Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old November 10th, 2009 #1
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default FBI Strategy

[The following thread is for COINTELPRO and other actions, not for speculation by nitwits. Dumb posts will disappear.]

Last edited by Alex Linder; November 21st, 2009 at 02:17 PM.
 
Old November 10th, 2009 #2
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

From "Hate: George Lincoln Rockwell & the American Nazi Party" (p. 226-227):

In 1964 the ANP came under the purview of the FBI's controversial COINTELPRO - Counterintelligence Program. The purpose of COINTELPRO was to "expose, disrupt and otherwise neutralize the activities of the various Klans and hate organizations, their leadership and adherents." The mandate stated:

The devious maneuvers and duplicity of these groups must be exposed to public scrutiny through the cooperation of reliable news media sources, both locally and at the Seat of Government. We must frustrate any effort of the groups to consolidate their forces or to recruit new or youthful adherents. In every instance, consideration should be given to disrupting the organized activity of these groups and no opportunity should be missed to capitalize upon organizational and personal conflicts of their leadership.

COINTELPRO would be used against the ANP on numerous occasions in the next four years.

The FBI's Richmond field office generated a COINTELPRO action against the party. Its target was National Secretary Matt Koehl. The field office proposed sending the following letter to Rockwell, signed by an anonymous sympathizer:

Dear Commander:

I am going to remain anonymous because this letter may get into the wrong hands.

I took part in the August 28th March on the niggers in Washington last year and was surprised when I first saw Matt Koehl. I thought I knew him then. When I was traveling in the Chicago area, I started to check around. I found that Matt Koehl, your second in command, is part Jewish. His mother's name was Birstein.

I'll bet that this was never told to you and I bet that if you watch Koehl closely you will find that he will meet with some member of the ADL at least once every two weeks.

Yours for future victory
Heil Hitler
A Friend


The Bureau rejected the Richmond field office request to target Koehl.

[p. 243]

About this time, the FBI COINTELPRO targeted the ANP Chicago unit with a two-pronged attack: ruin the Chicago unit financially and disrupt its leadership. The FBI Chicago field office wanted to expose the unit's building code violations to either the local ADL or the Jewish War Veterans of Chicago, in hopes that one of these organizations would badger the city to assess fines against the ANP. If neither organization would cooperate, the Bureau would itself make the information available to city officials. Exposing the building code violations would financially cripple the unit; repairs and fines would severely restrict its operations, because the bulk of its resources went for the $110 mortgage payment and basic maintenance of the dilapidated building at 1314 West Ohio Street. Any additional financial burden would limit literature creation and distribution, ruin morale, create dissatisfaction among the ranks, and discourage new recruits.

The second prong of the COINTELPRO attack was to disrupt the leadership of the local organization. False expressions of discontent would be directed at Rockwell by letters, either anonymous or signed with the name of a local Chicago member known to be dissatisfied. Such attacks would divide the loyalty of the organization and cause national headquarters to question the capability of the Chicago leadership. The Bureau also considered sabotage by an agent provocateur.

[Remember that the ANP was a fully legal organization. The FBI is using illegal means to destroy a legal operation. Contemplate that.]

A sympathetic ADL member was recruited in Chicago to act on behalf of the FBI to report the building code violations of the ANP Chicago unit, thus precluding direct contact by Bureau agents with city officials. The FBI also wanted to bait the Jewish War Veterans to action against the Chicago unit; JWV criticism of the ANP was almost non-existent. On February 26, 1965, the Bureau sent an anonymous letter to provoke them:

Jewish War Veterans of the United States
Chicago, Illinois

Gentlemen:

Recently my wife had occasion to ride in a Checker Cab in Chicago with a most outspoken young driver. Immediately after setting out for our home the driver engaged my wife in conversation denouncing the "dirty Jews and Niggers" in Chicago. He proceeded to blame every ill we face today on the Negro and Jew. When my wife cautioned him that he was then speaking with a Jew, he told her in so many words that he couldn't care less. He praised the Nazi Rockwell and mentioned what appeared to be his association with Rockwell's Nazi Party. He was even so bold as to mention their headquarters at 1314 West Ohio Street.

When my wife told me of this incident I took it upon myself to look over this stronghold of Nazism in Chicago. Gentlemen, this is an unimpressive building which could best be described as a firetrap. The thing that does impress me, however, is that the youth of today in this country could at all be taken with a philosophy you and I know should be dreaded. If this young man is typical of the attitude of Rockwell's followers then we must take action.

Though a Jew myself I am not a member of your organization. You have, however, in the past well represented the things that all Americans, no matter their creed or color, hold so dear. Now gentlemen, I fear I must chastize you. I konw that you have been vocal in your protests of the Nazis in Chicago in the past. An organization like yours can do little else but fight such a disease as this. Why then in recent months have we heard nothing from you in this regard?

Please, gentlemen, go see for yourselves this headquarters of the Nazis. Do what you can, and now, to put them out of business. Don't fail us now. All Americans need groups like yours, not only the Jew and the Negro. I am sorry, I lack the courage to identify myself. This is even further reason why you must, must speak for me.



As a direct result of COINTELPRO actions, the city of Chicago took action against the Nazis in the form of fines and of pressure to correct the building violations under threat of forced eviction. Chris Vidnjevich, the "officer in charge" of the Chicago Nazis, complained to the local FBI office that statutes were not being uniformly enforced and that his civil rights were being denied in that he was not being allowed to choose his residence and place of assembly. It was ironic that the Nazis had turned for help regarding their constitutional rights to the very organ of the federal government directing political persecution against them.


[p. 258-9]

The FBI's Richmond field office proposed yet another COINTELPRO operation against the party. This time the target was the deputy commander, Alan Welch. Since Welch was extremely active in the day-to-day operations of the party, the Bureau believed that if Rockwell lost faith in Welch during the critical campaign for governor, a severe disruption in ANP activities would result.

Unlike in the proposed COINTELPRO actions against Koehl, the Bureau authorized Richmond to send the following letter, complete with spelling errors, to the Dallas field office, where it was to be forwarded to Rockwell at the Arlington headquarters:

George Lincoln Rockwell
928 North Randolph Street
Arlington, VA

I have been a loyal follower of you for three years and I am in complete sympathy with all you are trying to accomplish, yours is the only voice in our society today which courageously speaks the truth. And I want you to know that I am supporting you in your cindiacy for Governor of the State of Virginia.

I know your berdens are heavy and that you must rely upon other persons to handle much of the day-to-day work of your organization. When you are at Headquarters, you can, and do, keep our operations running smoothly; however, while you are away there is a traitor carrying on the operations at home. This individual is not a traitor to the ideas of National Socialism in which we all believe but he is a physical traitor.

Alan Welch is a traitor to the Nazi Party. Not only is his mind warped but he is nothing but a damn queer. He interviews potential applicants to the Party and rejects those he believes are too manly. He attempted to engage an ANP member in an unnatural sex affair about three months ago. This is known to several of the Party members and we are sickened that a person of such low contemptible morals is in the Party, much less one of its high officers. . . . I hope you can find some way to replace this man who is doing so much to injure our great Party.

A hopeful member from
your best chapter


By postmarking the letter from Dallas the Bureau hoped to perplex Rockwell and add to what was perceived to be his general paranoia.

In late September, Rockwell received the letter from Dallas and immediately contacted the FBI, because he felt it had violated federal law. He told the special agent that the "vicious" letter had disrupted his organization and was a source of great worry to him "as it cast a spell on one of his most trusted workers." The Bureau, of course, did nothing about the letter; it was quite pleased by Rockwell's reaction to the COINTELPRO scheme. The agents circulated a memo congratulating themselves on the success of the endeavor, describing how Rockwell was "wracking his brain" to identify the "spy" in the ANP-Dallas.


[p 272]

The FBI COINTELPRO operatives seized the opportunity to attack the party. They produced a scheme to send a phony letter to the party's most ardent financial backers as well as rank-and-file members and sympathizers. The theme of the letter was "do not send money" to the ANP to help combat the IRS because their names would be exposed to the government. The letter read:

Dear Contributor:

As you know from the newspapers, the Jews in Washington have tried to finish their plot against us and have seized all worthwhile property belonging to the Party and our beloved Commander, George Lincoln Rockwell. We are fighting them as best we know how and can assure you that National Socialism will win out over the treachery placed upon us.

We are confident that our fight to regain our property will prevail; therefore, we request that you do not send any money to National Headquarters or to our Dallas, Los Angeles, or Chicago chapters. We are afraid that the federal government will obtain your name if you send money and they will harass you as they are harassing us. We do not want you to be compromised and would rather you remain in the background until the air clears.

We would be desirous of obtaining your well wishes but please, I repeat, do not send money for fear of reprisal.

If you have received our previous letters requesting that you help us financially, please disregard, because we believe the threat of reprisal is imminent and do not wish to bring harm to you.

American Nazi Party National Headquarters


The FBI skullduggery had little or no impact on the party. Matt Koehl later recalled that the hard-core support remained intact.


[p. 295-6]

The FBI continued to mount COINTELPRO operations against the ANP. It devised a plan to cause a rift between the ANP and the United Klans of America. In late August the Western Division-ANP held a rally in San Francisco. Nazi leader Alan Vincent invited William Fowler, chairman of the California United Klans of America, to speak from the Nazi rostrum. Fowler spoke at length about the "Negro problem" and was followed by a Ralph Forbes harangue concerning the Vietnam war. FBI COINTELPRO operatives requisitioned photographs of the event from the San Francisco Police Department, then sent a fabricated letter to Klan followers, Rockwell, and ANP leaders throughout the country in hopes of causing distrust and dissension among their ranks. The Bureau wanted to create a wide split not only between the ANP and the Klan but also between Imperial Wizard Robert Shelton of United Klans for America and William Fowler, the local California leader of the United Klans of America:

The pictures you see are of interest to all who swear allegiance to the Ku Klux Klan. Recently the American Nazi Party held a rally in Northern California. Now the Klan has no beef because the Nazi Party holds a rally, but what should concern the Klan is the fact that the man speaking at the microphone is William Fowler, Chairman of the California Ku Klux Klan, United Klans of America....

The Klan stands for Christianity and decency, the Klan stands for this great country of ours, the Klan stands for the rights of the White Man...but never should we be accused of needing the Nazi storm troopers to get our message across to the American people.

And what of these uniformed storm troopers who stand alongside our "Klan representative" at this rally, wearing the swastika of the Nazi Party [?] Needless to say, fellow Klansmen, these are the followers of the crooked George Lincoln Rockwell, the psychopathic agnostic who laughs at the name of Christ. Rockwell is great when it comes to playing boyish tricks, but have you ever noticed that it is not Rockwell himself who performs these publicity seeking stunts[?] Oh no, it is always some poor lame-brained nut who performs for the "Commander" and who sites in jail while the "Commander" quietly counts his money and dreams of new worlds to conquer....

Be assured that our Imperial Wizard, Robert Shelton will not tolerate the actions of Fowler in California. Fowler does not speak for the United Klans of America.
 
Old November 11th, 2009 #3
Rounder
Senior Member
 
Rounder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Missouri
Posts: 12,684
Rounder
Default

The Freedom of Information Act revealed in the late 70s, that the feds bragged about having enough NC klansmen on their payroll to elect the state's Grand Dragon. And that 7 out of 8 members of a Charlotte klan chapter were paid informants.

"Klansman" Eddie Dawson, who organized and led the anti-communist demonstration in Greensboro on 3 Nov 79, was then on the payrolls of the Greensboro police department and the SBI. His handler was SBI agent Joe Momier, who attended most of our public demonstrations during the 80s.

The WPP, no doubt, had government paid infiltrators. A fact I knew all along. But since there was nothing I could do to prevent this problem, I ignored it in the interest of my own peace of mind so I could continue hard-charging, free from demoralization and worry.

Rather than wring my hands or quit, I simple informed/warned all members constantly, and further stated that since we were totally legal, we had nothing to worry about. When cops and SBI agents were taking our photos and writing down our license plate numbers, we did the same to them. Besides, our infiltrators paid their membership dues, wore the WPP uniform, and helped fill our ranks when we marched in the streets.

In fairness to Joe Momier, he was a witness at my 1986 trial and he testified truthfully that he had no knowledge of my having violated any laws, and that he did not personally believe, based on his years of observation and investigation, that my intentions were to operate a para-military organization WITH THE INTENT TO CAUSE DISORDER, as charged.

I routinely invited Momier and county sheriffs to attend any and all our gatherings in those days, so as to help prove all our activities were legal. And I allowed them to subscribe to our newspaper which kept them informed. My own county sheriff was George Johnson, a retired green beret Sergeant Major, who I served directly under at Fort Bragg and had known for years. I regularly dropped by his office in Smithfield for chats and to give him literature. He never once spoke adversely about me or the WPP in the media.

Any WN entertaining thoughts of running an activist group but paranoid about government infiltrators, should forget both. Infiltrators are as sure as grits are groceries. None, however, ever did any damage to the WPP, far as I know.

As for anonymous letters I received, badmouthing this or that WPP member, and I received a hell of a lot, were shit-canned, and got about the same amount of my serious attention as the anonymous badmouthings on this forum. Zilch.
__________________
“To learn who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize” —–Voltaire





Last edited by Rounder; November 11th, 2009 at 08:41 AM.
 
Old November 21st, 2009 #4
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Hal Turner thread

http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=98976
 
Old December 11th, 2009 #5
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

saw this link on a disreputable communist blog. i have not listened to it, but it is purported to be an audio discussion of FBI COINTELPRO infitration of LEFTIES

http://www.archive.org/download/dn20...605-1_64kb.mp3
 
Old December 17th, 2009 #6
Tomasz Winnicki
White - European - Aryan
 
Tomasz Winnicki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London, Ontario, Dominion of Canada
Posts: 4,217
Tomasz Winnicki
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rounder View Post
... The WPP, no doubt, had government paid infiltrators ...
Do you think there would be many or even any at all willing informants working for the anti-White government if the feds didn't have much money to offer them?
__________________
Alex Linder: "Want to rebel White teen? Become a White Nationalist."
vnnforum.com | freedomsite.org | douglaschristie.com
RACE IS NOT SKIN COLOR. LOOK HERE http://i.imgur.com/mSKW5An.png AND HERE http://i.imgur.com/6O86hP6.png
 
Old March 31st, 2012 #7
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

The Hutaree Case: Next, Time, They’ll Send in the Drones

by William Norman Grigg

Next time the Regime identifies a group of people as "domestic terrorists," the result might be a summary mass execution, or imprisonment in military custody, rather than a trial. This is one very plausible result of the dismissal of "seditious conspiracy" charges against members of Michigan’s Hutaree militia.

Thanks to the legal environment created by the NDAA, the Feds won’t have to run the risks involved in submitting the next "domestic terrorism" case to the scrutiny of a court. Now that Attorney General Eric Holder has helpfully clarified that "due process" and "judicial process" aren’t the same thing, it’s entirely possible that the next group of American dissidents identified by the SPLC or some other self-appointed political watchdog group as "terrorists" could be targeted by a drone-fired missile or a presidential strike team. In fact, the SPLC, which provides an updated list of domestic enemies to law enforcement agencies, already has some experience as target-spotters for domestic drone operations.

When asked by Rep. Thomas Graves (R-Georgia) if "targeted assassinations" could be conducted domestically as well as overseas, FBI Commissar Robert Mueller pointedly refused to rule out the possibility. This was probably welcome news to Leslie Larsen, the FBI Agent who presided over the Hutaree case for years, only to see the most serious charges evaporate.

"We haven't worked a year and a half on this investigation and risked [an undercover agent's] life to walk away from this with 3 arrests," groused the secret police investigator two years ago. By that time it had become clear the FBI wouldn’t be able to manufacture a successful criminal conspiracy out of a few trivial firearms violations and a surfeit of anti-government rhetoric.

During the past decade, false flag operations targeting disaffected Muslims have become the FBI’s métier. The Hutaree was the first non-Muslim "domestic extremist" group to be cast as the lead in one of the Bureau’s post-911 Homeland Security Theater productions. U.S. District Judge Victoria Roberts, who was able to see the plot holes in the FBI’s implausible script, had the character and good sense – traits otherwise all but impossible to find on the bench – to dismiss the case with prejudice.

In her order granting the defense motion for summary judgment, Roberts – who had previously expressed severe skepticism regarding the supposed merits of the case – lambasted the Feds for repeatedly venturing beyond "inference to pure speculation" and "attempting to formulate an alternative theory of criminal liability" when it became clear that they couldn’t provide tangible evidence of intent to commit an overt criminal act. This resulted in a theory of the case "based primarily on two conversations … the first on August 13, 2009, and the second on February 20, 2010."

The Hutaree "militia" was a loosely organized group of obscure people united by their entirely commendable hostility toward the criminal clique calling itself the United States Government. They apparently shared a set of apocalyptic beliefs about the imminent rise of the Antichrist, and they engaged in survivalist training in anticipation of the End Times, when they might confront the necessity to use defensive force against government agents – whether foreign or domestic – in league with the enemy.

It was in the context of this scenario that members of the Hutaree group supposedly plotted to murder a law enforcement officer and then follow up with opportunistic attacks on other LEOs who would attend the funeral. This repellent terrorist tactic should be familiar to the Feds who investigated the Hutaree group; after all, the government that employs them has made extensive use of it. A detailed report compiled by British and Pakistani journalists has documented that CIA drone-fired missile strikes have killed "dozens of civilians who had gone to help rescue victims or [who] were attending funerals" that resulted from earlier missile attacks.

In orchestrating its phony domestic terrorist plots, the Regime tends to use a script inspired by its own acts of state terrorism abroad. The Hutaree "plot" to assassinate a cop and then capitalize on the funeral may have been prompted by the federal informant who infiltrated the group and – acting as a provocateur– thoughtfully offered to teach them how to make improvised explosive devices. It may have been stitched together from in post-production, from scraps of various conversations, by the FBI impresario presiding over this little melodrama. What we know for certain is that it was not conceived by the Hutaree activists, nor did they take ownership of it.

The original indictment – which Judge Roberts eviscerated in a preliminary ruling – accused the Michigan dissidents of making material preparations to carry out specific criminal acts. When it was shown that there was no evidence to support that charge, the Feds shifted their focus and charged them with "seditious conspiracy," which consisted of expressing opinions about government corruption and making physical preparations to for self-defense against criminal violence perpetrated by government authorities.

Citing a Supreme Court precedent (Russell v. United States, 1962) holding that the prosecution isn’t "free to roam at large – to shift its theory of criminality so as to take advantage of each passing vicissitude of the trial," Roberts observed that the Feds were not free to "say that the alleged plan set forth [in the original indictment] is irrelevant." Yet that’s precisely what they attempted to do.

Although the supposed police assassination plot was central to the case against the Hutaree, "the Government did not provide sufficient proof of the existence of a conspiracy at all," ruled Judge Roberts. "The Government says it is not certain whether the Hutaree intended to initiate the conflict, or simply engage in it once it was initiated by others." While Hutaree members frequently engaged in what were described as "diatribes" against law enforcement, "all of this speech is protected by the First Amendment," Roberts observed. Expressing hatred for the government’s enforcement caste "is not the same as seditious conspiracy." (Of course, sedition – rather than being a crime – is the highest and noblest form of patriotism, and should be commended, rather than prosecuted.)

Under the Government’s theory of the case, Roberts noted, one could be charged with "sedition" simply through his or her "mere presence at the scene" when a Hutaree activist spoke about "going to war and killing police."

One of the defendants, Tina Mae Stone, was described by the Feds as an "active, engaged and vocal member" of the purported conspiracy because she overheard two conversations – one regarding a planned trip to Kentucky by David Stone, Sr. and the federal informant, and a second that took place in an FBI-rented warehouse in which the provocateur "discussed explosives" with Mr. Stone.


The latter conversation touched on the subject of using coffee cans and wine bottles to make improvised explosively formed projectiles (EFPs). Ms. Stone joked that "she would take one for the team and drink more wine, presumably so that the bottles could be used to make explosives," Roberts recounts. The Feds characterized that wisecrack as evidence that she had "played an active, unhesitant, and continuing role in obtaining materials to use in building EFPs" – despite the fact that she was present for only one meeting with the Hutaree co-defendants, and never provided them with anything.

Following dismissal of the case, Hutaree defendant Michael Meeks, a 42-year-old former Marine, said that the salient lesson taught by the case was the need for Americans to "watch what you say. Even the most innocent of statements can be used against you."

Actually, the lesson is that anything said in your presence can be used against you – and if a sufficiently incriminating remark isn't forthcoming from you or your friends, the Feds can always pay somebody to perform on cue, and on camera.

While the Feds didn’t succeed in imprisoning the Hutaree defendants for life, they were able to steal more than two years of their respective lives through pre-trial incarceration.

As a consolation prize, the Feds were able to extort guilty pleas from David Stone, Sr. and his son Joshua on weapons charges, which could result in prison terms.

Although U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade – the Madam DeFarge behind this case – wasn’t able to feed the defendants to the guillotine, she expressed a measure of vindictive satisfaction that the felony convictions mean "that these defendants will never be permitted to possess firearms again." She also reiterated the Regime’s intent to continue "dismantling" militias and other dissident groups suspected of impermissible animosity toward their rulers.

Once again, thanks to the NDAA – the Obama Regime’s "Law of Suspects" – the Feds will be able to use extra-judicial means to "dismantle" dissident groups in the future.


The original Law of Suspects was enacted by France’s revolutionary Jacobin government on September 17, 1793 (as it happened, the sixth birthday of the U.S. Constitution). The decree permitted the wholesale imprisonment of several classes of people deemed enemies of the State:

Those considered "partisans of tyranny" or "enemies of liberty" – which in the Jacobin lexicon referred to defenders of the monarchy and traditional institutions;
Individuals who had been denied "certificates of patriotism" issued by the revolutionary regime;
Former nobles and erstwhile "civil servants" who had been cashiered by the National Convention;
Those who emigrated from France between July 1, 1789 and April 8, 1792, and their family members, unless they provided suitable displays of "devotion to the Revolution."
As David A. Bell of Johns Hopkins University points out in his study The First Total War: Napoleon's Europe and the Birth of Warfare as We Know It, the Law of Suspects – the template for every modern totalitarian legal system, including the NDAA – was the enabling act for the revolutionary Reign of Terror. As is the case with a contemporary American deemed an "enemy combatant," any French citizen branded a Suspect had no right to appeal that designation. Protests of that kind were probably met with some variation of the sentiment recently expressed by Robespierre’s modern disciple, Sen. Lindsey Graham: "Shut up – you don’t get a lawyer!"

The same concept was embedded in the Soviet Union’s Fundamental Principles of Penal Legislation, which identified the central mission of the state's law enforcement apparatus (chiefly the Ckeha secret police, which would later become the KGB) as that of identifying, and removing the threat of, "socially dangerous persons." That mission was enshrined in Article 58 of the Soviet penal code, which was the foundation of that government’s perpetual war of terror against dissent – and the antecedent to section 1031 of the NDAA.


The law dealing with "socially dangerous persons," notes the authoritative Black Book of Communism, dealt with "any activity that, without directly aiming to overthrow or weaken the Soviet regime, [which] was in itself 'an attack on the political or economic achievements of the revolutionary proletariat.' The law thus not only punished intentional transgressions but also proscribed possible or unintentional acts" (emphasis added).

Additionally, the expression "socially dangerous persons" itself was based on "extremely elastic categories" that permitted the imprisonment of people in the gulag "even in the absence of guilt." This is because what the Soviet rulers were pleased to call "the law" specified that incarceration, exile, or execution could be employed as means of "social protection" against "anyone classified as a danger to society, either for a specific crime that has been committed or when, even if exonerated of a particular crime, the person is still reckoned to pose a threat to society." (Emphasis added.) The Regime in Washington has acted on similar assumptions regarding Gitmo inmates who remain in detention despite their demonstrated innocence. The NDAA would authorize similar treatment of U.S. citizens as well.

Soviet "law" discarded entirely with the idea of punishing overt acts, focusing instead on the supposed motivations of those deemed innately threatening to the regime. Note also that the Soviet system was rigged to nullify exculpatory verdicts. Soviet prosecutors, like Federal prosecutors today, considered themselves entitled to "shift the theory of criminality" as needed in order to justify detention of political offenders.

Detention of "socially dangerous persons" was the primary function of the Soviet penal apparatus. As Paul Gregory points out in his book Lenin's Brain, most of the prisoners consigned to the gulag were sent there not because of what they had done, but because of what the state suspected they could do; they were being isolated from the rest of society "because of actual or suspected opposition to the Soviet state" – that is to say, that they had a "general plan" to "oppose the authority" of the government," as the U.S. "Justice" Department said of the Hutaree defendants.

During the Senate’s discussion of the NDAA’s martial law provisions, Sen. Graham warned that Americans suspected of terrorism – another "elastic" category that can include practically any kind of organized dissent – should "know what will come your way – death; detention; prosecution."

Under the NDAA, the Regime has the luxury of ignoring the third option listed by Graham when courts refuse to ratify every conspiracy theory concocted by the Cheka (or, as it’s now know, the FBI). Or the Feds could simply avoid the messiness associated with "judicial process" of any kind and implement the Obama administration’s policy of executive assassination.

Reprinted with permission from Pro Libertate.

March 31, 2012

William Norman Grigg [send him mail] publishes the Pro Libertate blog and hosts the Pro Libertate radio program.

Copyright © 2012 William Norman Grigg

http://lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w252.html
 
Old March 31st, 2012 #8
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

The Hutaree Case: Next, Time, They’ll Send in the Drones

by William Norman Grigg

Next time the Regime identifies a group of people as "domestic terrorists," the result might be a summary mass execution, or imprisonment in military custody, rather than a trial. This is one very plausible result of the dismissal of "seditious conspiracy" charges against members of Michigan’s Hutaree militia.

Thanks to the legal environment created by the NDAA, the Feds won’t have to run the risks involved in submitting the next "domestic terrorism" case to the scrutiny of a court. Now that Attorney General Eric Holder has helpfully clarified that "due process" and "judicial process" aren’t the same thing, it’s entirely possible that the next group of American dissidents identified by the SPLC or some other self-appointed political watchdog group as "terrorists" could be targeted by a drone-fired missile or a presidential strike team. In fact, the SPLC, which provides an updated list of domestic enemies to law enforcement agencies, already has some experience as target-spotters for domestic drone operations.

When asked by Rep. Thomas Graves (R-Georgia) if "targeted assassinations" could be conducted domestically as well as overseas, FBI Commissar Robert Mueller pointedly refused to rule out the possibility. This was probably welcome news to Leslie Larsen, the FBI Agent who presided over the Hutaree case for years, only to see the most serious charges evaporate.

"We haven't worked a year and a half on this investigation and risked [an undercover agent's] life to walk away from this with 3 arrests," groused the secret police investigator two years ago. By that time it had become clear the FBI wouldn’t be able to manufacture a successful criminal conspiracy out of a few trivial firearms violations and a surfeit of anti-government rhetoric.

During the past decade, false flag operations targeting disaffected Muslims have become the FBI’s métier. The Hutaree was the first non-Muslim "domestic extremist" group to be cast as the lead in one of the Bureau’s post-911 Homeland Security Theater productions. U.S. District Judge Victoria Roberts, who was able to see the plot holes in the FBI’s implausible script, had the character and good sense – traits otherwise all but impossible to find on the bench – to dismiss the case with prejudice.

In her order granting the defense motion for summary judgment, Roberts – who had previously expressed severe skepticism regarding the supposed merits of the case – lambasted the Feds for repeatedly venturing beyond "inference to pure speculation" and "attempting to formulate an alternative theory of criminal liability" when it became clear that they couldn’t provide tangible evidence of intent to commit an overt criminal act. This resulted in a theory of the case "based primarily on two conversations … the first on August 13, 2009, and the second on February 20, 2010."

The Hutaree "militia" was a loosely organized group of obscure people united by their entirely commendable hostility toward the criminal clique calling itself the United States Government. They apparently shared a set of apocalyptic beliefs about the imminent rise of the Antichrist, and they engaged in survivalist training in anticipation of the End Times, when they might confront the necessity to use defensive force against government agents – whether foreign or domestic – in league with the enemy.

It was in the context of this scenario that members of the Hutaree group supposedly plotted to murder a law enforcement officer and then follow up with opportunistic attacks on other LEOs who would attend the funeral. This repellent terrorist tactic should be familiar to the Feds who investigated the Hutaree group; after all, the government that employs them has made extensive use of it. A detailed report compiled by British and Pakistani journalists has documented that CIA drone-fired missile strikes have killed "dozens of civilians who had gone to help rescue victims or [who] were attending funerals" that resulted from earlier missile attacks.

In orchestrating its phony domestic terrorist plots, the Regime tends to use a script inspired by its own acts of state terrorism abroad. The Hutaree "plot" to assassinate a cop and then capitalize on the funeral may have been prompted by the federal informant who infiltrated the group and – acting as a provocateur– thoughtfully offered to teach them how to make improvised explosive devices. It may have been stitched together from in post-production, from scraps of various conversations, by the FBI impresario presiding over this little melodrama. What we know for certain is that it was not conceived by the Hutaree activists, nor did they take ownership of it.

The original indictment – which Judge Roberts eviscerated in a preliminary ruling – accused the Michigan dissidents of making material preparations to carry out specific criminal acts. When it was shown that there was no evidence to support that charge, the Feds shifted their focus and charged them with "seditious conspiracy," which consisted of expressing opinions about government corruption and making physical preparations to for self-defense against criminal violence perpetrated by government authorities.

Citing a Supreme Court precedent (Russell v. United States, 1962) holding that the prosecution isn’t "free to roam at large – to shift its theory of criminality so as to take advantage of each passing vicissitude of the trial," Roberts observed that the Feds were not free to "say that the alleged plan set forth [in the original indictment] is irrelevant." Yet that’s precisely what they attempted to do.

Although the supposed police assassination plot was central to the case against the Hutaree, "the Government did not provide sufficient proof of the existence of a conspiracy at all," ruled Judge Roberts. "The Government says it is not certain whether the Hutaree intended to initiate the conflict, or simply engage in it once it was initiated by others." While Hutaree members frequently engaged in what were described as "diatribes" against law enforcement, "all of this speech is protected by the First Amendment," Roberts observed. Expressing hatred for the government’s enforcement caste "is not the same as seditious conspiracy." (Of course, sedition – rather than being a crime – is the highest and noblest form of patriotism, and should be commended, rather than prosecuted.)

Under the Government’s theory of the case, Roberts noted, one could be charged with "sedition" simply through his or her "mere presence at the scene" when a Hutaree activist spoke about "going to war and killing police."

One of the defendants, Tina Mae Stone, was described by the Feds as an "active, engaged and vocal member" of the purported conspiracy because she overheard two conversations – one regarding a planned trip to Kentucky by David Stone, Sr. and the federal informant, and a second that took place in an FBI-rented warehouse in which the provocateur "discussed explosives" with Mr. Stone.


The latter conversation touched on the subject of using coffee cans and wine bottles to make improvised explosively formed projectiles (EFPs). Ms. Stone joked that "she would take one for the team and drink more wine, presumably so that the bottles could be used to make explosives," Roberts recounts. The Feds characterized that wisecrack as evidence that she had "played an active, unhesitant, and continuing role in obtaining materials to use in building EFPs" – despite the fact that she was present for only one meeting with the Hutaree co-defendants, and never provided them with anything.

Following dismissal of the case, Hutaree defendant Michael Meeks, a 42-year-old former Marine, said that the salient lesson taught by the case was the need for Americans to "watch what you say. Even the most innocent of statements can be used against you."

Actually, the lesson is that anything said in your presence can be used against you – and if a sufficiently incriminating remark isn't forthcoming from you or your friends, the Feds can always pay somebody to perform on cue, and on camera.

While the Feds didn’t succeed in imprisoning the Hutaree defendants for life, they were able to steal more than two years of their respective lives through pre-trial incarceration.

As a consolation prize, the Feds were able to extort guilty pleas from David Stone, Sr. and his son Joshua on weapons charges, which could result in prison terms.

Although U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade – the Madam DeFarge behind this case – wasn’t able to feed the defendants to the guillotine, she expressed a measure of vindictive satisfaction that the felony convictions mean "that these defendants will never be permitted to possess firearms again." She also reiterated the Regime’s intent to continue "dismantling" militias and other dissident groups suspected of impermissible animosity toward their rulers.

Once again, thanks to the NDAA – the Obama Regime’s "Law of Suspects" – the Feds will be able to use extra-judicial means to "dismantle" dissident groups in the future.


The original Law of Suspects was enacted by France’s revolutionary Jacobin government on September 17, 1793 (as it happened, the sixth birthday of the U.S. Constitution). The decree permitted the wholesale imprisonment of several classes of people deemed enemies of the State:

Those considered "partisans of tyranny" or "enemies of liberty" – which in the Jacobin lexicon referred to defenders of the monarchy and traditional institutions;
Individuals who had been denied "certificates of patriotism" issued by the revolutionary regime;
Former nobles and erstwhile "civil servants" who had been cashiered by the National Convention;
Those who emigrated from France between July 1, 1789 and April 8, 1792, and their family members, unless they provided suitable displays of "devotion to the Revolution."
As David A. Bell of Johns Hopkins University points out in his study The First Total War: Napoleon's Europe and the Birth of Warfare as We Know It, the Law of Suspects – the template for every modern totalitarian legal system, including the NDAA – was the enabling act for the revolutionary Reign of Terror. As is the case with a contemporary American deemed an "enemy combatant," any French citizen branded a Suspect had no right to appeal that designation. Protests of that kind were probably met with some variation of the sentiment recently expressed by Robespierre’s modern disciple, Sen. Lindsey Graham: "Shut up – you don’t get a lawyer!"

The same concept was embedded in the Soviet Union’s Fundamental Principles of Penal Legislation, which identified the central mission of the state's law enforcement apparatus (chiefly the Ckeha secret police, which would later become the KGB) as that of identifying, and removing the threat of, "socially dangerous persons." That mission was enshrined in Article 58 of the Soviet penal code, which was the foundation of that government’s perpetual war of terror against dissent – and the antecedent to section 1031 of the NDAA.


The law dealing with "socially dangerous persons," notes the authoritative Black Book of Communism, dealt with "any activity that, without directly aiming to overthrow or weaken the Soviet regime, [which] was in itself 'an attack on the political or economic achievements of the revolutionary proletariat.' The law thus not only punished intentional transgressions but also proscribed possible or unintentional acts" (emphasis added).

Additionally, the expression "socially dangerous persons" itself was based on "extremely elastic categories" that permitted the imprisonment of people in the gulag "even in the absence of guilt." This is because what the Soviet rulers were pleased to call "the law" specified that incarceration, exile, or execution could be employed as means of "social protection" against "anyone classified as a danger to society, either for a specific crime that has been committed or when, even if exonerated of a particular crime, the person is still reckoned to pose a threat to society." (Emphasis added.) The Regime in Washington has acted on similar assumptions regarding Gitmo inmates who remain in detention despite their demonstrated innocence. The NDAA would authorize similar treatment of U.S. citizens as well.

Soviet "law" discarded entirely with the idea of punishing overt acts, focusing instead on the supposed motivations of those deemed innately threatening to the regime. Note also that the Soviet system was rigged to nullify exculpatory verdicts. Soviet prosecutors, like Federal prosecutors today, considered themselves entitled to "shift the theory of criminality" as needed in order to justify detention of political offenders.

Detention of "socially dangerous persons" was the primary function of the Soviet penal apparatus. As Paul Gregory points out in his book Lenin's Brain, most of the prisoners consigned to the gulag were sent there not because of what they had done, but because of what the state suspected they could do; they were being isolated from the rest of society "because of actual or suspected opposition to the Soviet state" – that is to say, that they had a "general plan" to "oppose the authority" of the government," as the U.S. "Justice" Department said of the Hutaree defendants.

During the Senate’s discussion of the NDAA’s martial law provisions, Sen. Graham warned that Americans suspected of terrorism – another "elastic" category that can include practically any kind of organized dissent – should "know what will come your way – death; detention; prosecution."

Under the NDAA, the Regime has the luxury of ignoring the third option listed by Graham when courts refuse to ratify every conspiracy theory concocted by the Cheka (or, as it’s now know, the FBI). Or the Feds could simply avoid the messiness associated with "judicial process" of any kind and implement the Obama administration’s policy of executive assassination.

Reprinted with permission from Pro Libertate.

March 31, 2012

William Norman Grigg [send him mail] publishes the Pro Libertate blog and hosts the Pro Libertate radio program.

Copyright © 2012 William Norman Grigg

http://lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w252.html
 
Old June 1st, 2012 #9
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

How federal entrapment actually works

by Bill White

The American federal justice system is based upon the principle of entrapment. Federal agents go out looking for individuals they believe are “predisposed” to commit crimes, and then persuade them to conspire to commit new crimes, and arrest them for the conspiracy, resulting in a sentence similar to what they would have received had the committed the actual crime itself. A key to this system is that no actual crime occurs, and that, often, no actual crime was possible – the federal government arrests people for dreams that never come to fruition, and which they usually could never have achieved without the aid of the federal government. Thus, the federal government not only incarcerates a large portion of the US population, but it simultaneously manages to not actually address any real criminal acts in doing so. This system is largely based upon that of the old Soviet Union, where arrests of individuals for crimes of motive and social and economic status took priority over arrests for commissions of real criminal offenses.

Most federal entrapment cases revolve around two things – drugs and guns – products of the “war on drugs” which Ronald Reagan laid the legal foundation for in the mid 1980s. Modern “terrorism” and “murder for hire” cases are largely derived from the “drugs and guns” model and are derivative thereof.

In a federal entrapment, an individual is recruited as an informant for the federal government. This individual is typically someone accused or convicted of federal crimes in the past, though, in political movements where the average member is not involved in crime, they may be relatively bit players who express dissatisfaction with some higher priority federal target. Typically, an individual receives a reduction of one third to one half of their sentence for cooperation with the federal authorities that leads to the arrest of a more valuable target. Individuals not facing federal charges typically receive a salary of $400 - $500 a week, tax-free, plus a cash bonus for every conviction that results from their efforts. In both cases, there is an intense motivation to lie or engage in dishonest or criminal acts to convict the informant’s target. This motivation is shared by the informant’s handlers, who are generally under quotas to produce so many arrests in so long a period, with higher profile arrests being better for agent’s careers. Thus, there is an intense motivation for all parties to target and frame innocent but high profile citizens. Federal agents are typically required to have four informants on their payroll and encourage to have at least ten on their payroll at any given time. When one calculates all of the federal agents and agencies involved in such a program, as much as one out of every one hundred adults in the United States is employed creating crimes for the benefit of the US federal government.

The informant is then told to find a victim – a person who will be implicated and arrested for breaking a federal law. Higher profile victims are preferred, and innocence is not a defense against entrapment. Federal law requires that federal agents show that there was a “propensity” to commit a crime, but it has been found that “propensity” to commit a major drug trafficking offense can consist of having once smoked marijuana, and that “propensity” to commit an act of terrorism can consist of having once spoken angrily about the government. Thus the “propensity” requirement is really no requirement at all – if all us fails, the informant merely has to claim that they heard an angry statement, and an entire “murder for hire” frame up can be justified. The federal courts have also ruled that the unsupported testimony of a single witness can be sufficient evidence to prove an issue beyond a reasonable doubt, never mind provide reasonable cause to initiate an investigation

In a federal sting, the informant will typically approach an individual and ask them to commit a crime. Federal law requires that a conspiracy involve two or more people who are not federal agents, but the federal government evades this requirement, when necessary, with solicitation, aid, and attempt laws. Solicitation statutes often don’t apply, because they require the targeted party to solicit the crime, when the federal government is generally the party suggesting the crime. However, the Courts have found that the federal government can suggest a crime and the party they suggest it to can still “solicit” it by agreeing that it should occur – particularly if the federal agent pretends to have “cold feet” or to withdraw. Aid to terrorism laws (different from “aiding and abetting”) require that an individual intend to provide “material assistance” to terrorism; examples of “material assistance” include things as minor as sharing “terrorist” literature on the internet or working as the criminal attorney for an individual accused of “terrorism”. Attempt laws are utilized when a targeted individual insists on being “lone wolf”, and involve a more complex type of FBI operation, in which materials for an attempt often have to be provided without any real danger being created.

Federal sting operations tend to be stereotyped, and are run according to operations manuals provided by the FBI. For instance, in Chicago, Illinois, a popular type of DEA sting involves “robbing a stash house.” An individual involved in drugs is approached and asked to participate in robbing a stash house – though the stash house and the drugs do not exist. Once an agreement is reached, the targeted individual is asked to bring others into the agreement, and a small “crew” is formed. The amount of drugs at the stash house is talked up from perhaps one kilo to begin with to thirty; the effect of this is to increase the sentencing guidelines from five to thirty years. These targeted individuals are told to meet at the wildlife preserve just south of Chicago, where they are ambushed by federal agents and arrested. Six to ten individuals in two groups are typically arrested in this manner every week by federal agents.

The individuals targeted for this kind of sting are generally poor drug addicts. Often, they will appear on the related videotapes obviously high on cocaine as they are walked through the arrest process by the agents and informants. Most would never have had access to thirty kilos of cocaine outside of the federal sting; all are treated in the press as major drug traffickers and as evidence of the effectiveness of the government’s war on drugs.

During a federal string, every effort is generally made to eliminate the potential for violence or injury. The federal government has sometimes spectacularly failed in this regard, and has sometimes authorized political violence, such as the Oklahoma City bombing or the attempted bombing of Cyndi Steele. In general, though, the federal government tries to minimize the threat to their own agents and to the general public, because such violence reflects negatively on federal operations. The primary means by which the federal government effects this is through the maintenance of control over the operation at every level – their informants become intimately involved in the operation and are present at every major development in it to prevent anything outside of the script from occurring.

For instance, federal informants will generally not provide loaded or even functional weapons to targets. In many cases, federal informants do provide guns, bombs or missiles to targeted individuals; in all cases, these are non-functional items. If targeted individuals simply tested or demanded a demonstration of the weapons they were buying, a majority of federal terrorism “attempt” cases would be short circuited. When targets provide their own weapons, the federal informants will work to separate the target from the weapon; a typical ploy is to suggest that all weapons be placed in the trunk of a car or in a separate vehicle from the one the targets are travelling in. A good way to delay or short circuit a federal arrest is to carry a loaded weapon on one’s person – though flash bangs and similar devices are typically used when federal agents believe they have lost control of a weapon during a frame up.

Federal informants also do not provide useful information to targets. Most federal law enforcement officials live in terror of their home address being published on the internet; one cannot underestimate the personal cowardice of the men and women who serve in the federal judiciary and in the federal law enforcement agencies. Federal agents never provide accurate personal information on federal officials to targeted victims, and, if they provide inaccurate information, it will be the address of a public building or phone number – not an incorrect residence. Just as with weapons, if most targets of federal stings attempted to validate the information they were receiving, they would not be in prison today. Federal stings tend to catch people who are careless and excessively trusting, which is why they tend not to catch the individuals actually operating criminal enterprises.

The federal government will, within political groups, attempt to incite violence, but this violence will always be vague and directed towards public buildings and public targets – not towards individuals. It is also always the kind of violence that an individual requires assistance to commit – the feds will not tell an individual to go and get a gun and shoot up a building, first, because the sentencing guidelines for shootings are lower than for explosives, but, second, because that is something an individual could potentially do without the assistance of the federal agents. Better to lead the target down a route where they are dependent on the agents than down a route where they could “go rogue” and commit an act on their own.

Federal sting operations also direct their targets towards means of communication that can be monitored and in which both parties can be definitely identified. For instance, telephones, particularly cellular telephones, are utilized for ease of recording and because the GPS devices in telephones definitely identify the location of a party. Credit cards are preferred for purchases, when possible, because they provide identity information on the purchaser – though cash, particularly counterfeit cash, is utilized when the recipient is a federal agent. (An example is a federal missile terrorism sting, in which the target was told that the cost of the missile he wanted to fire at a federal building was $75,000, and the target was encouraged to counterfeit funds with a Xerox machine to purchase the missile – adding eighty years to his sentence). Federal agents also like to meet in person and utilize a device that generally looks like a car-lock clicker to record what happens. The federal government attempts to put as much of their operation as possible on record – and thus they will avoid things like anonymized internet as a means of communication.

To ease concerns about communication monitoring, the federal government will generally use a stereotyped set of code words suggested by their informants. In murder for hire cases, the murder is often referred to as “painting the house.” In drug case, a kilo of drugs may be referred to as a “CD”, a “leather jacket” or a “car rim”. The same phrases and techniques are typically used and reused in these cases, as the men arrested are generally incarcerated so long that they are not able to share information on how they are arrested with others, and thus the general population remains ignorant of what is occurring.

In evaluating whether or not someone is approaching you is an informant, one should be observant. If the individual is asking you to join them in committing a crime, you should ask yourself, “why is this person asking me to commit a crime?” If you are not someone already engaged in violent crime, it is unlikely that someone you do not know would approach you and ask you to commit a crime. If you are the leader of a political group not engaged in criminal acts, it is rare that someone who is not a federal informant would ask you to commit a crime. As mafia members will tell you, a general rule of criminal acts is not to work with someone you don’t know – and you should know who they are, where they live, who their family is, how they earn a living, and all of the details before even entertaining a criminal proposal from them.

If one is aware of federal law and particularly federal sentencing guidelines, federal informants become easier to spot. Most federal informants, once they have their hooks in a target, will attempt to talk a case up directly along the federal sentencing guidelines – increasing drug and money amounts or changing the underlying offense to make the crime more serious. For instance, thirty kilos of “ghost coke” maxes out a drug sentence as a thirty year mandatory minimum; bombing an occupied building carries a thirty five year mandatory minimum bombing an unoccupied building or a public area carries less. If what the person approaching you for the crime is walking you through the sentencing guidelines, they are an informant.

But the best way to be safe is to simply stay in control of your actions yourself. If you are going to commit a crime, be the person directing it, or at least directing your role in it. Real criminals try to avoid meeting in large groups to plan crimes; the person directing the activity meets with each member individually. Preferably, the participants approach and leave the target area individually, meeting only during the commission of the crime. Real criminals do not place their weapons in the trunk of a car; they have no weapon, or they have a weapon ready for use. If you are not a real criminal, consider whether it is a line of work really suited for you – for many, it is not.
 
Old August 22nd, 2012 #10
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[FBI strategy: insert agent provacateurs]

Man Who Trained Black Panthers on How To Fire Guns Was an FBI Informant

by Robert Wenzel
Economic Policy Journal

The man who gave the Black Panther Party some of its first firearms and weapons training – which preceded fatal shootouts with Oakland police in the 1960s – was an undercover FBI informer, according to a former bureau agent and an FBI report, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

SFGate reports:

One of the Bay Area's most prominent radical activists of the era, Richard Masato Aoki was known as a fierce militant who touted his street-fighting abilities. He was a member of several radical groups before joining and arming the Panthers, whose members received international notoriety for brandishing weapons during patrols of the Oakland police and a protest at the state Capitol...

But unbeknownst to his fellow activists, Aoki had served as an FBI intelligence informant, covertly filing reports on a wide range of Bay Area political groups, according to the bureau agent who recruited him.

That agent, Burney Threadgill Jr., recalled that he approached Aoki in the late 1950s, about the time Aoki was graduating from Berkeley High School. He asked Aoki if he would join left-wing groups and report to the FBI.

"He was my informant. I developed him," Threadgill said in an interview. "He was one of the best sources we had."

The former agent said he asked Aoki how he felt about the Soviet Union, and the young man replied that he had no interest in communism.

"I said, 'Well, why don't you just go to some of the meetings and tell me who's there and what they talked about?' Very pleasant little guy. He always wore dark glasses," Threadgill recalled.

http://lewrockwell.com/wenzel/wenzel188.html
 
Old August 27th, 2012 #11
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[Been reading the book "Enemies: A History of the FBI," by Tim Weiner (2012). It's pretty much a bio of J. Edgar Hoover. In this post I will list a few interesting things I've come across.]

COINTELPRO (counterintelligence program)

- first operations began August 28, 1956. "Armed with intelligence gathered through break-ins, bugs, and taps, COINTELPRO began to attack hundreds, then thousands, of suspected Communists and socialists with anonymous hate mail, tax audits by the Internal Revenue Service, and forged documents designd to sow and fertilize seeds of distrust among left-wing factions."

"The idea was to instill hate, fear, doubt and self-destruction within the American Left. The FBI used Communist techniques of propaganda and subversion. The goal was to destroy the public lives and private reputations of the members of the Communist Party and everyone connected with them."

- 12 major COINTELPRO campaigns with a total of 2,340 separate operations

- main figure was Bill Sullivan, chief of research and analysis in the FBI's Intelligence Division.

- Sullivan described Hoover as a "brilliant chameleon." "He was one of the greatest con men the country ever produced, and that takes intelligence of a certain kind, an astuteness, a shrewdness.'

- Sullivan said in testimony: "This is a rough, tough, dirty business, and dangerous. ... No holds were barred. Never once did I hear anybody, including myself, raise the question: 'Is this course of action which we hae agreed upon lawful? Is it legal? Is it ethical or moral?' We never gave any thought to this realm of reasoning, because we were just naturally pragmatists. The one thing we were concerned about was this: will this course of action work, will it get us what we want?" (pp. 196-7)
 
Old August 27th, 2012 #12
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default "Enemies: A History of the FBI" by Tim Weiner (2012)

[Been reading the book "Enemies: A History of the FBI," by Tim Weiner (2012). It's pretty much a bio of J. Edgar Hoover. In this post I will list a few interesting things I've come across.]

COINTELPRO (counterintelligence program)

- first operations began August 28, 1956. "Armed with intelligence gathered through break-ins, bugs, and taps, COINTELPRO began to attack hundreds, then thousands, of suspected Communists and socialists with anonymous hate mail, tax audits by the Internal Revenue Service, and forged documents designd to sow and fertilize seeds of distrust among left-wing factions."

"The idea was to instill hate, fear, doubt and self-destruction within the American Left. The FBI used Communist techniques of propaganda and subversion. The goal was to destroy the public lives and private reputations of the members of the Communist Party and everyone connected with them."

- 12 major COINTELPRO campaigns with a total of 2,340 separate operations

- main figure was Bill Sullivan, chief of research and analysis in the FBI's Intelligence Division.

- Sullivan described Hoover as a "brilliant chameleon." "He was one of the greatest con men the country ever produced, and that takes intelligence of a certain kind, an astuteness, a shrewdness.'

- Sullivan said in testimony: "This is a rough, tough, dirty business, and dangerous. ... No holds were barred. Never once did I hear anybody, including myself, raise the question: 'Is this course of action which we hae agreed upon lawful? Is it legal? Is it ethical or moral?' We never gave any thought to this realm of reasoning, because we were just naturally pragmatists. The one thing we were concerned about was this: will this course of action work, will it get us what we want?" (pp. 196-7)
 
Old August 27th, 2012 #13
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

The point is, while people on our side endless nod at each other and repeat the "wisdom" that is "keep it safe and legal," the FBI has never, not from day one, worried about legality for a single second. The FBI sets up and arrests people, and if later on the courts find it stepped over the law in 90% of the cases, so what?

The FBI originated in the WWI period. Some of its first missions were arresting German-Americans, and after that communists and socialists and pacifists. Anyone who was against our getting involved in the war was seen as disloyal. No distinction was made between those holding the wrong opinions, or belonging to the wrong organizations, and those actively conspiring to overthrow the US Government. Round 'em up, throw them in jail, let the courts sort it out as the basic policy.

Last edited by Alex Linder; August 27th, 2012 at 11:48 PM.
 
Old August 27th, 2012 #14
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[file under what everybody knows that just aint so]

"[Wild Bill] Donovan believed that Hoover was a failure at foreign intelligence, and he spread rumors that Hoover was a secret homosexual.

"Hoover had been the subject of those rumors since at least 1937 -- the year that the Bureau began its long-running efforts to root out homosexuals in government. The innuendo is probably the most famous aspect of Hoover's life today.

"The one thing everyone seems to know about Hoover is that he had sexual relations with his constant companion Clyde Tolson. The idea was imprinted in the public mind long ago, in a book by a British journalist that included the indelible descriptions of Hoover in drag. It would be fascinating if it were true. But it is almost surely false. The allegation rests on third-hand hearsay from highly reliable sources. Not a shred of evidence supports the notion that Hoover ever had sex with Tolson or with any other human being." [...]

"He abhorred homosexuality," said Cartha "Deke" DeLoach, a loyal Hoover lieutenant for many years. "That's why so many homosexuals were dismissed by the Bureau." If Hoover was himself a repressed homosexual whose secret frustrations soured into fury against his enemies, his inner rages were known to no one.

(pp. 106-7)
 
Old August 27th, 2012 #15
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

"Hoover worked for the War Emergency Division at the Justice Department..."

"Hoover rose quickly to the top of the division's Alien Enemy Bureau, which was responsible for identifying and imprisoning politically suspect foreigners living in the United States. At the age of twenty-three, Hoover oversaw 6,200 Germans who were interned in camps and 450,000 more who were under government surveillance." (p. 3)
 
Old August 27th, 2012 #16
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

On August 1, 1919, Hoover became the chief of the Justice Department's newly created Radical Division.

...

Woodrow Wilson "told citizens who opposed the war [WWI] that they were in effect enemy combatants."

"Hoover had learned the mechanics of mass arrests and detentions during his first year at Justice. The department had a list of 1,400 politically suspect Germans living in the United States on the day war was declared. Ninety-eight were jailed immediately; 1,172 were deemed potential threats to national security and subject to arrest at any time."

"The Bureau launched its first nationwide domestic surveillance programs under the Espionage Act of 1917, rouding up radicals, wiretapping conversations, and opening mail." (p. 13)
 
Old August 27th, 2012 #17
N.B. Forrest
Senior Member
 
N.B. Forrest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Virginia, CSA
Posts: 11,145
N.B. Forrest
Default

"Everybody knows" Hoover was a closet queen because the leftist kikes he partially stymied hate his guts, and the hypocrites suffer no anguish over smearing an enemy for something they otherwise use their culture control to actively encourage.... From all we actually know about him, Hoover was just a physically reticent type. His lust was for power, not sex.

Generally speaking, it seems that the FBI has always been an organization of gooberment bully-boy shits who'll do anything to win, i.e. destroy anyone who in any way even irritates their masters.
 
Old August 28th, 2012 #18
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by N.B. Forrest View Post
"Everybody knows" Hoover was a closet queen because the leftist kikes he partially stymied hate his guts, and the hypocrites suffer no anguish over smearing an enemy for something they otherwise use their culture control to actively encourage.... From all we actually know about him, Hoover was just a physically reticent type. His lust was for power, not sex.

Generally speaking, it seems that the FBI has always been an organization of gooberment bully-boy shits who'll do anything to win, i.e. destroy anyone who in any way even irritates their masters.
Weiner says that Hoover hated jews, but there's no proof of this ever given. Hoover was defininitely anti-communist as his main mission. He tracked the jew Levison spoon-feeding MLK very closely, but there's not a word in this book about the jews being the real power behind 'civil rights.' Interestingly, Hoover stayed away from infiltrating the Klan until ordered to undermine them by LBJ in 1964, if the author is right. Hoover's thinking was that if they infiltrated the Klan the way they had the communists/leftists, people would think they were in fact leading it. Not sure what to make of that.
 
Old August 28th, 2012 #19
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

"COINTELPRO -- WHITE HATE was inaugurated on September 2, 1964, two months after the president hade told Hoover to pursue the Klan just as he had chased the Communists. WHITE HATE went on for seven years, inflicting serious and lasting damage on the Klan.

[...]

WHITE HATE "involved all the techniques developed in the FBI's long-running attack on the Left. Once a week during the fall of 1964, FBI agents interrogated all known members of the White Knights of the KKK, blaming other Klansmen for being snitches and naming names, sowing deep suspicion among Klan members. Few knew who was an informer and who was not. The FBI dangled small fortunes before potential KKK informers, offered outright bribes to Klansmen who could serve as double agents inside state and local police forces, planted bugs and wiretaps in Klaverns, carried out black-bag jobs to steal membership lists and (on at least one occasion) dynamite caches. The FBI's infiltration of the Klan proved better than the Klan's infiltration of state and local law enforcement agencies." (p. 247)

It appears the FBI defeated the Klan primarily by its ability to bribe members to become informants. I suspect the Southern tradition of taking money from Uncle Sam to fight in its military undermined whatever little loyalty there was among these Southerners, who seem generally to share the mentality of beaten dogs. The reason they were so willing to take money from the enemy is that they don't truly believe their side can win, and that is the result not just of the War of Northern Aggression, but of their reaction to it. That's my judgment, anyway.
 
Old August 28th, 2012 #20
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

"The FBI's mail-opening program dated back to World War I. It violated the Fourth Amendment's ban on unwarranted searches and seizures. It had gone on without an interruption since 1940, when the British had taught the Bureau the ancient art of chamfering, cutting envelopes with scalpels and then resealing them undetected." (p. 268)
 
Reply

Tags
books, cointelpro, fbi, hoover, tim weiner

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:29 AM.
Page generated in 0.22790 seconds.