Documents Reveal FBI Infiltrated Occupy Movement -Worked w/ Banks to Shut Down OWS

So now we know the FBI had infiltrated the Occupy Movement What’s interesting about this information about Occupy, is I was at the press conference and recorded Oakland Mayor Jean Quan saying that she was on the phone with mayors from 16 other cities on how to deal with the Occupy Movement.. Her remarks were quickly downplayed and any discussion of ‘coordinated shut downs’, Department of Homeland Security involvement or FBI infiltration was chalked up as ‘conspiracy’ theory…

Most folks involved with Occupy already figured out something was afoot.. and now its been confirmed.. What’s problematic is seeing how many blatant things have been ignored.. For example, how and why were NYPD units able to work on behalf of a private firm?  In this case Wall Street/ JP Chase..You can read about that HERE..

We never really got to understand why so much energy was put on Occupy Wall Street and not the people who actually caused the financial crises that brought OWS into existence..How many FBI agents have been or are working to take down those running illegal financial schemes?

In places like Oakland where we’ve had high number of homicides as well as in neighboring SF and San Jose.. we also saw tremendous amounts of time and energy spent monitoring the Occupy Movement vs solving pressing crimes.. We’ve seen as many as 17 different police agencies show up to stop 100 people from taking over abandoned buildings, but if your place got robbed, you would have to make the trip to the police station to file a report.. The police say they were stretched watching Occupy folks.. With all that’s been going on in this beloved country, the Occupy Movement was that much of a threat? 

Sounds more like monitoring folks was an easier gig, paid lots of overtime and reflected deep mismanagement and warped priorities inside some of these departments.. And for those who think this is some sort of exaggeration take a look at the types of things our law enforcement spends our tax dollars on… Read this story about the police investigating Meet the Press anchor David Gregory for holding a gun magazine on TV.. You can peep that HERE

The most pressing question is how did all this go down on President Obama’s watch? What kind of community organizing is this? It’s interesting to note that many accused Occupy of being a grand brainchild of Obama.. Maybe when he realized that OWS wasn’t rolling in lockstep with the Democrats, he decided to send in the FBI.. Maybe there was a reason behind all the antiwar movements quieting down after he got elected even though he continued many of the same Pro-war policies of President George Bush his predecessor.

Questions: Did the FBI infiltrate the Tea Party? If Obama’s FBI was spying on Occupy what other domestic political groups were under his ‘watchful eye’?  What sort of dissention did infiltrating agents cause in the ranks? Were these endless debates about diversity of tactics and property destruction tactics deployed by the FBI to make Occupy less attractive?

One thing I recall Black Panther co-founder Bobby Seal stating about what the FBI/ Cointel-Pro  papers on the Panthers  revealed… He noted that the Panthers were considered a threat when they started doing community things like serving free breakfast.. Seal said FBI papers showed they worked overtime to make Panthers be unattractive to the community. Did they do similar things with Occupy? With all the hi-tech equipment available today spying on someone is easy, if we’re talking about capturing footage or a recording a conversation.. If the FBI had infiltrated OWS then it had to be to cause confusion and be disruptive..This is what happened during Cointel-pro days from the 60s.. why not now?

-Davey D-

**PS.. Dec 29 2012**.. This just came in… FBI worked with the big Banks to shut down Occupy Movements.. Folks need to chew on that for a minute..u can read that article here…  http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/29/fbi-coordinated-crackdown-occupy

—————————————————————————-

FBI Had Counterterrorism Agents Investigate Occupy Movement

It’s the latest example of counterterrorism officials looking into domestic protest groups.

http://www.alternet.org/fbi-had-counterterrorism-agents-investigate-occupy-movement

The New York Times reports that the FBI had counterterrorism agents to investigate Occupy Wall Street, and that “F.B.I. personnel around the country were routinely involved in exchanging information about the movement with businesses, local law-enforcement agencies and universities.”

The Partnership for Civil Justice received the records after a Freedom of Information Act request. They show that once again the agency used counterterrorism agents to track domestic activists — like they have in the past with environmental, anti-poverty and animal rights groups.

The Times reports that:

The memo said agents discussed “past and upcoming meetings” of the movement, and its spread. It said agents should contact Occupy Wall Street activists to ascertain whether people who attended their events had “violent tendencies.”

The memo said that because of high rates of unemployment, “the movement was spreading throughout Florida and there were several Facebook pages dedicated to specific chapters based on geographical areas.”

The F.B.I. was concerned that the movement would provide “an outlet for a lone offender exploiting the movement for reasons associated with general government dissatisfaction.”

The records provide one of the first glimpses into how deeply involved federal law-enforcement authorities were in monitoring the activities of the movement, which is sometimes described in extreme terms.

An agency spokesman told the paper that “The F.B.I. recognizes the rights of individuals and groups to engage in constitutionally protected activity. While the F.B.I. is obligated to thoroughly investigate any serious allegations involving threats of violence, we do not open investigations based solely on First Amendment activity.”

Debate, Hate & Wait: How to Spot an Agent in Your Organization

Tonight (Fri Nov 26, 2010)  in San Francisco there will be an screening of an incredible documentary called ‘Cointel-Pro’ followed by a community discussion w/ children of political prisoners and Hip Hop artists Wise Intelligent, Killer priest, Casual and Digable Planets..It’s an important discussion followed by a concert.. For more info on discussion and concert click here… http://bit.ly/def2sr

In the meantime.. I want everyone to read this article about government infiltration/ domestic spying  into organizations.. The author Supreme gives a lot of insight and encourages folks to set up protocals vs going on witch hunts and having endless discussions about who is real and who isn’t..

This is important because government infiltration still goes on today and as was shown in the documentary Cointel-pro it’s not limited to militant/ Black organizations.. In fact groups like the Black Panthers were the last to get infiltrated.

In recent years we’ve seen agents touch base in peace organizations as highlighted by Michael Moore in his film on 9-11. We seen this happen in the aftermath of Katrina with Common Ground organization. The agent (Brandon Darby) who came to disrupt recovery efforts had already caused havoc among organizations in Austin , Texas.  This is important to note, because as the author Supreme points out in his article, so many groups don’t talk to one another. Some have egos and see everything as uber competitive. Others are afraid of losing funding by tipping off other operations. Others are simply ignorant to history and don’t believe our government will go that far..

More recently we here in Oakland saw this happen during the Justice 4 Oscar Grant Movement.. Sometimes its the feds other times its local police departments doing the infiltrating.  Folks need to read the article, get informed and act on principle not personality..

The most important statement in this article is as follows

Agents are no longer gathering information, unless your org. is HIGHLY proactive and doing intensive work in the community…so let’s stop this talk of  “They can come and take whatever notes they want…and I’ma teach em.”  No. Most agents now are simply working to keep orgs at a STANDSTILL. Mired in debate, hate, and wait. Read that again. DEBATE, HATE, and/or WAIT. Through these three mechanisms, they do their job QUITE effectively. “

-Davey D-

 

How to Spot and Agent?

by Supreme Understanding

http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/notes/supreme-understanding-supremedesignonline/how-to-spot-an-agent/464236052290

Author Supreme Understanding

I’m sick and tired of watching good groups fail because of the wicked people who are still being sent among us. Moreso because of our failure to respond appropriately to these wicked people. I don’t blame them so much as I blame us for not doing anything about them. But we who are intelligent people should be wise enough to know that COINTELPRO still exists, both online and in real life. Yet very rarely do I hear about people being “run from among us” nowadays. So we know that they’re here, yet we continue to let them do their work? They’re not gathering info. They’re making us fall apart. And my survey says that they’re being highly successful. So if you can use this to improve your organization, please do so. If not, I’ve said my part. Here’s some qualities to look for, when you are wondering if someone is an agent provacateur:

1. They bring confusion and chaos with them. Everytime they come around, it’s drama.
2. They keep discussions and productivity at a stalemate. They’d rather keep debating than engaging the community you’re supposed to serve.
3. They focus on impertinent theoretical points of contention as serious sources of conflict. It’s never about the people or the work. It’s always about some ideas, structures, philosophy, or abstract concept.
4. They create/increase tribalism and intensify pre-existing organizational dissatisfaction. Whatever issues you had, they root them out and make them grow.
5. They don’t have reputable sources or references for where they come from. Nobody knows them where they say they came from, or they can’t even tell you who can vouch for them. Anyone with more than 5 years of involvement in any community should have good references. Anyone with less than 5 years experiences should not be in a position to dictate or distract.
6. Many have short bursts of vigorous activity, not long histories of continuous (documented/verifiable) growth and development. They come in, make a mess, then disappear to enjoy their plea deal, stipend, etc…or to move on to another org. Because we have little cross-organizational communication, they can sometimes do the same thing to 3 or 4 orgs in a row. So many of them are organization-hoppers.
7. Others claim long histories, even claiming “birthrights” of some sort, as a means to establish authority. Yet these claims rarely hold up under further investigation. For example, some agents who were outed by the Church Committee had claimed to be “born into” the organizations and groups they’d later infiltrated. Oh, by the way, I’m a historical researcher. Everything in this list is based on extensive research on publicly-identified agent provocateurs, as well as the documented methods used by COINTELPRO, the CIA, the “hip hop police” etc.
8. They have ambiguous sources of income. They may be on the payroll, but they’re posing as an independent hustler of some sort, or working in some office building you can’t visit.
9. They came from prison or worked in the military or law enforcement in the past (or the present, if u dig deep enough). They may be working in exchange for reduced time/plea agreement/special assignment.
10. They turn around all questions about them into attacks on the questioner. They create scapegoats, red herrings, and target people who may be onto them.
11. They build alliances with weak-minded dissatisfied people through shared vices, financial generosity, or a sense of solidarity. Do you smoke with em and give em a free pass on their transgressions?
12. They also “give” as a means of establishing authority and legitimacy. Some even give “knowledge” to an extent that it blurs their allegiances, making less critical-minded people believe they “must” be on the side of good, since they share so much “good information.” But even this can be a ruse. If the information does not serve to liberate people, empower the community (regular people, that is), and engender social change, then they are doing NOTHING to disturb the status quo.
13. These people don’t tend to be primary sources either. They simply get credit by “sharing” or transmitting information and ideas created by others. Yet these people also tend to “modify” this info as well, significantly affecting the end result.
14. They act like zealots but aren’t zealous about social change. You’ll never see them go this hard when it comes to helping regular people.
15. They want power and control, but demonstrate no ability to use this power or control for the good of others. Once they have acquired enough authority, it’s all gonna get burned to the ground.
16. They are masters of manipulation, but never teach others how to manipulate the system. But watch how they can twist, spin, and distort everything that comes their way. It takes TRAINING to be that good. And there are actually programs that train people on how to do this.

FYI, I’m not talking about people who are stupid and don’t know how to act right. I’m talking about people who are clear, consistent, and CONSCIOUSLY working to undermine and neutralize progress. It’s not impossible to distinguish the former from the latter. And typically, the former acts that way because they are following the lead of the latter.

Also, let’s be clear. Agents are no longer gathering information, unless your org. is HIGHLY proactive and doing intensive work in the community…so let’s stop this talk of “They can come and take whatever notes they want…and I’ma teach em.” No. Most agents now are simply working to keep orgs at a STANDSTILL. Mired in debate, hate, and wait. Read that again. DEBATE, HATE, and/or WAIT. Through these three mechanisms, they do their job QUITE effectively.

What do you do if someone has many of these characteristics? If your org has a structure for calling someone to attention and letting them know their actions are creating a disturbance, then it’s time to gather the people who can call that meeting and notify that person. Either they will (A) become belligerent and threaten physical harm, (B) respond quietly and soon disappear, or (C) continue doing the same. If they disappear, notify other orgs about them, because that person may be headed their way. If they do (A) or (C), proceed to whatever is “level 2” of your org’s protocol for dealing with serious offenders. Just know that the person is NOT someone with a misunderstanding, or someone who just doesn’t get it yet. If you are effective in explaining your concerns (as a collective) and they PERSIST, it should be clear that they are not naieve. They are acting purposefully and willfully, and it is YOUR collective failure if you allow this behavior to exist, remain, thrive, and destroy everything around it.

I’m just one man speaking, but I had to say something because it’s getting out of control in some places. I hope people will take notice and DO something. Beyond what I’ve said above, it’s important we establish some cross-cultural/cross-organizational communication. I propose that we identify, by name and picture, those individuals we run out of our groups, so that when they come to another group, we will know not to accept this person in with open arms. I’d love to some sort of online agent provocateur database (like www.whosarat.com), but that presents too much potential for abuse and misuse. In lieu of that, we should AT LEAST engage in (a) teaching awareness of the above, (b) background checks on new people coming to our groups, (c) some checks and balances for people trying to leverage power and authority, (d) an investigation and response protocol for people causing repeated disturbances, and (e) cross-organizational communication for people who have been rooted out.

Tag anyone you know who is involved with an organization/group/culture that is serious about the community, and who would benefit from this perspective.

Thank you,

Supreme Understanding

Return to Davey D’s Hip Hop Corner

The Los Angeles Times royally screwed up a big story about Tupac’s 1994 robbery and shooting. What else did it get wrong?

By Eric K. Arnold

http://www.eastbayexpress.com/ebx/PrintFriendly?oid=678909
April 9, 2008

The unsolved murders of Biggie Smalls and Tupac Shakur were the subject of the documentary Biggie & Tupac.

It may have been the biggest f-up in the history of mainstream media hip-hop coverage.

In case you haven’t heard, the Los Angeles Times was caught red-faced when website TheSmokingGun.com out-reported – and more importantly, out-fact-checked – the daily newspaper a couple weeks ago on what seemed to be an important story detailing new evidence in the 1994 shooting and robbery of the late Tupac Shakur. Times reporter Chuck Philips, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, revealed that an incarcerated and unnamed informant had confirmed the involvement of Sean “Diddy” Combs, Christopher “The Notorious B.I.G.” Wallace, hip-hop manager Jimmy “Henchman” Rosemond, and Mafia wanna-be James Sabatino in the incident. Philips did not name the shooter(s) but presented alleged FBI case files and court transcripts. One of the robbers, Philips wrote, still had Shakur’s purloined medallion, fourteen long years after the fact.

The Times article drew more than one million viewers to the paper’s web site, making it the newspaper’s most heavily trafficked article this year.

Blogs followed suit. “Sometimes a reporter comes to a story, and sometimes the story comes to him,” wrote blogger/author Jeff Chang in a post. Other outlets, however, were skeptical. As MTV News noted, Philips has sparked controversy before with his reporting methods. “His allegations are at times hard to believe, and he has drawn criticism for largely citing unnamed sources,” wrote reporter Jayson Rodriguez. “And many question why an older white man is the one pursuing the case of two murdered black hip-hip icons.”

Philips initially defended his reportage. “I’m not gonna write it just because someone says it,” he told MTV News. People have tried to set him up in the past, he added, “But in this case, I [didn’t] write anything until I feel it’s confident, it’s true.”

The only problem was the story was apparently completely fabricated by Sabatino, a chubby, boyish-faced scam artist with a long rap sheet who has boasted of his alleged ties to both La Cosa Nostra and the hip-hop elite. After the Smoking Gun meticulously dissected Philips’ account, pointing out several glaring inconsistencies – among them evidence that the FBI documents were typed on a typewriter, not a computer (the bureau hasn’t used typewriters for approximately thirty years) and, most tellingly, that Sabatino wasn’t in New York when Shakur was shot – the Times admitted its error. “I got duped,” Philips told the Associated Press, which is basically the journo-speak equivalent of “Oh shit. My Bad.”

There’s also the matter of potential litigation both from Diddy and Rosemond. In a statement, Rosemond’s attorney said the Times and Philips should “Print an apology and take out their checkbooks or brace themselves for an epic lawsuit.” Since the Times issued a formal apology within 21 days as required by law, any potential lawsuit would face an uphill batle, considering the strength of California’s media protections.

Perhaps most interesting is speculation on how this doozy of a boo-boo will impact the future of entertainment reporting and, specifically, coverage of rap and hip-hop. “Mainstream publications have been letting a lot of people who aren’t connected to hip-hop do major stories,” says author Adisa Banjoko. “Stories on Tupac, B.I.G., or any other dead rapper [are] seen as easy filler and hype for a boost in sales.”

From a mainstream media perspective, rap music is often associated with crime just like famine is associated with Ethiopia. High-profile incidents of violence involving rappers have long been fodder for newspapers, Internet sites, and TV news; sensationalistic, tabloid-style reporting has become par for the course. After with this latest blunder, the Times look like opportunists willing to print anything, as long as it draws traffic.

Meanwhile, Philips is starting to seem like a G-Funk version of the morally twisted paparazzo Danny DeVito played in L.A. Confidential. His past stories on the B.I.G. and Tupac killings were questioned by African-American journalists and hip-hop-identified outlets, yet his methodology largely remained sacrosanct despite these complaints. His 1999 Pulitzer for exposing corruption in the entertainment industry gave Philips a lot of credibility, but that now seems as dubious as the purported FBI case files Sabatino apparently wrote from behind bars.

This latest incident only renews suspicions about the veracity of Philips’ past work. In particular, Philips has been accused of deliberately misreporting key evidence in the 2005 wrongful death suit against the city of Los Angeles by B.I.G.’s mother, Violetta Wallace. He also claimed that B.I.G. paid a member of the Crips $1 million to kill Shakur in 1996 – which was denied by both Tupac and Biggie’s camps – and has drawn suspicion away from Suge Knight by discrediting ex-LAPD detective Russell Poole, whose investigation of B.I.G.’s 1997 murder led to a tangled web of corrupt cops, music industry gangstas, and city officials.

In 2005, Front Page magazine speculated that Philips was an apologist for Knight and Death Row Records: “By fingering two dead men … as Tupac’s killers, Philips’ story took the focus off Suge Knight, whom many believe had Tupac killed because Tupac planned to leave Death Row. Philips’ story also claimed that Biggie was later killed by the Crips for stiffing them – again taking the heat off prime suspect Suge Knight.”

Webmaster/journalist Davey D says he dismissed Chuck Philips a long time ago. “Now it’s beyond a shadow of a doubt that he’s wrong and he was wrong in the past,” he says.

Perhaps, but to many hip-hop insiders, digging up Tupac’s 1994 shooting seemed like a red herring in the first place. At the end of the day, Davey D says, Philips’ stories “don’t really connect the dots in any kind of meaningful way.”

Still, he adds, “A lot of this stuff has run its course. … If you look at the top news that’s going on in hip-hop, it’s all arrests. … People are talking about Remy Ma crying in court. That’s what I’m hearing.”

The bottom line in the assassinations of Tupac and Biggie remains that both murders are still unsolved. If and when the truth is ever uncovered, it’s probably safe to say it won’t be the Times or Chuck Philips who’re responsible.

Return to Davey D’s Hip Hop Corner