You can fool some of the people some of the time

The San Francisco Bay Area has some of the finest creative and dedicated people in the world when it comes to exposing injustice, protecting the environment, and championing human rights.

That the U.S. government has known for years about oil depletion and impending petrocollapse is no secret. Yet no real solutions have been proposed to transform communities to support themselves once the era of cheap energy and consumption is over. Now, the human race stands on the brink of extinction or survival, as very little time remains to transform our communities, and make the transition from oil-dependence to sustainable, local solutions.

Many have known for years about the RAND Corp.'s studies on Critical Mass, and others may suspect that Bay Area activists were literally experimented on by the U.S. military in conjunction with the RAND Corp. and other "think tanks" that work to empower those who simply desire more and more money. The question that has not been asked and explored is, exactly what did RAND and the Pentagon make use of in their experiments on activist culture? There was far more going on in the late 1990s than experiments on Critical Mass: recall the suppression of KPFA, the Urban Warrior military exercises, and others. The US military was present at the Seattle WTO protests, and twisted these grassroots ideas for use against protestors to divide-and conquer on behalf of the elite's agenda of global control.

Following are three simple examples:

-Critical Mass cyclists made use of cell phones to communicate with one another starting in late 1997. This was highly effective in avoiding deliberate police traps designed to ensnare unsuspecting cyclists. Today, nearly all cell phones have built-in batteries that cannot be removed, and the NSA in conjunction with Motorola and other cell phone manufacturers have the ability to turn on your cell phone remotely, and listen in on private conversations. Billions of dollars have been wasted by the NSA and the Department of Defense, developing the ability to triangulate cell phone signals, and locate individuals geographical coordinates within a few meters. This abuse of privacy is now used in the Middle East and elsewhere, to execute people defending their homelands with weapons such as hellfire missiles, which can home-in on certain individuals the US government wishes to eliminate. Murder by remote control is a coward's war, and cowards hide behind lies and deception, like the leaders in Washington DC.

-Studies have been conducted on disrupting grassroots organizing efforts, by making use of the old trick of divide-and-conquer. It only takes one or two individuals among a group of people committed to a worthy cause to interject divisiveness with accusations of racism, sexism, homophobia, and other issues. The idea of political correctness is now used to subvert organizing efforts whenever possible, while the powers-that-be remain united along their common desire: greed. Worthy causes need to be supported, and not scuttled due to lack of perfect representation across ethnic, gender, religious, sexual orientation, and other lines. Smart, effective activists are aware of this, but many newcomers are quickly turned off by the confrontation, divisive tone that is often interjected at meetings, whether by infiltrators, or simply by people who feel full equality and equal representation is needed to make a group effort worthwhile.

-Media self-censorship and allegiance to advertising dollar$ corrupts absolutely. Gary Webb, who risked his life and career to break the story in the San Jose Mercury News on CIA drug running into US inner cities, fell victim to such corruption. So has Michael Ruppert, who continued his fine reporting on 9/11 and the dark side of U.S. The death of Anna Nicole, and Saint Clinton's private affairs really have no bearing on quality-of-life issues to most working peoples. What these news reports do functions as is a diversion from meaningful issues that do impact everyone's quality of life. Demand better from your media, or shun their corporate sponsors.

Put on your thinking caps, and please add your own insights on exactly what tactics and creativity was exploited to divide and conquer people seeking peace, harmony, and justice.


This commentary is in the public domain, and is dedicated to Michael C. Ruppert and Gary Webb.

The photo of Iwo Jima is one of the most recognized pieces of American history and imagery. The RAND Corp. studied and twisted grassroots organizing tactics, as explained here and here:

http://bikesummer.org/CanRAND.html
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/02/16/18364555.php

Now connect these dots to see how BushCo manipulated imagery to launch its wars in the Middle East:

http://bikesummer.org/2007/iwo_jima.jpg

http://bikesummer.org/SFCMvideo/PIC00004.JPG

http://www.coreykoberg.com/9-11-01/IwoFirefighters-large.jpg

Much, much more video and pictures at:
http://bikesummer.org/

Another RAND Corp. ripoff?

Bay Area activists videotaped the police for years, in order to hold them accountable for misconduct and police brutality. These same tactics are now used by the police to intimidate citizens from exercising their first amendment rights. Kudos to this judge in NYC for his ruling limiting the use of videocameras by police. Article reposted from http://nyc.indymedia.org/


Videotaping the police

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/16/nyregion/16police.html?pagewanted=print

February 16, 2007

Judge Limits New York Police Taping
By JIM DWYER

In a rebuke of a surveillance practice greatly expanded by the New York Police Department after the Sept. 11 attacks, a federal judge ruled yesterday that the police must stop the routine videotaping of people at public gatherings unless there is an indication that unlawful activity may occur.

Four years ago, at the request of the city, the same judge, Charles S. Haight Jr., gave the police greater authority to investigate political, social and religious groups.

In yesterday’s ruling, Judge Haight, of United States District Court in Manhattan, found that by videotaping people who were exercising their right to free speech and breaking no laws, the Police Department had ignored the milder limits he had imposed on it in 2003.

Citing two events in 2005 ­ a march in Harlem and a demonstration by homeless people in front of the home of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg ­ the judge said the city had offered scant justification for videotaping the people involved.

“There was no reason to suspect or anticipate that unlawful or terrorist activity might occur,” he wrote, “or that pertinent information about or evidence of such activity might be obtained by filming the earnest faces of those concerned citizens and the signs by which they hoped to convey their message to a public official.”

While he called the police conduct “egregious,” Judge Haight also offered an unusual judicial mea culpa, taking responsibility for his own words in a 2003 order that he conceded had not been “a model of clarity.”

The restrictions on videotaping do not apply to bridges, tunnels, airports, subways or street traffic, Judge Haight noted, but are meant to control police surveillance at events where people gather to exercise their rights under the First Amendment.

“No reasonable person, and surely not this court, is unaware of the perils the New York public faces and the crucial importance of the N.Y.P.D.’s efforts to detect, prevent and punish those who would cause others harm,” Judge Haight wrote.

Jethro M. Eisenstein, one of the lawyers who challenged the videotaping practices, said that Judge Haight’s ruling would make it possible to contest other surveillance tactics, including the use of undercover officers at political gatherings. In recent years, police officers have disguised themselves as protesters, shouted feigned objections when uniformed officers were making arrests, and pretended to be mourners at a memorial event for bicycle riders killed in traffic accidents.

“This was a major push by the corporation counsel to say that the guidelines are nice but they’re yesterday’s news, and that the security establishment’s view of what is important trumps civil liberties,” Mr. Eisenstein said. “Judge Haight is saying that’s just not the way we’re doing things in New York City.”

A spokesman for Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly referred questions about the ruling to the city’s lawyers, who noted that Judge Haight did not set a deadline for destroying the tapes it had already made, and that the judge did not find the city had violated the First Amendment.

Nevertheless, Judge Haight ­ at times invoking the mythology of the ancient Greeks and of Harold Ross, the founding editor of The New Yorker ­ used blunt language to characterize the Police Department’s activities.

“There is no discernible justification for the apparent disregard of the guidelines” in his 2003 court order, he said. These spell out the broad circumstances under which the police could investigate political gatherings.

Under the guidelines, the police may conduct investigations ­ including videotaping ­ at political events only if they have indications that unlawful activity may occur, and only after they have applied for permission to the deputy commissioner in charge of the Intelligence Division.

Judge Haight noted that the Police Department had not produced

evidence that any applications for permission to videotape had ever been filed.

Near the end of his 51-page order, the judge warned that the Police Department must change its practices or face penalties.

“Any future use by the N.Y.P.D. of video and photographic equipment during the course of an investigation involving political activity” that did not follow the guidelines could result in contempt proceedings, he wrote.

At monthly group bicycle rides in Lower Manhattan known as Critical Mass, some participants break traffic laws, and the police routinely videotape those events, Judge Haight noted. That would be an appropriate situation for taping, he said, but police officials did not follow the guidelines and apply for permission.

“This is a classic case of application of the guidelines: political activity on the part of individuals, but legitimate law enforcement purpose on the part of the police,” Judge Haight wrote. “It is precisely the sort of situation where the guidelines require adherence to certain protocols but ultimately give the N.Y.P.D. the flexibility to pursue its law enforcement goals.”

Gideon Oliver, a lawyer who has represented many people arrested during the monthly bicycle rides, said he was troubled by the intensive scrutiny of political activities.

“I’m looking forward to a deeper and more serious exploration of how and why this surveillance has been conducted,” Mr. Oliver said.

In the past the Police Department has said that it needed intelligence about the Critical Mass rides in order to protect the streets from unruly riders.

Patrick Markee, an official with another group that was cited in the ruling, the Coalition for the Homeless, said the judge’s decision ratified their basic rights to free speech.

“We’re gratified that Judge Haight found that the police shouldn’t engage in surveillance of homeless New Yorkers and their supporters when they’re engaged in peaceful, lawful political protest,” Mr. Markee said.

The Police Department’s approach to investigating political, social and religious groups has been a contentious subject for most of four decades, and a class action lawsuit brought by political activists, including a lawyer named Barbara Handschu, was settled in 1985. Judge Haight oversees the terms of that settlement, which are known as the Handschu guidelines, and which he modified in 2003.

At the time, Judge Haight said that the police could “attend any event open to the public, on the same terms and conditions of the public generally.”

But in yesterday’s ruling, he said that permission “cannot be stretched to authorize police officers to videotape everyone at a public gathering just because a visiting little old lady from Dubuque (to borrow from The New Yorker) could do so. There is a quantum difference between a police officer and the little old lady (or other tourist or private citizen) videotaping or photographing a public event.”

The judge said he bore some responsibility for misinterpretation of the guidelines.

“I confess with some chagrin that while the text of this opinion and its implementing order, read together, may not be as opaque as the irritatingly baffling pronouncements of the Oracle” at Delphi, “they do not constitute a model of clarity,” he wrote.

This is the finest compilation of video, physical evidence, and applied physics and engineering to date on the controlled demolition of the WTC:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vd1-Dp_-7WI&mode=related&search

The smoking gun is the bright liquid metal running down between floors about halfway through the video.

More information on RAND Corp. and Busho. ties can be found here:

http://www.google.com/search?as_q=RAND&hl=en&num=100&as_sitesearch=www.oilempire.us