June 13, 2008
KLAS TV in Las Vegas reports:
The head of the state Homeland Security Commission puts schools as the number one terrorist target to protect in the state. He follows that closely by the Las Vegas mega-casinos. The information came out of the state Homeland Security Commission meeting today…. When you break it down, Doctor Dale Carrison [head of Nevada's Homeland Security Commission] says domestic terrorism is more likely to happen here than foreign terrorism. He says domestic terrorists would target schools.
|Not only does the evil white version of al-Qaeda want to attack school kids, but casinos as well, never mind that there is a serious lack of terrorism in Nevada and the United States at large, according to official admission.|
One has to wonder if Mr. Carrison forgot to take his meds. “There has been more domestic terrorism than there has been foreign. 9/11 brought the foreign terrorism home,” he told KLAS.
In fact, domestic terrorism is almost non-existent — few arrests, less prosecutions, almost zero convictions. As the Los Angeles Times noted last month, “the number of terrorism prosecutions ending up in court… has continued to decline, in some cases precipitously,” but this has not stopped the government from engaging in attacks against the Fourth Amendment. “Law enforcement officials say … additional surveillance powers have been critically important in ways the public does not always see. Threats can be mitigated, they say, by … letting them know that authorities are watching them.”
It’s not members of the supposed blue eyed, blond haired al-Qaeda the government snoops. It’s antiwar protesters and other such malcontents. “The Federal Bureau of Investigation has collected extensive information on the tactics, training and organization of antiwar demonstrators and has advised local law enforcement officials to report any suspicious activity at protests to its counterterrorism squads, according to interviews and a confidential bureau memorandum,” the New York Times reported in 2003.
“We’re not concerned with individuals who are exercising their constitutional rights,” an FBI official told the newspaper. “But it’s obvious that there are individuals capable of violence at these events. We know that there are anarchists that are actively involved in trying to sabotage and commit acts of violence at these different events, and we also know that these large gatherings would be a prime target for terrorist groups.”
In Canada, for instance, at an SPP protest last August, the “anarchists” were in fact police provocateurs. During the G8 last year, cops admitted dressing up in black clothing and acting like so-called anarchists. In New York, “disguised officers or others working with them [infiltrated] seven public gatherings since August 2004,” according to the New York Times. “Beyond collecting information, some of the undercover officers or their associates are seen on … tape having influence on events. At a demonstration last year during the Republican National Convention, the sham arrest of a man secretly working with the police led to a bruising confrontation between officers in riot gear and bystanders.”
It is said “eco-terrorists” of the sort mentioned by Geraldo Rivera — the coiffured talking head has lumped 9/11 truth activists into this group — are a threat to the established order, but after the FBI arrested a few of these folks in 2006 it was revealed during a trial that “the only member of the [Earth Liberation Front] who did any serious plotting was the FBI’s own informant.” According to Jennifer Van Bergen, writing for Raw Story in June, 2006, an FBI provocateur “tried to provoke conflict at various advocacy events and violent incidents with police to get people arrested.” A simple Google search reveals dozens of such incidents.
“In an analysis of 120 informant files from around the country, the Justice Department’s inspector general, Glenn A. Fine, found that FBI agents violated procedures in 87 percent of the cases, including some in which informants allegedly engaged in illegal activity without proper oversight or permission,” the Washington Post reported in 2005. Making an excuse for this, “FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III told Fine’s investigators that many agents found it difficult to comply with complicated paperwork requirements for confidential informants.”
Mueller’s explanation is, of course, hogwash. The FBI has used such illegal tactics for many decades. In the 1960s, for instance, “anti-war activists didn’t realize the extent to which the authorities were destroying their movement from within by using agents provocateurs and informants, and from the outside by using trumped-up charges, anonymous denunciations and snitch jackets, and stories planted in the media,” writes Daniel Brandt. It was called COINTELPRO and it is alive and well today, legalized under the Patriot Act and a flurry of presidential directives.
The FBI, writes Camille T. Taiara for the San Francisco Bay Guardian, “continues to issue secret Intelligence Bulletins… on a weekly basis” and “requires law-enforcement agencies nationwide to keep an eye on ‘possible indicators of protest activity and report any potentially illegal acts to the nearest FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force,’ according to a leaked FBI Intelligence Bulletin issued Oct. 15, 2003.” It has nothing to do with a phantom white al-Qaeda and everything to do with stifling dissent and smashing the Bill of Rights.
“Nevada invested tens of millions of dollars in grant funding for fusion centers and computer programs to help police identify foreign terrorist threats,” reports KLAS, never mind there is no “foreign terrorist threat.” As the Federation of American Scientists noted earlier this month, there is a genuine “absence of a widespread domestic terrorist threat” in the United States, no “evolving terrorist threat,” and thus the very existence of so-called fusion centers and “collaborative law enforcement and intelligence organizations” are in question. “There is, more often than not, insufficient purely ‘terrorist’ activity to support a multi-jurisdictional and multi-governmental level fusion center that exclusively processes terrorist activity,” Milton Nenneman, a Sacramento police officer, wrote in his master thesis.
So, what to do? “Fusion centers must consider analyzing or processing other criminal activity, in addition to terrorist activity, in order to maintain the skills and interest of the analysts, as well as the participation and data collection of the emergency responder community.”
Mr. Nenneman may or may not know it, but the idea is not to fight al-Qaeda terrorism — admitted to be all but non-existent — but impose a surveillance and police state grid on the American people. As Bud Schultz writes in It Did Happen Here: Recollections of Political Repression in America, the FBI “is the most well known and perhaps the mainstay of American’s political police.”
Since Schultz wrote his book in 1990, however, a lot of things have changed. In the wake of the inside job on September 11, 2001, the FBI has made room for the Pentagon, the CIA (now admitted to work domestically), and the newly minted Department of Homeland Security with its state spawned apparatus reaching down into increasingly militarized police departments across the land.
As Nenneman realized in his thesis, the “war on terror” is now about garden variety crime and what was once considered non-crime and even constitutionally protected activity — from protesting against illegal and immoral wars to resisting tyrannical government. Now cops on the street, indoctrinated in the newly minted definition of terrorism, are harassing, arresting, even beating and tasering people who dare ask questions of our anointed political class at public events. It is now a crime to pass out political DVDs on street corners and at the local mall, as We Are Change Colorado recently discovered.
|Alex Jones LIVE, A Fourth Hour Now Added To The Infowars Radio Show For Members
Click here to get your subscription today!
This article was posted: Friday, June 13, 2008 at 9:33 am