Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Beware of agents provocateur in NYC!
if you see someone acting violently or encouraging violence, even property destruction, especially if they don't seem to be with a good-sized group of friends/cohorts and your affinity group does not recognize any of them, get the f*%k out of that area as quickly as you can, as you and the people around you are likely being set up for mass arrest or a good ol' fashioned police whoopin'...
Feds monitoring NYC anti-GOP activists
Concerns about mayhem at New York convention
The Associated Press
Updated: 11:01 a.m. ET Aug. 16, 2004
NEW YORK - Federal agents and city police are keeping tabs on people they say might try to cause trouble at the Republican National Convention, questioning activists, making unannounced visits and monitoring Web sites and meetings.
The law enforcement effort has been going on quietly, overshadowed in public by talk of counterterrorism measures planned for the Aug. 30-Sept. 2 event.
“We’re not engaging in surveillance of groups or individuals without legal predication,” said Jim Margolin, spokesman for the New York office of the FBI.
Ann Roman, a spokeswoman for the Secret Service, said agents expect to respond to an increase in possible domestic threats against President Bush and other dignitaries as the convention at Madison Square Garden nears. The Secret Service is also playing a lead role in planning convention security.
“How we do that specifically, I’m not going to go into,” she said.
Law enforcement sources said that in recent weeks, federal agents have begun interviewing people in the New York City area they believe might know about any plots to cause mayhem at the convention, and have used surveillance against possible suspects.
The intelligence unit of the New York Police Department has been closely monitoring Web sites run by self-described anarchists. It also has sought to infiltrate protest groups with young, scruffy-looking officers posing as activists.
Concerns about mayhem at New York convention
The Associated Press
Updated: 11:01 a.m. ET Aug. 16, 2004
NEW YORK - Federal agents and city police are keeping tabs on people they say might try to cause trouble at the Republican National Convention, questioning activists, making unannounced visits and monitoring Web sites and meetings.
The law enforcement effort has been going on quietly, overshadowed in public by talk of counterterrorism measures planned for the Aug. 30-Sept. 2 event.
“We’re not engaging in surveillance of groups or individuals without legal predication,” said Jim Margolin, spokesman for the New York office of the FBI.
Ann Roman, a spokeswoman for the Secret Service, said agents expect to respond to an increase in possible domestic threats against President Bush and other dignitaries as the convention at Madison Square Garden nears. The Secret Service is also playing a lead role in planning convention security.
“How we do that specifically, I’m not going to go into,” she said.
Law enforcement sources said that in recent weeks, federal agents have begun interviewing people in the New York City area they believe might know about any plots to cause mayhem at the convention, and have used surveillance against possible suspects.
The intelligence unit of the New York Police Department has been closely monitoring Web sites run by self-described anarchists. It also has sought to infiltrate protest groups with young, scruffy-looking officers posing as activists.
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
I'd agree on several points. I said this in another comment, but when I have been in New York, I experienced police throw a 45 year old man through a window at a very low key protest where it was mainly cranky old people reading the bill of rights in a park etc. and then they decided to march to another park, and the police blocked them on the sidewalk and suddenly arrested half of them for failing to disperse even though their way was blocked.
Also, the police there look much more working class than in the Bay Area, are paid a lot less, and so there are more young men in their 20s who don't clearly look like police officers.
I would stay with a small affinity group and realize that influencing the US election is by definition indirect action, and not direct action. It seems like my friends and everything I've read about indicates that there will be lots of creative and theatrical events and projects that people will be doing. By all means, it would be worth it to avoid being in a position like Camilo Viveiras who spent the last 4 years fighting a false bicycle throwing charge from Philadelphia 2000 when the police chief came and was pushing around a group of peaceful people.
Also, the police there look much more working class than in the Bay Area, are paid a lot less, and so there are more young men in their 20s who don't clearly look like police officers.
I would stay with a small affinity group and realize that influencing the US election is by definition indirect action, and not direct action. It seems like my friends and everything I've read about indicates that there will be lots of creative and theatrical events and projects that people will be doing. By all means, it would be worth it to avoid being in a position like Camilo Viveiras who spent the last 4 years fighting a false bicycle throwing charge from Philadelphia 2000 when the police chief came and was pushing around a group of peaceful people.
F.B.I. Goes Knocking for Political Troublemakers
By Eric Lichtblau
New York Times
Monday 16 August 2004
WASHINGTON, Aug. 15 - The Federal Bureau of Investigation has been questioning political demonstrators across the country, and in rare cases even subpoenaing them, in an aggressive effort to forestall what officials say could be violent and disruptive protests at the Republican National Convention in New York.
F.B.I. officials are urging agents to canvass their communities for information about planned disruptions aimed at the convention and other coming political events, and they say they have developed a list of people who they think may have information about possible violence. They say the inquiries, which began last month before the Democratic convention in Boston, are focused solely on possible crimes, not on dissent, at major political events.
But some people contacted by the F.B.I. say they are mystified by the bureau's interest and felt harassed by questions about their political plans.
"The message I took from it," said Sarah Bardwell, 21, an intern at a Denver antiwar group who was visited by six investigators a few weeks ago, "was that they were trying to intimidate us into not going to any protests and to let us know that, 'hey, we're watching you.' ''
The unusual initiative comes after the Justice Department, in a previously undisclosed legal opinion, gave its blessing to controversial tactics used last year by the F.B.I in urging local police departments to report suspicious activity at political and antiwar demonstrations to counterterrorism squads. The F.B.I. bulletins that relayed the request for help detailed tactics used by demonstrators - everything from violent resistance to Internet fund-raising and recruitment.
In an internal complaint, an F.B.I. employee charged that the bulletins improperly blurred the line between lawfully protected speech and illegal activity. But the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, in a five-page internal analysis obtained by The New York Times, disagreed.
The office, which also made headlines in June in an opinion - since disavowed - that authorized the use of torture against terrorism suspects in some circumstances, said any First Amendment impact posed by the F.B.I.'s monitoring of the political protests was negligible and constitutional.
The opinion said: "Given the limited nature of such public monitoring, any possible 'chilling' effect caused by the bulletins would be quite minimal and substantially outweighed by the public interest in maintaining safety and order during large-scale demonstrations."
Those same concerns are now central to the vigorous efforts by the F.B.I. to identify possible disruptions by anarchists, violent demonstrators and others at the Republican National Convention, which begins Aug. 30 and is expected to draw hundreds of thousands of protesters.
In the last few weeks, beginning before the Democratic convention, F.B.I. counterterrorism agents and other federal and local officers have sought to interview dozens of people in at least six states, including past protesters and their friends and family members, about possible violence at the two conventions. In addition, three young men in Missouri said they were trailed by federal agents for several days and subpoenaed to testify before a federal grand jury last month, forcing them to cancel their trip to Boston to take part in a protest there that same day.
Interrogations have generally covered the same three questions, according to some of those questioned and their lawyers: were demonstrators planning violence or other disruptions, did they know anyone who was, and did they realize it was a crime to withhold such information.
A handful of protesters at the Boston convention were arrested but there were no major disruptions. Concerns have risen for the Republican convention, however, because of antiwar demonstrations directed at President Bush and because of New York City's global prominence.
With the F.B.I. given more authority after the Sept. 11 attacks to monitor public events, the tensions over the convention protests, coupled with the Justice Department's own legal analysis of such monitoring, reflect the fine line between protecting national security in an age of terrorism and discouraging political expression.
F.B.I. officials, mindful of the bureau's abuses in the 1960's and 1970's monitoring political dissidents like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., say they are confident their agents have not crossed that line in the lead-up to the conventions.
"The F.B.I. isn't in the business of chilling anyone's First Amendment rights," said Joe Parris, a bureau spokesman in Washington. "But criminal behavior isn't covered by the First Amendment. What we're concerned about are injuries to convention participants, injuries to citizens, injuries to police and first responders."
F.B.I. officials would not say how many people had been interviewed in recent weeks, how they were identified or what spurred the bureau's interest.
They said the initiative was part of a broader, nationwide effort to follow any leads pointing to possible violence or illegal disruptions in connection with the political conventions, presidential debates or the November election, which come at a time of heightened concern about a possible terrorist attack.
F.B.I. officials in Washington have urged field offices around the country in recent weeks to redouble their efforts to interview sources and gather information that might help to detect criminal plots. The only lead to emerge publicly resulted in a warning to authorities before the Boston convention that anarchists or other domestic groups might bomb news vans there. It is not clear whether there was an actual plot.
The individuals visited in recent weeks "are people that we identified that could reasonably be expected to have knowledge of such plans and plots if they existed," Mr. Parris said.
"We vetted down a list and went out and knocked on doors and had a laundry list of questions to ask about possible criminal behavior," he added. "No one was dragged from their homes and put under bright lights. The interviewees were free to talk to us or close the door in our faces."
But civil rights advocates argued that the visits amounted to harassment. They said they saw the interrogations as part of a pattern of increasingly aggressive tactics by federal investigators in combating domestic terrorism. In an episode in February in Iowa, federal prosecutors subpoenaed Drake University for records on the sponsor of a campus antiwar forum. The demand was dropped after a community outcry.
Protest leaders and civil rights advocates who have monitored the recent interrogations said they believed at least 40 or 50 people, and perhaps many more, had been contacted by federal agents about demonstration plans and possible violence surrounding the conventions and other political events.
"This kind of pressure has a real chilling effect on perfectly legitimate political activity," said Mark Silverstein, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado, where two groups of political activists in Denver and a third in Fort Collins were visited by the F.B.I. "People are going to be afraid to go to a demonstration or even sign a petition if they justifiably believe that will result in your having an F.B.I. file opened on you."
The issue is a particularly sensitive one in Denver, where the police agreed last year to restrictions on local intelligence-gathering operations after it was disclosed that the police had kept files on some 3,000 people and 200 groups involved in protests.
But the inquiries have stirred opposition elsewhere as well.
In New York, federal agents recently questioned a man whose neighbor reported he had made threatening comments against the president. He and a lawyer, Jeffrey Fogel, agreed to talk to the Secret Service, denying the accusation and blaming it on a feud with the neighbor. But when agents started to question the man about his political affiliations and whether he planned to attend convention protests, "that's when I said no, no, no, we're not going to answer those kinds of questions," said Mr. Fogel, who is legal director for the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York.
In the case of the three young men subpoenaed in Missouri, Denise Lieberman, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union in St. Louis, which is representing them, said they scrapped plans to attend both the Boston and the New York conventions after they were questioned about possible violence.
The men are all in their early 20's, Ms. Lieberman said, but she would not identify them.
All three have taken part in past protests over American foreign policy and in planning meetings for convention demonstrations. She said two of them were arrested before on misdemeanor charges for what she described as minor civil disobedience at protests.
Prosecutors have now informed the men that they are targets of a domestic terrorism investigation, Ms. Lieberman said, but have not disclosed the basis for their suspicions. "They won't tell me," she said.
Federal officials in St. Louis and Washington declined to comment on the case. Ms. Lieberman insisted that the men "didn't have any plans to participate in the violence, but what's so disturbing about all this is the pre-emptive nature - stopping them from participating in a protest before anything even happened."
The three men "were really shaken and frightened by all this," she said, "and they got the message loud and clear that if you make plans to go to a protest, you could be subject to arrest or a visit from the F.B.I."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on your rights when dealing with the FBI go to: http://www.nlg.org/resources/kyr/kyr_poster.pdf.
By Eric Lichtblau
New York Times
Monday 16 August 2004
WASHINGTON, Aug. 15 - The Federal Bureau of Investigation has been questioning political demonstrators across the country, and in rare cases even subpoenaing them, in an aggressive effort to forestall what officials say could be violent and disruptive protests at the Republican National Convention in New York.
F.B.I. officials are urging agents to canvass their communities for information about planned disruptions aimed at the convention and other coming political events, and they say they have developed a list of people who they think may have information about possible violence. They say the inquiries, which began last month before the Democratic convention in Boston, are focused solely on possible crimes, not on dissent, at major political events.
But some people contacted by the F.B.I. say they are mystified by the bureau's interest and felt harassed by questions about their political plans.
"The message I took from it," said Sarah Bardwell, 21, an intern at a Denver antiwar group who was visited by six investigators a few weeks ago, "was that they were trying to intimidate us into not going to any protests and to let us know that, 'hey, we're watching you.' ''
The unusual initiative comes after the Justice Department, in a previously undisclosed legal opinion, gave its blessing to controversial tactics used last year by the F.B.I in urging local police departments to report suspicious activity at political and antiwar demonstrations to counterterrorism squads. The F.B.I. bulletins that relayed the request for help detailed tactics used by demonstrators - everything from violent resistance to Internet fund-raising and recruitment.
In an internal complaint, an F.B.I. employee charged that the bulletins improperly blurred the line between lawfully protected speech and illegal activity. But the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, in a five-page internal analysis obtained by The New York Times, disagreed.
The office, which also made headlines in June in an opinion - since disavowed - that authorized the use of torture against terrorism suspects in some circumstances, said any First Amendment impact posed by the F.B.I.'s monitoring of the political protests was negligible and constitutional.
The opinion said: "Given the limited nature of such public monitoring, any possible 'chilling' effect caused by the bulletins would be quite minimal and substantially outweighed by the public interest in maintaining safety and order during large-scale demonstrations."
Those same concerns are now central to the vigorous efforts by the F.B.I. to identify possible disruptions by anarchists, violent demonstrators and others at the Republican National Convention, which begins Aug. 30 and is expected to draw hundreds of thousands of protesters.
In the last few weeks, beginning before the Democratic convention, F.B.I. counterterrorism agents and other federal and local officers have sought to interview dozens of people in at least six states, including past protesters and their friends and family members, about possible violence at the two conventions. In addition, three young men in Missouri said they were trailed by federal agents for several days and subpoenaed to testify before a federal grand jury last month, forcing them to cancel their trip to Boston to take part in a protest there that same day.
Interrogations have generally covered the same three questions, according to some of those questioned and their lawyers: were demonstrators planning violence or other disruptions, did they know anyone who was, and did they realize it was a crime to withhold such information.
A handful of protesters at the Boston convention were arrested but there were no major disruptions. Concerns have risen for the Republican convention, however, because of antiwar demonstrations directed at President Bush and because of New York City's global prominence.
With the F.B.I. given more authority after the Sept. 11 attacks to monitor public events, the tensions over the convention protests, coupled with the Justice Department's own legal analysis of such monitoring, reflect the fine line between protecting national security in an age of terrorism and discouraging political expression.
F.B.I. officials, mindful of the bureau's abuses in the 1960's and 1970's monitoring political dissidents like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., say they are confident their agents have not crossed that line in the lead-up to the conventions.
"The F.B.I. isn't in the business of chilling anyone's First Amendment rights," said Joe Parris, a bureau spokesman in Washington. "But criminal behavior isn't covered by the First Amendment. What we're concerned about are injuries to convention participants, injuries to citizens, injuries to police and first responders."
F.B.I. officials would not say how many people had been interviewed in recent weeks, how they were identified or what spurred the bureau's interest.
They said the initiative was part of a broader, nationwide effort to follow any leads pointing to possible violence or illegal disruptions in connection with the political conventions, presidential debates or the November election, which come at a time of heightened concern about a possible terrorist attack.
F.B.I. officials in Washington have urged field offices around the country in recent weeks to redouble their efforts to interview sources and gather information that might help to detect criminal plots. The only lead to emerge publicly resulted in a warning to authorities before the Boston convention that anarchists or other domestic groups might bomb news vans there. It is not clear whether there was an actual plot.
The individuals visited in recent weeks "are people that we identified that could reasonably be expected to have knowledge of such plans and plots if they existed," Mr. Parris said.
"We vetted down a list and went out and knocked on doors and had a laundry list of questions to ask about possible criminal behavior," he added. "No one was dragged from their homes and put under bright lights. The interviewees were free to talk to us or close the door in our faces."
But civil rights advocates argued that the visits amounted to harassment. They said they saw the interrogations as part of a pattern of increasingly aggressive tactics by federal investigators in combating domestic terrorism. In an episode in February in Iowa, federal prosecutors subpoenaed Drake University for records on the sponsor of a campus antiwar forum. The demand was dropped after a community outcry.
Protest leaders and civil rights advocates who have monitored the recent interrogations said they believed at least 40 or 50 people, and perhaps many more, had been contacted by federal agents about demonstration plans and possible violence surrounding the conventions and other political events.
"This kind of pressure has a real chilling effect on perfectly legitimate political activity," said Mark Silverstein, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado, where two groups of political activists in Denver and a third in Fort Collins were visited by the F.B.I. "People are going to be afraid to go to a demonstration or even sign a petition if they justifiably believe that will result in your having an F.B.I. file opened on you."
The issue is a particularly sensitive one in Denver, where the police agreed last year to restrictions on local intelligence-gathering operations after it was disclosed that the police had kept files on some 3,000 people and 200 groups involved in protests.
But the inquiries have stirred opposition elsewhere as well.
In New York, federal agents recently questioned a man whose neighbor reported he had made threatening comments against the president. He and a lawyer, Jeffrey Fogel, agreed to talk to the Secret Service, denying the accusation and blaming it on a feud with the neighbor. But when agents started to question the man about his political affiliations and whether he planned to attend convention protests, "that's when I said no, no, no, we're not going to answer those kinds of questions," said Mr. Fogel, who is legal director for the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York.
In the case of the three young men subpoenaed in Missouri, Denise Lieberman, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union in St. Louis, which is representing them, said they scrapped plans to attend both the Boston and the New York conventions after they were questioned about possible violence.
The men are all in their early 20's, Ms. Lieberman said, but she would not identify them.
All three have taken part in past protests over American foreign policy and in planning meetings for convention demonstrations. She said two of them were arrested before on misdemeanor charges for what she described as minor civil disobedience at protests.
Prosecutors have now informed the men that they are targets of a domestic terrorism investigation, Ms. Lieberman said, but have not disclosed the basis for their suspicions. "They won't tell me," she said.
Federal officials in St. Louis and Washington declined to comment on the case. Ms. Lieberman insisted that the men "didn't have any plans to participate in the violence, but what's so disturbing about all this is the pre-emptive nature - stopping them from participating in a protest before anything even happened."
The three men "were really shaken and frightened by all this," she said, "and they got the message loud and clear that if you make plans to go to a protest, you could be subject to arrest or a visit from the F.B.I."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on your rights when dealing with the FBI go to: http://www.nlg.org/resources/kyr/kyr_poster.pdf.
For more information:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/081704V.shtml
Nessie,
Thanks for the snapshot, it is needed work.
It pays to always remember that all corrupted systems are always breakable upon demand;
1. Camviews;
armed with this knowledge it should be fairly obvious to all to plan to ... expose .... multiple images ... of same personal identities .... at multiple sites .... at the same time .... whenever needed.
2. PsyOps profiling;
so? ever heard of camouflage? there are many variants and one of my alltime favourites is the "personality switch" in which you ... or your multiplicity unit .... simply alter your own established and known patterns in such a variation of manners or ways that the overall image is .... well, distorted.
who IS that madman anyway? I mean, REALLY? Where is he? When is he there? Is he a he after all? Is she in actuality a spook in depth as the reports we have received from....such and such an accepted source...I think... claimed? What? They DIDNT claim that? WHO DID?
It also helps to remember that we the people are a lot better at it than the regimented, uniformed, identified opposition to the rule of the people will ever be.
That is why we are still here and with all it´s faults, the American republic is still alive, although not yet well.
Thanks for the snapshot, it is needed work.
It pays to always remember that all corrupted systems are always breakable upon demand;
1. Camviews;
armed with this knowledge it should be fairly obvious to all to plan to ... expose .... multiple images ... of same personal identities .... at multiple sites .... at the same time .... whenever needed.
2. PsyOps profiling;
so? ever heard of camouflage? there are many variants and one of my alltime favourites is the "personality switch" in which you ... or your multiplicity unit .... simply alter your own established and known patterns in such a variation of manners or ways that the overall image is .... well, distorted.
who IS that madman anyway? I mean, REALLY? Where is he? When is he there? Is he a he after all? Is she in actuality a spook in depth as the reports we have received from....such and such an accepted source...I think... claimed? What? They DIDNT claim that? WHO DID?
It also helps to remember that we the people are a lot better at it than the regimented, uniformed, identified opposition to the rule of the people will ever be.
That is why we are still here and with all it´s faults, the American republic is still alive, although not yet well.
Yep, they can keep track of you everywhere and your family and friends too. So you just have to be yourself.
In the end, even if you do *nothing* they can frame you in any way they like and put you away for life with no hearing.
So forget about it, and don't get scared. If you're doing *anything* that's something you've contributed to this world. Because some people will do *nothing* and get axed for it (and whatever other reasons), and they made no contribution. Like the people who died in 9/11 when the jets were stood down, the Arabs who were likely framed, those workers in the towers which were likely demolished, rather than experiencing an actual collapse (see wtc7.net). Those people got mowed down and didn't even get the chance to *try* to make a difference. And some even thought they were making a difference.
Nessie is right - it's good to know the basics of the fascist state - but also, don't worry about it. That's the thing they want most of all, is for you to be scared. Our strongest tools are our knowledge - which Nessie helps us out with - and our courage, which they are frantic to take from us.
Just take one look at the TV and guess how much money they're spending each moment to scare us.
Problem for them is, it's easy not to be scared. Just believe in yourself and your cause. They're betting you can't do it. They're betting they can scare you instead. But remember, it only takes 30% of the people to have a revolution.
In the end, even if you do *nothing* they can frame you in any way they like and put you away for life with no hearing.
So forget about it, and don't get scared. If you're doing *anything* that's something you've contributed to this world. Because some people will do *nothing* and get axed for it (and whatever other reasons), and they made no contribution. Like the people who died in 9/11 when the jets were stood down, the Arabs who were likely framed, those workers in the towers which were likely demolished, rather than experiencing an actual collapse (see wtc7.net). Those people got mowed down and didn't even get the chance to *try* to make a difference. And some even thought they were making a difference.
Nessie is right - it's good to know the basics of the fascist state - but also, don't worry about it. That's the thing they want most of all, is for you to be scared. Our strongest tools are our knowledge - which Nessie helps us out with - and our courage, which they are frantic to take from us.
Just take one look at the TV and guess how much money they're spending each moment to scare us.
Problem for them is, it's easy not to be scared. Just believe in yourself and your cause. They're betting you can't do it. They're betting they can scare you instead. But remember, it only takes 30% of the people to have a revolution.
Let's just pretend there's nothing going on? Is that what people were supposed to do in Seattle? Fuck that shit.
So what is going on anyway, besides the same old dog and pony show they trot out every four years to delude people into believing that the government, not the corporations, are in charge, and it actually cares what you think?
It's a show, nothing more, nothing less, and a puppet show, to boot. Why not focus on the puppeteers?
Republicans are not the enemy. Government is not the enemy. Corporations are not the enemy. The system is the enemy. It's not made of politicians. It's made of puppet strings. How long are we going to keep fighting the puppets, before we wise up and start cutting the strings?
It's a show, nothing more, nothing less, and a puppet show, to boot. Why not focus on the puppeteers?
Republicans are not the enemy. Government is not the enemy. Corporations are not the enemy. The system is the enemy. It's not made of politicians. It's made of puppet strings. How long are we going to keep fighting the puppets, before we wise up and start cutting the strings?
Be aware that the day of reckoning comes for your sort.
We are not going to stand by and watch you trash our city for the sake of your misguided teenage angst.
The NYC police are the least of your problems next week.
Be ready to answer for whatever you do.
Protest peacefully, and I will defend your right to do so with my blood.
Destroy my city and I will spill yours on the streets.
We are not going to stand by and watch you trash our city for the sake of your misguided teenage angst.
The NYC police are the least of your problems next week.
Be ready to answer for whatever you do.
Protest peacefully, and I will defend your right to do so with my blood.
Destroy my city and I will spill yours on the streets.
for defending our right to free speech. remember not to edit what we say. for that would be unpatriotic.
here are some good examples of this police povacateur
stuff from Miami -
http://www.ftaaimc.org/en/2003/11/398.shtml
(movie) http://www.ftaaimc.org/en/2003/11/781.shtml
http://www.ftaaimc.org/en/2003/11/904.shtml
http://www.ftaaimc.org/en/2003/11/882.shtml
http://www.ftaaimc.org/en/2003/11/1211.shtml
http://www.ftaaimc.org/en/2003/11/1471.shtml
http://www.ftaaimc.org/en/2003/11/1559.shtml
http://www.ftaaimc.org/en/newswire/archive36.shtml (all)
http://www.ftaaimc.org/en/2003/11/1916.shtml
** BEST ** :
http://www.ftaaimc.org/en/2003/11/1455.shtml
http://www.ftaaimc.org/en//newswire/archive33.shtml (all)
http://www.ftaaimc.org/en/2003/11/1849.shtml
http://www.ftaaimc.org/en/2003/11/2067.shtml
http://www.ftaaimc.org/en/2003/11/2116.shtml
many many more good articles if you explore this site.
At recent FTAA protests in Miami (Nov. ,03) a
dedicated indy media center was set up. It stands as a great resource
for activists.
[These articles are also available in Spanish, so I ask a reader - please
translate this and re-post it in Spanish on indy media! ]
So.., who was considered one of the top 56 activists by the FBI. They said that agents were flying to California to track a few people to New York. Nessie, did he make the list? Some of the people described in Colorado seemed to be quaker/mennonite kids who aren't even drinking age, have no history, and weren't even going, so who knows what their methods are.
Ingrid,
That is the really fun part. Not only do you never "know" how they choose their "methods", even more importantly, "they" never "know" where much of their information comes from or how much of it is in fact correct and how much is deliberately released psyops disinfo for their exercises in the futility of serving an oligarch when the people resist.
1. First you bait the hook
2. Then you make the catch look appealing
3. Then you prepare your blinds and doubleblinds
4. Then you decide if you will keep what YOU have caught...
The strategy of pre-emptive, proactive missions of shadows and bogus events and individuals is a proven to be effective measure, especially for peoples movements...in their initial stages of development.
"Hit ém where they ain´t..." is precisely the correct formula and could have come straight out of a textbook treatise on guerilla tactics....
That is the really fun part. Not only do you never "know" how they choose their "methods", even more importantly, "they" never "know" where much of their information comes from or how much of it is in fact correct and how much is deliberately released psyops disinfo for their exercises in the futility of serving an oligarch when the people resist.
1. First you bait the hook
2. Then you make the catch look appealing
3. Then you prepare your blinds and doubleblinds
4. Then you decide if you will keep what YOU have caught...
The strategy of pre-emptive, proactive missions of shadows and bogus events and individuals is a proven to be effective measure, especially for peoples movements...in their initial stages of development.
"Hit ém where they ain´t..." is precisely the correct formula and could have come straight out of a textbook treatise on guerilla tactics....
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$75.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network