portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article questions united states

actions & protests | corporate dominance

FBI document, Plot to kill occupy leaders "if deemed necessary"

Paul Kennedy, the National Lawyers Guild attorney in Houston who represented a number of Occupy Houston activists arrested during the protests, had not heard of the sniper plot, but said, "I find it hard to believe that such information would have been known to the FBI and that we would not have been told about it." He then added darkly, "If it had been some right-wing group plotting such an action, something would have been done. But if it is something law enforcement was planning, then nothing would have been done. It might seem hard to believe that a law enforcement agency would do such a thing, but I wouldn't put it past them."
Would you be shocked to learn that the FBI apparently knew that some organization, perhaps even a law enforcement agency or private security outfit, had contingency plans to assassinate peaceful protestors in a major American city and did nothing to intervene?

Would you be surprised to learn that this intelligence comes not from a shadowy whistle-blower but from the FBI itself - specifically, from a document obtained from Houston FBI office last December, as part of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by the Washington, DC-based Partnership for Civil Justice Fund?

To repeat: this comes from the FBI itself. The question, then, is: What did the FBI do about it?


 link to whowhatwhy.com

Nice try. 28.Jun.2013 13:32

C.W.

You're insane. The Tsarnaevs weren't investigated further by the federal government because occupy terrorists were on the agenda. A neo nazi in Wisconsin walked into a Sheikh temple and executed a bunch of people while the Joint Terrorism Task Force was investigating self identified Anarchists in the Pacific Northwest. Because of windows. Broken windows. Say that out loud. "A neo nazi who was being monitored by the federal government walked into a sheikh temple and executed a bunch of innocent human beings but my government went after Leah Lynn Plante." Now say it again. What'll you say when your government comes for you.

But you're probably a fucking cop anyway so...

... 28.Jun.2013 15:22

Fidelity

Wow, you are angry CW. I'm sure the cops go around posting bullshit on PIMC: maybe this is where all those VKD postings come from. I'm curious: do you reflexively call everyone a cop that you don't like, or is there some baseline criteria?

You can't discount that political oppression is also dealt to the anti-government right-wing. For example: the group Oath Keepers has had several of their members imprisoned and had their families taken away for incredibly benign actions and affiliations. Look up Jonathan Irish: his newborn baby daughter was taken out of the hospital by government agents just hours after birth - their excuse: he recently bought some guns, and the government thought it was bad that the daughter would be in a household with parents who didn't trust the government. He's just one-of-many who has come forward publically about local law enforcement harassing (or kidnapping) their family.

Here in Portland, a friend of mine was very active with Oath Keepers several years ago, the day after being nominated for a leadership position in the group, there was an unmarked police car outside of his house with binoculars and a laptop. He approached the car after it sat in front of his house for 10 minutes, the person in the car pretended to be lost and asked directions back to the highway.

I also think of Barry Cooper: his house was raided several times, and his kids taken, because he was trying to expose police corruption.

If you spend time looking, you'll find many examples of oppression and monitoring of all anti-government activists.

Anyone who challenges authority, from any level or any political persuasion, is likely to be harassed or imprisoned by the government. I think a neo-nazi is unlikely to challenge government authority, so they are ignored. Did you have some sort of expectation that the FBI would be interested in actually protecting the public? Then I'm sorry to break this to you: the police are not interested in protecting "Americans" or innocent people: they want to maintain their own institutions of power.

Also, in Portland, the local Occupy actually dealt with real right wing harassment, remember that a dude drove his truck up from Southern Oregon to ram the barricades erected to close off Main Street (I think it was main street). Keep in mind the insanity of this guy: thank god he only used his truck instead of his rifle. These people are real. Plus, like two or three years ago two red-necks showed up in a giant truck to May Day with a shitty looking sign that said "Go Home", referring to the immigrants. Government will encourage batshit rightwingers to attack left wingers like the Secret Army Organization down in California in the late 60's.

If you expect government to stop these people then you're the insane one, or at least very ignorant about the role of cops/FBI.

Oh, christ... 28.Jun.2013 15:47

Shaker

Well, C.W., maybe you ought to learn to read with something that resembles objective comprehension rather than let whatever motives or emotions that you have do the reading for you. Your hypebole is what is insane, might I add, expressly so?

As for the comment about Boston, that was one paragraph to allude to the fact that there were others that were there who may have had an interest in pulling off the action while expressing what may be evidence of their contention in carrying similar backpacks as those claimed to have exploded, and that's all. That paragraph was there only to make example of their contentions and not necessarily claim that is what exactly happened. No reference to any personal name, as you have done.

Remember, my friend, the gist of the article, while it may be convoluted in some respects, is supported by documents supplied by the FBI. Also, be sure that you remember that fireman start fires. It may go a long way to understanding what the article is saying, whether you believe it or not.

Look up Russ Baker, decide for yourself 30.Jun.2013 11:59

...

Website founder wiki page:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russ_Baker

Russ Baker is a US investigative journalist and founder of the nonprofit website WhoWhatWhy.com. His recurring themes are politics, secrecy, and abuses of power. His recent writings have focused on elites in finance, resource extraction, military and intelligence operations, and their quiet influence over national and global political and economic affairs.

In 2009 Bloomsbury published his book Family of Secrets: the Bush Dynasty, the Powerful Forces That Put It in the White House, and What Their Influence Means for America. The paperback edition was released in November 2009 under the title Family of Secrets: the Bush Dynasty, America's Invisible Government, and the Hidden History of the Last Fifty Years. The book has been reviewed by many print and electronic journals.

Baker has written for many US publications including the New Yorker, Vanity Fair, the New York Times, The Nation, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, the Village Voice, Esquire, Slate and Salon, and served as a contributing editor to the Columbia Journalism Review.[1][2][3] Internationally, his work has appeared in dozens of top publications including: The Globe & Mail (Canada); The Sunday Times, The Guardian, and The Observer (UK); Der Spiegel and Frankfurter Allgemeine (Germany), La Repubblica (Italy), South China Morning Post (Hong Kong), and the Sydney Morning Herald.[4]

Baker received an MS in Journalism from Columbia University and a BA in Political Science from UCLA, and has served as a member of the adjunct faculty of the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. He has won numerous journalism awards, including a 2005 Deadline Club award for his reporting on George W. Bush's military record. He also writes essays, profiles, humor, and culture and travel pieces.




I was going to dismiss this as more foil hat stuff. But he looks legit. Maybe not "radical" enough for some readers at Indy, but he's no more a narc than Chomsky.

*cue foil hat brigade