COINTELPRO Operations in the 21st Century

2004, January 29: 21st Century COINTELPRO

By Big Brother government. The American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California and members of Peace Fresno filed requests on this day under the Freedom of Information Act to seek information related to Peace Fresno being infiltrated by an undercover sheriff's detective. Aaron Kilner regularly attended meetings of the group, telling members who asked what he did for a living that he was independently wealthy. The group realized it had been infiltrated after Kilner's photograph appeared in a local newspaper when he was killed in an off-duty motorcycle accident on 30 Aug. 2003. The requests were filed with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Attorney's office, which operates a terrorism task force with local law enforcement agencies in the Fresno area. ACLU-NC staff attorney Julia Harumi Mass commented in a statement, "The federal government is targeting innocent Americans engaged in nothing more than lawful dissent." The group had already filed requests for information with the Fresno County Sheriff's Department and the Fresno Police Department under the California Public Records Act. Both agencies denied having any records regarding Peace Fresno or its members, and both also refused to turn over manuals, pamphlets, and procedures relating to intelligence and surveillance which had also been requested.

Return to chronology 29 Jan 2004

2004, February 07: Report on 21st Century COINTELPRO

By Big Brother government. A federal judge in Iowa issued a subpoena on 03 Feb for Drake University to turn over records about a gathering of anti-war activists and others for four protesters to appear before a grand jury. The one to the university seems to be the first such subpoena in decades. The subpoenas focus on a 15 Nov 2003 forum called, "Stop the Occupation! Bring the Iowa Guard Home!" The forum was held the day before an anti-war rally at Iowa National Guard headquarters in Johnston, at which twelve protesters were arrested. Aside from the records about who attended the forum, the subpoena also orders the university to divulge all records relating to the local chapter of the National Lawyers Guild. This is a New York-based legal activist organization; it sponsored the forum. This group was once targeted in the 1950s for alleged ties to communism. It announced on Friday, 06 Feb, that it will ask a federal court to quash the subpoena on Monday, 09 Feb.

According to Associated Press, which got a copy of the subpoena, the Drake subpoena asks for records of the request for a meeting room, "all documents indicating the purpose and intended participants in the meeting, and all documents or recordings which would identify persons that actually attended the meeting." As well as for campus security records, "reflecting any observations made of the Nov. 15, 2003, meeting, including any records of persons in charge or control of the meeting, and any records of attendees of the meeting."

Guild President Michael Ayers said in a statement, "The law is clear that the use of the grand jury to investigate protected political activities or to intimidate protesters exceeds its authority." Brian Terrell of the peace ministry, one of those subpoenaed, commented, "This is exactly what people feared would happen. The civil liberties of everyone in this country are in danger. How we handle that here in Iowa is very important on how things are going to happen in this country from now on." A source with knowledge of the investigation said a judge had issued a gag order forbidding school officials from discussing the subpoena.

[So not only are the right of association and free political speech being attacked, but the targets are not even allowed to talk about this apsect of their personal lives. --MN]

Return to chronology 07 Feb 2004

2004, February 10: 21st Century COINTELPRO repudiated

By We the People. Federal prosecutors withdrew a subpoena asking Drake University to turn over the list of participants at a November anti-war forum, as well as subpoenas ordering four activists to testify before a grand jury. U. S. Attorney Stephen O'Meara did not resist motions to quash the subpoenas and U. S. District Judge Ronald E. Longstaff then lifted the gag order prohibiting University employees from discussing the case. A spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office, Al Overbaugh, said the investigation was not over, although he could not comment further. The Iowa Civil Liberties Union seems to agree that this affair is not over as it has pledged to file legal motions and "use other avenues" to find out why the subpoenas were served in the first place. The prosecutors seemed to back down as the investigation drew nationwide condemnation from civil liberties advocates, politicians and peace activists. The federal investigation became public the week before this when a Polk County sheriff's deputy - who identified himself as a member of the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force - delivered a number of subpoenas. Facing growing concern, the U. S. attorney in Des Moines, Stephen Patrick O'Meara, took the unusual step Monday of acknowledging the secret grand jury investigation, although he denied the investigation was in any way related to terrorism. Federal authorities said on 09 Feb that part of the investigation focused on whether a "prior agreement to violate federal law" had been hatched at the 15 Nov conference.

Court papers say Elton Davis was arrested after he "entered onto federal property and remained there after being ordered to leave" by federal officials. On this day, Davis denied crossing any official boundary. He said he simply walked up to a gate and asked to speak to a commanding officer, and then related his encounter as, "I told him I was there to establish an ongoing presence at the base. I would like to occupy the base. I would like his help with accommodations, would like an office . . . to work with the command authority to bring home people who were trapped in Iraq by a failure of foreign policy. At which point he almost fell down laughing."

A few comments about the affair by civil libertarians are:

• Drake President David Maxwell said in court papers unsealed on this day: "Whatever one's views of the political positions articulated at that meeting, the university cherishes and protects the right to express those views without fear of reprisal or recrimination."

• Brian Terrell, leader of the Catholic Peace Ministry and one of the four called before the grand jury, 10 Feb: "We made them want to stop, and we have to make sure they never want to do this again."

• Ben Stone, executive director of the ICLU:
  • "If it was just a trespassing investigation, why seek the membership records of the National Lawyers Guild? If this was an attempt to chill protests through the aggressive policing of a run-of-the-mill crime, we've got a serious problem in America. "
  • "In the two years since 9/11, we have heard one refrain from the Justice Department every time the executive branch seeks to arrogate more power to itself: 'trust us, we're the government.' But, if it is going to be issuing secretive slapdash subpoenas and then rescinding them to save face, how can we trust that more expansive surveillance and investigative powers will be used properly?"

• Bruce Nestor, a Minneapolis attorney and past president of NLG: "It's really hard to tell what this means in a broader or policy sense for the Department of Justice. Clearly the FBI memo reported by The New York Times in October, directed the joint terrorism task forces to compile info about political protesters. The actions of the U.S. attorney's office in Iowa appear to be consistent with the directive in that memo.

  "Whether that means that the Department of Justice intends to expand the use of the grand jury to investigate political protest movements is unclear. In this instance they clearly used the grand jury fore (sic) that purpose."

• Sheldon Steinbach, general counsel for the American Council on Education, which represents 1,800 colleges, including Drake: "[it's] a one-time affair that's not likely to curtail activity on other campuses. This seems to be an excessive gunslinging act by an overly ambitious U.S. attorney. If anything, for the moment, it strengthens and reminds institutions of their appropriate role in society to provide a marketplace of ideas."

• Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, in a letter to Attorney General John Ashcroft on 09 Feb: "Our country has experienced dark episodes in which the government has curtailed citizens' civil liberties in the name of fighting enemies. I call on you to give the Iowa case your personal attention to help ensure that we do not see another such episode in Iowa or anywhere in America."

• U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley concerned about the impression left on peace activists: "I will be following this case closely to help make sure that the Department of Justice protects and defends people's constitutional rights."

David Goldman, a lawyer for Drake University and representing the (formerly) subpoenaed Sally Frank, adviser to the Drake chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, said his client and others who were subject to the subpoenas and gag order are considering filing civil lawsuits. He commented, "They are very concerned about how their rights were what they believe trampled upon and are talking about what to do about it."

Forum organizers suspect that a man who attended the meeting, and who gave an incorrect phone number and did not show up at the protest, might have been an undercover government agent. Organizers pointed to an e-mail which advertised the forum, and which federal prosecutors had obtained, which suggested the group might have been monitored in the weeks leading up to the forum.

You can also see the various reports and commentaries which are the source articles for this entry:

• The breaking story was published at Truthout.org on 07 Feb.

• There was a follow up article at First Amendment Center on 10 Feb.

• There is an article about the feds backing down at the First Amendment Center, by AP, of course, and with a slightly different slant than the one reprinted at Freedom Of Information Center.

• Criminal Dissent, by Bill Berkowitz, 12 Feb 2004, originally at TomPaine.com and reprinted at Alternet.Org. An excellent commentary.

Return to chronology 10 Feb 2004

2004, February 13: 21st Century COINTELPRO by the U.S. Army

By Big Brother government. On 09 Feb two Army agents visited the University of Texas Law School and knocked on various doors in pursuit of a list of participants, and a video, of a conference, which took place the previous week. On this day, Sahar Aziz, a UT law student, said that organizers of the event would not willingly turn over to Army investigators either the list or a video of the conference, titled "Islam and the Law: The Question of Sexism." He was joined by representatives of the National Lawyers Guild, the Freedom and Justice Foundation and the Texas Civil Rights Project in accusing the U.S. Army of spying on the conference and denouncing the investigation as a "campaign of fear." He is quoted: "We believe that it is inappropriate for us to invite the public and the student body to come and freely exchange ideas and then to turn around and relay their personal information to the intelligence community."

Jim Harrington, of the Texas Civil Rights Project, commented that the tactics were meant to, "intimidate and scare people from using the First Amendment," and further said, "We're going to make the Army back off -- and all the other intelligence operations -- in the name of the First Amendment, or we're going to see them in court." Bill Allison, a professor at the school who is working independently to help the students, said that the Army has not used subpoenas or search warrants to find more information, and commented, "It is reasonable that these students should be quite fearful that the military comes into this school to gather information." He also raised questions about why Army lawyers would attend the conference, which he characterized as apolitical and educational.

Return to chronology 13 Feb 2004

2004, July 08: 21st Century COINTELPRO against Hip-Hop artists

By Big Brother government. Salim Muwakkil, in a commentary which is reprinted at Alternet.org, details police surveillance of purveyors and producers of the genre. He wrote in part:

Miami officials said they were compelled to do a crash course on hip-hop after realizing their city was becoming a favorite destination. But just like their big-city mentors, Miami cops' actions are being driven by stereotypes. "A lot of, if not most, rappers belong to some sort of gang," Miami Police Sergeant Rafael Tapenes told the Herald. Law enforcement conflates gangs and hip-hop because young black men are at the core of both -- the same black youth who have had problems with American law enforcement since the days of the slave patrols.

[There seems to be a bit of knee-jerk reactionist hypersensitivity in this one. I had decided when I first quickly scanned the source article to file this one under COINTELPRO operations, not because one of the industry members Muwakkil cited likened it to COINTELPRO. I only saw that when I read the article more closely. I do not see any indication of federal involvement; even municipal police forces can have legitimate concerns over homeland security. So far, my tendency is to chalk this one up to an overreaction by the cops; not the feds. I'm filing it under COINTELPRO because even though it is not a federal case, it still conforms to the type for such an operation --MN]

Return to chronology 08 Jul 2004

2004, August 17: 21st Century COINTELPRO

By Big Brother government. An Associated Press article posted to the First Amendment Center web site reported that federal agents and city police are keeping tabs on activists and others, including making unannounced visits to people's homes, conducting interviews, monitoring Web sites, and monitoring meetings. Cassandra M. Chandler, the FBI Assistant Director, said in a statement released on 16 Aug, "The F.B.I. is not monitoring groups or interviewing individuals unless we receive intelligence that such individuals or groups may be planning violent and disruptive criminal activity or have knowledge of such activity." [...] "the F.B.I. conducted interviews, within the bounds of the U.S. Constitution, in order to determine the validity of the threat information. Violent acts are not protected by the U.S. Constitution, and the FBI has a duty to prevent such acts and to identify and bring to justice those who commit them."

It was also reported in an article reprinted at TruthOut.org that Representative John Conyers Jr. [D-Michigan], Jerrold Nadler [New York]. and Robert C. Scott [Virginia], all of the House Judiciary Committee, called for a Justice Department investigation into the Federal Bureau of Investigation's actions on this day. This article detailed the following actions and ramifications thereof:

• In recent weeks, beginning last month before the Democratic National Convention in Boston, F.B.I. agents have contacted a number of people who have been active in political demonstrations in at least six states: Colorado, Illinois, Kansas, Massachusetts, Missouri and New York. Many of those contacted have been active in past demonstrations, and agents have asked whether they planned acts of violence at upcoming protests, whether they knew of anyone who did and whether they realized it was a crime to withhold such information.

• Three young men in Missouri were also trailed by federal agents and subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury last month to tell what they knew of protest plans, forcing them to cancel a planned trip to Boston to participate in a demonstration there.

• Officials of the F.B.I. would not say how many interviews the bureau had conducted.

• Civil rights advocates who have monitored the process estimated that at least several dozen people had received visits from agents at their homes and elsewhere in recent weeks. They said they were continuing to collect anecdotal information from demonstrators who had been approached by federal agents.

• In a newly disclosed episode in Colorado, two college students said that an F.B.I. agent approached the faculty adviser for their campus group late last month and that the agent showed photographs of the students, Mark Silverstein, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado, said. The students did not want their names or college disclosed, Mr. Silverstein said, because "they're really scared out of their minds."

Anthony Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, reportedly said that he was troubled by the pre-emptive nature of the inquiries, which he said had deterred some demonstrators from protesting; he is quoted, "This looks like it's much more about intimidation and coercion than about criminal conduct. It's not enough for the F.B.I. to say that there's the potential for criminal activity. That's not the legal threshold, and if that were really the case, they could investigate anybody." The ACLU reported on this movement at its web site on 16 Aug. In that

[While what Chandler said is true as far as it goes, history, in the form of the COINTELPRO operations of the civil rights movement, has proven that most activism groups are squeaky clean enough that the FBI has to manufacture evidence against them. Assuming that these groups of a priori guilt because of the minority of groups which probably will employ riotous behaviour (but not "terrorism", except in the beady brains of the would-be oppressors), is also a violation of the assumption of innocence. --MN]

Return to chronology 17 Aug 2004

2004, August 23: An examination of 21st Century COINTELPRO

By Steve Weissman. A long time civil rights activist and journalist who now writes for Truthout.org, he had a commentary about the recent FBI incursions against activists printed there. He wrote in part:

As a Vietnam anti-war protester and then an investigative journalist exposing undercover CIA operations against European and Third World governments, labor movements, and others who did not fit in with Washington's view of how the world should be run, I frequently saw how police and intelligence agencies gather, use, and make up intelligence. So, with all respect to my fellow civil libertarians, stifling protest and chilling free speech are only part of what the the lawmen are now doing.

The other part threatens us far more. Even before Congress seriously considers creating a domestic intelligence service, as some damned fools have suggested they do, the Joint Terrorism Task Force, FBI, and local cops are quietly building their own ad-hoc secret police. And like other politicized gumshoes throughout history, they will increasingly collect information on everyone they can, use it however they can, and put their hooks into as much of our private and political lives as we let them get away with.

In his piece, he also compared the original movement with this resurgence.

He also offered a simple solution for when law enforcement officials show up to question you about your lawful activities: just don't let them in your home. There are also other tips on how to take control of such a situation which are not only perfectly legal, but are exercises of your rights.

Return to chronology 23 Aug 2004

2004, August 25: More tales of 21st Century COINTELPRO

By Matthew Rothschild. In this latest round of whistleblowing on intimidation tactics by the Bush administration, Mr. Rothschild tells the stories of Paul Bame, Sarah Bardwell, and the three students mentioned above, in this article reposted to Alternet.org. This article clearly illustrates the climate of chill being perpetrated by the so-called Joint Terrorism Task Force.

[Addendum (04 Sep 2004:) On 30 Aug, Nat Hentoff waded into the fray with a commentary printed on The Washington Times web site; and which was reprinted at the First Amendment Center web site. --MN]

Return to chronology 25 Aug 2004

2004, December 02: Anti-21st Century COINTELPRO

By the ACLU. the organization filed Freedom of Information Act requests with the FBI yesterday to try to find out why why bureau task forces set up to combat terrorism had also looked into anti-war, animal rights, and environmental groups. According to the ACLU, dozens of organizations have been subjected to scrutiny. Ann Beeson, the ACLU's associate legal counsel, is quoted, "We think it's clear that the public is interested in the possible return of FBI spying on political and religious groups." According to Ms. Beeson, one of the requests is to seek information on how the task forces are funded, to determine if they are rewarded with government money by inflating the number of cases related to terrorism.

ACLU affiliates in California and New Jersey have previously filed lawsuits seeking similar information, and these information requests were being filed with FBI headquarters in Washington, as well as at field offices in:

• Colorado,
• Iowa,
• Illinois,
• Michigan,
• Oregon,
• New York,
• Virginia, and
• Massachusetts.

The FBI denies singling out individuals or groups for surveillance or investigation based solely on activities protected by the Constitution's guarantees of free speech. Officials say agents adhere strictly to Justice Department guidelines requiring evidence of criminal activity or indications that a person may know something about a crime.

[The FBI can deny it all it wants, but there are a number of incidents that need explaining, and Bush administration tactics of suppression are a well established pattern of behaviour. And John Ashcroft has been particularly active in civil liberties erosions. At first glance, I'd say that the request for funding information is a fishing expedition, but then I figured that such an activity would be in keeping with the behaviour alleged by Ms. Sibel Edmonds in a 60 Minutes interview, in which she said that FBI translators were required to drag their feet in the interest of better funding. --MN]
(see 18 Jul 2004)

Return to chronology 02Dec 2004

2005, January 07: Illustrating the folly of COINTELPRO

By Ed Rampell. This examination of the folly of McCarthyism was posted to AlterNet.org. It is a rousing condemnation via exposé of the hysteria of the times, and an oblique warning concerning the Bush administration hysteria upon which is based the "War on Terror". The piece stems from a book review of The Gordon File, by screenwriter Bernard Gordon, who was a victim of McCarthyism. He was kept under investigation for twenty-five years and never charged with anything.

Return to chronology 07 Jan 2005