2008 Republican National Convention

Special report: New Cleveland RNC Police & Military Docs: FEMA Base to Setup at NASA

The big report I have been focused on for a month finally dropped. Thanks to the support of colleagues we have it out the door and people have a much better sense of the security state they might face at the 2016 Republican National Convention. I am disappointed as always that our limited resources on this planet go not to research, science or the arts but to the brutal bloatware of the National Special Security Events.

Full report: New Cleveland RNC Police & Military Docs: FEMA Base to Setup at NASA. Extra appendices are located here.

A trove of new documents exposes how Cleveland’s impending Republican National Convention will subject the public to a massive domestic military operation. Following decades of planning and millions of dollars spent, the RNC this July will amass into an unprecedented security state, constricting the constitutional rights of thousands of people.

As the panopticon descends on Cleveland, military forces will begin staging security operations at NASA’s Glenn Research Center, while other federal forces begin staffing a “Multi Agency Communications Center” (MACC), located at the International Exposition Center (IX) near the Hopkins International Airport.

The mechanics of America’s most distilled form of political lockdown, the National Special Security Event (NSSE), are spelled out in a series of posted PDFs, some from the Ohio Emergency Management Agency (these have since been taken down). NSSEs are massive security operations managed by the Secret Service, which activate many supporting federal and military agencies, such as Homeland Response Forces, and tactical units from state and local police departments across the region.

Large event planning has evolved dramatically since the 1968 Chicago Democratic National Convention marshaled massive police, federal and military support. NSSEs were defined and systematized as perpetually repeating large activations by President Bill Clinton in 1998's Presidential Decision Directive 62 (PDD-62). In 2016, the NSSE framework remixes the Incident Command System (ICS) for civilian law enforcement aided by FEMA, along with a "Dual Status" Joint Task Force military command.

Please check out the rest of the story. It's 3000+ words but the Moar You Know... Here is a video my colleagues at Unicorn Riot produced with Kris Hermes about NSSEs.

Author Kris Hermes Discusses National Special Security Events (NSSE) from Unicorn Riot on Vimeo.

Here is my 27 minute rundown: https://vimeo.com/171349422

2016 RNC Exposed: New Cleveland police & military docs: FEMA base to setup at NASA from Unicorn Riot on Vimeo.

The November 2010 story that I published both here and was on the Late Great Twin Cities Indymedia server, is helpful. It took me from April to November to put that thing together -- fortunately this year's project, with the help of friends, only took a month.

Here is the 2010 intro video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaacTx9oi1A

Also in 2012 I went on the Alex Jones show a couple times, mostly because of the Drug Recognition Evaluator (DRE) lawsuit. The notes from that appearance are here, which I am including because I used that situation to educate the audience about all of this stuff. (Relevant side note: On April 1 2016 Chief U.S. District Judge, District of Minnesota, John R. Tunheim, tossed the DRE case and ruled it was okay for cops to drug people under guardianship if they fail to lay out their life circumstances to a random drug-wielding cop. Seems legit.)

Anyway I am glad to be keeping busy on the path of weird truths no matter where they lead, especially bringing transparency and sunshine to domestic militarization. We can't win every round but knowing is half the battle. Please follow @UR_Ninja and support the volunteer work there.

After all of that research it is another clue that Iran Contra is still alive. What other explanation can there be for Oliver North style FEMA domestic military ops thirty years later? See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug0IL7k3elQ

Also coming to the 2016 RNC, the National Communications System was part of the Iran Contra equation as Peter Dale Scott highlighted. More of my notes from 2008 about how Iran Contra is still alive here. Too bad Tom Cruise's movie about Barry Seal won't be out until after election season.

Exclusive: National Security Agency to spy on Boston for 2024 Olympics in National Special Security Event SIGINT Spectacular, Snowden leak shows

nsa-olympics-spying.jpg

Most people have no idea that the National Security Agency gets involved in big events like national political conventions and the Olympics: National Special Security Events (NSSEs) with security led by the Secret Service, which is now a part of the Department of Homeland Security.

This was apparently overlooked until now: the National Security Agency lists one of its top level "strategic missions" as getting involved with NSSEs such as the Olympics, according to a file published by the NY Times in Nov 2013 and attributed to Edward Snowden. See also: Olympics in Boston would require an unprecedented security effort - Boston Globe (Jan 15)

Many ideas taken for granted - including the separation of military and civilian life within the US - evaporate in NSSEs. Many, many federal agencies send little teams, including advanced military intelligence.

Header_Logo.pngI had only recently rejoiced that the 2016 Democratic National Convention wouldn't land in Minneapolis. The new crowd running Minneapolis actually saw the light there. These giant spectacles are a huge diversion of focus, don't help cities achieve their goals, at a vastly inflated expense, while compromising the rights of city residents. Many opponents are acting including No Boston Olympics and NoBoston2024 | Independent voices of Boston area residents opposed to the Boston 2024 Olympic bid.

This is apparently the first time that it has been really noted the NSA's director in 2007 officially stated that NSSE's are strategic missions. This in turn means that the NSA must have had *some* role at the 2008 Republican National Convention in Minneapolis. (see our RNC documentary Terrorizing Dissent here & RNC08Report for docs) More background below the doc fulltext.

It's hard to overstate the nasty, elitist, disruptive effects of the Olympics. As a new resident of Boston, the unfortunate news that the 2024 Olympics now has this city in its crosshairs is disappointing & fear inducing. After all I ran into (at least) four FBI informants because of the 2008 RNC, gassed & shot at by the authorities.

2829703418_1958b3785c_b.jpg

2008 RNC memories - Photo Creative commons by Nigel Parry @flyingmonkeyair - src

I am publishing almost the whole document here except for the short page 2, as it is annoyingly difficult to locate online anyway. There are a lot of typos in the Optical Character Recognition, oh well.. See a little earlier coverage: Top Level Telecommunications: NSA's Strategic Mission List and Report: S. Korea key intelligence target for US eavesdropping - Zoom in Korea | Zoom in Korea (Nov 2013).

SOURCE: https://www.eff.org/files/2013/11/15/20131104-nyt-sigint_goals.pdf

/////

United States SIGINT System January 2007 Strategic Mission List

Introduction - Director’s Intent

(S//SI) The SIGINT Strategic Mission List represents the intent of the Director, National Security Agency in regard to mission priorities and risks for the United States S1G1NT System (USSS) over the next 12-18 months The list is derived from review of the Intelligence Community National Intelligence Priorities Framework, DC1/DNI Guidance, the Strategic Warning List, National SIGINT Requirements Process (NSRP) and other strategic planning documents The missions included on the list are in relative priority order and represent the most urgent tasks for the USSS The list is not intended to be all encompassing, but is intended to set forth guidance on the highest priorities.

Topical Missions and Enduring Targets

(S//S1) The SIGINT Strategic Mission List is divided into two parts. It includes 16 critical topical missions in Part I of the list, which represent missions discerned to be areas of highest priority for the USSS, where SIGINT can make key contributions. In addition to the 16 critical topical missions, Part U of the SIGINT Strategic Mission List includes 6 enduring targets that are included due to the need to work these targets holistically because o f their strategic importance. In addition to their long-term strategic importance, the enduring targets can potentially "trump" the highest priority topical missions on the list at any time, based upon evolving world events. Elements o f these targets are also represented throughout the topical target sets. For each of the 16 topical missions and each of the 6 enduring targets the Strategic Mission List includes:

1) Focus Areas - critically important targets against which the SIGINT enterprise is placing emphasis. DIRNSA designation of a target as a focus area constitutes his guidance to the SIGINT System that it is a "must do” target for that mission
2) Accepted Risks strategically significant targets against which the USSS is not placing emphasis and for which SIGINT should not be relied upon as a primary source. DIRNSA's reasons for accepting these risks include high difficulty and lack of resources or as an “Economy of Force Measure,” in order to achieve focus on the most critical targets

A Strategic Investment Tool for SIGINT Resources

(S//S1) Given a finite level of resources available in all mission areas, the Strategic Mission List provides high-level strategic direction to the global SIGINT system to focus resources on the most important/highest priority areas. “Risks” identify targets that cannot be resourced to the level of a Focus Area, thereby acknowledging that shortfalls will exist. As world circumstances change, these or other targets can be added to the list as needed, targets no longer of critical importance can also be removed from the Focus Area category. In addition, other targets, not listed as focus or risk areas, can also be wrorked by the USSS to a lesser degree to meet other customer requirements. The Strategic Mission List will be reviewed bi- annually by the USSS Signals Intelligence leadership Team Missions. Focus areas, and Accepted Risks will be adjusted as a means of providing high-level steerage to the Nation’s agile SIGINT System.

[….]

United States SIGINT System Strategic Mission L ist- January 2007

(U) I. Strategic Mission List - Topical Missions

(S//S1) A. MISSION: Terrorism: Winning the Global War on Terrorism. Focus Areas:

a. All Interagency Intelligence Committee on Terrorism (I1CT) Tier 0 and 1 terrorist groups with capabilities and intentions to attack the US, its interests or allies, or groups actively planning or carrying out a terrorist attack against U.S. persons, facilities, or interests

b. Key individuals and Terrorist Support Entities (TSE) involved in the facilitation, financing, and recruitmentorradicalizationofallIICT Tier0and 1terroristgroupnetworksglobally.

Accepted Risks: All IICT Tier 2,3, and 4 terrorist groups, and TSEs.

(S//S1) B. MISSION: Homeland Security: Protecting the U.S. Homeland from terrorist attack and other transnational threats to safeguard U.S. persons, freedoms, critical information, infrastructure, property and economy.
Focus Areas:

a Border Security (land, air, sea).
b. Direct defense against terrorist attack.
c. Diseases, epidemics, and pandemics.
d. Executive Protection/U.S.-Based NSSEs
e. Illicit Facilitation as it relates to special interest aliens and CBRN materials and technology

Accepted Risks:

a Accepted risks as stated in the “Terrorism” mission.
b. Global coverage o f all illicit activities of potential concern to the Homeland.

(S//SI//REL USA, AUS, CAN, GBR) C. MISSION: W M P and CBRN Programs and Proliferation: Combating the Threat of Development and Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, CBRN, and Delivery Methods (particularly ballistic and nuclear-capable cruise missiles).
Focus Areas:

a. Development, Acquisition, or Use of CBRN.
b.State W'MD and ballistic and cruise missile programs of:

China (biological, chemical, nuclear, ballistic and cruise missiles) India (nuclear, ballistic missiles)
Iran (biological, chemical, nuclear, and ballistic missiles)
North Korea (biological, chemical, nuclear, ballistic missiles) Pakistan (nuclear, ballistic missiles)

Russia (biological, chemical, nuclear, ballistic and cruise missiles)

Syria (chemical, nuclear, ballistic missiles).
c.W MD and missile proliferation activities by states:

China (nuclear, ballistic missiles), Israel (cruise missiles) North Korea (nuclear, ballistic missiles)

Pakistan (nuclear, ballistic missiles)

Russia (ballistic missile).
d.W.MD and missile acquisition activities by states:

China (cruise missiles)
India (cruise missiles)
Iran (nuclear, ballistic missiles)
Pakistan (cruise missiles)
Saudi Arabia (nuclear, ballistic missiles).

e.Safety and Security ofWMD: Pakistan (nuclear)
Russia (nuclear).

Accepted Risks:
State WMD and ballistic and cruise missile programs of: Egypt (ballistic missiles)
Libya (ballistic missiles)
Taiwan (ballistic missiles).

(S//S1) D. MISSION: U.S. Forces at Risk (Military Support): Protecting U.S. Military Forces Deployed Overseas and Enabling their Operations.
Focus Areas:

a. U.S. forces deployed in: Iraq. Afghanistan. Mideast Region. Korea, and Philippines.
b. Support to military planning and operations: Support to OPLAN 5027 (Korea).
c. Intentions of foreign and indigenous anti-coalition forces, command and control. OOB, and

operational support in Iraq and Afghanistan.
d. Support to U.S. forces in identification of HVTs in Afghanistan/ Pakistan and Iraq

Accepted Risks:

a Protection of U S forces deployed in: Balkans (Kosovo),
b South Korea leadership intentions in OPLAN 5027.
c Routine military support to U.S. forces deployed in non-combat situations.

(S//S1) E. MISSION: State/Political Stability: Providing Warning of Impending State Instability. Focus Areas:

a. Internal political activities that could threaten the survivability of leadership in countries where US has interest in regime continuity Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia.

b. Internal political activities that could result in crisis in. North Korea, Sudan/Dafur humanitarian crisis. Cuba, Kosovo, Turkey, Nigeria, Lebanon, Venezuela, Syria, Bolivia, Latin American Bolivarian Developments, and Palestinian Authority.

Accepted Risks: Internal political stability of: Egypt, Zimbabwe, Cote d'Ivoire, Liberia, DROC, Bangladesh, Georgia, Jordan, and Haiti.

(S//SI) F. MISSION: Warning of Strategic Nuclear Missile Threats: Providing Warning of a Strategic Nuclear Missile Attack on the territory of the 50 United States.
Focus Areas: Areas covered under a peacetime SIGINT strategy maintaining full capabilities with reasonably sufficient coverage for the provision of warning include: Russia's Nuclear C3, Mobile

ICBMs, strategic navy missiles, and Bombers; China's Nuclear C3, Mobile ICBMs, and SSBNs; and North Korea's Nuclear C3 and potential ICBM (TD-2) Threat.
Accepted Risks: Strategic Targets where SIGINT is not a primary intelligence source in providing warning: Russia's Silo-based ICBMs; China's Silo-based ICBMs.

(S//SI) G. MISSION: Regional Conflict and Crisis/Flashpoints to War: Monitoring Regional Tensions that Could Escalate to Conflict/Crisis.
Focus Areas:
Regional flashpoints that could pose a significant threat to U.S. strategic interests: Arab,Iran-Israel conflict, Korean Peninsula, China-Taiwan, India-Pakistan, Venezuela (impact on surrounding region), and Russia/Georgia.

Accepted Risks: Regional flashpoints in: Ethiopia-Eritrea and Africa Great Lakes Region

(S//REL USA. AUS. CAN, GBR. NZL) H. MISSION: Information Operations: Mastering Cyberspace and Preventing an Attack on U.S. Critical Information Systems.
Focus Areas:

a (S//SI) Enabling Computer Network Defense (CND): Provide cyber threat warning, detection, characterization, and mitigation services for U.S. and allied computer network operators: Named Intrusion Sets (Including, but not limited to Gadget Hiss. Seed Sphere/Byzantine Trace. Makers Mark. Byzantine Candor), New intrusions.

b. (S//REL USA, AUS, CAN. GBR, NZL) Enabling Computer Network Attack (CNA): Deliver intelligence, access, and dual-use capabilities in support of U.S. computer network attack objectives. c. (S//SI) Foreign Intelligence Serv ices' Cyber Threat Activities: Deliver intelligence on the capabilities.

vulnerabilities, plans and intentions o f foreign actors to conduct CNO against USG networks and those of interest to the USG. Identify what Foreign Intel Services know about USG capabilities, vulnerabilities, plans and intentions to conduct CNO: China, Russia, Iran, and al-Qa'ida

d (S//SI) Enabling Electronic Warfare (EW): Provide cognizance ofthe EM environment, signal detection/geolocation, and characterization through intelligence (ELINT. COMINT, Tech SIGINT) and other technical means to U.S. EW planners and operators: China. Russia, Iran, Iraq/Afghanistan (IED's) and North Korea.

e. (S//SI) Enabling Influence Operations: Support U.S. military deception (MILDEC) and psychological operations (PSYOP), and inter-agency Strategic Communication objectives to influence target behavior and activities: Terrorist groups. China. North Korea. Iran, and Venezuela.

Accepted Risks:

a. Enabling CND: Isolated malicious activity that could pose a serious threat.
b. Enabling CNA.
c. FIS Cyber Threat: France, Israel, Cuba, India, and North Korea.
d. Enabling EW: (producers.'’prolifcrators): Sweden, Japan. Germany, Israel, and France, e Enabling Influence Operations: Pakistan and Russia.

(S//SI) I. MISSION: Military Modernization: Providing Early Detection ofCritical Developments in Foreign Military Programs.
Focus Areas:

b. Activities of state and non-state actors (gray arms dealers) in supplying advanced conventional weapons.

c. Threats posed by foreign space and counter-space systems: China and Russia Accepted Risks:

a Weapons and force developments in: Saudi Arabia, and India
b Threats posed by foreign space and counter-space systems India and France

(S//SI) J. MISSION: Emerging Strategic Technologies: Preventing Technological Surprise.
Focus Areas:
Critical technologies that could provide a strategic military, economic, or political advantage: high energy lasers, low energy lasers, advances in computing and information technology, directed energy weapons, stealth and counter-stealth, electronic warfare technologies, space and remote sensing, electro-optics, nanotechnologies, energetic materials The emerging strategic technology threat is expected to come mainly from Russia. China. India, Japan. Germany, France. Korea. Israel, Singapore, and Sweden.

Accepted Risks: Technological advances and/or basic S&T development on a global basis elsewhere.

(S//S1) K. MISSION: Foreign Policy ((includes Intention of Nations and Multinational Orgs)): Ensuring Diplomatic Advantage for the US.
Focus Areas:
Positions, objectives, programs, and actions on the part of governments or multilateral organizations that could significantly impact U.S. national security interests: China, Russia, France, Germany, Japan. Iran. Israel. Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Afghanistan. Iraq. UN, Venezuela, Syria. Turkey, Mexico, South Korea, India and Pakistan.

Accepted Risks: Positions, objectives, programs, and actions on the part of governments or multilateral organizations that could impact U.S. foreign policy or security interests: Taiwran.

(S//SI) l~ MISSION: Energy Security: Ensuring a Steady and Reliable Energy Supply for the US. Focus Areas: Threats to the production and global distribution/transportation of energy supplies of: Iraq, Saudi Arabia, V enezuela, Iran, Russia and Nigeria. Accepted Risks: Global impact o f the state o f energy industries in: Mexico and China.

(S//SI) M. MISSION: Foreign Intelligence, Counterintelligence; Denial & Deception Activities: Countering Foreign Intelligence Threats.
Focus Areas:
Espionage/intelligence collection operations and manipulation/influence operations conducted by foreign intelligence services directed against U.S. government, military', science & technology and Intelligence Community from: China, Russia, Cuba, Israel, Iran, Pakistan, North Korea. France. Venezuela, and South Korea

Accepted Risks: Espionage'intelligence collection operations against U.S. government, military, science & technology and Intelligence Community from: Taiwan and Saudi Arabia

(S//S1) N. MISSION: Narcotics and Transnational Criminal Syndicates and Networks: Mitigating the impact on U.S. national interests from drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) and transnational criminal syndicates and networks (TCSNs).
Focus Areas:

a. DTOs and associated enabling activities in Afghanistan, Mexico and Colombia that threaten U.S.interests.

b.TCSNs based in (or originating in) Russia that threaten U.S. or allied interests.

c. Money laundering that benefits TCSNs within, into, and out of Colombia and Mexico.

d. Criminal facilitators acting as a nexus between crime/narcotics and terrorism.

e. State-sponsored money laundering by Iran and North Korea. Accepted Risks:

a Drug production/trafficking within the Golden Triangle, China, and North Korea b. TCSNs operating in Central Asia, former Eastern Europe, and Asia,
c Criminal associated money laundering in Afghanistan, and Iraq.

State-sponsored money laundering by Syria.

(S//S1) O. MISSION: Economic Stability/Influence: Ensuring U.S. Economic Advantage and Policy Strategies.
Focus Areas:
Economic stability, financial vulnerability, and economic influence of states of strategic interest to the US: China, Japan, Iraq, and Brazil.

Accepted Risks: Economic stability, financial vulnerability, and economic influence of states of strategic interest to the US: Turkey and India.

(S//S1) P. Mission: Global Signals Cognizance: The core communications infrastructure and global network information needed to achieve and maintain baseline knowledge. Capture knowledge of location, characterization, use, and status of military and civil communications infrastructure, including command, control, communications and computer networks: intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and targeting systems; and associated structures incidental to pursuing Strategic Mission List priorities. Focus of mission is creating knowledge databases that enable SIGINT efforts against future unanticipated threats and allow continuity on economy of force targets not currently included on the Strategic Mission List. Focus Areas:

Global Environment knowledge Signals knowledge.

Network knowledge.

Target knowledge.
Accepted Risks: Degree of maturity may greatly vary by target

(U) II. Strategic Mission List - Enduring Targets

(S//S1) A. MISSION: China: Enabling U.S. policy and avoiding strategic surprise. Focus Areas: Provide U.S. decision makers with a holistic SIGINT perspective oftrends and developments in China, assessing and/or predicting strategic direction, plans, intentions, and capabilities that impact U.S. interests. Such analysis must consider China’s strategic foreign and economic policy trends that impact U S. interests or degrade U.S. influence, the pace, scope, doctrine, and economic sustainability of China’s military modernization, the proliferation of PRC weapons and technology; the prospects for regional conflict or strategic nuclear attack; domestic economic transformation and its consequences for economic, political, and social stability'; subversive threats to U.S. institutions through hostile intelligence and information operations, and the interdependencies among these developments Accepted Risks: Certain domestic problem sets, such as demographic issues; lower-level political institutional growth; civil society' issues such as crime and human rights; environmental problems and planning; and agricultural production and food security'. Also, issues that transcend national boundaries, such as Chinese involvement in international organized crime; energy demand, production, and acquisition; and infectious disease and health.

(S//S1) B. MISSION: North Korea: Enabling the US to counteract North Korea’s development/use/proliferation of WMD, deter its aggression, and shape its behavior while maintaining U.S. readiness for collapse/war. Focus Areas: Provide U.S. decision-makers with a holistic SIGINT perspective of trends and developments in North Korea, assessing and/or predicting strategic direction, plans, intentions, and capabilities that impact U S interests and provide warning o f strategic threat. Such analysis must consider the stability of the North Korean regime and how it employs domestic and foreign policies to maintain its grip on power; the relationship between regime stability/behavior and its access to income from illicit activities and weapons proliferation; how Chinese and South Korean “carrots and sticks” enable or constrain North Korean behavior; the impact of the decaying North Korean economy on military' readiness; and how the interplay between U S policy initiatives toward North Korea and all of the above elements affect North Korea’s strategic calculus, the material disposition of its nuclear weapons, and the status of its military Accepted Risks: For domestic issues, risks include non-defense oriented industrial production, demographic issues, and environmental problems. Regarding issues that transcend borders, risks include non-counterintelligence associated ties between North Korean state- sponsored illicit activities and international organized crime institutions and individuals; North Korean agent activity in South Korea and Japan; non-state sponsored corruption and illicit behavior; and North Korean economic refugee flows into China

(S//S1) C. MISSION: Iraq: Enabling Coalition efforts to assist Iraq in establishing a secure, unified, democratic, and sovereign state. Focus Areas: Provide U S decision makers with a holistic SIGINT perspective of trends and developments, assessing Iraq’s progress toward establishing a viable, stable government; securing public order, suppressing insurgent opposition, ensuring reliable access to basic services and commodities; safeguarding strategic resources; and restoring a more sound economic footing. Provide intelligence on relevant factors, forces, leaders, and regional actors to facilitate U.S. Governmentpolicy or actions in support of the Iraqi process and to seize the strategic communications initiative.

Accepted Risks: none

(S//S1) D. MISSION: Iran: Enabling policymakers in preventing Iran from achieving its regional dominance objectives and pursuing policies that impact U.S. global interests. Focus Areas: Provide U.S. decision makers with a holistic SIGINT perspective of regional trends and developments, assessing and/or predicting strategic direction, plans, intentions and capabilities that impact U.S. interests. Assess Iran's foreign policy trends and leadership intentions that impact U.S. interests or degrade U.S. influence. Provide warning of Iran's capability to produce a nuclear weapon or its plans to use terrorist surrogates to attack Israel or U.S. forces and interests Assess the regime's progress in initiatives that enhance its pursuit of regional power objectives in the political, economic, energy, and religious or ideological arenas

Provide indicators of regime stability and/or susceptibility to democratic reform initiatives Accepted Risks: Efforts to ascertain the scope of Iran's narcotics'organized crime elements and economic stability/influence.

(S//S1) E. MISSION: Russia: Assuring diplomatic and strategic advantage and avoiding critical surprise. Focus Areas: Provide U.S. policy and decision makers with a holistic SIGINT perspective of developments and trends in Russia, assessing and/or predicting strategic direction, plans, intentions, and capabilities that impact U S. interests Such analysis must consider Russia's strategic foreign policy and economic intentions and actions as they pertain to U S interests and influence in the region and globally; the strength of Russia's economy and its impact on Russian power projection capability and strategic positioning; Russia's efforts to regain military strength and stimulate economic growth through the development and sale ofadvanced technology and weaponry', and the role ofWMD, organized crime and counterintelligence in enabling Russian strategic initiatives. Accepted Risks: Certain domestic issues such as demographics, regional politics, development of civil society in the country, and monitoring of low-level military' training activities. Also, issues that transcend national boundaries such as Russia’s plans, intentions and capabilities regarding influence on the former Soviet space

(S//S1) F. MISSION: Venezuela: Enabling policymakers in preventing Venezuela from achieving its regional leadership objectives and pursuing policies that negatively impact U.S. global interests. Focus Areas: Provide U.S. decision makers with a holistic SIGINT perspective of regional trends and developments, assessing and/or predicting strategic direction, plans, intentions and capabilities that impact U S interests Assess Venezuela's foreign policy trends and leadership intentions that impact U S

interests or degrade U S. influence Assess Chavez’ progress in his initiatives to pursue regional power objectives in the political, economic, energy, and ideological arenas. Provide indicators of regime stability, particularly in the energy sector. Assess the depth and breadth of Venezuela's relations with countries of strategic concern to the United States, particularly Iran, Cuba, China, and Russia. Accepted R i s k s : E f f o r t s t o a s c e r t a i n t h e s c o p e o f V e n e z u e l a ’s n a r c o t i c s / o r g a n i z e d c r i m e e l e m e n t s a n d e c o n o m i c stability/influence.

Nice to have a record of all this so it's easier to find later. I might write some more stories about lesser known NSSE features that apply to this impending nightmare if I can find the time. For now...

/////

Quick notes: Lesser-known agencies such as the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency and US Northern Command also get very busy in the domestic battlespace indeed. NSSEs are part of their annual activity cycle of exercises and practice operations.

See previously: Nov 2010: USNORTHCOM: Secret 'Trigger' & blueprint for emergency domestic military crackdown plan revealed | HongPong.com - CONPLAN3502 is another story altogether - but it makes you wonder what the NSA connection to NORTHCOM's 'civil disturbance operations' would be.

Feb 2009: Targeting the RNC Welcoming Committee: A Case Study in Political Paranoia | Dissident Voice

Having declared the RNC a National Security Special Event (NSSE), one that derived its “authorization” to target activists and journalists from the top secret 2006 National Security Presidential Directive-46/Homeland Security Presidential Directive-15 (NSPD-46/HSPD-15), local, state and federal law enforcement entities, the U.S. military, intelligence agencies such as the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and corporate partners in the telecommunications industry and elsewhere, preemptively disrupted legal political dissent by a score of protest groups.

Revealing RNC document leaked: RNC '08 Report: Text: Revealing RNC document leaked (ACLU Nov 21 2008)

RNC '08 Report: Police & Security Documents: Powerpoint presentation: National Special Security Events (NSSE) - background involving March 2008.

Digging around - the NGA pulled its old Pathfinder issues. You'll have to look in Archive.org - January/February Pathfinder 2009

Boston skyline source Creative Commons: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3c/Boston_Skyline_Panorama_Dusk_Edit_1.jpg

Upper right logo by Dan McCall - libertyManiacs.com - http://cdn0.dailydot.com/uploaded/images/original/2013/8/27/NSA-Listens-Shirtmock.jpg

Cyberpunk art: http://boingboing.net/2015/05/08/your-cyberpunk-games-are-dange.html

LICENSE: CREATIVE COMMONS WITH ATTRIBUTION TO HONGPONG.COM. PLEASE SHARE!

Heroes in "(T)error": Urgently necessary documentary turns FBI sting inside out in War on Terror exposé; similar operations now escalating in Minnesota

saeed-torres2.png

I was fortunately able to catch a screening of the new documentary "(T)error" at the Boston Independent Film Festival. It exposes a whole level and mode of our political reality, the closest thing to an accurate domestic war on terror doc that has yet been done. (official website)

terror_3.jpg

As a film it has some technical shortcomings, but it covers a lot of ground including important community history of the Black Panther Party and intelligence probes of Muslims in New York City. In showing how the real machinery of domestic intelligence operations really work, it's an invaluable, quite original film and one sure to blow the minds of many viewers. At 93 minutes, its length works well with the often low-energy, weird situations, without wearing people out through excessive tangents.

For the first time (T)error brings the viewer within an active FBI sting as 15-year self-described "civilian operative" Saeed Torres moves to Pittsburgh and attempts to sting Khalifah al-Akili (below), a Muslim-American who mainly makes relatively militant Facebook posts, which draws the Feds' attention to him.

khalifah-al-akili.png

In the bulk of the film. with massive guilt and exhaustion hanging over him like a raincloud, Saeed (below) chainsmokes blunts, exchanges lots of texts with his FBI handlers and tries to lurk his way into the local community. Social media engineering attempts and the entry of another veteran informant operative define the midst of the story.

terror-guilt.jpg

While Saeed is mainly narcing for the money, he also has contempt for Muslims that are messing things up, as he sees it. His regretful severe social isolation, a consequence of his actions, is not downplayed at all - and unlike some films it seems sincere, even as he performs the role of a lying sociopath for envelopes of cash from the feds.

saeed-torres.png

I won't get into the details here, though they have been well-publicized. A 45-minute Democracy Now segment brings everyone up to speed, key spoilers included: FBI Informant Exposes Sting Operation Targeting Innocent Americans in New "(T)ERROR" Documentary | Democracy Now!

//////

Parallels are connected between the Pittsburgh op and Saeed's earlier FBI sting campaigns since 2000. The story also covers in-depth the very similar sting and prosecution of musician Tarik Shah, whose mother Marlene presents the strong front reminiscent of so many other family members of those targeted previously.

marlene-tarik-shah.png

The work that Steve Downs does in attempting to bring transparency in the case is highly commendable and necessary - contact this man's org if you credibly think you are really getting put into a sting:

steve-downs.png

Shahed Hussain, the informant involved in the Newburgh Four case from 2006 and another case in Albany, started working for the bureau in 2002 and makes quite a splash of fake reality spam in this film. (NY Post neutrally notes HBO doc The Newburgh Sting - 2014. Wiki page notes )

shahed-hussain.png

shahed-hussain2.png

It's impossible to watch this film without vividly recalling the wave of federal informant activity around the 2008 Republican National Convention and the antiwar movement, culminating in surprise grand jury raids in 2009. I ran into at least four people somewhat like Saeed over about two years and these are the kind of encounters burned in your memory within a whole separate category of social & political reality. For some viewers the 2009 G20 conference in Pittsburgh will echo through this story as well, although it's not discussed in the film.

Adding to this film's urgency, in recent weeks Minnesota's primarily Muslim Somali community has gotten snared in another high profile sting. Early indications are pretty clear that the informant was someone who was under pressure from compelled secret grand jury testimony that went bad, showing how these operations generate the raw power necessary to compel informants into action.

See: Feds charge six Minnesotans with trying to join ISIS | Minnesota Public Radio News (Apr 20 2015), some constitutionally dubious new charge: Man charged for sending threatening tweets in ISIS case | Minnesota Public Radio News (Apr 24 2015 - wut?!), Informant's role emerges as key in counterterror sweep | Minnesota Public Radio News (Apr 20 2015), Defense challenges use of paid informant in Minnesota ISIS case - CBS News (Apr 23 2015), Defense calls case against MN terror suspects weak; judge allows it to move forward - BringMeTheNews.com

/////

This whole realm is totally alien to most Americans, and I certainly hope that it gets aired as widely as possible. Ideally via another national PBS program distribution deal like Better This World (2011: Dirs Katie Galloway & Duane de la Vega), which covered the "Texas Two" molotov cocktail case and grandiose informant Brandon Darby -- who soon thereafter entered the Breitbart conservative media fold. [I contributed some help to BTW] Review here.

BTW_Poster_LRG.jpg

Another film Informant (2012: Dir Jamie Meltzer) more or less let Darby expose himself in his own words.

informant-darby.jpg

It also brings to mind the huge series of semi/fictionalized informant characters in movies - how often the Hollywood films end up getting told from the perspective of people that rolled.

Most recently, the skillful and vivid Pynchon adaptation Inherent Vice (2014: Dir Paul Thomas Anderson) features the anxious Owen Wilson as a semi-private COINTELPRO informant circa 1970. Wilson confesses he found out they "want to use us to keep the membership in line" - that is, keep the hippie revolution within boundaries. Helpfully, this film shows the psychological toll that being rolled into the game as a plant really takes, helping drive much of the plot.

owen-wilson-inherentvice.png

Goodfellas (1990: Dir. Martin Scorsese) is getting attention now at its 25th anniversary. Goodfellas' real-life Henry Hill, who was paid handsomely by the film production - ultimately leaving witness protection and dying peacefully in 2012:

Henryhillmugshot.jpg

American Hustle (2013: Dir David O. Russell) gave a glossy, color saturated Jersey yarn of rolled con man Irving Rosenfeld.

american-hustle.jpg

As studios so frequently do, it was paired off Scorsese's indulgent and somewhat saggy The Wolf of Wall Street (2013). Jordan Belfort undeservedly gets the privilege of introducing himself, played by Leonardo DiCaprio - and his sporting of the wire to expose his co-workers is quite condensed from reality in the film plot.

movie-cameo-jordan-belfort-the-wolf-of-wall-street-leonardo-dicaprio.jpg

But no one that I'm aware of has touched the notion in fiction or reality of an ex-black revolutionary & Muslim who is a repeat player for the Feds, rather than another smooth-talking pushy hustler folding under charges. (Although you might say The Spook Who Sat by the Door (1973: Dir. Ivan Dixon) portrays the reverse of this operation. Full film here.).

/////

I would be remiss in failing to note a couple new informant-related stories from WhoWhatWhy: the Boston bombing case and the late Ibragim Todashev remains locked away. As is so often the case, the American public is not privy to secret documents that could indicate earlier federal activity in the circle of acquaintances of the Tsarnaev brothers. The Unexplained Connection Between the FBI and Two Muslim Friends Killed by Law Enforcement - WhoWhatWhy. See this relatively new heavily redacted document:

boston-bombing-todashev-crop.png

Additionally, the April 19, 1995 bombing of the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City continues to emit interesting new informant information nodes, with "CI-183" at Elohim City a new awkward data point of interest in understanding the case better: Exclusive: Oklahoma City Bombing Breakthrough, Part 1 of 2 - WhoWhatWhy // Exclusive: Oklahoma City Bombing Breakthrough, Part 2 of 2 - WhoWhatWhy. Kudos to WhoWhatWhy for publishing well sourced new material in both the Boston and OKC cases in the last few days, April 22-25th.

After seeing (T)error it should be easier to understand the kind of shadowy context informant type operations may have intersected with these tragedies, and at least the stubs of the paper trails of those intersections.

/////

See another review: Sundance Doc (T)ERROR Is This Year’s Citizenfour - Vogue. As noted, the regret-bound Saeed really just wishes he could apprentice to a master baker and cook cupcakes. "(T)ERROR should be seen as ancillary viewing to Laura Poitras’s Citizenfour, both of which touch on issues of surveillance and the right to privacy versus the imperative to prevent terrorism."

Saeed pegs his map of Pittsburgh, cryptically:

embed-interview-with-terror-directors.jpg

Follow the Terror documentary on Facebook here. As protests uptick across America again, the film also gains relevancy in looking back at how revolutionary movement's like Saeed's former Black Panther Party, the Nation of Islam and American Muslims got put under COINTELPRO pressure. Saeed never really seems to recant his former revolutionary beliefs, at least on camera. Aptly enough, a Le Carré novel and many other items of political and spy literature dot the scenes in Pittsburgh.

It gives us some better grasp of how the government interfaces deep into the lives of communities living in political and economic tension, making it among the most perfectly relevant things one could hope to see on the screen right now. One can't conclude anything else but that Saeed is another misguided "hero in error", to borrow Iraqi exile Ahmed Chalabi's phrase, a memorably awful defense of his own transgressions.

Pentagon domestic operations switches from "pull" to "push" on 24-48hr timelines: "Defense Support of Civil Authorites" expands

This is an incredibly short period of time, he said, and it forces a change in the relationship between DOD and other agencies. The old paradigm was to have civil partners “pull assistance” from DOD, while now DOD will actually push assistance where it is needed.

Defense.gov News Article: Official Explains New Homeland Defense/Civil Support Strategy

There is also a video here: http://www.pentagonchannel.mil/Video.aspx?videoid=285596

Mirrored: Domestic Pentagon ops expands Defense Support of Civil Authorities vs domestic extremists - YouTube

//// UPDATE 4.22.13: I forgot! Here is one version of USNORTHCOM CONPLAN 3501. Thanx to YAN, reddit, & Cryptogon for taking note of this post! This video from the Boston metro area shows what domestic militarization of police is all about:

Also please follow PublicIntelligence.net and Cryptome.org for more handy docs. PI in particular has been pretty well on top of this.////

Mission drift into the US continues as the Pentagon contemplates dealing with "domestic extremists" under the rubric of Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA) - one aspect of which is the US Northern Command's "USNORTHCOM CONPLAN 3501".

CONPLAN 3501, This generic emergency plan is relatively easy to obtain (most of the text), but it is the "friendly" hand of the DOD compared to the more mysterious and riot-control-oriented "USNORTHCOM CONPLAN 3502" entitled "Civil Disturbance Operations" (CDO). This surfaced in researching the role of Northcom at the 2008 Republican National Convention, which was a very 3502 CDO style operation with National Guard controlling space on Kellogg Blvd. CONPLAN 3502 is the post-2002 version of GARDEN PLOT, the 1960s-1990s template plan for domestic military deployments, like for example in the LA Riots.

This extends the story from late 2010: Secret 'Trigger' & blueprint for emergency domestic military crackdown plan revealed | HongPong.com and reconfirms various aspects.

/////////////

Here is the new front-piece document. Also bonus weird stuff about the ever popular integration of North America.

An interesting Snippet:

Loosely-networked or individually motivated violent extremists will continue to exhort followers and encourage violent extremism in the homeland.

o HVEs will operate alone or organize in small groups and will be largely autonomous in their operations; they will have access to web-based resources to assist them in their operational planning.

o Military members and facilities will remain prominent targets of terrorists, and particularly by HVEs.

ł DoD will be called upon to provide significant resources and capabilities during a catastrophic event in the homeland.

o The National Response Framework will remain the primary instrument for applying Federal capabilities during disaster response.

And

Rapid and actionable intelligence on terrorist threats

DoD will maintain and enhance the Joint Intelligence Task Force for Combating Terrorism (JITF-CT) as its key node for sharing intelligence with interagency partners on terrorist threats. DoD will improve and refine intelligence and information-sharing relationships that have developed since 9/11 and as a result of the Fort Hood shootings.

DoD maintains a robust array of foreign intelligence capabilities, and sharing relevant counterterrorism-related information with the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and other key parties is vital to the prevention of potential terrorist threats to the homeland. JITF-CT will remain the focal point for DoD’s outreach and sharing of intelligence and information with the FBI, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), and the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). Additionally, DoD will expand its participation within the various FBI Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs),9 as well as other similar entities to maximize “top-down” and “bottom-up” sharing of key pieces of intelligence and information, consistent with applicable law and policy.

And of course, Unity of Effort and the ever popular Council of Governors:

Promote Federal-State Unity of Effort

Unity of effort between the Federal Government and States must be one of DoD’s guiding principles in the homeland, since unifying DoD’s efforts with those of its external partners improves collaboration and shortens response times for meeting life-saving needs during emergencies. Unity of effort also means greater national preparedness at less overall cost, while preserving both Federal and State constitutional requirements and responsibilities. DoD and its Federal partners must continue to strengthen unity of effort with States to define common goals regarding capabilities, structures, and processes for responses to disaster and emergencies in the homeland. The Council of Governors – established by Executive Order in 2010 – will be an essential forum for enhanced, senior-level dialogue among Federal and State civilian and military officials for this purpose.

[.....] DoD will regard dual-status commanders as the usual and customary command and control arrangement in cases where Federal military and State National Guard forces are employed simultaneously in support of civil authorities within the United States.

DoD will continue to refine processes for dual-status commanders and their associated command structures. By leveraging the use of such commanders, DoD will improve Federal-State communication, economy of force, and force employment for planned events and no-notice or imminent incidents. Historic examples of the employment of dual status commanders include national special security events such as the Democratic and Republican national conventions and responses to disasters like Hurricane Sandy and wildfires in the western United States...

Vague talk of militarized domestic databases always good:

Since Federal and State military components have varying requirements for relevant information and level of detail, development of a COP solution need not specify systems, hardware, or software. Instead, it must be based on common data from authoritative military or civilian databases that flow to various systems in a common format.....

The DCE/DCO structure is reconfirmed to be key to domestic military operations:

DoD will use the planning capacity of Defense Coordinating Elements (DCEs) to expand planning cooperation at the regional level so that Departmental capabilities are considered in FEMA-led regional planning efforts. DoD will also build an integrated organizational architecture for its liaison and coordinating officers at various headquarters.

The ten FEMA regional offices are key nodes for integrating Federal plans with State and local plans, and DCEs within these regional offices are essential for operational and tactical unity of effort in an adaptive environment. This regional planning relationship bridges the gap between State-level planning conducted at a National Guard’s Joint Force Headquarters (JFHQ)-State and DoD and DHS national-level planning. The JFHQs in each of the 54 States and Territoriesprovide vital ties to State emergency officials and the National Guard Bureau. This enduring synergy positions the JFHQ as the key State-level organization for integrating the emergency plans of local DoD installations with State plans and FEMA regional plans.

DoD will deepen and facilitate rigorous Federal, regional, and State-level planning, training, and exercises through coordination and liaison arrangements that support civil authorities at all levels. These arrangements include DoD liaison officers at DHS and FEMA, Defense Coordinating Officers (DCOs), and Emergency Preparedness Liaison Officers from each Service.....

FULL DOCUMENT: Pentagon domestic ops Homeland Defense Strategy 2.2013

/////////////

Defense.gov News Article: Official Explains New Homeland Defense/Civil Support Strategy

By Jim Garamone - American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, April 1, 2013 – The Defense Department incorporated hard lessons learned when it codified its new homeland defense and civil support strategy, said Todd M. Rosenblum, DOD’s top homeland defense official.

In an interview with American Forces Press Service and the Pentagon Channel, Rosenblum, the acting assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense and Americas’ security affairs, said the new strategy is a recognition that the operating environment has changed.

“We face new threats, we have new vulnerabilities, we have new dependencies, most importantly we have a new way to do business,” Rosenblum said during a Pentagon interview. “We have to capture that and make sure the department is prepared and directed toward being more effective and efficient as we can be.”

The Defense Department is charged with defending the homeland from attack. U.S. Northern Command is further charged with working with state and local entities and other federal agencies to provide support in times of natural or man-made disasters. In the first instance, DOD has the lead. In the second, another federal agency -- such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency -- has the lead.

The strategy, released in February, looks at the lessons learned from past experiences -- from Hurricane Katrina through Hurricane Sandy.

They also looked at changes including the growth of communications networks, dependence on private-sector capabilities and “the rising expectations from the president and from the secretary, and certainly from the American people, that we will be prepared to provide support to civil authorities within a 24- to 48-hour window,” Rosenblum said.

This is an incredibly short period of time, he said, and it forces a change in the relationship between DOD and other agencies. The old paradigm was to have civil partners “pull assistance” from DOD, while now DOD will actually push assistance where it is needed.

“So we are postured to provide assistance as fast and rapidly as possible,” Rosenblum said.

The vast difference between the response to Katrina in 2005 and to Sandy in 2012 shows the effectiveness of the new strategy, he said.

“We were more efficient, timely and effective in our support to Hurricane Sandy,” Rosenblum said. “This is because we did integrated planning within DOD, with our federal partners, and with our state partners. We recognized the need to not wait to be called upon, but to pre-position our support capabilities knowing there’s going to be audibles and ad hoc requests.”

Planning is at the heart of the strategy, he said. Integrated planning -- with state and local officials, with other federal agencies and with non-governmental entities -- has increased visibility and prominence. The National Guard -- an organization that bridges state and federal efforts -- continues to play a crucial role. But, Rosenblum noted, the strategy recognizes that response to disasters requires an all-of-government approach.

Cyberattacks, he said, also could produce the type of man-made disaster that would require DOD assistance. The homeland defense mission codifies requirements to provide cyberdefense, he added.

“The threats to networks and critical infrastructure increase when we are engaged in operations overseas,” he said. “The physical effects of cyberattacks can impact our military operation capabilities and response capabilities.”

The fiscal environment impacts this -- and all other -- strategies.

“The sequester is real and effecting DOD through readiness, training,” Rosenblum said. “It is difficult for the department to plan and budget intelligently, when we don’t have budget certainty.”

Officials devised the strategy when the department had already committed to $487 billion in reductions over 10 years.

“Sequester has changed the calculus tremendously,” Rosenblum said. “But this strategy is not about buying new capabilities: It’s about our planning, our processes and our integration.”

////////////

Defense.gov News Release: DOD Releases Strategy for Homeland Defense and Defense Support for Civil Authorities

U.S. Department of Defense

Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)

News Release

On the Web:

http://www.defense.gov/Releases/Release.aspx?ReleaseID=15878

Media contact: +1 (703) 697-5131/697-5132 Public contact:

http://www.defense.gov/landing/comment.aspx

or +1 (703) 571-3343

IMMEDIATE RELEASE No. 172-13

March 22, 2013

DOD Releases Strategy for Homeland Defense and Defense Support for Civil Authorities

The Department of Defense announced today the release of the Strategy for Homeland Defense and Defense Support of Civil Authorities. This policyestablishes DoD’s priorities in the areas of homeland defense and defense support of civil authorities through 2020, consistent with the president’s National Security Strategy and the 2012 Defense Strategic Guidance. It links with other DoD and national strategic documents related to missile defense, space, cyberspace, counterterrorism, and the Western Hemisphere. The strategy identifies two priority missions for the department in the homeland: defend U.S. territory from direct attack by state and non-state actors; and provide assistance to domestic civil authorities in the event of natural or manmade disasters, potentially in response to a very significant or catastrophic event.

The strategy emphasizes cost-effective policy mechanisms and innovative approaches to defend the homeland against direct attacks and to provide timely responses to routine and catastrophic events on U.S. territory. It stresses the continuation of DoD capabilities to defend against conventional and emerging threats in the air and maritime domains, while expanding cooperation with federal, state, and local partners to defeat asymmetric threats – including, for example, homegrown violent extremists who may seek to use improvised explosive devices. Additionally, it addresses DoD preparations for responding to man-made and natural disasters.

“The Department of Defense’s contributions to the defense of our nation have evolved over the past decade and account for new threats and challenges. Lessons learned from events like Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy and collaboration with our interagency partners and State Governors have framed our current approach to DoD civil support activities,” said Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas’ Security Affairs Todd Rosenblum. “This strategy emphasizes strengthening our partnerships with federal agencies like the Departments of Homeland Security and Justice, with state and local governments, with the private sector, and with our Canadian and Mexican neighbors – not only for more comprehensive approaches to complex security challenges in the homeland, but also to create efficiencies through collaboration and joint action,”

For further information about this strategy, please access http://www.defense.gov/news/Homelanddefensestrategy.pdf

//////////

Never heard of this guy, he is the one doing the news release above. Career includes being Evan Bayh's national security staff & CIA Near East 1988-1993hires_061611094311_Rosenblum_Todd.JPG

Defense.gov Biography: Todd M. Rosenblum

Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas' Security Affairs [Acting?]

Todd M. Rosenblum is the Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas’ Security Affairs. In this position, he advises the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy on the homeland defense activities of the Department and regional security matters for the countries of the Western Hemisphere. He is also responsible for advising the Secretary of Defense on all matters pertaining to defense support to civil and law enforcement authorities in the homeland. Mr. Rosenblum has nearly 25 years of political, policy, and legislative experience in national security affairs.

Prior to his appointment at the Department of Defense in May 2011, Mr. Rosenblum was the Deputy Under Secretary of Intelligence for Plans, Policy, and Performance Management, Department of Homeland Security, from February 2009 to May 2011. He directed strategic and policy planning for the Department’s intelligence program, oversaw budget development and resource allocation priorities for the synchronization of intelligence programs and priorities, provided stewardship and direction for the Information Sharing Enterprise, and ensured that the intelligence program was aligned with national, departmental, and intelligence strategy and requirements.

Mr. Rosenblum was a Professional Staff Member on the Senate Intelligence Committee from March 2005 to November 2008, leading Committee oversight of Department of Defense human intelligence collection programs and Intelligence Community-wide intelligence collection programs and operations in the Middle East. Concurrently and prior to joining the Committee, he served as the Military Legislative Assistant and National Security Advisor to Senator Evan Bayh from January 2001 to November 2008, where he acted as senior counsel and represented the Senator on defense issues and foreign policy, national security legislative actions, and public affairs. He was a member of the Senior Personnel Staff, National Security Cluster, on the Obama Presidential Transition Team from November 2008 to February 2009.   

Mr. Rosenblum held several management and advisory positions at the Department of State and the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency from August 1994 to January 2001. From April 1999 to January 2001, he was the Executive Assistant/Chief of Staff to the Assistant Secretary of State for Nonproliferation where he provided executive management and policy liaison on the full range of nonproliferation issues. He was the Senior Foreign Affairs Advisor for Northeast Asia at the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency from August 1994 to April 1999, where he represented the Agency in numerous nonproliferation negotiations and regional security dialogues.

From January 1993 to August 1994, he was the Deputy Political-Military Advisor for the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, U.S. Department of State. Mr. Rosenblum chaired an interagency export control working group, providing departmental recommendations on proposed arms sales to the region, and was responsible for ensuring consistency between national policy and regional security assistance activities. He was an Intelligence Officer in the Central Intelligence Agency’s Office of Near Eastern Affairs, Directorate of Intelligence, from September 1988 to January 1993.

Mr. Rosenblum has received numerous individual and group awards from the Department of State, the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, and the Central Intelligence Agency. He received his Masters in International Affairs in 1988 from the School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University, and his Bachelor of Arts in 1986 from Columbian College, The George Washington University.

//////////////

Anyway that should give everyone a little more to work with, given the heightened domestic military operations surrounding the Boston aftermath, it is important to get a sense of where the Pentagon sees itself going in these reactions and ongoing operations -- what happens next is another question.

A great move would be publishing the entire text of USNORTHCOM CONPLAN 3502 Civil Disturbance Operations on the Internets immediately!

MPD Tracking OccupyMN Facebook BBQs: Minneapolis "secret" Strategic Information Center / Emergency Operations and Training Facility 25 37th Ave NE in Fridley

Dateline: Pseudo-Secret Minneapolis (aka Fridley): What WCCO called the "secret" "City of Eyes" Strategic Information Center has been located on the Google! Your Federal Stimulus Money & FY2010 Homeland Security Appropriations At Work - A Facility for Spying on Facebook Occupy Barbecues

strategic-center-mpls.png

It's nice when data releases tie together a larger system, and we've sure got that here. It's not really "secret" but it's quite shiny & new, not well-known at all, and it is certainly has been used as a site for spying on Occupy activists without criminal predicates by the Minneapolis Police Department. [emails a bit farther down]

///// UPDATE Nov 14 2014: See #Pointergate Pieces: Hodges merged out politically powerful police pensions; KSTP Quadruples Down; Minneapolis gang intel plugs away ///// UPDATE Jan 10 2013: See How to check cops checking your driver's license, Rassmusson lawsuit settlement docs /////

The Minneapolis Police Department files about Occupy Minnesota released by a data request on Monday afternoon are turning up interesting wastes of taxpayer money -- and even the so-called "secret" Strategic Information Center & Emergency Operations and Training Facility at 25 37th Ave Northeast in Fridley, north of the city line by the river & railroad tracks.

Also known as the EOTF/SIC, let's wrangle up everything we can find. Start with architects, via Wold Architects/Engineers: City of Minneapolis EOTF | Wold Architects and Engineers

Wold Architects and Engineers designed a site and facility for the City of Minneapolis Fire Department Training Campus to include a Fire Department’s Training Division; training classrooms multi-used as an Emergency Operations Center for the City’s Emergency Preparedness; a Strategic Information Sensor Monitoring Center for the Minneapolis Police Department; and vehicle storage garages for the Fire Department’s regional asset equipment.

The design exceeds the City of Minneapolis requirement for design to meet LEED Silver.

strategic-4.png

strategic-5.pngThis state-of-the-art federally funded facility allows police to determine... the location of barbecues on Facebook, including even the number of "YES" and "MAYBE" invitees.

This facility also encompasses "Shotspotter" directional microphones all over the city - I wonder if those are ever activated besides the gunshot decibel threshold "trigger" - they are in fact pretty high-fidelity microphones, it has been disclosed (May 28 2012 NYT article) but the manufacturer denies the mics are triggered by conversations.

I for one, am glad that we spent both municipal and borrowed federal tax dollars on training the Minneapolis police to believe a Facebook "YES" invite is real. The simulacrum of today's clicks has become the strategic information of tomorrow!

The old EOC center, used in the 2007 35W bridge collapse, can be seen here via MPR and clearly lacks expensive-enough videoconferencing gear.

Here is the press release from Nov 4 2010: Minneapolis opens Emergency Operations Training Facility - City of Minneapolis

Minneapolis opens Emergency Operations Training Facility

The City of Minneapolis has opened its new Emergency Operations Training Facility, which will help emergency responders and other City staff better prepare for and respond to emergencies. The multi-purpose building helps meet the training and response needs of the Minneapolis Fire Department, the Minneapolis Police Department, and the City's Emergency Management Division, along with other regional partners.

The Emergency Operations Training Facility is a multi-purpose building that includes training classrooms for Minneapolis firefighters and metro emergency managers, a strategic information center for the Minneapolis police, the main training site for the State of Minnesota Structural Collapse Team, and an emergency operations center that will be used during significant emergencies or disasters.

The new facility is built on a 12-acre site in Fridley that the City purchased in 1990, and since that time, the site has been built out as a training facility for Minneapolis Firefighters. Over the years, a fire training tower and propane burn building have been constructed, and special equipment has been purchased to help train emergency responders for incidents involving hazardous materials and collapsed structures. The construction of the new Emergency Operations Training Facility on the site is a major step toward completing this training and response site.

The Emergency Operations Training Facility is built to a LEED Silver Quality Standard for sustainability, and it includes facilities for a wide range of emergency responders from Minneapolis and the region:

Emergency Operations Center

One of the lessons learned from the City's response to the Interstate 35W Bridge collapse in 2007 was that the City's Emergency Operations Center, located in the basement of City Hall, was too small to serve as a center for large-scale emergencies. The new facility fixes that, with 2,800 more square feet of floor space. It will also be used as a back-up Emergency Operations Center for the State, Hennepin County and the City of St. Paul.

Strategic Information Center

The Strategic Information Center is a new space where the Minneapolis Police Department will analyze data to determine long-range trends that pose potential risks to the city. It can provide emergency managers with important information during a major event, incident or disaster.

State of Minnesota Structural Collapse Team

This team serves the entire state with specialized equipment and trained personnel for urban search and rescue and structural collapse incidents. This facility will include apparatus bays for storage of emergency response vehicles and specialty equipment for the Coast Guard, State, City and Metro West region of Homeland Security. In addition, this facility will house training and classroom space, staff offices, support spaces and common spaces.

Coast Guard monitoring.

The U.S. Coast Guard will also use the facility as a monitoring location for cameras placed along the Mississippi River from St. Louis to the metro area.

Published Nov. 4, 2010

Moar casual Google Mapping:

google-streetview-mpls.png

Apparently they dropped a cool $50K on the fence in early 2012. here is the bid page "To furnish all labor, materials, equipment and incidentals necessary to accomplish the complete construction of Emergency Operations Training Facility Perimeter Fence Project, located at 25 37th Ave NE, Fridley, MN." SRC: Minneapolis, City of - Projects. [A little more on the fence industrial complex below]

google-streetview-mpls2.png

Of course, once Erin Brockovich samples those weird adjacent holding pond things, I'm sure the infamous Fridley Cancer Cluster case will be solved. Perhaps Sgt. Garcia can go out and take some samples!

google-map-mpls1.png google-map-mpls2.png

I believe at least two of structures are firefighter training buildings - later pics below seem to bear this out.

eoc-marketing-swag1.pngHere is some marketing swag about the video conferencing gear. AVI-SPL Integrates Government Emergency Operation Centers. See the PDF and video too.

eoc-marketing-swag2.pngLet's check out the $330,704 in electronically-created yet borrowed-at-interest-from-private-Fed-cartel recently invested in this barbecue monitoring center. Official less-than-informative stimulus info page: Minneapolis Recovery - City of Minneapolis Minneapolis Police Strategic Information Center.

[Naturally it is funded by the electronically created debt-digits from the Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), the same endless police pork hub that brought us all those "you might be a terrorist if you pay in cash" type intel flyers for everything from hotels to hobby stores - many of those flyers were financed by Grant Number 2007-MU-BX-K002, which I included ironically on my own site's banner art. Google it for lulz!] Here's that official page:

The City of Minneapolis is not a primary recipient on this project. No Federal Report XML is submitted for this project.

Dollars Awarded

$330,704

Project Status

Fully completed

Project Description

To establish integrated crime analysis in cooperation with the St. Paul Police Department. Staff will be located in a joint Strategic Information Center (SIC).

Funding Program

MN Department of Public Safety: Byrne Justice Assistance Grant

Responsibility for Implementation

Police Department

Funding Agency

US Department of Justice [BJA/Recovery Act]

Dollars Leveraged

Data not yet available.

Dollars Leveraged Description

Data not yet available.

Dollars Requested

$330,704

Projected Jobs Created

2

Award Type

Grant

Sub-recipient Names

Minneapolis, City of

Vendor Names

No vendors have been contracted to date.

Recovery Funds Spent to Date

$330,704

Perhaps this is even the 'secret' location Tippy spycams are constructed: a while ago prankster MPD Spokester & PIO Jesse Garcia shared pics of a camera construction room & with all the other video rigs this seems a likely spot.

Anyway finally here is the email chain which prompted this line of research. There are surely other gems, we are just barely getting started. Circa page 109 of Part 1:

strategic-center-targets-barbecue.png

The public servant on some of these emails is one Minneapolis Police Department officer Steven Otteson, who has a decidedly low Internet profile.

Poking for traces of intrepid Strategic Facebooker Otteson turns up very little - even though the email is dated June 2012, he has no listed salary on this MPD salary list: My Docstoc. Crossposted the index here: 2011 Minneapolis Police Dept Gross Salary index for Web.

A news story indicated the supervisor of the Strategic Information Center is MPD Lt. Jeff Rugel at 612-673-3428. Page 112:

rugel-bbq.png

"Why are we not getting this stuff from the SIC?" Here is stuff about why they should not have to "spend time looking it up" and it should be run through the SIC... This could kind of be the crux of the whole issue here on Page 114:

sic-track-occupy

Alright, that covers some of the new data on this SIC thing vis-a-vis obsessing on Occupy events, so let's turn to the news coverage of this facility.

Carefully shaped news coverage: Mid-2012 saw a series of mainstream media items intended to shape public perceptions this center is designed to neutralize the threats from the surveilled populace. WCCO went so far as to call it a "secret location". That is some quality Fourth Estate right there.

Coverage for this "City of Eyes" facility on WCCO March 19 2012 (video) City Of Eyes: Your Camera May Help Mpls Police Fight Crime « CBS:

MINNEAPOLIS (WCCO) – Minneapolis police are the first in the country to merge two technologies to help officers fight crime.

The Minneapolis Police Department has combined shot spotter technology and a system of cameras to help catch criminals in the act.

Authorities allowed WCCO-TV’s Reg Chapman into a secret location in Minneapolis, where a strategic information center is housed.

Minneapolis Police Deputy Chief Rob Allen said the room is where police gather intelligence.

“This is the room where we try and fuse the technology we have to monitor video cameras, to monitor the sounds of possible gunshots, and it’s where we have our officers who are trained in intelligence gathering,” he said.

The system in the room is like CBS’ Thursday night show “Person of Interest,” in which cameras are used to help save people from becoming victims of crime.

“If you can anticipate where crimes might happen, you got a far better chance of preventing them from occurring,” Allen said.

According to Allen, when a gunshot goes off, a camera turns toward the source of the sound. Strategic Information Center Commander Lt. Jeff Rugel said the technology helped solve a case where a man was shot, killed and pushed out of a moving car. The sound of the gunfire activated the cameras, which gave police their first clue.

[......]City Of Eyes

The number of cameras connected to the intelligence system is growing and helping police catch more criminals. But not all the cameras are owed by the city.

“The city owns roughly 250 cameras,” Allen said. “We can access right now … an infinite number of cameras.”

According to Allen, any camera that has an IP address, is connected to the Internet, and that police have permission to use can give information to authorities.

So whenever you are in a public space, know that you’re likely on camera. Police are using portable cameras more now than ever. They can put them where they are needed and have one up and running within an hour of the order.

Invasion Of Privacy?

But what about your right to privacy? Police say they are careful not to infringe on anyone’s rights.

“Every time we installed a camera system, we went to the neighborhood and said, ‘You know, this is what we’ve thought about doing? Do you want it or not,’” Allen said.

He says police can’t look into a place where someone has the expectation of privacy. [magic filters eh?] But police still have a wide reach, which gives criminals a greater chance of getting caught on camera.

Crime patterns are currently moving and Minneapolis police hope to add more portable cameras. Police believe if criminals know they are being watched they are more likely not to commit crimes.

Star Tribune writes about this center using Facebook to watch what the state defines as "gang members" (mysteriously, shady rich Caucasian financial operatives never seem to meet this race/age/wealth-biased deviance category schema).

Of course, this week's data release shows this has bloated out to canvassing political movements without even the semblance of illegal activity... there is no "barbecue predicate" but there are of course hourly wages to be paid by Minneapolis taxpayers for monitoring the barbecue Facebook Event. Perhaps even overtime!

Gangs sometimes fire first shots online | StarTribune by Matt McKinney July 14 2012:

Facebook has become a virtual street corner where members trade threats, mourn the dead.

"It's probably no different than any other kids, right?" said Minneapolis police Lt. Jeff Rugel. "They're sharing stuff that they used to do face-to-face or over the phone. But there's criminal stuff." [.....]

Rugel runs the police department's Strategic Information Center, where officers use technology to track crime. One of the jobs in his office amounts to monitoring Facebook full-time. They understand the teen slang and filter through thousands of innocuous and inane comments to look for the few that could solve a crime or stop one before it happens. They try to draw connections out of the Facebook networks to help document the shifting alliances on the street.

Police were aware of Facebook threats between rival gangs weeks before the shooting that killed Nizzel, but the threats weren't specific. When Rugel and his staff sees something that looks like trouble -- a known gang member says he's going to hurt someone -- they pass the information along to officers on the street.

It's a poorly kept secret that the police watch Facebook, said Rugel.

"You see comments every once in a while. 'Don't put that on Facebook. You know who's looking at it,' " he said.

Despite some users' occasional concern, many of the Facebook users monitored by police flaunt their illegal behavior online, showing themselves smoking marijuana, posing with stolen merchandise, the security tags still attached, and making gang signs. [.....]

There was also some bidding information online about the estimated $50,000 fence around the facility. Emergency Operations Training Facility Perimeter Fence Project (eBidDoc #1810882) contact: David Schlueter phone: 612-673-2834 e-mail: david.schlueter@ci.minneapolis.mn.us bid date: 01/25/2012 10:00:00 AM

Try http://io.questcdn.com/questio/projects/planholder/planholder_list.html?jobPK=1810882&userPK=&modifiable=FALSE&isQCPI=TRUE

strategic-center-fence-bidding.png

//////

garcia-yatedo.pngSome other stuff: for what it's worth, this lists PIO Jesse Garcia as being based at the Strategic Information Center.Minneapolis Police Department Employees - Professional Experience,Email,Phone numbers..Everything!: Digging deeper to: Jesse Garcia III - Strategic Information Center, Minneapolis Police Department:

It was scraped off his LinkedIn - no surprise there. But no one put it together... Jesse Garcia III | LinkedIn. I think it would be great if state law were changed so that Garcia could be cross-examined by taxpayers about the flow of drug money through the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis and its member banks, let's say once a month on live community access TV. Looks like he ought to be tapped into that gigaflow of data on bankster crime intel!

Strategic Information Center

Minneapolis Police Department

September 2010 – Present (2 years 5 months)

I am a supervisor in our new intel center that focuses on:

-gang intel

-crime intel

-real time officer assist

-safety camera analysis

-Emergency Operations Center readiness

jesse.garcia@ci.minneapolis.mn.us

Public Information Officer / Media Relations

Minneapolis Police Department

October 2007 – September 2010 (3 years)

More media: Vehicle data, email access among Minneapolis legislative issues | MinnPost - Karen Boros, Nov 2, 2012. Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) including of course the "secret" camera on nearby Plymouth Ave. N. bridge is controlled from this "Strategic Information unit" according to the article - I would assume this is the same spot it's based, unless it is somehow split:

Currently, the Minneapolis Police Department uses cameras to record the license plates, time and location of vehicles. That data is now public information that can be obtained by anyone requesting the information.

“Our concern is that if it stays public data that people can use it for inappropriate purposes,” said Deputy Chief Robert Allen. The system now doesn’t allow police to inquire how it might be used. “We’re not allowed to make a judgment,” he said.

Access to the data is controlled by about a dozen people working in the department’s Strategic Information unit.

Alright this is taking more than long enough. This thing says it is 22,178 sq ft and it is on parcel 34-30-24-43-0009.

Minneapolis, City of - Projects: An estimated $1.5 million were bid on this beast for just a small chunk of the building, closed Feb 2012.

directions to site: 25 37th Ave NE Fridley, MN 55421

bids close: 02/23/2012, 10:00:00 AM

bids received by: City of Minneapolis Purchasing Department CONSTRUCTION OF THE EOTF APPARAUS BAY ADDITION 330 Second Avenue South Suite 552 Minneapolis, MN 55401

estimated value: $1,500,000.00

project completion date: 08/15/2011

pre-bid meeting information: A Pre-Bid Meeting and site tour will be held on February 15th, at 11:00 AM, Local Time in Room 128 at the Emergency Operations Training Facility located at 25 37th Ave NE, Fridley MN. All interested bidders should attend this meeting.

addenda: 1

project description: Scope of Work Includes: Complete construction of the Apparatus Bay Addition at the City of Minneapolis Emergency Operations Training Facility. This work shall include all labor, equipment, materials, installation, handling, delivery at site, necessary insurance and permits, erection and other required items for general, civil, landscaping, demolition, structural, architectural, mechanical and electrical construction and stability as shown on the plans and specifications.

additional description: This Contract contemplates the complete construction of the Emergency Operations Training Facility Apparatus Bay Addition for the Minneapolis Fire Department located at 25 37th Avenue NE., in Fridley, all in accordance with the Contract Documents. This Project has been designed to comply with the requirements of the State of Minnesota Sustainability Building Guidelines B3 (MSBG B3) Version 2.1 and also the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Design ( USGBC LEED®) Rating System. It is the intent of this Contract that the Project shall become MSBG B3 Version 2.1 Certified and LEED® SILVER level of quality building under the LEED®-NC Rating System. Work to be performed consists of the furnishing of all materials, machinery, equipment, labor, supplies, tools, transportation, and other incidentals necessary or convenient to complete the work as shown in the Contract Documents on file in the Minneapolis Finance Department, Property Services Division and with the Purchasing Agent of the City of Minneapolis.

owner: City of Minneapolis

350 South 5th Street, Room 223

Minneapolis , MN 55415

ph: 612-673-3774

contact: Chris Backes e-mail: chris.backes@ci.minneapolis.mn.us

Soliciting Agent: Soliciting agent

Minneapolis, City of

330 2nd Ave. S. Suite 552

Minneapolis, MN 55415

ph: 612-673-2834

fax: 612-673-3565

contact: David Schlueter e-mail: david.schlueter@ci.minneapolis.mn.us

It was used to host a session of the 10,000 Lakes Chapter of the International Code Council. [pdf]

The site's address is place on things like preparedness for your pet: Emergency Preparedness - City of Minneapolis && stuff about exercises (again on the sidebar) City Preparation - City of Minneapolis - the 'meh' front page: Emergency Preparedness - City of Minneapolis. Really need to improve page titles at the city. Perhaps after the election?

Awards - City of Minneapolis:

Minneapolis wins its second Tekne Award

Minneapolis Emergency Operations Training Facility

November 2011: The Minnesota High Tech Association recognized the City of Minneapolis and its Emergency Operations Training Facility with an award at the 2011 Tekne Awards, held Nov. 3 at the Minneapolis Convention Center. The Tekne Awards recognize Minnesota companies and individuals who have shown superior technology innovation and leadership.

The City of Minneapolis took home the award in the “Technology Excellence in a Nonprofit Organization” category that recognized the City’s Emergency Operations Training Facility/Strategic Information Center (EOTF/SIC) for bringing technology and information together to make Minneapolis a safer place. At the facility, technology, digital data, streaming video and highly interactive interfaces come together in one highly efficient communication center for the city.

The Minneapolis Fire Department, Police Department, and Emergency Management division opened the EOTF/SIC in August 2010 as a place where they and other emergency responders could coordinate more closely than had ever been possible before. The facility recently demonstrated its effectiveness during the response to the May 22 tornado that struck north Minneapolis.The multi-purpose building also provides training space for emergency responders.

Here it was, the first one: Minneapolis Emergency Operations Training Facility wins Tekne award - City of Minneapolis: The City of Minneapolis took home the award in the “Technology Excellence in a Nonprofit Organization” category that recognized the City’s Emergency Operations Training Facility/Strategic Information Center (EOTF/SIC) for bringing technology and information together to make Minneapolis a safer place. At the facility, technology, digital data, streaming video and highly interactive interfaces come together in one highly efficient communication center for the city.... and earlier: Oct 18, 2011: Minneapolis Emergency Operations Training Facility a finalist for Tekne award - City of Minneapolis

Mpls. Unveils New Emergency Operations Center | Crime | Downtown News - Nov 4 2010, KSTP Gail Brown: Congressman Keith Ellison secured $750,000 for the project in a 2010 appropriations bill, and he will be attending a ribbon cutting ceremony at 2:30 p.m. along with Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak, City Council President Barb Johnson and other city leaders.

Ellison Secures $750,000 for Minneapolis Emergency Operations Center - Ellison.House.gov Oct 15 2009:

Washington, D.C. – Congressman Keith Ellison (D-Minneapolis) secured a $750,000 appropriation for the City of Minneapolis to build a new Emergency Operations Center in a bill approved by the House today. The funds were included in H.R. 2892, the Homeland Security Appropriations Bill for FY 2010.

Roughly the same stuff in this Council Prez Barb Johnson doc.

It's on Pinterest - see Government & Military for tons of funny stuff including everything from the avispl swag people above. And also: AV Products We Love / Minneapolis Emergency Operations Training Facility

There is a blog post about training there on the Mpls Dept of Civil Rights by Anthony Johnson - Civil Rights Urban Scholars with a helpful slideshow. Tony’s Voice: Our Day As Fire Fighters! | Minneapolis Department of Civil Rights.

strategic-center-3.png strategic-center-2.png strategic-center-1.png

I think you can see this fire training structure (or maybe a similar one) on Google Maps though I have not swung by to check out the Facility myself. Another one:

Minneapolis Emergency Services Employ projectiondesign - AVNetwork.com (undated? A couple pix included)

Fredrikstad, Norway--The City of Minneapolis has deployed 12 projectiondesign F32 DLP projectors as the main display source in the Analyst Room and F22 series projectors in the Incident Command Room of its Emergency Operations Training Facility (EOTF).

Located just outside Minneapolis, the EOTF boasts an extensive surveillance, audiovisual and network infrastructure specified and installed by systems integrator AVI-SPL.

“In a facility like this, even the slightest compromise in performance can result in tragic consequences,” said Fred Primoli, regional VP Sales for AVI-SPL. Primoli and his colleagues worked with the city for nearly two years on the concept, planning and final implementation of the EOTF, with the primary challenge being an interesting one: the creation of a state-of-the-art communications facility that may get activated no more than once in a decade.

“We needed systems that were capable of totally robust operation 24 hours per day, seven days per week – but which also were capable of performing at their best after extended periods of inactivity.

“From the outset we were delighted with the performance of the F32 projectors. The Analyst Room has three rear-projection screens, each measuring 160 inches wide by 120 inches tall, with four projectors driving each screen so that four separate windows can be shown on each one.

“The projectors have been superbly colour-matched to ensure consistency across each screen, while their excellent resolution, contrast and brightness mean they are equally at home showing video or data sources – which is important in an installation such as this where the staff need to a view a combination of both.”

Deputy Chief Robert Allen, a veteran of the Minneapolis Police Department, said: “The new display system allows us to look at a video feed and understand a situation almost instantly. Through video, we can get information to our officers much faster – especially when time is critical. We can zoom in with our cameras and really examine a situation and relay it back to our officers, allowing them to be prepared even before they get there. With this new technology, we can see something happen faster than a police offer 50 feet away.”

F22 series projectors from projectiondesign can also be found in the EOTF’s Incident Command Room that’s used for emergency training and an actual declared emergency.

“There is a large number of emergency monitoring projects in the U.S., and we are delighted that our technology has been used to display high-resolution security-camera images in so many of them," said Anders Løkke, marketing director, projectiondesign. "The Minneapolis EOTF already demonstrated its effectiveness during the tornado that swept through the area last May and, although we would prefer it if our systems never had to be used in similar situations again, the reality is that the city is better-protected now that its providers of emergency services have such easy, immediate and accurate access to security-camera imaging from so many locations.”

“The EOTF was conceived as a place where the various Departments responsible for emergency response and management in Minneapolis could co-ordinate their efforts more closely than had previous been possible,” said Primroli.

Same stuff as May 11, 2012: Minneapolis Emergency Services Goes with Projectiondesign - Fire Apparatus

On May 20 2011 CItyPages reported on Rocco Forte, former Minneapolis fire chief, departing, and Forte talked about being pleased to help finish the complex: "After the 35W bridge collapse, the Republican National Convention, and the tornado that went through South Minneapolis, it is clear that we have one of the finest emergency management teams in the country. It was also a long time goal of mine to complete the Emergency Operations Training Facility that includes an Emergency Operations Center, Strategic Information Center as well as a training facility which seats up to 250 people per day."

Reed Construction Data estimates its cost at $3,988,400 (a more accurate cost estimate is available from RSMeans Online), they say.

There are a couple autogenerated links at Facility Management Minneapolis Product From Industrial Manufacturers, Distributers, Suppliers And OEMs.

There is some PR speak about AVI-SPL getting an award. Press Release/ InfoComm, Sound & Video Contractor Honor AVI-SPL with Two PRO AV Spotlight Awards - Audio/Video Equip./Surveillance - AVI-SPL, Inc. | PRZOOM

On March 11, 2009, the overall cost of the project was pegged by House Research as $27,403,000. SRC: www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/bs/86/hf0554.pdf

This bill would grant $8,000,000 in bond proceeds to the City of Minneapolis to design, construct, furnish, and equip an emergency operations center housed in the City’s current training center and to make other improvements to the training center.

According to the 2008 budget request, the overall cost of the project is $27,403,000 with the City and Hennepin County funding the non-state funded portions of the project. The Joint Emergency Operations Center (EOC) for Hennepin County and the City of Minneapolis will be located at the Minneapolis Fire Training Campus on city owned land. The City contends the current facility is inadequate and limits the effectiveness of the command structure. The City further contends that the Minneapolis Fire Training Campus is an ideal location for the EOC as it would provide a secure operations center with enough room to respond to a major incident affecting the county. Finally, the City believes this request would provide much needed training classrooms at the Minneapolis Training Facility which is the main site for training the State Structural Collapse Team.

HF 554 Status in the House for the 86th Legislature (2009 - 2010) - this is the bill number - I suspect it probably got rolled into the omnibus bill but I will leave that to a Deep Wonk to suss out. // H.F. No. 554, as introduced - 86th Legislative Session (2009-2010).

With a pretty severe shortage of funds for both state and municipal operations, is an open-ended SIC mandate to track protest activity on Facebook really the most prudent use of funds? And doesn't this operational configuration create a chilling effect on political expression in Minneapolis? The research continues....

Federal Homeland Security TSA VIPR Team & #VikingsDrone: Suspicious drone & Feds spotted at Vikings/Packers game

Things are a little strange at the Vikings/Packers Game today. A drone has been photographed hovering around the Metrodome fan plaza on the west side, and a Homeland Security / TSA "VIPR" team has been hanging around as well, indicating the federal government is shifting into "protecting" the major Spectacles at taxpayer expense.

My friend Nathan Hansen noticed the #VikingsDrone and the VIPR team, documenting & posting them on twitter @nathanmhansen. [Note: awhile back I did a 'lil client design work for Hansen.]

//// UPDATE 12:15PM Monday: According to @TCRover, a branch of the Pioneer Press, the drone was NOT operated by the government but rather some production company. The pic they say is from the crew flying it earlier: See https://twitter.com/TCRover/status/285560684245315585/photo/1 . Nonetheless we still need to deal with the impending prospect of government & contractor drones filling our airspace - and indeed this story has prompted others to discuss other sightings near government sites. //// 2:20PM update: It's annoying that they tried to tweet @ me last night but it never turned up in my timeline so I didn't find out until today. I would have much preferred to straighten it out immediately! Also, here's what's going on with drones in Oklahoma... Follow my friend @axxiom for more. ////

PHOTO sources: yfrog Fullsize - http://twitter.yfrog.com/h41hxevhj // yfrog Fullsize - http://twitter.yfrog.com/o0mkqkobj // yfrog Fullsize - http://twitter.yfrog.com/oemubbyj // VIPR Team: yfrog Fullsize - http://twitter.yfrog.com/odjd2ybj

odjd2ybj.jpeg h41hxevhj.jpeg

You can see the four rotors pretty well on these pics. It is comparable to the sports photography drone linked below as well - I figured it might just be a civilian hobbyist drone or some weird sports media project drone until the VIPR team was found by Hansen.

mkqkob.jpg mubby.jpeg

I am just delighted that the national government had to borrow more money at interest from the Federal Reserve System in order to send out these guys and their fancy flying spy robot to the Vikings/Packers game. We get the twin benefits of national debt slavery AND a surveillance state with nothing useful to do!

Our friends at WTFNews cranked out a quick post on this already: Unidentified Drone Spotted at @Packers-@VikingsFootball @NFL Game » WTF RLY REPORT

Let's Ban This Drone Operation in Minneapolis: Already Minneapolis activist Kurtis Hanna has suggested a petition to get drones banned on the city charter. (come to think of it, wouldn't it be good to get something like the White House petition site for the Mpls Charter Commission?) I will include some info below on this.

The Department of Homeland Security and the National Football League have a burgeoning relationship. Previously when I wrote up a post on the relatively new and totally off-the-radar Homeland Security Investigations division (basically their own militant version of the FBI, intended to reach BATF-level org status) they did a drill black helicopter landing on the Super Bowl field. [yes really - HSI is so new I must have been the first person to satirize its absurdities on the whole interweb!] See April 12 2012: Meet the new Boss in Town: ICE spawns... HSI Homeland Security Investigations, for great justice & cocaine cowboys | HongPong.com

The Super Bowl and World Series are also both declared National Special Security Events, which activates a fat block of overtime for many federal police agencies, much like the Republican & Democratic National Conventions. (However, since rioting at sports events is closer to the booze-soaked Id of the American public than more 'political' street upheavals, it doesn't meet the same heavy hand from federal & local police agencies) NSSEs generally feature Homeland Security, FEMA and the Secret Service operating at a high tempo, another thing that HSI & TSA are getting involved with as a 'filler force' if you will.

For Super Bowl NSSE info see: Super Bowl XLVI, NSSE & Big Sis - YouTube // www.secretservice.gov/press/pub0202.pdf on Bowl XXXVI // this crazy PDF: rnc08report.org/engine/uploads/1/Day-2-Breakout-2-NSSE-Carillo-Lowry-Lumley.pdf // Infowars » Indy Super Bowl: National Security State Protects Sports Fans from Prostitutes // National Special Security Events: 8. NSSE Fill-in Fact Sheet // Article Detail - Domestic Preparedness via LLIS.gov // etc

Federal VIPR teams: been popping up in all sorts of places. Here's the Wiki page. Wiki notes GAO attributes their existence to a Reaction to the shady Madrid train bombings. VIPR is trying to get at pro sports & local transportation (the Hiawatha light rail has a station close to where they were photographed) and wherever else they can normalize their presence. In this case the VIPR deployment apparently includes at least a half-dozen uniformed officers and at least one drone.

Additionally there was strange audio interference right before a commercial break in the first half, kind of like the sound a cell phone makes when its microwave signal induces noise in a speaker or electronics. However, I don't think game-day satellite transmissions go straight over-the-air from the Metrodome, as there aren't really satellite dishes around there I've noticed. Thus it seems unlikely to me that the one spotted drone would have glitched the transmission. Perhaps unrelated but also something you don't usually see. I blame Wisconsin FalseFlag types for this noise, whoever that might be :-P

SEE ALSO:

The drone does look similar to the one in this story. New use for drones: Sports photography - CBS News

Oh this is great. Perhaps the best link I've found in this. "PUT [VIPR] TEAMS TO WORK FOR YOU" VIPR teams and pipelines!! A "no cost resources for expanding and enhancing your security". Free oil goon security? Screw that: www.dleg.state.mi.us/mpsc/gas/download/2011SS-2-4-VIPR_Handout.pdf

May 2012: TSA VIPR Team Spotted at… Detroit Music Festival?? « TSA Out of Our Pants!

CNN Jan 28 2012: TSA rail, subway spot-checks raise privacy issues - CNN.com

VIDEO Blackburn Questions TSA Officials on VIPR Teams - YouTube

VIDEO TSA VIPR Teams in Greyhound Bus Station Tampa FL 02/16/2010

TSA deploys 'VIPR' teams throughout Tennessee to set up illegal security checkpoints on interstates - NaturalNews with a bunch of other links including: TSA-style full body pat-downs coming to an NFL stadium near you (Sept 2011) etc

6 USC § 1112 - Authorization of Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response teams | LII / Legal Information Institute. So they are doing this about the Hiawatha light rail officially I would guess. This would also signify that Metro Transit would have some record of the situation if "consult" in Sec.4 has occurred

(a) In general

The Secretary, acting through the Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration, may develop Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (referred to in this section as “VIPR”) teams to augment the security of any mode of transportation at any location within the United States. In forming a VIPR team, the Secretary—

(1) may use any asset of the Department, including Federal air marshals, surface transportation security inspectors, canine detection teams, and advanced screening technology;

(2) may determine when a VIPR team shall be deployed, as well as the duration of the deployment;

(3) shall, prior to and during the deployment, consult with local security and law enforcement officials in the jurisdiction where the VIPR team is or will be deployed, to develop and agree upon the appropriate operational protocols and provide relevant information about the mission of the VIPR team, as appropriate; and

(4) shall, prior to and during the deployment, consult with all transportation entities directly affected by the deployment of a VIPR team, as appropriate, including railroad carriers, air carriers, airport owners, over-the-road bus operators and terminal owners and operators, motor carriers, public transportation agencies, owners or operators of highways, port operators and facility owners, vessel owners and operators and pipeline operators.

(b) Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section such sums as necessary for fiscal years 2007 through 2011.

Process for City Charter Amendment for banning these drones: Sent along by Kurt Hanna who thinks that "10,791 valid signatures of Minneapolis residents who are registered voters in order to qualify for the ballot" based on the figure of 215,806 voters voting last time. Citizen petition timeframe link. BUT: How much time do we have to gather these signatures?

Some more info: Via Minneapolis City Charter: http://library.municode.com/HTML/11490/level2/SUHITA_CH.html

(1) The methods available for amending a home rule city charter are contained in Minnesota Statutes, Section 410.12 et seq., which provides as follows:

(1) 410.12 AMENDMENTS. Subdivision 1. Proposals. The charter commission may propose amendments to such charter and SHALL DO SO upon the petition of voters equal in number to five percent of the total votes cast at the last previous state general election in the city.Proposed charter amendments must be submitted at least 12 weeks before the general election. Only registered voters are eligible to sign the petition. All petitions circulated with respect to a charter amendment shall be uniform in character and shall have attached thereto the text of the proposed amendment in full; except that in the case of a proposed amendment containing more than 1,000 words, a true and correct copy of the same may be filed with the city clerk, and the petition shall then contain a summary of not less than 50 nor more than 300 words setting forth in substance the nature of the proposed amendment. Such summary shall contain a statement of the objects and purposes of the amendment proposed and an outline of any proposed new scheme or frame work of government and shall be sufficient to inform the signers of the petition as to what change in government is sought to be accomplished by the amendment.The summary, together with a copy of the proposed amendment, shall first be submitted to the charter commission for its approval as to form and substance. The commission shall within ten days after such submission to it, return the same to the proposers of the amendment with such modifications in statement as it may deem necessary in order that the summary may fairly comply with the requirements above set forth.

Subd. 2. Petitions. The signatures to such petition need not all be appended to one paper, but to each separate petition there shall be attached an affidavit of the circulator thereof as provided by this section. A petition must contain each petitioner's signature in ink or indelible pencil and must indicate after the signature the place of residence by street and number, or their description sufficient to identify the place. There shall appear on each petition the names and addresses of five electors of the city, and on each paper the names and addresses of the same five electors, who, as a committee of the petitioners, shall be regarded as responsible for the circulation and filing of the petition. [........]

(1) Subd. 3. May be assembled as one petition. All petition papers for a proposed amendment shall be assembled and filed with the charter commission as one instrument. Within ten days after such petition is transmitted to the city council, the city clerk shall determine whether each paper of the petition is properly attested and whether the petition is signed by a sufficient number of voters. The city clerk shall declare any petition paper entirely invalid which is not attested by the circulator thereof as required in this section. Upon completing an examination of the petition, the city clerk shall certify the result of the examination to the council. If the city clerk shall certify that the petition is insufficient the city clerk shall set forth in a certificate the particulars in which it is defective and shall at once notify the committee of the petitioners of the findings. A petition may be amended at any time within ten days after the making of a certificate of insufficiency by the city clerk, by filing a supplementary petition upon additional papers signed and filed as provided in case of an original petition. The city clerk shall within five days after such amendment is filed, make examination of the amended petition, and if the certificate shall show the petition still to be insufficient, the city clerk shall file it in the city clerk's office and notify the committee of the petitioners of the findings and no further action shall be had on such insufficient petition. The finding of the insufficiency of a petition shall not prejudice the filing of a new petition for the same purpose. (Back)

(1) Subd. 4. Election. Amendments shall be submitted to the qualified voters at a general or special election and published as in the case of the original charter. The form of the ballot shall be fixed by the governing body. The statement of the question on the ballot shall be sufficient to identify the amendment clearly and to distinguish the question from every other question on the ballot at the same time. If 51 percent of the votes cast on any amendment are in favor of its adoption, copies of the amendment and certificates shall be filed, as in the case of the original charter and the amendment shall take effect in 30 days from the date of the election or at such other time as is fixed in the amendment.

An amusing side question: is this "magick" security theater? Security Theater of course works most "effectively" at materializing psychological phantoms with an audience at a Spectacle. This is the perhaps the principle Stimulus Effect intended by Homeland Security & its general orientation around 'visuals' which is not that different than Ceremonial Magick, which is [arguably] anything that generates a certain sense-impression in the mind of Observers.

metrodome-national-guard.jpeg

Another old backstory: In 2010 some people noticed they were using government photos of MN National Guard riot control gear from the deployment at the 2008 Republican National Convention under the NSSE system for recruitment propaganda on the Metrodome. RNC '08 Report: Our News: National Guard advert on Metrodome, proposed site of 2012 DNC, depicts soldiers deployed against protesters during 2008 RNC. Your tax dollas at work!

Security culture danger as closed Occupy Homes sessions proceed without 2/3rds internal support in MN; two networks for price of one?

Troublesome assumptions about security culture arrangements for closed Occupy Homes national gathering sessions starting tomorrow at the Neighborhoods Organizing for Change MN (NOC Office) around noon put participants at risk. I feel everyone involved means well, but a bunch of particularly 'toxic' situations have materialized. Since these developments reflect larger trends, they need to be fixed if possible, and certainly discussed. [See August 4th story on conflict around meeting closure at NOC Office 911 Broadway Ave on Tuesday] At issue: the desire of the organizers of the Occupy Homes national convening to close the gathering.

The Occupy Homes MN last Saturday, which ran around four hours, reached a vote of 22 in favor of the closure of sessions at the national Occupy Homes convening, 18 against, and 8 standasides. 22/18/8 fails to reach a 2/3rds level of consensus (even ignoring standasides, only 55%). Unfortunately a kind of reverse fait accompli has evidently been imposed on the consensus-based group -- the inability to prevent the meeting closure decision from having been taken earlier by the two delegates means that now the group is [purportedly] imposed upon with a 55% decision. [I have not been able to get comment about when this closure happened exactly]

//// UPDATE Aug 7th: Getting complaints not for attribution from one of the people that arranged the lockout. They say they had a vote of 23, not 22, to proceed with the session lockout. Two initial reports said 22, but even if it is 23, that fails to meet 2/3rds consensus. Let's show exactly how this works, using 23 as the affirmative number lacking 66% consensus. The third chart & data set shows the consensus actually required.

occupy homes vote chartoccupy homes pie chart

If this doesn't make it obvious there's no 66% support, I don't know what will - no matter whether you factor in the stand-asides.END UPDATE ////

For coverage on what happens [if/when] the gesture of locking out the conference is made by its supporters Tuesday, I will try to post summaries on twitter at http://twitter.com/hongpong and possibly live video will be available at http://bambuser.com/channel/hongpong .

@TshirtToby sent along the following writeup of the Saturday meeting. Thanks Toby - follow him!

/// This is a report about the Occupy Homes MN meeting held on Saturday April 4th.

Once other business was able to be taken care of, the meeting moved on to the contentious issue over the openness of the upcoming conference. The people involved with organizing the conference admitted that they made mistakes and move forward from here.

It was proposed that the conference should be open to everyone. Arguments for and against were made. For openness arguments were made for transparency, spirit of the Occupy movement, worries over the groups involved and their influence. Against, it was brought up with the people outside of Minnesota organizing it on a conference call and it didn't pass a vote among them; didn't want media/informants/undercover government agents at meeting; Talking about sensitive tactics and people personal homes and financials. A vote was taken and it didn't pass.

It had been agreed that it 6 "Participants" and 5 "Observers" to the various panels. This was decided fairly quickly and somewhat sloppily due to time crunch and tensions. This meeting had the second highest tensions I have ever felt during an Occupy meeting.

In my opinion the meeting went as well as it could considering the lack of time to solve an emotional debate. The problem I see is that some of the people invited to this meeting are not from Occupy affiliated groups. These groups don't abide by Occupy traditions of openness and transparency. This could hurt Occupy Homes reputation.

It is my hope that this group will be able to recover from this incident and continue to do its good work. ///

Veteran activists in Minneapolis know full well after many incidents in recent years (see 2008 Republican National Convention, 2009 Grand Jury & beyond), any large gathering can easily be surveilled, yet security culture assertions by those who have promulgated the plan to lock the sessions are simply faulty. It is totally implausible that closing the meeting sessions will spare it the effects of informants or government operatives. This is extremely dangerous -- the faith that security culture can 'work' with this many people around -- and needs to be set aside immediately.

[Protip: In the future, the dangerous power of delegation has to be carefully bounded for nonhierarchical groups, such as instructing delegates under no circumstances may they agree to close meetings to their members. You'd think it was an assumption of everyone, but unfortunately it's not.]

The Movement Resource Group, (Movementresourcegroup.org started by Ben Cohen of Ben & Jerrys, and others) provided a large grant to support this Occupy Homes gathering, grant info attached below. Simply put, if MRG provides more grants sponsoring closed "Occupy" meetings, the critical network topology of openness upon which the entire idea depends will be killed off, sprayed into oblivion by the Roundup of good intentions expressed through grants.

Additionally, as Anthony Newby discussed on the video taken last Wednesday, members from several of the groups flying in to Minneapolis have had their airfare paid by Service Employees International Union (SEIU), although Newby said he wasn't sure if it was the local or national organization.

Alongside the partially closed Occupy Homes series of events, a second specific effort is taking place, and one source said that this affair is at least partially put on by Minnesotans for a Fair Economy (MFE), an organization set up for electoral purposes by the Fight for a Fair Economy network.

According to: http://occupybernal.org/wordpress/?p=1976 : [bold added]

/// Occupy Bernal Participates in National Home Defenders LeaguePosted on July 30, 2012 by

At our Saturday, July 28, 2012 joint general assembly, Occupy Bernal/SF ACCE/Occupy Noe agreed to generate support for Wells Fargo Bank (WFB) foreclosure fighter Steve Boudreaux of Atlanta, GA.

He is in foreclosure, and fighting, with the support of his community, to keep his home.

Two of us are attending the first convening of the new National Home Defenders League in Minneapolis, MN on August 7-8, 2012. Our fellow organizations from around the country are all fighting foreclosures. Let’s show them that our organizations believe in solidarity. Hopefully, after that national meeting, we will have a nationwide organization capable or fighting the banks county-wide.

Here’s where to sign the petition, and Steve’s story, Steve’s story continued and more info on Steve’s campaign. ///

One source stated that members of at least five of the groups involved in the Occupy Homes summit are also attending the MFE-supported event. It seems likely, though unconfirmed, that the MFE-supported event is the National Home Defenders League convening.

Several of the staffers involved with Home Defenders League [HDL] (also those in MN involved with MFE & SEIU in recent years) share a pretty common background: they were ACORN network staffers & relatively tight-knit. More recently, within the last few weeks, HDL has been staffing up, and HDL opened at the same address as ACCE (Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment), which itself opened less than two weeks after California's ACORN chapter dissolved, at that same address, with much of the same ACORN staff.

HDL was announced as early as 2010 as a descendant org of ACCE:

/// October 8, 2010 Friday - Home Edition - HOUSING; Freeze sought on U.S. home seizures;

As questions mount about how banks have handled foreclosures, consumer and civil rights groups call for a national moratorium. By Alejandro Lazo and E. Scott Reckard

SECTION: BUSINESS; Business Desk; Part B; Pg. 1

Two advocacy groups -- the Los Angeles-based Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment and the Greenlining Institute of Berkeley -- this week called for a foreclosure moratorium. The L.A. group said it was forming a separate organization, the Home Defenders League, to help homeowners fight foreclosures. Both groups called on Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown to support a moratorium. ///

This summer has seen an expanded relaunch of HDL in different states. June 6 2012 NY Daily News:

/// About a dozen New York Communities for Change volunteers canvassed Jamaica recently, talking to homeowners facing foreclosure and looking for abandoned homes that have become neighborhood eyesores. Members of the Queens chapter of the grassroots advocacy group knocked on about 300 doors on Saturday to mark the launch of the Home Defenders League. ///

It's really no problem for representatives of HDL-friendly & ACORN network related chapter organizations to join an Occupy Homes meeting like they will tomorrow. With large parts of the gathering put off limits to general participation (there aren't open 'political' events, only socially-oriented gatherings), that presents a major issue with power flows and openness in an ostensibly "Occupy" related gathering.

When many of those orgs are also apparently having a parallel unadvertised gathering supported by an electoral organization [though I do not have further evidence on paper of the arrangement], that looks like two networks tangled in one situation. It's much better in the long run for all of us to openly work on untangling this issue.

******

Having known quite a few staff working in the milieu of paid political organizations including ACORN, MFE & SEIU, by and large these are good people who have good intentions. Occupy has always supported unions, but is wary of co-option by managerial union leadership.

Many of the homeowners involved in these campaigns are gritty, very well-intentioned union members. This doesn't mean they necessarily support this kind of organizing - with quite a few I've talked to, this sort of thing strikes them as a bad move.

The troubling thing is that quite frequently, people in the paid milieu don't realize their tactical approaches are harmful to the very forces they're trying to bolster. The gradients of structural politics, grants, co-option, working in cooperation and trying to build bridges to turn large projects into movements are certainly not pretty, and makes people uneasy.

This is why the open nature of Occupy as a network has been such a sturdy foundation - it works not as a closed door cabal but rather an open network. Security culture, properly applied, involved small temporary affinity groups working on individual projects, far away from any venues with dozens of people. No more ambitious OPSEC (operational security) approach is really plausible. The closing of information and lines of contact damages the ability of the networks to maintain a 'common operating picture' and the broad, heterogeneous 'weak tie networks' needed to keep projects thriving over the long run.

Occupy Homes MN has most effectively functioned not as one organization, but as another network performing direct actions, in which activists who primarily identify with other organizations kept the projects alive.

The overall principle of openness, not informationally constricted, leaky boxes of withheld information & pseudo 'security culture', is essentially what brings these types of movements oxygen, preventing rot, political ossification, and hierarchical decision-making.

******

One individual reported to be an attendee at this week's meeting, Jonathan Matthew Smucker, advocated Occupy embracing "Co-Optation". I think this line of analysis runs pretty deeply with the people pushing in this direction.

It's worthy of debate, but debate in open meetings, whether this approach sacrifices goals of more radical, deeper social change for much smaller tactical victories, working with electorally oriented organizations. Without open meetings, the pros & cons of this approach will never get worked out properly.

Memorably describing OWS as a "harvest moment": Occupy The Progressive Movement: Why Occupy Should Embrace "Co-Optation" | Alternet (April 26 2012)

/// ..... But angst about an over-generalized sense of co-option may be an even bigger problem. We cannot build a large-scale social movement capable of achieving big changes without the involvement of long-standing broad-based institutions. OWS should actively and strategically forge relationships with many of these institutions, while preserving the role of OWS as an "outsider" force.

.........The worst thing we could do right now is make Occupy Wall Street into a small "radicals only" space. We cannot build a large-scale social movement capable of achieving big changes without the involvement of long-standing large membership institutions, including labor unions, national advocacy organizations, community organizations, and faith communities. Radicals never have and never will have sufficient numbers to go it alone. We have to muster the courage and smarts to be able to help forge and maintain alliances that we can influence but cannot fully control. That's the nature of a broad populist alignment.

Social movement theorists have a term for the sort of co-option that Occupy Wall Street should prize: infrastructure co-option. Nascent movements become mass movements not by building their own infrastructure entirely from scratch or recruiting new volunteers one at a time, but by "co-opting" existing institutions and social infrastructure into the service of the movement and its goals. The Civil Rights movement went big when existing institutions—especially black churches and schools—came to identify strongly as part of the movement. Organizers provided opportunities for members of those pre-existing institutions to make this new identification actionable and visible. This was cultivated to such an extent that, eventually, to be a member of certain institutions implied active involvement in the Civil Rights movement. When this happens with enough institutions, the movement gets a huge boost in capacity. And capacity means power.

Over the past few months many organizations and constituencies have been watching Occupy Wall Street, trying to figure out whether and how to relate to it. These organizations—including faith communities, the NAACP, MoveOn.org, labor unions, community organizations, and many other groups—understand how they and their members are affected by the crises that Occupy Wall Street has named and confronted. Some of them are already engaging in important ways, explicitly as part of—or in support of—Occupy Wall Street. And many more have long been engaged in work that clearly aligns with the movement's core values—and probably even deserve some credit for helping to lay the long-term organizing groundwork that helped create OWS.

But there are still significant barriers standing in the way of broader constituencies conceptualizing themselves as part of a 99% movement and getting actively involved. The first and most obvious barrier is that many groups haven't really been asked to get involved. During the first couple months of OWS, if a group wanted to get involved, it was typically a matter of them taking the initiative to approach us and ask what kind of support they might provide. Usually the answer was some variety of "Come down to Zuccotti Park" or "Stand up against Bloomberg for our right to occupy the park." Often the groups that wanted to support OWS simply showed up. While this kind of involvement made perfect sense when we held the park, it's clear that we now have to come up with other ways for more people and groups to take action as part of the 99% movement.

This is a critical transition for Occupy Wall Street and the 99% movement. Remember that Occupy Wall Street kicked off with a well timed call-to-action, a ripe target, some planning, and a lot of crazy luck. As a result, OWS has understandably had more of a culture of mobilizing than of organizing. It's been a little like a group of folks who don't know anything about farming who arrive at a farm at harvest time. There's delicious food everywhere, and all they have to do is pick, pluck, and gather it. And eat it! "Wow," one of them exclaims, "farming is awesome! Why would we waste our time cultivating the soil? This food is delicious! I want to eat it all the time! This is working very well. We should just keep doing this — all the time!"

Occupy Wall Street has been something of a harvest moment. It pulled thousands of people out of the woodwork who'd been waiting for something just like this to come along, and who were in a place where we could carve out time from our lives to engage it. But movements need hundreds of thousands if not millions of active participants to become mass movements. It's difficult if not impossible to activate those kinds of numbers by just taking public action with the hope that other like-minded individuals will decide to join you. We need more on-ramps and more ways to be involved — for folks who might not yet feel comfortable camping out at a public park.

.....And this is why it is now critical that we meet with folks who are movers and shakers in other social networks and institutions. That's how the 99% movement can grow at the rate we all know it needs to; byactivating whole swaths of society at a time.....

.....All of the above gets so much more complicated in an election year. Occupy Wall Street is an outsider force. It should remain an outsider force this year. If it were to endorse candidates or a particular political party, it would immediately lose all of its value and leverage. Our job is to push from the outside.

But that's not at all to say that we shouldn't have a strategy for engaging with the energy and media attention of the election season. We should. And how we do it will seriously affect our ability to continue to grow this movement, to be seen as relevant, to cultivate alliances, and to leverage power to effect real change......

.......Once someone starts running on your rhetoric, you then have more leverage over them. You are better positioned to expose them if they're just giving lip service to your ideas without any intention of delivering. And for all the horrendous limits of the two-party system, still a slate of candidates who get elected pledging to take on the big banks gives us a lot more to work with—as an outsider social movement—than a slate of candidates elected on a pledge to cut social spending. And more importantly, it keeps the momentum on our side.

Another important question has to do with how we engage allies who do endorse candidates. Many labor unions, for example, are likely at some point to endorse President Obama's reelection bid. Some already have. And some will surely endorse specific state and local candidates. We're an outsider force. We should never endorse candidates. But is it possible to ally around specific actions with organizations that also endorse candidates?

It has to be. We join up with others where we can, and we depart where we depart. If we call for an end to corporate personhood, for example, we should welcome as many co-endorsers as possible, including organizations that endorse politicians — and even politicians themselves. Welcoming politicians' endorsements of our goals doesn't mean endorsing those politicians. This is an important detail, and it requires a precise threading of the needle. As an outside force, we have to take all politicians to task, regardless of party. But the details of how we do this matter. We need to pressure politicians and candidates, and the best way to do this is to ask them hard questions and provide pressure that pulls them in our direction (or put them on the defensive). If we ask good questions that resonate with the people who hear them, then we're doing our job well. If, on the other hand, we make general statements like, "It doesn't matter who you vote for, they're all the same," then we're being needlessly belligerent to our allies and potential allies (without even putting politicians on the defensive). An organization focused primarily on reproductive rights, for example, will understandably be very concerned about whether Barack Obama or Mitt Romney occupies the White House. We can take candidates from both parties to task on an array of other issues without spurning their reasons for deciding to endorse a candidate. ........

........Someone who had felt constrained within her institution before the shake-up may now see and seize openings to move the institution in a bolder direction. And this is more likely to happen if organizers from Occupy Wall Street—the visible catalyst of the earthquake—approach longstanding institutions to strategize together about how they might engage with this moment.

An earthquake moment is a time to invite people to engage. It's not a moment to keep people in boxes, or to draw rigid lines. It's a moment to hammer Wall Street, the big banks, and the political system that has been fixed to serve only the very wealthy and powerful. Our task now is to activate as many people as possible into action. And this has to include people we wouldn't necessarily choose to have as our best friends. ///

Unfortunately at the sessions Smucker is participating in in Minneapolis this week, such an open debate is not an option because of restricted access. The big question: Does that mean that the position and debate frames adopted as "Occupy approved" will shift in a less radical, more institutionalized direction?

Located from deeper areas of the internet, Home Defenders League PR structure in a press release:

/// EVENT: CONFERENCE CALL BRIEFING - THE HOME DEFENDERS LEAGUE;

LOCATION: None given -- May 31, 2012 As seen in text

SECTION: GENERAL NEWS EVENTS - LENGTH: 98 words

SUBJECT: The Home Defenders League holds a conference call briefing, beginning at noon, with an overview of the Home Defenders League campaign, a "new alliance of homeowners and renters across the country who are joining together to make their voices heard in the 2012 election and beyond."

CONTACT: Moria Herbst, 646-452-5637, 917-743-6350, moira@berlinrosen.com [Note: Media should RSVP to Moira Herbst at moira@berlinrosen.com or 646-452-5637. Call-in, 800-434-1335; password, 995583#. A Q&A follows the news conference. Information on the launch of the alliance is embargoed until 9 a.m. May 31.] ///

Located near Wall Street at 15 Maiden Lane, Suite 1600, New York, NY, Berlin Rosen is interesting, reminiscent of other liberal communications consultancies. See http://www.berlinrosen.com/section/our-team/ for some familiar names.

In conclusion, I hope that broad networks can evolve, especially on all housing issues including fraud, homelessness, financialization, fractional reserve, and foreclosures, but that will not work out when narrow networks with bowtie chokepoints, rather than broad, open and loose networks evolve.

DISCLAIMER: I have performed videography services for MFE in the last year, contributed to videos & trained supporters in mobile video software (ustream/bambuser). Also, Movement Resource Group or one of its founders, Ben Cohen, (not sure which) provided funding for GlobalRevolution.tv (which I am a member) to supply Occupy and related movements with media gear, via GlobalRev's fiscal sponsor . We need to have good spirited disclosure of paid political organizing, in the long run this is essential. As so many people are well-intentioned, to avoid conflicts and jumbles, clear, plain information is the best goal we should share.

Previous stories on mainstream politics & the Occupy movement on HongPong.com : Feb 19 2012: BuStEd: I sense Astroturfing in the Occupy! UAW social media plan posted for "99% Spring" electioneering schema // Aug 4 2012: Plans for closed door Occupy Homes national meeting spurs opposition [VIDEO]

CREATIVE COMMONS WITH ATTRIBUTION - hongpong.com - hongpong@hongpong.com

"Warning shot will not be fired" by MPs trained in Martial Law in America: Military Police training: heavily patrolled domestic detention facilities, dissident/sniper warrantless searches - CONPLAN 3502 Civil Disturbance Operations training @ Ft McClellan

b. Use of Deadly and Non-deadly Force (4) (b) Warning shot will not be fired.

or better yet:

(3) In an occupied building, when the dissident's/sniper's location is unknown, all suspected rooms must be searched. The action element should try to have occupants submit voluntarily to the search of their rooms. At the same time, occupants should be questioned in an attempt to pinpoint the sniper's location. If occupants will not submit voluntarily and there is probable cause to believe that the dissident/ sniper is located in the room, a complete physical search of the room or rooms should be conducted. Use of the patrol dog will help in conducting such searches.

Another planning layer for emergency domestic military operations has been published: The 2006 US Army Military Police training manual for Civil Disturbance Operations does not concern itself with warrants in the 'search' section, indicating a certain level of Constitutional disregard in the military's planning for emergencies in what the document calls CONUS, or Continental United States.

The excellent PublicIntelligence is where this just popped up (first I saw of it anyway): U.S. Army Military Police School Civil Disturbance Operations Course | Public Intelligence - Direct PDF link (115 pages).

martial-law-mp-training-front.png

///////UPDATE JULY 11: Just talked with Alex Jones for an hour on this stuff. Here's the crib notes & PDFs you'll want to see.
/////// UPDATE July 7 AM: My interview with Darren McBreen on Infowars Nightly News: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNw_m7gfqXM // Prisonplanet stories by Kurt Nimmo and "Army Manual Outlines Plan To Kill Rioters, Demonstrators In America" by Paul Watson.. Also I put it on Reddit One & Two

///////

I've only had time to read a bit of it so far, but it ties in very closely with another level of this planning framework, USNORTHCOM (Northern Command) CONPLAN 3502 Civil Disturbance Operations, which is the 21st century replacement for GARDEN PLOT, the Pentagon's plan used between the 1960s and 2002 for domestic riot control & emergency operations in such settings as the LA Riots.

In 2010 I found presentation files on a US Army Corps of Engineer server - for full story please see TC Indymedia Exclusive: Secret 'Trigger' & blueprint for emergency domestic military crackdown plan revealed. Having seen first hand domestic military operations at the 2008 Republican National Convention & 2009 G20 Pittsburgh, the growth and use of domestic military capacity for crowd control is a more-than-hypothetical situation -- and the subsequent obfuscation of those operations by political officeholders and appointees is quite terrifying in its implications.

This Civil Disturbance Operations Subcourse training manual ties right into material cited in the CONPLAN and supporting documents, including many of the same riot control weapons. An earlier version of a very similar manual can be found via that link.

martial-law-crowd-army-weapons-mp.png

Plus this one has quizzes!!

Billeting - I swear I heard something about revolutionaries complaining about billeting earlier... Something everyone makes a big deal out of this time of year....

There is a lot of stuff about formations -

P 62: Handy tip that rioter-impressing safe-port position is a PSYOP and tiring!

(a) The safe-port position is extremely useful in making a show of force before rioters. The above mentioned carrying position is the primary method of carrying weapons in the control force formation. It allows the Soldier to control both ends of the weapon while moving in and out of the formation and advancing the crowd.

All the stuff about gathering intel against rioting/unlawful Americans is nice and creepy and they definitely aren't saying anything about the Defense Intelligence Agency or National Geospatial Intelligence Agency.

[.............]

b. Collection.

(1) Military information elements having counterintelligence resources will maintain the ability to collect civil disturbance threat data during the period in which there is a distinct threat of actual civil disorder requiring the use of federal military forces.

(2) On activation by the Department of the Army, military intelligence elements having counterintelligence capability will:

(a) Establish and maintain contact with suitable local, state, and federal authorities.

(b) Collect civil disturbance data concerning incidents, and estimate the capability of civil authorities to control the situation. This can be achieved through direct contact with civil authorities.

(c) Report collection results to the Department of the Army in accordance with current plans.

(d) Keep appropriate commanders informed. (e) Provide intelligence support to the Personal Liaison Officer Chief of Staff of the Army.

(f) Recommend methods of overt collection, other than liaison, if required, to the Department of the Army for approval.

(3) Military intelligence elements may employ methods of collection other than liaison only on order of the Department of the Army.

(4) Covert agent operations are not used to obtain civil disturbance data on persons or organizations without specific advance approval of each operation by the Under Secretary of the Army.

(5) Basically, the following vital elements of data will be required for sound planning and operations once approval has been received:

(a) Objectives of elements which are a distinct threat to cause or are causing civil disturbances.

(b) Times and locations of disturbances.

(c) Cause of disturbances.

(d) Existence of persons, groups, or organizations which have distinctively threatened or are creating disturbances.

(e) Estimated number of persons who will be or are involved in civil disturbances. (f) Assembly areas for crowds.

(g) Presence and location of known leaders and persons who are a distinct threat to cause civil disturbances.

(h) Organization and activities planned by the leaders who are a distinct threat to cause civil disturbance.

(i) Source, types and locations of arms, equipment, and supplies available to the leaders who are a distinct threat to cause civil disturbance.

(j) Use of sewers, storm drains, and other underground systems by the elements who are a distinct threat to cause or are causing civil disturbances.

(k) Identification of new techniques and equipment not previously used by elements that are a distinct threat to cause civil disturbances.

(l) Attitude of general masses towards: (a) Groups causing civil disturbances. (b) Civil law enforcement authorities. (c) Federal intervention to control the disturbance.

(m) Possible threat to public property including private utilities. (n) Communications and control methods employed by elements referred to in paragraph 1 above.

PART C - Request for Federal Support/Training 1. Request for Federal Support.

a. Providing military support to state and local governments to assist them in quelling a civil disturbance or riot requires close coordination through a host of state and federal agencies. It requires a though briefing of Soldiers at all levels on what they can and cannot do with respect to law enforcement. Civil authorities must be briefed on the restrictions placed on federal forces by the Constitution of the United States, federal statutes and laws.

b. Under the Constitution of the United States and United State Codes the President is empowered to direct federal intervention in civil disturbances to:

(1) Respond to state request for aid in restoring order (2) Enforce the laws of the United States. (3) Protect the civil rights of citizens (4) Protect federal property and functions.

c. The Secretary of Defense retains approval for federal support to civil authorities involving the use of DOD forces, personnel, and equipment. The Secretary of the Army is the Department of Defense executive agent is the approval authority for federal emergency support in response to natural or man-made disasters (except weapons of mass destruction [WMD]). The Directorate of Military Support (DOMS) plans and executes the DOD domestic support mission to civil authorities. The DOMS is the DOD primary contact for all federal departments and agencies during DOD involvement in most domestic support operations. DOMS is also the staff agency responsible to the Chief of Staff, Army and Secretary of the Army for recommending to them appropriate measures necessary to cope with civil disturbances and terrorism and to transmit the approved recommendations to Department of Defense agencies for execution and to supervise the execution. The missions and functions of DOMS are outlined in AR 500-50. Additional roles of responsibilities of various agencies can be found in FM 3-19.15

Prior to activating federal military forces there is a sequence of steps that must occur. When data begins to show that a disturbance may develop into a situation that will require the help of federal forces, several actions are introduced at the federal level while state and local law enforcement agencies attempt to contain the disorder. Such actions may include increasing the readiness posture of forces named to help the jurisdiction concerned.

d. As the situation worsens and the state employs its National Guard, the U.S. Attorney General would send his personal agent to the scene of the disorder. This agent is named as the Senior Civilian Representative of the Attorney General (SCRAG) and is the organizer of all federal activities in the area of the disorder, including contact with local civil authorities. At the same time, the Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army would send his personal liaison officer (PLOCSA) to the scene along with members of the Department of the Army Liaison Team (DALT) that serves as his planning staff.

[.........] CROWD CONTROL PAGE 35+

c. Techniques for Crowd Control. There are numerous techniques designed to provide the commander with flexibility of action in accomplishing crowd control. He must select a combination which will produce the desired results within the framework of the selected crowd control option. The most common techniques appropriate for military usage are discussed below.

(1) Observation. This consists of deployment of persons or teams to the periphery of a crowd for the purpose of monitoring its activity. It includes gathering data on crowd size, location, mood, and reporting on the developing situation. This technique includes posting persons on strategic rooftops and other high terrain overlooking the crowd. This latter measure provides additional security to control force personnel should they become committed to other crowd control operations. Such a team may be composed of an expert marksman, a radio operator, and an observer equipped with binoculars. Care must be taken to assure that committed control forces are aware of the locations of such teams to prevent their being mistaken for sniper elements.

(2) Communication of Interest and Intent. In certain situations, effective communication with crowd and mob leaders and participants may enable the commander to control the situation without resorting to more severe actions. When planned and organized demonstrations, marches, or rallies within the disturbed area are announced, the control force commander in coordination with local authorities should meet with organizers of the activity in order to communicate the interest of the control forces. The following matters, as appropriate, should be discussed.

(a) Parade or demonstration permits. (b) Location of demonstration and routes of march. (c) Time limits for the activity. (d) Provision of marshals by activity organizers. (e) Prevention of violence. (f) Safety of all concerned.

(3) The task force commander and local authorities should also communicate to the activity organizers

their intent to cope with violence, unlawful actions, and violations of restrictions imposed on the activity. It is intended that, by this communication between activity organizers and control force personnel, the demonstration, rally, or parade will occur without incident through the mutual cooperation of all concerned. The intentions of control forces will not be effective if delivered as an ultimatum. A limited, begrudging dialogue with activity organizers reduces the opportunity for authorities to learn the plans of the demonstrators. It must be remembered that if this communication is not effected, the activity organizers might well hold the demonstration in defiance of local authorities, thereby creating a potential for violence that might not have existed if this technique had been employed.

d. Channelization. Pressure can be brought to bear on the dissident leadership to channel the crowd into an area which will minimize the disruption when the following requirements are met:

(1) When communications have been established with the dissident leadership.

(2) When the intent and nature of the crowd activity is known.

e. Diversion. When communication exists with the dissident leadership, consideration may be given to efforts to divert the leadership of the crowd itself from its stated or obvious objective. The diversion should support the objectives of the control force either by reducing the strength of the crowd situation or motivating the crowd to seek an area more easily controlled by the control force.

f. Cooperation. Decreasing the potential disruption of the crowd activity may be accomplished by an active attempt on the part of the control force to obtain cooperation of the dissident leadership. Whenever there is an attempt by the crowd leadership to seek permission and cooperation of the local government, every effort should be made to maximize this cooperation by demonstrating an attitude of facilitation. This may be accomplished by helping the leadership to organize a peaceful demonstration while establishing guidelines which will minimize the impact of the demonstration on the community.

g. Selection of Force Options.

(1) The commitment of federal military forces must be viewed as a drastic last resort. Their role, therefore, should never be greater than is absolutely necessary under the particular circumstances which exist. This does not mean, however, that the number of Soldiers used should be minimized. The degree of force required to control a disorder is often inversely proportionate to the number of available personnel. Doubts concerning the number of Soldiers required should normally be resolved in favor of large numbers since the presence of such large numbers may prevent the development of situations in which the use of deadly force is necessary. A large reserve of Soldiers should be maintained during civil disturbance operations. The knowledge that a large reserve force is available builds morale among military and law enforcement personnel and helps to prevent overreaction to annoying acts by unruly persons.

(2) In selecting an operational approach to a civil disturbance situation, the commander and his staff must follow the "minimum necessary force" principle; for example, crowd control formations or crowd control agents should not be used if the area filled with manpower would be sufficient.

(3) Every effort should be made to avoid appearing as an alien invading force and to present the image of a restrained and well-disciplined force whose sole purpose is to help to restore law and order with a minimum loss of life and property and due respect for those citizens whose involvement may be purely accidental. Further, while crowd control personnel should be visible, tactical, or force concentrations which might tend to excite rather than to calm should be avoided where possible.

(4) The normal reflex action of the well-trained combat Soldier to sniper fire is to respond with all firepower available. In a civil disturbance, this tactic endangers innocent people more than snipers. The preferred tactic is to allow a special reaction team (SRT) who is trained for this type of mission, to enter the building from which sniper fire starts. Keeping with the controlling principle that the team must use only the minimum force necessary to fulfill the mission, the commander may select any one of the following options for arming his Soldiers:

(a) Riot Shield. In the hands of a well trained soldier, the riot shield can be utilized as both a defensive and offensive weapon when contact is made with an aggressive crowd. The primary use of the riot shield is for defense of the line. However, each riot shield holder must be proficient in its retention. The Soldier holding the shield must be trained to react when a demonstrator grabs the top of the shield by slapping with his strong hand and gives the following command" Get back", "Get away" "Stop". If a rioter grabs the bottom of the shield the Soldier should be trained in forcefully dropping to one knee and pinning the rioters' fingers to the ground.

(b) Baton. The baton is most effective in a crowd control operation and is considered the primary weapon for crowd control operations. The baton is considered to be an offensive weapon with reduced lethality and unlike the rifle, the loss of a baton to the crowd does not create a serious threat. Soldier must be trained with the riot baton to the point its various techniques are automatic to them. This training must also include the vulnerable points on the body so they can avoid areas that may cause permanent injury or death when struck.

Currently there are two types of riot batons, wooden and expandable. The most common one is the 36 inch hickory riot baton with thong. There is also the 24-inch to 36 inch expandable riot baton, which has been added to the nonlethal capabilities set. Each Solder within the control force need to be proficiently trained in all techniques for blocking and striking. Improper use of the riot baton by an untrained Soldier has the potential for creating a greater problem than what already exist.

(c) Shotgun. The 12 gage shotgun is a pump action shotgun currently in the nonlethal capabilities set (NLCS) inventory. The pump action shotgun is chambered to take up to 3-inch shells. The 3- inch chamber allows for the use of M1012 and M1013 NL munitions. This shotgun also provides a visually distinct alternative to the standard military issues weapon.

(d) Rifle. The rifle, if capable of automatic fire, must be modified to prevent automatic operation. Keeping with the controlling principle of using only the minimum force necessary to fulfill the mission. If the Soldier are equipped with their long weapons and are in the front lines of the formation, the weapon should be carried across their back from left to right with the muzzle of the weapon pointed down and the butt of the weapon pointed up. The weapon should be cleared and the magazine in the proper ammunition pouch.

(e) Non lethal weapons and munitions. Nonlethal weapons and munitions are an additional asset afforded to the commander in civil disturbance and are preferred over lethal force. The showing of force with nonlethal weapons and munitions may assist in crowd dispersing, separate, or leave the area with minimal causalities. This nonlethal capability set (NLCS) is a well-rounded, versatile package of both equipment and munitions. NLCS are dived into four distinct categories: personnel protection, personnel effectors, mission enhancers and training devices

(f) While each of the above options represents an escalation in the level of force, they are not sequential in the sense that a commander must initially select the first option, or proceed from one to another in any particular order. So long as the option selected is appropriate, considering the

existing threat, the minimum necessary force principle is not violated.

1. The rifle and rifle with bayonet attached have extremely limited offensive use as both may constitute deadly force. The primary value of the rifle or the rifle with bayonet attached is the psychological impact on the crowd. While the use of fixed bayonets can add considerably to this effect, the danger of intentional or accidental injury to demonstrators or fellow control force personnel prevents such use except with extremely violent crowds.

2. Fire by selected marksmen. Fire by selected marksmen may be necessary under certain circumstances. Marksmen should be pre-selected, trained, and thoroughly instructed. They may be placed on vehicles, in buildings, or elsewhere as required.

3. Full firepower. The most severe measure of force that can be applied by Soldiers is that of available unit firepower with the intent of producing extensive casualties. This extreme measure would be used as a last resort only after all other measures have failed or obviously would be impractical, and the consequence of failure to completely subdue the crowd would be an imminent overthrow of the government, continued mass casualties, or similar grievous conditions.

4. Shotgun. The riot shotgun is an extremely versatile weapon; its appearance and capability also produce a strong psychological effect on rioters. It is particularly suited to certain applications in civil disturbance operations. When used with No. 00 buckshot ammunition, it is an excellent point target weapon extremely effective at limited range. By varying the nonlethal munitions' M1012 and M1013 the weapon can be employed with considerably less possibility of serious injury or death. This provides the commander with a desirable flexibility in selecting the ammunition most appropriate under the existing conditions

(g) The measures described in paragraphs 1 through 5 below, may be applied in any order as deemed suitable by the responsible commander as long as his application is consonant with prescribed confrontation management techniques outlined earlier.

(1) Proclamation. A public announcement is considered an excellent medium to make known to a crowd the intentions of the control force commander. In some cases, such an announcement makes further action unnecessary. An announcement puts the population on notice that the situation demands extraordinary military measures, prepares the people to accept military presence, tends to inspire respect from lawless elements and supports law-abiding elements, gives psychological aid to the military forces trying to restore order, and shows to all concerned the gravity with which the situation is viewed. In making a proclamation, a commander may consider imposing a time limit. However, the situation may change, and not imposing a time limit may leave the commander other options as he sees fit, as long as the proclamation is specific in its instruction.

(2) Show of Force. A show of force is effective in various situations in civil disorder control operations. A show of force may as simple as Soldier dismounting from buses or trucks in plan sight of the demonstrators, but must be far enough away to prevent a provoked attack of thrown objects. When a crowd has gathered in a large area, show of force can take the form of marching a well-equipped, highly disciplined control force into their midst. When persons are scattered throughout the disturbance area in small groups, a show of force may take the form of motor marches of Soldiers throughout the area, saturation patrolling, and the manning of static posts or similar measures.

(3) Employment of Crowd Control Formations. Crowd control formations are used to contain,

disperse, block or break up a non conforming crowd; these crowd control formations are more effective in urban areas than they are in open fields or parks. When this method is utilized in urban areas, it is easy to disperse or split the crowd into small groups, isolate instigators, or funnel a crowd into a desired area. The use of such formations is part of the show of force and has a strong psychological effect on any crowd.

(4) Employment of Water. Water from a high pressure hose may be effective in moving small groups on a narrow front such as a street or in defending a barricade or roadblock. Personnel applying water should be protected by riflemen and in some cases by shields. In the use of water, the factors discuss below should be considered.

(a) Water may be used as a flat trajectory weapon utilizing pressure, or as a high trajectory weapon using water as a rainfall. The latter is highly effective during cold weather.

(b) The use of a large water tank (750 to 1,000 gallons) and a power water pump mounted on a truck with a high pressure hose and nozzle capable of searching and traversing will enable Soldiers to use water as they advance. By having at least two such water trucks, one can be held in reserve for use when required.

(c) In using water, as with other measures of force, certain restraints must be applied. Using water on innocent bystanders, such as women and children, should be avoided; ways to escape must be provided; and the more severe use, flat trajectory application, should be used only when absolutely necessary.

(d) Fire departments are normally associated with lifesaving practices rather than maintenance of law and order. In order to maintain this image, fire department equipment will not be used for riot control and crowd dispersal.

(e) Use of Crowd Control Agents. Crowd control agents are extremely useful in civil disorder control operations because they offer a humane and effective method of reducing resistance and lessen requirements for the application of more severe measures of force. Task force commanders are authorized to delegate the authority to use crowd control agents and other forms of non lethal force at their discretion.

2. Establish Area Control.

a. General. Acts of violence, such as looting, arson, and vandalism, are greatly reduced when the physical and psychological influence of lawlessness is defeated. In establishing effective area control, commanders must recognize the problem of widespread looting and arson that has accompanied most large urban disorders. Performance of this task consists of reducing or eliminating those conditions which contribute to the outbreak or continuation of lawlessness in the disturbed area.

(1) Looting. When dealing with persons involved in looting, extreme care and adherence to the principle of minimum force must be observed. Looting may start at any time or place as an isolated incident and spread quickly throughout the affected areas. Looting is not limited to any particular sex or age group; it includes the very old, the very young, women, and children. For example, many children may be looting without any idea of how serious their actions are. In the control of looting, unit leaders must recognize that deadly force is not authorized.

(2) Anti-looting. Unit commanders must be familiar with anti-looting measures which can be taken by civil authorities, such as boarding up broken or unbroken windows, covering windows with photo-

luminescent particles, and by the prompt posting of looting penalty proclamations. Anti-looting actions that can be taken by military forces include the establishment of foot and motor patrols, the posting of fixed guard posts, and the lighting of likely areas for looting. Guards at fixed posts will be briefed not to leave their posts to pursue individual looters on foot, but to remain on post and prevent looters from approaching their areas of responsibility. All guards must be briefed that looters will not be fired upon nor will deadly force be used to catch looters.

(3) Protected or Sensitive Commercial Establishments. A main consideration in the conduct of civil disturbance operations is to prevent liquor, drugs, weapons, and ammunition from falling into the hands of rioters. Therefore, liquor stores, drug stores, sporting good shops, pawn shops, and hardware stores are main targets for looters and must be kept under close observation by means of foot and motorized patrols. Normally, businesses of this type must be identified in advance and included in emergency plans.

(4) Arson. Arson is generally defined as a crime of purposely setting fire to a building or property. Acts of setting fire to buildings, property, etc., often follow disturbances. Certain situations may arise in controlling arson where the use of deadly force is authorized and necessary.

[.........] PAGE 40

(2) Imposed Restrictions. Except in the unlikely event of martial law, federal military forces will not have the authority to impose restrictions such as a curfew on the civilian population. Certain restrictions, however, may be imposed by civilian authorities to help in the control of lawlessness. Military leaders should be prepared to recommend which restrictions are of substantial value in comparison with the burden of enforcement. The most commonly used restrictions include:

Curfew. The curfew is a control measure which has proved highly effective in many civil disturbances. Its purpose is to restrict the unauthorized movement of personnel on streets and public places during specified periods of time, especially during the hours of darkness. Joint planning with civil authorities regarding the imposition of a curfew should provide for:

(a) Coordination of the initiation, enforcement, and termination of a curfew.

(b) Public announcements of the beginning and ending of curfews. Civilian authorities make these announcements through local mass media, pamphlets, and public address systems to ensure maximum exposure.

(c) Curfew exemptions and guidance on who should receive them, including written authorization or passes.

(d) Provision for the apprehension and disposition of curfew violators.

(3) Sales Restrictions. Restrictions on the sale, transfer, and possession of sensitive material such as gasoline, firearms, ammunition, and explosives will help control forces in minimizing certain forms of violence. Limiting the availability of weapons to the potential sniper or terrorist may reduce the likelihood of such violence. The effective enforcement of these restrictions, however, requires extensive planning and the commitment of adequate manpower to this effort.

So much for the Second Amendment SUCKAZ....

[.........] PAGE 22+

f. Army Detention Facilities.

(1) The Army will not operate facilities for confinement, custody, or detention of civilian personnel apprehended for violation of local or state laws as long as civil confinement facilities, operated by the Department of Justice, state, or local agencies are sufficient to accommodate the number of persons apprehended.

(2) When it appears that available local facilities are insufficient, due to the large number of persons apprehended or detained, and this fact can be verified by the person or agency responsible for the facilities, temporary confinement/detention facilities may be operated with prior approval from DA, specifically, the Chief of Staff, U.S. Army. These facilities will be operated only until custody of the persons detained can be transferred to and assumed by civil authorities. They will not be used for the confinement of persons charged or convicted under civil jurisdiction.

(3) Temporary confinement/detention facilities can be developed from local federal facilities provided they are adaptable to the requirements of custody and control. Such facilities should be established, if possible, within the affected area; this will conserve time, transportation, and escort personnel.

However, if no suitable federal property is available within the affected area, they can be located elsewhere on any property under federal control as long as the persons to be detained are apprehended in the affected area. Whenever such temporary facilities are established during civil disturbance control operations, the Army is responsible for providing those personnel, facilities, and supplies necessary for the custody, control, health, comfort, and sustenance of persons detained.

(4) Officers and key NCOs specifically trained and experienced in confinement operations are required to operate such facilities. Guards and support function personnel operating under the direct control of such officers and NCOs need not be specifically trained or experienced in confinement operations as long as they are under close and continuing supervision of trained responsible personnel. Whenever females are detained, they must be held in physically separate detention facilities and under the control of selected female guards operating under the supervision of trained and experienced confinement personnel.

(5) Temporary detention facilities should be constructed and arranged to provide for adequate custody, control, and safety of detainees. It is advisable to use existing permanent-type buildings. Where sufficient permanent structures are not available, only that amount of new construction required for temporary custody, control, and administration of prisoners should be accomplished. Temporary field- type facilities provide compartments to assure effective control.

(6) The same operational procedures that apply to the operation of installation confinement facilities and treatment of detainees apply to these temporary facilities except that those policies and procedures establishing training, employment, mail and correspondence, and administrative discipline requirements will not apply. Detailed guidance in procedures for confinement of detainees is contained in EPW Operations, FM 3-19.40.

g. Special Equipment. Certain items of equipment available to military and civil police forces can do much to limit injuries to civilian and military personnel and destruction of property. These items increase the psychological effects of a show of force and offer additional protection and versatility to civil disturbance forces during the operations.

(1) The 12 gage shotgun is a pup action shotgun currently in the non lethal capabilities set (NLCS) inventory. The pump action shotgun is chambered to take up to 3-inch shells. The 3-inchchamber allows for the use of M1012 and M1013 NL munitions. This shotgun also provides a visually distinct alternative to standard military weapons that may be desired based on mission considerations.

(2) The shotgun, as in the case of other firearms used in civil disturbance operations, is fired only on the orders of a qualified superior officer when lesser measures of force are not effective, or when the individual Soldier has no other means of protecting his life.

(3) The M7 is a 66-millimeter vehicle-mounted NL grenade-launching device that is mounted on a HMMWV. It is a indirect fire support system that can deliver the M99 blunt trauma grenade that creates a sting-ball effect. The M315 installation kit is used to install an M7 discharger on the turret ring of appropriate HMMWV variants. An adjustable bracket allows the launch angle to be depressed for engaging targets at ranges of 50, 75 and 100 meters. The system enforces standoff distances and deters potential threats.

(4) The M1012 is a single projectile round made of hard rubber that is shaped like a bomblet and designed to be fired at a single target. With the muzzle velocity of 500 feet per second, the M1012 as the effective range of no closer that 5 meters and no further that 30 meters. Engagement inside of 5 meters could result in serious bodily injury or death. Beyond 30 meters the kinetic dissipates to the point where the round becomes ineffective.

(5) The M1013 is a multiple projectile round with .23 caliber hard rubber pellets that is designed to be fired at and employed with the purpose of affecting multiple targets. With a muzzle velocity of 900 feet per second, the M1013 has an effective range of no closer than 5 meters and no further that 30 meters. Engagements of less than 5 meter can result in seriously bodily injury or death. Beyond 30 meters the kinetic dissipates to the point where the round becomes ineffective

(6) The midsize riot control disperser (M37) is the size of a standard fire extinguisher that uses compressed air to force the RCA out to a range of 30 feet. It has the capacity to employ 18 burst of RCA into a hostile crowd while maintaining excellent standoff capabilities. The M37 can be refilled and is rechargeable. It can be refilled with CR solution (liquid agent) or CS (dry agent). For the purport of training the M37 can be filled with water and CS can be substituted with talcum power.

(7) The Squad riot control agent disperser (M33A1) is designed to provide crowd control and protection at the squad level. It is capable of projecting a ballistic stream of RCA's beyond 25 feet in up to 25 half- seconds burst. It consists of a frame and harness assembly, compressed-gas cylinder (agent container assembly) air pressure assembly, gun and hose assembly, multi-jet spray unit, and check valve assembly. The M33A1 can be refilled and is rechargeable. For training purposes, CR can be substituted with water and CS and be substituted with talcum power.

(8) The above mention items are but just a few of the non lethal weapons and munitions available to the commander and unit to utilize during a response to the civil disturbance, and can be utilized to train and prepare Soldiers. Additional non lethal weapons and munitions as well as protective gear can be found in FM 3-19.15.

3. Vehicles. Armored vehicles and transport vehicles add to the readiness of the crowd control force. The use of these vehicles increases flexibility, reduces troop commitments, and provides protection for personnel. In considering the use of vehicles, however, it must be remembered that they should be secured by foot elements.

a. Armored Security Vehicles (ASV) can be used in several ways to keep the effects of civil disturbances at a minimum.

(1) Their use adds a considerable psychological effect to riot control formations while providing added protection for Soldiers. They provide a readily accessible barrier for Soldiers to crouch behind if necessary, and excellent protection for those inside.

(2) Their use as mobile command posts offers the added advantages of security, communication, and mobility.

(3) They are well adaptable to roadblock operations providing the advantages listed above, while at the same time providing an excellent barrier.

(4) Their use for patrolling an area of violence adds to the psychological effect, and allows Soldiers to maneuver in close to snipers in order to make an apprehension.

b. Standard military transport vehicles can be modified with sandbags, armor plating, wire screening, or similar materials to give some protection against sniper fire and thrown objects. They provide mobility and communication capability for area coverage. Soldiers should be deployed with ample vehicles to provide sufficient flexibility to handle all situations in an area of civil disturbance. TOE allowances should probably be increased for this purpose.

3. Other Equipment. In addition to the special equipment discussed above, certain other items should be available for use in operations within the disturbance area.

a. Armored vests and protective masks are required for anti-sniping operations and at other times when violence is expected. Flexibility is an important consideration. For example, the limitation on visibility must be considered when requiring the use of protective masks, and the limitation on mobility when wearing the armored vests.

b. Successful conduct of the overall operation may depend on other items. Auxiliary lighting should be available to include hand-portable lights, vehicular-mounted searchlights, spotlights, flood-lights, flashlights, flares (with caution toward fires), and vehicle headlights. Prefabricated wood or metal barriers, or suitable materials, such as wire or ropes, may be used to block off an area; signs should be provided to supplement these barriers. Evidence equipment, including movie and still cameras with telescopic lenses, and recording devices should be obtained and placed into position.

c. Other items of equipment should also be provided. Helicopters should be used for observation, communication relay, illumination, resupply, reserve displacement, and numerous other tasks. Adequate firefighting and fire protection equipment are vital in civil disturbance.

d. Provisions should be made for appropriate communications equipment for use at the scene and between the scene and the operations headquarters. Every available means of communications to include public address systems--both hand-portable and vehicle-mounted--should be used.

PART E - Operational Tasks

1. General. In any civil disturbance operation, certain tasks must be accomplished to reach the ultimate objective of restoring and maintaining law and order. To do this, action must be taken to gain control of the situation. Control forces must perform certain tasks that will develop a physical and psychological environment which will permit law enforcement personnel to enforce the law and maintain order. The importance of having a high degree of flexibility and selectively in the response cannot be overemphasized. It is just as important that the tasks selected be completed only after a careful evaluation of the situation. This evaluation must consider the particular uniqueness of the situation. In this respect, the commander selects those tasks that are most likely to reduce the intensity of the given situation. Therefore, not all tasks will apply in all situations, but control force commanders and unit leaders must identify those tasks which must be performed and then develop plans and procedures for their accomplishment. The operational and integrated tasks listed below are discussed in detail in the paragraphs and lessons to follow.

a. Operational Tasks. (1) Isolate the area. (2) Secure likely targets. (3) Control crowds or mobs. (4) Establish area control. (5) Neutralize special threats.

b. Integrated Tasks.

(1) Gather, record, and report information. (2) Apprehend violators. (3) Maintain communications. (4) Maintain mobile reserves.

(5) Inform the public. (6) Protect the fire service operations. (7) Process detained personnel.

2. Isolate the Area.

a. This task includes the restriction and sealing off of the disturbed area. The objectives of sealing off the disturbed area are to prevent the disorder from spreading to unaffected areas, to prevent escape of persons bent on expanding the disturbance, to speed up the exit of the uninvolved, and to exclude unauthorized personnel from entering the affected area. In order to prevent the disturbance from expanding in size and strength, it is critical to prevent the inflow of extra demonstrators or curious onlookers into the disturbed area.

b. When military forces are committed to helping the civil authorities in controlling civil disturbances, the situation will be beyond the capability of local law enforcement agencies and a scene of major disorder should be expected. This disorder may be characterized by small, dispersed groups which are looting, burning, and generally causing havoc in the area, or it may be characterized by large groups participating in varying degrees of illegal conduct. The initial action taken by military forces to control the disorder is critical and should include the immediate isolation of the disturbed area.

c. The initial commitment of control force personnel may be required to clear a building or an area in order to isolate the persons creating the disturbance from those not yet motivated or actively involved. The primary emphasis should be on identifying what area and who has to be isolated.

3. Isolated Techniques. There are several techniques to use when isolating a disturbed area.

a. Barricades and Roadblocks. Barricades and roadblocks are physical barriers which deny or limit entry into and exit from the disturbed area. They can be used to totally deny passage of people and vehicles or to permit certain designated categories of persons and vehicles to pass. They must be positioned so as to prevent their being bypassed, surrounded, or cut off from support. In many cases, it may be impractical to physically seal an area due to the physical and geographical considerations, such as in the case of a college campus or a suburban area.

b. Barricades Against Personnel. Civil disturbance operations contingency planning should provide for the availability of portable barricades which slow down the passage of personnel. Concertina wire is a suitable material for rapid construction and effectiveness, although wooden sawhorses, ropes, and other field expedient devices may suffice. Concertina wire should be used sparingly and only under serious circumstances as it is indicative of violent disorders.

c. Roadblocks Against Vehicles. The erection of effective roadblocks which cannot be easily breached by vehicles requires large, heavy construction materials. One item that can be stockpiled in advance is 55- gallon drums to be filled with water or earth on site. Other materials include sandbags, earthworks, trees, or heavy vehicles. Several roadblocks placed at intervals of 25 to 50 feet provide sufficient depth to prevent breaches by heavy or high-speed vehicles.

d. Construction Considerations. The construction of barricades and roadblocks should provide cover from small arms fire where this threat is likely. Provisions should be for night illumination of approaches to the position; however, care must be taken not to silhouette the personnel manning it. Construction materials which would chip or shatter upon impact by thrown objects should be covered with canvas or sandbags to prevent injuries from flying fragments. Warning signs should be placed in front of the position directing authorized personnel not to approach the position. One technique of providing a quickly erected barrier is the use of vehicles parked bumper to bumper; however, this procedure may subject the vehicles to damage by a hostile crowd. Another device which may be effectively used both as a barricade and a part of a formation is the use of a locally built frame of wood or metal with wire covering.

e. Perimeter Patrols. Perimeter patrols should be established to prevent entry or exit from the disturbed area, particularly by persons or groups trying to bypass barricades and roadblocks. These patrols operate along the outer operational boundary of the disturbed area. Perimeter patrols can be integrated with area patrol routes within the disturbed area.

f. Pass and Identification Systems. Unit, installation, or municipal contingency planning should include a pass and identification system providing for the entry and exit of authorized personnel to and from the isolated area. Procedures should be established for press personnel, emergency medical personnel, public utility work crews, and for any other personnel who have a legitimate purpose for entering and exiting the isolated area. Consideration must be given to those persons residing within the disturbed area who must travel to and from work. An effective pass and identification system requires careful and detailed planning as a contingency measure.

g. Public Utility Control. Ensure that civil authorities have established a means for controlling public utilities to include street lights, gas, electric, water, and telephone services so that they may be turned on or off to support the tactics employed by the control forces.

4. Secure Likely Targets.

a. General. Certain buildings, utilities, and services are critical to the economic and physical well-being of a community and require security to prevent disruption of essential functions. In addition, certain facilities and buildings have become symbolic targets to radical or extremist elements and should be identified and afforded protection with the priorities established. Among the likely targets to be attacked are control force command posts, billeting areas, and motor parks. Another potential problem in civil disturbance operations is the threat posed by dissident elements intent on doing bodily harm to control force personnel and civilian dignitaries in the disturbed area. When such threats exist, military personnel may have to be committed to security operations. In particular, security must be placed on armories, arsenals, hardware, and sporting good stores, pawnshops, and gunsmith establishments, or other places where weapons or ammunition are stored. To conserve manpower, consideration may be given to evacuating sensitive items, such as weapons from stores and storing them in a central facility. Priorities for physical security must be established to prevent waste of available forces on less important facilities or those which have their own physical security forces. The degree of security necessary to protect various buildings and utilities is determined by considering the following: [..............]

It goes on.... Again the page is here. I'll leave it here to get this posted now. Check it out and be sure to get a handle on CONPLAN 3502 and other aspects of domestic military operations planning frameworks -- when similar emergency/disaster scenarios happen (i.e. Katrina) you see military personnel acting like this...

REX-84 under Iran Contra was 'then', and 'now' a literal US Army war to save the criminal banks from angry mobs is basically what's planned. Under this plan a nation ripped off & crippled by LIBOR peta-scale financial scams leaves forces like the military on the hook for defending the organized ring of criminals operating banks, i.e. "services ... critical to the economic... well-being of a community". What is the Pentagon supposed to do about the fact that the critical infrastructure is often operated by the criminally insane -- the very people who have pushed the US most of the way to the point where terrifying emergency plans like those above spring to life? X-(

For reference: A convoluted BlackBloc debate - Summarizing dickering on the Adbusters Mayday post

This post is a spinoff of a larger, incomplete project. Hopefully, it can be completed! :D

Having more time on my hands than I expected lately, I've been scouring the interwebs for everything I can find about the ongoing debates around militant direct action, protest tactics, the nebulous fate and hodgepodgy status of the Occupy Wall Street movement across North America -- along with related movements such as the Quebec uprising.

My whole inquiry really got rolling after reading a relatively ridiculous writeup on the ugly interval at the Chicago NATO summit by some guy from US Uncut, Carl Gibson: Cut It Out: An Open Letter to Black Bloc Anarchists, who made some generalizations based upon "According to those who were there... By starting confrontations with riot police during the ceremony.... All you did was attract more riot police to an otherwise peaceful event, leading to kettlings, beatings and arrests. Way to go. [....] Nobody asked you to be the self-appointed 'Defenders of Dissent' at our actions. Nobody asked you to give us lessons in how to be 'real activists.' If you want to join the movement, join the movement."

It certainly appeared from my remote vantage point that the event was kettled on three sides from the get-go and the Chicago PD started beating the shit out of people with batons without any substantial aggressive acts on the part of the bloc types.

Obviously Carl's reasoning justifies the ol' state violence beat-down without actually proving his point at all -- free form demonization. And the usual boundary-patrolling of who gets to "join the movement" is an eye-roller considering that OWS was at its core obviously a wild-eyed project mostly launched by capital-A Anarchists in the first place.

And of course, Carl buys into the silly notion the opportunistic Chris Hedges maliciously dumped into the mix in January, which is that the black bloc is some discrete sub-group like Blue Dog Democrats or the Congressional Black Caucus, not an anonymized mode of protest utilized by rank-and-file Occupy regulars & others, with a history stretching back at least as far as that iconic colonial Tea Party incident.

Having myself been loosely around the scene which gave rise to the 2008 Republican National Convention St. Paul Principles that then gave OWS that complex three-word phrase "diversity of tactics," I feel like the whole thing is almost old news. It's all quite a bit bigger than black bloc, after all. The late great Walker Church, the RNC8 Defense Committee, the whole debate which once seemed bounded by the Twin Cities barged out into North America to wig out perhaps thousands of people!

I don't feel like laying out all the major points floating around right now, but in the process of pulling links I started pulling the more relevant points and counter-points from the Adbusters piece on MayDay, which had, let's say a number of issues.

It seems like Adbusters wasn't accurate about how things in NYC went down that day (though I wasn't there myself). It also fails to really inform readers about more aggressive & violent tactics from the state, and there are plenty of important elements to share with readers who might not be familiar with that kind of madness. (Not to justify it like Carl avidly does, but it's important to at least inform readers about police & intelligence tactics when discussing militant protest tactics!)

The rightwing anti-Occupy leeches -- less fun now they've lost their main man Breitbart -- only have drab pieces such as this WorldNetDaily: Anarchist tactics ‘future’ of Occupy movement, which was a riff upon #7 Battle for the Soul of Occupy | Adbusters, touting the various MayDay black bloc actions...

Anyway I wanted to put up this condensed collection of comments for reference because I think it caught much of the anarchist/marxist/capitalist/mainstream/reactionary/confused/trolling spectrum of the debate. If you want a sample of the juncture of the issue, I think this is a useful skim.

Along with a few historical, zine, video & PDF links for variety, here is a condensed view of those comments from Adbusters for yr political reference.

~~ TO BE CONTINUED WITH WAY MORE AWESOME LINX LATER ~~

EXCLUSIVE: Cointelpro Gothic II: Midwestern Police State Paranoia Continues! Winona & Des Moines hubs of spurious "terrorism" & great statistical accomplishments!

Iowa-American-Gothic-500.jpeg EARLIER: October 13, 2010: Cointelpro Gothic: Docs prove Iowa FBI's Wild Rose Rebellion a pretend RNC "Terrorism Enterprise" for great "statistical accomplishment"

BY DAN FEIDT -- Another level of the seemingly endless, unregulated Midwestern law enforcement campaign against political activists has been revealed in 525 pages obtained from the Department of Justice by Freedom of Information Act requests filed by David Goodner of Des Moines. (FULL PDF 62MB / Scribd.com)

Two related stories emerge: in 2004-2006, federal agents spurred to achieve career-advancing "statistical accomplishments" spied on people the G-Men linked with the CrimeThinc Anarchist publishing label -- in Des Moines and Winona, MN anyone linked to anything CrimeThinc is deemed a great target for further snooping.

Of course, in this file, the FBI deems CrimeThinc as a terrorist organization, a designation which they never have to account for to anyone. They never found any evidence of terrorism to charge anyone with any crimes, terrorism or otherwise, but this lack of 'real terrorism' only creates a gentle opportunity for career advancement without the risk of hassling any powerful people.

In 2006, FBI agents conducted a sweeping surveillance stakeout of a CrimeThinc meetup at the Winona, MN visitor's center, which has not been reported in detail until now. Since they've already labeled CrimeThinc a terrorist organization, they collect tons of precious "statistical accomplishments" merely for rationalizing their conclusions and defaming random people to local police officers.

Goodner previously obtained the 2008 Republican National Convention documents around the "WILD ROSE REBELLION" FBI investigation.

Separately, an addition batch of documents obtained by a member of Twin Cities Indymedia (via the MN Data Practices Act) about the East Metro WMD Task Force (available for viewing & download @ Scribd.com), which started shortly after September 11, 2001, reveals another layer of paranoid, baseless police activity targeting everyone from Somali immigrants to 2008 RNC protesters. Among many interesting documents, former Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher planned a strange wargame during the election, a kind of exercise designed to ascertain what they would do if terrorists gained control of elected officials.

-- Sorry no time for a more detailed writeup right now - please repost as you will. Creative Commons with Attribution! - hongpong@hongpong.com

Syndicate content