LDS Freedom Forum

http://www.wcvb.com/blob/view/-/2249977 ... Letter.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We brought William Turner to speak at our 13th Annual Conference Investigating Crimes Committed by FBI agents
held at the University of Maine in the fall of 2002.

see link for full story
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2013/11/ ... ws-answer/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Did The CIA Assassinate JFK? Former FBI Agent Dedicated To Case Believes He Knows Answer
November 16, 2013 11:43 PM




On Friday Nov. 22, 1963, less than an hour after he had arrived in Dallas for a rally, President John F. Kennedy was gunned down.

Now, 50 years later, we’re hearing from a man who’s dedicated his entire life to figuring out what really happened that day, and he says he knows the truth.

“I smelled a rat,” said William Turner.

He has seen it more times than he cares to count. The grainy Zapruder film captured a pivotal moment in American history — the shot seen and heard around the world.

President Kennedy was shot in the head and rushed to a Dallas hospital. There was nothing doctors could to do save him.

Turner saw the aftermath first hand, arriving in Dallas just hours after the assassination.

“It was a somber and eerie situation,” he said. “It was half dark and people were crying.”

Turner was a G-Man — an FBI agent from 1951 to 1961 — with counter espionage and major crime cases his specialty.

However, He grew increasingly concerned by the way J. Edgar Hoover was running the bureau. Hoover found out and cut Turner loose.

So, he parlayed his investigative talents into becoming a journalist. His very first assignment was to head to Dallas to cover the breakdown of security during the assassination.

He scoured Dealey Plaza, asking questions, and using former FBI colleagues as confidential sources.

“I conducted the investigation and had two pieces of information that I thought might be pertinent,” Turner said.

Witnesses, including a police officer, told him they thought there was a second shooter.

“He thought he heard three shots from an upper area equally spaced,” said Turner. “A woman ran up to him from the direction of what we now know as the Grassy Knoll and the bushes there, and said ‘they were shooting from the bushes.’ “

The Warren Commission concluded in the official government report there was a lone gunman — Lee Harvey Oswald.

“The bushes are a good distance from the supposed sniper perch of Oswald,” said Turner. “I tucked that in my bonnet and it demonstrated there were at least two shooters.”

Turner was one of the first to report that. Days then turned to hours, which turned to decades. A lifetime of research led Turner to a shocking conclusion — the Kennedy’s murder was choreographed by our own CIA.

“I think what happened was a capacity for assassination was set up by (a) CIA base in the Everglades called Point Mary. That’s where they trained Cuban snipers,” said Turner.

He says two of those Cuban snipers were sent to assassinate the president. The CIA and Kennedy had a falling out after the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion in Cuba. After the failed plan to oust Fidel Castro, it’s reported that Kennedy promised to smash the CIA into a thousand pieces.

But would the CIA really plot to kill a U.S. president?

“I believe the mafia was allied with the CIA in assassinating Kennedy, and I think we’ve proven that and should go ahead with closure — designating it a conspiracy and not a single man’s work,” said Turner.

It’s a tangled web. Turner believes President Lyndon B. Johnson worried a full investigation could reveal plans to assassinate Castro — a finding he feared could escalate into a nuclear war with Cuba and their soviet allies.

“National security is used as an excuse for all kinds of ridiculous activities and the failure to investigate the assassination of JFK was one of their worst failures,” said Turner.

If you had the presence of mind to attend our 13 th Annual Conference
Investigating Crimes Committed by FBI agents in 2002 you would have had the opportunity to hear former FBI agent William Turner discuss how J Edgar Hoover, Lyndon Johnson and Texas Oil assassinated President Kennedy.
The conference was held at the University of Maine in Farmington Maine.
The birthplace of Chester Greenwood, the man who invented ear muffs.
http://inventors.about.com/library/inve ... enwood.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


The question on everybody's mind was How do you shut the FBI down?
The answer was you shut down the Department of Justice.

In today's Boston Globe you have the expected corporate media spin on the JFK assassination They are now spinning Robert Kennedy saying in the article "There is no indication that Bobby ever found evidence to prove a wider conspiracy." Fortunately we have the facts that within 48 hours of the assassination Robert Kennedy asked the French Secret Police force to investigate the murder of his brother. Shortly later The report was published in the book FAREWELL AMERICA detailing the evidence for Texas Oil, the FBI and Lyndon Johnson assassinating Kennedy.
Of course Bobby Kennedy could not be allowed to become President.

2 stories


1st story
see link for full story

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/1 ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Robert F. Kennedy saw conspiracy in JFK’s assassination
By Bryan Bender and Neil Swidey
| Globe Staff

November 24, 2013



Robert Kennedy and Jacqueline Kennedy watched as President Kennedy’s coffin was placed in an ambulance at Andrews Air Force Base, Md., on Nov. 22, the day he was assassinated.

Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy was sitting at his backyard patio table, clutching a tuna fish sandwich, when the call came through. Kennedy had spent the morning at a Justice Department conference on his intensifying war against organized crime. He had invited two of his employees from New York, US Attorney Robert Morgenthau and an aide, back to his sprawling home, Hickory Hill in McLean, Va., to continue the conversation over a private lunch.

A key focus of the morning meetings had been the Justice Department’s efforts to put Mafia kingpins behind bars. Now, by the pool on an unseasonably warm day in November 1963, Kennedy talked optimistically about efforts to neutralize one of those mob leaders, Carlos Marcello. At the very moment when Kennedy and his guests were digging into their sandwiches and clam chowder, Marcello was sitting in a packed courtroom in New Orleans, awaiting the verdict in his deportation trial.

Kennedy had turned 38 just two days earlier, and his mop of brown hair, slim frame, and charging intensity had always combined to project an aura of youth. Still, the bags under his eyes betrayed the weight of responsibilities he had been shouldering for the previous three years, serving as not just the nation’s top law enforcement official but also the president’s most trusted adviser and fixer.


Just then his wife, Ethel, called over to him, holding the patio phone extension. “It’s J. Edgar Hoover,” she said, a look of worry playing over her face. They both knew the FBI director never called Bobby at home.

Morgenthau, in a recent interview, recalled watching Kennedy drop his sandwich, race over to the phone, and then quickly cup his hand over his mouth as he heard the devastating news. “Jack’s been shot in Dallas,” Bobby said with a gasp. “It may be fatal.”

In the half-century since that awful day, much has been made of Bobby Kennedy’s impossible burden following the assassination of his brother. He needed to reassure a shaken nation, support his widowed sister-in-law and her two young children in addition to his own brood of kids, and maintain the cohesion and political relevance of the entire Kennedy clan — all while contending with his own soul-crushing sadness.

But a closer examination of Bobby’s actions leading up to and immediately following Nov. 22 offers a fresh vantage point on this still-unhealed gash on the American psyche. The view has become clearer thanks to the accumulation of documents released over the last two decades — some as recently as a few months ago — that had long been kept from public view. A review of those documents by the Globe, fortified by the work of historians and new interviews with former Kennedy aides, paints a picture of a brother responding to the assassination with equal parts crippling grief and growing suspicions.

No one had done more than he to create enemies for the Kennedy administration — the right kind of enemies, to the brothers’ way of thinking. In the mob, in corrupted labor, in Castro’s Cuba, in the rogue wing of the American intelligence system.

It had been a brave, sometimes reckless crusade. It all looked different now.

In the five years between his brother’s murder and his own assassination in 1968, Bobby Kennedy voiced public support for the findings of the Warren Commission, namely that a pathetic, attention-seeking gunman had alone been responsible for the murder of President Kennedy. Privately, though, Bobby was dismissive of the commission, seeing it, in the words of his former press secretary, as a public relations tool aimed at placating a rattled populace. When the chairman of the commission, Chief Justice Earl Warren, personally wrote to the attorney general, asking for any information to suggest that a “domestic or foreign conspiracy” was behind his brother’s assassination, Bobby scrawled a note to an aide, asking, “What do I do?” Then, after stalling for two months, he sent along a legalistic reply saying there was nothing in the Justice Department files to suggest a conspiracy. He made no mention of the hunches that appeared to be rattling around in his own mind.

There is no indication that Bobby ever found evidence to prove a wider conspiracy. But judging from his actions after hearing the news out of Dallas, it’s clear that he quickly focused his attention on three areas of suspicion: Cuba, the Mafia, and the CIA. Crucially, Bobby had become his brother’s point man in managing all three of those highly fraught portfolios. And by the time the president was gunned down, Bobby understood better than anyone how all three had become hopelessly interwoven, and how much all three bore his own imprint.


2nd read

see link for full story

http://www.jfk-online.com/farewellnavis1.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Farewell America
The Book and the Enigma
by Al Navis



"Farewell America, Al, you have to get a copy of Farewell America," said the voice on the telephone. The soft East Texas twang immediately identified the caller as one William Penn Jones, Jr. and he was calling me from his desk as Editor-in-Chief of the Midlothian Mirror, a weekly newspaper from the town just south of Dallas.

It was about two weeks before Christmas 1968 and winter in Toronto was fast approaching. America, and indeed the entire world, had just endured what was possibly the worst single year of the century, excepting the Wars. It was a presidential election year and Lyndon Johnson said he wouldn't run, but Robert Kennedy said he would. By the end of the year, Kennedy was dead by assassins' bullets, Richard Nixon was President, Hubert Humphrey had lost the election by just over 25,000 votes and Johnson was back home in Texas after aging 20 years in the past five.

Add to this, the assassination of Civil Rights champion Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.; the riots at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago; North Korea capturing the electronic spy ship USS Pueblo; the continuing war in south-east Asia; the Soviet Union occupying Czechoslovakia, a student and worker revolt in France and the few good things which occurred that year were all but invisible.

The first heart transplant in December, 1967 gave way to an avalanche of them in 1968; American astronauts orbited the moon in preparation for a lunar landing in mid-1969 and President John Kennedy's widow, Jacqueline, married Greek shipping magnate Aristotle Onassis.

So when Penn mentioned Farewell America, I asked him what was it about. The story that Penn told me -- coupled with what I learned from former FBI-agent-turned-author William Turner and added to the rather bizarre occurrences which would happen to me 16 years later -- is what Paul Harvey routinely calls "the rest of the story."

The rest of this story begins on 22 November 1963, with the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dallas. While the various timelines of history converged on that place at that time, what came out of Dallas was best described by a Hopi word koyaanisqatsi, meaning crazy life, life in turmoil, life out of balance, life disintegrating or a state of life that calls for another way of living.

For virtually every person connected with the assassination, this is true and it was especially true for the President's brother, then-Attorney General Robert Kennedy. Even in the middle of the worst four days of his life, Robert Kennedy had the presence of mind to ask one of his most trusted aides, future Senator from New York Daniel Moynihan to quietly assemble a small staff to look into his brother's murder. Kennedy basically asked Moynihan to get him the answer to two questions: did Teamster boss and Kennedy family enemy Jimmy Hoffa have any involvement in the assassination, and, was the Secret Service as an agency or specific agents themselves paid off?

In a few months, the results came back to Kennedy: "no" and "no." The report was, however, quite damning in its criticism of the Secret Service agents and the agency in general, as far as their collective performance was concerned. Standard protection procedures had been ignored, countermanded or subverted and the result was that the President was left exposed from practically everywhere in Dealey Plaza -- a full 360 degrees of opportunity.

When you look back at the weekend which followed the assassination in 1963, you can probably agree with Robert Kennedy's prime suspects. Jimmy Hoffa was the most vocal of the detractors of the Kennedy White House as both John and Robert Kennedy had sat on the Kefauver Committee in the late 1950s looking into organized crime in America. The very fact that the President was so completely defenseless naturally gave cause to cast disparaging glances at the organization whose primary duty is to protect him.

It is indeed interesting, from the point of view of 35 years after the fact, that Hoffa and the Secret Service would be the primary suspects in the 'crime of the century.' When we now look at who might have had a hand in the planning and execution of this execution, we normally list the CIA, the FBI, the Mafia, the anti-Castro and pro-Castro Cubans, the Joint Chiefs of Staff/Pentagon/DIA, the Texas oil fortunes of the Hunts and the Murchisons and even the massive interests involved in the Federal Reserve Bank. The 'grassy knoll' is now getting to be as crowded as a Tokyo subway car at rush hour!

It was during the first few months of 1964 that a copy of the Moynihan report to Robert Kennedy found its way across the Atlantic and into the caverns of French Intelligence and, eventually, onto the desk of President Charles de Gaulle. Who actually was the genesis of what would become Farewell America must now be left to pure conjecture, as it was probably done verbally, covertly and quietly. Was it Robert Kennedy or Charles de Gaulle or both or neither?

It became the provenance of two recently-retired French Intelligence operatives and one of their British counterparts to look into the murder of a president, again probably done verbally, covertly and quietly. They were basically given carte blanche to travel wherever leads took them and to talk to whoever they thought had useful and pertinent information to give. Their investigation took more than 3 years and covered practically the entire globe.

Because the operatives were just that, and not writers, they enlisted a rather peculiar-looking Frenchman who called himself Herve Lamarr. It was this slightly-built, chain-smoking editor who took the voluminous notes, reports, interview transcripts and essays that the operatives had accumulated over the past 40+ months and collate them into a somewhat readable concise report. It was also Lamarr who came up with the pseudonym "James Hepburn," based on his overwhelming love and admiration for actress Audrey Hepburn. He bastardized the French word j'aime which means I love.

It was most probably in mid-December, 1967 that Robert Kennedy received the final draft of the report and its effect was quite noticeable. Kennedy's public image changed from that of a New York Senator to a potential presidential candidate. His speeches became more international and less local-oriented. And it was quite soon thereafter that he did indeed throw his hat into the ring for the November presidential election.

During Kennedy's all-too-brief run for the Presidency, most people judiciously avoided the assassination questions, but one student reporter for a campus newspaper in Berkeley, California asked Kennedy a rather direct question, couched in metaphor -- if elected would he open 'the files?' Kennedy's reply was metaphorical in return, saying that only the President can open 'those files' and I will be President! In less than three days, Robert Kennedy lay dead in a Los Angeles hospital after being shot three times at point blank range 25 hours earlier, only minutes after winning the California Democratic Primary.

After waiting a few weeks, the Kennedy family was contacted about the status of 'the project,' meaning Farewell America. It was now the duty of the last remaining son, Edward Kennedy to basically squelch the entire operation as he said to the effect that he and the Kennedy Family no longer wished to pursue any aspects of either of the brothers' deaths.

So now Lamarr had a book with content that could change the world's view of what had happened in Dallas. After approaching nearly every major American and British publisher and getting rejections from all of them, Lamarr decided to begin in Europe. One can assume that corporate attorneys working as counsel for those American and British publishing houses looked at a statement on page 387 of Farewell America:

We challenge the individuals whose names are cited in this book to sue us for libel.

One can also assume that those same attorneys would have cast a 'no' vote when asked by the editorial staff if they should publish Farewell America. But that was the entire tone of the book, because the book was a natural product of the results of the research and that research named names and placed blames.

While I won't disclose what that research found, leaving it up to you to read the book, I will say that it cast light in directions which, at that time, had always been in shadows. When it was published in France under the title America Brule (America Burns), it quickly shot to the top of the non-fiction bestseller charts. Italian and German editions soon followed, each a bestseller as well and soon it became apparent that the only way to get an edition published in English was to self-publish it.

So came the entity now known as "Frontiers Publishing." It was registered in Vaduz, the tiny capital city of the even tinier Duchy of Liechtenstein, nestled in the Alps. The legal office was in Geneva, Switzerland. The editorial office in Paris. The books were actually printed in Belgium and shipped to Manchester, England and Montreal, Quebec. The print run has never been disclosed but my research came up with an approximate number of copies in the 10,000 range. It seems that 4,000 were shipped for distribution throughout the UK and the other 6,000 were off to North America, but by having them sent out from Montreal they kept them out of the reach of the American authorities. Or so they thought.

While the copies which were in England were distributed without incident to various bookstores in the British Isles, the copies which were sent to Canada came under attack quite quickly. After about one-third of the consignment had been shipped, a very odd thing happened. The shipments stopped completely.

I have been able to place together some random facts and oddities into a fairly reliable story of what indeed happened. It seems that the FBI (or perhaps the CIA, but more probably the former) had traced the flow of Farewell America to a book warehouse in Montreal and they elicited the assistance of the Canadian Government (possibly the RCMP, but more probably the Ministry of Customs and Excise) to find a way to staunch the flow of Farewell America into the U.S.

Now comes the creative part. Through some logistical legerdemain they were able to create an excise on hardcover books which were printed in Belgium. They were then assigned a 50% duty, to be applied retroactively as well! This means that the books would be seized for non-payment of a duty which didn't even exist when the shipment arrived in Canada. It's like getting a speeding ticket in September after they lowered the speed limit, and you traveled there in July! Nice grift if you can swing it.

From 1969 until 1984 two pallets of Farewell America languished in Montreal, in an unheated, bonded, government warehouse. Freezing cold winters and blistering hot summers -- all fifteen of them.

During this time the book became very tough to find and the price began to climb, eventually hitting more then $100.00 -- if you could find a copy. The scuttlebutt was that the FBI had bought up all remaining copies and had them destroyed. This type of tactic had worked with two of William Turner's books, The Fish is Red and The Assassination of Robert F. Kennedy which Random House had stopped shipping to bookstores a few months after it was published, probably at the behest of the FBI. Of the 20,000 copies it printed, Random House probably burned three-quarters of them! Not good for the bottom line, but very good for the government relations.

But the rumors were untrue and for some reason, still unknown, the book showed up as part of a Canadian government auction back in the spring of 1984. When I saw that there were two lots of about 2,000 copies each, I decided that I would attend the auction. With most of the auction audience after office furniture and the like, I was unopposed when bidding for the first lot of 2,000 copies. That changed in the few minutes that it took to begin bidding for the second lot. I repeated my opening bid when a voice from the back of the room bid an amount that was ten times my bid! Needless to say I didn't get the second lot.

The bidder was a nondescript white male in a dark suit, perhaps 6'2" and around 200 pounds, as was his partner. I say 'partner' because they immediately radiated the impression 'government' or 'police.' When I paid for the lot and got my receipt and release slip I was approached by the two men and offered twice what they had just paid for the second lot in cash, right there and then, if I gave them my release slip and receipt. I politely declined.

By the way if any of you have any unwanted pets taxpayer funded FBI agents sure could use them for their SWAT in-service training programs.
Seems like very special taxpayer funded FBI agent Lovett Ledger got the neighbors 10 year old girl's 3 lb Chihuahua and a neighbors Labrador up the street.
After all you never know when a very special agent will be called to defend this country against a known terrorist like Vicki Weaver who was shot and killed standing on her porch
holding her baby at Ruby Ridge . One of the FBI supervisors involved in the ensuing coverup would later go on to direct his informant Timothy McVeigh. see the
following three stories

see link fror full story
http://fortheloveofthedogblog.com/news- ... rist-video" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Dog Killing FBI Agent Gets a “Slap on the Wrist” VIDEO
Sunday, July 12th, 2009 at 8:40 am

Lovett Leslie Ledger indicted for shooting dead of neighbor's dogThere are times when I’m not sure why I ever actually expect more from our justice system. Last February, a Waco, TX FBI agent, a sniper and member of the FBI SWAT team, Lovett Leslie Ledger, Jr. shot and killed a neighbor’s little 3-lb chihuahua named Sassy, with a pellet rifle and although indicted for felony animal cruelty the only ones who paid for this crime were the dog with its life and the family who lost their tiny little furry family member.

Cyndi Mitchell, who lives across the street from FBI agent, Lovett Leslie Ledger, told authorities that she witnessed Ledger shoot the dog in front of her house with a pellet rifle on Feb. 29.

Mitchell has said that her dogs were barking and she went to the door and saw Sassy walking on Estes Road in front of her house.

The dog lurched to one side upon being shot, then rolled into a yard where she died, she has said.

“I’ve never heard a noise like that from an animal,” Mitchell said, describing it as “a screaming sound.”

As neighbors gathered around the fallen dog, Ledger took the pellet gun, turned and walked inside his house with one of his children.

Initially when confronted by authorities about the crime, Ledger lied but changed his story when witnesses came forward.

He was later indicted by a grand jury for cruelty to animals, a state jail felony punishable by up to two years in a state jail and a $10,000 fine.

Pleading no contest, Judge Matt Johnson in 54th District Court sentenced Ledger to two years deferred probation and ordered to perform 300 hours of community service. Not only that, if he completes the term of probation, the conviction will be expunged from his record.

FBI spokesman Erik Vasys said Wednesday the agency will determine whether Ledger faces any sanctions, which could range from suspension to dismissal, after an internal inquiry is completed. Initially it was reported that if convicted of the felony, that would mostly likely be the end of his career, with Ledger getting deferred adjudication probation, the FBI will probably just let him get away with it too. After all, if the justice system doesn’t care, why should they. It was “just a dog” after all!

Yet another injustice from our justice system! Sure, shoot and kill a 3-lb dog for no reason…. who care…. just a dog!


2nd story
see link for full story
http://www.cato.org/publications/commen ... ruby-ridge" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Remember Ruby Ridge
By Tim Lynch
This article was published in National Review Online, Aug. 21, 2002.


On August 21, 1992 a paramilitary unit of the U.S. Marshals Service ventured onto the 20-acre property known as Ruby Ridge. A man named Randy Weaver owned the land and he lived there with his wife, children, and a family friend, Kevin Harris. There was an outstanding warrant for Weaver’s arrest for a firearms offense and the marshals were surveilling the premises. When the family dog noticed the marshals sneaking around in the woods, it began to bark wildly. Weaver’s 14-year-old boy, Sammy, and Kevin Harris proceeded to grab their rifles because they thought the dog had come upon a wild animal.

A firefight erupted when a marshal shot and killed the dog. Enraged that the family pet had been cut down for no good reason, Sammy shot into the woods at the unidentified trespasser. Within a few minutes, two human beings were shot dead: Sammy Weaver and a marshal. Harris and the Weaver family retreated to their cabin and the marshals retreated from the mountain and called the FBI for assistance.

During the night, FBI snipers took positions around the Weaver cabin. There is no dispute about the fact that the snipers were given illegal “shoot to kill” orders. Under the law, police agents can use deadly force to defend themselves and others from imminent attack, but these snipers were instructed to shoot any adult who was armed and outside the cabin, regardless of whether the adult posed a threat or not. The next morning, an FBI agent shot and wounded Randy Weaver. A few moments later, the same agent shot Weaver’s wife in the head as she was standing in the doorway of her home holding a baby in her arms. The FBI snipers had not yet announced their presence and had not given the Weavers an opportunity to peacefully surrender.


Embarrassed by the outcome, FBI officials told the world that there would be a thorough review of the case, but the Bureau closed ranks and covered up the mess. FBI director Louis Freeh went so far as to promote one of the agents involved, Larry Potts, to the Bureau’s number-two position.



3rd story
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/6601 ... tml?pg=all" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nichols says bombing was FBI op

Detailed confession filed in Salt.Lake city about Oklahoma City bombing plot
Feb. 22 2007


The only surviving convicted criminal in the April 19, 1995, bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City is saying his co-conspirator, Timothy McVeigh, told him he was taking orders from a top FBI official in orchestrating the bombing.

A declaration from Terry Lynn Nichols, filed in U.S. District Court in Salt Lake City, has proven to be one of the most detailed confessions by Nichols to date about his involvement in the bombing as well as the involvement of others.
The declaration was filed as part of Salt Lake City attorney Jesse Trentadue's pending wrongful death suit against the government for the death of his brother in a federal corrections facility in Oklahoma City. Trentadue claims his brother was killed during an interrogation by FBI agents when agents mistook his brother for a suspect in the Oklahoma City bombing investigation.

The most shocking allegation in the 19-page signed declaration is Nichols' assertion that the whole bombing plot was an FBI operation and that McVeigh let slip during a bout of anger that he was taking instruction from former FBI official Larry Potts.

Potts was no stranger to anti-government confrontations, having been the lead FBI agent at Ruby Ridge in 1992, which led to the shooting death of Vicki Weaver, the wife of separatist Randy Weaver. Potts also was reportedly involved in the 51-day siege of the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas in 1993, which resulted in a fire that killed 81 Branch Davidian followers.

Potts retired from the FBI under intense pressure and criticism for the cover-up of an order to allow agents to shoot anyone seen leaving the Weaver cabin at Ruby Ridge.

People's Thanksgiving Dinner to raises funds for Rasmea Odeh defense
By staff |
December 6, 2013
Read more articles in Rasmea Odeh
Enter a descriptive sentence about the photo here.


Chicago, IL - Since 1992, activists with Fight Back! news, some of whom are members of Freedom Road Socialist Organization, have held a People’s Thanksgiving dinner. According to Joe Iosbaker, “It was started as part of a movement to protest 500 years of colonialism and to celebrate the resistance of the indigenous people.”

Each year the dinner has recognized activists and organizations that have contributed to struggles in Chicago and around the country.

This year, there is urgency to the gathering. Rasmea Odeh, a beloved activist in the Palestinian community in Chicago, is under attack by the U.S. government. The Sunday, Dec. 8 dinner will raise funds for her defense, in addition to helping to keep publishing Fight Back!.

Hatem Abudayyeh, a friend of Fight Back!, and himself a victim of repression, said, “The FBI and the U.S. attorney in Chicago have used political repression against 23 anti-war and international solidarity activists for the past three years. Now the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. attorney in Detroit are victimizing Rasmea.”

Odeh faces 10 years in prison and deportation if she is convicted of falsifying her application for citizenship.

Along with Rasmea Odeh, the dinner will honor two activists with the Anti-War Committee-Chicago: Newland Smith, a longtime fixture in the Palestine solidarity movement, and Sarah Simmons for her role resisting Mayor Emanuel’s attack on the Chicago Teachers Union and public education. Pete Camarata, a founder of Teamsters for a Democratic Union, will be recognized for his lifelong efforts for the cause of working people. And the continued struggle for justice for Trayvon Martin will be highlighted by a Skype message from Michael Sampson, a Dream Defender who occupied the State Capitol in Florida after the acquittal of George Zimmerman.

For more information on the dinner, go to http://www.StopFBI.net" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Is the Huffington Post part of the FBI sensitive Informant program?

This article that appeared today in the Huffington Post looks like it was
written at FBI headquarters. Do you know anything about the founders of this online
liberal rag? In 1995 Breitbart saw the Drudge Report and was so impressed that he emailed Matt Drudge. Breitbart said, "I thought what he was doing was by far the coolest thing on the Internet. And I still do."[7] Breitbart described himself as "Matt Drudge's &!@$#"[13] and selected and posted links to other news wire sources. Later Matt Drudge introduced him to Arianna Huffington (when she was still a Republican)[9] and Breitbart subsequently assisted her in creating The Huffington Post.[14]


Wonder why FBI director Hoover didn't ignore Martin Luther King before the assassinated him?


two reads


1st read
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/1 ... 26501.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
J. Edgar Hoover Ordered FBI To Ignore Rep Who Badmouthed Him

2/11/2013

WASHINGTON -- J. Edgar Hoover ordered his bureau to ignore Rep. Jack Brooks back in 1958 after the then-36-year-old Texas Democrat reportedly badmouthed the FBI director during a standard background interview concerning a potential judicial nominee, according to Brooks' FBI file.

"He is to be ignored," Hoover handwrote in a June 1958 memo.

Brooks, who served in Congress for 42 years and was in John F. Kennedy's motorcade when the president was assassinated, died last year at the age of 89. Brooks served in Congress until the mid-1990s, when he was defeated by Rep. Steve Stockman (R-Texas) in 1994.


2nd read


see link for full story

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/02/bob- ... t-program/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Brother of Murder Victim Seeks Details of FBI's u2018Sensitive Informant Program'

By Bob McCarty

February 1, 2013
Email Print
FacebookTwitter
Share

Salt Lake City attorney Jesse Trentadue filed a motion Monday asking a federal judge to determine whether he is entitled to limited discovery into the FBI’s u201CSensitive Informant Program.u201D

Trentadue Motion for Discovery 1-28-13 Click to download copy of motion (pdf).

In his motion, Trentadue described the program as one used by the bureau “to recruit and/or place informants on the staffs of members of the United States Congress and perhaps even federal judges, in the national media, within other federal agencies as well as the White House, on defense teams in high-profile federal and/or state criminal prosecutions, inside state and local law enforcement agencies, and even among the clergy of organized religions.”

Trentadue’s interest in the program stems from questions that have surfaced during his ongoing investigation into the death of Kenneth Trentadue, his brother who died in 1995 under suspicious circumstances while in custody at the U.S. Bureau of Prisons Federal Transfer Center in Oklahoma City, months after the Oklahoma City Bombing.

Kenneth-Trentadue_Pic Click to learn more at http://KennethTrentadue.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

With his latest legal maneuver, Trentadue hopes to convince Judge Clark Waddoups to compel the FBI to provide all documentation outlining what he describes in the motion as an “unlawful and unconstitutional domestic spying program.”

The maneuver comes almost four weeks after the FBI answered a federal court complaint Trentadue filed under the Freedom of Information Act to obtain copies of the manual the FBI uses to recruit and place u201Csensitive informants.u201D Citing national security concerns as the basis for their response, FBI officials answered that complaint by saying they u201Ccan neither confirm nor deny the allegations [of the Complaint] regarding its confidential informant program.u201D

Shown below, Trentadue’s definition of a “sensitive informant” is, perhaps, the most interesting aspect of his motion:

“…the term ‘Sensitive Informant’ is defined as anyone acting, directly or indirectly and with or without any compensation, on behalf of the FBI as a member of, person associated with or otherwise a participant in or observer of the activity or activities of an entity, organization, group, governmental agency or unit, association of organizations or individuals, public official, member of Congress, judge, cleric and/or religious or political organization AND who does not disclose or reveal to such entity, organization, group, governmental agency or unit, association of organizations or individuals, public official, member of Congress, judge, cleric and/or religious or political organization his or her FBI affiliation.

“A Sensitive Informant is, in other words, some one who is acting, directly or indirectly, on behalf of the FBI as an undisclosed participant in or observer of the activity or activities of an entity, organization, group, governmental agency or unit, association of organizations or individuals, public official, member of Congress, judge, cleric and/or religious or political organization.

“The term ‘Sensitive Informant’ likewise includes what the FBI's current terminology refers to as a ‘Confidential Human Source’ including any and all sub-categories of Confidential Human Sources such as, but not limited to, what the FBI refers to as a ‘Privileged Confidential Human Source,’ who is someone reporting confidential information to the FBI in violation of a privilege such as an attorney reporting his client's confidential communications, a physician reporting upon his patient's medical or mental condition, a cleric informing on a member of his or her church or other religious organization, etc.

In his motion, Trentadue requested the judge order FBI officials to answer 11 critical questions about the scope of their “Sensitive Informant Program” prior to a yet-to-be-scheduled hearing during which, according to Trentadue, FBI officials have said they will file a motion for summary judgment to prevent him access to the information he seeks.

Looking only for numbers of Sensitive Informants and not for specific names from the FBI, Trentadue’s questions target the time frame, “since January 1, 1995.” In short, he wants to know whether or not the agency has had Sensitive Informants inside a variety of government and non-governmental organizations.

Among the government organizations mentioned in his queries were the state and federal court systems, the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate, federal agencies other than the FBI, federal prosecutors’ offices, and law enforcement agencies at the municipal, county and state levels.

Among non-governmental agencies, he listed management positions inside news organizations, including but not limited to, the following: Associated Press, ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, NBC, NPR, PBS, Reuters or Scripps-Howard; Boston Globe, Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, Miami Herald, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and/or Washington Post; The Daily Beast, Mother Jones, The New American, Newsweek, TIME and/or U.S. News & World Report.

Curiously, he also asked whether the FBI has had a Sensitive Informant(s) who was a cleric or member of the clergy in any religious organization.

Do you think this non-sentence FBI Supervisor Ken Kaiser received is fair?
Is there a mandatory minimum sentence for the crime Kaiser committed?
Do you think the fix was in?
How can you tell when the fix is in?
What can you do if you believe the fix was in?
What other cases are similar to this case?
For example FBI agent Lovett Ledger in Waco Texas
For example John Lesko of Virginia.

Ken Kaiser recently retired as head of the Boston FBI office. The FBI office in Boston has been characterized as a cesspool
of FBI corruption. There is a reasonable chance very special FBI supervisor Kaiser retired at a Grade 15 Step 10 which indicates he would have been making a salary of:
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 2006

Annual Rates by Grade and Step


$142737.00 see http://archive.opm.gov/oca/06tables/html/BOS_leo.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


When he retired he would receive 59% of his annual salary unless he was under the FERS plan initiated by Ronald Reagan.

see link for full story
http://www.masslive.com/news/boston/ind ... 00_fo.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Boston FBI chief Kenneth Kaiser pleads guilty in ethics case
October 03, 2013
The former head of the Boston FBI office has pleaded guilty to an ethics charge in a plea agreement that spares him from prison time but seeks a $15,000 fine.


Part of becoming a smart criminal justice consumer is recognizing what individuals and companies are part of the FBI Sensitive Informant program . These are people who do not officially work for the FBI but do work for FBI agents as paid and unpaid informants
providing a wide variety of services. see http://bobmccarty.com/2013/12/05/everyt ... t-program/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

An example is compare the story about Ken Kaiser at the above link and the story run by the Boston Herald.

see http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/lo ... r_contacts" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Do you think one of these newspapers is in bed with the Boston FBI?

see link for full story
see link because website is run by current and former FBI agents

a smart criminal justice consumer will notice the spin .....

http://www.ticklethewire.com/2013/12/26 ... n-in-2013/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Feds Misbehavin’ in 2013



FBI agent Adrian Johnson got 18 months in prison this year after he was convicted of multiple charges including vehicular manslaughter after he drove drunk and crashed into a car in suburban D.C., in Prince George’s County. He killed an 18-year old and man and seriously injured the man’s friend in 2011.

Oklahoma FBI agent Timothy A. Klotz confessed to dipping into the FBI cookie jar. Authorities allege that he embezzled $43,190 that was earmarked for confidential informants for tips on criminal activities from 2008-2011. He acknowledged in a signed statement that he falsified 66 receipts during a scheme that went undiscovered for more than four years. He was sentenced earlier this month to six months in prison and three years of supervised released. He was also ordered to pay a restitution of $43,190.
FBI agent Travis Raymond Wilson, 38, of Huntington Beach, Calif., apparently had a little gambling jones and didn’t want the big guys at the FBI to know. Unfortunately for him, he got busted. Wilson pleaded guilty to structuring financial transactions in violation of the federal Bank Secrecy Act. The feds say between January 2008 and February 2013, Wilson regularly gambled at casinos in California, Nevada, Arizona, and West Virginia, authorities said. In total, Wilson structured more than $488,000 in cash. Sentencing is set for March 3.
Kenneth Kaiser, former head of the FBI’s Boston office, found that ethics still apply when you leave the bureau. The choked up ex-agent appeared in court where he was fined $10,000 for violating an ethics charge. Kaiser was accused of meeting with former FBI colleagues about his company that was under investigation. Federal law prohibited him from having professional contact with former FBI colleagues within a year of leaving government service.

FBI agent Arthur “Art” Gonzales of Stafford County, Va. is charged with shooting his estranged wife to death in April. He told dispatchers he was acting in self-defense when he shot his 42-year-old wife, Julia Sema Gonzales. He says his wife attacked him with a knife.

Gonzales was a supervisory special agent-instructor at the FBI’s National Academy at Quantico. Court records show bond was granted. Trial has been set for March.



FBI agent Donald Sachteren who leaked information to the Associated Press was recently sentenced to more than three years in prison for possessing and disclosing secret information. Sachteren, 55, was accused of disclosing intelligence about the U.S. operation in Yemen in 2012. What made him a far less sympathetic character in this whole mess was the fact he was also sentenced to more than 8 years in prison for possessing and distributing child pornography in an unrelated case.
- See more at: http://ticklethewire.com/#sthash.kqxzNYul.dpuf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

see link for full story
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11 ... us-affair/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


FBI agent's behavior questioned in probe that turned up Petraeus affair
Published November 13, 2012

The FBI agent who spurred the investigation that turned up David Petraeus' affair was taken off the case because authorities grew concerned about his relationship with one of the key figures in the scandal, Fox News has confirmed.

The new wrinkle, first reported by the Wall Street Journal, seems to fill in some of the gaps in how the investigation developed and how word of the investigation made its way to lawmakers, the White House and eventually the public last week, when Petraeus resigned as CIA director.

The FBI agent under scrutiny had launched the investigation into harassing emails sent to Jill Kelley, a Petraeus family friend, but the agent was removed from the case over the summer because of his behavior, which included sending shirtless photos of himself to Kelley, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing officials familiar with the probe.

The agent's identify wasn't divulged, but he now faces an internal investigation for his behavior, the Journal reported.

see link for full story
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/0 ... 32631.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



FBI Denies Requests For '60 Minutes' Benghazi Source's Interview Records

01/02/2014

NEW YORK -- The FBI has denied Freedom of Information Act requests for records related to federal officials' interviews with Dylan Davies, a security officer who claimed to have witnessed the Benghazi, Libya, attack in a now-discredited “60 Minutes” report.

see link for full story

http://politicalnews.me/?id=27789&keys= ... ION-HOLDER" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


FBI Agent in Stevens Investigation “Severely Disciplined,” Director Tells Murkowski
Senator Continues to Pursue Answers, Accountability for Alaska





Mar 30,2014 -

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Senator Lisa Murkowski pushed the Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James B. Comey, Jr. for answers about the agency’s investigation into improper and unethical activities by FBI agents that overshadowed the fraud-laden federal investigation of Senator Ted Stevens. Years after the Stevens verdict was thrown out of court by Attorney General Eric Holder, Murkowski is still seeking closure for Alaskans upset at the lack of information surrounding the efforts that have been made to ensure that reforms are made.

In her questions to director Comey during the Commerce, Justice and Science Appropriations Subcommittee hearing, Murkowski contended that she has been asking the FBI for years about the outcome of the investigation, and no information has been provided about its status or what punishments were meted out. “My question is whether this investigation has concluded. If so, what was the outcome and what corrective actions have been taken?”



(Senator Murkowski asks FBI Director
James Comey, Jr. about punishments for unethical agents)

Director Comey said that the FBI’s internal investigation had concluded, and that they had “identified an agent who engaged in improper conduct there and the agent was severely disciplined. The discipline has been imposed and on top of that we have pushed out refresher training to the entire work force especially about our discovery obligations and how we expect them to conduct themselves during those investigations.”

With Comey not able to provide any further information, Murkowski then asked him to provide her the written account of the internal disciplinary investigation.

The hearing wrapped up with Murkowski asking Comey about the FBI’s policy towards whistleblowers, and seeking recognition for Agent Chad Joy. No longer with the FBI, Chad Joy was responsible for calling attention to the unethical work being conducted by
the agents on the Stevens investigation. “As you are looking to this issues- if you might look into this specific situation and if you did right by him. Not only are whistle blowers not rewarded but there are negative consequences at the end and I think this is something we need to certainly be aware of.”

Utah US Senators support NSA spying

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/in- ... 2ad90da239" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
BY AL KAMEN
April 1 at 4:24 pm
The Senate on Tuesday confirmed
career federal prosecutor John Carlin, who had been chief of staff to former FBI director Robert S. Mueller and more recently acting assistant Attorney General for National Security was confirmed 99-1 to be assistant Attorney General for National Security.
The one “no” vote was Sen. Dean Heller (R-Nev.), whose spokeswoman e-mailed that Heller was “concerned with comments made by Mr. Carlin indicating that he believes the NSA’s bulk data collection program is a lawful practice.” Heller believes the program “violates Americans’ privacy rights and could not in good conscience support this nominee.”

TWO READS
For close to 40 years the Southern Poverty Law Center has been best buddies with the FBI making sure there is never an investigation into the FBI's assassination of Martin Luther King. Far Left Group? LOL.......

1st read

see link for full story
http://www.worldmag.com/2014/04/fbi_sto ... e_resource" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

FBI stops promoting far-left group as a ‘hate crime’ resource

Posted April 3, 2014, 11:30 a.m.

The FBI removed the far-left group Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) from its hate-crime resource list last week. The listing disappeared without official explanation after the Family Research Council (FRC), along with 14 other conservative groups, sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder and FBI Director James Comey on Feb. 10 asking the FBI to stop promoting the organization.

A hate crime is defined as a “criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, ethnic origin, or sexual orientation.” The FBI helps prosecute those responsible for hate crimes. Until last week, the agency recommended the SPLC as a resource to learn more about hate crimes. But conservative groups have long questioned the SPLC’s motives.



2nd read

http://www.worldmag.com/2014/04/fbi_sto ... e_resource" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


The Church of Morris Dees

By Ken Silverstein -- Harper's Magazine, November 2000

How the Southern Poverty Law Center profits from intolerance

Ah, tolerance. Who could be against something so virtuous? And who could object to the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Montgomery, Alabama-based group that recently sent out this heartwarming yet mildly terrifying appeal to raise money for its "Teaching Tolerance" program, which prepares educational kits for schoolteachers? Cofounded in 1971 by civil rights lawyer cum direct-marketing millionaire Morris Dees, a leading critic of "hate groups" and a man so beatific that he was the subject of a made-for-TV movie, the SPLC spent much of its early years defending prisoners who faced the death penalty and suing to desegregate all-white institutions like Alabama's highway patrol. That was then.

Today, the SPLC spends most of its time--and money--on a relentless fund-raising campaign, peddling memberships in the church of tolerance with all the zeal of a circuit rider passing the collection plate. "He's the Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker of the civil rights movement," renowned anti- death-penalty lawyer Millard Farmer says of Dees, his former associate, "though I don!t mean to malign Jim and Tammy Faye." The Center earned $44 million last year alone--$27 million from fund-raising and $17 million from stocks and other investments--but spent only $13 million on civil rights program , making it one of the most profitable charities in the country.

The Ku Klux Klan, the SPLC's most lucrative nemesis, has shrunk from 4 million members in the 1920s to an estimated 2,000 today, as many as 10 percent of whom are thought to be FBI informants <http://www.servtech.com/~grugyn/kkk-5.htm> . But news of a declining Klan does not make for inclining donations to Morris Dees and Co., which is why the SPLC honors nearly every nationally covered "hate crime" with direct-mail alarums full of nightmarish invocations of "armed Klan paramilitary forces" and "violent neo-Nazi extremists," and why Dees does legal battle almost exclusively with mediagenic villains-like Idaho's arch-Aryan Richard Butler-eager to show off their swastikas for the news cameras.

In 1987, Dees won a $7 million judgment against the United Klans of America on behalf of Beulah Mae Donald, whose son was lynched by two Klansmen. The UKA's total assets amounted to a warehouse whose sale netted Mrs. Donald $51,875. According to a groundbreaking series of newspaper stories in the Montgomery Advertiser, the SPLC, meanwhile, made $9 million from fund-raising solicitations featuring the case, including one containing a photo of Michael Donald's corpse.

Horrifying as such incidents are, hate groups commit almost no violence. More than 95 percent of all "hate crimes," including most of the incidents SPLC letters cite (bombings, church burnings, school shootings), are perpetrated by "lone wolves." Even Timothy McVeigh, subject of one of the most extensive investigations in the FBI's history-and one of the most extensive direct-mail campaigns in the SPLC's-was never credibly linked to any militia organization.

No faith healing or infomercial would be complete without a moving testimonial. The student from whose tears this white schoolteacher learned her lesson is identified only as a child of color. "Which race," we are assured, "does not matter." Nor apparently does the specific nature of "the racist acts directed at him," nor the race of his schoolyard tormentors. All that matters, in fact, is the race of the teacher and those expiating tears. "I wept with him, feeling for once, the depth of his hurt," she confides. "His tears washed away the film that had distorted my white perspective of the world." Scales fallen from her eyes, what action does this schoolteacher propose? What Gandhi-like disobedience will she undertake in order to "reach real peace in the world"? She doesn't say but instead speaks vaguely of acting out against "the pain." In the age of Oprah and Clinton, empathy--or the confession thereof--is an end in itself.

Any good salesman knows that a products "value" is a highly mutable quality with little relation to actual worth, and Morris Dees-who made millions hawking, by direct mail, such humble commodities as birthday cakes, cookbooks (including Favorite Recipes of American Home Economics Teachers), tractor seat cushions, rat poison, and, in exchange for a mailing list containing 700,000 names, presidential candidate George McGovern-is nothing if not a good salesman. So good in fact that in 1998 the Direct Marketing Association inducted him into its Hall of Fame. "I learned everything I know about hustling from the Baptist Church," Dees has said. "Spending Sundays on those hard benches listening to the preacher pitch salvation-why, it was like getting a Ph.D. in selling." Here, Dr. Dees (the letter's nominal author) masterfully transforms, with a mere flourish of hyperbole, an education kit available "at cost" for $30 on the SPLC website into "a $325 value."

This is one of the only places in this letter where specific races are mentioned. Elsewhere, Dees and his copywriters, deploying an arsenal of passive verbs and vague abstractions, have sanitized the usually divisive issue of race of its more disturbing elements-such as angry black people-and for good reason: most SPLC donors are white. Thus, instead of concrete civil rights issues like housing discrimination and racial profiling, we get "communities seething with racial violence." Instead of racially biased federal sentencing laws, or the disparity between poor predominantly black schools and affluent white ones, or the violence against illegals along the Mexican border, the SPLC gives us "intolerance against those who are different," turning bigotry into a color-blind, equal-opportunity sin. It's reassuring to know that "Caucasians" are no more and no less guilty of this sin than African Americans, Asian Americans, Native Americans, and Hispanics. In the eyes of Morris Dees, we're all sinners, all victims, and all potential contributors.

Morris Dees doesn't need your financial support. The SPLC is already the wealthiest civil rights group in America, though this letter quite naturally omits that fact. Other solicitations have been more flagrantly misleading. One pitch, sent out in 1995-when the Center had more than $60 million in reserves-informed would-be donors that the "strain on our current operating budget is the greatest in our 25-year history." Back in 1978, when the Center had less than $10 million, Dees promised that his organization would quit fund-raising and live off interest as soon as its endowment hit $55 million. But as it approached that figure, the SPLC upped the bar to $100 million, a sum that, one 1989 newsletter promised, would allow the Center "to cease the costly and often unreliable task of fund raising. " Today, the SPLC's treasury bulges with $120 million, and it spends twice as much on fund-raising-$5.76 million last year-as it does on legal services for victims of civil rights abuses. The American Institute of Philanthropy gives the Center one of the worst ratings of any group it monitors, estimating that the SPLC could operate for 4.6 years without making another tax-exempt nickel from its investments or raising another tax-deductible cent from well-meaning "people like you."

The SPLC's "other important work justice" consists mainly in spying on private citizens who belong to "hate groups," sharing its files with law-enforcement agencies, and suing the most prominent of these groups for crimes committed independently by their members-a practice that, however seemingly justified, should give civil libertarians pause. The legal strategy employed by Dees could have put the Black Panther Party out of business or bankrupted the New England Emigrant Aid Company in retaliation for crimes committed by John Brown. What the Center's other work for justice does not include is anything that might be considered controversial by donors. According to Millard Farmer, the Center largely stopped taking death-penalty cases for fear that too visible an opposition to capital punishment would scare off potential contributors. In 1986, the Center's entire legal staff quit in protest of Dees's refusal to address issues-such as homelessness, voter registration, and affirmative action-that they considered far more pertinent to poor minorities, if far less marketable to affluent benefactors, than fighting the KKK. Another lawyer, Gloria Browne, who resigned a few years later, told reporters that the Center's programs were calculated to cash in on "black pain and white guilt." Asked in 1994 if the SPLC itself, whose leadership consists almost entirely of white men, was in need of an affirmative action policy, Dees replied that "probably the most discriminated people in America today are white men when it comes to jobs."

Contributors to Teaching Tolerance might be surprised to learn how little of the SPLC's reported educational spending actually goes to education. In response to lobbying by charities, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants in 1987 began allowing nonprofits to count part of their fundraising costs as "educational" so long as their solicitations contained an informational component. On average, the SPLC classifies an estimated 47 percent of the fund-raising letters that it sends out every year as educational, including many that do little more than instruct potential donors on the many evils of "militant right-wing extremists" and the many splendid virtues of Morris Dees. According to tax documents, of the $10. 8 million in educational spending the SPLC reported in 1999, $4 million went to solicitations. Another $2.4 million paid for stamps.

In the early 1960s, Morris Dees sat on the sidelines honing his direct-marketing skills and practicing law while the civil rights movement engulfed the South. "Morris and I...shared the overriding purpose of making a pile of money," recalls Dees's business partner, a lawyer named Millard Fuller (not to be confused with Millard Farmer). "We were not particular about how we did it; we just wanted to be independently rich." They were so unparticular, in fact, that in 1961 they defended a man, guilty of beating up a journalist covering the Freedom Riders, whose legal fees were paid by the Klan. ("I felt the anger of a black person for the first time," Dees later wrote of the case. "I vowed then and there that nobody would ever again doubt where I stood.") In 1965, Fuller sold out to Dees, donated the money to charity, and later started Habitat for Humanity. Dees bought a 200-acre estate appointed with tennis courts, a pool, and stables, and, in 1971, founded the SPLC, where his compensation has risen in proportion to fund-raising revenues, from nothing in the early seventies to $273,000 last year. A National Journal survey of salaries paid to the top officers of advocacy groups shows that Dees earned more in 1998 than nearly all of the seventy-eight listed, tens of thousands more than the heads of such groups as the ACLU, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and the Children's Defense Fund. The more money the SPLC receives, the less that goes to other civil rights organizations, many of which, including the NAACP, have struggled to stay out of bankruptcy. Dees's compensation alone amounts to one quarter the annual budget of the Atlanta-based Southern Center for Human Rights, which handles several dozen death-penalty cases a year. "You are a fraud and a conman," the Southern Center's director, Stephen Bright, wrote in a 1996 letter to Dees, and proceeded to list his many reasons for thinking so, which included "your failure to respond to the most desperate needs of the poor and powerless despite your millions upon millions, your fund-raising techniques, the fact that you spend so much, accomplish so little, and promote yourself so shamelessly." Soon the SPLC win move into a new six-story headquarters in downtown Montgomery, just across the street from its current headquarters, a building known locally as the Poverty Palace.

(Original URL: http://www.texasls.org/articles/reading ... s_dees.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

Copyright Notice: In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, any copyrighted work on this website is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed an interest in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational purposes only. Ref.: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also see: Intolerance Identified -- Morris Dees & The Southern Poverty Law Center
The Laissez Faire City Times, Vol 4, No 50, December 11, 2000

"This man [Morris Dees] works to gain the trust of young people by displaying the evils of admitted racist organizations that have a tiny number of adherents. Mr. Dees then proceeds to propagate the notion that conservative organizations -- particularly those that are pro-gun or anti-government -- pose the same dangers, and thus, must be impeded."

see link for how your tax dime was used


http://www.boston.com/news/nation/2014/ ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Setback for Former Portland Man in FBI Torture Lawsuit

June 1, 2014 7:31 PM

— A federal judge dismissed several claims from a former Portland resident who said he was tortured in the United Arab Emirates at the behest of the FBI and put on the U.S. government’s no-fly list.

The ruling Thursday from U.S. District Judge Anna Brown formalizes statements she made during a March hearing but gives Yonas Fikre until June 27 to rewrite his complaint, which names the FBI, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and others, The Oregonian reported Friday.

National Public Radio. has done to our minds what corporations
have done to the land. NPR has fracked our brains,eh?

NPR brought to you by the Koch brothers.

$50,000,000.00 taxpayer funded FBI manufacturing consent public relations bureau works 24/7 to keep you warm and fuzzy about your feelings for an organization that assassinated President Kennedy and Martin Luther King; created 1993 1st World Trade Center bombing,Oklahoma City bombing, 911 , Mumbai Attack, Murragh bombing

sob sigh have to stop typing. Cannot see the screen because of tears.This story makes me feel so warm and fuzzy about FBI DIrector Comey, a man who likes to torture people


http://www.npr.org/2014/06/09/319828283 ... nine-years" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

FBI Director Comey Looks Ahead To His Next Nine Years


June 09, 2014 3:29 AM ET

FBI director James Comey wants the agency to get better at preventing crimes and improve diversity. He has another nine years and three months to do that.
Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

FBI Director Jim Comey brushed back a dark curtain last Thursday morning and emerged to greet his audience, Tonight Show style.

"I feel like a talk show host," Comey told a group of new recruits, the first hired on his watch since he joined the FBI nine months ago.

The FBI director serves for a decade, longer than the president who appointed him, and longer than any other member of the national security establishment. That tenure's designed to insulate the FBI from political influence. But it also gives the bureau's leader the time to put his stamp on an organization that's meant to disrupt terror plots and root out corruption.

That effort is now underway, and it's significant enough to send Comey to the academy in Quantico, Va., where about 50 new agents and another 28 intelligence analysts-in-training fill half the auditorium. He wants to deliver a message about integrity, bravery and judgment.

"You're gonna get to see a lot of bad things in this work, a lot of pain you're gonna absorb," Comey said. "You're gonna help a lot of people and in the course of helping them you're going to be touched by some of the pain and suffering they've endured. I need you to look after yourselves."

FBI Director As Emergency Foster Parent

After his chat with trainees, a reporter asked the FBI director what he does off the clock to stay centered. One answer: he and his wife have been helping as emergency foster parents.

"Little boy who came to us born a month premature in a homeless shelter to a drug-addicted mother and born in very very difficult circumstances so we got him right out of the hospital," Comey said.

The baby's doing well. He's been placed with an adoptive mom but Comey and his wife, Patrice, still watch the boy a couple times a week.

"And we've stayed very close. We'll look after him his whole life," Comey said. "It is absolutely true that as a foster parent that you in a lot of ways get more out of it than you put into it."

Leaving His Mark on the FBI

These days, Comey's pouring most of himself into charting a course for the FBI. He's on track to hire 1,500 people by October to fill positions that stayed empty during the recent federal budget crunch. And he's starting to make an imprint on some of the most important jobs in the FBI, installing more than a dozen new leaders in cities around the country and 11 more key staffers at headquarters.

The new executive assistant director of the national security branch, , once led a team that questions high value terrorism suspects. The new assistant director of the counterterrorism division, , helped command and coordinate FBI agents and intelligence operatives in Iraq. And in Miami, the new special agent in charge is , the man who interrogated former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Many of the newly promoted leaders have backgrounds in the military and advanced degrees in law or history.

But Comey says the FBI still has a long way to go on diversity. In 2001, the bureau filed by African American agents. Another lawsuit , brought before Comey arrived, is still moving through the courts.

"I'm very fond of slightly geeky 6 [foot] 8 white guys from the Northeast — cause I am one. But if I have a table that's just filled with me's, I'm not being advised, directed, challenged, the way I need to be," Comey said.

Back in the auditorium in Quantico, Comey said the new agents and analysts would be learning more about FBI history in the coming weeks. Not just the decades-long reign of J. Edgar Hoover, but also some of the abuses carried out in his name.

That history is troubling enough that the new FBI director is adding a stop on the recruits' annual trip to DC's monuments. After visiting the Holocaust museum, they'll go to the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial, to reflect on how the FBI misused its power to harass the civil rights icon. Comey said he'll go along too, to make sure the trainees understand the lesson he's trying to impart.

There's room for improvement, too, Comey told his recruits, on the intelligence front.
President Obama is expected to nominate James Comey, seen in 2004, to be the next director of the FBI.
Jim Comey, then deputy attorney general, testifies during a House Judiciary Committee hearing in 2005.
FBI Director Robert Mueller testifies on Capitol Hill in June.

After the Sept. 11 attacks, Comey's predecessor, Robert Mueller, devoted himself to turning an agency created to arrest bank robbers into an organization that focuses on preventing crime before it happens.

"Bob Mueller began the transformation of this organization after 9-11 to make sure that intelligence was part of all of our operations," Comey said. "We've made tremendous strides there; I've been traveling all over the country trying to figure out how it's going. And my answer is it's going pretty well, but not good enough."

Finding clues and sharing that information — within the FBI and among state and local police — is a centerpiece of that transformation. But a recent watchdog report identified failings there — failings revealed in an investigation after the Boston marathon bombing. The federal agents on a terrorism task force had been scribbling information on sticky notes, not exactly conducive to good communications.

Comey says that problem's already been fixed. But he wants to make sure the FBI is prepared to identify and focus on the biggest threats, not just the easy stuff in the inbox. He's got nine years and three months more to make that happen.
More From National Security

see link for full story


http://abcnews.go.com/International/wir ... o-24151206" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;




TANAMO BAY NAVAL BASE, Cuba —
Jun 16, 2014,

Lawyers for Guantanamo prisoners charged in the Sept. 11 attack say the FBI has questioned more people who work as support staff on their legal teams than previously disclosed, a development that may prompt a new detour in an already snarled case when the war crimes tribunal reconvenes Monday at this U.S. base.

The trial by military commission of the five prisoners was derailed in April when the attorney for one defendant revealed that a member of his support staff had been questioned at home by the FBI and asked to provide information on others who work for the defense.

a smart criminal justice consumer always knows the back story


do you know the back story on FBI agent Orsini?

Why would taxpayer funded FBI very special agent try to kill President Kennedy assassination truth teller Cyril Wecht MD/JD. ?

you connect the dots, eh?


couple of reads


http://www.post-gazette.com/frontpage/2 ... 0707110253" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Wecht investigator's discipline file opened
July 11, 2007 11:00 PM

A federal judge yesterday unsealed records revealing that the lead FBI agent in the criminal case against Dr. Cyril H. Wecht was disciplined elsewhere for forging other agents' names and initials on chain-of-custody forms, evidence labels and interview forms.

Related documents

See more information about the disciplinary reports of FBI agent Bradley W. Orsini.


Further, in September 2001 Special Agent Bradley W. Orsini was demoted and received a 30-day suspension without pay for a series of policy violations that occurred from 1993 through 2000, which included having an inappropriate relationship with a subordinate; making improper vulgar and sexual comments; threatening a subordinate with violence; and improperly documenting the seizure of a weapon and ammunition from a search.

"We're pleased this information is now available to the public for its own analysis and understanding of its impact on the case," said Dr. Wecht's defense attorney, Jerry McDevitt. "The report speaks for itself."

The U.S. attorney's office filed Agent Orsini's records under seal on April 7, 2006, asking U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Schwab to determine if it was required to turn them over to Dr. Wecht's defense attorneys.

What followed was a 15-month legal battle that ended this week when the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a final order in the case, making the disciplinary reports public.

Judge Schwab unsealed the records late yesterday afternoon. He also vacated a previous decision in which he'd ordered a contempt hearing for the defense attorneys for their failure to follow his orders.

He wrote "this Court considers the 'time-out' caused by the interlocutory appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit as providing an opportunity for a 'fresh start.'"

He also ordered a hearing in Dr. Wecht's case on Sept. 18 that will allow the defense to use the Orsini reports in their examination of him.

Agent Orsini has been an agent for more than 18 years, and he has spent much of that time, including in Pittsburgh, working public corruption cases. All of the allegations included in the two disciplinary reports occurred while he was working in the FBI's Newark, N.J., office.

U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan would not comment on the reports' release. It was unclear if she was aware of Mr. Orsini's background before he became the lead agent in the case against Dr. Wecht, who is charged with 84 counts of misusing his public office for private gain.

The first time Agent Orsini was disciplined was Nov. 2, 1998. He received a five-day suspension without pay for signing other agents' names to evidence labels and custody forms from May 1995 to January 1997.

He explained that he and another agent, on limited occasions, signed each other's names on evidence "to save time."

Though the investigator from the Office of Professional Responsibility found that Agent Orsini did not intend to jeopardize the evidence or cases involved, his actions could have called the integrity of the bureau into question, he wrote in his report.

A 28-page report issued Sept. 24, 2001, by the assistant director of the Office of Professional Responsibility described additional transgressions.

The first violation listed dated to Nov. 2, 1993. Agent Orsini failed to obtain the proper consent form while searching a man's home for illegal firearms and failed to properly document the ammunition seized.

Agent Orsini was found to have falsified at least six FBI interview forms in 1993 and 1994 by writing other agents' initials on them.

He said in a statement that he didn't believe there would be a problem with that provided the information in the body of the interview form was accurate.

"I have no idea how many times I may have done so," he said. He said he did so for "convenience and a shortcut."

Throughout the Wecht case, defense attorneys have argued that the government based part of the charges against their client -- that he exchanged unclaimed bodies from the county morgue for lab space from Carlow University -- on a single interview form filled out by Agent Orsini.

The disciplinary report next goes into great detail about a relationship Agent Orsini had with a subordinate agent, from April 1998 through early 2000.

The document indicates that other agents in his squad believed Agent Orsini was favoring the woman and gave her premium assignments. It also details gag gifts exchanged at the squad's Christmas parties in 1998 and 1999. One, given to the woman, was a pet collar, with a note that said, "If found, return to Brad Orsini."

"By their very nature, the public notoriety attached to the gag gifts would have put even the most insensitive person on notice of this perception of favoritism," the assistant director wrote.

By January 2000, when supervisors in the Newark office learned of the relationship, Agent Orsini was reassigned.

But before that, he approached one of the agents in his squad and accused him of revealing the relationship. During the meeting, Agent Orsini threatened to hit his subordinate but quickly added that he was kidding.

Newark's assistant agent in charge reported that Agent Orsini "has an aggressive personality, and I would characterize him as a bully."

Other substantiated allegations in the report included that Agent Orsini punched at least one hole in the wall in the Newark office, and threw and broke chairs. He also jokingly called fellow supervisors "homosexuals," and even used a bullhorn to make his comments.

For those actions, the Office of Professional Responsibility said he failed to prevent the development of a "locker room atmosphere" in his squad that repressed professional conduct.

In addition to the suspension and demotion, Agent Orsini was ordered to serve 12 months' probation and to attend mandatory sensitivity training.

Ray Morrow, special agent in charge of the FBI's Pittsburgh office, defended Agent Orsini yesterday, calling him one of the best investigators he's seen.

"Early on in his career, he made some bad decisions," Agent Morrow said, noting that nothing Agent Orisini did was criminal. "He has deeply and dearly paid the price -- both personally and professionally."


2nd story

agent had affair, Begolly defender says



Published: Thursday, Jan. 13, 2011

The attorney for a Clarion County man charged with biting two federal agents claims in a court document filed Wednesday that one of the agents had a romantic relationship with the man's mother.

Emerson Begolly, 21, of Mayport is charged with assaulting two FBI agents and carrying a firearm in furtherance of a felony because he was carrying a 9 mm pistol when he resisted the agents.

During a Jan. 6 detention hearing, federal Public Defender Marketa Sims raised the point that Agent Bradley Orsini had some kind of relationship with Begolly's estranged mother, Joan Kowalski of New Kensington. Michael Christman, a supervisory special agent for the FBI, testified he did not know the nature of their relationship.

The court document says "the defense has since learned that this was a romantic relationship."

Kowalski said Thursday she only met Orsini once at a football game before her son's arrest and they did not have any kind of romantic relationship.

"It's a blatant lie," she said.

During the hearing, Sims claimed the FBI became involved in a feud between Kowalski and her ex-husband, Shawn Begolly of Mayport. Kowalski is upset because her adult son prefers living with his father, Sims said.

A federal magistrate ordered Begolly released on bond but stayed his order so the government could appeal. A detention hearing is scheduled for today before U.S. District Judge Maurice Cohill.

The government filed documents Tuesday renewing prosecutors' claims that Begolly is a danger to himself and others and should be kept in jail. The government contends Begolly posted anti-Semitic and pro-jihad messages on the Internet and told relatives he wants to martyr himself.

Sims said in her response that the government distorted the facts to paint Begolly, who suffers from a mild form of autism known as Asperger's syndrome, as a "crazy man." The government continues to claim he's off his medications, she said, when his psychiatrist hasn't prescribed any drugs for Begolly.

as a smart street wise criminal justice consumer you already knew
the link between early childhood abuse and adult criminal behaviour

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 133107.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Early life stress can leave lasting impacts on the brain
Date:
June 27, 2014
Source:
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Summary:
For children, stress can go a long way. A little bit provides a platform for learning, adapting and coping. But a lot of it — chronic, toxic stress like poverty, neglect and physical abuse — can have lasting negative impacts. A team of researchers recently showed these kinds of stressors, experienced in early life, might be changing the parts of developing children’s brains responsible for learning, memory and the processing of stress and emotion.
Different forms of early life stress, such as child maltreatment or poverty, impacted the size of two important brain regions: the hippocampus (shown in red) and amygdala (shown in green), according to new University of Wisconsin-Madison research. Children who experienced such stress had small amygdalae and hippocampai, which was related to behavioral problems in these same individuals.
Credit: Image courtesy of Jamie Hanson and Seth Pollak
[Click to enlarge image]

For children, stress can go a long way. A little bit provides a platform for learning, adapting and coping. But a lot of it — chronic, toxic stress like poverty, neglect and physical abuse — can have lasting negative impacts.

A team of University of Wisconsin-Madison researchers recently showed these kinds of stressors, experienced in early life, might be changing the parts of developing children’s brains responsible for learning, memory and the processing of stress and emotion. These changes may be tied to negative impacts on behavior, health, employment and even the choice of romantic partners later in life.

The study, published in the journal Biological Psychiatry, could be important for public policy leaders, economists and epidemiologists, among others, says study lead author and recent UW Ph.D. graduate Jamie Hanson.

“We haven’t really understood why things that happen when you’re 2, 3, 4 years old stay with you and have a lasting impact,” says Seth Pollak, co-leader of the study and UW-Madison professor of psychology.

Yet, early life stress has been tied before to depression, anxiety, heart disease, cancer, and a lack of educational and employment success, says Pollak, who is also director of the UW Waisman Center’s Child Emotion Research Laboratory.

“Given how costly these early stressful experiences are for society … unless we understand what part of the brain is affected, we won’t be able to tailor something to do about it,” he says.

For the study, the team recruited 128 children around age 12 who had experienced either physical abuse, neglect early in life or came from low socioeconomic status households.

Researchers conducted extensive interviews with the children and their caregivers, documenting behavioral problems and their cumulative life stress. They also took images of the children’s brains, focusing on the hippocampus and amygdala, which are involved in emotion and stress processing. They were compared to similar children from middle-class households who had not been maltreated.

Hanson and the team outlined by hand each child’s hippocampus and amygdala and calculated their volumes. Both structures are very small, especially in children (the word amygdala is Greek for almond, reflecting its size and shape in adults), and Hanson and Pollak say the automated software measurements from other studies may be prone to error.

Indeed, their hand measurements found that children who experienced any of the three types of early life stress had smaller amygdalas than children who had not. Children from low socioeconomic status households and children who had been physically abused also had smaller hippocampal volumes. Putting the same images through automated software showed no effects.

Behavioral problems and increased cumulative life stress were also linked to smaller hippocampus and amygdala volumes.

Why early life stress may lead to smaller brain structures is unknown, says Hanson, now a postdoctoral researcher at Duke University’s Laboratory for NeuroGenetics, but a smaller hippocampus is a demonstrated risk factor for negative outcomes. The amygdala is much less understood and future work will focus on the significance of these volume changes.

“For me, it’s an important reminder that as a society we need to attend to the types of experiences children are having,” Pollak says. “We are shaping the people these individuals will become.”

But the findings, Hanson and Pollak say, are just markers for neurobiological change; a display of the robustness of the human brain, the flexibility of human biology. They aren’t a crystal ball to be used to see the future.

“Just because it’s in the brain doesn’t mean it’s destiny,” says Hans

http://www.freedomarchives.org/Cointel_Resources.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


and the FBI: The Covert War Against the Central America Movement by Ross Gelbspan, Cambridge, MA, South End Press, 1991

Challenging the Secret Government: The Post-Watergate Investigations of the CIA and FBI by Kathryn S. Olmsted, Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina Press, 1996

The COINTELPRO Papers: Documents From the FBI's Secret Wars Against Dissent in the United States by Ward Churchill and Jim Vander Wall, Cambridge, MA, South End Press 1990, 2002

COINTELPRO: The FBI's Secret War on Political Freedom by Nelson Blackstock, New York, Pathfinder Press, 1988

COINTELPRO: The FBI's Secret War on Political Freedom, Exclusive Documents from Illegal Counterintelligence Programs the government was forced to reveal, edited by Cathy Perkus, Introduction by Noam Chomsky, New York, Monad Press, 1975

FBI Secrets: An Agent's Exposé by M. Wesley Swearingen, South End Press, 1995

The FBI v. The First Amendment by Richard Criley, First Amendment Foundation, Los Angeles, 1990.
In the Spirit of Crazy Horse by Peter Matthiessen, New York, Viking Press, 1991

It Did Happen Here: Recollections of Political Repression in America by Bud Schultz and Ruth Schultz, Berkeley University of California Press, 1989

Protectors of Privilege: Red Squads and Police Repression in Urban America by Frank Donner, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1992

Secrets: The CIA’s War at Home by Angus Mackenzie, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1999

State Secrets by Paul Cowan, Nick Egleson, and Nat Hentoff, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1973

There’s Something Happening Here: The New Left, the Klan, and FBI Counterintelligence by David Cunningham, Berkeley, University of California Press, 2005.

War at Home: Covert Action Against U.S. Activists and What We Can Do About It by Brian Glick, South End Press, 1999

Articles

Churchill, Ward and Jim Vander Wall, “COINTELPRO Against the Black Panthers: The Case of Geronimo Pratt,” Covert Action Information Bulletin, No. 31, January 1989

Goldstein, Robert Justin, “The FBI's Forty Year Plot,” The Nation, No. 227, July 1, 1978

Goldstein, Robert Justin, “An American Gulag? Summary Arrest and Emergency Detention of Political Dissidents in the United States,” Columbia Human Rights Law Review, No. 10, 1978

Gary T. Marx, “Thoughts on a Neglected Category of Social Movement Participant: The Agent Provocateur and the Informant,” American Journal of Sociology, vol. 80, no. 2 (September 1974)

National Lawyer's Guild, Counterintelligence: A Documentary Look at America's Political Police, Volume One, Chicago, 1978.

Government Reports

Final Report of the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities of the United States Senate, Ninety Fourth Congress, First Session, U.S. Government Printing Office, No. 94-755, April 14, 1976, Volumes 1–6

Hearings Before the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities of the United States Senate, Ninety Fourth Congress, First Session, U.S. Government Printing Office, Sept. 16–Dec. 5, 1975, Volumes 1–7



COINTELPRO Resources

The following resources may prove helpful to those who wish to dig deeper into the history and continuing impact of COINTELPRO. This is a brief, basic list—there are many other books, films, and websites that delve into aspects of this history; there are many other possible directions for political action and research. And, as the film makes clear, there are still many of the crimes of COINTELPRO that remain unknown.

Websites: There is some duplication on the websites listed, which we have retained given the ever-changing nature of the web, so that the important resources, such as “COINTELPRO: The Untold American Story” remain available. Also, some of the sites include full text and/or excerpts of many of the books listed below.

COINTELPRO: The Untold American Story is a compilation by Paul Wolf with contributions from Robert Boyle, Bob Brown, Tom Burghardt, Noam Chomsky, Ward Churchill, Kathleen Cleaver, Bruce Ellison, Cynthia McKinney, Nkechi Taifa, Laura Whitehorn, Nicholas Wilson, and Howard Zinn. It was presented to then U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, at the World Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa by members of the Congressional Black Caucus attending the conference: Donna Christianson, John Conyers, Eddie Bernice Johnson, Barbara Lee, Sheila Jackson Lee, Cynthia McKinney, and Diane Watson.

It can be found at the following sites:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/FBI/C ... Story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.whale.to/b/wolf_coin.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This Political Research Associates site has much information, and, still in progress, allows the user to look at files state-by-state.
http://www.publiceye.org/liberty/Feds/cointelpro.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Paul Wolf, who made the compilation, also has additional information on COINTELPRO on his site at:
http://www.icdc.com/~paulwolf/cointelpro/cointel.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Human Rights in the US: The Unfinished Story of Political Prisoners/Victims of COINTELPRO is an important pamphlet.

This site includes a good collection of book excerpts and articles relating to COINTELPRO. This is the main contents listing: http://www.whale.to/b/cointelpro_q.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Among the reference books listed below, the site includes excerpts from Secrets: The CIA’s War at Home by Angus Mackenzie: http://www.whale.to/b/mackenzie_h.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And War at Home: Covert Action Against U.S. Activists and What We Can Do About It by Brian Glick: http://www.buildingliberty.us/war-at-home/index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Third World Traveler site, another collection, also includes the Brian Glick book: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Third ... s_WAH.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This site includes the “Intelligence Activities and The Rights of Americans, Final Report of the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities,” also known as the Church Committee Report: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/FBI/C ... eport.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A collection entitled “COINTELPRO: The Sabotage Of Legitimate Dissent” appears here:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/PO ... elpro.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chapter 1 of the book listed below There’s Something Happening Here: The New Left, the Klan, and FBI Counterintelligence by David Cunningham, can be accessed here:
http://www.ucpress.edu/excerpt.php?isbn ... adchapter1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Political prisoner Sundiata Acoli has prepared analysis and information on political prisoners and the prison movement:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28866348/Who- ... n-Struggle" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This site includes information on the assassination of Fred Hampton of the Black Panther Party:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/26742855/The- ... -and-F-B-I" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Information on the case of Leonard Peltier of the American Indian Movement: http://ishgooda.org/peltier/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The site includes documents from the FBI's Secret Wars Against Dissent in the United States
by Ward Churchill and Jim Vander Wall and related information: http://ishgooda.org/peltier/cointel.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

An article on the break-in to the offices of the FBI in Media, Pennsylvania: http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0308-27.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hip-Hop Fridays: COINTELPRO: The Untold American Story Part 3: http://www.blackelectorate.com/print_article.asp?ID=632" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2014/0 ... 758188.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Recent visits by FBI
by BACRPR
Wednesday Jul 2nd, 2014 8:48 PM

The FBI has recently tried to question activists in New York, Chicago, and San Francisco. If you are visited or questioned by any kind of agent, say only "I have nothing to say to you. Give me your card and my lawyer will contact you. Then contact the Bay Area Committee to Resist Political Repression at BACRPR [at] riseup.net.

Statement on recent FBI visits and questioning of political activists
July 2, 2014

Over the past few weeks, more than a dozen political activists in New York, Chicago, and the San Francisco Bay Area have been visited by FBI, US Marshals, and Joint Terrorist Task Force (JTTF) agents. In some cases the agents have shown a more than 30-year-old wanted poster of Donna Borup, who was arrested with others during a 1981 anti-Apartheid demonstration at JFK International Airport. Borup was charged with “riot” and “assault on a police officer,” but did not appear for a 1982 federal trial in New York.

Because the government considers her a fugitive, there is no statute of limitations on her indictment or pursuit. But the government is using these minor decades-old charges to once again equate political resistance with terrorism.

So far, none of the known targets of FBI questioning have cooperated with the investigation. One activist responded by saying: "I refused to talk to the FBI when they questioned me 30 years ago, why would I talk to them now?" We believe these visits are an effort to intimidate political activists and stifle free speech and association. We strongly encourage anyone who is visited by the FBI or other agents, whether it concerns this case or any other politically motivated investigations, to insist on your right to remain silent. It doesn’t matter if you think you “have nothing to hide.” Even the most seemingly innocuous information can help the government further repress our movements.

Over the years, there have been numerous inflammatory and sensational mainstream media reports on people and organizations that the FBI claims are domestic terrorists. We know that many of these people are social justice activists like ourselves, and we will not be intimidated or coerced.

By refusing to cooperate with political fishing expeditions and by exposing the government’s harassment, we can build support and solidarity among our various communities.

If you are ever visited by the FBI or other law enforcement agents:
• Say only: "I have nothing to say to you. Give me your card and my lawyer will contact you."
• Contact your nearest National Lawyers Guild chapter to let them know about the encounter.
• Let us know what happened by contacting the Bay Area Committee to Resist Political Repression at: BACRPR [at] riseup.net.
• We encourage you to broadly spread the word of your experience, which will alert other activists.

For more information on resisting political repression:
• Unified statement of resistance against grand juries and FBI questioning at: http://grandjuryresistance.org/statement.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
• Information on resistance against grand juries and FBI questioning: http://grandjuryresistance.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Bay Area Committee to Resist Political Repression is a committee of long-time activists from the anti-imperialist, anarchist, animal rights, and environmental movements.
http://grandjuryresistance.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Where does FBI director Tomey go to eat after a hard day of creating terrorist events?

couple of reads from Chef Ramsey


The Washington Post
Food
Noelia Italian Kitchen, trending toward ho-hum
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Noelia Italian Kitchen downtown has arched ceilings in the back and large windows in the front. (Astrid Riecken/For The Washington Post )
By Tom Sietsema July 7 at 10:30 AM

Kaiser Gill has served as an armor officer in the U.S. Army and as a counter-terrorism agent for the FBI. With the June debut of Noelia Italian Kitchen downtown, the serial risk-taker added “restaurateur” to his résumé.




In other FBI. news

see link for how FBI agents solve murders


http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/21/us/fbi-misbehavior/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


FBI battling 'rash of sexting' among its employees
See show times »
The Situation Room
By Scott Zamost and Drew Griffin, CNN Special Investigations Unit
updated 5:35 AM EST, Fri February 22, 2013
Watch this video
Misconduct revealed within FBI
STORY HIGHLIGHTS

CNN obtained FBI internal reports on employee misconduct
According to the reports, employees sent naked photos and inappropriate text messages
An FBI official says it sends the reports to its employees to deter further misconduct
She described a "rash of sexting" cases among the bureau's employees

Washington (CNN) -- It sounds like the plot of a bad movie: bugging your boss' office. Sending naked photos around to co-workers. Sexting in the office. Paying for sex in a massage parlor.

But it all happened in the federal agency whose motto is "fidelity, bravery, integrity" -- the FBI.

These lurid details are outlined in confidential internal disciplinary reports obtained by CNN that were issued to FBI employees as a way to deter misconduct.

Read the FBI's internal reports (PDF)

The FBI hopes these quarterly reports will stem what its assistant director called a "rash of sexting cases" involving employees who are using their government-issued devices to send lurid texts and nude photos.

"We're hoping (that) getting the message out in the quarterlies is going to teach people, as well as their supervisors ... you can't do this stuff," FBI assistant director Candice Will told CNN this week. "When you are given an FBI BlackBerry, it's for official use. It's not to text the woman in another office who you found attractive or to send a picture of yourself in a state of undress. That is not why we provide you an FBI BlackBerry."

While the vast majority of the FBI's 36,000 employees act professionally, the disciplinary reports issued by the agency's Office of Professional Responsibility show serious misconduct has continued for years.

From 2010 to 2012, the FBI disciplined 1,045 employees for a variety of violations, according to the agency. Eighty-five were fired.

The internal reports over the last year don't specify job titles, names or the location of the employees. Yet, they provide exact details of their misdeeds:

-- One employee engaged in a "romantic relationship with former boyfriend (now husband) knowing he was a drug/user dealer. Employee also lied under oath when questioned during the administrative inquiry about her husband's activities."

-- Another FBI worker "hid a recording device in supervisor's office. In addition, without authorization, employee made copies of supervisor's negative comments about employee that employee located by conducting an unauthorized search of the supervisor's office and briefcase." It said the employee "lied to investigators during (the) course of the administrative inquiry."

-- An FBI supervisor "repeatedly committed check fraud and lacked candor under oath."

-- One employee "was involved in a domestic dispute at mistress' apartment, requiring police intervention. Employee was drunk and uncooperative with police" and "refused to relinquish his weapon, making it necessary for the officers to physically subdue him, take the loaded weapon and place employee in handcuffs."

-- In other cases, an employee was charged with DUI for the second time, one used a lost or stolen credit card to buy gas, and another was caught in a child pornography sting operation, according to the internal reports.

All of the employees in these cases were fired.

More FBI employees were disciplined for their transgressions, including one woman who -- according to the reports -- "used (a) personal cell phone to send nude photographs of herself to other employees" which "adversely affected the daily activities of several squads." Another FBI worker e-mailed a "nude photograph of herself to ex-boyfriend's wife." Both employees received 10-day suspensions.

Another who visited a massage parlor "and paid for a sexual favor from the masseuse" received a 14-day suspension. And an employee who used a government-issued BlackBerry "to send sexually explicit messages to another employee" was suspended for five days.

Will expressed surprise at some of the behavior outlined in the reports.

"As long I've been doing this ... there are days when I think 'OK, I've seen it all,' but I really haven't," Will said. "I still get files and I think, 'Wow, I never would have thought of that.'"

Some of the recent cases follow what CNN uncovered in 2011 after obtaining several years of the internal disciplinary reports. Those reports included incidents involving FBI employees sleeping with informants, a sex tape made by an agent and his girlfriend, tapping into FBI databases for unauthorized searches, viewing pornography on bureau computers and other cases of drunk driving.

couple of reads



1st read





see link for full story or Google title


http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/08/justice/c ... econd-gun/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



RFK assassination witness willing to testify for Sirhan Sirhan's lawyers
By Brad Johnson and Michael Martinez, CNN
updated 11:30 AM EDT, Mon July 9, 2012
Watch this video
Her Story: RFK assassination witness
STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Nina Rhodes-Hughes agrees, if called, to testify about a second shooter
Rhodes-Hughes: Sirhan Sirhan was not the only shooter in the pantry
Sirhan was the only person charged and convicted in RFK assassination
Witness says FBI altered her account of RFK shooting

Los Angeles (CNN) -- A woman who witnessed the 1968 assassination of Robert F. Kennedy says she has agreed to testify for Sirhan Sirhan's new defense team.

Nina Rhodes-Hughes insists Sirhan was not the only gunman firing shots when Sen. Kennedy was murdered only a few feet away from her at a Los Angeles hotel. She says there were two guns firing from separate positions and that authorities altered her account of the crime.

"What has to come out is that there was another shooter to my right," Rhodes-Hughes has told CNN. "The truth has got to be told. No more cover-ups."

As a federal court has been preparing to rule on Sirhan's current legal challenge to his conviction in the Kennedy murder, Rhodes-Hughes says she has been contacted by Sirhan's lead defense lawyer, New York attorney William Pepper. "He asked me if indeed I would testify that there was another shooter and I said yes, I would," she said. Rhodes-Hughes says she has not been contacted by the California attorney general's office, which represents the other side in the Sirhan federal court case.
Previously reported
RFK assassination witness tells CNN: There was a second shooter

Attorneys for RFK convicted killer Sirhan push 'second gunman' argument

Prosecutors, attorneys argue: Was there a second gunman in RFK assassination?

Prosecutors rebut convicted RFK assassin's claims in freedom quest

Convicted RFK assassin Sirhan Sirhan seeks prison release

Convicted RFK assassin denied parole

Sirhan Sirhan, convicted RFK assassin, to face parole board

Rhodes-Hughes has described for CNN various details of the June 1968 assassination as well as her long frustration with the official reporting of her witness account and her reasons for speaking out 44 years later: "I think to assist me in healing -- although you're never 100% healed from that. But more important to bring justice.

"For me it's hopeful and sad that it's only coming out now instead of before -- but at least now instead of never," said the former Los Angeles resident now living near Vancouver, British Columbia, in Canada.

Sirhan, the only person arrested, tried and convicted in the shooting of Robert Kennedy and five other people, is serving a life sentence at Pleasant Valley State Prison in Coalinga, California.

The U.S. District Court in Los Angeles is set to rule on a request by Sirhan, now 68, that he be released, retried or granted a hearing on new evidence, including Rhodes-Hughes' firsthand account.

At his 1969 trial, Sirhan's original defense team never contested the prosecution's case that Sirhan was the one and only shooter in Kennedy's assassination. Sirhan testified at his trial that he had killed Kennedy "with 20 years of malice aforethought." He was convicted and sentenced to death, which was reduced to life in prison in 1972.

After the trial, Sirhan recanted his courtroom confession.
Was there a second RFK shooter?
Sirhan Sirhan's federal case
Convicted RFK assassin awaits ruling

In recent federal court filings, state prosecutors led by California Attorney General Kamala Harris argued that even if there was a second gunman involved in the Kennedy shooting, Sirhan hasn't proven his innocence and he's still guilty of murder under California's "vicarious liability" law. Sirhan's new legal team disputes Harris' assertion concerning the state statute.

The current battle has prosecutors and Sirhan's lawyers engaging directly the merits of new evidence -- as well as witness recollections such as Rhodes-Hughes' account -- never before argued in court.

The particular clash over Rhodes-Hughes was triggered five months ago by prosecutors under the attorney general when they contended that Rhodes-Hughes had told the FBI she heard no more than eight gunshots during the assassination. In court papers filed in February, Harris' prosecutors argued that Rhodes-Hughes was among several witnesses reporting "that only eight shots were fired and that all these shots came from the same direction."

Three weeks later, Sirhan's lawyers challenged those assertions in a response also filed in federal court in Los Angeles. The defense team led by William Pepper contended that the FBI misrepresented Rhodes-Hughes' witness account and that she actually had heard a total of 12 to 14 shots fired.

"She identified fifteen errors including the FBI alteration which quoted her as hearing only eight shots, which she explicitly denied was what she had told them," Sirhan's lawyers argued in February, citing a previously published statement from Rhodes-Hughes in which she stated, "I heard 12-14 shots, some originating in the vicinity of the Senator [and] not where I saw Sirhan."

The FBI and the California attorney general's office have both declined comment to CNN on the controversy over Rhodes-Hughes' witness account since the matter is now being reviewed by a federal judge.

When the dispute over her account erupted in February, CNN sought out Rhodes-Hughes for comment, eventually locating her in March in the Vancouver area.

Rhodes-Hughes, now 78, told CNN that she was a television actress working as a volunteer fundraiser for Kennedy's presidential campaign and that she had been invited to the Ambassador Hotel to celebrate, along with the senator and hundreds of his supporters, his anticipated victory in the June 4, 1968, California primary election. She said she witnessed the Kennedy shooting shortly after midnight on June 5 inside a hotel kitchen service pantry.

The FBI report indicates that she was indeed inside the hotel pantry during the crucial moments of the Kennedy shooting, but Rhodes-Hughes contends the bureau got details of her story wrong, including her assertions about the number of shots fired and where the shots were fired from.

Rhodes-Hughes tells CNN she informed authorities in 1968 that the number of gunshots she counted in the kitchen pantry exceeded eight -- which would have been more than the maximum Sirhan could have fired -- and that some of the shots came from a location in the pantry other than Sirhan's position.

The 42-year-old Kennedy was the most seriously wounded of the six people shot inside the pantry only moments after the New York senator had claimed victory in California's Democratic presidential primary. The presidential candidate died the next day; the other victims survived.

The Los Angeles County coroner determined that three bullets struck Kennedy's body and a fourth passed harmlessly through his clothing. Police and prosecutors declared the four bullets were among eight fired by Sirhan acting alone.

Rhodes-Hughes told CNN the FBI's eight-shot claim is "completely false." She says the bureau "twisted" things she told two FBI agents when they interviewed her as an assassination witness in 1968, and she says state Attorney General Harris and her prosecutors are simply "parroting" the bureau's report.

"I never said eight shots. I never, never said it," Rhodes-Hughes told CNN. "But if the attorney general is saying it then she's going according to what the FBI chose to put into their report."

"There were more than eight shots," Rhodes-Hughes said. She says that during the FBI interview in her Los Angeles home, one month after the assassination, she told the agents that she'd heard 12 to 14 shots. "There were at least 12, maybe 14. And I know there were because I heard the rhythm in my head," Rhodes-Hughes said. She says she believes senior FBI officials altered statements she made to the agents to "conform with what they wanted the public to believe, period."

"When they say only eight shots, the anger within me is so great that I practically -- I get very emotional because it is so untrue. It is so untrue," she said.

Contacted by CNN for comment, Sirhan lawyer William Pepper called the alleged FBI alteration of Rhodes-Hughes' story "deplorable" and "criminal" and said it "mirrors the experience of other witnesses."

Other witnesses also mentioned more than eight shots

Law enforcement investigators have always maintained that only eight shots were fired in the RFK assassination, all of them by Sirhan. His small-caliber handgun could hold eight bullets, but no more.

But released witness interview summaries show at least four other people told authorities in 1968 that they heard what could have been more than eight shots. The following four witness accounts appear not in FBI reports but in Los Angeles Police Department summaries:

-- Jesse Unruh, who was speaker of the California Assembly at the time, told police that he was within 20 to 30 feet behind Kennedy when suddenly he heard a "crackle" of what he initially thought were exploding firecrackers. "I don't really quite remember how many reports there were," Unruh told the LAPD. "It sounded to me like somewhere between 5 and 10."

-- Frank Mankiewicz, who had been Kennedy's campaign press secretary, told police that he was trying to catch up to the senator when he suddenly heard sounds that also seemed to him to be "a popping of firecrackers." When an LAPD detective asked Mankiewicz how many of the sounds he'd heard, he answered: "It seemed to me I heard a lot. If indeed it had turned out to have been firecrackers, I probably would have said 10. But I'm sure it was less than that."

-- Estelyn Duffy LaHive, who had been a Kennedy supporter, told police that she was standing just outside the kitchen pantry's west entrance when the shooting erupted. "I thought I heard at least about 10 shots," she told the LAPD.

-- Booker Griffin, another Kennedy supporter, told police that he had just entered the pantry through its east entrance and suddenly heard "two quick" shots followed by a slight pause and then what "sounded like it could have been 10 or 12" additional shots.

An analysis of a recently uncovered tape recording of the shooting detected what an expert said was at least 13 shot sounds erupting over a period of less than six seconds. The audiotape was recorded at the Ambassador Hotel by free-lance newspaper reporter Stanislaw Pruszynski and is the only known soundtrack of the assassination.

Audio expert Philip Van Praag told CNN that his analysis establishes the Pruszynski recording as authentic and the 13 sounds electronically detected on the tape as gunshots.

"The gunshots are established by virtue of my computer analysis of waveform patterns, which clearly distinguishes gunshots from other phenomena," Van Praag said. "This would include phenomena that to human hearing are often perceived as exploding firecrackers, popping camera flashbulbs or bursting balloons."

The Pruszynski recording is now a major point of controversy among the new evidence being argued between the two sides in the Sirhan federal court case.

California Attorney General Harris contends that Van Praag's findings amount to an "interpretation or opinion" that is not universally accepted by acoustic experts. However other audio experts have reported finding more than eight gunshots in Stanislaw Pruszynski's recording.

In 2005, Spence Whitehead of Atlanta told CNN that he had located "at least 9, possibly 11 shot sounds" captured by Pruszynski's audiotape of the Kennedy shooting.

A 2007 Investigation Discovery Channel television documentary reported that Wes Dooley and Paul Pegas of Pasadena, California, along with their colleague Eddy B. Brixen of Copenhagen, Denmark, had located "at least ten" shots in Pruszynski's recording of the kitchen pantry gunfire.



2nd read

• News • Stories • 2014 • July • FBI, Interpol Host Critical Infrastructure Symposium

Director Comey Speaks at WMD Critical Infrastructure Symposium in Miami
FBI Director James Comey speaks at the International Law Enforcement Critical Infrastructure Symposium in Miami on July 7, 2014.


FBI, Interpol Host Critical Infrastructure Symposium
Director Comey Addresses the Importance of Partnerships

07/08/14

FBI Director James Comey was in Miami yesterday, where he spoke at the opening of the four-day International Law Enforcement Critical Infrastructure Symposium. The event, co-hosted by the FBI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Directorate and Interpol, has drawn senior law enforcement officials from more than 90 countries to explore and share best practices for managing WMD and counterterrorism threats targeted against critical infrastructure and to identify common approaches to protect infrastructure and key resources.

Also participating in the symposium are domestic first responders, corporate security officers, and other U.S. federal partners.

“Today, critical infrastructure is all encompassing,” said Director Comey. “It is everything to our country and our world—our dams, our bridges, our highways, our networks,” he added, explaining that the threats we face to our interconnected systems—such as bioterrorism, agroterrorism, and sabotage—are as diverse as our infrastructure itself.

Comey cited examples of threats to infrastructure, to include the armed assault last April on a California power station, the 2008 attack in Mumbai in which gunmen opened fire at a number of locations, and last year’s deadly shootings at a Kenyan shopping mall. He also noted the ninth anniversary of the July 7, 2013 strikes by terrorists who bombed the London Underground and a double-decker bus in a series of coordinated suicide attacks.

“We know these threats are real,” Comey told the audience. “We must together figure out ways to protect our infrastructure, to work together to strengthen our response to a terrorist attack, a tragic accident, or a natural disaster.”

While touching on topics ranging from terrorism, cyber, and WMD threats to training, partnerships, and intelligence, Comey’s theme throughout underscored the importance of open communication and information sharing with our partners in the U.S. and abroad.

Interpol, as an international police organization, is an important partner on which the Bureau relies heavily to help combat threats of all types. The FBI, through its liaison with Interpol, is able to leverage 190 member countries to address challenges around the globe—a very important ability in a constantly evolving global threat environment.

Comey also highlighted the work of our WMD Directorate, each FBI field office’s WMD coordinator, and our two regional WMD assistant legal attachés in Tbilisi and Singapore. “They integrate our counterterrorism, intelligence, counterintelligence, scientific, and technological components and provide timely analysis of the threat and response,” Comey said. “The goal is to shrink the world to respond to the threat.”

The symposium provides the opportunity for participants to help work toward that goal. Through networking and discussions on how to coordinate and cooperate on critical infrastructure preparedness and protection efforts, attendees will strengthen existing partnerships and develop new ones. By rallying the international community around defeating a common threat, our collective chances of success increase.

Director Comey said that our greatest weapon in this fight is unity, which is developed through intelligence sharing and interagency cooperation. “It is built on the idea that standing together, we are smarter and stronger than when we are standing alone,” he said. “Because no one person—no FBI agent, no police officer, no agency, and no country—can prevent or respond to an attack on critical infrastructure alone.”

http://www.thewire.com/national/2014/07 ... ce/374142/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Why Were Five Muslim-American Leaders Subject to NSA Surveillance?

The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald has been teasing a story connecting NSA surveillance to specific Americans, and on Wednesday morning that story was pushed out in the world. According to a story based on documents leaked by Edward Snowden, the U.S. was spying on five Americans — all Muslims — for reasons that remain classified. According to The Intercept, it's not clear whether the government had legal permission to monitor those five Americans between the years 2002 and 2008. The individuals were identified by the reporters through their email addresses.

According to Greenwald's report, those five Americans are: Faisal Gill, a Republican lawyer and political operative and one-time candidate for public office who previously worked as a Senior Policy Advisor at the Department of Homeland Security; Asim Ghafoor, an attorney who has defended terrorism suspects; Hooshang Amirahmadi, a professor of international relations at Rutgers University; Agha Saeed, a former political science professor at California State University; and Nihad Awad, the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

You can read Greenwald's full report for yourself here, but it's important to note that what is arguably the most critical detail contained in this narrative remains a mystery: how, and why, the U.S. government justified spying on these Americans. That information, if it exists on paper, remains classified. In other words, what do these five cases say about how high a bar the U.S. government sets on when it may target a U.S. citizen? We don't know, conclusively. Nor do we know from the report how, or if, the U.S. was granted legal permission to spy on these five Americans. Intelligence agencies are legally barred from surveilling American citizens without warrants, but legal maneuvering to obtain such permission is highly secretive. To the former question, Greenwald's piece seems to make an educated guess, using evidence that would be familiar to those following the U.S.'s post-9/11 national security policy towards American Muslim leaders.

Noting that the FBI is listed as the “responsible agency” for investigating all five Americans, Greenwald called up a former FBI official notorious for his anti-Muslim views to get his take on the spying program. John Guandolo claims to be behind an FBI training program targeting "The Muslim Brotherhood" and "their subversive movement in the United States," and is now a well-known figure on the anti-Muslim national security pundit circuit. Also, Guandolo is long gone from the law enforcement agency. The FBI has had a ... mixed record when it comes to targeting of U.S. Muslim communities, having relied in the past on training materials depicting all U.S. Muslims as potential subversives or terrorists.

Here's what Guandolo told Greenwald about some of the targets of U.S. surveillance, even though none of the men have ever been credibly connected to terrorist activity:

To hear Guandolo tell it, Faisal Gill, the former homeland security official under Bush, was “a major player in the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States.” Asim Ghafoor, Gill’s fellow attorney, is “a jihadi” who was “directly linked to Al Qaeda guys” simply because of his representation of the Al Haramain Foundation. “He had knowledge of who they were and what they were doing,” Guandolo says. (Such logic would subject every lawyer representing defendants accused of terrorism to government surveillance.) To Guandolo, Agha Saeed was yet another secret operative for the Muslim Brotherhood. “He’s a pretty senior guy with them,” Guandolo says, “affiliated with several groups.”

Guandolo also told Greenwald that he participated in the investigation of at least one of the five Americans listed in the Snowden documents. As The Intercept notes, the five men named in their report would be familiar to those Americans who believe in a Muslim conspiracy similar to what Guandolo promotes in his statements.

The implications of the dots connected in the Greenwald report are already having an impact on the American Muslim community. Muslim Advocates's Fatima Kahn released a statement shortly after publication stating, "This report confirms the worst fears of American Muslims." She added, "the federal government has targeted Americans, even those who have served their country in the military and government, simply because of their faith or religious heritage."

In response, The Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Justice Department issued a statement on Wednesday insisting that it does not target any Americans for their religious or political views, though it does not address whether these particular individuals were targeted or why.

No U.S. person can be the subject of surveillance based solely on First Amendment activities, such as staging public rallies, organizing campaigns, writing critical essays, or expressing personal beliefs.

On the other hand, a person who the court finds is an agent of a foreign power under this rigorous standard is not exempted just because of his or her occupation.

see link for full story



http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/07/12/bu ... &referrer=" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


John Seigenthaler, Editor and Aide to Politicians, Dies at 86

July 11, 2014

In October 1954, a man called The Nashville Tennessean and said he was going to jump to his death from a bridge high above the Cumberland River. “Send a reporter and a photographer if you want a story,” he said.

A 27-year-old reporter, John Seigenthaler, climbed out to talk to the man and tucked his leg around the rusty grillwork. After about 40 minutes of an interview that blended questions with pleas to reconsider, Mr. Seigenthaler lunged, grabbing the man by the collar and holding him until the police could drag both men to safety.

The man he rescued said, “I’ll never forgive you.” Mr. Seigenthaler continued to pursue his muscular approach to journalism as a crusading newspaper editor and publisher in Nashville and as the founding editorial director of USA Today. He worked for his friend Robert F. Kennedy in the Justice Department and in his presidential campaign in 1968. And at an age when many people consider retirement, he started a new career, founding the First Amendment Center at Vanderbilt University and in Washington.

He died on Friday at his home in Nashville at 86. The cause was complications of colon cancer, said his son, John M. Seigenthaler, a prime-time news anchor at Al Jazeera America.

Mr. Seigenthaler’s career took him from journalism to politics and back again. He worked on John F. Kennedy’s presidential campaign in 1960 and joined the Justice Department the next year. That May, as a representative of Robert Kennedy, the attorney general, Mr. Seigenthaler was beaten when a mob attacked a busload of Freedom Riders in Montgomery, Ala. He was hit on the head with a lead pipe and suffered a concussion while trying to protect a young woman. John Lewis, now a member of Congress from Georgia, was among the Freedom Riders beaten that day.

After a year at the Justice Department, he was offered the job of editor at The Tennessean and returned to Nashville, beginning a 29-year tenure. He sent a reporter under cover to report on the Ku Klux Klan and hounded the union boss Jimmy Hoffa. When a Tennessean copy editor, Jacque Srouji, was revealed to be an F.B.I. informant, he fired her.

When he subsequently discovered that the F.B.I. was keeping a file on him, he demanded that it be turned over to him and pledged to run it in the newspaper. After a year, he received a heavily redacted copy; it mentioned “allegations of Seigenthaler having illicit relations with young girls.” Mr. Seigenthaler ran it, in a first-person article that he called “the most difficult assignment I have undertaken.”

The statement was slanderous and untrue, he wrote, adding that his wife was “outraged” by the file — “outraged at the F.B.I. and not at me, I am happy to report.”

as a smart criminal justice consumer you
are able to sniff the stench of sulphur and recognize
a FBI public relations infomercial.

Ever read a story about a welder who can weld 1/2 plate steel
with a mig welder in the overhead position?
How about a timber frame carpenter who can build a timber frame without using nails?
nah, didn't think so. Why? Because these occupations don't have a full time taxpayer funded pubic relations department.

couple of reads as always funded by the disinformed taxpayer


1st. read



FBI cyber expert is ex-discount furniture salesman


http://www.mercedsunstar.com/2014/07/13 ... count.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



July 13, 2014

PITTSBURGH — J. Keith Mularski's world has expanded greatly since he stopped selling discount furniture to join the FBI 1998. Especially since he transferred from Washington, D.C., in 2005 to fill a vacancy in the Pittsburgh field office's cyber squad — which he now heads.

Since then, Supervisory Special Agent Mularski has been recognized as a foremost expert on cybercrime. His profile has risen even more since the Justice Department used Mularski's sleuthing to bring two indictments with worldwide ramifications.

In May, five Chinese Army intelligence officers were charged with stealing trade secrets from major manufacturers including U.S. Steel, Alcoa and Westinghouse.

In June, a Russian man was charged with leading a ring that infected hundreds of thousands of computers with identity-thieving software, then using the stolen information to drain $100 million from bank accounts worldwide.

Mularski, 44, said in April during an oral history interview for the National Law Enforcement Museum that he became a furniture salesman out of college because jobs were hard to come by then. He spent about five years in the business before joining the FBI.

"I was in private industry beforehand. But I've kind of always liked computers," Mularski told The Associated Press during a recent interview.

All 56 FBI field offices have cyber squads. Mularski chose Pittsburgh largely because of family considerations — he grew up in suburban White Oak, the son of a steelworker.

"It kind of looked like cyber was the wave of the future," Mularski said. "The majority of all my computer training was just on-the-job training at the bureau."

It has proved remarkably effective.

Even before the Chinese and Russian cases made worldwide headlines


2nd read

see link for full story


http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/k/ke ... dence.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PROLOGUE

Tainting Evidence
Inside the Scandals at the FBI Crime Lab
By JOHN F. KELLY and PHILLIP K. WEARNE
The Free Press

Read the Review

Prologue: Examining the Examiners

The tall, graying legislator strode past the American flag onto the platform of Committee Room 226. With a quick adjustment of his black-and-white spotted tie, he seated himself at the center of a semicircular dais under the carved eagle on the hardwood-paneled wall. As the lights of six television cameras were switched on and photographers and cameramen began to jostle for position, Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa began to read slowly from three sheets of paper. It was his opening statement as chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight into the Courts at hearings entitled, "A Review of the FBI Laboratory: Beyond the Inspector General's Report."

His purpose, he explained, was to help restore public confidence in federal law enforcement in general and the Federal Bureau of Investigation in particular. But the facts the senator went on to outline hardly seemed likely to do that. The hearings had had to be postponed twice, he stated, because of the FBI's refusal to cooperate by supplying requested documentation and by making FBI employees available to testify without the bureau's lawyers present. This, Senator Grassley said, was despite FBI director Louis Freeh's appeal for more oversight to another congressional subcommittee just four months earlier, when he had stated that the FBI could be the most dangerous agency in the country if "not scrutinized carefu


country if "not scrutinized carefully."

Senator Grassley said the FBI was being hypocritical. "It is not the message that rings true. It's the actions. The Bureau's actions contradict the director's assertion that it is inviting oversight. And until the actions match the words, the ghosts of FBI past are still very much in the present." He went on to say that he expected the requested documentation to arrive the moment the hearings finished. In fact, within an hour, Senator Grassley had to apologize to the packed committee room for being "so cynical." The documents had arrived but were so heavily redacted as to be virtually useless, he said, holding up page after page of blacked-out FBI memos.

Senator Grassley's hearings took place in the wake of the release five months earlier of a damning 517-page report by the Inspector General's Office of the Department of Justice, the result of an eighteen-month investigation into the FBI laboratory. The investigators had included a panel of five internationally renowned forensic scientists, the first time in its sixty-five-year history that the FBI lab, considered by many -- not least, by itself -- the best in the world, had been subject to any form of external scientific scrutiny. The findings were alarming. FBI examiners had given scientifically flawed, inaccurate, and overstated testimony under oath in court; had altered the lab reports of examiners to give them a pro-prosecutorial slant, and had failed to document tests and examinations from which they drew incriminating conclusions, thus ensuring that their work could never be properly checked.

FBI lab management, meanwhile, had failed to check examinations and lab reports; had overseen a woefully inadequate record retention system; and had not only failed to investigate serious and credible allegations of incompetence but had covered them up. Management had also resisted any form of external scrutiny of the lab and had failed to establish and enforce its own validated scientific procedures and protocols -- the same ones that had been issued by managers themselves in an effort to combat the lab's known shortcomings in the first place.

But the IG's report, shocking as its conclusions were, was severely limited. It had looked at just three of seven units in the FBI lab's Scientific Analysis Section, a fraction of the lab's total of twenty-seven units.* The IG had been mandated to look into the specific allegations of just one man, Dr. Frederic Whitehurst, a Ph.D. chemist and FBI supervisory special agent who for eight years, until 1994, had worked solely on explosives-residue analysis -- trace detection, and identification of the residue left behind by explosions in the lab's Materials Analysis Unit.

For nearly ten years, until he was suspended and put on "administrative leave" just weeks before the IG's report was published in April 1997, Whitehurst had reported his own observations and what others had told him. Underpinning his complaints and their persistence were three things: the unscientific nature of so much of what was being passed off as science in the FBI lab; the culture of pro-prosecution bias rather than scientific truth that pervaded the lab, including the possibly illegal withholding of exculpatory information; and the complete inability of the FBI lab or its management to investigate itself and correct these problems.

Not only had the IG report confined itself to Whitehurst's admittedly limited sphere of knowledge within the FBI lab, it had no mandate to look into the evidentiary matters raised, to ask how particular cases might have been affected, or to look at the possibility of charges against FBI lab employees heavily criticized by the report. Given the plentiful evidence of pro prosecution bias, false testimony, and inadequate forensic work, it was only logical to assume that cases had been affected. How many people might be in jail unjustly? How many might be on Death Row by mistake? If innocent people were in jail for crimes they did not commit, how many guilty ones were walking the streets?

Senator Grassley and others in Congress quickly realized that the inspector general's report had to be the beginning, not the end. The issues Whitehurst had raised, the inspector general had investigated, and now the hearings were examining further, went to the heart of the credibility of justice and the courts in the United States. In the end, the IG's report had raised more questions than it had answered, not least perhaps the most important of all: How had this happened in the first place and how might it be avoided in the future?

The task of assessing what exculpatory evidence had been withheld, how many cases had been affected, and who in the FBI lab, if anyone, should face charges for what had been uncovered had now fallen to a task force in the Criminal Division of the Justice Department. The task force had to identify the prosecutors in each case, then release forensic documentation to them in order to allow them to decide if anything crucial had been withheld. The floodgates, in other words, were controlled by the nation's prosecutors, whose records had been built on legal victories they were now supposed to question. "Is it cynical to question whether these prosecutors are virtually the worst officials to objectively evaluate tainted evidence in their own cases? Clearly the fox is guarding the henhouse," noted Congressman Robert Wexler at the hearings.

The Justice Department refuses to provide updates as to the progress of the task force or even to name its members. However, the scale of the potential fallout is clear: just one of the numerous examiners heavily criticized by the IG's report handled more than six hundred cases in a decade of work at the FBI lab. Defense lawyers believe that thousands of cases will be affected. "The IG's report was a starting, not a finishing point," says one attorney. "I think we will be living with the ramifications of this for years, and not just in terms of the number of appeals you can expect. No defense lawyer in the country is going to take what the FBI lab says at face value any more. For years they were trusted on the basis of glossy advertising. Now the real product turns out to be a dud."

As Fred Whitehurst, a mustached Vietnam veteran sat, arms crossed, at the back of the room, Senator Grassley went on to recount that it was "the FBI's say-one-thing-do-another habit" that made him hesitant to simply accept assurances that everything was now in order at the FBI lab. "The subcommittee's investigation has revealed that systemic problems remain at the lab....The problems exist and flourish because of a cultural disease within the FBI," Grassley continued. "The question is, how will these changes ensure the integrity of the scientific process within the lab, which seeks to discover the truth, when a culture exists within the FBI to apparently cut corners and slant lab reports in favor of the prosecution, which seeks to convict. The IG report did not reconcile this dilemma. The FBI will not admit the problem exists. That is why we are here today."

During the hearings, senators would hear Congressman Robert Wexler call for legislation to ensure the FBI's "future integrity" and express outrage that Whitehurst, "the courageous whistle-blower, was out...while dozens of FBI agents who suppressed evidence, altered evidence, or testified falsely were still there." Clearly angered by what he had heard at the previous hearings four months earlier, Wexler would now accuse the IG of failing to draw logical conclusions from its own findings. How could obvious lying on the witness stand not be considered perjury? How could the systematic alteration of lab reports to make them more incriminating not be considered intentional?

The committee would hear four past and current FBI lab employees all express support for Whitehurst and the general charges he had made. They would hear Dr. Drew Campbell Richardson, an adviser to the FBI lab's deputy assistant director and a highly qualified scientist, say that the FBI lab ignored scientific evidence that did not suit its purposes. They would hear how Bill Tobin, the FBI's metallurgist, and Jim Corby, Whitehurst's former boss, had made repeated complaints about the same examiners Whitehurst had accused, only to have them ignored. And they would hear how one of those heavily criticized in the report had been promoted to head the FBI lab's Explosives Unit, despite being under investigation at the time, passing over Ed Kelso, a widely respected firearms instructor and bomb expert with twenty-five years experience.

This book seeks to explore how all this happened. It seeks to go beyond the inspector general's informative but restricted investigation of the FBI lab and tell the story that the report did not. It seeks to go beyond Fred Whitehurst's serious but limited allegations and show how what he charged applies to other parts of the FBI lab that were never investigated. We have done this with the help of hundreds of hours of interviews of current and former FBI lab staff and thousands of pages of documents, memos, lab reports, interviews, and audits, many of them only released under the Freedom of Information Act after months of stonewalling by the FBI and the IG's office. Some of these documents were the raw material of the IG's report, a number of them indicating problems with lab units and cases never investigated by the investigators.

There was, of course, no cooperation from the FBI in the writing of this book, although we were allowed to talk to Fred Whitehurst on the same terms as the rest of the media -- essentially, without reference to specific cases. In August 1997, the authors submitted a request to interview twenty past and present lab staff; in September we were told our request had been lost; in October it was still pending. In November the authors received a letter thanking us for our interest in the FBI but turning down our request. One of the themes of this book is the FBI's obsession with how it appears rather than what it actually is. This book and its subject did not fit the Bureau's agenda.

In the Introduction and Chapter 1 we look at the state of forensic science in this country and the FBI lab in particular. We show that while claiming to have investigated Whitehurst's allegations and found no problems, management was fully aware that there were massive problems with the FBI lab, its science, its supervision, and its safety. We show that management knew that if it ever agreed to real external scrutiny, if it was ever forced to publish the research data on which its forensic tests were based, if it ever had to make public the results of its internal proficiency tests, the image of the FBI lab as the best forensic laboratory in the world would rapidly dissolve. For this, as Senator Grassley remarked at the Senate hearings, is a culture that rewards "public image-building over discovering the truth."

The extent of the lab's dysfunction becomes clear in Chapters 2 through 8, where we look at major cases the FBI lab has handled. In particular, we detail the failings of four key FBI staff members -- Terry Rudolph, Tom Thurman, Roger Martz, and David Williams -- whose practices in several high-profile cases demonstrate the dangers of the lab's modus operandi. Some of these are cases the IG looked at -- the World Trade Center bombing, the Unabomber investigation, the VANPAC case, the 0.J. Simpson trial. Others are cases the IG did not investigate or examined only partially -- the lab's role in the Ruby Ridge investigation, the Jeffrey MacDonald case, the Oklahoma City bombing.

All of these are celebrated cases involving massive forensic and other investigative resources. The FBI lab's role in all of them raises a huge and still unanswered question: If this is what happens in these high-profile, well-scrutinized cases, what is happening in thousands of less publicized ones?

In talking to dozens of forensic scientists and FBI lab personnel, one thing has become clear to us. Few were surprised at the revelations of the IG report. Many people, inside and out, have known for many years that there were serious problems at the FBI lab. Very few, however, inside or out, have chosen to speak out. With a few honorable exceptions, forensic scientists outside the FBI lab have been reluctant to take on the Bureau, which now wields enormous power throughout the profession, through training programs, research grants, and consultancy work. Many of those working inside the FBI lab seem to have been intimidated by the climate of fear that is a constant theme of Fred Whitehurst's 237 written complaints. In failing to come forward, or in some cases even to support Fred Whitehurst when he did, they have only themselves to blame for the broad-brush condemnation with which all at the FBI lab, good or bad, have now been tainted. They are in essence living testimony to what Senator Grassley describes as the FBI's "cultural problem."

*Even a recent history of the FBI lab, as this book is, presents one accounting dilemma. The number of units and actions, and even their names, have changed continuously over the years. A case in point is the Hairs and Fibers Unit, later called the Microscopic Analysis Unit, now named the Trace Evidence Unit. Ultimately, the problems described here remain, regardless of the name.


Introduction