New Docs Reveal Extensive Monitoring of Occupy

[marmar]

http://inthesetimes.com/latest/entry/new_docs_reveal_extensive_monitoring_of_occupy


New Docs Reveal Extensive Monitoring of Occupy
May 23, 2014 · Posted by Carlos Ballesteros


Lawyers that represented Occupy Wall Street defendants have obtained thousands of pages of unclassified emails and reports that reveal how heavily law enforcement officials monitored Occupy protestors, starting in 2011. The files—which contain warnings about possible Occupy actions, from protestors occupying congressional offices in Kansas to Milwaukeeans holiday caroling at “an undisclosed location of ‘high visibility’”—were mostly composed of information stemming from public venues, such as social media, and on-the-ground reports from police themselves.

Advocates for civil liberties have expressed concern over the sheer volume of the documents, especially since most of the activity present in the reports can be described as lawful.

The Partnership for Civil Justice Fund was responsible for obtaining the documents. Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, of the Fund, was quoted in the New York Times as being concerned over the documents, which to her signal a stifling of political dissent in the United States. "People must have the ability to speak out freely to express a dissenting view without the fear that the government will treat them as enemies of the state,” she said.

The New York Times goes on to report:

The communications, distributed by people working with counterterrorism and intelligence-sharing offices known as fusion centers, were among about 4,000 pages of unclassified emails and reports obtained through freedom of information requests ... They offer details of the scrutiny in 2011 and 2012 by law enforcement officers, federal officials, security contractors, military employees and even people at a retail trade association. The monitoring appears similar to that conducted by the FBI counterterrorism officials ...

According to a Senate subcommittee report, fusion centers have not been very useful in their stated goal of informing counterterrorism operations. Currently, there are 78 such locally-run centers operating across the country, many of which are now monitoring ordinary criminal activity.

[deutsey]

1. I can just imagine what info is in the classified emails and reports n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

2. Fusion centers not useful for catching terrorists

so they get put to use for more traditional pursuits: suppressing legitimate dissent. Nobody could have anticipated that this would happen.

[Pholus]

9. +100

Gotta pay for those whooshing starship doors somehow! If you can't catch terraists, go after hippies!

[merrily]

31. Going after the left has been the default for over a century.

[malaise]

13. +10,000 n/t

[marmar]

50. tragically true

[sabrina 1]

70. To Wall St, the people are the terrorists. And OWS was a shock to them. They thought they had

controlled the 'message' only to find out that millions of Americans weren't buying the BS they were being fed. OWS spread so fast and far beyond what the original organizers expected (maybe one week in NY alone) it had to scare them enough to employ all the resources at their disposal to put a stop to the protests and in any way possible, make sure those protests were quashed. So they used the resources they pay for, politicians, 'civilian' police forces, mayors, and all those who are beholden to them, to silence the PEOPLE as quickly as possible.

Their biggest fear is the PEOPLE, not Terrorists, whatever that means anymore.

[dougolat]

78. But it's big business and provides a significant number of jobs!

So, it can't be all bad?

[xchrom]

3. du rec.

[Earth_First]

4. In Buffalo and Rochester, N.Y.

DHS, US Customs and Border Patrol, the Coast Guard and local (and certainly federal agencies) were monitoring the two groups...

[hobbit709]

5. Yet there are still those that deny it is a police state-even here on DU

[Warren Stupidity]

42. "it's all legal" - the authoritarian excuse of the day. nt.

[Mojorabbit]

45. Yes it is. I am glad I am not the only one to spot that! nt

[treestar]

53. If it were a police state, they'd have been arrested and put in jail

for nothing.

Were there any arrests not based on some law?

[reddread]

59. or, they can keep them/"us" prisoners in their own homes, enriching the thieving banksters.

with proper monitoring and firm warnings, anyway.
its totally different, isnt it?

[hobbit709]

64. And that statement proves you know nothing about how a police state works.

It's the fear and threat of arrest, not the actual arrest that keeps people in line.

And a very high percentage of those arrests were tossed.

But evidently you would rather make excuses. I have been in police states.

[JDPriestly]

74. Thank you. So true. And we are there. Not Obama's fault.

This is the result of years of fear-mongering.

[U4ikLefty]

69. Police states make horrible things legal & then oppress the masses.

[davidn3600]

6. Government takes threats to the 1% very seriously...

[Jefferson23]

7. Recommend, thank you for the OP. n/t

[G_j]

8. K&R

[Fred Drum]

10. Do You not get it?

Unlawful is what we say is Unlawful

meta-data isn't unlawful

[L0oniX]

35. Who's law? The corporate rich.

Sick that people make excuses for the NSA and government thugs. It's our right to protest. Fascism has its laws too. They would have us all shut up ...I guess we know who's side you are on.

[dougolat]

79. (PSST! He was being sarcastic)....nt

[socialist_n_TN]

11. All this for a movement that wasn't really very radical at all.......

(in most areas anyway) and CERTAINLY wasn't revolutionary. But it did deal with economic injustice. I guess the subject alone justified the scrutiny.

Wait till the next one. I have a feeling it's going to be a LOT more militant and it MIGHT come out of the Fight for $15 movement. At least that would be working class based more in keeping with Marx.

[merrily]

33. Addressing economic injustice is revolutionary. So is seeking to alter the status quo.

It was not an armed revolution, but the PTB understand that revolutionary ideas are, by definition, not good for the PTB.

I don't know about the next one. I think they've gotten on for almost a century by throwing some money at us whenever a threats seems likely to erupt, as after 1929 and the 1960s. No reason to assume that it will not continue to work. And, if it doesn't, they are very well armed and we are very well surveilled.

I am not sure how you avoid the cameras and mikes and the mass snooping of the internet and phones long enough to get a nationwide uprising going. And how many Americans would keep going after the first few casualites?

We are not exactly a gritty people. Especially the left, which tends to be unarmed and unprepared for those who are armed. For example, you speak of revolution, but have you priced bulletproof vests? Do you have a defense planned if chemical weapons are used? (These are rhetorical questions. I am not prying to get your answers.) Many of the Occupy people didn't even have a bandana or goggles, which would have spared them some pain and are not prohibitively expensive or otherwise hard to come by.


I am not saying it's impossible I am saying that I have given it some serious thought and am not certain that we will see it.

[socialist_n_TN]

58. Occupy wasn't revolutionary because, in most cases anyway, it wouldn't.....

even name the perpetrator of the injustices involved in the economy. How can you change a system when you won't even call capitalism, capitalism? In addition, it didn't seek to alter the status quo because it didn't call for any real change IN the status quo. The owners still owned. At best it advocated some sort of utopian "drop out" type of ethic.

Any worker's revolution in this country will have to begin with strikes. Wildcat, called, sector strikes culminating in a general strike. This won't be some Maoist or Guevaraist (sp?) guerilla campaign involving armed insurrection in the countryside spreading into the cities. Once these strikes happen, the workers will have to occupy the actual plants and factories, ESPECIALLY in the industries involved in the creating and distribution of foodstuffs and other necessities. At this point there will probably be some fighting when the police try to take back this "private" property for the oligarchs. Hence the need for worker's militias to protect the workers and the infrastructure the workers have occupied. Of course, the military will have to be neutralized by soldier's councils who overrule the officers' orders to kill civilians. It would be best if the grunts actually came over onto the side of the workers, but at the very least these councils need to make sure that the military is neutral.

Together with these events, workplace and neighborhood councils will need to be organized to police and organize the distribution of necessities and the protection of these areas. These councils will need to co-ordinate with each other and NOT with the "regular" channels of authority which will create a dual power situation. Eventually a vanguard will need to arise and take actual political power based on these councils.

I agree that when it begins to get near these conditions, the capitalists will try to buy us off with a few reforms. Or maybe they will. It depends on their hubris at that time. In the 30s they were smart enough to give us a few more crumbs rather than lose the whole system. Are they that smart now? I honestly don't know. I do know that they began trying to take back the concessions that were forced on them almost immediately. Are people dumb enough to fall for a few more crumbs again? Once again, we'll have to see.

To see what will happen here, look to Ukraine. That is the test drive for the total takeover of society by the wealthy.

Finally, I'm not sure we'll see it in my lifetime (I'm 60+), but the only way to actually avoid it totally is for the capitalists to relinquish some of their control and pull back on their designs. Do you think that will happen?

[merrily]

71. I'm sorry. I can't see that happening. (Is anyone is even working toward it?)

The 1% has done a pretty good job discrediting unions and strikes. There aren't that many plants remaining. They're now in places like Maylasia.

AFAIK, the only people organizing and propagandizing the soldiers are the right; and, they, too, have done a pretty good job of it. Same for law enforcement.

In Russia, a century ago, the massive slaughters of WWI, the flu plus a lot of desperation were the catalyst for the soldiers to join the uprising, instead of firing on it, as they had a few years earlier. Our soldiers are never going to be that hungry and we are in a new kind of war. Drone killings aren't going to lead to revolution. Even the so-called left barely cares. Even those drones can be small and, like all other weapons, turned on anyone.

[malaise]

12. Any documents on the RW militias? n/t

[reddread]

60. who? what?

good point.

[Helen Borg]

14. Wait until Greenwald publishes his article....

Any bets on who we may find out was on NSA's surveillance list?

[Enthusiast]

15. Legitimate dissent does not include criticism of Wall Street thieves.

Apparently.

TPTB did not want a spotlight focused on the financial crimes. Maybe because they wanted these crimes to continue?

It's a new day. Since the theft of the 2000 election governmental criminality has been rampant. The criminality did not stop with the election of President Obama.

Something is a afoot. Duh.

[ladjf]

26. Good post. nt

[raouldukelives]

30. Nah. If that were the case, every single investor and Wall St lackey would be lending a hand

to those destroying people simply trying to survive, trying to retain the Constitution of the United States, trying to create a planet with a sustainable environment and working for a better tomorrow that frees their children from the shackles of a life of misery.
I mean, then they'd just be people aligning and working for their own best interest at the expense of us all and any form of "liberal" legislation. Funding and financing the very groups aligned against our wishes. Against the needs of our ecosystems and its various furry lifeforms.
I really can't see people burdened with a liberal or even a Christian conscience having anything to do with that.
Nah, these were just misguided people who cannot see the big picture like the people in charge. I suggest they latch onto a learned shepherd like Jamie Dimon and follow him to the life of blissful happiness so many others enjoy.

[L0oniX]

36. ^^^THIS^^^

[Octafish]

40. When the government protects the Banksters, they are accessories to fraud and grand theft.

It also makes clear: We the People who believe the Constitution still applies are now the Enemies of the State.

[marmar]

61. Of course not. The system is intractably corrupt at this point.

[randome]

16. Oh. My. God.

Law enforcement did not close their eyes to large groups of people camping out in public parks? What is the world coming to?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[marmar]

17. Right. Because you need fusion centers to get people out of parks.

Dios mio.

[randome]

19. Well, a lot of the groups refused to leave so...yeah, planning how to evict them...

...from parks whose surrounding residents wanted them out might have needed some strategy.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[DirkGently]

21. And the holiday caroling. Don't forget the caroling.

Totally warranted "counter terrorism" efforts!

What if they did that "Bells" song? That creepy one?

That song could scare people!

[randome]

22. 'Jingle Bells' doesn't sound good with drums in the background.

So they used fusion centers to communicate. That doesn't mean they saw Occupy as a terrorist group and there is nothing that further supports they did.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[DirkGently]

23. Other than using counter terrorism resources, you mean?

Yep. Take away the DHS and FBI and "fusion center" monitoring, and it it was nothing like treating OWS like terrorism.

Basically.

I know you have a point here.

Somewhere.

Right?

[randome]

25. 'Resources' as in a place to meet?

The files did not show any evidence of phone or email surveillance; instead, much of the material was acquired from social media, publicly disseminated information and reports by police officers or others. While a Homeland Security bulletin in October 2011 warned that protests could be disruptive or violent, some civil liberties advocates are concerned about the monitoring of lawful political activities tied to the Occupy movement. Homeland Security officials acknowledged that the movement, which criticized the financial system as undemocratic, was “mostly peaceful.”

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[DirkGently]

28. Well that's a baseless characterization you invented.

And yet the very people carrying it out think there was overreach.

Federal Protective Service has long been a source of concern for civil liberties advocates. Homeland Security's own Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties has previously concluded, in response to a March 2006 protective service bulletin, that the division "failed to differentiate adequately between civil activist and violent extremist organizations." But it said the protective service had provided assurances that it would make that distinction in the future.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/02/homeland-security-occupy-wall-street_n_3002445.html

[randome]

32. It's not baseless. It's from the New York Times article that the OP is based on.

I should have included the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/23/us/officials-cast-wide-net-in-monitoring-occupy-protests.html?_r=1

And 2006 was before Occupy. Hopefully Federal Protective Service followed through on their changes, although, since they deal solely with federal properties, I doubt they had much to do with Occupy.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[Armstead]

41. You hit on the relevant word there ---- "hopefully"

Hopefully a huge bureaucracy set up to spy on people will hopefully not forget that they are bound by both the law and the notion of freedom that the US is supposed to represent, and hopefully they won't go overboard with all of the new power and techno toys they have been given since 9-11.

And hopefully, they aren't going to try to stifle activists and hippies by treating them as though they are potential members of Al Kayda and hopefully they wont start treating any group that is expressing discontent as though they are criminals and terrorists.

Hopefully, but god forbid we should know what they are doing. Hopefully they'll behave without any oversight or criticism from the unwashed masses.

[merrily]

34. Where did they close their eyes? In Zuccotti (sp) park, the occupiers had permission to be there.

In Boston (the place that took up the 99% refrain first, or so they say), demonstrators could not use the park. They were confined to a median strip on a very busy street--more like a highway--and no one closed their eyes. Demonstrators were harassed early and often, usually around 3 am. They had their belongings discarded more than one and a couple of them landed in the hospital, though not as bad as in Oakland. Even in laid back Portland, the Mayor had a few of them beaten up. Don't know if they got a park, either.

Closed their eyes? Seriously? Where you at the time that you think police closed their eyes to people in parks?

[randome]

48. When you have hundreds of people camped out in parks where local residents don't want them...

...you have a different situation than normal. Sure, some Occupy groups did not camp out in parks. And if some were confined to a median strip, maybe that was because local residents wanted them gone.

Many of the Occupy groups were given advance warning that they were going to be evicted. They weren't protesting at that point, they simply expected that the park be given over to them. So when they were forcibly evicted, is it any wonder that some of their belongings were discarded?

How would you have forcibly evicted a hundred or more people from a park?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]

[merrily]

77. Local residents had nothing to do with it.

How would you have forcibly evicted a hundred or more people from a park?

First, people landed in hospitals when no eviction per se was involved. And why, in the middle of the night, are you evicting sleeping people from a median strip, where you've previously told them they could stay?

Second, are you seriously suggesting that 100 unarmed people is too much for a government that closed down 7 cities and towns for 24 hours on a work day?

And why do you keep saying "park" after I told you that Occupy was not in parks all over the country and in a private park in NYC only by permission of the owner of the park?

Nice seamless transition too, from your claim that law enforcement closed their eyes to justifying landing peaceful, unarmed demonstrators in the hospital, without ever acknowledging that your first claim was inconsistent with actual events, aka false. I have so little patience for that kind of discussion technique.

It's sad how far right this country has gone. And some members of this party.

[L0oniX]

37. Obviously government snipers on roof tops were needed.

[randome]

47. Wow. Where do you get that from?

Maybe we're not reading the same article.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]

[L0oniX]

51. Another article.

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/redacted_fbi_document_shows_plot_to_kill_occupy_leaders_20130629#

An identified [DELETED] as of October planned to engage in sniper attacks against protestors (sic) in Houston, Texas if deemed necessary. An identified [DELETED] had received intelligence that indicated the protesters in New York and Seattle planned similar protests in Houston, Dallas, San Antonio and Austin, Texas. [DELETED] planned to gather intelligence against the leaders of the protest groups and obtain photographs, then formulate a plan to kill the leadership via suppressed sniper rifles. (Note: protests continued throughout the weekend with approximately 6000 persons in NYC. ‘Occupy Wall Street’ protests have spread to about half of all states in the US, over a dozen European and Asian cities, including protests in Cleveland (10/6-8/11) at Willard Park which was initially attended by hundreds of protesters.)

[Rex]

55. Oh well that can be ignored, as you can see.

Only things that fit the narrow narrative will get a reply.

[bobduca]

87. You will know them

by their abandoned subthreads.

[randome]

89. That's been debunked over and over.

There is nothing in that article to say that LE was planning anything. They received reports that someone might so they investigated. Geeze, paranoia runs deep in GD.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"The whole world is a circus if you know how to look at it."
Tony Randall, 7 Faces of Dr. Lao (1964)[/center][/font][hr]

[L0oniX]

90. After Kent State ...it is not out of the question.

[Warren Stupidity]

43. Finally somebody steps up to defend COINTELPRO Version 2.0

[treestar]

54. The usual false victimization thing

It seems people think Occupy will have no effect unless the public can be convinced they are victims of a police state. They apparently didn't convince anyone with the protests, but if they can just prove they have been unjustly treated by LE then that will make the banksters go away for something.

[Rex]

56. LOL! That is some funny nonsense!

OWS showed the WORLD how authoritarian we are as a nation.


Yeah look at all those NON-VICTIMS and that one brave cop that got compensated for mental trauma!

OWS showed just how unequal America is, the fact that it does burns people up to no end.

[msanthrope]

62. So you're claiming one douche security guard is evidence of a national conspiracy? nt

[rhett o rick]

67. You are on the wrong side of this class war. You relish the police brutality against OWS, why?

Because they disturb your precious status quo. Why do you post on a Politically Liberal message board if you love the 1%?

[Union Scribe]

75. Wow.

Is there any abuse of power you actually object to?

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. I am amazed the usual denial chorus

has not come yet.

[DirkGently]

29. Ohh. Some of it is here. n/t

[L0oniX]

38. Need some popcorn while we wait?

[fasttense]

20. I went to a very small occupy protest in the park in Asheville NC.

And there were 2 cops video taping us. They must be very worried to go to such trouble for a measly 100 protesters. I'll bet you they didn't bother to video the teabaggers. It's selective law enforcement. They just spy on people who could actually make a difference.

They were video taping me when I trip on a tree root and fell on my ass. Darn, now the cops know how to trip us up.

[Rex]

24. The Feds have to justify some of their worthless ABC agencies by spending money.

We really don't need the DHS, but that won't stop the govt from wasting billions on spying domestically. All of which won't help catch one single terrorist, but might nab a few protesters. Of the Left variety, evidently the ABC agencies LOVE them some Teabaggers!

[johnnyreb]

27. 209 comments at the NYT link.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/23/us/officials-cast-wide-net-in-monitoring-occupy-protests.html?_r=0

K&R for Occupy.

[villager]

39. Well, what else would people expect from an administration owned by the corporate sector?

[mattclearing]

44. K&R n/t

[yodermon]

46. It's because genuine terrorists might have used Occupy as cover to stage their terroristic activitie

s. Or something.

[Progressive dog]

49. When you are camping in a public place,

you should have no expectation of privacy. When you post photos and comments to a public website, you should have no expectation of privacy. This may have been a waste of police resources, but most activity monitored by police turns out to be legal.

[rhett o rick]

52. Disparaging OWS? That's not "Progressive". You should look at your name once in a while.

I think you forget your supposed to be Progressive. Progressives support whistle-blowers and protestors.

[Union Scribe]

76. He's probably not a dog either

[Progressive dog]

82. Disparaging is not the same as stating simple facts.

You seem to continue to confuse libertarian with progressive.

[rhett o rick]

83. So tell me that you dont support the police brutality and have empathy for OWS.

That would be what I would expect from a Progressive Dog. But I havent gotten that feeling from you posts.

[Progressive dog]

84. So tell me you can stay on a single

subject. Do you know anyone who supports police brutality? Do you think that that is all it takes to be a progressive?

[rhett o rick]

85. Many Republicans and Conservative Democrats choose to condemn OWS and not the

brutality of the police.

[Progressive dog]

86. Many Republicans and Democrats only condemn

illegal actions, by either the police or protesters. Many believe laws apply equally, regardless of what portion of the political spectrum the protester comes from. Many understand that monitoring protests and brutality are not the same thing.

[rhett o rick]

88. Monitoring protestors and police brutality are not the same, but hey are two arms of the same

monster.

I object to my tax-dollars spent on monitoring protestors that are standing up for their rights as they are allowed by the Constitution while we let the Wall Street thieves ravish our economy.

I cant believe that people claiming to be progressive or liberal would side with police over protestors.

[MadrasT]

57. A lot of wasted effort for an extremely disappointing "movement".

I had high hopes for Occupy and it turned into an ineffective clusterfuck of nothing.

[msanthrope]

63. It was a pitiful disaster here in Philly...overrun with the LaRouchies.

Occupy was issued a permit for City Hall but told they would have to move in a few months because the new skating rink construction was starting.

Months later, Occupy refuses to move, threatening to block construction. So the cops told Occupy that they had a choice....move peacefully down the block to Love Park, or the unions workers who would not be getting paid would be allowed to clear the site.

They moved.

They fizzled out after they tried to block the 4th of July fireworks...and the locals put a stop to the forward marvh down the parkway.

[stevenleser]

72. I would like to have seen what Occupy could have done without the experimentation in leaderless

organizing.

I think that organizational structure hampered the attempts to get it going. Getting decisions made was slow. No one really had the authority to speak for them, etc.

[arthritisR_US]

66. Are they being run by the NSA? nt

[U4ikLefty]

68. I see a lot of pathtic authority-sniffers posting BS about Occupy...again.

Some things never change.

I was actually there & saw many violations of good people's civil rights.

Keyboard warriors for the power-structure are not worth your time...ignore them & fight!!!!

[tofuandbeer]

73. The nuts with guns is a group the 1% can figure out and even mold to their whims.

But the mystery and effectiveness behind Occupy Wall Street, scared the SHIT out of the 1%.

[blkmusclmachine]

80. I have seen the enemy. And he is us.

[woo me with science]

81. K&R