Laughing with a mouth of blood

The fact that Bradley Manning is being punished for exposing government crimes, lies, and misdeeds is a travesty unto itself, if you ask me. But charging him with “aiding the enemy” – which is punishable by death – is just piling on.

In court on Tuesday, Manning’s defense lawyers tried to get a significantly reduced jail time sentence due to the fact that Manning was held in abusive conditions - solitary confinement 23 hours a day, kept under  a strict suicide watch and often ordered to strip naked. The judge lifted a pitiful 112 days off of Manning’s potential life sentence.

The absurd charge of aiding the enemy – as if Manning had some connection or intention with al-Qaeda – refers to Manning’s alleged leak of classified material to WikiLeaks, a website. The ACLU explains:

The key to the government’s case is this simple claim: that posting intelligence information to the internet aids Al Qaeda because Al Qaeda has access to the internet.

…The government does not contend that Manning gave any information to Al Qaeda, or even that he intended that Al Qaeda receive it. Rather, it claims that Manning “indirectly” aided Al Qaeda by causing intelligence information to be posted on WikiLeaks’ website, knowing that Al Qaeda has access to the internet. Specifically, the government contends that Manning violated Article 104 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which provides that “any person who … gives intelligence to or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly; shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.”

Article 104 is not limited to sensitive or classified information — it prohibits any unauthorized communication or contact with an enemy. So, if the government is right that a soldier “indirectly” aids the enemy when he posts information to which the enemy might have access, then the threat of criminal prosecution hangs over any service member who gives an interview to a reporter, writes a letter to the editor, or posts a blog to the internet.

Manning’s attorneys have tried to get the judge to throw out these ridiculous charges, but the judge has refused. While the prosecution claims the charges are appropriate, Manning’s lawyers point out, apparently without objection, that such aiding the enemy charges have never been used this way. Politico’s Josh Gerstein:

“Publishing information in a newspaper [can] indirectly convey information to the enemy,” prosecutor Capt. Angel Overgaard said Tuesday during the pretrial hearing. She said courts in past cases had recognized that such disclosures could constitute aiding the enemy.

However, defense attorney David Coombs said those cases date to the Civil War and involve publishing coded messages, not conveying information evident to everyone on its face.

“Every case that charges Article 104 [aiding the enemy] deals with somebody who had given information directly to the enemy. This case is unprecedented,” defens attorney David Coombs said during the session. “There’s been no case in the entire history of military jurisprudence that dealt with somebody providing information to a legitimate journalistic organization and having them publish it and that involved dealing with the enemy.”

Daniel Ellsberg is today almost universally considered a hero for leaking the Pentagon Papers in 1971. He wins awards, goes on television, he’s a renowned figure and activist. The material he leaked to the press was designated Top Secret, and – partly due to the abuse he was subjected to by the government for it – he was able to live out his life in freedom. Contrast that with Manning, who leaked nothing marked Top Secret, all of it was marked Secret or Classified – much lower secrecy classifications. Yet, he possibly faces charges akin to treason and punishable by death. What an outrage!

letterstomycountry:

Julian Assange has not given much detail on what the nature of the documents will be, except to say that they will “affect every country in the world.”  

If these documents are standard Wikileaks fare, they will probably include embarrassing and/or scandalous matter about large powerful institutions—world governments in particular.  Moreover, the diffusion of these documents will no doubt leave some grumbling about the risks attendant to their disclosure.  

There are understandable arguments in favor of such a position.  Critics of Wikileaks appear to favor government secrecy on certain topics because they believe it to be a necessary predicate to good governance (e.g. keeping information about matters of national security matters classified).  Thomas Jefferson, during his time as President, noted that:

[T]he  Executive  ought to  communicate  such papers  as the public good would permit,  and  ought  to refuse  those, the  disclosure  of which  would  injure  the  public …

 The fundamental flaw of this apparently reasonable position, however, is that there is no way to determine when the government is keeping information out of public hands for legitimate purposes.  This is undoubtedly why many of Jefferson’s contemporaries took hardline stances in the other direction.  Here is John Adams:

[The People] have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge, I mean, of the characters and conduct of their rulers. Rulers are no more than attorneys, agents, and trustees for the people; and if the cause, the interest and trust, is insidiously betrayed, or wantonly trifled away, the people have a right to revoke the authority that they themselves have deputed, and to constitute abler and better agents, attorneys, and trustees. And the preservation of the means of knowledge among the lowest ranks, is of more importance to the public than all the property of all the rich men in the country.  

James Madison:

A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.

Benjamin Franklin:

I was struck dumb with astonishment at the sentiments … [t]hat the executive alone shall have the right of judging what shall be kept secret, and what shall be made public, and that the representatives of a free people, are incompetent to determine on the interests of those who delegated them … .

The legitimacy of Democratic governance depends on consent of the governed.  It is impossible for people to consent to acts of which they had no knowledge.  And if history is any guide on the matter, government secrecy is invoked at least as often to ensure that the public remains uninformed of acts of official wretchedness carried out in their name, as it is to secure the blessings of confidentiality to sensitive information.

Such a state of affairs is intolerable in a free society.  As Thomas Paine noted in the Dissertations, “In republics, such as those established in America, the sovereign power, or the power over which there is no control, and which controls all others, remains where nature placed it—in the people[.]”   Government secrecy, no matter how well intentioned, subverts that control by ensuring that people cast their votes ignorant to potentially embarrassing, disagreeable, or perhaps even shocking actions which the government carries out in their name.  One cannot vote against something they have knowledge of.  And being ignorant of the same, a person would have little reason to.  And therein, as they say, lies the problem.

In the US foreign policy community, one major legacy of George W. Bush’s war in Iraq is that it gave Iraq to the Shiites and thus to Iran. There is some focus on the fact that the administration lied the country into war, and almost none on the fact that this led to hundreds of thousands of deaths and unimaginable suffering for millions of Iraqis. Among the “foreign policy community,” the geo-political legacy is that the war was a gift to Iran, which no longer faces a neighboring nemesis and is exponentially better positioned for the regional dominance it seeks.

That is true, and it was a massive strategic blunder for policymakers in Washington aiming to maintain regional hegemony over the Middle East. But a better illustration of the war’s legacy is what is going on in Syria right now: al-Qaeda jihadists, bred in the wake of the American invasion and who flooded to Iraq to fight the Crusaders, are now an actual entity that has flooded over the border into Syria to fight the next holy war. The fact that the Syrian rebels are largely made up of extremists is one of the major factors persuading Washington not to intervene militarily.

Al-Qaeda in Syria (formerly al-Qaeda in Iraq) is preventing what would probably be a par for the course humanitarian intervention against the Assad regime and making the prospect of terrorist rebels sacking Damascus and rising to political power a dangerous reality. That should be considered by the elite foreign policy community to be at least as big a geo-strategic loss as Iran’s new regional stature.

The huge spectacle and sheer enormity of the terror of 9/11 has helped reinforce an illusion about al-Qaeda at that time. Despite what the greatest terrorist attack on US soil in American history would seem to indicate, they were a small group, marginalized everywhere they went. They were a small group of extremists peculiarly obsessed with US military troops in Saudi Arabia. They used Israel-Palestine, resentment towards US-supported dictators and the sanctions-enabled genocide in Iraq to excite the Muslim masses to their cause, but nobody rose up like they’d hoped.

And then Iraq happened. The 2006 National Intelligence Estimate on Trends in Global Terrorism said that the Iraq war was “breeding deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement.” The former head of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center Robert Grenier said the war “has convinced many Muslims that the United States is the enemy of Islam and is attacking Muslims, and they have become jihadists as a result of their experience in Iraq.”

Bush’s maniacal foreign policy gave global appeal to al-Qaeda’s militant anti-US brand. And now the US is faced with several independent off-shoots that draw inspiration from the comparatively small original clan. There is al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, many of whose members fought the rebel war in Libya and were themselves veteran jihadis in Iraq. Groups in Syria like Jabhat al-Nusra, which the US State Department last month officially designated a Global Terrorist organization, identifying the group as an offshoot of al-Qaeda in Iraq. And al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which according to Washington has coordinated at least a few attempted attacks on the US.

Now, President Obama’s so-called “counter-terrorism” policies have been equally counterproductive. His surge in Afghanistan, his relentless secret drone war in Pakistan and Yemen, his shortsighted intervention in Libya, and his limited backing of Syrian rebels have all contributed to the bolstering of al-Qaead groups.

But there is not enough emphasis on Bush’s contributions here, specifically the extent to which the Iraq war contributed. That legacy is not just the strategic blunder of an unnecessary war that failed to yield sufficient geo-political gains. It is one of creating an entirely new and larger generation of al-Qaeda terrorists.

Ending the War on Drugs would save countless lives from being lost or ruined. An enormous drain on our economy would cease. It would be great. Ending the War on Drugs would be a tremendous first step, but then what?

The government would still have all the police powers it used to have. Perhaps they could be convinced to cut them back a bit, but we know from painful experience how hard it is to get the government to give up a power it has acquired. No doubt it wouldn’t take them long to find other laws for their bloated police agencies to enforce on us. They have to justify those big budgets somehow.

A key point here is that the source of the problem is not the War on Drugs, that is merely the symptom. The problem is that the government has the means to enforce laws like the drug prohibition. Once it had the power it then passed the bad laws. (Of course, once they had these bad laws to enforce they then used the higher crime rates these bad laws created to justify more, and more powerful, police.) The only way to ensure that there won’t be a repetition of the War on Drugs fiasco is to abolish policing as we know it today. The ending of the prohibition of alcohol proves this point. They merely switched from punishing bootleggers and drinkers to punishing drug dealers and users.

We need to move to a system of private security. There is no need for local police. History has already proved that private security is better at protecting us than the government is. A shining example is Oro Valley, Arizona. In 1975 they hired Rural/Metro Fire Department, Inc. to essentially be their police department providing the services previously provided by the county sheriff. Crime rates where greatly reduced at a fraction of the cost of a government police force. (See Guns for Protection, and Other Private Sector Responses to the Government’s Failure to Control Crime, page 22 of the PDF page counter)

There is no need for national level law enforcement. Agencies like the Federal Bureau of Investigation; the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; and the Drug Enforcement Administration are merely instruments of oppression enforcing mostly unconstitutional laws. One is reminded of Thomas Jefferson’s words about the distant and overly powerful capitol, “When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.”

So not only is private security better able to protect people and property, they have a provider/client relationship with them. Under this scenario there is no incentive for private security to enforce something like the Drug Prohibition and the government wouldn’t have the means to do so.

Policing as we know it today got its start in the mid 19th century. It wasn’t truly about preventing crime as crime rates were quite low back then. It was all about expanding the government’s power. Fast forward to today and we find that the greatest threat to our lives, liberty, and property is the government. This is due to their tremendous police power. The only way for us to preserve (restore?) our rights is to take that power away from the government.

Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa has said the CIA may try to kill him prior to upcoming elections. Citing reports of a plot to “destabilize the region,” Correa said the threats were “credible,” given the history of US involvement in Latin America.

Correa alluded to reports by Chilean journalist Patricio Mery Bell, who allegedly passed on information to the Ecuadorian government that President Correa’s life was “under threat” by a CIA plot.

“There are many cases of [the CIA] interfering” in Latin American affairs, Correa said during a campaign tour in the coastal province of Guayas. “These are credible [reports] because this has happened before in Latin America.”

The head of the US diplomatic mission in Quito, Adam Nann, responded to Bell’s claims by saying that Washington “would never get involved” in Ecuador’s electoral process.

Although Correa conceded that he believed the statements of the US ambassador, he warned that agencies such as the CIA often follow their own agenda and maintain links with organizations representing the extreme right in the countries in which they operate.

Bell first voiced his concerns for the safety of President Correa three months ago when he released a report claiming the CIA sought to “destabilize” Ecuador. He said that the threat to Correa’s life would be at its height from January 15 and onwards, as Correa applies to run for another presidential term.

“We will have to be three times more vigilant with President Correa,” Bell said in an interview with publication El Ciudadano. Bell maintained that although he was not a staunch supporter of Correa, it was his duty as a Latin American citizen to warn of the alleged $88-million CIA plot to destabilize the Ecuadorian government.

The journalist believes that this money will be divided amongst extremist anarchist, leftist and hardline conservative groups, in the hopes of discrediting Correas.

Bell claimed in his report that the main motives behind the CIA plot were the closing of the US Manta military base,  hailed as a victory for Ecuadorian national sovereignty, and the granting of asylum to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

President Correa is often described as echoing the policies of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, especially in anti-US rhetoric. The 49-year-old economist has reduced poverty and increased stability and the overall standard of living in Ecuador during his presidency, winning popularity amongst the country’s poorest as well as the educated middle class.

Correa will run for reelection against six other candidates when campaigning begins on January 15. Ecuadorians will vote for the next president and vice president on Sunday, February 17.

questionall:

(NaturalNews) The Feds (federal government) couldn’t care LESS about pot smokers, and a bunch of people feeling happy and eating nachos late at night while talking about the universe and maybe a little “green” peace. In fact, the U.S. government only cares about keeping HEMP FARMING ILLEGAL because that, my friends, will ruin the corporate medicine, power and fuel conglomerates. Think about it; cigarettes and alcohol cause diseases and deaths right and left, but nobody overdoses on pot, so what is so bad about it? Hemp! Hemp is what is so “bad” about marijuana, and the United States government does not want or need the competition. If they legalize pot, they legalize the growing of hemp, it’s that simple. (http://www.breitbart.com)

If you don’t know about it already, no plant on earth, not even soy, has ever spawned as many different products (and as much controversy) as hemp. You can buy hemp clothing, hemp paper, hemp milk, hemp oil, the list goes on. One Canadian company actually built an electric car out of hemp. Hemp is “taxonomically identical” to marijuana, as both are classified as Cannabis Sativa L, and the only true difference between them is the concentration of THC, or delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, the psychoactive substance in pot, of which marijuana usually contains at least three percent.

Say goodbye to pesticides, GMOs, and fertilizers

Hemp can be used for natural medicine, food, textiles, medicine, paper, clothing and affordable shelter. Hemp can serve as natural fuel for homes, cars, and businesses. The power companies that charge you hundreds of dollars every month would be crippled. Thousands of retail “conglomerates” would go under. Gas companies would go bankrupt. People could get healthy, instead of eating processed foods and GMO pesticide-laden, cancer causing food. That’s right, cancer could be prevented and cured. Forget about marching for the cure, cannabis and hemp would be the new “dynamic duo” of food and medicine in the United States, and all over the earth. (http://www.naturalnews.com/035244_hemp_save_the_world_music_video.html)

So what do the feds and the mainstream media do about hemp and its impending MASS BENEFITS? Look over there – distraction! Let’s talk about whether or not people should be allowed to smoke pot, that way nobody will think about hemp being legalized, which would only solve nearly every resource crisis in the United States. The media has everyone debating about pot heads instead of natural resources, you see?

Living off the grid

Millions of people living “off the grid” is a problem. It’s a huge problem for the government and the corporations that overcharge and abuse the power of supplying energy and resources to the country. Gas and power rank at the top of that “food chain.” Let me explain.

If the U.S. government legalizes marijuana at the federal level, and all or most of the states follow suit shortly thereafter, that would mean everyone could grow hemp. If everyone can grow “pot,” then everyone becomes their own small farmer, and for reasons far beyond some practical vegetable garden that provides a tasty, healthy salad. Far beyond the “weed” garden of “the herb” that helps with cataracts, skin cancer, allergies, and nausea.

Hemp becomes your second job and your greatest source of wealth, because growing it eliminates major bills you incur regularly, bills which are influenced by inflation, corrupt government, and everyone’s use and misuse of it around you (http://greenlivingideas.com). Suddenly, you drop off the grid, actually growing your own power, fuel, clothing, building materials and food, and very healthy food at that. Have you really taken a long look at the benefits of hemp, or did you think that was just a “hippy” thing?

Hemp nation USA!

By the way, do not expect any successful GREEN ENERGY development and resources coming from the government any time soon. That’s like “the war on drugs” the “war on cancer, and the war on terror” – all complete hoaxes. Why do you think the government won’t mass produce solar panels and wind mills? Oops, so much for power bills! Most Americans spend 40 hours a month working just to pay their power and fuel bills. Why do you think we are at war, because terrorists threaten our way of life? No. It’s for free oil from abroad to be sold in United States.
(http://www.naturalnews.com)

Top reasons for the U.S. government’s “War on Hemp”

Hemp as fuel and clean energy: Question: Who needs a welfare check or social security when you can grow a few grand worth of hemp every month in your own back yard? (http://reason.org/news/show/1002979.html) Are you still not sure? “Hemp fuel is a way out of oil! Planting only six percent of the continental United States with biomass crops such as hemp would supply all current domestic demands for oil and gas.” That’s perfect for cars, homes, small businesses and living off the grid. (http://www.hempowered.com/hemp-fuel.html)

Hemp as medicine: Who says hemp can cure cancer? Should you know more about hemp seed oil and cannabis sativa? Are any doctors talking about it? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlAPAiAvEtA) Does hemp oil contain omega-3s, which are devoid in most U.S. food, but which are vital to good health? Yes. Another question: Can you buy hemp seed oil legally online and have it delivered to your home? Yes, you can.
(http://www.naturalnews.com/036039_hemp_seeds_oil_EFAs.html)

Hemp clothing is free of chemicals. Goodbye formaldehyde and skin allergies.
(http://www.rawganique.com/) Organic linens are sold right here in the U.S. legally, but who knows? You could be wearing chemical-free, eco-friendly, cruelty-free hemp products that are made in the U.S. Oh, and what about water conservation and being environmentally friendly? Hemp plants need around 50 percent less water per season than cotton does, and hemp can grow with little irrigation. The facts are out there: http://www.washingtonpost.com

Hemp is essential food: Seeds of the plant “cannabis sativa” (hemp seeds) contain all the essential amino acids and essential fatty acids necessary to maintain healthy human life. No other single plant source has amino acids in such an easily digestible form, nor has the essential fatty acids in as perfect a ratio to meet human nutritional needs
(http://store.naturalnews.com/Organic-Shelled-Hempseed_p_97.html). Plus, hemp provides sustainability. Hemp is 100 percent biodegradable, so bye-bye pollution from plastics, like bisphenol-A (BPA).

Hemp for storage and emergencies: Learn about survival and “surthrival” during natural disasters, nuclear disasters, GMO pollution and more. The Health Ranger has done his “homework” on this subject thoroughly, and you can and should learn the basics. (http://www.naturalnews.com/033985_Surthrival_course.html)

Lastly, why do you think alternative fuel agendas are a big joke, full of companies which are federally funded, but running for the hills, with the federal funds feeding huge salaries and bonuses that bankrupt the companies? These businesses are made to fail, period. Natural News has covered this well before. Health enthusiasts all over the world are waking up to the truth about natural resources and natural medicine. Mike Adams said it best, “We are living through the end of one era and the birth of a new one.” (http://www.naturalnews.com)

Sources for this article include:

http://www.washingtonpost.com

http://www.ratical.org/renewables/hempseed1.html

http://www.hempowered.com/hemp-fuel.html

http://reason.org/news/show/1002980.html

http://www.rawganique.com/

http://www.naturalnews.com/033985_Surthrival_course.html

http://greenlivingideas.com

http://reason.org/news/show/1002979.html

http://www.naturalnews.com

http://www.breitbart.com

http://www.naturalnews.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlAPAiAvEtA

http://www.naturalnews.com/035244_hemp_save_the_world_music_video.html

randomactsofchaos:

The FBI documents are not only a chilling example of how widespread this surveillance and obstruction has become, they are an explicit warning by the security services to all who consider dissent. Anyone who defies corporate power, even if he or she is nonviolent and acting within constitutional rights, is a suspect. These documents are part of the plan to make us fearful, compliant and disempowered. They mark, I suspect, a government attempt to end peaceful mass protests by responding with repression to the grievances of Americans. When the corporate-financed group FreedomWorks bused in goons to disrupt Democratic candidates’ town hall meetings about the federal health care legislation in August 2009, Eric Zuesse of the Business Insider notes, “there was no FBI surveillance of those corporate-organized disruptions of legitimate democratic processes. There also were no subsequent FreedomWorks applications for Freedom of Information Act releases of FBI files regarding such surveillance being used against them—because there was no such FBI campaign against them.”

The combination of intimidation tactics by right-wing fringe groups, which speak in the language of violence and hate, with the state’s massive intrusion into the personal affairs of the citizen is corporate fascism. And we are much farther down that road than many of us care to admit. 

A federal appeals court’s August ruling in which it said the federal government may spy on Americans’ communications without warrants and without fear of being sued won’t be appealed to the Supreme Court, attorneys in the case said Thursday.

The decision by a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals this summer reversed the first and only case that successfully challenged then-President George W. Bush’s once-secret Terrorist Surveillance Program. In December, the San Francisco-based appeals court — the nation’s largest — declined to revisit its decision — making the case ripe for an appeal to the Supreme Court.

The appellate decision overturned a lower court decision in which two American attorneys — who were working with the now-defunct al-Haramain Islamic Foundation — were awarded more than $20,000 each in damages and their lawyers $2.5 million in legal fees after a years-long, tortured legal battle where they proved they were spied on without warrants.

Jon Eisenberg, the attorney for the two lawyers, said in a telephone interview that he would lose in the Supreme Court with its “current composition.”

“It would be a risky endeavor to take this case to this Supreme Court,” he said.

Eisenberg’s legal strategy means that the appellate court’s decision remains binding only in the 9th Circuit, which covers Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington. Had the Supreme Court ruled against Eisenberg, a nationwide precedent would be set.

“At some point down the line, a case could end up in a different circuit that would not be bound by the 9th Circuit ruling,” Eisenberg said. By that time, he said, perhaps a more willing Supreme Court would be sitting.

Eisenberg sued under domestic spying laws Congress adopted in the wake of President Richard M. Nixon’s Watergate scandal. The government appealed their victory, and the appeals court dismissed the suit and reversed the damages.

The appellate court had ruled that when Congress wrote the law regulating eavesdropping on Americans and spies, it never waived sovereign immunity in the section prohibiting the targeting Americans without warrants. That means Congress did not allow for aggrieved Americans to sue the government, even if their constitutional rights were violated by the United States breaching its own wiretapping laws.

Congress authorized Bush’s spy program in 2008, five years after the illegal wiretapping involved in this case. Last week, Congress reauthorized it for another five years.

The Bush spy program was first disclosed by The New York Times in December 2005, and the government subsequently admitted that the National Security Agency was eavesdropping on Americans’ telephone calls without warrants if the government believed the person on the other end was overseas and associated with terrorism. The government also secretly enlisted the help of major U.S. telecoms, including AT&T, to spy on Americans’ phone and internet communications without getting warrants as required by the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the law at the center of the al-Haramain dispute.

A lower court judge found in 2010 that two American lawyers’ telephone conversations with their al-Haramain clients in Saudi Arabia were siphoned to the National Security Agency without warrants. The government subsequently declared the group a terror organization. The eavesdropping allegations were initially based on a classified document the government accidentally mailed to the former al-Haramain Islamic Foundation lawyers Wendell Belew and Asim Ghafoor.

The document was later declared a state secret, removed from the long-running lawsuit and has never been made public. With that document ruled out as evidence, the lawyers instead cited a bevy of circumstantial evidence that a trial judge concluded showed the government illegally wiretapped the lawyers as they spoke on U.S. soil to Saudi Arabia.

The FBI organized a nationwide law enforcement investigation and monitoring of the Occupy Wall Street movement beginning in August of 2011.

Just released heavily-redacted documents revealing the FBI’s actions were obtained by the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF) via a Freedom of Information Act Request (FOIA). In some documents, the FBI refers to the Occupy Wall Street protests as a “criminal activity” and “domestic terrorism.”

“This production, which we believe is just the tip of the iceberg, is a window into the nationwide scope of the FBI’s surveillance, monitoring, and reporting on peaceful protestors organizing with the Occupy movement,” stated Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, Executive Director of the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF).  “These documents show that the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security are treating protests against the corporate and banking structure of America as potential criminal and terrorist activity.  These documents also show these federal agencies functioning as a de facto intelligence arm of Wall Street and Corporate America.”

The Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, a legal nonprofit that focuses on civil rights, said Saturday that the 112-pages of FBI documents are now available for public viewing here.

The documents show that FBI offices and agents across the US were actively conducting surveillance on the Occupy movement in August 2011, a month before the OWS encampment in Zuccotti Park in New York City and the blossoming of hundreds of other Occupy actions around the country.

The full Partnership for Civil Justice Fund statement:

FBI documents just obtained by the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF) pursuant to the PCJF’s Freedom of Information Act demands reveal that from its inception, the FBI treated the Occupy movement as a potential criminal and terrorist threat even though the agency acknowledges in documents that organizers explicitly called for peaceful protest and did “not condone the use of violence” at occupy protests.

The PCJF has obtained heavily redacted documents showing that FBI offices and agents around the country were in high gear conducting surveillance against the movement even as early as August 2011, a month prior to the establishment of the OWS encampment in Zuccotti Park and other Occupy actions around the country. 

“This production, which we believe is just the tip of the iceberg, is a window into the nationwide scope of the FBI’s surveillance, monitoring, and reporting on peaceful protestors organizing with the Occupy movement,” stated Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, Executive Director of the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF).  “These documents show that the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security are treating protests against the corporate and banking structure of America as potential criminal and terrorist activity.  These documents also show these federal agencies functioning as a de facto intelligence arm of Wall Street and Corporate America.”

“The documents are heavily redacted, and it is clear from the production that the FBI is withholding far more material. We are filing an appeal challenging this response and demanding full disclosure to the public of the records of this operation,” stated Heather Benno, staff attorney with the PCJF.

• As early as August 19, 2011, the FBI in New York was meeting with the New York Stock Exchange to discuss the Occupy Wall Street protests that wouldn’t start for another month. By September, prior to the start of the OWS, the FBI was notifying businesses that they might be the focus of an OWS protest.

• The FBI’s Indianapolis division released a “Potential Criminal Activity Alert” on September 15, 2011, even though they acknowledged that no specific protest date had been scheduled in Indiana. The documents show that the Indianapolis division of the FBI was coordinating with “All Indiana State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies,” as well as the “Indiana Intelligence Fusion Center,” the FBI “Directorate of Intelligence” and other national FBI coordinating mechanisms.

• Documents show the spying abuses of the FBI’s “Campus Liaison Program” in which the FBI in Albany and the Syracuse Joint Terrorism Task Force disseminated information to “sixteen (16) different campus police officials,” and then “six (6) additional campus police officials.”  Campus officials were in contact with the FBI for information on OWS.  A representative of the State University of New York at Oswego contacted the FBI for information on the OWS protests and reported to the FBI on the SUNY-Oswego Occupy encampment made up of students and professors.

• Documents released show coordination between the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and corporate America. They include a report by the Domestic Security Alliance Council (DSAC), described by the federal government as “a strategic partnership between the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security and the private sector,” discussing the OWS protests at the West Coast ports to “raise awareness concerning this type of criminal activity.” The DSAC report shows the nature of secret collaboration between American intelligence agencies and their corporate clients - the document contains a “handling notice” that the information is “meant for use primarily within the corporate security community. Such messages shall not be released in either written or oral form to the media, the general public or other personnel…” (The DSAC document was also obtained by the Northern California ACLU which has sought local FBI surveillance files.)

• Naval Criminal Investigative Services (NCIS) reported to the DSAC on the relationship between OWS and organized labor for the port actions. The NCIS  describes itself as “an elite worldwide federal law enforcement organization” whose “mission is to investigate and defeat criminal, terrorist, and foreign intelligence threats to the United States Navy and Marine Corps ashore, afloat and in cyberspace.” The NCIS also assists with the transport of Guantanamo prisoners.

• DSAC issued several tips to its corporate clients on “civil unrest” which it defines as ranging from “small, organized rallies to large-scale demonstrations and rioting.” It advised to dress conservatively, avoid political discussions and “avoid all large gatherings related to civil issues. Even seemingly peaceful rallies can spur violent activity or be met with resistance by security forces. Bystanders may be arrested or harmed by security forces using water cannons, tear gas or other measures to control crowds.”

• The FBI in Anchorage reported from a Joint Terrorism Task Force meeting of November 3, 2011, about Occupy activities in Anchorage.

• A port Facility Security Officer in Anchorage coordinated with the FBI to attend the meeting of protestors and gain intelligence on the planning of the port actions. He was advised to request the presence of an Anchorage Police Department official to also attend the event. The FBI Special Agent told the undercover private operative that he would notify the Joint Terrorism Task Force and that he would provide a point of contact at the Anchorage Police Department.

• The Jacksonville, Florida FBI prepared a Domestic Terrorism briefing on the “spread of the Occupy Wall Street Movement” in October 2011. The intelligence meeting discussed Occupy venues identifying “Daytona, Gainesville and Ocala Resident Agency territories as portions …where some of the highest unemployment rates in Florida continue to exist.”

• The Tampa, Florida FBI “Domestic Terrorism” liaison participated with the Tampa Police Department’s monthly intelligence meeting in which Occupy Lakeland, Occupy Polk County and Occupy St. Petersburg were discussed. They reported on an individual “leading the Occupy Tampa” and plans for travel to Gainesville for a protest planning meeting, as well as on Veterans for Peace plans to protest at MacDill Air Force Base.

• The Federal Reserve in Richmond appears to have had personnel surveilling OWS planning. They were in contact with the FBI in Richmond to “pass on information regarding the movement known as occupy Wall Street.” There were repeated communications “to pass on updates of the events and decisions made during the small rallies and the following information received from the Capital Police Intelligence Unit through JTTF (Joint Terrorism Task Force).”

• The Virginia FBI was collecting intelligence on the OWS movement for dissemination to the Virginia Fusion Center and other Intelligence divisions.

• The Milwaukee division of the FBI was coordinating with the Ashwaubenon Public Safety division in Green Bay Wisconsin regarding Occupy.

• The Memphis FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force met to discuss “domestic terrorism” threats, including, “Aryan Nations, Occupy Wall Street, and Anonymous.”

• The Birmingham, AL division of the FBI sent communications to HAZMAT teams regarding the Occupy Wall Street movement.

• The Jackson, Mississippi division of the FBI attended a meeting of the Bank Security Group in Biloxi, MS with multiple private banks and the Biloxi Police Department, in which they discussed an announced protest for “National Bad Bank Sit-In-Day” on December 7, 2011.

• The Denver, CO FBI and its Bank Fraud Working Group met and were briefed on Occupy Wall Street in November 2011. Members of the Working Group include private financial institutions and local area law enforcement.

• Jackson, MS Joint Terrorism Task Force issued a “Counterterrorism Preparedness” alert. This heavily redacted document includes the description, “To document…the Occupy Wall Street Movement.”

You can read the FBI - OWS documents below where we have uploaded them in searchable format for public viewing.

The PCJF filed Freedom of Information Act demands with multiple federal law enforcement agencies in the fall of 2011 as the Occupy crackdown began. The FBI initially attempted to limit its search to only one limited record keeping index. Recognizing this as a common tactic used by the FBI to conduct an inadequate search, the PCJF pressed forward demanding searches be performed of the FBI headquarters as well as FBI field offices nationwide.  

The PCJF will continue to push for public disclosure of the government’s spy files and will release documents as they are obtained.

thefreelioness:

thevocalibertarian:

By Washington’s Blog

Wesley Clark, Supreme Allied Commander NATO, testifies in this 2-minute video that the US planned to overthrow seven countries after 9/11: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.

The Pentagon admitted a strategy to do so (here, here, here):

1. the US conducts acts of terrorism in nations they want to control,
2. the US continues terrorism to provoke an act of reprisal,
3. the US labels the reprisal “terrorism” to justify covert and overt military operations to overthrow targeted governments.

Therefore, the US caused the “war on terror” as a policy choice; 9/11 was pretense and not the cause.

Indeed, war law and two UN Security Council Resolutions provided international cooperation for factual discovery of the 9/11 terrorists, arrests, and trial for lawful justice all nations supported.

The US rejects the rule of law, violates treaty obligations, killed over a million human beings from armed attacks since 9/11, and so far has long-term costs of $4 to $6 trillion to US taxpayers ($40 – $60,000 per household).

This rogue state of the US ends when enough Americans in military, law enforcement, government, media, education, and the general public have sufficient intellectual integrity and moral courage to accept the “emperor has no clothes” obvious facts.

This unlawful policy choice of the US for Wars of Aggression has killed 20-30 million people in covert and overt wars since 1945. It follows a long history of lie-began and treaty-violated wars of choice to steal land and resources, as I’ve reminded the public before:

1. The US regularly violated treaties with Native Americans, as well as manipulating their meaning for the purpose of stealing their land.

2. US President Polk lied to Congress to initiate a War of Aggression in Mexico. The result was the US taking 40% of Mexico in 1848. This occurred despite Abraham Lincoln’s crystal-clear explanation as a member of Congress that the Adams-Onis Treaty placed the “border dispute” 400 miles within land forever promised to Mexico and forever promised as outside any US claim.

3. The US violated our treaty with Hawaii and stole their country in 1898.

4. The US reneged on promises of freedom after the Spanish American War to impose our rule on the Philippines and install US-friendly dictators in Cuba.

5. The US entered WW1 upon no national security threat to the US and put the 3rd party presidential candidate in prison for public speeches questioning the war.

6. The CIA had several covert wars; perhaps most important in today’s context of war on Iran:“Operation Ajax” that overthrew Iran’s democracy and installed a US-friendly and brutal dictator.  When that dictator was overthrown and Iran refused another, the US aided Iraq to unlawfully invade and attack Iran from 1980-1988; killing up to a million Iranians. If the US lied and acted twice to unlawfully overthrew Iran’s democracy within our own lifetimes, shouldn’t we assume first another lie-stared unlawful war today? Upon confirmation of the lies (documented below), shouldn’t we arrest the US War Criminals rather than allow them to kill again?!?

7. The Vietnam War occurred after the US allowed the cancellation of an election to unify the country, as escalated with the Gulf of Tonkin incident: false intelligence at best, but then manipulated into a false-flag event for a “defensive” war.

8. Perhaps most disturbing is the King Family civil suit that found the US government guilty in the assassination of Dr. King. Corporate media, including our text publishers, omit this history. The King family’s conclusion is that Martin was assassinated to prevent his “Occupy DC” plan beginning for the sumer of 1968 to end his version of today’s wars.

9. We now know from Congressional reports that all “reasons” for war with Iraq were known to be falseas they were told.

10. The two “reasons” for war with Iran are as false as the “reasons” for war with Iraq. Beware a false flag attack by the US or Israel to blame on Iran as pretext for another “defensive” war:

1. Iran’s president never physically threatened Israel.
2. All of Iran’s nuclear material is fully accounted for peaceful and legal use for energy and medicine.

There isn’t a lot to do in Paragould, Arkansas, but residents of the town of barely 25,000 seem to have no problem finding trouble. Now in order to curb the rising crime rate, the city is proposing heavily armed police patrol the streets on foot.

At a town hall meeting on Thursday, Mayor Mike Gaskill and Police Chief Todd Stovall endorsed a plan to send cops dressed in full-fledged SWAT gear and equipped with AR-15s into downtown Paragould starting in 2013.

The militarized police force will be tasked with trying to control a crime rate that has made Paragould an increasingly dangerous place to live in recent years. According to statistics collected by city-data.com, Paragould has had a property crime index rating more than double the national average since 2007. Rapes, burglaries, thefts and assaults per capita are also well above the mean there, statistically suggesting Paragould is perhaps the least-safe among area cities.

“This fear is what’s given us the reason to do this. Once I have stats and people saying they’re scared, we can do this,” Stovall said, according to the Paragould Daily Press. “It allows us to do what we’re fixing to do.”

In order to bring crime down, residents of Paragould may soon have to endure police officers brandishing semi-automatic assault riddles on the regular. What’s more, Stovall says, is he intends to have the cops collecting identification from everyone and anyone in an attempt to discourage criminal activity.

“If you’re out walking, we’re going to stop you, ask why you’re out walking, check for your ID,” the Daily Press reports him saying during last week’s meeting.

“To ask you for your ID, I have to have a reason,” he said. “Well, I’ve got statistical reasons that say I’ve got a lot of crime right now, which gives me probable cause to ask what you’re doing out. Then when I add that people are scared…then that gives us even more [reason] to ask why are you here and what are you doing in this area.”

“They may not be doing anything but walking their dog,” added Mayor Gaskill, “but they’re going to have to prove it.”

Soon after the Paragould Daily Press picked up the story, news of the small town’s efforts to enforce martial law began making headlines outside of Arkansas. On Sunday, Stovall authored an explanation on the Paragould Police Department website to clarify how exactly the proposed Street Crimes Unit will interact with citizens.

“Most often, this identification process will be nothing more than making contact with a subject, handing them a business card, and asking if they live in the area and if there’s anything we can do for them,” he says. During hours in which crime seems to be more prevalent, however, Chief Stovall says their process “will become more stringent.”

“We will be asking for picture identification. We will be ascertaining where the subject lives and what they are doing in the area. We will be keeping a record of those we contact.”

Stovall adds that they program would not violate the constitutional rights of Paragould citizens, claiming, “Once we have an area that shows a high crime rate or a high call volume, it is our duty and obligation to find out why this is occurring and what we can do to prevent the trend from continuing. Therefore, identifying subjects in those problem areas help us to solve crimes, and hopefully to prevent future crimes.”

Paragould has scheduled two more town hall meetings to discuss the Street Crimes Unit.

sinidentidades:

1. Buses and street cars that can hear what you say .

You can’t really go anywhere in America without being tracked by surveillance cameras. But seeing what people do is not enough; according to a report by the Daily, cities all over the country are literally bugging public transportation. 

In San Francisco, city officials have plans to install surveillance cameras that record sound on 357 buses and trolley cars, the Daily reported. Eugene, Oregon and Columbus, Hartford and Athens, Georgia, also have audio recording plans in the works. The systems have the capacity to filter background noise and hone in on passengers’ conversations.

Officials have said that the system is merely intended to help resolve disputes between bus riders. San Francisco officials did not comment, but the Daily found a similar justification in procurement documents for the technology. “The purpose of this project is to replace the existing video surveillance systems in SFMTA’s fleet of revenue vehicles with a reliable and technologically advanced system to increase passenger safety and improve reliability and maintainability of the system.”

It’s nice that the Department of Homeland Security, which covered the entire cost of San Francisco’s system, is so committed to ensuring pleasant bus rides for passengers. 

2. Mannequins that can see you.

A handful of retailers in the US and Europe are installing mannequins in their stores that can determine customers’ age, gender and race, Bloomberg reported last month. Don’t worry, the face recognition-equipped camera is hidden, so there is no way to tell whether the giant plastic dolls in the store are watching you as you shop. The company that developed the mannequins (named EyeSee) sells their attributes thusly: 

This special camera installed inside the mannequin’s head analyzes the facial features of people passing through the front and provides statistical and contextual information useful to the development of targeted marketing strategies. The embedded software can also provide other data such as the number of people passing in front of a window at certain times of the day.

They are also developing audio technology that can pick up key words from customer conversations to help them tailor their marketing plans. A screen that displays advertising geared specifically to each customers’ demographic is also in EyeSee’s future.

Really, wouldn’t the ideal marketing scenario be if human customers were replaced by mannequins programmed to buy everything the other mannequins were selling?

3. Biometric time clocks.

For too long, employers lacked the ability to extract every second of labor from their workers with scientific precision. Thanks to the wonders of face recognition technology, many employees in low-wage workplaces are now required to log in to work on face recognition readers instead of using key cards or codes . Biometric time clocks like FaceIn, most commonly used at construction sites, create an avatar of the workers’ face that the machine keeps forever and that ages alongside the employee. Allegedly, it can tell twins apart. 

Meanwhile, many fast food restaurants and retailers have started using biometric time clocks that record digital fingerprints, like the creepily named U.are.U digital fingerprint reader, to prevent employees from coming in late or giving out discounts. 

4. Tagging children.

It’s probably best to train people in robotic discipline early, and many US schools, aided by surveillance technology vendors, are on it. Last month, a Texas sophomore sued her school district for making students carry RFID chips that tracked their movements, but that’s just the start. School administrators all over the country use CCTV cameras, RFID chips, and GPS tracking to moniter where students go and what they do, as David Rosen reported for AlterNet. One pilot program for middle schoolers used GPS to make  sure kids aren’t late: 

Each school day, the delinquent students get an automated “wake-up” phone call reminding them that they need to get to school on time. In addition, five times a day they are required to enter a code that tracks their locations: as they leave for school, when they arrive at school, at lunchtime, when they leave school and at 8pm. These students are also assigned an adult “coach” who calls them at least three times a week to see how they are doing and help them find effective ways to make sure they get to school.

5. Biometric databases.

Federal agencies ranging from the DoD to the FBI to the DHS are revamping their databases to include iris scans, voice patterning, measures of gait, face recognition, and records of scars and tattoos. They also have a mandate to indiscriminately share this information between agencies and with unnamed foreign entities.