of his blogs, about the purported difficulty in finding a cemetery that would inter Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s body, he wrote:

    “I truly understand and appreciate why many folks want nothing to do with the corpse of a man who apparently hated America and our way of life.”

    He also wrote:

    f and when [Dzhokhar] Tsarnaev were scheduled to die, his name and image would be plastered all over the news, further increasing his undeserved celebrity in the minds of those on the political fringe who view our government as evil and corrupt.”

    And:

    “The bombing seems to have been an attack against American life, not specifically American lives. Those killed and injured were unfortunate surrogates of the intended target: America and the freedoms we enjoy.”

    It’s a mouthful given how little we knew at that time about any of this—and even how little we know almost a year later.

    John Miller, PR Man for the FBI, Among Other Things

    Fox was hardly the only well-situated figure who moved to promote what looks like an agreed-upon “consensus narrative.” Consider CBS’s John Miller, one of the TV reporters who got access to Danny.

    That’s the same John Miller who reported the strange and long-delayed (May 16) exclusive about how Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, grievously wounded and bleeding badly, nevertheless managed to pull himself up and scrawl a confession-cum-manifesto on the wall of the boat in which he was hiding.

    That’s the same John Miller who left journalism in 2002 and spent the next eight years in government national security posts, including helping Chief William Bratton establish counterterrorism and criminal intelligence bureaus at the Los Angeles Police Department, serving as the top spokesman for the FBI, and then going to work for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which oversees both the FBI and CIA.

    Thus, John Miller has close relationships with key people at the very agency whose actions call everything into question about this story.

    Summing Up

    As we see, a small group of journalists and one criminologist have effectively acted as gatekeepers to this mystery witness. Yet, as we reported in Part I, the story told by the central witness in the Boston Bombing case does not add up. Have the gatekeepers not noticed?

    We spelled out some of the many discrepancies that appear to undermine the tidy notion that the facts of the Boston Marathon bombing were settled within days of the heinous event. Perhaps it would be helpful to sum up the inconsistencies:

    — Danny was afraid for his life.
    — Danny was not afraid for his life.

    — Danny’s car was taken from him and he was ejected almost immediately.
    — Danny was carjacked for 30 minutes.
    — Danny was carjacked for 90 minutes.

    — Danny’s captors told him they would not harm him.
    — Danny’s captors told him they had planted the Marathon bombs and killed the MIT cop and would harm him if he did not play ball.

    — Danny’s captors told him to get out of his car and took off without him.
    — Both of Danny’s captors got out of the car and virtually ignored him.
    — One of his captors remained in the car and Danny escaped when the man fiddled with a GPS, although the moment he opened the car door, the man made a futile grab at him.

    — Danny wanted anonymity because he was mostly worried about his own safety.
    — Danny wanted anonymity because he didn’t want his mother to worry.
    — Danny wanted anonymity because he didn’t want to appear heroic.

    One has to give Danny a tremendous benefit of the doubt to believe that he would get that confused about momentous events in which he was the central player, telling such different versions of a story whose details, one would imagine, had been seared into his memory.

    Note to Danny: We’d be glad to hear your side. Please contact us.

    Note to readers: for background on other aspects of the Boston Marathon bombing story, please see this, this, this, this and this. For lingering doubts about the murder of the MIT officer, see this. For more on the murder of Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s friend, Ibragim Todashev, and FBI harassment of people who have sought to raise doubts about the official story, see this.

    In the meantime, consider the following:

    Without the murder of the MIT policeman, followed by the carjacking confession reported by Danny, we would have no solved crime, no evidence linking anyone to the horrific Boston Marathon bombing except some grainy video of two guys wearing backpacks in a sea of other backpack-wearers near the source of the explosion. The assumption many of us make that the Tsarnaevs planted those bombs is just that: an assumption that, in the absence of the reported confession, has no evidence behind it.

    Thanks to the media’s consensus narrative, we think we saw or heard proof. But we didn’t. We heard people saying there is proof, and we saw ambiguous footage that we were told established proof.

    While this too-tidy scenario certainly calmed the public, it may also have poisoned a cherished principle of American justice: the notion of “innocent until proven guilty.”

    According to the consensus narrative, Tamerlan Tsarnaev commandeered a private car, and was soon joined by his younger brother. Tamerlan spontaneously informed their hostage that they were behind both the bombing and the shooting of the police officer. The hostage then escaped from the car, and relayed what he heard to police. But, in fact, beyond the testimony of a gas station owner that a man came running up and said he had been carjacked, we do not know what else of this is true.

    Crucially, we do not know that Tamerlan Tsarnaev actually confessed to either the Boston bombing or the murder of Officer Collier. We only think we know this to be true because we have been told there was a witness. Yet we do not even know who that crucial witness is. We are left with the word of “the authorities” that this quasi-phantom, his identity protected by, and his remarks filtered through, handpicked intermediaries from the traditional media, is telling us the truth.

  3. Person of Interest #1 -- McGeorge Bundy.

    Person of Interest #2 -- Averell Harriman

    btw, where was the first media reference to Oswald as a Lone Nut?

    The New York Herald Tribune. Trib owner Uber-blueblood Jock Whitney wrote a stop the presses editorial Fri night.

    (His father and grandfather Skull & Bones. A billionare in todays monies. Worked all night to get out "lone nut" tale. When do billionaires do low level work all night ??) (GAAL.in red)

    That's two Skull & Bones and a Scroll & Key.

    Big day for Yale...

  4. FBI’s “Suicide Letter” to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Dangers of Unchecked Surveillance
    ====================================================================
    Global Research, November 13, 2014

    The New York Times has published an unredacted version of the famous “suicide letter” from the FBI to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The letter, recently discovered by historian and professor Beverly Gage, is a disturbing document. But it’s also something that everyone in the United States should read, because it demonstrates exactly what lengths the intelligence community is willing to go to—and what happens when they take the fruits of the surveillance they’ve done and unleash it on a target.

    The anonymous letter was the result of the FBI’s comprehensive surveillance and harassment strategy against Dr. King, which included bugging his hotel rooms, photographic surveillance, and physical observation of King’s movements by FBI agents. The agency also attempted to break up his marriage by sending selectively edited “personal moments he shared with friends and women” to his wife.

    Portions of the letter had been previously redacted. One of these portions contains a claim that the letter was written by another African-American: “King, look into your heart. You know you are a complete fraud and a great liability to all us Negroes.” It goes on to say “We will now have to depend on our older leaders like Wilkins, a man of character and thank God we have others like him. But you are done.” This line is key, because part of the FBI’s strategy was to try to fracture movements and pit leaders against one another.

    The entire letter could have been taken from a page of GCHQ’s Joint Threat Research and Intelligence Group (JTRIG)—though perhaps as an email or series of tweets. The British spying agency GCHQ is one of the NSA’s closest partners. The mission of JTRIG, a unit within GCHQ, is to “destroy, deny, degrade [and] disrupt enemies by discrediting them.” And there’s little reason to believe the NSA and FBI aren’t using such tactics.

    The implications of these types of strategies in the digital age are chilling. Imagine Facebook chats, porn viewing history, emails, and more made public to discredit a leader who threatens the status quo, or used to blackmail a reluctant target into becoming an FBI informant. These are not far-fetched ideas. They are the reality of what happens when the surveillance state is allowed to grow out of control, and the full King letter, as well as current intelligence community practices illustrate that reality richly.

    mlkletters-1.jpg
    The newly unredacted portions shed light on the government’s sordid scheme to harass and discredit Dr. King. One paragraph states:No person can overcome the facts, no even a fraud like yourself. Lend your sexually psychotic ear to the enclosure. You will find yourself and in all your dirt, filth, evil and moronic talk exposed on the record for all time. . . . Listen to yourself, you filthy, abnormal animal. You are on the record.

    And of course, the letter ends with an ominous threat:King, there is only one thing left for you to do. You know what it is. You have just 34 days in which to do it (this exact number has been selected for a specific reason, it has definite practical significance). You are done. There is but one way out for you. You better take it before your filthy, abnormal fraudulent self is bared to the nation.

    There’s a lesson to learn here: history must play a central role in the debate around spying today. As Professor Gage states:Should intelligence agencies be able to sweep our email, read our texts, track our phone calls, locate us by GPS? Much of the conversation swirls around the possibility that agencies like the N.S.A. or the F.B.I. will use such information not to serve national security but to carry out personal and political vendettas. King’s experience reminds us that these are far from idle fears, conjured in the fevered minds of civil libertarians. They are based in the hard facts of history.

    Copyright Electronic Frontier Foundation 2014 posted in FAIR USE

    #################
    #################
    ***************************

    COINTELPRO Revisited:
    Spying & Disruption By Brian Glick

    ==================================================================================

    Internet Activists across the country report increasing government harassment and disruption of their work: -In the Southwest, paid informers infiltrate the church services, Bible classes and support networks of clergy and lay workers giving sanctuary to refugees from El Salvador and Guatamala. -In Alabama, elderly Black people attempting for the first time to exercise their right to vote are interrogated by FBI agents and hauled before federal grand juries hundreds of miles from their homes. -In New England, a former CIA case officer cites examples from his own past work to warn college students of efforts by undercover operatives to misdirect and discredit protests against South African and US racism. -In the San Francisco Bay Area, activists planning anti-nuclear civil disobedience learn that their meetings have been infiltrated by the US Navy. -In Detroit, Seattle, and Philadelphia, in Cambridge, MA, Berkeley,CA., Phoenix, AR., and Washington, DC., churches and organizations opposing US policies in Central America report obviously political break-ins in which important papers are stolen or damaged, while money and valuables are left untouched. License plates on a car spotted fleeing one such office have been traced to the US National Security Agency. -In Puerto Rico, Texas and Massachusetts, labor leaders, community organizers, writers and editors who advocate Puerto Rican independence are branded by the FBI as "terrorists," brutally rounded-up in the middle of the night, held incommunicado for days and then jailed under new preventive detention laws. -The FBI puts the same "terrorist" label on opponents of US intervention in El Salvador, but refuses to investigate the possibility of a political conspiracy behind nation-wide bombings of abortion clinics. -Throughout the country, people attempting to see Nicaragua for themselves find their trips disrupted, their private papers confiscated, and their homes and offices plagued by FBI agents who demand detailed personal and political information. These kinds of government tactics violate our fundamental constitutional rights. They make it enormously difficult to sustain grass-roots organizing. They create an atmosphere of fear and distrust which undermines any effort to challenge official policy. Similar measures were used in the 1960s as part of a secret FBI program known as "COINTELPRO." COINTELPRO was later exposed and officially ended. But the evidence shows that it actually persisted and that clandestine operations to discredit and disrupt opposition movements have become an institutional feature of national and local government in the US. This pamphlet is designed to help current and future activists learn from the history of COINTELPRO, so that our movements can better withstand such attack. The first section gives a brief overview of what we know the FBI did in the 60s. It explains why we can expect similar government intervention in the 80s and beyond, and offers general guidelines for effective response. The main body of the pamphlet describes the specific methods which have previously been used to undermine domestic dissent and suggests steps we can take to limit or deflect their impact. A final chapter explores ways to mobilize broad public protest against this kind of repression. Further readings and groups that can help are listed in back. The pamphlet's historical analysis is based on confidential internal documents prepared by the FBI and police during the 60s. It also draws on the post-60s confessions of disaffected government agents, and on the testimony of public officials before Congress and the courts. Though the information from these sources is incomplete, and much of what was done remains secret, we now know enough to draw useful lessons for future organizing. The suggestions included in the pamphlet are based on the author's 20 years experience as an activist and lawyer, and on talks with long-time organizers in a broad range of movements. They are meant to provide starting points for discussion, so we can get ready before the pressure intensifies. Most are a matter of common sense once the methodology of covert action is understood. Please take these issues seriously. Discuss the recommendations with other activists. Adapt them to the conditions you face. Point out problems and suggest other approaches. It is important that we begin now to protect our movements and ourselves. A HISTORY TO LEARN FROM: WHAT WAS COINTELPRO? "COINTELPRO" was the FBI's secret program to undermine the popular upsurge which swept the country during the 1960s. Though the name stands for "Counterintelligence Program," the targets were not enemy spies. The FBI set out to eliminate "radical" political opposition inside the US. When traditional modes of repression (exposure, blatant harassment, and prosecution for political crimes) failed to counter the growing insurgency, and even helped to fuel it, the Bureau took the law into its own hands and secretly used fraud and force to sabotage constitutionally- protected political activity. Its methods ranged far beyond surveillance, and amounted to a domestic version of the covert action for which the CIA has become infamous throughout the world. HOW DO WE KNOW ABOUT IT? COINTELPRO was discovered in March, 1971, when secret files were removed from an FBI office and released to news media. Freedom of Information requests, lawsuits, and former agents' public confessions deepened the exposure until a major scandal loomed. To control the damage and re-establish government legitimacy in the wake of Vietnam and Watergate, Congress and the courts compelled the FBI to reveal part of what it had done and to promise it would not do it again. Much of what has been learned, and copies of some of the actual documents, can be found in the readings listed at the back of this pamphlet. HOW DID IT WORK? The FBI secretly instructed its field offices to propose schemes to "misdirect, discredit, disrupt and otherwise neutralize "specific individuals and groups. Close coordination with local police and prosecutors was encouraged. Final authority rested with top FBI officials in Washington, who demanded assurance that "there is no possibility of embarrassment to the Bureau." More than 2000 individual actions were officially approved. The documents reveal three types of methods: 1. Infiltration: Agents and informers did not merely spy on political activists. Their main function was to discredit and disrupt. Various means to this end are analyzed below. 2. Other forms of deception: The FBI and police also waged psychological warfare from the outside--through bogus publications, forged correspondence, anonymous letters and telephone calls, and similar forms of deceit. 3. Harassment, intimidation and violence: Eviction, job loss, break-ins, vandalism, grand jury subpoenas, false arrests, frame- ups, and physical violence were threatened, instigated or directly employed, in an effort to frighten activists and disrupt their movements. Government agents either concealed their involvement or fabricated a legal pretext. In the case of the Black and Native American movements, these assaults--including outright political assassinations--were so extensive and vicious that they amounted to terrorism on the part of the government. WHO WERE THE MAIN TARGETS? The most intense operations were directed against the Black movement, particularly the Black Panther Party. This resulted from FBI and police racism, the Black community's lack of material resources for fighting back, and the tendency of the media--and whites in general--to ignore or tolerate attacks on Black groups. It also reflected government and corporate fear of the Black movement because of its militance, its broad domestic base and international support, and its historic role in galvanizing the entire Sixties' upsurge. Many other activists who organized against US intervention abroad or for racial, gender or class justice at home also came under covert attack. The targets were in no way limited to those who used physical force or took up arms. Martin Luther King, David Dellinger, Phillip Berrigan and other leading pacifists were high on the list, as were projects directly protected by the Bill of Rights, such as alternative newspapers. The Black Panthers came under attack at a time when their work featured free food and health care and community control of schools and police, and when they carried guns only for deterrent and symbolic purposes. It was the terrorism of the FBI and police that eventually provoked the Panthers to retaliate with the armed actions that later were cited to justify their repression. Ultimately the FBI disclosed six official counterintelligence programs: Communist Party-USA (1956-71); "Groups Seeking Independence for Puerto Rico" (1960-71); Socialist Workers Party (1961-71); "White Hate Groups" (1964-71); "Black Nationalist Hate Groups" (1967-71); and "New Left" (1968- 71).The latter operations hit anti-war, student, and feminist groups. The "Black Nationalist" caption actually encompassed Martin Luther King and most of the civil rights and Black Power movements. The "white hate" program functioned mainly as a cover for covert aid to the KKK and similar right-wing vigilantes, who were given funds and information, so long as they confined their attacks to COINTELPRO targets. FBI documents also reveal covert action against Native American, Chicano, Phillipine, Arab- American, and other activists, apparently without formal Counterintelligence programs. WHAT EFFECT DID IT HAVE? COINTELPRO's impact is difficult to fully assess since we do not know the entire scope of what was done (especially against such pivotal targets as Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, SNCC and SDS),and we have no generally accepted analysis of the Sixties. It is clear,however, that: -COINTELPRO distorted the public's view of radical groups in a way that helped to isolate them and to legitimize open political repression. -It reinforced and exacerbated the weaknesses of these groups, making it very difficult for the inexperienced activists of the Sixties to learn from their mistakes and build solid, durable organizations. -Its violent assaults and covert manipulation eventually helped to push some of the most committed and experienced groups to withdraw from grass-roots organizing and to substitute armed actions which isolated them and deprived the movement of much of its leadership. -COINTELPRO often convinced its victims to blame themselves and each other for the problems it created, leaving a legacy of cynicism and despair that persists today. -By operating covertly, the FBI and police were able to severely weaken domestic political opposition without shaking the conviction of most US people that they live in a democracy, with free speech and the rule of law. THE DANGER WE FACE: DID COINTELPRO EVER REALLY END? Public exposure of COINTELPRO in the early 1970s elicited a flurry of reform. Congress, the courts and the mass media condemned government "intelligence abuses." Municipal police forces officially disbanded their red squads. A new Attorney General notified past victims of COINTELPRO and issued Guidelines to limit future operations. Top FBI officials were indicted (albeit for relatively minor offenses), two were convicted, and several others retired or resigned. J. Edgar Hoover--the egomaniacal, crudely racist and sexist founder of the FBI--died, and a well-known federal judge, William Webster, eventually was appointed to clean house and build a "new FBI." Behind this public hoopla, however, was little real improvement in government treatment of radical activists. Domestic covert operations were briefly scaled down a bit, after the 60s' upsurge had largely subsided, due inpart to the success of COINTELPRO. But they did not stop. In April, 1971, soon after files had been taken from one of its offices, the FBI instructed its agents that "future COINTELPRO actions will be considered on a highly selective, individual basis with tight procedures to insure absolute security." The results are apparent in the record of the subsequent years: -A virtual war on the American Indian Movement, ranging from forgery of documents, infiltration of legal defense committees, diversion of funds, intimidation of witnesses and falsification of evidence, to the para-military invasion of the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota, and the murder of Anna Mae Aquash, Joe Stuntz and countless others; -Sabotage of efforts to organize protest demonstrations at the 1972 Republican and Democratic Party conventions. The attempted assassination of San Diego Univ. Prof. Peter Bohmer, by a "Secret Army Organization" of ex-Minutemen formed, subsidized, armed, and protected by the FBI, was a part of these operations; -Concealment of the fact that the witness whose testimony led to the 1972 robbery-murder conviction of Black Panther leader Elmer "Geronimo" Pratt was a paid informer who had worked in the BPP under the direction of the FBI and the Los Angeles Police Department; -Infiltration and disruption of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, and prosecution of its national leaders on false charges (Florida, 1971-74); -Formation and operation of sham political groups such as "Red Star Cadre," in Tampa, Fla., and the New Orleans "Red Collective" (1972-76); -Mass interrogation of lesbian and feminist activists, threats of subpoenas, jailing of those who refused to cooperate, and disruption of women's health collectives and other projects (Lexington, KY., Hartford and New Haven,Conn., 1975); -Harassment of the Hispanic Commission of the Episcopal Church and numerous other Puerto Rican and Chicano religious activists and community organizers (Chicago, New York City, Puerto Rico, Colorado and New Mexico, 1977); -Entrapment and frame-up of militant union leaders (NASCO shipyards,San Diego, 1979); and -Complicity in the murder of socialist labor and community organizers (Greensboro, N.C., 1980). IS IT A THREAT TODAY? All this, and maybe more, occured in an era of reform. The use of similar measures in today's very different times cannot be itemized in such detail, since most are still secret. The gravity of the current danger is evident, however, from the major steps recently taken to legitimize and strengthen political repression, and from the many incidents which are coming to light despite stepped-up security. The ground-work for public acceptance of repression has been laid by President Reagan's speeches reviving the old red-scare tale of worldwide "communist take-overs" and adding a new bogeyman in the form of domestic and international "terrorism." The President has taken advantage of the resulting political climate to denounce the Bill of Rights and to red-bait critics of US intervention in Central America. He has pardoned the FBI officials convicted of COINTELPRO crimes, praised their work, and spoken favorably of the political witchhunts he took part in during the 1950s. For the first time in US history, government infiltration to "influence" domestic political activity has received official sanction. On the pretext of meeting the supposed terrorist threat, Presidential Executive Order 12333 (Dec. 4, 1981) extends such authority not only to the FBI, but also to the military and, in some cases, the CIA. History shows that these agencies treat legal restriction as a kind of speed limit which they feel free to exceed, but only by a certain margin. Thus, Reagan's Executive Order not only encourages reliance on methods once deemed abhorent, it also implicitly licenses even greater, more damaging intrusion. Government capacity to make effective use of such measures has also been substantially enhanced in recent years: -Judge Webster's highly-touted reforms have served mainly to modernize the FBI and make it more dangerous. Instead of the back- biting competition which impeded coordination of domestic counter- insurgency in the 60s, the Bureau now promotes inter-agency cooperation. As an equal opportunity employer, it can use Third World and female agents to penetrate political targets more thoroughly than before. By cultivating a low-visibility corporate image and discreetly avoiding public attack on prominent liberals, the FBI has regained respectability and won over a number of former critics. -Municipal police forces have similarly revamped their image while upgrading their repressive capabilities. The police "red squads" that infiltrated and harassed the 60s' movements have been revived under other names and augmented by para-military SWAT teams and tactical squads as well as highly-politicized community relations and "beat rep" programs, in which Black, Hispanic and female officers are often conspicuous. Local operations are linked by FBI-led regional anti-terrorist task forces and the national Law Enforcement Intelligence Unit (LEIU). -Increased military and CIA involvement has added political sophistication and advanced technology. Army Special Forces and other elite military units are now trained and equipped for counter-insurgency (known as"low-intensity warfare"). Their manuals teach the essential methodology of COINTELPRO, stressing earlier intervention to neutralize potential opposition before it can take hold. The CIA's expanded role is especially ominous. In the 60s, while legally banned from "internal security functions," the CIA managed to infiltrate the Black, student and antiwar movements. It also made secret use of university professors, journalists, labor leaders, publishing houses, cultural organizations and philanthropic fronts to mold US public opinion. But it apparently felt compelled to hold back--within the country--from the kinds of systematic political destabilization, torture, and murder which have become the hallmark of its operations abroad. Now, the full force of the CIA has been unleashed at home. -All of the agencies involved in covert operations have had time to learn from the 60s and to institute the "tight procedures to insure absolute security" that FBI officials demanded after COINTELPRO was exposed in 1971. Restoration of secrecy has been made easier by the Administration's steps to shield covert operations from public scrutiny. Under Reagan, key FBI and CIA files have been re-classified "top secret." The Freedom of Information Act has been quietly narrowed through administrative reinterpretation. Funds for covert operations are allocated behind closed doors and hidden in CIA and defense appropriations. Government employees now face censorship even after they retire, and new laws make it a federal crime to publicize information which might tend to reveal an agent's identity. Despite this stepped-up security, incidents frighteningly reminiscent of 60s' COINTELPRO have begun to emerge. The extent of the infiltration, burglary and other clandestine government intervention that has already come to light is alarming. Since the vast majority of such operations stay hidden until after the damage has been done, those we are now aware of undoubtedly represent only the tip of the iceberg. Far more is sure to lie beneath the surface. Considering the current political climate, the legalization of COINTELPRO, the rehabilitation of the FBI and police, and the expanded role of the CIA and military, the recent revelations leave us only one safe assumption: that extensive government covert operations are already underway to neutralize today's opposition movements before they can reach the massive level of the 60s. WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT IT? Domestic covert action has now persisted in some form through at least the last seven presidencies. It grew from one program to six under Kennedy and Johnson. It flourished when an outspoken liberal, Ramsey Clark, was Attorney General (1966-68). It is an integral part of the established mode of operation of powerful, entrenched agencies on every level of government. It enables policy-makers to maintain social control without detracting from their own public image or the perceived legitimacy oftheir method of government. It has become as institutional in the US as the race, gender, class and imperial domination it serves to uphold. Under these circumstances, there is no reason to think we can eliminate COINTELPRO simply by electing better public officials. Only through sustained public education and mobilization, by a broad coalition of political, religious and civil libertarian activists, can we expect to limit it effectively. In most parts of the country, however, and certainly on a national level, we lack the political power to end covert government intervention, or even to curb it substantially. We therefore need to learn how to cope more effectively with this form of repression. The next part of this pamphlet examines the methods that were used to discredit and disrupt the movements ofthe 60s and suggests steps we can take to deflect or reduce their impact in the 80s. A CHECK-LIST OF ESSENTIAL PRECAUTIONS: -Check out the authenticity of any disturbing letter, rumor, phone call or other communication before acting on it. -Document incidents which appear to reflect covert intervention, and report them to the Movement Support Network Hotline: 212/477- 5562. -Deal openly and honestly with the differences within our movements (race, gender, class, age, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, personality, experience, physical and intellectual capacities, etc.) before the FBI and police exploit them to tear us apart. -Don't rush to expose a suspected agent. Instead, directly criticize what the suspect says and does. Intra-movement witchhunts only help the government create distrust and paranoia. -Support whoever comes under government attack. Don't be put off by political slander, such as recent attempts to smear radical activists as "terrorists." Organize public opposition to FBI investigations, grand juries, show trials and other forms of political harassment. -Above all, do not let them divert us from our main work. Our most powerful weapon against political repression is effective organizing around the needs and issues which directly affect people's lives. WHAT THEY DO & HOW WE CAN PROTECT OURSELVES: INFILTRATION BY AGENTS OR INFORMERS Agents are law enforcement officers disguised as activists. Informers are non-agents who provide information to a law enforcement or intelligence agency. They may be recruited from within a group or sent in by an agency, or they may be disaffected former members or supporters. Infiltrators are agents or informers who work in a group or community under the direction of a law enforcement or intelligence agency. During the 60s the FBI had to rely on informers (who are less well trained and harder to control) because it had very few black, Hispanic or female agents, and its strict dress and grooming code left white male agents unable to look like activists. As a modern equal opportunity employer, today's FBI has fewer such limitations. What They Do: Some informers and infiltrators quietly provide information while keeping a low profile and doing whatever is expected of group members. Others attempt to discredit a target and disrupt its work. They may spread false rumors and make unfounded accusations to provoke or exacerbate tensions and splits. They may urge divisive proposals, sabotage important activities and resources, or operate as "provocateurs" who lead zealous activists into unnecessary danger. In a demonstration or other confrontation with police, such an agent may break discipline and call for actions which would undermine unity and detract from tactical focus. Infiltration As a Source of Distrust and Paranoia: While individual agents and informers aid the government in a variety of specific ways, the general use of infiltrators serves a very special and powerful strategic function. The fear that a group may be infiltrated often intimidates people from getting more involved. It can give rise to a paranoia which makes it difficult to build the mutual trust which political groups depend on. This use of infiltrators, enhanced by covertly-initiated rumors that exaggerate the extent to which a particular movement or group has been penetrated, is recommended by the manuals used to teach counter-insurgency in the U.S. and Western Europe. Covert Manipulation to Make A Legitimate Activist Appear to be an Agent: An actual agent will often point the finger at a genuine, non-collaborating and highly-valued group member, claiming that he or she is the infiltrator. The same effect, known as a "snitch jacket," has been achieved by planting forged documents which appear to be communications between an activist and the FBI, or by releasing for no other apparent reason one of a group of activists who were arrested together. Another method used under COINTELPRO was to arrange for some activists, arrested under one pretext or another, to hear over the police radio a phony broadcast which appeared to set up a secret meeting between the police and someone from their group. GUIDELINES FOR COPING WITH INFILTRATION: l. Establish a process through which anyone who suspects an informer (or other form of covert intervention) can express his or her fears without scaring others. Experienced people assigned this responsibility can do a great deal to help a group maintain its morale and focus while, at the same time, centrally consolidating information and deciding how to use it. This plan works best when accompanied by group discussion of the danger of paranoia, so that everyone understands and follows the established procedure. 2. To reduce vulnerability to paranoia and "snitch jackets", and to minimize diversion from your main work, it generally is best if you do not attempt to expose a suspected agent or informer unless you are certain of their role. (For instance, they surface to make an arrest, testify as a government witness or in some other way admit their identity). Under most circumstances, an attempted exposure will do more harm than the infiltrator's continued presence. This is especially true if you can discreetly limit the suspect's access to funds, financial records, mailing lists, discussions of possible lawviolations, meetings that plan criminal defense strategy, and similar opportunities. 3. Deal openly and directly with the form and content of what anyone says and does, whether the person is a suspected agent, has emotional problems, or is simply a sincere, but naive or confused person new to the work. 4. Once an agent or informer has been definitely identified, alert other groups and communities by means of photographs, a description of their methods of operation, etc. In the 60s, some agents managed even after their exposure in one community to move on and repeat their performance in a numberof others. 5. Be careful to avoid pushing a new or hesitant member to take risks beyond what that person is ready to handle, particularly in situations which could result in arrest and prosecution. People in this position have proved vulnerable to recruitment as informers. OTHER FORMS OF DECEPTION Bogus leaflets, pamphlets, etc.: COINTELPRO documents show that the FBI routinely put out phony leaflets, posters, pamphlets, etc. to discredit its targets. In one instance, agents revised a children's coloring book which the Black Panther Party had rejected as anti-white and gratuitously violent, and then distributed a cruder version to backers of the Party's program of free breakfasts for children, telling them the book was being used in the program. False media stories: The FBI's documents expose collusion by reporters and news media that knowingly published false and distorted material prepared by Bureau agents. One such story had Jean Seberg, a noticeably pregnant white film star active in anti-racist causes, carrying the child of a prominent Black leader. Seberg's white husband, the actual father, has sued the FBI as responsible for her resulting still-birth, breakdown, and suicide. Forged correspondence: Former employees have confirmed that the FBI and CIA have the capacity to produce "state of the art" forgery. The U.S. Senate's investigation of COINTELPRO uncovered a series of letters forged in the name of an intermediary between the Black Panther Party's national office and Panther leader Eldridge Cleaver, in exile in Algeria. The letters proved instrumental in inflaming intra-party rivalries that erupted into the bitter public split that shattered the Party in the winter of 1971. Anonymous letters and telephone calls: During the 60s, activists received a steady flow of anonymous letters and phone calls which turn out to have been from government agents. Some threatened violence. Others promoted racial divisions and fears. Still others charged various leaders with collaboration, corruption, sexual affairs with other activists' mates, etc. As in the Seberg incident, inter-racial sex was a persistent theme. The husband of one white woman involved in a bi-racial civil rights group received the following anonymous letter authored by the FBI: --Look, man, I guess your old lady doesn't get enough at home or she wouldn't be shucking and jiving with our Black Men in ACTION, you dig? Like all she wants to integrate is the bedroom and us Black Sisters ain't gonna take no second best from our men. So lay it on her man--or get her the hell off [name]. A Soul Sister False rumors: Using infiltrators, journalists and other contacts, the Bureau circulated slanderous, disruptive rumors through political movements and the communities in which they worked. Other misinformation: A favorite FBI tactic uncovered by Senate investigators was to misinform people that a political meeting or event had been cancelled. Another was to offer non- existent housing at phony addresses, stranding out-of-town conference attendees who naturally blamed those who had organized the event. FBI agents also arranged to transport demonstrators in the name of a bogus bus company which pulled out at the last minute. Such "dirty tricks" interfered with political events and turned activists against each other. SEPARATE BOX: Fronts for the FBI: COINTELPRO documents reveal that a number of Sixties' political groups and projects were actually set up and operated by the FBI. One, "Grupo pro-Uso Voto," was used to disrupt the fragile unity developing in l967 among groups seeking Puerto Rico's independence from the US. The genuine proponents of independence had joined together to boycott a US-administered referendum on the island's status. They argued that voting under conditions of colonial domination could serve only to legitimize US rule, and that no vote could be fair while the US controlled the island's economy, media, schools, and police. The bogus group, pretending to support independence, broke ranks and urged independistas to take advantage of the opportunity to register their opinion at the polls. Since FBI front groups are basically a means for penetrating and disrupting political movements, it is best to deal with them on the basis of the Guidelines for Coping with Infiltration (below). Confront what a suspect group says and does, but avoid public accusations unless you have definite proof. If you do have such proof, share it with everyone affected. GUIDELINES FOR COPING WITH OTHER FORMS OF DECEPTION: 1. Don't add unnecessarily to the pool of information that government agents use to divide political groups and turn activists against each other. They thrive on gossip about personal tensions, rivalries and disagreements. The more these are aired in public, or via a telephone which can be tapped or mail which can be opened, the easier it is to exploit a groups' problems and subvert its work. (Note that the CIA has the technology to read mail without opening it, and that the telephone network can now be programmed to record any conversation in which specified political terms are used.) 2. The best way to reduce tensions and hostilities, and the urge to gossip about them, is to make time for open, honest discussion and resolution of "personal" as well as "political" issues. 3. Don't accept everything you hear or read. Check with the supposed source of the information before you act on it. Personal communication among estranged activists, however difficult or painful, could have countered many FBI operations which proved effective in the Sixties. 4. When you hear a negative, confusing or potentially harmful rumor, don't pass it on. Instead, discuss it with a trusted friend or with the people in your group who are responsibile for dealing with covert intervention. 5. Verify and double-check all arrangements for housing, transportation, meeting rooms, and so forth. 6. When you discover bogus materials, false media stories, etc., publicly disavow them and expose the true source, insofar as you can. HARASSMENT, INTIMIDATION & VIOLENCE: Pressure through employers, landlords, etc.: COINTELPRO documents reveal frequent overt contacts and covert manipulation (false rumors, anonymous letters and telephone calls) to generate pressure on activists from their parents, landlords, employers, college administrators, church superiors, welfare agencies, credit bureaus, licensing authorities, and the like. Agents' reports indicate that such intervention denied Sixties' activists any number of foundation grants and public speaking engagements. It also cost underground newspapers most of their advertising revenues, when major record companies were persuaded to take their business elsewhere. It may underlie recent steps by insurance companies to cancel policies held by churches giving sanctuary to refugees from El Salvador and Guatamala. Burglary: Former operatives have confessed to thousands of "black bag jobs" in which FBI agents broke into movement offices to steal, copy or destroy valuable papers, wreck equipment, or plant drugs. Vandalism: FBI infiltrators have admitted countless other acts of vandalism, including the fire which destroyed the Watts Writers Workshop's multi-million dollar ghetto cultural center in 1973. Late 60s' FBI and police raids laid waste to movement offices across the country, destroying precious printing presses, typewriters, layout equipment, research files, financial records, and mailing lists. Other direct interference: To further disrupt opposition movements, frighten activists, and get people upset with each other, the FBI tampered with organizational mail, so it came late or not at all. It also resorted to bomb threats and similar "dirty tricks". Conspicuous surveillance: The FBI and police blatantly watch activists' homes, follow their cars, tap phones, open mail and attend political events. The object is not to collect information (which is done surreptiously), but to harass and intimidate. Attempted interviews: Agents have extracted damaging information from activists who don't know they have a legal right to refuse to talk, or who think they can outsmart the FBI. COINTELPRO directives recommend attempts at interviews throughout political movements to "enhance the paranoia endemic in these circles" and "get the point across that there is an FBI agent behind every mailbox." Grand juries: Unlike the FBI, the Grand Jury has legal power to make you answer its questions. Those who refuse, and are required to accept immunity from use of their testimony against them, can be jailed for contempt of court. (Such "use immunity" enables prosecutors to get around the constitutional protection against self-incrimination.) The FBI and the US Dept. of Justice have manipulated this process to turn the grand jury into an instrument of political repression. Frustrated by jurors' consistent refusal to convict activists of overtly political crimes, they convened over 100 grand juries between l970 and 1973 and subpoenaed more than 1000 activists from the Black, Puerto Rican, student, women's and anti-war movements. Supposed pursuit of fugitives and "terrorists" was the usual pretext. Many targets were so terrified that they dropped out of political activity. Others were jailed without any criminal charge or trial, in what amounts to a U.S. version of the political internment procedures employed in South Africa and Northern Ireland. False arrest and prosecution: COINTELPRO directives cite the Philadelphia FBI's success in having local militants "arrested on every possible charge until they could no longer make bail" and "spent most of the summer in jail." Though the bulk of the activists arrested in this manner were eventually released, some were convicted of serious charges on the basis of perjured testimony by FBI agents, or by co-workers who the Bureau had threatened or bribed. The object was not only to remove experienced organizers from their communities and to divert scarce resources into legal defense, but even more to discredit entire movements by portraying their leaders as vicious criminals. Two victims of such frame-ups, Native American activist Leonard Peltier and 1960s' Black Panther official Elmer "Geronimo" Pratt, have finally gained court hearings on new trial motions. Others currently struggling to re-open COINTELPRO convictions include Richard Marshall of the American Indian Movement and jailed Black Panthers Herman Bell, Anthony Bottom, Albert Washington (the "NY3"), and Richard "Dhoruba" Moore. Intimidation: One COINTELPRO communique urged that "The Negro youths and moderates must be made to understand that if they succumb to revolutionary teaching, they will be dead revolutionaries." Others reported use of threats (anonymous and overt) to terrorize activists, driving some to abandon promising projects and others to leave the country. During raids on movement offices, the FBI and police routinely roughed up activists and threatened further violence. In August, 1970, they forced the entire staff of the Black Panther office in Philadelphia to march through the streets naked. Instigation of violence: The FBI's infiltrators and anonymous notes and phone calls incited violent rivals to attack Malcolm X, the Black Panthers, and other targets. Bureau records also reveal maneuvers to get the Mafia to move against such activists as black comedian Dick Gregory. A COINTELPRO memo reported that "shootings, beatings and a high degree of unrest continue to prevail in the ghetto area of southeast San Diego...it is felt that a substantial amount of the unrest is directly attributable to this program." Covert aid to right-wing vigilantes: In the guise of a COINTELPRO against "white hate groups," the FBI subsidized, armed, directed and protected the Klu Klux Klan and other right-wing groups, including a "Secret Army Organization" of California ex-Minutemen who beat up Chicano activists, tore apart the offices of the San Diego Street Journal and the Movement for a Democratic Military, and tried to kill a prominent anti-war organizer. Puerto Rican activists suffered similar terrorist assaults from anti-Castro Cuban groups organized and funded by the CIA. Defectors from a band of Chicago-based vigilantes known as the "Legion of Justice" disclosed that the funds and arms they used to destroy book stores, film studios and other centers of opposition had secretly been supplied by members of the Army's 113th Military Intelligence Group. Assassination: The FBI and police were implicated directly in murders of Black and Native American leaders. In Chicago, police assassinated Black Panthers Fred Hampton and Mark Clark, using a floor plan supplied by an FBI informer who apparently also had drugged Hampton's food to make him unconscious during the raid. FBI records show that this accomplice received a substantial bonus for his services. Despite an elaborate cover-up, a blue-ribbon commision and a U.S Court of Appeals found the deaths to be the result not of a shootout, as claimed by police, but of a carefully orchestrated, Vietnam-style "search and destroy mission". GUIDELINES FOR COPING WITH HARASSMENT, INTIMIDATION & VIOLENCE: 1. Establish security procedures appropriate to your group's level of activity and discuss them thoroughly with everyone involved. Control access to keys, files, letterhead, funds, financial records, mailing lists, etc. Keep duplicates of valuable documents. Safeguard address books, and do not carry them when arrest is likely. 2. Careful records of break-ins, thefts, bomb threats, raids, arrests, strange phone noises (not always taps or bugs), harassment, etc. will help you to discern patterns and to prepare reports and testimony. 3. Don't talk to the FBI. Don't let them in without a warrant. Tell others that they came. Have a lawyer demand an explanation and instruct them to leave you alone. 4. If an activist does talk, or makes some other honest error, explain the harm that could result. But do not attempt to ostracize a sincere person who slips up. Isolation only weakens a person's ability to resist. It can drive someone out of the movement and even into the arms of the police. 5. If the FBI starts to harass people in your area, alert everyone to refuse to cooperate (see box). Call the Movement Support Network's Hotline:(2l2) 614-6422. Set up community meetings with speakers who have resisted similar harassment elsewhere. Get literature, films, etc. through the organizations listed in the back of this pamphlet. Consider "Wanted" posters with photos of the agents, or guerilla theater which follows them through the city streets. 6. Make a major public issue of crude harassment, such as tampering with your mail. Contact your congressperson. Call the media. Demonstrate at your local FBI office. Turn the attack into an opportunity for explaining how covert intervention threatens fundamental human rights. 7. Many people find it easier to tell an FBI agent to contact their lawyer than to refuse to talk. Once a lawyer is involved, the Bureau generally pulls back, since it has lost its power to intimidate. If possible, make arrangements with a local lawyer and let everyone know that agents who visit them can be referred to that lawyer. If your group engages in civil disobedience or finds itself under intense police pressure, start a bail fund, train some members to deal with the legal system, and develop an ongoing relationship with a sympathetic local lawyer. 8. Organizations listed in the back of this pamphlet can also help resist grand jury harassment. Community education is important, along with legal, financial, child care, and other support for those who protect a movement by refusing to divulge information about it. If a respected activist is subpoenaed for obviously political reasons, consider trying to arrange for sanctuary in a local church or synagogue. 9. While the FBI and police are entirely capable of fabricating criminal charges, any law violations make it easier for them to set you up. The point is not to get so up-tight and paranoid that you can't function, but to make a realistic assessment based on your visibility and other pertinent circumstances. 10. Upon hearing of Fred Hampton's murder, the Black Panthers in Los Angeles fortified their offices and organized a communications network to alert the community and news media in the event of a raid. When the police did attempt an armed assault four days later, the Panthers were able to hold off the attack until a large community and media presence enabled them to leave the office without casualties. Similar preparation can help other groups that have reason to expect right-wing or police assaults. 11. Make sure your group designates and prepares other members to step in if leaders are jailed or otherwise incapacitated. The more each particpant is able to think for herself or himself and take responsibility, the better will be the group's capacity to cope with crises. ORGANIZING PUBLIC OPPOSITION TO COVERT INTERVENTION A BROAD-BASED STRATEGY: No one existing political organization or movement is strong enough, by itself, to mobilize the public pressure required to signficantly limit the ability of the FBI, CIA and police to subvert our work. Some activists oppose covert intervention because it violates fundamental constitutional rights. Others stress how it weakens and interferes with the work of a particular group or movement. Still others see covert action as part of a political and economic system which is fundamentally flawed. Our only hope is to bring these diverse forces together in a single, powerful alliance. Such a broad coalition cannot hold together unless it operates with clearly-defined principles. The coalition as a whole will have to oppose covert intervention on certain basic grounds--such as the threat to democracy, civil liberties and social justice, leaving its members free to put forward other objections and analyses in their own names. Participants will need to refrain from insisting that only their views are "politically correct" and that everyone else has "sold out." Above all, we will have to resist the government's manuevers to divide us by moving against certain groups, while subtly suggesting that it will go easy on the others, if only they dissociate themselves from those under attack. This strategy is evident in the recent Executive Order and Guidelines, which single out for infiltration and disruption people who support liberation movements and governments that defy U.S. hegemony or who entertain the view that it may at times be necessary to break the law in order to effectuate social change. DIVERSE TACTICS: For maximum impact, local and national coalitions will need a multi-faceted approach which effectively combines a diversity of tactics, including: l. Investigative research to stay on top of, and document, just what the FBI, CIA and police are up to. 2. Public education through forums, rallies, radio and TV, literature, film, high school and college curricula, wallposters, guerilla theater, and whatever else proves interesting and effective. 3. Legislative lobbying against administration proposals to strengthen covert work, cut back public access to information, punish government "whistle-blowers", etc. Coalitions in some cities and states have won legislative restrictions on surveillance and covert action. The value of such victories will depend our ability to mobilize continuing, vigilant public pressure for effective enforcement. 4. Support for the victims of covert intervention can reduce somewhat the harm done by the FBI, CIA and police. Organizing on behalf of grand jury resisters, political prisoners, and defendants in political trials offers a natural forum for public education about domestic covert action. 5. Lawsuits may win financial compensation for some of the people harmed by covert intervention. Class action suits, which seek a court order (injunction) limiting surveillance and covert action in a particular city or judicial district, have proved a valuable source of information and publicity. They are enormously expensive, however, in terms of time and energy as well as money. Out-of-court settlements in some of these cases have given rise to bitter disputes which split coalitions apart, and any agreement is subject to reinterpretation or modification by increasingly conservative, administration-oriented federal judges. The US Court of Appeals in Chicago has ruled that the consent decree against the FBI there affects only operations based "solely on the political views of a group or an individual," for which the Bureau can conjure no pretext of a "genuine concern for law enforcement." 6. Direct action, in the form of citizens' arrests, mock trials, picketlines, and civil disobedience, has recently greeted CIA recruiters on a number of college campuses. Although the main focus has been on the Agency's international crimes, its domestic activities have also received attention. Similar actions might be organized to protest recruitment by the FBI and police, in conjunction with teach-ins and other education about domestic covertaction. Demonstrations against Reagan's attempts to bolster covert intervention, or against particular FBI, CIA or police operations, could also raise public consciousness and focus activists' outrage. PROSPECTS: Previous attempts to mobilize public opposition, especially on a local level, indicate that a broad coalition, employing a multi-faceted approach, may be able to impose some limits on the government's ability to discredit and disrupt our work. It is clear, however, that we currently lack the power to eliminate such intervention. While fighting hard to end domestic covert action, we need also to study the forms it takes and prepare ourselves to cope with it as effectively as we can. Above all, it is essential that we resist the temptation to so preoccupy ourselves with repression that we neglect our main work. Our ability to resist the government's attacks depends ultimately on the strength of our movements. So long as we continue to advocate and organize effectively, no manner of intervention can stop us.

    purpleball.gifFBI watch

    WHEN I AM NOT SIGNED IN THE MATERIAL POSTED ABOVE (WHICH IS IN RED BELOW) is NOT VISIBLE REPEAT NOT VISABLE (WHAT GIVES ???) CAN SEE WHEN SIGNED IN (1984 ?)

    FBI Domestic Intelligence ActivitiesCOINTELPRO Revisited - Spying & DisruptionBy Brian Glick

    (author of War at Home, South End Press)

    ==================================================================================

    Internet Activists across the country report increasing government harassment and disruption of their work: -In the Southwest, paid informers infiltrate the church services, Bible classes and support networks of clergy and lay workers giving sanctuary to refugees from El Salvador and Guatamala. -In Alabama, elderly Black people attempting for the first time to exercise their right to vote are interrogated by FBI agents and hauled before federal grand juries hundreds of miles from their homes. -In New England, a former CIA case officer cites examples from his own past work to warn college students of efforts by undercover operatives to misdirect and discredit protests against South African and US racism. -In the San Francisco Bay Area, activists planning anti-nuclear civil disobedience learn that their meetings have been infiltrated by the US Navy. -In Detroit, Seattle, and Philadelphia, in Cambridge, MA, Berkeley,CA., Phoenix, AR., and Washington, DC., churches and organizations opposing US policies in Central America report obviously political break-ins in which important papers are stolen or damaged, while money and valuables are left untouched. License plates on a car spotted fleeing one such office have been traced to the US National Security Agency. -In Puerto Rico, Texas and Massachusetts, labor leaders, community organizers, writers and editors who advocate Puerto Rican independence are branded by the FBI as "terrorists," brutally rounded-up in the middle of the night, held incommunicado for days and then jailed under new preventive detention laws. -The FBI puts the same "terrorist" label on opponents of US intervention in El Salvador, but refuses to investigate the possibility of a political conspiracy behind nation-wide bombings of abortion clinics. -Throughout the country, people attempting to see Nicaragua for themselves find their trips disrupted, their private papers confiscated, and their homes and offices plagued by FBI agents who demand detailed personal and political information. These kinds of government tactics violate our fundamental constitutional rights. They make it enormously difficult to sustain grass-roots organizing. They create an atmosphere of fear and distrust which undermines any effort to challenge official policy. Similar measures were used in the 1960s as part of a secret FBI program known as "COINTELPRO." COINTELPRO was later exposed and officially ended. But the evidence shows that it actually persisted and that clandestine operations to discredit and disrupt opposition movements have become an institutional feature of national and local government in the US. This pamphlet is designed to help current and future activists learn from the history of COINTELPRO, so that our movements can better withstand such attack. The first section gives a brief overview of what we know the FBI did in the 60s. It explains why we can expect similar government intervention in the 80s and beyond, and offers general guidelines for effective response. The main body of the pamphlet describes the specific methods which have previously been used to undermine domestic dissent and suggests steps we can take to limit or deflect their impact. A final chapter explores ways to mobilize broad public protest against this kind of repression. Further readings and groups that can help are listed in back. The pamphlet's historical analysis is based on confidential internal documents prepared by the FBI and police during the 60s. It also draws on the post-60s confessions of disaffected government agents, and on the testimony of public officials before Congress and the courts. Though the information from these sources is incomplete, and much of what was done remains secret, we now know enough to draw useful lessons for future organizing. The suggestions included in the pamphlet are based on the author's 20 years experience as an activist and lawyer, and on talks with long-time organizers in a broad range of movements. They are meant to provide starting points for discussion, so we can get ready before the pressure intensifies. Most are a matter of common sense once the methodology of covert action is understood. Please take these issues seriously. Discuss the recommendations with other activists. Adapt them to the conditions you face. Point out problems and suggest other approaches. It is important that we begin now to protect our movements and ourselves. A HISTORY TO LEARN FROM: WHAT WAS COINTELPRO? "COINTELPRO" was the FBI's secret program to undermine the popular upsurge which swept the country during the 1960s. Though the name stands for "Counterintelligence Program," the targets were not enemy spies. The FBI set out to eliminate "radical" political opposition inside the US. When traditional modes of repression (exposure, blatant harassment, and prosecution for political crimes) failed to counter the growing insurgency, and even helped to fuel it, the Bureau took the law into its own hands and secretly used fraud and force to sabotage constitutionally- protected political activity. Its methods ranged far beyond surveillance, and amounted to a domestic version of the covert action for which the CIA has become infamous throughout the world. HOW DO WE KNOW ABOUT IT? COINTELPRO was discovered in March, 1971, when secret files were removed from an FBI office and released to news media. Freedom of Information requests, lawsuits, and former agents' public confessions deepened the exposure until a major scandal loomed. To control the damage and re-establish government legitimacy in the wake of Vietnam and Watergate, Congress and the courts compelled the FBI to reveal part of what it had done and to promise it would not do it again. Much of what has been learned, and copies of some of the actual documents, can be found in the readings listed at the back of this pamphlet. HOW DID IT WORK? The FBI secretly instructed its field offices to propose schemes to "misdirect, discredit, disrupt and otherwise neutralize "specific individuals and groups. Close coordination with local police and prosecutors was encouraged. Final authority rested with top FBI officials in Washington, who demanded assurance that "there is no possibility of embarrassment to the Bureau." More than 2000 individual actions were officially approved. The documents reveal three types of methods: 1. Infiltration: Agents and informers did not merely spy on political activists. Their main function was to discredit and disrupt. Various means to this end are analyzed below. 2. Other forms of deception: The FBI and police also waged psychological warfare from the outside--through bogus publications, forged correspondence, anonymous letters and telephone calls, and similar forms of deceit. 3. Harassment, intimidation and violence: Eviction, job loss, break-ins, vandalism, grand jury subpoenas, false arrests, frame- ups, and physical violence were threatened, instigated or directly employed, in an effort to frighten activists and disrupt their movements. Government agents either concealed their involvement or fabricated a legal pretext. In the case of the Black and Native American movements, these assaults--including outright political assassinations--were so extensive and vicious that they amounted to terrorism on the part of the government. WHO WERE THE MAIN TARGETS? The most intense operations were directed against the Black movement, particularly the Black Panther Party. This resulted from FBI and police racism, the Black community's lack of material resources for fighting back, and the tendency of the media--and whites in general--to ignore or tolerate attacks on Black groups. It also reflected government and corporate fear of the Black movement because of its militance, its broad domestic base and international support, and its historic role in galvanizing the entire Sixties' upsurge. Many other activists who organized against US intervention abroad or for racial, gender or class justice at home also came under covert attack. The targets were in no way limited to those who used physical force or took up arms. Martin Luther King, David Dellinger, Phillip Berrigan and other leading pacifists were high on the list, as were projects directly protected by the Bill of Rights, such as alternative newspapers. The Black Panthers came under attack at a time when their work featured free food and health care and community control of schools and police, and when they carried guns only for deterrent and symbolic purposes. It was the terrorism of the FBI and police that eventually provoked the Panthers to retaliate with the armed actions that later were cited to justify their repression. Ultimately the FBI disclosed six official counterintelligence programs: Communist Party-USA (1956-71); "Groups Seeking Independence for Puerto Rico" (1960-71); Socialist Workers Party (1961-71); "White Hate Groups" (1964-71); "Black Nationalist Hate Groups" (1967-71); and "New Left" (1968- 71).The latter operations hit anti-war, student, and feminist groups. The "Black Nationalist" caption actually encompassed Martin Luther King and most of the civil rights and Black Power movements. The "white hate" program functioned mainly as a cover for covert aid to the KKK and similar right-wing vigilantes, who were given funds and information, so long as they confined their attacks to COINTELPRO targets. FBI documents also reveal covert action against Native American, Chicano, Phillipine, Arab- American, and other activists, apparently without formal Counterintelligence programs. WHAT EFFECT DID IT HAVE? COINTELPRO's impact is difficult to fully assess since we do not know the entire scope of what was done (especially against such pivotal targets as Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, SNCC and SDS),and we have no generally accepted analysis of the Sixties. It is clear,however, that: -COINTELPRO distorted the public's view of radical groups in a way that helped to isolate them and to legitimize open political repression. -It reinforced and exacerbated the weaknesses of these groups, making it very difficult for the inexperienced activists of the Sixties to learn from their mistakes and build solid, durable organizations. -Its violent assaults and covert manipulation eventually helped to push some of the most committed and experienced groups to withdraw from grass-roots organizing and to substitute armed actions which isolated them and deprived the movement of much of its leadership. -COINTELPRO often convinced its victims to blame themselves and each other for the problems it created, leaving a legacy of cynicism and despair that persists today. -By operating covertly, the FBI and police were able to severely weaken domestic political opposition without shaking the conviction of most US people that they live in a democracy, with free speech and the rule of law. THE DANGER WE FACE: DID COINTELPRO EVER REALLY END? Public exposure of COINTELPRO in the early 1970s elicited a flurry of reform. Congress, the courts and the mass media condemned government "intelligence abuses." Municipal police forces officially disbanded their red squads. A new Attorney General notified past victims of COINTELPRO and issued Guidelines to limit future operations. Top FBI officials were indicted (albeit for relatively minor offenses), two were convicted, and several others retired or resigned. J. Edgar Hoover--the egomaniacal, crudely racist and sexist founder of the FBI--died, and a well-known federal judge, William Webster, eventually was appointed to clean house and build a "new FBI." Behind this public hoopla, however, was little real improvement in government treatment of radical activists. Domestic covert operations were briefly scaled down a bit, after the 60s' upsurge had largely subsided, due inpart to the success of COINTELPRO. But they did not stop. In April, 1971, soon after files had been taken from one of its offices, the FBI instructed its agents that "future COINTELPRO actions will be considered on a highly selective, individual basis with tight procedures to insure absolute security." The results are apparent in the record of the subsequent years: -A virtual war on the American Indian Movement, ranging from forgery of documents, infiltration of legal defense committees, diversion of funds, intimidation of witnesses and falsification of evidence, to the para-military invasion of the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota, and the murder of Anna Mae Aquash, Joe Stuntz and countless others; -Sabotage of efforts to organize protest demonstrations at the 1972 Republican and Democratic Party conventions. The attempted assassination of San Diego Univ. Prof. Peter Bohmer, by a "Secret Army Organization" of ex-Minutemen formed, subsidized, armed, and protected by the FBI, was a part of these operations; -Concealment of the fact that the witness whose testimony led to the 1972 robbery-murder conviction of Black Panther leader Elmer "Geronimo" Pratt was a paid informer who had worked in the BPP under the direction of the FBI and the Los Angeles Police Department; -Infiltration and disruption of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, and prosecution of its national leaders on false charges (Florida, 1971-74); -Formation and operation of sham political groups such as "Red Star Cadre," in Tampa, Fla., and the New Orleans "Red Collective" (1972-76); -Mass interrogation of lesbian and feminist activists, threats of subpoenas, jailing of those who refused to cooperate, and disruption of women's health collectives and other projects (Lexington, KY., Hartford and New Haven,Conn., 1975); -Harassment of the Hispanic Commission of the Episcopal Church and numerous other Puerto Rican and Chicano religious activists and community organizers (Chicago, New York City, Puerto Rico, Colorado and New Mexico, 1977); -Entrapment and frame-up of militant union leaders (NASCO shipyards,San Diego, 1979); and -Complicity in the murder of socialist labor and community organizers (Greensboro, N.C., 1980). IS IT A THREAT TODAY? All this, and maybe more, occured in an era of reform. The use of similar measures in today's very different times cannot be itemized in such detail, since most are still secret. The gravity of the current danger is evident, however, from the major steps recently taken to legitimize and strengthen political repression, and from the many incidents which are coming to light despite stepped-up security. The ground-work for public acceptance of repression has been laid by President Reagan's speeches reviving the old red-scare tale of worldwide "communist take-overs" and adding a new bogeyman in the form of domestic and international "terrorism." The President has taken advantage of the resulting political climate to denounce the Bill of Rights and to red-bait critics of US intervention in Central America. He has pardoned the FBI officials convicted of COINTELPRO crimes, praised their work, and spoken favorably of the political witchhunts he took part in during the 1950s. For the first time in US history, government infiltration to "influence" domestic political activity has received official sanction. On the pretext of meeting the supposed terrorist threat, Presidential Executive Order 12333 (Dec. 4, 1981) extends such authority not only to the FBI, but also to the military and, in some cases, the CIA. History shows that these agencies treat legal restriction as a kind of speed limit which they feel free to exceed, but only by a certain margin. Thus, Reagan's Executive Order not only encourages reliance on methods once deemed abhorent, it also implicitly licenses even greater, more damaging intrusion. Government capacity to make effective use of such measures has also been substantially enhanced in recent years: -Judge Webster's highly-touted reforms have served mainly to modernize the FBI and make it more dangerous. Instead of the back- biting competition which impeded coordination of domestic counter- insurgency in the 60s, the Bureau now promotes inter-agency cooperation. As an equal opportunity employer, it can use Third World and female agents to penetrate political targets more thoroughly than before. By cultivating a low-visibility corporate image and discreetly avoiding public attack on prominent liberals, the FBI has regained respectability and won over a number of former critics. -Municipal police forces have similarly revamped their image while upgrading their repressive capabilities. The police "red squads" that infiltrated and harassed the 60s' movements have been revived under other names and augmented by para-military SWAT teams and tactical squads as well as highly-politicized community relations and "beat rep" programs, in which Black, Hispanic and female officers are often conspicuous. Local operations are linked by FBI-led regional anti-terrorist task forces and the national Law Enforcement Intelligence Unit (LEIU). -Increased military and CIA involvement has added political sophistication and advanced technology. Army Special Forces and other elite military units are now trained and equipped for counter-insurgency (known as"low-intensity warfare"). Their manuals teach the essential methodology of COINTELPRO, stressing earlier intervention to neutralize potential opposition before it can take hold. The CIA's expanded role is especially ominous. In the 60s, while legally banned from "internal security functions," the CIA managed to infiltrate the Black, student and antiwar movements. It also made secret use of university professors, journalists, labor leaders, publishing houses, cultural organizations and philanthropic fronts to mold US public opinion. But it apparently felt compelled to hold back--within the country--from the kinds of systematic political destabilization, torture, and murder which have become the hallmark of its operations abroad. Now, the full force of the CIA has been unleashed at home. -All of the agencies involved in covert operations have had time to learn from the 60s and to institute the "tight procedures to insure absolute security" that FBI officials demanded after COINTELPRO was exposed in 1971. Restoration of secrecy has been made easier by the Administration's steps to shield covert operations from public scrutiny. Under Reagan, key FBI and CIA files have been re-classified "top secret." The Freedom of Information Act has been quietly narrowed through administrative reinterpretation. Funds for covert operations are allocated behind closed doors and hidden in CIA and defense appropriations. Government employees now face censorship even after they retire, and new laws make it a federal crime to publicize information which might tend to reveal an agent's identity. Despite this stepped-up security, incidents frighteningly reminiscent of 60s' COINTELPRO have begun to emerge. The extent of the infiltration, burglary and other clandestine government intervention that has already come to light is alarming. Since the vast majority of such operations stay hidden until after the damage has been done, those we are now aware of undoubtedly represent only the tip of the iceberg. Far more is sure to lie beneath the surface. Considering the current political climate, the legalization of COINTELPRO, the rehabilitation of the FBI and police, and the expanded role of the CIA and military, the recent revelations leave us only one safe assumption: that extensive government covert operations are already underway to neutralize today's opposition movements before they can reach the massive level of the 60s. WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT IT? Domestic covert action has now persisted in some form through at least the last seven presidencies. It grew from one program to six under Kennedy and Johnson. It flourished when an outspoken liberal, Ramsey Clark, was Attorney General (1966-68). It is an integral part of the established mode of operation of powerful, entrenched agencies on every level of government. It enables policy-makers to maintain social control without detracting from their own public image or the perceived legitimacy oftheir method of government. It has become as institutional in the US as the race, gender, class and imperial domination it serves to uphold. Under these circumstances, there is no reason to think we can eliminate COINTELPRO simply by electing better public officials. Only through sustained public education and mobilization, by a broad coalition of political, religious and civil libertarian activists, can we expect to limit it effectively. In most parts of the country, however, and certainly on a national level, we lack the political power to end covert government intervention, or even to curb it substantially. We therefore need to learn how to cope more effectively with this form of repression. The next part of this pamphlet examines the methods that were used to discredit and disrupt the movements ofthe 60s and suggests steps we can take to deflect or reduce their impact in the 80s. A CHECK-LIST OF ESSENTIAL PRECAUTIONS: -Check out the authenticity of any disturbing letter, rumor, phone call or other communication before acting on it. -Document incidents which appear to reflect covert intervention, and report them to the Movement Support Network Hotline: 212/477- 5562. -Deal openly and honestly with the differences within our movements (race, gender, class, age, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, personality, experience, physical and intellectual capacities, etc.) before the FBI and police exploit them to tear us apart. -Don't rush to expose a suspected agent. Instead, directly criticize what the suspect says and does. Intra-movement witchhunts only help the government create distrust and paranoia. -Support whoever comes under government attack. Don't be put off by political slander, such as recent attempts to smear radical activists as "terrorists." Organize public opposition to FBI investigations, grand juries, show trials and other forms of political harassment. -Above all, do not let them divert us from our main work. Our most powerful weapon against political repression is effective organizing around the needs and issues which directly affect people's lives. WHAT THEY DO & HOW WE CAN PROTECT OURSELVES: INFILTRATION BY AGENTS OR INFORMERS Agents are law enforcement officers disguised as activists. Informers are non-agents who provide information to a law enforcement or intelligence agency. They may be recruited from within a group or sent in by an agency, or they may be disaffected former members or supporters. Infiltrators are agents or informers who work in a group or community under the direction of a law enforcement or intelligence agency. During the 60s the FBI had to rely on informers (who are less well trained and harder to control) because it had very few black, Hispanic or female agents, and its strict dress and grooming code left white male agents unable to look like activists. As a modern equal opportunity employer, today's FBI has fewer such limitations. What They Do: Some informers and infiltrators quietly provide information while keeping a low profile and doing whatever is expected of group members. Others attempt to discredit a target and disrupt its work. They may spread false rumors and make unfounded accusations to provoke or exacerbate tensions and splits. They may urge divisive proposals, sabotage important activities and resources, or operate as "provocateurs" who lead zealous activists into unnecessary danger. In a demonstration or other confrontation with police, such an agent may break discipline and call for actions which would undermine unity and detract from tactical focus. Infiltration As a Source of Distrust and Paranoia: While individual agents and informers aid the government in a variety of specific ways, the general use of infiltrators serves a very special and powerful strategic function. The fear that a group may be infiltrated often intimidates people from getting more involved. It can give rise to a paranoia which makes it difficult to build the mutual trust which political groups depend on. This use of infiltrators, enhanced by covertly-initiated rumors that exaggerate the extent to which a particular movement or group has been penetrated, is recommended by the manuals used to teach counter-insurgency in the U.S. and Western Europe. Covert Manipulation to Make A Legitimate Activist Appear to be an Agent: An actual agent will often point the finger at a genuine, non-collaborating and highly-valued group member, claiming that he or she is the infiltrator. The same effect, known as a "snitch jacket," has been achieved by planting forged documents which appear to be communications between an activist and the FBI, or by releasing for no other apparent reason one of a group of activists who were arrested together. Another method used under COINTELPRO was to arrange for some activists, arrested under one pretext or another, to hear over the police radio a phony broadcast which appeared to set up a secret meeting between the police and someone from their group. GUIDELINES FOR COPING WITH INFILTRATION: l. Establish a process through which anyone who suspects an informer (or other form of covert intervention) can express his or her fears without scaring others. Experienced people assigned this responsibility can do a great deal to help a group maintain its morale and focus while, at the same time, centrally consolidating information and deciding how to use it. This plan works best when accompanied by group discussion of the danger of paranoia, so that everyone understands and follows the established procedure. 2. To reduce vulnerability to paranoia and "snitch jackets", and to minimize diversion from your main work, it generally is best if you do not attempt to expose a suspected agent or informer unless you are certain of their role. (For instance, they surface to make an arrest, testify as a government witness or in some other way admit their identity). Under most circumstances, an attempted exposure will do more harm than the infiltrator's continued presence. This is especially true if you can discreetly limit the suspect's access to funds, financial records, mailing lists, discussions of possible lawviolations, meetings that plan criminal defense strategy, and similar opportunities. 3. Deal openly and directly with the form and content of what anyone says and does, whether the person is a suspected agent, has emotional problems, or is simply a sincere, but naive or confused person new to the work. 4. Once an agent or informer has been definitely identified, alert other groups and communities by means of photographs, a description of their methods of operation, etc. In the 60s, some agents managed even after their exposure in one community to move on and repeat their performance in a numberof others. 5. Be careful to avoid pushing a new or hesitant member to take risks beyond what that person is ready to handle, particularly in situations which could result in arrest and prosecution. People in this position have proved vulnerable to recruitment as informers. OTHER FORMS OF DECEPTION Bogus leaflets, pamphlets, etc.: COINTELPRO documents show that the FBI routinely put out phony leaflets, posters, pamphlets, etc. to discredit its targets. In one instance, agents revised a children's coloring book which the Black Panther Party had rejected as anti-white and gratuitously violent, and then distributed a cruder version to backers of the Party's program of free breakfasts for children, telling them the book was being used in the program. False media stories: The FBI's documents expose collusion by reporters and news media that knowingly published false and distorted material prepared by Bureau agents. One such story had Jean Seberg, a noticeably pregnant white film star active in anti-racist causes, carrying the child of a prominent Black leader. Seberg's white husband, the actual father, has sued the FBI as responsible for her resulting still-birth, breakdown, and suicide. Forged correspondence: Former employees have confirmed that the FBI and CIA have the capacity to produce "state of the art" forgery. The U.S. Senate's investigation of COINTELPRO uncovered a series of letters forged in the name of an intermediary between the Black Panther Party's national office and Panther leader Eldridge Cleaver, in exile in Algeria. The letters proved instrumental in inflaming intra-party rivalries that erupted into the bitter public split that shattered the Party in the winter of 1971. Anonymous letters and telephone calls: During the 60s, activists received a steady flow of anonymous letters and phone calls which turn out to have been from government agents. Some threatened violence. Others promoted racial divisions and fears. Still others charged various leaders with collaboration, corruption, sexual affairs with other activists' mates, etc. As in the Seberg incident, inter-racial sex was a persistent theme. The husband of one white woman involved in a bi-racial civil rights group received the following anonymous letter authored by the FBI: --Look, man, I guess your old lady doesn't get enough at home or she wouldn't be shucking and jiving with our Black Men in ACTION, you dig? Like all she wants to integrate is the bedroom and us Black Sisters ain't gonna take no second best from our men. So lay it on her man--or get her the hell off [name]. A Soul Sister False rumors: Using infiltrators, journalists and other contacts, the Bureau circulated slanderous, disruptive rumors through political movements and the communities in which they worked. Other misinformation: A favorite FBI tactic uncovered by Senate investigators was to misinform people that a political meeting

    =

    WHEN I AM NOT SIGNED IN THE MATERIAL POSTED AT TOP (WHICH IS IN RED BELOW) is NOT VISIBLE REPEAT NOT VISABLE (WHAT GIVES ???) CAN SEE WHEN SIGNED IN (1984 ?)

  5. Quote

    "The result [of the cable of August 24] is we started down a road from which we never really recovered...[uS Vietnam military commander General Paul] Harkins was against it and Lodge wasn't talking to Harkins. So Henry Cabot Lodge started down one direction, the State Department was rather in the middle, and they suddenly called off the coup. Then the next five or six weeks we were all concerned about whether they were going to have a coup, who was going to win the coup, and who was going to replace the government. Nobody ever really had any of the answers to any of these things...the President was trying to get rid of Henry Cabot Lodge...The policy he [Lodge] was following was based on that original policy that had been made and then rescinded...that Averell Harriman was responsible for..."


    "The government was broken in two in a very disturbing way" -- Robert Kennedy

    Very disturbing, indeed.

    //// CLIFF VARNELL

    ++++++++++++++
    Golly gee willikers ....its almost like JFK was already dead ???.......... Never knew how powerful Walker was...

    +++++++++
    As I said , "THIS WHOLE THREAD (Trejo part) WACKY " (except Root who started it).

    “Vous me blaguez! [You're kidding me.] Cowboys and Indians!”

    - French President Charles DeGaulle, on being briefed by a reporter on the lone-nut theory of the Kennedy assassination. Quoted by David Talbot in The mother of all coverups.”

  6. Fort Lauderdale pays $75k to 15 y/o girl taken down with leg sweep, dragged to cruiser and then to police station despite having committed no crime. (CLICK link)
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Cops Assault And Arrest Woman for No Reason, Leave Her Cuffed and Naked in Public for 30 Minutes (CLINK LINK)
    ===========================
    Cop who Beat Down a Wheelchair Bound Man Found Not Guilty on All Charges (CLICK LINK)
    =======================================
    Cops Assault And Arrest Woman for No Reason, Leave Her Cuffed and Naked in Public for 30 Minutes (CICK LINK)
    ===================================
    Two Men Confront Louisiana Cop After He Litters... Cop gets infuriated taunts citizens by saying, "go do something about it" (click link)
    #############################################
    Cleveland to Pay $3 Million Over Police Shooting (click link)

    Gilbert called the shooting "probably one of the worst cases of police misconduct" in U.S. history because of the number of police officers involved. More than 100 officers and 60 police cars, including some driven by supervisors, were involved in the chase. Gilbert said that by the time the chase ended in East Cleveland, officers had Russell's car blocked in and surrounded when they opened fire.

    Webmaster's Commentary: WRH site

    Basically the victims' car was stopped and the two men unarmed when the police opened up with 137 shots, killing both of them.

  7. You're not following the sequence of events. One of the first calls LBJ made from AF1 was to Bundy in the White House Situation Room. This coincides with information coming from the SR that the lone nut was in custody. Bundy allegedly admitted to reporter Charles Roberts (iirc) that he told LBJ the lone nut was in custody.

    When Johnson got back to Washington he was met by Harriman and Ball at Andrews. Ball accompanied LBJ to the White House via helicopter discussing possible foreign involvement. LBJ was met at the White House by Bundy. Ten minutes later LBJ had his meeting with Harriman. After that LBJ met with is aide Cliff Carter. Carter then made a series of calls to Dallas DA Henry Wade, Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry, and Texas State Attorney General Waggoner Carr putting the kibosh on the blame-Castro scenario. LBJ and Abe Fortas made calls to Texas officials. Johnson was happy to go along with this since it let him off the hook. //Cliff Varnell

    ==============

    Bruce Adamson

    • In May of 1963, prior to the Assassination of President Kennedy, after he left Senate, Prescott Bush's banking firm Brown Brothers & Harriman gave Lee Harvey Oswald's closest friend, George de Mohrenschildt a $300,000 line of credit, when de Mohrenschildt's credit "stunk" to high heaven. (approx 3 million $ dollars in todays monies)
    • ####################################

    =======

    these skull & bones droids are not the ones your looking for .... SAVE ME OBI WAN TREJOBE !!!

  8. FBI’s “Suicide Letter” to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Dangers of Unchecked Surveillance
    ====================================================================
    Global Research, November 13, 2014

    The New York Times has published an unredacted version of the famous “suicide letter” from the FBI to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The letter, recently discovered by historian and professor Beverly Gage, is a disturbing document. But it’s also something that everyone in the United States should read, because it demonstrates exactly what lengths the intelligence community is willing to go to—and what happens when they take the fruits of the surveillance they’ve done and unleash it on a target.

    The anonymous letter was the result of the FBI’s comprehensive surveillance and harassment strategy against Dr. King, which included bugging his hotel rooms, photographic surveillance, and physical observation of King’s movements by FBI agents. The agency also attempted to break up his marriage by sending selectively edited “personal moments he shared with friends and women” to his wife.

    Portions of the letter had been previously redacted. One of these portions contains a claim that the letter was written by another African-American: “King, look into your heart. You know you are a complete fraud and a great liability to all us Negroes.” It goes on to say “We will now have to depend on our older leaders like Wilkins, a man of character and thank God we have others like him. But you are done.” This line is key, because part of the FBI’s strategy was to try to fracture movements and pit leaders against one another.

    The entire letter could have been taken from a page of GCHQ’s Joint Threat Research and Intelligence Group (JTRIG)—though perhaps as an email or series of tweets. The British spying agency GCHQ is one of the NSA’s closest partners. The mission of JTRIG, a unit within GCHQ, is to “destroy, deny, degrade [and] disrupt enemies by discrediting them.” And there’s little reason to believe the NSA and FBI aren’t using such tactics.

    The implications of these types of strategies in the digital age are chilling. Imagine Facebook chats, porn viewing history, emails, and more made public to discredit a leader who threatens the status quo, or used to blackmail a reluctant target into becoming an FBI informant. These are not far-fetched ideas. They are the reality of what happens when the surveillance state is allowed to grow out of control, and the full King letter, as well as current intelligence community practices illustrate that reality richly.

    mlkletters-1.jpg
    The newly unredacted portions shed light on the government’s sordid scheme to harass and discredit Dr. King. One paragraph states:

    No person can overcome the facts, no even a fraud like yourself. Lend your sexually psychotic ear to the enclosure. You will find yourself and in all your dirt, filth, evil and moronic talk exposed on the record for all time. . . . Listen to yourself, you filthy, abnormal animal. You are on the record.

    And of course, the letter ends with an ominous threat:

    King, there is only one thing left for you to do. You know what it is. You have just 34 days in which to do it (this exact number has been selected for a specific reason, it has definite practical significance). You are done. There is but one way out for you. You better take it before your filthy, abnormal fraudulent self is bared to the nation.

    There’s a lesson to learn here: history must play a central role in the debate around spying today. As Professor Gage states:

    Should intelligence agencies be able to sweep our email, read our texts, track our phone calls, locate us by GPS? Much of the conversation swirls around the possibility that agencies like the N.S.A. or the F.B.I. will use such information not to serve national security but to carry out personal and political vendettas. King’s experience reminds us that these are far from idle fears, conjured in the fevered minds of civil libertarians. They are based in the hard facts of history.

    Copyright Electronic Frontier Foundation 2014 posted in FAIR USE

    #################
    #################
    ***************************

    COINTELPRO Revisited:
    Spying & Disruption By Brian Glick

    ==================================================================================

    Internet Activists across the country report increasing government harassment and disruption of their work: -In the Southwest, paid informers infiltrate the church services, Bible classes and support networks of clergy and lay workers giving sanctuary to refugees from El Salvador and Guatamala. -In Alabama, elderly Black people attempting for the first time to exercise their right to vote are interrogated by FBI agents and hauled before federal grand juries hundreds of miles from their homes. -In New England, a former CIA case officer cites examples from his own past work to warn college students of efforts by undercover operatives to misdirect and discredit protests against South African and US racism. -In the San Francisco Bay Area, activists planning anti-nuclear civil disobedience learn that their meetings have been infiltrated by the US Navy. -In Detroit, Seattle, and Philadelphia, in Cambridge, MA, Berkeley,CA., Phoenix, AR., and Washington, DC., churches and organizations opposing US policies in Central America report obviously political break-ins in which important papers are stolen or damaged, while money and valuables are left untouched. License plates on a car spotted fleeing one such office have been traced to the US National Security Agency. -In Puerto Rico, Texas and Massachusetts, labor leaders, community organizers, writers and editors who advocate Puerto Rican independence are branded by the FBI as "terrorists," brutally rounded-up in the middle of the night, held incommunicado for days and then jailed under new preventive detention laws. -The FBI puts the same "terrorist" label on opponents of US intervention in El Salvador, but refuses to investigate the possibility of a political conspiracy behind nation-wide bombings of abortion clinics. -Throughout the country, people attempting to see Nicaragua for themselves find their trips disrupted, their private papers confiscated, and their homes and offices plagued by FBI agents who demand detailed personal and political information. These kinds of government tactics violate our fundamental constitutional rights. They make it enormously difficult to sustain grass-roots organizing. They create an atmosphere of fear and distrust which undermines any effort to challenge official policy. Similar measures were used in the 1960s as part of a secret FBI program known as "COINTELPRO." COINTELPRO was later exposed and officially ended. But the evidence shows that it actually persisted and that clandestine operations to discredit and disrupt opposition movements have become an institutional feature of national and local government in the US. This pamphlet is designed to help current and future activists learn from the history of COINTELPRO, so that our movements can better withstand such attack. The first section gives a brief overview of what we know the FBI did in the 60s. It explains why we can expect similar government intervention in the 80s and beyond, and offers general guidelines for effective response. The main body of the pamphlet describes the specific methods which have previously been used to undermine domestic dissent and suggests steps we can take to limit or deflect their impact. A final chapter explores ways to mobilize broad public protest against this kind of repression. Further readings and groups that can help are listed in back. The pamphlet's historical analysis is based on confidential internal documents prepared by the FBI and police during the 60s. It also draws on the post-60s confessions of disaffected government agents, and on the testimony of public officials before Congress and the courts. Though the information from these sources is incomplete, and much of what was done remains secret, we now know enough to draw useful lessons for future organizing. The suggestions included in the pamphlet are based on the author's 20 years experience as an activist and lawyer, and on talks with long-time organizers in a broad range of movements. They are meant to provide starting points for discussion, so we can get ready before the pressure intensifies. Most are a matter of common sense once the methodology of covert action is understood. Please take these issues seriously. Discuss the recommendations with other activists. Adapt them to the conditions you face. Point out problems and suggest other approaches. It is important that we begin now to protect our movements and ourselves. A HISTORY TO LEARN FROM: WHAT WAS COINTELPRO? "COINTELPRO" was the FBI's secret program to undermine the popular upsurge which swept the country during the 1960s. Though the name stands for "Counterintelligence Program," the targets were not enemy spies. The FBI set out to eliminate "radical" political opposition inside the US. When traditional modes of repression (exposure, blatant harassment, and prosecution for political crimes) failed to counter the growing insurgency, and even helped to fuel it, the Bureau took the law into its own hands and secretly used fraud and force to sabotage constitutionally- protected political activity. Its methods ranged far beyond surveillance, and amounted to a domestic version of the covert action for which the CIA has become infamous throughout the world. HOW DO WE KNOW ABOUT IT? COINTELPRO was discovered in March, 1971, when secret files were removed from an FBI office and released to news media. Freedom of Information requests, lawsuits, and former agents' public confessions deepened the exposure until a major scandal loomed. To control the damage and re-establish government legitimacy in the wake of Vietnam and Watergate, Congress and the courts compelled the FBI to reveal part of what it had done and to promise it would not do it again. Much of what has been learned, and copies of some of the actual documents, can be found in the readings listed at the back of this pamphlet. HOW DID IT WORK? The FBI secretly instructed its field offices to propose schemes to "misdirect, discredit, disrupt and otherwise neutralize "specific individuals and groups. Close coordination with local police and prosecutors was encouraged. Final authority rested with top FBI officials in Washington, who demanded assurance that "there is no possibility of embarrassment to the Bureau." More than 2000 individual actions were officially approved. The documents reveal three types of methods: 1. Infiltration: Agents and informers did not merely spy on political activists. Their main function was to discredit and disrupt. Various means to this end are analyzed below. 2. Other forms of deception: The FBI and police also waged psychological warfare from the outside--through bogus publications, forged correspondence, anonymous letters and telephone calls, and similar forms of deceit. 3. Harassment, intimidation and violence: Eviction, job loss, break-ins, vandalism, grand jury subpoenas, false arrests, frame- ups, and physical violence were threatened, instigated or directly employed, in an effort to frighten activists and disrupt their movements. Government agents either concealed their involvement or fabricated a legal pretext. In the case of the Black and Native American movements, these assaults--including outright political assassinations--were so extensive and vicious that they amounted to terrorism on the part of the government. WHO WERE THE MAIN TARGETS? The most intense operations were directed against the Black movement, particularly the Black Panther Party. This resulted from FBI and police racism, the Black community's lack of material resources for fighting back, and the tendency of the media--and whites in general--to ignore or tolerate attacks on Black groups. It also reflected government and corporate fear of the Black movement because of its militance, its broad domestic base and international support, and its historic role in galvanizing the entire Sixties' upsurge. Many other activists who organized against US intervention abroad or for racial, gender or class justice at home also came under covert attack. The targets were in no way limited to those who used physical force or took up arms. Martin Luther King, David Dellinger, Phillip Berrigan and other leading pacifists were high on the list, as were projects directly protected by the Bill of Rights, such as alternative newspapers. The Black Panthers came under attack at a time when their work featured free food and health care and community control of schools and police, and when they carried guns only for deterrent and symbolic purposes. It was the terrorism of the FBI and police that eventually provoked the Panthers to retaliate with the armed actions that later were cited to justify their repression. Ultimately the FBI disclosed six official counterintelligence programs: Communist Party-USA (1956-71); "Groups Seeking Independence for Puerto Rico" (1960-71); Socialist Workers Party (1961-71); "White Hate Groups" (1964-71); "Black Nationalist Hate Groups" (1967-71); and "New Left" (1968- 71).The latter operations hit anti-war, student, and feminist groups. The "Black Nationalist" caption actually encompassed Martin Luther King and most of the civil rights and Black Power movements. The "white hate" program functioned mainly as a cover for covert aid to the KKK and similar right-wing vigilantes, who were given funds and information, so long as they confined their attacks to COINTELPRO targets. FBI documents also reveal covert action against Native American, Chicano, Phillipine, Arab- American, and other activists, apparently without formal Counterintelligence programs. WHAT EFFECT DID IT HAVE? COINTELPRO's impact is difficult to fully assess since we do not know the entire scope of what was done (especially against such pivotal targets as Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, SNCC and SDS),and we have no generally accepted analysis of the Sixties. It is clear,however, that: -COINTELPRO distorted the public's view of radical groups in a way that helped to isolate them and to legitimize open political repression. -It reinforced and exacerbated the weaknesses of these groups, making it very difficult for the inexperienced activists of the Sixties to learn from their mistakes and build solid, durable organizations. -Its violent assaults and covert manipulation eventually helped to push some of the most committed and experienced groups to withdraw from grass-roots organizing and to substitute armed actions which isolated them and deprived the movement of much of its leadership. -COINTELPRO often convinced its victims to blame themselves and each other for the problems it created, leaving a legacy of cynicism and despair that persists today. -By operating covertly, the FBI and police were able to severely weaken domestic political opposition without shaking the conviction of most US people that they live in a democracy, with free speech and the rule of law. THE DANGER WE FACE: DID COINTELPRO EVER REALLY END? Public exposure of COINTELPRO in the early 1970s elicited a flurry of reform. Congress, the courts and the mass media condemned government "intelligence abuses." Municipal police forces officially disbanded their red squads. A new Attorney General notified past victims of COINTELPRO and issued Guidelines to limit future operations. Top FBI officials were indicted (albeit for relatively minor offenses), two were convicted, and several others retired or resigned. J. Edgar Hoover--the egomaniacal, crudely racist and sexist founder of the FBI--died, and a well-known federal judge, William Webster, eventually was appointed to clean house and build a "new FBI." Behind this public hoopla, however, was little real improvement in government treatment of radical activists. Domestic covert operations were briefly scaled down a bit, after the 60s' upsurge had largely subsided, due inpart to the success of COINTELPRO. But they did not stop. In April, 1971, soon after files had been taken from one of its offices, the FBI instructed its agents that "future COINTELPRO actions will be considered on a highly selective, individual basis with tight procedures to insure absolute security." The results are apparent in the record of the subsequent years: -A virtual war on the American Indian Movement, ranging from forgery of documents, infiltration of legal defense committees, diversion of funds, intimidation of witnesses and falsification of evidence, to the para-military invasion of the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota, and the murder of Anna Mae Aquash, Joe Stuntz and countless others; -Sabotage of efforts to organize protest demonstrations at the 1972 Republican and Democratic Party conventions. The attempted assassination of San Diego Univ. Prof. Peter Bohmer, by a "Secret Army Organization" of ex-Minutemen formed, subsidized, armed, and protected by the FBI, was a part of these operations; -Concealment of the fact that the witness whose testimony led to the 1972 robbery-murder conviction of Black Panther leader Elmer "Geronimo" Pratt was a paid informer who had worked in the BPP under the direction of the FBI and the Los Angeles Police Department; -Infiltration and disruption of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, and prosecution of its national leaders on false charges (Florida, 1971-74); -Formation and operation of sham political groups such as "Red Star Cadre," in Tampa, Fla., and the New Orleans "Red Collective" (1972-76); -Mass interrogation of lesbian and feminist activists, threats of subpoenas, jailing of those who refused to cooperate, and disruption of women's health collectives and other projects (Lexington, KY., Hartford and New Haven,Conn., 1975); -Harassment of the Hispanic Commission of the Episcopal Church and numerous other Puerto Rican and Chicano religious activists and community organizers (Chicago, New York City, Puerto Rico, Colorado and New Mexico, 1977); -Entrapment and frame-up of militant union leaders (NASCO shipyards,San Diego, 1979); and -Complicity in the murder of socialist labor and community organizers (Greensboro, N.C., 1980). IS IT A THREAT TODAY? All this, and maybe more, occured in an era of reform. The use of similar measures in today's very different times cannot be itemized in such detail, since most are still secret. The gravity of the current danger is evident, however, from the major steps recently taken to legitimize and strengthen political repression, and from the many incidents which are coming to light despite stepped-up security. The ground-work for public acceptance of repression has been laid by President Reagan's speeches reviving the old red-scare tale of worldwide "communist take-overs" and adding a new bogeyman in the form of domestic and international "terrorism." The President has taken advantage of the resulting political climate to denounce the Bill of Rights and to red-bait critics of US intervention in Central America. He has pardoned the FBI officials convicted of COINTELPRO crimes, praised their work, and spoken favorably of the political witchhunts he took part in during the 1950s. For the first time in US history, government infiltration to "influence" domestic political activity has received official sanction. On the pretext of meeting the supposed terrorist threat, Presidential Executive Order 12333 (Dec. 4, 1981) extends such authority not only to the FBI, but also to the military and, in some cases, the CIA. History shows that these agencies treat legal restriction as a kind of speed limit which they feel free to exceed, but only by a certain margin. Thus, Reagan's Executive Order not only encourages reliance on methods once deemed abhorent, it also implicitly licenses even greater, more damaging intrusion. Government capacity to make effective use of such measures has also been substantially enhanced in recent years: -Judge Webster's highly-touted reforms have served mainly to modernize the FBI and make it more dangerous. Instead of the back- biting competition which impeded coordination of domestic counter- insurgency in the 60s, the Bureau now promotes inter-agency cooperation. As an equal opportunity employer, it can use Third World and female agents to penetrate political targets more thoroughly than before. By cultivating a low-visibility corporate image and discreetly avoiding public attack on prominent liberals, the FBI has regained respectability and won over a number of former critics. -Municipal police forces have similarly revamped their image while upgrading their repressive capabilities. The police "red squads" that infiltrated and harassed the 60s' movements have been revived under other names and augmented by para-military SWAT teams and tactical squads as well as highly-politicized community relations and "beat rep" programs, in which Black, Hispanic and female officers are often conspicuous. Local operations are linked by FBI-led regional anti-terrorist task forces and the national Law Enforcement Intelligence Unit (LEIU). -Increased military and CIA involvement has added political sophistication and advanced technology. Army Special Forces and other elite military units are now trained and equipped for counter-insurgency (known as"low-intensity warfare"). Their manuals teach the essential methodology of COINTELPRO, stressing earlier intervention to neutralize potential opposition before it can take hold. The CIA's expanded role is especially ominous. In the 60s, while legally banned from "internal security functions," the CIA managed to infiltrate the Black, student and antiwar movements. It also made secret use of university professors, journalists, labor leaders, publishing houses, cultural organizations and philanthropic fronts to mold US public opinion. But it apparently felt compelled to hold back--within the country--from the kinds of systematic political destabilization, torture, and murder which have become the hallmark of its operations abroad. Now, the full force of the CIA has been unleashed at home. -All of the agencies involved in covert operations have had time to learn from the 60s and to institute the "tight procedures to insure absolute security" that FBI officials demanded after COINTELPRO was exposed in 1971. Restoration of secrecy has been made easier by the Administration's steps to shield covert operations from public scrutiny. Under Reagan, key FBI and CIA files have been re-classified "top secret." The Freedom of Information Act has been quietly narrowed through administrative reinterpretation. Funds for covert operations are allocated behind closed doors and hidden in CIA and defense appropriations. Government employees now face censorship even after they retire, and new laws make it a federal crime to publicize information which might tend to reveal an agent's identity. Despite this stepped-up security, incidents frighteningly reminiscent of 60s' COINTELPRO have begun to emerge. The extent of the infiltration, burglary and other clandestine government intervention that has already come to light is alarming. Since the vast majority of such operations stay hidden until after the damage has been done, those we are now aware of undoubtedly represent only the tip of the iceberg. Far more is sure to lie beneath the surface. Considering the current political climate, the legalization of COINTELPRO, the rehabilitation of the FBI and police, and the expanded role of the CIA and military, the recent revelations leave us only one safe assumption: that extensive government covert operations are already underway to neutralize today's opposition movements before they can reach the massive level of the 60s. WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT IT? Domestic covert action has now persisted in some form through at least the last seven presidencies. It grew from one program to six under Kennedy and Johnson. It flourished when an outspoken liberal, Ramsey Clark, was Attorney General (1966-68). It is an integral part of the established mode of operation of powerful, entrenched agencies on every level of government. It enables policy-makers to maintain social control without detracting from their own public image or the perceived legitimacy oftheir method of government. It has become as institutional in the US as the race, gender, class and imperial domination it serves to uphold. Under these circumstances, there is no reason to think we can eliminate COINTELPRO simply by electing better public officials. Only through sustained public education and mobilization, by a broad coalition of political, religious and civil libertarian activists, can we expect to limit it effectively. In most parts of the country, however, and certainly on a national level, we lack the political power to end covert government intervention, or even to curb it substantially. We therefore need to learn how to cope more effectively with this form of repression. The next part of this pamphlet examines the methods that were used to discredit and disrupt the movements ofthe 60s and suggests steps we can take to deflect or reduce their impact in the 80s. A CHECK-LIST OF ESSENTIAL PRECAUTIONS: -Check out the authenticity of any disturbing letter, rumor, phone call or other communication before acting on it. -Document incidents which appear to reflect covert intervention, and report them to the Movement Support Network Hotline: 212/477- 5562. -Deal openly and honestly with the differences within our movements (race, gender, class, age, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, personality, experience, physical and intellectual capacities, etc.) before the FBI and police exploit them to tear us apart. -Don't rush to expose a suspected agent. Instead, directly criticize what the suspect says and does. Intra-movement witchhunts only help the government create distrust and paranoia. -Support whoever comes under government attack. Don't be put off by political slander, such as recent attempts to smear radical activists as "terrorists." Organize public opposition to FBI investigations, grand juries, show trials and other forms of political harassment. -Above all, do not let them divert us from our main work. Our most powerful weapon against political repression is effective organizing around the needs and issues which directly affect people's lives. WHAT THEY DO & HOW WE CAN PROTECT OURSELVES: INFILTRATION BY AGENTS OR INFORMERS Agents are law enforcement officers disguised as activists. Informers are non-agents who provide information to a law enforcement or intelligence agency. They may be recruited from within a group or sent in by an agency, or they may be disaffected former members or supporters. Infiltrators are agents or informers who work in a group or community under the direction of a law enforcement or intelligence agency. During the 60s the FBI had to rely on informers (who are less well trained and harder to control) because it had very few black, Hispanic or female agents, and its strict dress and grooming code left white male agents unable to look like activists. As a modern equal opportunity employer, today's FBI has fewer such limitations. What They Do: Some informers and infiltrators quietly provide information while keeping a low profile and doing whatever is expected of group members. Others attempt to discredit a target and disrupt its work. They may spread false rumors and make unfounded accusations to provoke or exacerbate tensions and splits. They may urge divisive proposals, sabotage important activities and resources, or operate as "provocateurs" who lead zealous activists into unnecessary danger. In a demonstration or other confrontation with police, such an agent may break discipline and call for actions which would undermine unity and detract from tactical focus. Infiltration As a Source of Distrust and Paranoia: While individual agents and informers aid the government in a variety of specific ways, the general use of infiltrators serves a very special and powerful strategic function. The fear that a group may be infiltrated often intimidates people from getting more involved. It can give rise to a paranoia which makes it difficult to build the mutual trust which political groups depend on. This use of infiltrators, enhanced by covertly-initiated rumors that exaggerate the extent to which a particular movement or group has been penetrated, is recommended by the manuals used to teach counter-insurgency in the U.S. and Western Europe. Covert Manipulation to Make A Legitimate Activist Appear to be an Agent: An actual agent will often point the finger at a genuine, non-collaborating and highly-valued group member, claiming that he or she is the infiltrator. The same effect, known as a "snitch jacket," has been achieved by planting forged documents which appear to be communications between an activist and the FBI, or by releasing for no other apparent reason one of a group of activists who were arrested together. Another method used under COINTELPRO was to arrange for some activists, arrested under one pretext or another, to hear over the police radio a phony broadcast which appeared to set up a secret meeting between the police and someone from their group. GUIDELINES FOR COPING WITH INFILTRATION: l. Establish a process through which anyone who suspects an informer (or other form of covert intervention) can express his or her fears without scaring others. Experienced people assigned this responsibility can do a great deal to help a group maintain its morale and focus while, at the same time, centrally consolidating information and deciding how to use it. This plan works best when accompanied by group discussion of the danger of paranoia, so that everyone understands and follows the established procedure. 2. To reduce vulnerability to paranoia and "snitch jackets", and to minimize diversion from your main work, it generally is best if you do not attempt to expose a suspected agent or informer unless you are certain of their role. (For instance, they surface to make an arrest, testify as a government witness or in some other way admit their identity). Under most circumstances, an attempted exposure will do more harm than the infiltrator's continued presence. This is especially true if you can discreetly limit the suspect's access to funds, financial records, mailing lists, discussions of possible lawviolations, meetings that plan criminal defense strategy, and similar opportunities. 3. Deal openly and directly with the form and content of what anyone says and does, whether the person is a suspected agent, has emotional problems, or is simply a sincere, but naive or confused person new to the work. 4. Once an agent or informer has been definitely identified, alert other groups and communities by means of photographs, a description of their methods of operation, etc. In the 60s, some agents managed even after their exposure in one community to move on and repeat their performance in a numberof others. 5. Be careful to avoid pushing a new or hesitant member to take risks beyond what that person is ready to handle, particularly in situations which could result in arrest and prosecution. People in this position have proved vulnerable to recruitment as informers. OTHER FORMS OF DECEPTION Bogus leaflets, pamphlets, etc.: COINTELPRO documents show that the FBI routinely put out phony leaflets, posters, pamphlets, etc. to discredit its targets. In one instance, agents revised a children's coloring book which the Black Panther Party had rejected as anti-white and gratuitously violent, and then distributed a cruder version to backers of the Party's program of free breakfasts for children, telling them the book was being used in the program. False media stories: The FBI's documents expose collusion by reporters and news media that knowingly published false and distorted material prepared by Bureau agents. One such story had Jean Seberg, a noticeably pregnant white film star active in anti-racist causes, carrying the child of a prominent Black leader. Seberg's white husband, the actual father, has sued the FBI as responsible for her resulting still-birth, breakdown, and suicide. Forged correspondence: Former employees have confirmed that the FBI and CIA have the capacity to produce "state of the art" forgery. The U.S. Senate's investigation of COINTELPRO uncovered a series of letters forged in the name of an intermediary between the Black Panther Party's national office and Panther leader Eldridge Cleaver, in exile in Algeria. The letters proved instrumental in inflaming intra-party rivalries that erupted into the bitter public split that shattered the Party in the winter of 1971. Anonymous letters and telephone calls: During the 60s, activists received a steady flow of anonymous letters and phone calls which turn out to have been from government agents. Some threatened violence. Others promoted racial divisions and fears. Still others charged various leaders with collaboration, corruption, sexual affairs with other activists' mates, etc. As in the Seberg incident, inter-racial sex was a persistent theme. The husband of one white woman involved in a bi-racial civil rights group received the following anonymous letter authored by the FBI: --Look, man, I guess your old lady doesn't get enough at home or she wouldn't be shucking and jiving with our Black Men in ACTION, you dig? Like all she wants to integrate is the bedroom and us Black Sisters ain't gonna take no second best from our men. So lay it on her man--or get her the hell off [name]. A Soul Sister False rumors: Using infiltrators, journalists and other contacts, the Bureau circulated slanderous, disruptive rumors through political movements and the communities in which they worked. Other misinformation: A favorite FBI tactic uncovered by Senate investigators was to misinform people that a political meeting or event had been cancelled. Another was to offer non- existent housing at phony addresses, stranding out-of-town conference attendees who naturally blamed those who had organized the event. FBI agents also arranged to transport demonstrators in the name of a bogus bus company which pulled out at the last minute. Such "dirty tricks" interfered with political events and turned activists against each other. SEPARATE BOX: Fronts for the FBI: COINTELPRO documents reveal that a number of Sixties' political groups and projects were actually set up and operated by the FBI. One, "Grupo pro-Uso Voto," was used to disrupt the fragile unity developing in l967 among groups seeking Puerto Rico's independence from the US. The genuine proponents of independence had joined together to boycott a US-administered referendum on the island's status. They argued that voting under conditions of colonial domination could serve only to legitimize US rule, and that no vote could be fair while the US controlled the island's economy, media, schools, and police. The bogus group, pretending to support independence, broke ranks and urged independistas to take advantage of the opportunity to register their opinion at the polls. Since FBI front groups are basically a means for penetrating and disrupting political movements, it is best to deal with them on the basis of the Guidelines for Coping with Infiltration (below). Confront what a suspect group says and does, but avoid public accusations unless you have definite proof. If you do have such proof, share it with everyone affected. GUIDELINES FOR COPING WITH OTHER FORMS OF DECEPTION: 1. Don't add unnecessarily to the pool of information that government agents use to divide political groups and turn activists against each other. They thrive on gossip about personal tensions, rivalries and disagreements. The more these are aired in public, or via a telephone which can be tapped or mail which can be opened, the easier it is to exploit a groups' problems and subvert its work. (Note that the CIA has the technology to read mail without opening it, and that the telephone network can now be programmed to record any conversation in which specified political terms are used.) 2. The best way to reduce tensions and hostilities, and the urge to gossip about them, is to make time for open, honest discussion and resolution of "personal" as well as "political" issues. 3. Don't accept everything you hear or read. Check with the supposed source of the information before you act on it. Personal communication among estranged activists, however difficult or painful, could have countered many FBI operations which proved effective in the Sixties. 4. When you hear a negative, confusing or potentially harmful rumor, don't pass it on. Instead, discuss it with a trusted friend or with the people in your group who are responsibile for dealing with covert intervention. 5. Verify and double-check all arrangements for housing, transportation, meeting rooms, and so forth. 6. When you discover bogus materials, false media stories, etc., publicly disavow them and expose the true source, insofar as you can. HARASSMENT, INTIMIDATION & VIOLENCE: Pressure through employers, landlords, etc.: COINTELPRO documents reveal frequent overt contacts and covert manipulation (false rumors, anonymous letters and telephone calls) to generate pressure on activists from their parents, landlords, employers, college administrators, church superiors, welfare agencies, credit bureaus, licensing authorities, and the like. Agents' reports indicate that such intervention denied Sixties' activists any number of foundation grants and public speaking engagements. It also cost underground newspapers most of their advertising revenues, when major record companies were persuaded to take their business elsewhere. It may underlie recent steps by insurance companies to cancel policies held by churches giving sanctuary to refugees from El Salvador and Guatamala. Burglary: Former operatives have confessed to thousands of "black bag jobs" in which FBI agents broke into movement offices to steal, copy or destroy valuable papers, wreck equipment, or plant drugs. Vandalism: FBI infiltrators have admitted countless other acts of vandalism, including the fire which destroyed the Watts Writers Workshop's multi-million dollar ghetto cultural center in 1973. Late 60s' FBI and police raids laid waste to movement offices across the country, destroying precious printing presses, typewriters, layout equipment, research files, financial records, and mailing lists. Other direct interference: To further disrupt opposition movements, frighten activists, and get people upset with each other, the FBI tampered with organizational mail, so it came late or not at all. It also resorted to bomb threats and similar "dirty tricks". Conspicuous surveillance: The FBI and police blatantly watch activists' homes, follow their cars, tap phones, open mail and attend political events. The object is not to collect information (which is done surreptiously), but to harass and intimidate. Attempted interviews: Agents have extracted damaging information from activists who don't know they have a legal right to refuse to talk, or who think they can outsmart the FBI. COINTELPRO directives recommend attempts at interviews throughout political movements to "enhance the paranoia endemic in these circles" and "get the point across that there is an FBI agent behind every mailbox." Grand juries: Unlike the FBI, the Grand Jury has legal power to make you answer its questions. Those who refuse, and are required to accept immunity from use of their testimony against them, can be jailed for contempt of court. (Such "use immunity" enables prosecutors to get around the constitutional protection against self-incrimination.) The FBI and the US Dept. of Justice have manipulated this process to turn the grand jury into an instrument of political repression. Frustrated by jurors' consistent refusal to convict activists of overtly political crimes, they convened over 100 grand juries between l970 and 1973 and subpoenaed more than 1000 activists from the Black, Puerto Rican, student, women's and anti-war movements. Supposed pursuit of fugitives and "terrorists" was the usual pretext. Many targets were so terrified that they dropped out of political activity. Others were jailed without any criminal charge or trial, in what amounts to a U.S. version of the political internment procedures employed in South Africa and Northern Ireland. False arrest and prosecution: COINTELPRO directives cite the Philadelphia FBI's success in having local militants "arrested on every possible charge until they could no longer make bail" and "spent most of the summer in jail." Though the bulk of the activists arrested in this manner were eventually released, some were convicted of serious charges on the basis of perjured testimony by FBI agents, or by co-workers who the Bureau had threatened or bribed. The object was not only to remove experienced organizers from their communities and to divert scarce resources into legal defense, but even more to discredit entire movements by portraying their leaders as vicious criminals. Two victims of such frame-ups, Native American activist Leonard Peltier and 1960s' Black Panther official Elmer "Geronimo" Pratt, have finally gained court hearings on new trial motions. Others currently struggling to re-open COINTELPRO convictions include Richard Marshall of the American Indian Movement and jailed Black Panthers Herman Bell, Anthony Bottom, Albert Washington (the "NY3"), and Richard "Dhoruba" Moore. Intimidation: One COINTELPRO communique urged that "The Negro youths and moderates must be made to understand that if they succumb to revolutionary teaching, they will be dead revolutionaries." Others reported use of threats (anonymous and overt) to terrorize activists, driving some to abandon promising projects and others to leave the country. During raids on movement offices, the FBI and police routinely roughed up activists and threatened further violence. In August, 1970, they forced the entire staff of the Black Panther office in Philadelphia to march through the streets naked. Instigation of violence: The FBI's infiltrators and anonymous notes and phone calls incited violent rivals to attack Malcolm X, the Black Panthers, and other targets. Bureau records also reveal maneuvers to get the Mafia to move against such activists as black comedian Dick Gregory. A COINTELPRO memo reported that "shootings, beatings and a high degree of unrest continue to prevail in the ghetto area of southeast San Diego...it is felt that a substantial amount of the unrest is directly attributable to this program." Covert aid to right-wing vigilantes: In the guise of a COINTELPRO against "white hate groups," the FBI subsidized, armed, directed and protected the Klu Klux Klan and other right-wing groups, including a "Secret Army Organization" of California ex-Minutemen who beat up Chicano activists, tore apart the offices of the San Diego Street Journal and the Movement for a Democratic Military, and tried to kill a prominent anti-war organizer. Puerto Rican activists suffered similar terrorist assaults from anti-Castro Cuban groups organized and funded by the CIA. Defectors from a band of Chicago-based vigilantes known as the "Legion of Justice" disclosed that the funds and arms they used to destroy book stores, film studios and other centers of opposition had secretly been supplied by members of the Army's 113th Military Intelligence Group. Assassination: The FBI and police were implicated directly in murders of Black and Native American leaders. In Chicago, police assassinated Black Panthers Fred Hampton and Mark Clark, using a floor plan supplied by an FBI informer who apparently also had drugged Hampton's food to make him unconscious during the raid. FBI records show that this accomplice received a substantial bonus for his services. Despite an elaborate cover-up, a blue-ribbon commision and a U.S Court of Appeals found the deaths to be the result not of a shootout, as claimed by police, but of a carefully orchestrated, Vietnam-style "search and destroy mission". GUIDELINES FOR COPING WITH HARASSMENT, INTIMIDATION & VIOLENCE: 1. Establish security procedures appropriate to your group's level of activity and discuss them thoroughly with everyone involved. Control access to keys, files, letterhead, funds, financial records, mailing lists, etc. Keep duplicates of valuable documents. Safeguard address books, and do not carry them when arrest is likely. 2. Careful records of break-ins, thefts, bomb threats, raids, arrests, strange phone noises (not always taps or bugs), harassment, etc. will help you to discern patterns and to prepare reports and testimony. 3. Don't talk to the FBI. Don't let them in without a warrant. Tell others that they came. Have a lawyer demand an explanation and instruct them to leave you alone. 4. If an activist does talk, or makes some other honest error, explain the harm that could result. But do not attempt to ostracize a sincere person who slips up. Isolation only weakens a person's ability to resist. It can drive someone out of the movement and even into the arms of the police. 5. If the FBI starts to harass people in your area, alert everyone to refuse to cooperate (see box). Call the Movement Support Network's Hotline:(2l2) 614-6422. Set up community meetings with speakers who have resisted similar harassment elsewhere. Get literature, films, etc. through the organizations listed in the back of this pamphlet. Consider "Wanted" posters with photos of the agents, or guerilla theater which follows them through the city streets. 6. Make a major public issue of crude harassment, such as tampering with your mail. Contact your congressperson. Call the media. Demonstrate at your local FBI office. Turn the attack into an opportunity for explaining how covert intervention threatens fundamental human rights. 7. Many people find it easier to tell an FBI agent to contact their lawyer than to refuse to talk. Once a lawyer is involved, the Bureau generally pulls back, since it has lost its power to intimidate. If possible, make arrangements with a local lawyer and let everyone know that agents who visit them can be referred to that lawyer. If your group engages in civil disobedience or finds itself under intense police pressure, start a bail fund, train some members to deal with the legal system, and develop an ongoing relationship with a sympathetic local lawyer. 8. Organizations listed in the back of this pamphlet can also help resist grand jury harassment. Community education is important, along with legal, financial, child care, and other support for those who protect a movement by refusing to divulge information about it. If a respected activist is subpoenaed for obviously political reasons, consider trying to arrange for sanctuary in a local church or synagogue. 9. While the FBI and police are entirely capable of fabricating criminal charges, any law violations make it easier for them to set you up. The point is not to get so up-tight and paranoid that you can't function, but to make a realistic assessment based on your visibility and other pertinent circumstances. 10. Upon hearing of Fred Hampton's murder, the Black Panthers in Los Angeles fortified their offices and organized a communications network to alert the community and news media in the event of a raid. When the police did attempt an armed assault four days later, the Panthers were able to hold off the attack until a large community and media presence enabled them to leave the office without casualties. Similar preparation can help other groups that have reason to expect right-wing or police assaults. 11. Make sure your group designates and prepares other members to step in if leaders are jailed or otherwise incapacitated. The more each particpant is able to think for herself or himself and take responsibility, the better will be the group's capacity to cope with crises. ORGANIZING PUBLIC OPPOSITION TO COVERT INTERVENTION A BROAD-BASED STRATEGY: No one existing political organization or movement is strong enough, by itself, to mobilize the public pressure required to signficantly limit the ability of the FBI, CIA and police to subvert our work. Some activists oppose covert intervention because it violates fundamental constitutional rights. Others stress how it weakens and interferes with the work of a particular group or movement. Still others see covert action as part of a political and economic system which is fundamentally flawed. Our only hope is to bring these diverse forces together in a single, powerful alliance. Such a broad coalition cannot hold together unless it operates with clearly-defined principles. The coalition as a whole will have to oppose covert intervention on certain basic grounds--such as the threat to democracy, civil liberties and social justice, leaving its members free to put forward other objections and analyses in their own names. Participants will need to refrain from insisting that only their views are "politically correct" and that everyone else has "sold out." Above all, we will have to resist the government's manuevers to divide us by moving against certain groups, while subtly suggesting that it will go easy on the others, if only they dissociate themselves from those under attack. This strategy is evident in the recent Executive Order and Guidelines, which single out for infiltration and disruption people who support liberation movements and governments that defy U.S. hegemony or who entertain the view that it may at times be necessary to break the law in order to effectuate social change. DIVERSE TACTICS: For maximum impact, local and national coalitions will need a multi-faceted approach which effectively combines a diversity of tactics, including: l. Investigative research to stay on top of, and document, just what the FBI, CIA and police are up to. 2. Public education through forums, rallies, radio and TV, literature, film, high school and college curricula, wallposters, guerilla theater, and whatever else proves interesting and effective. 3. Legislative lobbying against administration proposals to strengthen covert work, cut back public access to information, punish government "whistle-blowers", etc. Coalitions in some cities and states have won legislative restrictions on surveillance and covert action. The value of such victories will depend our ability to mobilize continuing, vigilant public pressure for effective enforcement. 4. Support for the victims of covert intervention can reduce somewhat the harm done by the FBI, CIA and police. Organizing on behalf of grand jury resisters, political prisoners, and defendants in political trials offers a natural forum for public education about domestic covert action. 5. Lawsuits may win financial compensation for some of the people harmed by covert intervention. Class action suits, which seek a court order (injunction) limiting surveillance and covert action in a particular city or judicial district, have proved a valuable source of information and publicity. They are enormously expensive, however, in terms of time and energy as well as money. Out-of-court settlements in some of these cases have given rise to bitter disputes which split coalitions apart, and any agreement is subject to reinterpretation or modification by increasingly conservative, administration-oriented federal judges. The US Court of Appeals in Chicago has ruled that the consent decree against the FBI there affects only operations based "solely on the political views of a group or an individual," for which the Bureau can conjure no pretext of a "genuine concern for law enforcement." 6. Direct action, in the form of citizens' arrests, mock trials, picketlines, and civil disobedience, has recently greeted CIA recruiters on a number of college campuses. Although the main focus has been on the Agency's international crimes, its domestic activities have also received attention. Similar actions might be organized to protest recruitment by the FBI and police, in conjunction with teach-ins and other education about domestic covertaction. Demonstrations against Reagan's attempts to bolster covert intervention, or against particular FBI, CIA or police operations, could also raise public consciousness and focus activists' outrage. PROSPECTS: Previous attempts to mobilize public opposition, especially on a local level, indicate that a broad coalition, employing a multi-faceted approach, may be able to impose some limits on the government's ability to discredit and disrupt our work. It is clear, however, that we currently lack the power to eliminate such intervention. While fighting hard to end domestic covert action, we need also to study the forms it takes and prepare ourselves to cope with it as effectively as we can. Above all, it is essential that we resist the temptation to so preoccupy ourselves with repression that we neglect our main work. Our ability to resist the government's attacks depends ultimately on the strength of our movements. So long as we continue to advocate and organize effectively, no manner of intervention can stop us.

    purpleball.gifFBI watch

  9. As for the RUMOR that the CIA was behind the attack on De Gaulle, you GRAB for it -- but it's only a RUMOR. ''Trejo

    (the case is sol-ved)

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++//

    Back in 1967, the CIA’s own Inspector General produced a 133-page internal report that implicated “every living CIA officer who has served as chief of the clandestine service—-Allen Dulles, Richard Bissell, Richard Helms, and Desmond FitzGerald—in conspiracies to commit murder,” writes investigative journalist Tim Weiner in his book “Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA”(Anchor Books).

    ===================================================================

    Source: Excerpts from “France/Algeria 1960s: L’état, c’est

    la CIA,” Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions

    since WWII, 1995.

    ================================================

    By William Blum, former U.S. State

    Department employee who resigned in 1967

    in opposition to the Vietnam war.

    =================================================

    On 22 April, 1961, four French generals

    in Algeria seized power in an at

    tempt to maintain the country’s union

    with France. The putsch [coup détat] which

    held out for only four days, was a direct confrontation

    with French President Charles de

    Gaulle, who had dramatically proclaimed a

    policy leading “not to an Algeria governed from

    France, but to an Algerian Algeria.”

    The next day, the leftist Italian newspaper,

    Il Paese, stated that “It is not by chance

    that some people in Paris are accusing the

    American secret service headed by Allen Dulles

    of having participated in the plot of the four

    ‘ultra’ generals.” Dulles expressed the opinion

    that “This particular myth was a Communist

    plant, pure and simple.”

    The Washington Star said some of the

    rumors were launched by “minor officials at

    the Elysee Palace” who gave reporters “to understand

    that the generals’ plot was backed by

    strongly anti-communist elements in the U.S.

    government and military services.”

    Whatever its origins, the story spread

    rapidly around the world, and the French Foreign Office

    refused to refute it. Le Monde asserted in a front-page editorial

    on 28 April that “the behavior of the U.S. during the

    recent crisis was not particularly skillful. It seems established

    that American agents more or less encouraged

    [Maurice] Challe [the leader of the putsch].”

    Reports from all sources agreed that if the CIA had

    been involved in the putsch, it was for two reasons:

    (1) the concern that if Algeria weas granted independence,

    “communists” would come to power, being those in the

    ranks of the National Liberation Front which had been

    fighting the French Army in Algeria for several years;

    (2) the hope that it would precipitate the downfall of de

    Gaulle, an end desired because he was a major stumbling

    block to U.S. aspirations concerning NATO. He

    refused to incorporate French troops into an integrated

    military command and he opposed exclusive U.S. control

    over NATO’s nuclear weapons.

    Washington Post columnist Marquis Childs said that

    the French were so shocked by the generals’ coup that they

    had to find a scapegoat. He also quoted “one of the highest

    officials of the French government” as saying: “when you

    have so many hundreds of agents in every part of the world,

    it is not to be wondered at that some of them should have

    got in touch with the generals in Algiers” (5 May).

    James Reston wrote in the New York Times that the

    CIA: “was involved in an embarrassing liaison with the

    anti-Gaullist officers who staged last week’s insurrection

    in Algiers ... [the Bay of Pigs and Algerian events have]

    increased the feeling in the White House that the CIA has

    gone beyond the bounds of an objective intelligence-gathering

    agency and has become the advocate of men and policies

    that have embarrassed the Administration” (29 April).

    In May 1961, L’Express, the widely-read French

    weekly, published what was perhaps the first detailed account

    of the affair. Their Algerian correspondent, Claude

    Krief, reported: “Both in Paris and Washington the facts

    are now known, though they will never be publicly admitted.

    In private, the highest French personalities make no

    secret of it. What they say is this: ‘The CIA played a direct

    part in the Algiers coup, and certainly weighed heavily on

    the decision taken by ex-general Challe to start his putsch.’”

    At a Washington luncheon in 1960, Jacques

    Soustelle, the former Governor-General of Algeria who had

    made public his disagreement with

    de Gaulle’s Algeria policy, met

    with CIA officials, including Richard

    Bissell, head of covert operations.

    According to Krief,

    Soustelle convinced CIA officials

    that Algeria would become,

    through de Gaulle’s blundering, “a

    Soviet base.” This lunch became

    something of a cause célèbre in the

    speculation concerning the CIA’s

    possible role.

    Krief also said that a clandestine

    meeting in Madrid on 12

    April, 1961, included “various foreign

    agents, including members of

    the CIA and the Algiers conspirators,

    who disclosed their plans to

    the CIA men.” The Americans were reported to have angrily

    complained that de Gaulle’s policy was “paralyzing

    NATO and rendering the defense of Europe impossible,”

    and assured the generals that if they and their followers

    succeeded, Washington would recognize the new Algerian

    government within 48 hours.

    Between 1958 and the mid-1960s, there were some 30 serious

    assassination attempts upon the life of Charles de Gaulle,

    in addition to any number of planned attempts which didn’t

    advance much beyond the planning stage. In at least one of

    the attempts, the CIA may have been a co-conspirator

    against the French president.

    ++++++++==========================

    This government rumor , oops I mean documents re assassination de Gaulle

    http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/document_conversions/89801/DOC_0000011788.pdf

    +++++++++++++
    BUT WAIT !!!!! DULLES has an opinion on the de Gaulle assassination attempt.

    ====

    The Generals' Plot Against DeGaulle
    The next day, the leftist Italian newspaper,


    Il
    Paese

    , stated that �It is not by chance

    that some people in Paris are accusing the

    American secret service headed by Allen Dulles

    of having participated in the plot of the four

    �ultra� generals.� Dulles expressed the opinion

    that �This particular myth was a Communist

    plant, pure and simple.�


    #######

    CASE IS SOL-VED !!!!!!!!!!

  10. (Gaal) Dulles himself was allied with the plotters to assassinate French President Charles de Gaulle. Ruby knew CIA asset involved in the assassination operation.of de Gaulle. Bannisters lawyer Gatlin was part of the de Gaulle plot. THE de Gaulle plot a CIA plot.

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    ))))))))))))))))))))

    Armstrong

    On March 11, 1959, Dallas FBI agent Charles Flynn wrote, "on the basis of preliminary contacts and information developed to date, I recommend the captioned individual (Jack Ruby) for informant development." Flynn further wrote, "PCI [Potential Criminal Informant] advised he was willing to assist Bureau by supplying criminal information, on a confidential basis, which comes to his attention. On November 6, 1959, Flynn wrote, "contacts (with Ruby) have been negative to date, it is felt that further attempts to develop this man would be fruitless."

    On March 15, 1959 Ruby telephoned and met with CIA-connected gun-runner Thomas Eli Davis III in Beaumont, TX. A year earlier, in June, 1958, Davis received a sentence of five years of probation for robbing a bank. While on probation Davis worked for the Agency training anti-Castro units in Florida. Soon, Ruby and Davis were supplying arms and munitions to Anti-Castro Cubans, apparently without the fear of arrest.

    NOTE: When JFK was assassinated, Davis was in jail in Algiers, charged with running guns to a secret army terrorist movement then attempting to assassinate French President Charles de Gaulle. Davis was released from jail through the intervention of the CIA’s foreign agent code-named “QJ/WIN," who was identified by the top-secret CIA Inspector General’s Report as the “principle asset” in the Agency’s assassination program known as ZR/RIFLE.

    After Ruby's arrest for killing Oswald, his defense attorney (Tom Howard) asked Ruby if he could think of anything that might damage his defense. Ruby responded and said there would be a problem if a man by the name of "Davis" should come up. Davis was later identified as Thomas Eli Davis III, a CIA-connected gun-runner and “soldier of fortune." In December, 1963 the Moroccan National Security Police informed the US State Department that Davis was arrested for an attempted sale of firearms to a minor. When Davis was searched, the police found “a letter in his handwriting which referred in passing to Oswald and to the Kennedy assassination.” Ruby told Howard that “he had been involved with Davis, who was a CIA connected gunrunner entangled in anti-Castro efforts and that he (Ruby) had intended to begin a regular gun-running business with Davis”. Ruby warned Howard about this connection, and feared that if it were to be revealed by either an investigative reporter or a witness it would blow open the CIA's role in JFK’s assassination. IT IS MPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT RUBY TOLD TOM HOWARD ABOUT HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH A CIA OPERATIVE. Tom Howard died of a heart attack within a year at age 48. The doctor, without an autopsy, said that he may have suffered a heart attack. But some reporters and friends thought Howard had been murdered.

    +++++++++++

    ############

    • De Gaulle plot from CIA thus GATLIN CIA
    see
    +++++++++++++++++
    William Turner, Rearview Mirror (2001)
    -
    That left Maurice Brooks Gatlin, Sr., an attorney associated with Banister, on Brooks's list of key Minutemen in Louisiana. According to Brooks, Gatlin served as legal counsel to the ACLC. In fact, Brooks had been a kind of protege of Gatlin. The attorney's passport was stamped with visas of countries around the world. In Brooks's estimation, he was a "transporter" for the CIA. On one occasion Gatlin bodaciously told Brooks, "I have pretty good connections. Stick with me-I'll give you a license to kill." Brooks became a firm believer in 1962 when Gatlin displayed a thick wad of bills, saying he had $ioo,ooo of CIA money earmarked for a French reactionary clique planning to assassinate General de Gaulle. Shortly thereafter Gatlin flew to Paris, and shortly after that came the Secret Army Organization's abortive ambush of the French president. But Gatlin as well was beyond Garrison's reach. In 1964 he fell or was pushed from the sixth floor of the Panama Hotel in Panama, dying instantly.
  11. [...]

    Dear Steven,

    I think that Trejo's whole point is that although Ruby may have been a CIA asset, he was not a CIA OFFICER.

    --Tommy :sun

    At first he denied CIA = Ruby connections.

    ====

    ############################

    Furthermore, I mock any notion that a Mafia pimp like Jack Ruby would be of SERVICE for the US Government.....// TREJO

    shift shift shift hut one hut two OMAHA OMAHA !!!!

    (our British readers may not understand http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2014/2/2/5371134/peyton-manning-omaha-super-bowl-48 )

    Per Trejo the JFK case was as Inspector Clouseau says 'sol-ved' . Why the shifting positions on many items ??

    Yes Inspector Clouseau and Trejo I see similarities.Except Clouseau gets it right.

    ==========

    (rules of speech: How to speak Clouseauese. ... the wrong

    place or accent the wrong syllable. Ex. solved = 'sol-ved', received = 'rah-ceived'.)

  12. It's like Steven Gaal trying to make Jack Ruby into the same stature as Allen Dulles in the eyes of a common superior -- it's REACHING.

    So, in response -- yes, even if somebody has several years in the military and has worked as a gopher for the CIA for a long time -- HE'S STILL NOT A CIA OFFICER, and he can still be a pimp, a street-thug, a drug-pusher, a hit-man, or any other sort of riff-raff on the street.

    The CIA like the FBI has never been above hiring criminals and thugs to do dirty work. That doesn't make them CIA Officers. // TREJO

    • ##################################

    I never said Ruby was of the stature of treasonous NAZI profit man Dulles. You at first denied Ruby's CIA connections.The above response of Paul Trejo is trollism and a mockery of civilized dialog. The ever shifting xxxxx Trejo.
    • TREJO BELOW

    =

    Let's see here -- according to Doug Valentine:

    (1) In 1947 in Chicago, George White of the CIA used Jack Ruby as an INFORMANT.

    (2) Also, in 1948, George White of the CIA used Jack Ruby as an INFORMANT to spy on Bugsy Siegel's Mafia operation in Mexico -- although nobody was arrested.

    Now, based on this somebody is jumping to the conclusion that George White of the CIA was Jack Ruby's BOSS?

    What, did George White pay Jack Ruby a fortune for giving him street Information on Mafia figures? Did Jack Ruby never have to work for anybody else? This was a full-time career for Jack Ruby?

    This is what Valentine suggests -- that the CIA was controlling Jack Ruby from 1947 and forever, and that Jack Ruby didn't make a move without checking in with his CIA BOSS.

    But that's exactly what Doug Valentine needs to PROVE! He can't just ASSUME it!

    Then, on top of THAT, Steven, you imply (only by assumption) that GEORGE WHITE was somehow connected with the JFK murder! How? Well, simply by being a CIA Officer!

    Regards,

    --Paul Trejo

    ##################################

    • (GAAL)

      Not according to Doug Valentine but from the diaries of George White himself as interpreted by Peter Dale Scott.

      On pgs 169-170 of Peter Dale Scott's DEEP POLITICS and THE DEATH OF JFK. In his, Scott's, analysis of the diaries.

      George White, "met with Ruby" and made him FBN INFORMANT.

      Greorge White is not CIA but the head of the FBN,however, it seems he did a lot of work for the CIA, so much so it seems he wanted to be CIA.Whites CIA patron at the CIA was none other than James Jesus Angleton.

      Ruby was a INFORMANT from 1946 (not 1947) at "25/week" per diaries.(per Valentine Ruby still working with FBN in Dallas).

      Ruby couldnt get out of the INFORMANT position not because of the "25/week" but because White could put a murder wrap on Ruby. Per the interpretation Of White's diaries by Scott ,Ruby was part of the mob Ragen killing and White had the 'goods' on Ruby. This was no ordinary killing but was a significant part of a major organized crime 'reorganization'.

      • Valentine never suggested that CIA was controlling Ruby from 1947. From the Armstrong link (which you do not address) it shows Ruby in CIA operations. The best interpretation of know facts is that Ruby was handed over to the CIA thus having CIA deniability per Ruby's Mob operations as cover. White seemed to want to ingratiate himself with the CIA and sharing assets was part of his modus operandi to do this.
      • RUBY would check with both his FBN and CIA controllers before going into any POTUS killing schemes. Morales would know this. Thus its illogical to assume that RUBY wouldn't be in any assassination plan without CIA HDQ approval. Ruby is attached to TWO intel agencies and thus no ROGUE would use him because of the risk of being caught.
      ############################
      Posted 20 October 2014 - 07:55 PM

    So, now let's talk about Jack Ruby and these alleged, so-called "CIA operations" in which he was supposedly involved. Certainly nobody can suggest that Jack Ruby was a CIA Officer, or anything like it. Jack Ruby was a Mafia punk; a Mafia bag-man; a Mafia pimp; a Mafia drug pusher; perhaps a Mafia hit-man......
    To sum up, you've shown nothing to link George White with the CIA. Nothing to link the CIA with the murder of JFK. Nothing to prove that Jack Ruby was working for George White for the CIA to murder JFK.

    Regards,

    --Paul Trejo
    ==========================================

    (GAAL)
    ????? Have you no knowledge of George White ????? He is connected to numerous very TOP HDQ CIA people.
    ###############
    http://visupview.blo...r-white_25.html
    -
    http://visupview.blo...r-white_14.html
    =
    White was involved in the spy trade since the birth of the modern
    US intelligence community at the time of World War II. White was an officer in the Office of Strategic Services, the WWII-era predecessor to the CIA. He was also involved in the highly secretive Division 19, a joint venture of the OSS and the National Defense Research Committee. Division 19 was involved in a host of black op activities, including assassinations, Mafia alliances, and the search for a 'truth drug.' White was a student of Division 19's Camp X, an 'assassination and elimination' training program that he later described as "the school for mayhem and murder."
    White later became a trainer himself. Several of his students included Richard Helms, William Colby, Frank Wisner and James Jesus Angelton, among others. Helms and Colby would later become CIA directors while Wisner and Angelton would head several of the CIA's most powerful departments.
    ##############
    http://mindcontrolbl...e-hunter-white/

    Col. White was recruited for Project Artichoke by CIA counterintelligence agent chief James Jesus Angleton, White established a domestic Artichoke team that operated out of a CIA-funded safe house located in New York’s Greenwich Village. White’s operation was funded by MK-ULTRA Subproject 3.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Please note + Per the George White Diaries, Ruby and White "met" ,White personally recruited Ruby. THUS one way to think of it is that RUBY was :
    one degree of seperation from Angelton,Helms ,Wisner and Colby.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    ????? Have you no knowledge of Ruby government connections ?????

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    Gunrunner Ruby and the CIA
    by Lisa Pease
    http://www.ctka.net/pr795-ruby.html

    ==oooooo+oooooo==

    Ruby's Smuggling Operation, 1956-1958
    http://jfklancer.com...onnections.html

    =======================================================

    Jack Ruby by John Armstrong

    In the early 1950's Robert Ray McKeown was a 42 year old engineer from Texas who owned and operated a manufacturing plant in Santiago, Cuba, with the blessing of Cuban President Carlos Prio Socarras. On March 10, 1952 General Fulgencio Batista, with army backing, staged a coup, ousted Carlos Prio and took control of Cuba. McKeown soon began working with Prio in an effort to help restore him to power. Prio was a very wealthy man (a fortune estimated at $50 million) and began backing Fidel Castro and his small band of rebels with arms and munitions in their attempts to overthrow Batista.

    NOTE: as early as 1952 Robert McKeown was the subject of an FBI Neutrality Act Investigation in connection with arms smuggling to Prio and rebel forces in Cuba. In a letter to J. Lee Rankin of the Warren Commission, Hoover wrote: "The neutrality and registration act investigation related primarily to the activities of Carlos Prio Socarras, who, with a number of others including McKeown, was involved in a conspiracy to ship arms, munitions, and other war materials to Fidel Castro to assist him in his efforts to overthrow the Batista regime in this investigation."

    In 1952 Jack Ruby sold the Silver Spur nightclub to Gimpel and Willie Epstein. He then began commuting from Dallas to Daytona, Florida where he became involved in supplying counterfeit currency, guns, and munitions to leftist rebels in Cuba.

    NOTE: Ruby was not seen in Dallas for several months in 1952. In an interview with the FBI Ruby said that he went broke in the night club business, was "mentally depressed, hibernated in the Cotton Bowl Hotel for three or four months, and then returned to Chicago for 6 weeks.” Nonsense; Jack Ruby was in Florida.

    In Florida Ruby soon became acquainted with former Cuban President Carlos Prio, who was supplying arms and munitions to Castro. It was during this time that Ruby met gun smuggler and CIA operative Donald Edward Browder. The two men contracted with Joe Marrs (Marrs Aircraft, Miami) to transport weapons and munitions to Cuba. Ruby soon purchased an interest in two aircraft that he used to illegally transport the arms, and also acquired partial ownership in a Havana gaming house in which Carlos Prio held majority ownership. Donald Browder knew Jack Ruby well and said, “During the pre-Castro years (pre-1959), the CIA and Customs would not oppose gun shipments to Castro.”

    NOTE: Blaney Mack Johnson (FBI informant “T-2”) knew a lot about Ruby's and Browder's gun-running activities in the early 1950s. In 1964 Johnson provided the FBI with detailed information concerning their activities and gave the Bureau the names of three people who he said could corroborate his story: Joe Marrs of Marrs Aircraft, with whom Ruby had contracted to make illegal flights to Cuba; Leslie Lewis, former Chief of Police in Hialeah, Florida, who knew of Ruby's gunrunning and smuggling operations; and pilot Clifton T. Bowes, Jr., formerly a captain with National Airlines in Miami. When questioned by the FBI, following the assassination of JFK and Ruby's nationally televised murder of Oswald, these three individuals denied being involved with the illegal transportation of firearms and, of course, denied knowing Jack Ruby.

    On August 1, 1953 Fidel Castro and 123 armed men and women supporters attacked the Moncada military barracks in Santiago (where Robert McKeown lived and worked) in an attempt to begin the overthrow of the Batista regime. Castro was arrested and given a 15 year prison term. Ruby's gun-running activities suddenly came to an end and he returned to Dallas where he re-opened the Silver Spur nightclub, took over the Vegas Club with partners Joe Bonds and Irving Alkana, and was soon operating a third nightclub, “Hermando's Hideaway."

    In May, 1954 the United States indicted former Cuban President Carlos Prio and seventeen other persons on charges stemming from their purchase, exportation, and transportation of arms and munitions to Cuba. Prio did not contest the charges, plead “nolo contendere," and was fined a mere $9,000. Jack Ruby, Prio's business partner and gun-running accomplice, was not charged, indicted, nor even questioned by US government authorities.

    NOTE: in 1954 one of Donald Browder's contacts was Efrom Pichardo who was charged with conspiracy to ship arms to Cuba on behalf of Carlos Prio. Another co-defendant, Marcos Diaz Lanz, was a close associate of CIA operative Frank Sturgis (Fiorini).

    On May 15, 1955 Fidel Castro was released from prison and fled to Mexico where he met Dr. Ernesto “Che” Guevara, a physician from Argentina. Castro soon visited the US in search of wealthy people who he thought would be sympathetic to his cause and offer financial aid to support his coming revolution.

    On November 25, 1956 Castro purchased an old yacht, the “Granma," and set sail from Tuxpan, Veracruz to Cuba with 82 armed revolutionaries. Upon landing they were attacked by Batista military forces and many were killed. The Castro brothers and Che Guevara escaped, fled into the Sierra Maestra Mountains, and began recruiting people sympathetic to their cause.

    In 1957 Robert McKeown lost his manufacturing business when Cuban President Batista deported him, allegedly for not paying kickbacks, but more likely for helping Carlos Prio supply arms to Castro. By this time Prio, McKeown, and Jack Ruby had known each other for 5 years. But it was McKeown who began to develop a close, personal friendship with Castro as he delivered boatload after boatload of arms and munitions from operations based in Miami, Tampa, and later from Seabrook and Kemah, Tex (where McKeown lived). For his services McKeown was always paid in the office of an attorney who was counsel for Haiti, in cash, with $100 bills bundled in paper wrapping marked “Pan American Bank, Miami."

    NOTE: In a letter from Hoover to Rankin on April 17, 1964, the FBI informed the Warren Commission that McKeown was one of the persons "in an extensive investigation conducted by the Bureau since 1952 concerning the activities of Carlos Prio Socarras." The FBI said that Prio, along with others including McKeown, was engaged in assisting Castro in his revolutionary pursuit against Batista. The Bureau also had reports that “Jack Ruby/Rubenstein” was involved in supplying arms to Castro, but never provided those reports to the Commission, thereby helping to conceal any connections Ruby may have had with CIA operatives.

    By 1957 Castro and approximately 300 rebels were waging a guerilla campaign against Batista's government troops with weapons and munitions supplied by CIA-sponsored gun-runners. Once again, Browder and Ruby began to smuggle guns from Florida and Texas to Castro, while their activities were being monitored by the CIA and US Customs. The FBI had a 1000 page file on Browder, but in 1964 they released only three to the Warren Commission. The Bureau knowingly helped to conceal Ruby's gun-running with CIA operative Browder from the Commission. In the 1970's Browder testified before the House Select Committee on Assassinations and admitted that he used to work for the CIA. He told the Committee that he purchased arms from a CIA-proprietary company, the International Arms Corporation (InterArmco, of Alexandria, VA), and then smuggled the arms to Castro.

    Browder was a former Lockheed test pilot who, at the time of his HSCA interview, was serving a 25-year prison sentence for "security violations." Browder told the HSCA that one year after the assassination of President Kennedy he leased a B-25 bomber under the name of a non-existent company and flew it to Haiti. He then cashed a check in the amount of $25,000 that was signed by George DeMohrenschildt's Haitian business associate, Clemard Charles. The HSCA used Browder's testimony in their report relating to George DeMohrenschildt. But the HSCA did not use any of ex-CIA operative Donald Browder's testimony in their report that related to Jack Ruby. The HSCA helped to conceal Ruby's connections with CIA operative Browder, just as the FBI had helped to conceal Ruby's gun-running activities from the Warren Commission. The FBI file on Browder contains more than a thousand pages, yet the Bureau released only three to the Warren Commission. The reluctance of government authorities to properly investigate Ruby's connections to CIA operatives during most of the 1950's and early 1960's make sense as we begin to understand the extent of CIA involvement in the assassination of President Kennedy and Ruby's televised murder of Lee Harvey Oswald.

    As Castro and his growing number of rebels were attacking Batista's troops, Ruby was commuting between Dallas and the Houston waterfront community of Kemah, TX. James E. Beaird, a poker playing friend of Ruby's, told both The Dallas Morning News and the FBI that Ruby used to store guns and ammunition in a two-story house between the waterfront and railroad tracks in Kemah, TX., in Galveston Bay. On the weekends Beaird personally saw Ruby and his associates load "many boxes of new guns, including automatic rifles and handguns" onto a 50-foot long military-surplus boat. It was Robert McKeown who often piloted the boat to a drop-off point in Mexico, where Castro himself would land his yacht, the Granma, and pick up the arms. As McKeown delivered more and more arms to Castro, these two men developed a close, personal relationship. Their relationship became so close that shortly after Castro took over in Cuba he flew to Houston, TX and met with McKeown in an attempt to persuade his good friend to return to Cuba. Castro promised McKeown that he would be given a high government position or a business concession. When later questioned about Ruby's gun-running activities in Galveston Bay, Beaird said “many people knew all about this because he (Ruby) was so open with it." But unlike Prio, McKeown, and dozens of other people who supplied arms to Castro, Jack Ruby was never charged, indicted nor even questioned by US government authorities. Ruby appeared to have no fear of being arrested for his gun-running activities from 1952 through 1963. Not only did US government agencies overlook Ruby's illegal gun-running activities, but so did the Warren Commission, HSCA, the Church Committee, and the ARRB.

    In early 1958 the FBI learned that some of Castro's forces were planning a raid on Cuba from Texas, and it was McKeown who was busy arranging the procurement and shipment of arms. The FBI also documented McKeown's involvement with Mario Villamia, a CIA-connected associate of Carlos Prio who lived in Miami and later participated in the CIA's Bay of Pigs invasion.

    On February 18, 1958, the San Antonio FBI office provided information to US Customs that McKeown had purchased a yacht called the “Buddy Dee.” A few days later US Customs officials seized the Buddy Dee while the vessel was cruising from Patterson, La. to Houston with a load of arms and munitions. On February 25 Federal agents arrested McKeown and charged him with conspiracy to smuggle guns and related equipment to Cuba for the benefit and use of Castro. McKeown's co-defendants included Carlos Prio, Jorge Sotus, Manuel Arques, Mario Villamia and Evelyn Archer. On October 24 the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas, convicted McKeown and sentenced him to 60 days in jail, fined him $500, and imposed a 5-year probation period, to terminate on December 11, 1963. Carlos Prio plead guilty, but his sentence was soon suspended by authorities. But Jack Ruby, who never tried to conceal or hide his gun-running activities, was never once questioned, charged, nor indicted.

    NOTE: Some of Prio's co-defendants were working for the CIA. Mario Villamia, of Miami, FL., participated in the Bay of Pigs invasion and continued to work with the CIA during the 1960's. Juan Orta, while secretly working for the CIA, was director of Castro's ministerial office in Havana.

    In March, 1958 the US government announced the suspension of arms sales to Batista. It was now just a matter of time before Castro and his growing army of rebels (now numbering around 3000) succeeded in overthrowing Batista.

    While Prio and McKeown were facing charges for conspiracy to smuggle guns to Cuba, Jack Ruby was once again commuting between Dallas and Florida. In May (1958) Dolores Rhoads, her husband Richard Rhoads, and her mother (Mrs. Mary Thompson) visited her aunt and uncle, James and Mary Lou Woodard, in Islamorada, Florida. Dolores and Richard spent the first night in a small two-unit motel operated by “Jack” and “Isabel” who were acquaintances of her uncle. “Jack”, who was originally from Chicago, said his first name was “Leon” but he went by “Jack." Jack Ruby's middle name was Leon. Mrs. Woodard said that Jack had a trunk full of guns that he was going to supply to the Cubans. Mrs. Thompson was told there were supplies of guns hidden in the marshes near Islamorada that were to be sold and delivered to the Cubans. Mary Thompson and her daughter said that “Jack” was driving a late model grey colored Buick with Texas license plates. Dolores recalled that when drunk one evening her uncle, James Woodard, said he was going to help Jack run guns to Cuba.

    NOTE: Charles G. Watters was a CPA and worked for an accounting firm that kept Ruby's books until early 1960. Watters told the FBI that Ruby drove a second-hand Buick automobile.

    The FBI interviewed James Woodard in September, 1963. Woodard said that he had participated in the Bay of Pigs invasion and had furnished ammunition and dynamite to both Castro and his anti-Castro forces. On October 8, 1963, Woodard was questioned again, this time concerning dynamite found at his residence in South Dade County, Florida. He said the dynamite was to be used by Cuban exile forces fighting the Castro regime. Apparently the FBI did not ask Woodard if he knew or associated with Jack Ruby, “Leon," or “Rubenstein."

    Following the assassination of President Kennedy, and the murder of Oswald by Jack Ruby, James Woodard's sister said that her brother had been in Texas a lot, and that she had asked James if he ever knew Ruby. He said no, but then promptly disappeared and hasn't been seen since November 25, 1963.

    In 1958 a boat load of Cubans came ashore at a dock in Marathon Shores, Florida, and a young American placed a telephone call to a man in Dallas named “Ruby."

    In 1958 the Oklahoma State Crime Commission linked “Abe Rubenstein," owner of a night club in Dallas, to a carload of guns and ammunition destined for Cuba.

    In 1958 “Jack Rubenstein” wrote a letter to the Office of Munitions Controls requesting permission to negotiate the purchase of firearms and ammunition from an Italian firm.

    In 1959 an Army Intelligence Report, related to importers of armaments (11/26/62), listed “Jack Rubenstein” as the representative for Saunders Import Company, New York, NY. (click here)

    NOTE: It is interesting, and noteworthy, that while multi-millionaire and former Cuban President Carlos Prio Socarras, Robert McKeown, and numerous CIA connected co-defendants were arrested and convicted for running guns from 1953 through 1958, Jack Ruby was never once questioned, detained, nor arrested for the very same activities. Ruby never seemed concerned about his gun-running activites, but following the assassinations of President Kennedy and Oswald, Ruby was deeply concerned. Ruby warned his attorney (Tom Howard) about his CIA connections, and feared that if these connections were revealed it would expose the CIA's role in JFK’s assassination. A year later Tom Howard died, allegedly of a heart attack, at age 48; but reporters and friends thought he had been murdered.

    In the summer of 1958, while awaiting trial for gun-running, McKeown entered into a partnership with a “Mr. Jarrett” and opened the J and M Drive-In on Red Bluff Road near Kemah, TX. His good friend Carlos Prio funded their venture with a loan. According to McKeown, Prio had also promised him a one-half interest in the Seria Biltmore, a hotel in Havana. After his arrest, Prio's days of securing and arranging shipments of arms and munitions to Castro were over, and the multi-millionaire and former Cuban President turned his attention to developing real estate in Miami and Puerto Rico.

    NOTE: On April 5, 1977, while being sought for questioning by the HSCA, Carlos Prio was found lying on the ground outside the garage of his luxurious Miami Beach home, dead from gunshot wounds. He allegedly committed suicide—one week after George DeMohrenschildt allegedly committed suicide by gunshot, and three months after CIA asset and former US Ambassador William Pawley allegedly committed suicide on January 7, 1977. The HSCA could have asked Prio to explain how and where he acquired arms and munitions, how they were transported to Cuba, how and by whom he was paid, and his connection with Ruby, McKeown, and numerous CIA operatives including the notorious Frank Fiorini/Sturgis. Prio's testimony would have shown that Jack Ruby had been involved with CIA operatives and CIA gun-running operations for many years.

    On January 1, 1959, Fidel Castro and his rebels finally succeeded in overthrowing Batista, and there was no need for Ruby to continue supplying arms and munitions to Castro. But concerns over political conditions in Cuba began to surface and did not appear to be in the best interests of the USA.

    Four months prior to Castro's takeover Robert Welch, founder of the John Birch Society, wrote in the September 1958 issue of American Opinion that Castro “is a Communist agent carrying out Communist orders...." Soon after taking over Cuba, Castro's communist tendencies began to surface. There were confiscations of U.S. Property; banks and large industries were nationalized; schools became propaganda factories; civil liberties were suspended; free elections were dismissed; the courts were overtaken. As soon as the anti-Batista forces laid down their arms “revolutionary justice" began and purges with mass executions followed. Years later Castro explained, “back in 1959 the U.S. wanted us to make a strategic and tactical error and proclaim a doctrine as a communist movement. In fact, I was a communist .... (however) I think that a good Marxist-Leninist would not have proclaimed a socialist revolution in the conditions that existed in Cuba in 1959. I think I was a good Marxist-Leninist in not doing that, and we did not make known our underlying beliefs." (Le Figaro magazine, June 1986).

    On March 31, 1959, deep undercover CIA agent Frank Sturgis (real name Frank Fiorini) was interviewed by FBI SA Krant and SA V.H. Nasca, upon referral from the Director's Office of the FBI. Fiorini was then a Captain of Cuban Rebel Army, and was on a confidential mission to the US at the behest of the head of the Cuban Air Force. The real purpose of his trip was not known to Fidel Castro or his supporters. Sturgis/Fiorini identified members and leaders of the Cuban Government who were either communists or communist sympathizers. He also furnished information concerning Cuban plans for potential revolutions in Caribbean countries. Sturgis/Fiorini, without revealing that he was working for the CIA, offered his services to the FBI as an "agent" in the fight against infiltration of Cuban Government by communists. He then requested aid in fighting communism in the Cuban Government (click here to view the FBI report on Fiorini).

    NOTE: the HSCA asked Robert McKeown if he knew Frank Sturgis (CIA agent). McKeown answered, “I seen him one time over at Prio's house....” McKeown, Carlos Prio, Ruby, and others who supplied armaments to Castro were constantly surrounded and monitored by CIA operatives and US Customs.

    In response to the growing threat of a possible Communist government within 90 miles of the US, the CIA began training and arming thousands of former Batista supporters, anti-Castro Cubans, and Cuban refugees who fled their homeland and were living in south Florida. Donald Edward Browder told the HSCA, “During the pre-Castro years, the CIA and Customs would not oppose gun shipments to Castro. After Castro turned Communist, the CIA and Customs encouraged shipments to anti-Castro forces.” People were beginning to fear that Castro was, as many had suspected, a communist, and should be removed.

    On March 11, 1959, Dallas FBI agent Charles Flynn wrote, "on the basis of preliminary contacts and information developed to date, I recommend the captioned individual (Jack Ruby) for informant development." Flynn further wrote, "PCI [Potential Criminal Informant] advised he was willing to assist Bureau by supplying criminal information, on a confidential basis, which comes to his attention. On November 6, 1959, Flynn wrote, "contacts (with Ruby) have been negative to date, it is felt that further attempts to develop this man would be fruitless."

    On March 15, 1959 Ruby telephoned and met with CIA-connected gun-runner Thomas Eli Davis III in Beaumont, TX. A year earlier, in June, 1958, Davis received a sentence of five years of probation for robbing a bank. While on probation Davis worked for the Agency training anti-Castro units in Florida. Soon, Ruby and Davis were supplying arms and munitions to Anti-Castro Cubans, apparently without the fear of arrest.

    NOTE: When JFK was assassinated, Davis was in jail in Algiers, charged with running guns to a secret army terrorist movement then attempting to assassinate French President Charles de Gaulle. Davis was released from jail through the intervention of the CIA’s foreign agent code-named “QJ/WIN," who was identified by the top-secret CIA Inspector General’s Report as the “principle asset” in the Agency’s assassination program known as ZR/RIFLE.

    After Ruby's arrest for killing Oswald, his defense attorney (Tom Howard) asked Ruby if he could think of anything that might damage his defense. Ruby responded and said there would be a problem if a man by the name of "Davis" should come up. Davis was later identified as Thomas Eli Davis III, a CIA-connected gun-runner and “soldier of fortune." In December, 1963 the Moroccan National Security Police informed the US State Department that Davis was arrested for an attempted sale of firearms to a minor. When Davis was searched, the police found “a letter in his handwriting which referred in passing to Oswald and to the Kennedy assassination.” Ruby told Howard that “he had been involved with Davis, who was a CIA connected gunrunner entangled in anti-Castro efforts and that he (Ruby) had intended to begin a regular gun-running business with Davis”. Ruby warned Howard about this connection, and feared that if it were to be revealed by either an investigative reporter or a witness it would blow open the CIA's role in JFK’s assassination. IT IS MPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT RUBY TOLD TOM HOWARD ABOUT HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH A CIA OPERATIVE. Tom Howard died of a heart attack within a year at age 48. The doctor, without an autopsy, said that he may have suffered a heart attack. But some reporters and friends thought Howard had been murdered.

    The HSCA, under Robert Blakey, was intent on covering up any CIA connection or gun-running activities connected with Ruby and failed to investigate the Ruby/Davis connection. They explained, in typical government prose, “Due to limitations of time and resources... it was not possible to confirm these (Seth Kantor's) allegations."

    In April, 1959 Fidel Castro flew to the United States and met for three hours with Vice President Richard Nixon in Washington, DC. Following their meeting Nixon wrote a confidential memorandum in which he expressed concern over Castro's communist leanings. The memo was sent to the CIA, the State Department, and to the White House. The CIA soon began to organize and train anti-Castro groups in Florida, while Ruby and Davis helped to supply them with arms and munitions.

    After leaving Washington, DC Castro flew to Houston and met Robert McKeown at the airport. A photograph on the front page of the Houston Chronicle titled “Castro and the Gunrunner" recorded the event. An article accompanying the photograph quoted Castro as saying that if McKeown would return with him to Cuba, he would be given a high post in the government, a franchise.....whatever he wanted. McKeown politely told Castro that he could not legally leave the United States because of his probation. Castro said not to worry because US authorities would not bother him in Cuba. But McKeown declined his offer and Castro departed for Havana.

    McKeown's close friendship with Castro prompted many people to ask him for assistance in affairs pertaining to Cuba. On one occasion McKeown's brother asked him to contact Castro and attempt to obtain the release of three friends who were being detained because they were caught fishing in Cuban waters. McKeown personally telephoned and spoke with Castro and the men were quickly released. On another occasion Jack Porter, a campaign manager for Eisenhower, contacted McKeown about approaching Castro.

    In early 1959 Ruby made preliminary inquiries concerning the possible sale to Cuba of some surplus jeeps located in Shreveport, La., and asked about the possible release of prisoners from a Cuban prison. The jeeps, the prisoners, and Ruby's visit to Cuba in August, 1959 all suggest that his activities were sponsored and directed by others.

    Prior to visiting Cuba, Ruby asked McKeown to write a personal letter of introduction to Castro so that he could talk with Castro about releasing some unnamed friends that were being detained in Havana. McKeown also said that Ruby "had a whole lot of jeeps he wanted to get to Castro."

    In 1959 Cuban travel records show that Jack Ruby entered Cuba from New Orleans on August 8, left Cuba on September 11, re-entered Cuba from Miami on September 12, and returned from Cuba to New Orleans on September 13, 1959. But bank records, Dallas police records, and FBI records show that Ruby was in Dallas on August 10, 21, 31, and September 4. Someone was helping Ruby to get into and out of Cuba without going through Cuban customs and immigration.

    NOTE: The reluctance of the FBI, Warren Commission, HSCA, etc to properly investigate Ruby's connections to Prio, McKeown, Davis, and his various gun-runnings makes sense when one realizes that Jack Ruby's activities had been monitored by the CIA, FBI, and US Customs for years. In 1959 Ruby did not travel to Cuba for pleasure.

    At the time of Ruby's visit, Santo Trafficante was being held at the Trescornia detention center in Cuba. English journalist John Wilson Hudson (a.k.a. John Wilson) was detained with Trafficante, and said that Ruby came to see Trafficante in Trescornia. After Ruby shot Oswald, Wilson contacted the American Embassy and reported, "An American gangster called Santo.....was visited by an American gangster type named Ruby." If Ruby was trying to sell jeeps to Castro, as McKeown said, was he trying to negotiate Trafficante's release? Trafficante, as it turns out, was released from the detention center on August 18, 1959, just after Ruby arrived in Cuba.

    NOTE: Santo Trafficante was a mafia “Don” and was also one of the gangsters who participated in the CIA's attempt to assassinate Fidel. Trafficante appeared before the HSCA and was questioned by chief counsel Richard Sprague as follows:

    Mr. Trafficante, have you at any time been an employee, a contract employee, or in any manner been in the service of the Central Intelligence Agency, or any other agency of the Federal Government of the United States?
    Mr. Trafficante, did you know John Rosselli?
    Mr. Trafficante, did you know Sam Giancana?
    Mr. Trafficante, do you know Robert Maheu?
    Mr. Trafficante, prior to November 22, 1963, did you have information that President Kennedy was going to be assassinated?
    Mr. Trafficante, prior to November 22, 1963, did you advise other people of the assassination of President Kennedy?
    Mr. Trafficante, prior to November 22, 1963, did you know Jack Ruby
    Mr. Trafficante, have you ever met with representatives of the Central Intelligence Agency to discuss the assassination of various world leaders, including Fidel Castro?
    Mr. Trafficante, is any agency of the U.S. Government giving you any immunity with regard to any plans to assassinate any world leaders?
    Mr. Trafficante, did you ever discuss with any individual plans to assassinate President Kennedy prior to his assassination?
    Mr. Trafficante, while you were in prison in Cuba, were you visited by Jack Ruby?
    Mr. Trafficante, as a result of your appearance here today, have you been threatened by anyone, any group or agency? Has your life been threatened in any way?
    Mr. Trafficante, have you been contacted by any agency in the executive branch, say the CIA or FBI, in connection with your possible testimony before or after you received formal subpoena to appear before this committee?"

    Not one of Richard Sprague's questions concerned Trafficante's mob connections, but instead were focused on either Jack Ruby or the CIA. To each of these questions Trafficante's response was, "I respectfully refuse to answer that question pursuant to my constitutional rights under the 1st, 4th, 5th, and 14th amendments." This is the legal response to questions that would otherwise be self-incriminating. Sprague, because his focus of attention was on the CIA, was soon forced to resign as chief counsel and replaced by Robert Blakey, who managed through selective testimony and questioning to shift blame for the assassination of President Kennedy to the mafia.

    Due to his focus on CIA involvement, Richard Sprague was removed as the HSCA's chief counsel and replaced by Robert Blakey. Blakey worked very hard to sell the American people on how the “mob” was responsible for the Kennedy assassination. Blakey occasionally asserted that “rogue elements” of the CIA may have been involved, but always directed attention to the "mob." In 1981 Blakey wrote a book titled, The Plot to Kill the President—Organized Crime Assassinated JFK. Most of the evidence and witness testimony presented to the HSCA pointed to individuals at the highest level of the CIA as the principal planners of the assassination, but Blakey cleverly and deceptively ignored the obvious and blamed the "mob."

    In 1961 Ruby was involved in a plan to sell British Enfield rifles, obtained from Mexico, to anti-Castro-Cubans in Florida. Nancy Perrin Rich told the Warren Commission about a group running Enfield rifles from Mexico to Cuba in 1961 and returning with Cuban refugees to Florida. Ruby was evidently the “paymaster." During the 10 years preceding the assassination of President Kennedy there is a considerable amount of information that shows the FBI, CIA, and US Customs were very familiar with “Jack Rubenstein” and his gun-running activities. The Warren Commission requested a written response from the CIA for any and all “information on Jack Ruby (aka Jack Rubenstein)." The CIA responded by stating, “Examination of CIA records failed to produce information on Jack Ruby or his activities," but the CIA provided no information whatsoever for “Jack Rubenstein." ****

    ===========

    ****Guess when the CIA kills POTUS then its childsplay for the CIA to play a name game with Congress.

    ############################

    Furthermore, I mock any notion that a Mafia pimp like Jack Ruby would be of SERVICE for the US Government..... The US Government clearly used Jack Ruby like a low-level flunky.
    Regards,
    --Paul Trejo
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    (GAAL) ?? The CIA used the mafia for an ultrasensitive geopolitical operation with worldwide implications in the Castro hit. The CIA using Ruby is no stretch. The CIA used prostitutes with drugs in their MKULTRA operations.Shirley you jest at the suggestion that the CIA "intellectuals" (as you call them) are of high class and impeccable moral rectitude.
    If you had read the material you would know that Ruby has been involved in successful smuggling operations for many years. Said smuggling requires long range planning,sophistication,and intelligence. Smuggling is used in CIA operations and thus is a TYPE of intelligence they could/did use with Ruby.

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    Originally Posted by Anthony DeFiore

    =
    At the press conference, with Oswald looking right at him in disgust, Jack Ruby corrected the spokesman as he stumbled on the name and Ruby said clearly, "The Fair Play For Cuba Committee".

    JUST HOW IN THE HELL DID THIS OBSCURE DALLAS STRIP CLUB OWNER KNOW THE EXACT NAME OF A PRO CASTRO GROUP LOCATED IN NEW ORLEANS IN WHICH OSWALD (SOMEONE THAT HE HAD NEVER MET) WAS PASSING OUT LEAFLETS IN SUPPORT OF THE GROUP?
    ==############################
    Lee Forman EDFORUM

    =
    According to an FBI doc dated 12/1/63, a Mrs. Evelyn Harris was told by a Lucy Lopez that Lopez's daughter and some other women who worked in a sewing room across from the TSBD saw Ruby walking up and down the street near the TSBD, and saw him hand Oswald the pistol when he came out of the TSBD. Lopez said the women knew Oswald who apparently spoke Spanish well and ate with them at a nearby restaurant.
    ==
    Jack Ruby telephoned a friend on November 22nd and asked if he would "like to watch the fireworks." Unknown to Ruby, his friend was an informant for the criminal intelligence division of the Internal Revenue Service. He and Ruby were standing at the corner of the Postal Annex Building at the time of the shooting. Minutes after the shooting Phil Willis, who knew Jack Ruby, saw and photographed a man who looked like Ruby near the front of the School Book Depository.

    ##################
    ##################
    SEE http://harveyandlee....tt/Wil_full.htm
    ==posted at
    https://deeppolitics...argue-with-this!!!!!
    ==
    In 1978 former CIA accountant James B. Wilcott swore under oath before the House Select Committee on Assassinations that Lee Harvey Oswald was a "regular employee" of the Central Intelligence Agency, and that Oswald received "a full-time salary for agent work for doing CIA operational work." He testified that he was told by other CIA employees that money he (Wilcott) had personally disbursed to an encrypted account was for "the Oswald project or for Oswald." Wilcott's testimony was kept secret for decades, but can now be read in full by clicking on this link.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++
    RUBY a CIA MAN or General Walker man ??

    Jack Ruby telephoned a friend on November 22nd and asked if he would "like to watch the fireworks."


  13. Another silly laundry list.

    WHEN YOU DONT HAVE THE FACTS YOU ARGUE SILLY (GAAL)

    January 31, 2001 - A Treasury Department memo for Secretary Paul O'Neill contains a summary of a "military plan" for a "post-Saddam Iraq" marked secret.

    "UNCLASSIFIED WITH SECRET ATTACHMENTS

    DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

    WASHINGTON, D.C. 20220

    JAN 31 2001

    MEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARY O'NEILL

    FROM: Mark Sobel, Acting Assistant Secretary, International Affairs

    SUBJECT: Briefing for NSC Principals Meeting on Gulf Policy

    DATE AND TIME: 3:00 p.m.-4:30 p.m., Thursday, February 1, 2001

    LOCATION: White House Situation Room

    PURPOSE: To review the current state-of-play (including a CIA briefing on Iraq) and to examine policy questions on how to proceed.

    ATTACHMENTS:

    Tab C: Executive Summary: Political-Military Plan for Post-Saddam Iraq Crisis (interagency working paper) -- SECRET" - Memo at Paperless Archives

    O'Neill: Bush planned Iraq invasion before 9/11

    "The Bush administration began planning to use U.S. troops to invade Iraq within days after the former Texas governor entered the White House three years ago, former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill told CBS News' 60 Minutes.

    O'Neill was the main source for "The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House, and the Education of Paul O'Neill," by former Wall Street Journal reporter Ron Suskind.

    Suskind said O'Neill and other White House insiders gave him documents showing that in early 2001 the administration was already considering the use of force to oust Saddam, as well as planning for the aftermath.

    "There are memos," Suskind told the network. "One of them marked 'secret' says 'Plan for Post-Saddam Iraq.'" - CNN (01/14/04)

    (See also: January 13, 2004 - Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill says President Bush planned Iraq invasion before 9/11)

    #############

    #############

    March 4, 2001 - The Lone Gunmen's 'Pilot' episode, which depicts a U.S. government conspiracy plot to crash an electronically hijacked Boeing 727 into the WTC and blame it on foreign terrorists in order to provoke war and increase the military's budget, airs on FOX TV.

    "Events further unravel to reveal that a secret government agency known as "The Overlords" is behind a plot to crash a fully loaded [727] into the World Trade Building. The Overlords plan to blame the crash on terrorists in an attempt to generate a bigger budget for military spending (of course)." - Wizard's Keep

    The Sept. 11 Parallel "Nobody Noticed"

    "We know the ratings for Fox's short-lived X-Files spinoff The Lone Gunmen were bad, but this is ridiculous. Six months before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks — March 4, 2001, to be exact — Gunmen premiered with an episode featuring a terrorist plot to fly a commercial airliner into the World Trade Center. The climactic sequence actually shows the plane heading into one of the Twin Towers, but at the last minute, it's pulled upward and just misses the building.

    Shockingly, this horrifying bit of foreshadowing was never widely reported until Thursday, when industry newsletter The Myers Report broke the story. How is it that virtually no one remembered this post 9/11? "I know! That's what I've been wondering," marvels Frank Spotnitz, who along with Vince Gilligan and John Shiban wrote the episode. "I thought, 'Nobody noticed!' I guess so few people saw the show. But it's strange too because that was the pilot and the ratings were actually quite good for [that episode], and yet, we didn't hear anything."

    Myers Report columnist Ed Martin — who was tipped off about the horrific parallel by a friend — wrote that "this seems to be collective amnesia of the highest order. The final act of the Gunmen pilot, which seemingly made no impact last year, now contains some of the most deeply disturbing images ever created for an entertainment program."

    "I woke up on September 11 and saw it on TV and the first thing I thought of was The Lone Gunmen," recalls Spotnitz. "But then in the weeks and months that followed, almost no one noticed the connection.

    "What's disturbing about it to me is, you think as a fiction writer that if you can imagine this scenario, then the people in power in the government who are there to imagine disaster scenarios can imagine it, too."

    Unlike the actual attacks, there was no suicide hijacker in the Gunmen climax; the terrorists attempted to remotely steer the plane into the skyscraper. "Now, ironically, one of the things [the government is] talking about to prevent [another 9/11] is the ability of terrorists to remotely pilot planes," Spotnitz says, "which was another element of our story. It's weird." - TV Guide (06/21/02)

    "On March 4, 2001, during Season 8 of “The X-Files,” the three spun off in a seriocomic series of their own, created by “X” producers Chris Carter, Frank Spotnitz, Vince Gilligan and John Shiban, and co-starring Zuleikha Robinson (“Hidalgo”) and Stephen Snedden (“Coyote Ugly”).

    Despite the concern of some fans, the pilot of “The Lone Gunmen” is indeed part of the boxed set. This would seem like a no-brainer — until you realize that the central conspiracy in the episode involved the high-tech electronic hijacking of a commercial airliner with the intent of crashing it into the World Trade Center.

    Although the episode was conceived and shot in 2000 and aired six months before the tragic events of Sept. 11, 2001, the eerie coincidence sent shockwaves through cast and producers.

    “I'll never forget that,” says Spotnitz, calling in from the set of the pilot for his remake of “Kolchak: The Night Stalker.” “That was such a disturbing thing. It was very upsetting. As I say in the DVD featurette, you write something like that, and you assume that if you can think of it, being a Hollywood writer, then somebody in the government has thought about it already." - Kansas City Star (03/21/05)

    TV spinoff The Lone Gunmen comes to DVD with its prescient 9/11 episode

    "The Lone Gunmen, the Complete Series (Fox) - Back in 2001, when The X-Files was breathing its last prime-time gasp, this oddball spinoff series hit the airwaves for 13 episodes.

    The most remarkable episode... aired just a few months before 9/11 with an incredibly prescient plot about terrorists hijacking an airliner and threatening to crash it into the World Trade Center. Except, in this plot, the terrorists were a cabal within the U.S. government itself.

    On the episode's commentary track, the creators themselves cannot believe the irony. They recall how, in the immediate hours after the event when it wasn't known who was responsible, they feared their story might have inspired the real terrorists." - Canada.com (03/28/05)

    - The Lone Gunmen - Official website (Episode 1, "Pilot", original air date 3/04/01)

    (See also: March 20, 2000 - Filming begins on the The Lone Gunmen's 'Pilot' episode; March 21, 2005 - Lone Gunmen co-producer hopes WTC attack wasn't 'somehow inspired' by anything they did; Killtown's: The Lone Gunmen's 'Pilot' Episode)

    ######

    ######

    April 2001 - NORAD planned to practice a scenario in which a terrorist group hijacks a plane and crashes it into the Pentagon, but it was rejected by the Joint Chiefs of Staff as being too unrealistic.

    "Five months before Sept. 11, 2001, the officers responsible for defending American airspace wanted to test their ability to prevent a hijacked airliner from being crashed into the Pentagon, but the scenario was rejected by the Joint Chiefs of Staff as impractical, a Joint Chiefs spokesman confirmed yesterday.

    The disclosure was made after a government watchdog group released a leaked e-mail from a former official at the North American Air Defense Command. In the message, the official told colleagues a week after the attacks that in April 2001 NORAD requested that war games run by the Joint Chiefs include an ''event having a terrorist group hijack a commercial airline . . . and fly it into the Pentagon."

    Last night, Pentagon spokesman Lieutenant Commander Dan Hetlage confirmed the account, saying: ''That scenario was rejected because it would have become a whole exercise in and of itself. It wasn't looked on at the time as being practicable."

    The NORAD proposal is the clearest sign yet that national security officials were worried before 9/11 about terrorists using hijacked airliners as missiles, despite testimony that senior leaders, including National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, didn't know of such concerns.

    Peter Stockton, chief investigator for the Project on Government Oversight, said yesterday he was told by the source who provided the memo that a special forces officer attached to the NORAD command at the time had first proposed the Pentagon scenario be practiced.

    Concerns that terrorists might use hijacked airliners as missiles dates back to the 1996 Olympic games in Atlanta, when jets were placed on patrol to guard against such a threat." - Boston Globe (04/14/04)

    (See also: 1996 - U.S. officials considered possibility a plane could be flown into the main stadium at Olympics in Atlanta; 1998-99 - Federal Report warned the executive branch that Osama bin Laden's terrorists might hijack an airliner and dive bomb it into the Pentagon or other government buildings)

    #####

    #####

    May 4, 2001 - PNAC member Dov S. Zakheim, member and a co-author of PNAC's "Rebuilding America's Defenses", is sworn in as the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and Chief Financial Officer for the Department of Defense who was a former vice president of System Planning Corp., a defense contractor which makes remote control and flight termination products.

    "Dov S. Zakheim was sworn in as the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and Chief Financial Officer for the Department of Defense on May 4, 2001. Dr. Zakheim has previously served in a number of key positions in government and private business. Most recently, he was corporate vice president of System Planning Corp., a technology, research and analysis firm based in Arlington, Va. He also served as chief executive officer of SPC International Corp., a subsidiary specializing in political, military and economic consulting. During the 2000 presidential campaign, he served as a senior foreign policy advisor to then-Governor Bush.

    From 1985 until March 1987, Dr. Zakheim was Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Planning and Resources in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Policy). In that capacity, he played an active role in the Department's system acquisition and strategic planning processes. Dr. Zakheim held a variety of other DoD posts from 1981 to 1985. Earlier, he was employed by the National Security and International Affairs Division of the Congressional Budget Office.

    Dr. Zakheim has been a participant on a number of government, corporate, non-profit and charitable boards. His government service includes terms on the United States Commission for the Preservation of America's Heritage Abroad; the Task Force on Defense Reform (1997); the first Board of Visitors of the Department of Defense Overseas Regional Schools (1998); and the Defense Science Board task force on "The Impact of DoD Acquisition Policies on the Health of the Defense Industry" (2000).

    A 1970 graduate of Columbia University with a bachelor's in government, Dr. Zakheim also studied at the London School of Economics. He earned his doctorate in economics and politics at St. Antony's College, University of Oxford, where he was graduate fellow in programs of both the National Science Foundation and Columbia College, and then a research fellow. Dr. Zakheim has been an adjunct professor at the National War College, Yeshiva University, Columbia University and Trinity College, Hartford, Conn., where he was presidential scholar.

    Dr. Zakheim has written, lectured and provided media commentary on national defense and foreign policy issues domestically and internationally. He is the author of "Flight of the Lavi: Inside a U.S.-Israeli Crisis" (Brassey's, 1996), "Congress and National Security in the Post-Cold War Era" (The Nixon Center, 1998), "Toward a Fortress Europe?" (Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2000), and numerous articles and chapters in books." - DoD

    - System Planning Corporation's Command Transmitter Systems (CTS) provide remote control and flight termination functions through a fully-redundant self-contained solid-state system.

    - System Planning Corporation's is proud to offer the Flight Termination System (FTS), a fully redundant turnkey range safety and test system for remote control and flight termination of airborne test vehicles.

    REBUILDING AMERICA’S DEFENSES

    "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.

    PROJECT PARTICIPANTS

    Dov Zakheim, System Planning Corporation" - PNAC (Sept. 2000)

    "Dr. Dov S. Zakheim is a former political and economic adviser to the United States government. He is an ordained Orthodox Jewish rabbi...as well as a member of the Council on Foreign Relations." - Wikipedia

    (See also: September 2000 - PNAC advocates the build up of U.S. military, but won't think it will happen unless U.S. experiences a major catastrophic event such as a "new Pearl Harbor"; September 10, 2001 - Donald Rumsfeld announces that Pentagon has lost track of $2.3 trillion in military spending)

    May 18, 2001 - The Denver Council on Foreign Relations (DCFR) discuss in their meeting about 'The Development of Homeland Defense' that Washington and New York are the "most likely targets" of a terrorist attack, the scenario of a hijacked plane crashing into a "high-value target", and mentions that the alleged WTC '93 bomber's original plan was to blow up one WTC tower to fall into the other WTC tower, thus "collapsing both".

    Homeland Defense and the Transportation Industry: The Civil Aviation and Surface Transportation Sectors

    "Then came September 11, 2001, when all Americans understood what the attendants of these meetings had concluded beforehand--

    In the last meeting (May 2001), participants discussed Washington and New York as the most likely targets, even discussing a scenario in which a plane is hijacked and crashed into a high-value target. In fact, this scenario had been discussed for some 40 years..." - Denver Council on Foreign Relations (12/01)

    The Development of Homeland Defense: A New National Imperative

    This is an interim, summary report on three regional seminar workshops on Homeland Defense held in Denver, Colorado, and sponsored by the Denver Council on Foreign Relations (DCFR) and the Inter-University Seminar on Armed Forces and Society (IUS), Rocky Mountain Region, also in association with the Institute on Globalization and Security (IGLOS), University of Denver.

    May 16, 2000 (Denver Country Club), November 9, 2000 (Loews Giorgio Hotel, Denver), May 18, 2001 (Denver Country Club)

    4. In regard to targets of attack, an attacker can take out key centers of energy or transportation without inflicting large casualties, so perhaps numbers of casualties should not be the sole guide for US counter-terrorist and Homeland Defense efforts.

    Seminar workshop participants quickly agreed that MAD is not effective today against the likes of Osama Bin Laden or other terrorists so a new doctrine of defense of the homeland is needed.

    While the bombing of the World Trade Center in New York several years ago was quite shocking, it was nowhere near what its perpetrator, Achmed Ramsey Youssef, had planned. His plan reportedly was to kill 250,000 people by blowing up the one tower so it would fall into the other tower, thus collapsing both. - Denver Council on Foreign Relations (Summer 2001)

    #####

    #####

    June 2001 - Attorney General John Ashcroft stops flying commercial aircrafts three months before 9/11.

    "In response to inquiries from CBS News over why Ashcroft was traveling exclusively by leased jet aircraft instead of commercial airlines, the Justice Department cited what it called a "threat assessment" by the FBI, and said Ashcroft has been advised to travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term." - CBS (06/26/01)

    - Note: Watch CBS News Correspondent Jim Stewart reports on Aschcroft's travel arrangements.

    =====

    =====

    June 1, 2001 - Dept. of Defense (DoD) initiates new instructions for military assistance relating to aircraft hijackings, the first time since 1997, which states that for all non-immediate responses, assistance from the DoD must get approval from the Secretary of Defense who is currently Donald Rumsfeld.

    "CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF INSTRUCTION; J-3; CJCSI; 3610.01A

    1 June 2001

    AIRCRAFT PIRACY (HIJACKING) AND DESTRUCTION OF DERELICT AIRBORNE OBJECTS

    1. Purpose. This instruction provides guidance to the Deputy Director for Operations (DDO), National Military Command Center (NMCC), and operational commanders in the event of an aircraft piracy (hijacking) or request for destruction of derelict airborne objects.

    2. Cancellation. CJCSI 3610.01, 31 July 1997.

    3. Applicability. This instruction applies to the Joint Staff, Services, unified commands, and the US Element, North American Aerospace Defense Command (USELEMNORAD).

    4. Policy.

    a. Aircraft Piracy (Hijacking) of Civil and Military Aircraft. Pursuant to references a and b, the Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), has exclusive responsibility to direct law enforcement activity related to actual or attempted aircraft piracy (hijacking) in the “special aircraft jurisdiction” of the United States. When requested by the Administrator, Department of Defense will provide assistance to these law enforcement efforts. Pursuant to reference c, the NMCC is the focal point within Department of Defense for providing assistance. In the event of a hijacking, the NMCC will be notified by the most expeditious means by the FAA. The NMCC will, with the exception of immediate responses as authorized by reference d, forward requests for DOD assistance to the Secretary of Defense for approval. DOD assistance to the FAA will be provided in accordance with reference d. Additional guidance is provided in Enclosure A."

    ENCLOSURE D; REFERENCES:

    d. DOD Directive 3025.15, 18 February 1997, “Military Assistance to Civil Authorities” - Defense Technical Information Center (06/01/01)

    "Department of Defense; DIRECTIVE NUMBER 3025.15

    February 18, 1997

    4.7. Requests for military assistance should be made and approved in the following ways:

    4.7.1. Immediate Response. Requests for an immediate response (i.e., any form of immediate action taken by a DoD Component or military commander to save lives, prevent human suffering, or mitigate great property damage under imminently serious conditions) may be made to any Component or Command. The DoD Components that receive verbal requests from civil authorities for support in an exigent emergency may initiate informal planning and, if required, immediately respond as authorized in DoD Directive 3025.1 (reference (g)). Civil authorities shall be informed that verbal requests for support in an emergency must be followed by a written request. As soon as practical, the DoD Component or Command rendering assistance shall report the fact of the request, the nature of the response, and any other pertinent information through the chain of command to the DoD Executive Secretary, who shall notify the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and any other appropriate officials. If the report does not include a copy of the civil authorities' written request, that request shall be forwarded to the DoD Executive Secretary as soon as it is available." - Defense Technical Information Center (02/18/97)

    Department of Defense; DIRECTIVE NUMBER 3025.1

    January 15, 1993

    SUBJECT: Military Support to Civil Authorities (MSCA)

    References: (e) through (u), see enclosure 1

    E1. ENCLOSURE 1

    (g) DoD 5025.1-M, "DoD Directives System Procedures," December 1990" - Defense Technical Information Center (01/15/93)

    (See also: January 20, 2001 - Donald H. Rumsfeld becomes the U.S. Secretary of Defense for the second time)

    June 1, 2001 - NORAD conducts Amalgam Virgo 01, an exercise involving a cruise missile attack scenario in which their presentation manual has a photo of Osama bin Laden on the cover and a picture of an explosion in a skyscraper inside.

    Amalgam Virgo

    "Amalgam Virgo is a joint-service, cruise-missile defense exercise at Tyndall AFB.

    Fast, low-flying cruise missiles are hard to detect. To practice their part in defending the U.S. from these missiles, members of the 513th Air Control Group deployed to Florida for the "Amalgam Virgo" cruise missile defense exercise. The multi-service exercise tested the defense and response capabilities to a cruise missile attack on Tyndall Air Force Base, Fla., June 1-4, 2001.

    Homeland defense is increasingly being discussed as a primary mission for Guard and Reserve forces. The exercise was coordinated by the Air National Guard's 1st Air Force and involved active duty, National Guard and Reserve forces, the U.S. Navy and Coast Guard as players.

    Contributing to the air picture was the Navy Aegis cruiser, USS Yorktown, in the Gulf of Mexico. Equipped with a high-powered radar capable of tracking more than 100 targets simultaneously, the Yorktown also played a role in the multi-layered defense used to shoot down a cruise missile

    Real-time battle management and the transmission of E-3 aircraft sensor information is nothing new to the members of the 513th ACG. Data linking the Airborne Warning and Control System "picture" involves providing continual updates of the battlefield, thereby providing command leadership the needed information to instantly respond to changing conditions. It is crucial that information gathered by the AWACS aircraft be transmitted to the specified command center for rapid analysis and response.

    amalgam_skyscraper_small.gifWhat was perhaps a bit different about this exercise was that it involved U.S. homeland defense and practicing to merge a variety of sister services' capabilities to create a uniform picture and response. There are 75,000 cruise missiles and cruise missile-like aircraft in about 75 countries around the world. Those facts, coupled with the ease with which a cruise missile can be acquired make cruise missile defense a priority. Because of the capability for people with very limited means, in relative terms, to be able to obtain a cruise missile, NORAD has to be very serious about that threat. Key to defending against cruise missiles is making sure all air defenders see the same thing. The goal of this exercise was to improve the air picture and counter new and emerging threats.

    The Coast Guard, Navy and U.S. Southern Command, took the lead in detecting, identifying and prosecuting the surrogate terrorist vessel that "launched" the cruise missiles for the exercise. From an air defense point of view, the exercise was a complete success. Twelve drones were launched, and twelve were 'destroyed.' The multi-layered defense structure worked as advertised.

    At the heart of the exercise was the Joint-Based Expeditionary Connectivity Center, or JBECC, which 1st Air Force tested as part of its Area Cruise Missile Defense demonstration. Ackermann explained that the JBECC is a highly mobile connectivity shelter, which can be deployed to high-risk areas to provide early warning of a cruise-missile attack. It does this by collecting and correlating radar information from the different services to provide an accurate tracking picture of low-level targets such as cruise missiles.

    During the June 2001 exercise Amalgam Virgo, ANZUS, Inc. demonstrated the Rosetta LINK-16 / Link-11 gateway functionality. Tracks and data were forwarded between both links in both directions in real-time. This demonstration served as the pre-certification contractor test which was scheduled for October 2001 at JITC. Additionally, ANZUS demonstrated the JMMTIDS JICO toolset capabilities developed to support the Joint Interface Control Officer in managing a complex combined interface architecture." - GlobalSecurity.org [PDF]

    (See also: June 4, 2002 - NORAD conducts Amalgam Virgo 02, an exercise involving a domestic commercial airliner-hijacking scenario planned before 9/11)

    ====

    ====

    July 2001 - U.S. plans to invade Afghanistan for an attack on Osama bin Laden and the Taliban by October 2001.

    US 'planned attack on Taleban'

    "A former Pakistani diplomat has told the BBC that the US was planning military action against Osama Bin Laden and the Taleban even before last week's attacks.

    Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October.

    Mr Naik told the BBC that at the meeting the US representatives told him that unless Bin Laden was handed over swiftly America would take military action to kill or capture both Bin Laden and the Taleban leader, Mullah Omar.

    The wider objective, according to Mr Naik, would be to topple the Taleban regime and install a transitional government of moderate Afghans in its place - possibly under the leadership of the former Afghan King Zahir Shah.

    He said that he was in no doubt that after the World Trade Center bombings this pre-existing US plan had been built upon and would be implemented within two or three weeks.

    And he said it was doubtful that Washington would drop its plan even if Bin Laden were to be surrendered immediately by the Taleban." - BBC (09/18/01)

    Attack and counter-attack, Evidence suggests that Washington had planned to move against Bin Laden in the summer. Was the attack on America a pre-emptive strike?

    "These are the troubling questions raised by the Guardian's disclosure at the weekend that the Taliban received a specific warning - passed during secret diplomacy in Berlin in July - that the Bush team had prepared a new plan to topple the entire Afghan regime militarily unless they handed Bin Laden over.

    The Guardian's disclosures are proving controversial. Some analysts say Bin Laden had evidently prepared his suicide pilots up to a year beforehand, thus making Washington's behaviour in July beside the point. Others ask why US threats of military strikes in July should be of any more concern to Bin Laden than previous episodes, such as Clinton's rocketing of his camps.

    Reliable western military sources say a US contingency plan existed on paper by the end of the summer to attack Afghanistan from the north." - Guardian (09/26/01)

    (See also: June 2001 - India and Iran will "facilitate" U.S. and Russian plans for "limited military action" against the Taliban; August 2001 - Taliban warns the U.S. of a huge attack from Osama bin Laden; September 4, 2001 - White House approves plans to invade Afghanistan; October 7, 2001 - U.S. invades Afghanistan)

    #####

    #####

    August 6, 2001 - In a CIA memo titled "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US", drafted the day before the anniversary of the Al Qaeda linked U.S. embassy bombings in Africa, George W. Bush is warned of possible terrorist attacks and plane hijackings in the U.S. from Osama bin Laden, but this revelation isn't made public until May 16, 2002.

    "President Bush and his top advisers were informed by the CIA early last August that terrorists associated with Osama bin Laden had discussed the possibility of hijacking airplanes, according to reliable sources.

    White House spokesman Ari Fleischer confirmed that Bush had been told about the possibility of hijackings but he declined to say what had been revealed during his intelligence briefings." - Washington Post (05/16/02)

    "White House officials acknowledged that U.S. intelligence officials informed President Bush weeks before the Sept. 11 attacks that bin Laden's terrorist network might try to hijack American planes, and that information prompted administration officials to issue a private warning to transportation officials and national security agencies." - ABC (05/16/02)

    "George Bush received specific warnings in the weeks before 11 September that an attack inside the United States was being planned by Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network, US government sources said yesterday.

    In a top-secret intelligence memo headlined 'Bin Laden determined to strike in the US', the President was told on 6 August that the Saudi-born terrorist hoped to 'bring the fight to America' in retaliation for missile strikes on al-Qaeda camps in Afghanistan in 1998." - Guardian (05/19/02)

    "FBI and CIA officials were advised in August that as many as 200 terrorists were slipping into this country and planning "a major assault on the United States," a high-ranking law enforcement official said Wednesday.

    The advisory was passed on by the Mossad, Israel's intelligence agency. It cautioned that it had picked up indications of a "large-scale target" in the United States and that Americans would be "very vulnerable," the official said." - LA Times (09/20/01)

    "The White House acknowledged Wednesday night that U.S. intelligence agents warned President Bush a month before Sept. 11 that Usama bin Laden's terror network might hijack American planes, but officials said the president had no way of knowing that they would use the planes as missiles for suicide attacks on American landmarks." - FOX/AP (05/16/02)

    august6memo.jpgFull text of the Aug. 6, 2001 memo:

    "Declassified and Approved for Release, 10 April 2004

    Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US

    Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate Bin Ladin since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the US. Bin Ladin implied in US television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and "bring the fighting to America."

    After US missile strikes on his base in Afghanistan in 1998, Bin Ladin told followers he wanted to retaliate in Washington, according to a ...(redacted portion) ... service.

    An Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) operative told an ... (redacted portion) ... service at the same time that Bin Ladin was planning to exploit the operative's access to the US to mount a terrorist strike.

    The millennium plotting in Canada in 1999 may have been part of Bin Ladin's first serious attempt to implement a terrorist strike in the US. Convicted plotter Ahmed Ressam has told the FBI that he conceived the idea to attack Los Angeles International Airport himself, but that Bin Ladin lieutenant Abu Zubaydah encouraged him and helped facilitate the operation. Ressam also said that in 1998 Abu Zubaydah was planning his own US attack.

    Ressam says Bin Ladin was aware of the Los Angeles operation.

    Although Bin Ladin has not succeeded, his attacks against the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 demonstrate that he prepares operations years in advance and is not deterred by setbacks. Bin Ladin associates surveilled our Embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam as early as 1993, and some members of the Nairobi cell planning the bombings were arrested and deported in 1997.

    Al-Qa'ida members -- including some who are US citizens -- have resided in or traveled to the US for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks. Two al-Qa'ida members found guilty in the conspiracy to bomb our Embassies in East Africa were US citizens, and a senior EIJ member lived in California in the mid-1990s.

    A clandestine source said in 1998 that a Bin Ladin cell in New York was recruiting Muslim-American youth for attacks.

    We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a ... (redacted portion) ... service in 1998 saying that Bin Ladin wanted to hijack a US aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Shaykh" 'Umar 'Abd al-Rahman and other US-held extremists.

    Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.

    The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full field investigations throughout the US that it considers Bin Ladin-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our Embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group of Bin Ladin supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives." - Washington Post (04/10/04)

    (See also: June 2001 - Convicted terrorist provided US officials with very specific info about a terrorist attack, info was used in Aug 6 memo; May 16, 2002 - News comes out that the Bush Administration received warnings about terrorist attacks and plane hijackings by Osama Bin Laden; April 10, 2004 - The White House releases the August 6th memo)

    ###########

    ###########

    September 3, 2001 - Salman Rushdie 'given US air ban week before terrorist attacks'

    "Salman Rushdie says US authorities banned him from taking internal flights a week before the terrorist attacks.

    He thinks officials were aware of an imminent terrorist strike.

    He says the Federal Aviation Authority told his publisher it had intelligence of something about to happen.

    The author told The Times the FAA banned him from internal flights in the US and Canada on September 3, unless airlines complied with extra security measures.

    He says the airlines weren't willing to upgrade their security.

    According to the newspaper, the FAA has confirmed it stepped up security levels relating to Rushdie, but that it refused to give further details." - Ananova (09/27/01)

    September 4, 2001 - The White House approves plans to invade Afghanistan.

    Finger-Pointing On Anti-Terror Plan

    "An official said one such plan was drafted during the early days of the Bush administration, but was only ready for presentation to the president on Sept. 10, a day before the attacks.

    Top Bush administration officials approved what McCormack called the "comprehensive strategy to eliminate al Qaeda" exactly one week before the Sept. 11 attacks." - CBS (08/05/01)

    War not realistic option before 9/11

    "Secretary of State Colin Powell testified Tuesday that the option of an invasion was not seriously considered until a week before the Sept. 11 attacks, when Bush's senior foreign policy advisers approved a detailed counterterrorism strategy." - USA Today (03/23/04)

    (See also: July 2001 - US plans an attack on OBL and the Taliban for the middle of October; September 10, 2001 - White House's Afghan invasion plan awaits Bush's approval)

    September 5, 2001 - U.S. pulls the plug on Muslim websites.

    US pulls the plug on Muslim websites

    "Five hundred websites - many of them with an Arab or Muslim connection - crashed last Wednesday when an anti-terrorism taskforce raided InfoCom Corporation in Texas.

    The 80-strong taskforce that descended upon the IT company included FBI agents, Secret Service agents, Diplomatic Security agents, tax inspectors, immigration officials, customs officials, department of commerce officials and computer experts." - Guardian (09/10/01)

    FBI accused of anti-Muslim bias

    "Muslim leaders have accused the FBI of conducting an "anti-Muslim witch hunt" following a raid on the Texas offices of a Middle East internet service provider.

    An 80-strong US terrorism task force searched the Texas offices of Infocom Corporation on Wednesday and Thursday.

    The company is host to a number of Arabic websites, including that of the Arab world's leading independent television news channel.

    "American Muslims view the action as just one of a long list of attempts by the pro-Israel lobby to intimidate and silence all those who wish to see Palestinian Muslims and Christians free themselves of a brutal apartheid-like occupation," said a statement by a coalition of Muslim groups.

    Infocom said the raid resulted in a temporary shutdown of websites it hosted for about 500 customers, including that run by Al-Jazeera television and the newspaper Al-Sharq, both based in the Gulf state of Qatar.

    A lawyer for Infocom said the company had no links to terrorist groups and was co-operating with the FBI.

    Muslim leaders have rallied around Infocom. In a statement, several American Islamic groups condemned the search as "an anti-Muslim witch hunt promoted by the pro-Israel lobby in America"." - BBC (09/07/01)

    FBI Agents Raid Muslim-Owned Internet Company

    "Anti-terrorism agents" from the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and other federal law enforcement agencies, continued Thursday to search the offices of the Muslim-owned InfoCom Corporation, a Texas-based Internet service provider, after raiding its offices early Wednesday morning without any explanation.

    InfoCom hosts more than 500 web sites worldwide, both in the Middle East and in the United States, according to a media advisory from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

    The company hosts a web portal that services the Middle East, and the FBI search resulted in disruption of satellite television service in the United Arab Emirates, according to reports from Dubai.

    Qatar-based Al-Jazeera satellite television, a popular and world renowned Arabic news source, has been frequently criticized by Israel for its reporting on the Middle East conflict, according to CAIR's advisory.

    Among the domestic web sites whose servers are currently blocked as the "investigation" continues are those of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), whose annual conference took place in Chicago this past weekend, and CAIR's southwest office, as well as its e-mail listserv service, which the organization moved to another server.

    The website of the Muslim Students Association (MSA) was also affected." - Islam Online (09/06/01)===

    =========September 10, 2001 - San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown receives a travel warning eight hours before the attacks.

    "For Mayor Willie Brown, the first signs that something was amiss came late Monday when he got a call from what he described as his airport security - - a full eight hours before yesterday's string of terrorist attacks -- advising him that Americans should be cautious about their air travel.

    Exactly where the call came from is a bit of a mystery. The mayor would say only that it came from "my security people at the airport."

    "We can only do what we can," the mayor said, adding, "Hell, if they can't protect the Pentagon from attack, what can they protect?" - SFGate.com (09/12/01)

    Side note: It has been rumored that Condoleezza Rice gave Mayor Brown this warning. Here is were that came from...

    "David Irving comments: ACCORDING to a report today Friday, May 17, 2002, on Pacifica Radio, the warning to San Francisco's mayor came from squeaky-clean Condoleezza Rice." - Action Report (05/16/02)

    ====================

    ====================

    john_howard_bush.jpg September 10, 2001 - President George Bush and Australian Prime Minister John Howard meet at the Washington Navy Yard to hand over the bell from USS Canberra to the Australian Government and a survivor of the sunken Australian Canberra will have his reservation to fly on Flight 77 the next day cancelled by the Australian Embassy.

    Bush, Australian leader meet

    "U.S. President George Bush and Australian Prime Minister John Howard met Monday to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the military alliance between the two countries.

    Bush presented Howard with a gift that symbolizes the U.S.-Australia military alliance -- the ship's bell of the USS Canberra, an American vessel named in honor of an Australian warship lost in World War II. The ceremony took place at the Washington Navy Yard.

    Howard enjoys what he calls a 'special relationship' with the United States and that relationship is on solid ground despite a few recent trade disputes. He has been largely supportive of the United States' proposed missile defense plan.

    U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell earlier this year said Australia was one of America's "very, very best friends in the world" partly because it has regularly drawn on Australian support over the years.

    In 1990, Australia was one of the first nations to lend its support to the U.S.-led military build up and then intervention in the Persian Gulf following Iraq's invasion of Kuwait.

    Currently, the military alliance -- on the surface at least -- amounts to little more than occasional joint naval or military exercises, in addition to Australia providing the real estate for some strategic American listening posts." - CNN (09/10/01)

    Canberra vet lives to tell the tale

    "It's September 10 in Washington, USA, as survivor of the sunken HMAS Canberra, Mackenzie Gregory, turns to Australian Prime Minister John Howard and says "See you tomorrow at Arlington".

    Unbeknown to Mr Gregory, he is about to survive another event of historical significance - the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington the following day.

    Furthermore, Mr Gregory may also have the Prime Minister to thank for his good fortune after he was originally booked on Flight 77 that crashed into the Pentagon on September 11.

    Staff from the Australian Embassy cancelled the booking from Flight 77 and re-scheduled his flight to coincide with the Prime Minister's attendance at a wreath-laying ceremony in Arlington.

    As one of the few survivors from the sinking of HMAS Canberra on August 9, 1942, Mr Gregory was in Washington for a ceremony handing over the bell from USS Canberra to the Australian Government.

    President George W Bush even broke ranks to personally meet Mr Gregory, with Mr Bush ordering a three-star marine general to photograph himself with Mr Gregory, his wife and Prime Minister John Howard.

    The next morning Flight 77 was flown into the nearby Pentagon, with Mr Gregory and his wife taken to a hotel opposite the Australian Embassy shortly after." - Australian Navy (10/01/01)

  14. There is!!! a window washing conspiracy !! and here it is ....

    ==

    August 2nd, 2012

    The Windex Conspiracy or Vinegar and Water?

    The Windex conspiracy. Every time we use windex we close our eyes to the reality that it doesn’t work that well. And on the rare occasions that it does, a day later the tell tale streaks of our towel appear. That is the conspiracy. We are asked to believe Windex works even in the face of the evidence that it doesn’t. Then we grab the bottle of Windex to clean up the streaks..? Would you clean a wine glass with windex? Probably not. The good news is you can easily clean a window the way you would wash a wine glass. Water, a soft scrubber or towel, and a very little soap. No suds (so add the soap to the water after you fill a bucket). Towel dry it. It will look great. Save your money on the Windex. Enough said.

    My mom used vinegar…What do you use to clean windows?” Elbow grease; that’s my cheeky answer. The real answer is we use a product called Dawn…dishsoap…and just a wee drab. That, and the proper technique and tools produce the professional result. A professional cleaner uses a strip washer to apply water, a 5″ razor, brushes, sea sponges and a squeegee in their craft. I can’t prove it, but I believe that vinegar and newspaper (or ammonia or TSP) hold their sacred place in window cleaning mythology because at one time they were the tools of choice. Everyone had vinegar on hand, and newspaper was plentiful and essentially free. Equally, there was once a time when the Sears catalog was the tool of choice in the bathroom. Yet today, most everyone would agree there are far superior products for the purpose.

    Vinegar really is a good and versatile cleanser, which can be used in pickeling and other cooking. And, until the recent digital age of printing, newspapers were printed on a more absorbant, less slick paper and covered news. Nowadays, a wide range of detergents out-clean vinegar and are more common than vinegar in our homes. Plus, towels are inexpensive and easily available.

    Given the times and circumstances, vinegar and newspaper once made sense. Today, a homeowner can use soap in moderation with a terry cloth towel and feel just as good about the job. Or even a little better.

    Next week I’ll publish complete cleaning instructions right out of our beginning cleaner’s manual!

    1. Is Kenya's tetanus vaccine a secret sterilization campaign?
      World Magazine‎ - 1 day ago
      NAIROBI, Kenya—The Catholic Church in Kenya is up in arms about a government campaign to vaccinate women against tetanus, saying it ...
      'A mass sterilization exercise': Kenyan doctors find anti-fertility agent ... Lifesite
      WHO-UNICEF Tetanus Vaccination Campaign: A “Well-Coordinated ... Center for Research on Globalization
      Mass Sterilization Campaign: UN Laces Tetanus Vaccine With Drug ... LifeNews.com
      Washington Times - Talk Radio News Service
    2. Doctors: UN Vaccines in Kenya Used to Sterilize Women
      The New American‎ - 2 days ago
      In a statement released last week by the Kenya Catholic Doctors ... “The unfortunate truth is that the vaccine was laced with [sterilizing agent ...
    3. Kenyan gvmt launches probe into claim UN is using vaccines for ...
      Lifesite‎ - 2 hours ago
      Kenyan gvmt launches probe into claim UN is using vaccines for ... a documented involvement in developing a sterilization vaccine using the ...
    4. Is the WHO Using Vaccines to Secretly Sterilize Women All Over the ...
      Center for Research on Globalization‎ - 1 day ago
      ... vaccines” laced with sterilizing agents to girls and women in Kenya. ... According to a statement released Tuesday by the Kenya Catholic ...
    5. “Depopulation Vaccine” in Kenya and Beyond
      Center for Research on Globalization‎ - 2 days ago
      And not just a vaccine against the “killer germ” of the moment. ... Mass Sterilization: Kenyan Doctors Find Anti-Fertility Agent in UN Tetanus ...
    6. Kenyan government promises probe into vaccination campaign that ...
      Catholic Culture‎ - 1 day ago
      Kenyan government promises probe into vaccination campaign that included sterilization ... Catholic health-care workers found that the vaccine used to inoculate young women against tetanus also included a hormone that ...
    7. Kenyan Doctors Find Anti-Fertility Agent In Tetanus Vaccine ...
      The Inquisitr‎ - 5 days ago
      The Kenya Catholic Doctors Association is charging two separate United Nations organizations with knowingly sterilizing millions of women ...
    using the ...
    ++++
    United Nations Charged With Birth Control Subterfuge In Kenya
    Acton Institute (blog)‎ - 6 days ago
    kenya vaccine ... a statement this week saying they have found an antigen that can cause miscarriages and sterilization in women and girls.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++
    Anti-Fertility Under The Guise Of A Tetanus Vaccine For Africa ...
    Headlines & Global News‎ - 3 days ago
    Catholic bishops in Kenya are urging their congregations to refuse the tetanus vaccine, because they claim it is part of a sterilization movement ...

  15. Baltimore police officer charged with misconduct and perjury for arresting man he knew was innocent. (CLICK LINK)
    ##############
    ##############
    ==============
    ==============
    3rd Arrest for 90-Year-Old Man Who Feeds Homeless. The city of Fort Lauderdale has issued three criminal citations against him, but he says he has no fear of spending time in jail. (CLICK LINK)

    Arnold Abbott’s on a mission to feed the homeless and he won’t let a newly enacted law in Fort Lauderdale stand in his way.
    Abbott’s been cited with a criminal violation three times since the city’s ban on “public food sharing” went into effect Oct. 22. His most recent arrest came Wednesday night, according to WSVN.com.

  16. SECONDLY, William Harvey was drunk as a skunk in Italy in 1963, stationed there by RFK for insubordination in 1962, so he was nowhere near Dealey Plaza. Whether he helped to plan the JFK murder by telephone is doubtful /// Paul Trejo

    ++++++++++++++\

    GAAL

    He was always drinking. Trejo has no clue were HARVEY was on 11/22. Had a sharp mind. In 63 was close to James Jesus Angleton. You make it sound like in 63 he was on his death bed........Harvey died in 76 (BTW I thought Hunt (in confessions you like) fingered Harvey ??)

    ========

    Peter Wright, Spycatcher (1987)

    Harvey was already a living legend in the CIA for his hard drinking and his cowboy manners. He began his career handling Soviet counterespionage for the FBI, until Hoover sacked him for drunkenness. He promptly took his invaluable FBI knowledge and put it to work for the fledgling CIA, becoming along with Angleton one of the most influential American operators in the secret war against the KGB. Through most of the 1950s he served in Berlin, running agents, digging tunnels, and taking the battle to the Soviets wherever possible. For him, the Cold War was as real as if it had been hand-to-hand combat. But for all his crude aggression, Harvey was smart, with a nose for a spy. It was he who first fingered Philby in the USA after the defection of Burgess and Maclean. Harvey had amazing recall for the details of defections and cases decades before, and it was he, before anyone else, who put together the contradictory strands of the M16 man's career. While others paused for doubt, Harvey pursued Philby with implacable vengeance, and the incident left him with a streak of vindictive anti-British sentiment.

    William Harvey died as a result of complications from heart surgery in June, 1976.

    ######

    GAAL

    Paul Trejo conjectures a great demarcation between CIA and the USA far right . This dosent trend with horrible things (for Trejo) called facts.
    CIA/Dulles had access to USA far right.

    ######################################################
    ######################################################

    • De Gaulle plot is from CIA thus GATLIN CIA
    see

    Phillips is one of the most utterly fascinating suspects in the JFK case.

    Simply take for example the fact that he and McCord ran the CIA’s counterintelligence program against the FPCC. I mean, does that not suggest that he may have been involved with what Oswald was doing in New Orleans in the summer of 1963? For the simple reason that too many people saw Oswald either at 544 Camp Street or with Banister and/or Ferrie. In Destiny Betrayed, I listed over ten witnesses who were credible on this issue. Including people like Bill Gaudet and Vernon Gerdes and Allen Campbell. (See pages 110-113) Therefore, if Oswald was an undercover agent against the FPCC, which he has all the earmarks of being, then Phillips likely knew what he was doing.

    Then there is Phillips in Mexico City. And how he and Goodpasture controlled the daily take from the target embassies. And how the declassified ARRB files reveal that Phillips mailed the Oswald trasncripts to himself at Langley under a false name . Not to mention the fact that the Lopez Report catches Phillips in at least three lies. One of the things Hardway revealed in PIttsburgh was that the HSCA prepared two indictments for perjury about Mexico CIty, one for Phillips and one for Goodpasture. Did anyone see this on the MSM during the 50th?

    One of the most ridiculous things about the WR and volumes is that Phillips’ name is not in the nearly 19,000 pages of materials. I mean, this may have been the guy managing Oswald at a mid level in the months leading up to the assassination.

    Then there is the Veciana story about the SOuthland building and the story about Phillips’ last call to his brother. And the incredible confession at UCLA with Mark Lane, that when all was in, there was no evidence about Oswald being at the Soviet Embassy. I mean he should know since Lopez told me that Phillips and Goodpasture were as tight as Mutt and Jeff in Mexico City.

    If there was ever a guy who you needed every bit of paper on declassified its this guy

    ++++++++++++++++++++

    OFFICE OF SECURITY = McCord

    This same Navy memo arrived at CIA and, after a Warren Report type "delayed reaction", eventually went to James Angleton's CI/SIG unit on December 6th. Angleton was chief of counter-intelligence. SIG was a kind of safeguard unit that protected the Agency from penetration agents. It was closely linked to the Office of Security in that regard. But as Newman queries: where was it for the previous 31 days? Newman notes that the Snyder cable and this Navy memo fell into a "black hole " somewhere. In fact, the very first file Newman could find on Oswald was not even at CI/SIG. It was at the Office of Security. This is all quite puzzling because, as the author notes, neither should have been the proper resting place for an initial file on Oswald. This black hole "kept the Oswald files away from the spot we would expect them to go-the Soviet Russia division." (p. 27)

    ++++++++++++++

    William Turner, Rearview Mirror (2001)
    -
    That left Maurice Brooks Gatlin, Sr., an attorney associated with Banister, on Brooks's list of key Minutemen in Louisiana. According to Brooks, Gatlin served as legal counsel to the ACLC. In fact, Brooks had been a kind of protege of Gatlin. The attorney's passport was stamped with visas of countries around the world. In Brooks's estimation, he was a "transporter" for the CIA. On one occasion Gatlin bodaciously told Brooks, "I have pretty good connections. Stick with me-I'll give you a license to kill." Brooks became a firm believer in 1962 when Gatlin displayed a thick wad of bills, saying he had $ioo,ooo of CIA money earmarked for a French reactionary clique planning to assassinate General de Gaulle. Shortly thereafter Gatlin flew to Paris, and shortly after that came the Secret Army Organization's abortive ambush of the French president. But Gatlin as well was beyond Garrison's reach. In 1964 he fell or was pushed from the sixth floor of the Panama Hotel in Panama, dying instantly.
    =
    from POST #4 this thread. (( http://educationforu...=21367&p=289623 ))
    ==
    (Gaal)
    Michael Paine a Cabot from both sides of his families worked at Bell Helicopter. The Cabots controlled the First National Bank of Boston which controlled Textron which controlled Bell Helicopter. Michael Paine thus worked for his family - the Cabots. Textron lobbied the Pentagon in 1958 for increased usage of helicopters in warfare. The death of JFK insured Textron (the Cabots) got its wish of increased helicopter warefare,AKA the Vietnam War.
    Dulles and the Cabots were joined at the hip in secret covert operations. The Dulles brothers represented as lawyers United Fruit and also were large United Fruit investors and the Cabots were large United Fruit Investors.
    =
    SLATE By Ray Fisman

    In 1951, Jacobo Árbenz Gúzman became Guatemala's second democratically elected president. Árbenz's authoritarian predecessors had been very sympathetic to American business interests, particularly those of the United Fruit Co. (now Chiquita), which had bought up land titles on the cheap from Guatemala's corrupt elite for its ever-expanding banana empire. Once in office, Presidente Árbenz sought to take it all back, nationalizing UFC's Guatemalan assets and redistributing them to the poor.

    But UFC had friends in very high places—the assistant secretary of state for inter-American affairs, John Moor Cabot, was the brother of UFC President Thomas Cabot. The secretary of state himself, John Foster Dulles, had done legal work for UFC, and his brother Allen Dulles was director of the CIA and also on UFC's board. Thanks to the Freedom of Information Act, we now know that the various Cabots and Dulleses had a series of top-secret meetings in which they decided that Árbenz had to go and sponsored a coup that drove Árbenz from office in 1954.

    =

    (Gaal)

    GATLIN wrote letters to the assistant secretary of state for inter-American affairs, John Moor Cabot (above) about the so-called communist activities of Guatemala's Jacobo Árbenz Gúzman. Did Gatlin appear on the radar of CABOT/DULLES as a possible intel asset in the 1950s ??

  17. Cop Dressed as Donald Duck Sets Trap for Drivers, Rakes in $30,000 in Tickets in One Day (click link)

    Can you say "revenue generation"? No, I'm sorry, this is "catching dangerous criminals" (by first creating a dangerous situation to create someone you can label a criminal first).

    Apparently the profession of police officer in America now amounts to little more than, well... What exactly is the word for this?

    .......What a joke.

    Throw this on the pile of sleazy, underhanded police state tactics like Rahm Emanuel’s administration making all of Chicago’s yellow lights just 0.1 second shorter just to rake in an extra $8 million in new tickets; the fact that Keene, New Hampshire is suing a group of activists for putting change in people’s parking meters because of the lost revenue generated by giving out parking tickets; and the cops in Waldo, Florida who finally outed their sheriff for enforcing illegal ticket quotas.

    A retired police sergeant of 14 years wrote, “I am so annoyed at what is happening these days, in what I call ‘indiscriminate revenue gathering’ It is absolutely disgusting. The government and the Police Force need to hang their heads in shame.”....

    ##################################

    New Orleans police routinely ignored rape cases, scathing report finds Police chief ‘deeply disturbed’ by allegations that five detectives failed to investigate properly more than 1,000 cases of sex crimes and child abuse (click link)

    In the latest blow to New Orleans’ troubled police department, a city inspector general’s report claims five detectives failed to do substantial investigation of more than 1,000 cases of sex crimes and child abuse — with one detective being cited for stating a belief that simple rape should not be considered a crime.

    +++++++++++++++++

  18. Nor am I talking about the guy (whom I think you are talking about) who is wearing a suit and tie and hiding his face with his cigarette-holding hand at 1:05:40. (FWIW, I don't think that's Shelley. I think it's Gordon Novell...) // THOMAS GRAVES

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    The fellow has subtle wrinkles ,so to old for Novell. To me its Shelley.

  19. OMG ! An obscure website back's Gaal's view it must be true!

    Steve explain to us how your last post about the BBC report contradicts mine.

    Russia produce radar data which 'proves' military aircraft was flying close to MH17 when it was shot down above Ukraine (CLICK LINK)

    Russia today produced 'evidence' that it claims shows at least one military aircraft was flying close to Flight MH17 when it was shot down, killing all 298 on board.

    Data from air traffic controllers in Rostov-on-Don, leaked to a Moscow newspaper, appears to show an unidentified object flying at the time of the crash on 17 July and remaining in the area for 20 minutes after the crash.

    Russian military experts have previously claimed a Ukrainian war plane shot down the Malaysia Airline flight, but it has taken 119 days for sources to produce the 'proof'.

  20. ...

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Anyone who thinks Walker did it is working for a Bobby Inman dominated school and his responses are political.Said school is named after man who now heads BLACKWATER AKA Xe AKA Academi.

    ===========

    what's good for the goose is good for the gander (Gaal)

    Steven, if you're saying that Bobby Inman has evidence that Ex-General Edwin Walker led the plot to murder JFK, then I would be DELIGHTED to see it. This is news to me.

    Sincerely,

    --Paul Trejo

    No derogatory comment, but English not really your first language.

    [...]

    You've got a lot of damn gall, Gaal.

    Trejo writes English much better than you do.

    At least he writes in complete, intelligible sentences.

    --Tommy :sun

    You have got a lot of Paul ,Thomas.

    Trejo ignores the key points of my posts .like any USA politician

    He ignores truths in complete sentences.(like any USA politician)

    ++++++++++++++++

    Posted 12 November 2014 - 10:40 PM

    Paul Brancato, on 12 Nov 2014 - 1:47 PM, said:

    Does my memory fail me? Do either Garrison or Mellen think that Oswald was blackmailed by Banister, or that he was working with Banister because they were on the same side, or that Oswald was guilty of plotting with Banister and Ferrie to kill JFK? I think not.

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    (GAAL POST)

    Paul I laugh ....Banister manister this whole thread wacky

    • De Gaulle plot from CIA thus GATLIN CIA
    see

    Phillips is one of the most utterly fascinating suspects in the JFK case.

    Simply take for example the fact that he and McCord ran the CIA’s counterintelligence program against the FPCC. I mean, does that not suggest that he may have been involved with what Oswald was doing in New Orleans in the summer of 1963? For the simple reason that too many people saw Oswald either at 544 Camp Street or with Banister and/or Ferrie. In Destiny Betrayed, I listed over ten witnesses who were credible on this issue. Including people like Bill Gaudet and Vernon Gerdes and Allen Campbell. (See pages 110-113) Therefore, if Oswald was an undercover agent against the FPCC, which he has all the earmarks of being, then Phillips likely knew what he was doing.

    Then there is Phillips in Mexico City. And how he and Goodpasture controlled the daily take from the target embassies. And how the declassified ARRB files reveal that Phillips mailed the Oswald trasncripts to himself at Langley under a false name . Not to mention the fact that the Lopez Report catches Phillips in at least three lies. One of the things Hardway revealed in PIttsburgh was that the HSCA prepared two indictments for perjury about Mexico CIty, one for Phillips and one for Goodpasture. Did anyone see this on the MSM during the 50th?

    One of the most ridiculous things about the WR and volumes is that Phillips’ name is not in the nearly 19,000 pages of materials. I mean, this may have been the guy managing Oswald at a mid level in the months leading up to the assassination.

    Then there is the Veciana story about the SOuthland building and the story about Phillips’ last call to his brother. And the incredible confession at UCLA with Mark Lane, that when all was in, there was no evidence about Oswald being at the Soviet Embassy. I mean he should know since Lopez told me that Phillips and Goodpasture were as tight as Mutt and Jeff in Mexico City.

    If there was ever a guy who you needed every bit of paper on declassified its this guy

    ++++++++++++++++++++

    OFFICE OF SECURITY = McCord

    This same Navy memo arrived at CIA and, after a Warren Report type "delayed reaction", eventually went to James Angleton's CI/SIG unit on December 6th. Angleton was chief of counter-intelligence. SIG was a kind of safeguard unit that protected the Agency from penetration agents. It was closely linked to the Office of Security in that regard. But as Newman queries: where was it for the previous 31 days? Newman notes that the Snyder cable and this Navy memo fell into a "black hole " somewhere. In fact, the very first file Newman could find on Oswald was not even at CI/SIG. It was at the Office of Security. This is all quite puzzling because, as the author notes, neither should have been the proper resting place for an initial file on Oswald. This black hole "kept the Oswald files away from the spot we would expect them to go-the Soviet Russia division." (p. 27)

    ++++++++++++++

    William Turner, Rearview Mirror (2001)
    -
    That left Maurice Brooks Gatlin, Sr., an attorney associated with Banister, on Brooks's list of key Minutemen in Louisiana. According to Brooks, Gatlin served as legal counsel to the ACLC. In fact, Brooks had been a kind of protege of Gatlin. The attorney's passport was stamped with visas of countries around the world. In Brooks's estimation, he was a "transporter" for the CIA. On one occasion Gatlin bodaciously told Brooks, "I have pretty good connections. Stick with me-I'll give you a license to kill." Brooks became a firm believer in 1962 when Gatlin displayed a thick wad of bills, saying he had $ioo,ooo of CIA money earmarked for a French reactionary clique planning to assassinate General de Gaulle. Shortly thereafter Gatlin flew to Paris, and shortly after that came the Secret Army Organization's abortive ambush of the French president. But Gatlin as well was beyond Garrison's reach. In 1964 he fell or was pushed from the sixth floor of the Panama Hotel in Panama, dying instantly.
    =
    from POST #4 this thread. (( http://educationforu...=21367&p=289623 ))
    ==
    (Gaal)
    Michael Paine a Cabot from both sides of his families worked at Bell Helicopter. The Cabots controlled the First National Bank of Boston which controlled Textron which controlled Bell Helicopter. Michael Paine thus worked for his family - the Cabots. Textron lobbied the Pentagon in 1958 for increased usage of helicopters in warfare. The death of JFK insured Textron (the Cabots) got its wish of increased helicopter warefare,AKA the Vietnam War.

    Dulles and the Cabots were joined at the hip in secret covert operations. The Dulles brothers represented as lawyers United Fruit and also were large United Fruit investors and the Cabots were large United Fruit Investors.

    =

    SLATE By Ray Fisman

    In 1951, Jacobo Árbenz Gúzman became Guatemala's second democratically elected president. Árbenz's authoritarian predecessors had been very sympathetic to American business interests, particularly those of the United Fruit Co. (now Chiquita), which had bought up land titles on the cheap from Guatemala's corrupt elite for its ever-expanding banana empire. Once in office, Presidente Árbenz sought to take it all back, nationalizing UFC's Guatemalan assets and redistributing them to the poor.

    But UFC had friends in very high places—the assistant secretary of state for inter-American affairs, John Moor Cabot, was the brother of UFC President Thomas Cabot. The secretary of state himself, John Foster Dulles, had done legal work for UFC, and his brother Allen Dulles was director of the CIA and also on UFC's board. Thanks to the Freedom of Information Act, we now know that the various Cabots and Dulleses had a series of top-secret meetings in which they decided that Árbenz had to go and sponsored a coup that drove Árbenz from office in 1954.

    =

    (Gaal)

    GATLIN wrote letters to the assistant secretary of state for inter-American affairs, John Moor Cabot (above) about the so-called communist activities of Guatemala's Jacobo Árbenz Gúzman. Did Gatlin appear on the radar of CABOT/DULLES as a possible intel asset in the 1950s ??

×
×
  • Create New...