Voice of Revolution

Testing Military Command and Control Inside the U.S.

NORTHCOM Plans Five-Day Martial Law Exercise

The United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) recently announced plans for an “exercise in terrorism preparedness,” called Vigilant Shield 2008. The exercise will be conducted from October 15 to October 20, mainly in Oregon and Arizona as well as the U.S. colony of Guam in the Pacific.

The test involves the simultaneous detonation of “three radiological dispersal devices within the NORTHCOM areas of responsibility” — which include the U.S., Canada and Mexico. NORTHCOM, the Department of Homeland Defense (DHS), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and “local, state, and federal responders” will all be involved in the exercise. In addition the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) will engage in “detection and defense events” taking place “across all the exercise venues, to exercise the ability to mobilize resources for aerospace defense, aerospace control, maritime warning, and coordination of air operations in a disaster area.”

Vigilant Shield will be conducted together with the “Top Officials 4” exercise, which brings together the military and other top government officials. According to NORTHCOM, the exercises “will provide local, state, tribal, interagency, Department of Defense, and non-governmental organizations and agencies involved in homeland security and homeland defense the opportunity to participate in a full range of exercise scenarios that will better prepare participants to prevent and respond to national crises.” The exercises will be conducted “throughout the United States with several partner nations (Australia, Canada and Britain).”

Among the main goals of the test are to “demonstrate multi-agency, multi-jurisdictional unity of effort in support of a civilian-led response to a national crisis;” “reinforce operational and strategic relationships between USNORTHCOM and DHS” and “evaluate various combatant commands’ operational coordination.” They also include exercising “USNORTHCOM’s Ballistic Missile Defense planning and operations to create a seamless coordination of control between combatant commands,” and deploying “USNORTHCOM’s Mobile Consolidated Command Center.”

During the exercises NORTHCOM will “deploy Command Assessment Elements to two of the main exercise venues to assess the need for military support of local, state and federal forces.” USNORTHCOM will also “conduct continuity of operations and assess the readiness of the Chemical, Radiological, Nuclear or High-Yield Explosive Consequence Management Response Force.”

The Generals heading NORTHCOM have repeatedly stated that while responses to natural disasters or “terrorism,” begin with a “civilian response,” if NORTHCOM assesses that the civilian forces are overwhelmed, the military takes command. As well, “civilian-led” also mainly means at the direction of the president, who, supported by Congress, has now usurped the authority to unilaterally declare a national emergency of any kind — natural, health, “terrorist threat,” — and then use the military inside the country against civilians. This includes imposing martial law and suspending Congress and the Courts in favor of a “government of continuity,” where the president alone makes decisions. NORTHCOM and DHS also have plans already in place for contending with “civilian unrest.” The various October exercises give the military, and everyone else involved, testing grounds for organizing and imposing martial law. One cannot help but wonder if next year there just might be an “October surprise” of Bush and NORTHCOM’s making.

Using all these tests, the military is preparing all concerned — including its own soldiers, local and state police forces, firemen, doctors, nurses, and other hospital staff, the Red Cross and similar organizations — to follow military orders to implement martial law and do so irrespective of civilian needs. This was born out in government actions before and during Katrina.

Government “preparedness tests” a year before Katrina confirmed that at least 130-150,000 people in New Orleans had no means of evacuation and that the existing levees would not withstand a hurricane stronger than a category 3 (Katrina was a category 5). No action was taken to strengthen the levees or put in place an evacuation plan. Instead the military was deployed with “drop or kill” orders, meaning soldiers could demand that civilians drop and if they did not, they were to kill them. They were not to stop and rescue people on the rooftops, they were not to organize immediate evacuation though they had the resources to do so, they were not even to provide water for those in need. They were also to stop anyone else from doing so. Soldiers who disobeyed these orders were punished.

The military, coordinating with other police forces — all dressed in military fashion — did conduct the forced removal and separation of families after leaving people stranded without water for several days. They did exercise the “shoot to kill” orders, they did organize to confiscate firearms, especially from African Americans, while also making certain the state-organized gangs of vigilantes were armed with military-style weapons and given the green light to also “shoot to kill” civilians. They conducted a live exercise in martial law, using the disaster the government itself brought about.

All of these crimes were documented with testimony from survivors and government documents at the recent International Tribunal on Katrina. NORTHCOM has not drawn the lesson that these were crimes and taken responsibility for them. On the contrary, they are organizing to be more deeply involved in imposing military rule in the region. Even now, two years later, with the people of New Orleans still facing great difficulty, the military is patrolling the streets of the lower Ninth Ward and other areas. Indeed, they were present at every corner in the area during the recent demonstration demanding the right to return and rebuild. What are armed soldiers doing on the public streets two years later? One lesson that is clear is that once the military is deployed to civilian areas, they will remain there. In addition, NORTHCOM has conducted additional exercises with FEMA and the National Guard for “hurricane preparedness.” In particular, it has developed “pre-scripted mission assignments” for all the various forces to “accelerate the disaster response process.” Given the experience of military and police actions during Katrina, this can only mean more rapid militarization, including military command and control.

It is also the case that NORTHCOM is a mechanism not only for use of the military inside the U.S. but also in Canada and Mexico. This was evident by its presence in Quebec, during the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) summit of President George W. Bush, Canada’s Prime Minister Stephan Harper and Mexico’s President Felipe Calderon. Their role was to organize the repression of protests organized to denounce the SPP and reject U.S. annexation of Canada and Mexico. The military openly went to Canada and dictated to Canadian forces, including taking over a community center where a protest meeting was planned, instead turning it into the “command and control” center for police agencies. It also included having the Quebec police attempt to infiltrate the demonstrators and provoke violence — an attempt exposed by protesters right while it happened.

At the SPP summit, NORTHCOM states that “a report on the North American plan for avian and pandemic influenza” was released. Just after the SPP, NORTHCOM organized a joint conference of 80 officials, civilian and military, from Canada, Mexico and the U.S. to further develop these plans. The conference took place at its headquarters at Peterson Air Force base in Colorado. As William Horne, from Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade put it, “It’s absolutely vital the three countries get together in very close working relationships.” NORTHCOM is also specifically responsible for “creating the Department of Defense Global Synchronization Plan that will synchronize worldwide operations to mitigate and contain the effects of a pandemic influenza.”

Clearly the U.S. has in place arrangements for use of the military not only in aggressive wars like Iraq, but also for suppression of what the imperialists consider their “homeland,” — the U.S., Canada and Mexico, the peoples and resources of all three countries. The aim is “homeland security” for the imperialists and their drive for world empire, enforced by the military at home and abroad. NORTHCOM is a main instrument of this empire building.

Dismantle USNORTHCOM & NORAD! No to Militarization! Yes to Resistance!

[TOP]

NYPD Report on “Homegrown Terrorism”

Blueprint for Police-State Arrangements and Broad Government Impunity

In August, the New York Police Department (NYPD) Intelligence Division produced a 90-page report called “Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat.” The report states directly, “Where once we would have defined the initial indicator of the threat at the point where a terrorist or group of terrorists would actually plan an attack, we have now shifted our focus to a much earlier point — a point where we believe the potential terrorist or group of terrorists begin and progress through a process of radicalization,” (emphasis VOR's). While especially targeting male Muslim youth, it also more generally focuses on the concept of “homegrown” threats, emphasizing that the “potential” terrorists start as people that are “unremarkable” to law enforcement.

Most of the report outlines ten cases considered “terrorism,” from the U.S. and abroad, in an effort to establish what is called the “radicalization process” among young Muslim men, including converts from “ordinary neighbors.” This “radicalization process” supposedly leads to “jihad” which, according to this latest form of profiling, leads to organizing a terror attack. Throughout the report the authors claim that “Terrorism is the ultimate consequence of the radicalization process.”

Cases from overseas include the Madrid, March 2004 attack and the London July 2005 attack, and the Amsterdam Hofstad Group, Australia’s, Operation Pendinnis November 2005, and the Toronto 18 case of June 2006. The Madrid and London cases are the only ones where an actual terrorist act was carried out. Cases in the U.S. include the Lackawanna Six (New York) in 2002; the Portland (Oregon) Seven (2002); Northern Virginia, Paintball (2003); the Herald Square Subway (2004) and the Al Muhajiroun Two, the only New York City examples. The report openly admits that no acts of terrorism were committed in any of the U.S. cases, and in several cases, including that of the Lackawanna Six, Portland and Northern Virginia, no planning was done, no acts of violence, no crimes of any kind. As well, the cases are commonly government instigated. The government sends in an informant, who calls for and tries to instigate terrorist acts or at least plans, repeatedly attempting to inflame the passions of those involved. The informant then gives testimony for indictments, often being the main evidence that terrorism was even remotely thought about, let alone planned. Such criminal police activity is now considered normal and necessary to arrest what are otherwise “ordinary” individuals, living next door.

The report, without factual evidence, claims that these cases show an identifiable “trajectory,” that the individuals or groups identified will end up “committing acts of terror, planning acts of terror, or intending to commit acts of terror.” The individuals are said to go through the same four-step “radicalization process” or “trajectory.” The report emphasizes that understanding this process is key for law enforcement’s counter-terrorism efforts because it “provides a tool for predictability.” Indeed, one can say a key aim of the report is to justify use of this “tool” — a tool based not on law enforcement and investigation of actual crimes or plans for crimes, but on the potential intent of those with radical ideas. As well, factually, the main evidence from the U.S. cases given is that the individuals identified did not even intend to commit acts of terrorism (see below for Lackawanna Six case as a representative example). This does not stop the NYPD from creating its “tool for predictability.”

According to the report, stage one of the “radicalization process” is called “pre-radicalization.” During this stage “unremarkable” individuals who are often not religious and are “just like everyone else” become predisposed to the next stage of “radicalization.” This second stage is called “self-identification,” by both “internal and external factors.” These factors supposedly lead them in turn to “explore Salafi Islam,” which is described as a form of “militant Islam” that breeds “intolerance and hostility” against the “West” and sanctions violence to achieve its goals. Major “catalysts” for this “religious seeking” may be economic (“losing a job,” “blocked mobility”), social (“alienation,” “discrimination,” “racism — real or perceived”), political (“international conflicts involving Muslims”), or personal (“death in the close family”).

While the main target of this report is Muslims, one can readily see how the same method of “intervening at an early point” based on a “potential trajectory” can and is being used against many others, such as anti-war demonstrators, striking workers, anyone just thinking about what police believe to be “radical” action.

The third stage of the “trajectory,” is called “Indoctrination,” the phase in which “radical views are encouraged and reinforced,” and the individual “wholly adopts jihadi-salafi ideology” and is convinced “militant jihad” is needed. “Association with like-minded people is an important factor as the process deepens,” says the report. Here again, given statements by President George W. Bush claiming communism, for example, and other “radical ideologies” are the same as that of the “terrorists,” one can see how readily and broadly early intervention by police forces is to be justified. Police always consider that protesters have the “potential” for violence, for example. The emphasis on “association with like-minded people” is also significant, as it is aimed at smashing organizing efforts to build collectives and fight for the rights of those collectives, such as the youth, workers, political organizations or affinity groups in action at protests.

“Jihadization,” the final stage, is the phase in which members of a “cluster” or group are said to become committed to violence and “self-designate themselves as holy warriors.” While the first three stages may take a long time to evolve and develop, “jihadization,” says the report, “can occur quickly, and with very little warning.” Thus, according to the police, the need to intervene long before this point, based solely on an individual or groups “radical ideology” and conviction that militant action is needed.

The report’s identification of places where this radicalization takes place further reveals how broad the targets are. Called “radicalization incubators,” the places named by the report include: student associations, youth clubs, gyms, book stores, cafes, cab driver hangouts, butcher shops, flophouses, prisons, non-governmental organizations, mosques, hookah (water pipe) bars, and the internet. Law enforcement is directed to pay close attention to these “extremist incubators.” The internet is said to be a major “incubator” for “extremist fodder or fuel for radicalizing” because of the “thousands of extremist websites and chat-rooms” on it. The NYPD's racist and anti-worker, anti-youth character is also evident in this list of places.

The report adds, “There is no useful profile to assist law enforcement or intelligence to predict who will follow this trajectory of radicalization.” To be sure, “The subtle and non-criminal nature of the behaviors involved in the process of radicalization makes it difficult to identify or even monitor from a law enforcement standpoint.” “Radicalization makes little noise…[it] borders on areas protected by the First and Fourth amendments…and does not lend itself to a traditional criminal investigations approach.”

Confronted with the reality that crimes are not being committed and rights are being violated, the report explicitly and implicitly calls not for upholding the law, including standards of law enforcement, but for greater “intelligence” efforts, especially by local police agencies. It suggests that “intelligence” units like those in the NYPD be established in all police departments, and because of the “nature” of the “homegrown threat,” and it’s “non-criminal” character, more spies and informants will be needed.

The report openly speaks to the need to identify “potential” terrorists by intervening more, if not entirely, on the basis of “intent.” The Preface of the report states, “If the post-September 11 world has taught us anything, it is that the tools for conducting serious terrorist attacks are becoming easier to acquire. Therefore intention becomes an increasingly important factor in the formation of terrorist cells. This study is an attempt to look at how that intention forms, hardens and leads to an attack or attempted attack using real world case studies.” This is re-affirmed several times, including again at the end of the report, “In the early stages of their radicalization, these individuals rarely travel, are not participating in any kind of militant activity, yet they are slowly building the mindset, intention, and commitment to conduct jihad,”(emphasis added).

The change then from local law enforcement to primarily spies, infiltrators, instigators of terrorist acts and more can readily be seen. We are not even to wonder why the NYPD, a local police force, has an “intelligence unit” analyzing events in Europe and across the country and providing a report directed to “policymakers and law enforcement officials, both in Washington and throughout the country.”

It should also be noted that the NYPD, like that of Chicago and other major cities, during the Cold War had “red squads,” used to spy on, infiltrate and disrupt communist organizations, the Black Panthers, and others, including through use of framing people, false evidence and assassination. These squads, like McCarthyism, were denounced and rejected by the people and supposedly eliminated. Instead, they now exist as “intelligence” divisions, producing reports of this kind calling for more such squads — with their spies, infiltrators and “black-ops.” Given the content of this report, the plan is for these “intelligence” divisions to be the police departments, or at least their main core. This shows that McCarthyite arrangements are in place in the NYPD and now being openly promoted as necessary for all police departments.

Given past experience, and the demand now that people be arrested and charged based on what police admit is a potential trajectory of intent, there is no doubt that the scope of spying, infiltration, framing, attempts to instigate violence, splits and other disruptive actions by police forces will be far greater than in the past and present. And it will be directed not only at Muslims, but at any collectives and organizations or individuals expressing their opposition to the government and the need for radical change

The timing of the release cannot be considered a coincidence. It takes place just before the demonstrations in Quebec against U.S. plans to annex Canada and Mexico and create a North America of the Monopolies, with integrated military and police forces. The U.S. military was in command and control of repressing demonstrators, including trying to impose “protest pens,” like those used at the Democratic Party Convention in Boston in 2004. Police infiltrators were exposed right during the demonstration, attempting to provoke violence against union leaders.

The timing also coincides with the second anniversary of the government-organized Katrina disaster, where the government whipped up racist hysteria and then issued “shoot to kill” orders and carried them out. It comes just a few weeks before anti-war demonstrations in September and October. And it comes just a few weeks before the anniversary of September 11. The report again uses this crime to justify broad government impunity and institutionalizing, at the local level, police state measures. In this way, the NYPD is specifically being utilized to convince other local police forces to submit to federal and military command and control, abandon even the concept of their responsibility to “serve and protect,” and instead become instruments of McCarthyite terror and impunity.

Let all reject these measures and organize against government impunity. Let everyone step up resistance by defending the rights of all and bringing forward a rule of law and law enforcement that in word and deed serves and protects the people.

[TOP]

Disinformation Based on the Starting Point of Preventing Terrorism: An Examination of the Lackawanna Six Case

Lackawanna Discussion Group, July 2004

We reprint below a presentation given by the Lackawanna Discussion Group at the Symposium on Media and Disinformation, in Halifax, Canada, June 30-July 4, 2004. It serves to expose and analyze the disinformation used to justify broad attacks on rights and collective punishment, including that in the NYPD Report on “Homegrown Terrorism” (see above).

* * *

Since September 11, and even before, the government has put forward the necessity to prevent future terrorist attacks as the single most important issue to provide for national security. Its actions, whether at home or abroad, are to be looked at from this starting point. War in Afghanistan, detentions of thousands, widespread profiling or Arabs and Muslims, and brutal attacks on rights all have been justified on this basis of prevention.

According to the government, it is better to sacrifice rights than to permit another September 11. People then are pulled into these false presentations as to how problems are posing themselves. Disinformation of the government and media serves to block people from discussing what change is needed, in government and society as a whole, to both define and provide security. The critical role of defending rights in providing security is not only denigrated, but targeted as a support to terrorists. At the same time, opposing widespread U.S. impunity is certainly not included as part of what is needed to eliminate terrorism and contribute to peace and security, of nations and people, abroad and at home.

The Lackawanna Six case takes place in this context and is an integral part of the hysteria promoted concerning the threat of terrorism. Language such as “ticking time-bombs running loose,” “terrorist cells” and “sleeper cells” — where even the individuals involved supposedly do not know they are involved in terrorism — all contribute to the hysteria that distorts the reality that a) these threats do not exist and b) those threats which do exist, from the government, are not to be addressed.

The Lackawanna Six case involves six young men, all American citizens of Yemeni descent, living in Lackawanna, a former steel-town that borders Buffalo, New York. The Six had been identified, followed and interrogated by the FBI long before September 11, as well as after. They traveled to Pakistan and Afghanistan in the summer of 2001 and visited what at the time the U.S. identified as a Taliban training camp. After September 11 it was proclaimed an al-Qaida camp.

It is important to recognize that part of the disinformation and hysteria concerning terrorism also concerns al-Qaida itself. Coupled with the starting point of prevention has been the establishment, without trial, evidence or anything more than government say so, that al-Qaida is responsible for September 11. As well, anyone who associates with al-Qaida, harbors anyone called a member or in anyway assists them is just as guilty and has been subject to assassination, invasion or similar use of force by the government. Regardless of what one may believe about al-Qaida, all of these government actions, routinely given legitimacy by the media, are contrary to international and U.S. law. Individuals are held responsible for crimes committed, not the organizations they may be members of. Whole countries, like Afghanistan, are not guilty for the crimes of individuals, like those carried out on 9/11. All individuals are considered innocent until proven guilty.

By branding al-Qaida (as a whole) guilty of the crime of 9/11, the door is opened wide to branding anyone even remotely associated as a terrorist also guilty of 9/11. This is what was done with the Six, even though all they did, and all they were ever charged with, was attending the training camp. Even the government admitted that they did nothing on returning from the camp to in any way pose a threat.

Similarly, it is not an accident that the person the government labels the “mastermind” of September 11 is not being charged. He is reportedly being held in secret and the government says the information gotten from him, again in the name of prevention, is more important than charging him. In this way the facts of the case are never to be presented in open court and secret detention, secret interrogations and secret evidence branding individuals, whole organizations and countries as terrorists is made acceptable.

The media has been fundamental in broadly establishing these key issues that the problem is one of preventing terrorism, that any person, organization or nation in anyway associated with al-Qaida is guilty, and that government intervention when no crime has been committed is necessary so as to stop what are called “ticking time-bombs.” As FBI officials put it, they are no longer pursuing investigations to the point of having evidence, but rather “making quick arrests at even the hint of potential violence.” Notice here, that all that is needed is the hint of potential violence, as determined by the government. Said another way, an FBI official was quoted describing the new approach as, “Who cares where it [the investigation] goes? Let’s go get the bastards.”

The whole conception of law enforcement as enforcing laws through investigating crimes is being replaced with the standard that the role of the police agencies is to identify “potential” terrorists and intervene based on intent. This is a fundamental shift in the arrangements of governance and between government and individuals, organizations and nations. It is an arrangement of military rule, not democracy.

The Lackawanna Six, when arrested September 13, 2002, on the first anniversary of September 11, were immediately branded a terrorist cell trained by al-Qaida. President Bush has repeatedly referred to the government’s success in breaking up the “Buffalo terrorist cell,” including in his last State of the Union speech. He did so again when he recently visited Buffalo specifically to promote the case as a model for providing homeland security.

Recently resigned CIA head George Tenant referred to the Six as “the most dangerous bunch inside the United States.” FBI Director Robert Mueller said they “could be defined as a sleeper cell ... in terms of capabilities.” Attorney General Ashcroft uses the case as an example that verifies the need for the USA PATRIOT Act’s attacks on rights, claiming the “intelligence” they secured to arrest the Six could not have been gotten otherwise. All of these claims are endlessly repeated by the media, plastered across the front page, with both the government and media knowing full well that they are not only lies, they are disinformation on the facts of the case itself and on the threat of terrorism generally.

Usually not addressed at all, or buried and reduced to one line, are the facts that none of the Six were charged with an act of terrorism, with planning or even intending to plan any act of terrorism or violence. None were found guilty of such charges. The Six were charged simply with providing material support by attending the camp and conspiracy to attend the camp.

Nowhere was it explained why the FBI, who had them under surveillance before and after their attendance at the camp in summer of 2001, did not immediately arrest and charge them if they were indeed a “terrorist cell.” On the contrary, government officials throughout this case have said there was no danger or imminent threat to the people of New York from these men.

The atmosphere created in the whole region was for everyone to fear their neighbor, to think the main threat came from “all-American” youth like the Six, and that the government actions were the source of security. The terrorism of the government, including collective punishment of Lackawanna, itself a crime, was instead heralded as a “model” for homeland security.

What was completely eliminated from all media coverage was the violent collective punishment inflicted on Lackawanna. This included raiding the community with massive armed force at night to make arrests of people the FBI already had under surveillance. It included surrounding homes with dozens of police, arms drawn, to confront women and children. It included entering homes without warrants, ransacking them, pointing guns at and interrogating and humiliating grandmothers, sisters and wives. Following the arrests, the FBI remained present, using helicopters that buzzed the tree tops, hounding the youth, photographing children for databases, and attempting to brand all the Arabs and Muslim as terrorists or supporters of terrorists with “something to hide.” Spy cameras were placed directly across from the Mosque, at the community soccer field and a gas station.

Despite being directly informed of these events, not a single media outlet, TV, radio or press, investigated them or addressed this state terrorism. What could be more blatant than police raids on homes and cameras directed at a Mosque? People were so terrorized that they begin throwing out precious personal and family items for fear they would be branded terrorists. There was no outrage in the media against these crimes, no headlines about the FBI terrorizing Lackawanna, no challenge to the government as to why they were putting photographs of children in their databanks and hounding them on the way to school demanding if they were supporters of terrorism. Quite the contrary, the media joined in the hounding and humiliation of the youth and the community. They continue to repeat the government hysteria that Lackawanna is the home to and supporters of a terrorist cell and the Six are supposedly violent terrorists.

It is this reality that starkly shows that disinformation itself is a crime, directly aiding and abetting the terrorism of the government. To this day, helicopters and spy planes do regular raids on Lackawanna, youth are harassed, jailed, blackmailed to become informants or face terrorism charges, phones in the entire community are tapped and numerous other attacks are occurring. And to this day the role of the media is to present the government as providing security by uncovering “terrorist cells,” here inside the country.

The government’s Lackawanna model involves arresting and charging people who are not violent and who have not committed or planned any acts of terrorism, elimination of the need for evidence and the principle of innocent until proven guilty, and collectively branding and punishing whole communities. Guilty until proven innocent, whether it is guilt by association, as a family member, a neighbor, living in the community, being a Muslim, being an Arab, by “even a hint” of support for the Lackawanna Six, is what characterizes this government model for homeland security.

In the face of this very difficult situation, the Lackawanna Discussion Group took the stand to uphold the principle of innocent until proven guilty, to condemn the crime of collective punishment and to go door to door in the community to let everyone know that they were not alone and that the people of the Buffalo area stood with them. We repeatedly went door to door to gather the facts of the crimes committed against the people of the community and to inform people of their rights, such as their right not to talk with the FBI or allow them into their homes. We called on people not to compromise their own conscience by throwing out their precious belongings while also providing a place for the belongings to be safely kept.

We published our materials in both English and Arabic so as to give expression to the unity of all and the need for the respect and equality of languages and cultures. We organized to provide facts and information that cut through the government hysteria and provided everyone, inside and outside Lackawanna, with a principled position from which to fight. Numerous demonstrations were also organized. An appeal sent out to lend a hand in opposing the collective punishment of Lackawanna received broad support, from churches, organizations and concerned people in the region and nationwide.

Central to this work has been advancing the necessity to defend the rights of all and elaborating this content in the course of the struggle. Initially, for example, members of the community wanted to know why we risked taking these stands publicly and going door-to-door and demonstrating at the Court House when we ourselves were not directly under attack. Concretely elaborating that an attack on one is an attack on all and that the security of all could only be found in standing together to defend rights wherever they came under attack, has greatly strengthened the unity not only within the community but more broadly in Buffalo. This was evident in a recent demonstration that targeted government impunity against Iraq and Palestine, against Lackawanna and through police brutality in the African American community. Many of the women and youth from Lackawanna came out to themselves demonstrate downtown, despite the many on-going attacks on them and their families.

We have no doubt that media like our publication, The Community Voice, as part of persistent organizing to defend rights and stand against government terrorism and all its impunity has played a significant role. An important part of this has been providing the information and stands people need to stand up against impunity.

Taken as a whole, the work has armed the community not to speak with the FBI or the monopoly media and has enabled them to stand tall despite every effort to humiliate and defeat them. These are not small accomplishments in the current conditions where anyone can be jailed and indefinitely detained at any time.

The government attacks on Lackawanna have continued without let up. This is in part a response to the success that has been achieved in blocking government efforts to completely silence and paralyze the community while creating fear among everyone else. These attacks include the forced guilty pleas gotten from the Six, using threats of the death penalty and branding them enemy combatants subject to indefinite military detention. Like nearly all the terrorism related cases, the government does not want them tried in open court. In this case, for example, many felt the claim that it is a crime simply to attend a training camp would have readily been challenged. Indeed, the Ninth Circuit Court of appeals ruled a similar charge in a similar case as unconstitutional.

Despite the fact that the government admitted the pleas were gotten under death threats and despite the harassment and threats made to family members, both in the U.S. and Yemen, including the assassination of six people in Yemen by the CIA, the judge accepted the pleas. This was the same judge who refused to grant bail based not on the norms for bail, but on what he himself termed “what ifs,” despite all the facts demonstrating that the men were not violent or a threat.

These attacks also included charging a well-known community leader and businessman, humiliating him with a TV spectacle of handcuffing him and arresting him at has place of business for a technical infraction of a new law normally handled with a fine. Most recently, two businessmen, one also a well-known and respected community leader in both Buffalo’s African American community and in Lackawanna, have been denied bail. They were convicted in a case that had nothing whatever to do with terrorism and are currently appealing the conviction. While they had been out on bail during the trial for the past four years, with the conviction the government suddenly claimed both were a threat to national security. They used secret evidence to assert this, the judge accepted it, and both are now being held in jail, often under 23-hour lockdown. The recent action against government impunity was in part in their defense.

These facts are again confirming that the government is acting against its own laws and indeed imposing lawlessness. The entire Lackawanna Six case is evidence of the fact that due process is being eliminated, including not only innocent until proven guilty but the right to confront accusers, to present evidence of innocence, to be free from coercion and torture. Secret evidence, indefinite detention, collective punishment, all are part of the impunity unleashed in the name of preventing terrorism.

In concluding, we think one of the more significant contributions made by all those who take up work to provide facts, information and stands that defend rights is the space created to think through the problems we all face. A main feature of this work for us has been to reject the starting point of preventing terrorism. No doubt, some will wonder how can anyone be against preventing terrorism. We are not. We are very much against posing the problem in this manner as it necessarily serves the direction of the ruling circles toward arrangements for military rule. This is the role the disinformation is playing. It blocks thinking about what is occurring and about what needs to be done and particularly the role of the people in bringing about change. It is work that has been done to defend rights in Lackawanna, for example, that has provided security and opposed the terrorism of the state.

The content of prevention of terrorism by the state necessarily means imposing the standards of acting on the basis of intent, of whenever there is “even the hint” not of an act of terrorism, not of a plan to commit an act of terrorism, not even a crime committed, but of possible violence as determined by the government. It is well-known, for example, that the military camps imposed in Miami at the time of protests against the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) and more recently in Georgia against the G-8 and planned for New York City at the Republican convention, are all done in the name of “stopping potential violence.” In fact this was directly stated by the police agencies involved at the G-8, when they justified use of the military and numerous federal, state and local police in order to “stop terrorists and protesters out to cause trouble.” Canadians are familiar with similar actions in Quebec City, for example, also for protests against the FTAA.

Taking another example, the authorization for use of force issued by Congress shortly after 9/11 says the following: “The President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.” It should be noted here that the language of the resolution is such that the president alone determines targets and use of force and that nations, organizations and persons are all included, all of which goes against international and Constitutional law. In this manner Congress authorized widespread impunity, abroad and at home, based on “prevention.” Congress also gives its approval here to the president usurping power to wage war, to brand people, organizations and nations, based on his determination alone, as threats to be dealt with however he sees fit.

The government’s prevention of terrorism is its mechanism to unleash use of force as the norm for any and all problems. It is an integral part of the drive of U.S. imperialism for World Empire. In rejecting this starting point, all concerned are in a position to discuss what changes would contribute to eliminating terrorism and all use of force against the peoples. We think that changing the role of the U.S., beginning with having no U.S. troops abroad and ending the occupation of Palestine, would immediately contribute to blocking U.S. state terrorism abroad. We think making government impunity a crime and developing a rule of law based on guaranteeing rights would contribute to the security of all. We think discussion of such solutions and working through together how problems are posing themselves is an important part of opposing disinformation and providing human beings with the thinking they require.

[TOP]

“Guilty!” — Of Trying to See Our Senator

Reverend John Dear

On Thursday, September 6, 2007, six of us were found guilty in Federal court in Albuquerque, New Mexico by a federal judge for trying to visit the office of our senator. We will be sentenced in a few weeks. The message? It is a federal crime to attempt to speak to an elected Republican about the U.S. war on Iraq. Don’t visit your senator. Don’t get involved. Don’t speak out. Don’t take a stand for peace — or you too may end up in jail.

It all started one year ago, on September 26, 2006, when nine of us entered the Federal Building in Santa Fe, New Mexico, and tried to take the elevator to the third floor to the office of Senator Pete Domenici to present him with a copy of the “Declaration of Peace,” a national petition campaign aimed at stopping the U.S. war on Iraq, bringing our troops home, and pursuing nonviolent alternatives and reparations. More than 375 similar actions took place across the nation that week.

The senator’s office manager came downstairs, said she would only allow three of us upstairs, and after 45 minutes of waiting and negotiations, we nine just decided to go upstairs, figuring we had a right as a group of constituents to deliver our petition to the senator’s office.

As we stepped onto the elevator, a policeman put his foot in the door, and the next thing we knew, the power was turned off. So there we stayed — for some six hours. At one point, a police officer brought over a chair for one elderly member of our group who uses metal crutches. It seemed the officer was inviting us to make ourselves at home. He even said he supported our anti-war stand.

By the end of that memorable day, with over twenty police officers, SWAT teams, and FBI officials standing in the lobby, the Homeland Security director told us we had the choice to be arrested, jailed and tried, or cited and tried. He never gave us a warning, never told us to leave, never read us our rights. We took the citations, and for the past year, have been in and out of court, waiting to testify about our attempt to visit the senator’s office.

The prosecution would hear none of it. As far as the prosecutor was concerned, we went there to disrupt the Federal Building and shut down the elevator. He seemed to think we liked being in an elevator. He, of course, had been a marine for decades, and now commands a National Guard unit, and was just back two days before the trial from directing military operations in Colorado Springs. He called the police and the senator’s assistant to testify against us. They said we had plenty of warning, said we threatened to do a sit in, and said we disrupted the government’s office work.

Then it was our turn. One by one we took the stand — Philip, Michella, Sansi, Ellie, Bud and me. Our excellent pro bono lawyers, Todd Hotchkiss and Penni Adrian, asked us why we went to the Federal Building and what happened. We each testified that we intended to bring a copy of the “Declaration of Peace” statement to the senator’s office, in the hope that it could be faxed to him, that he would sign it, and that he would work to stop this evil war.

During my testimony, I was asked about the lists of names I brought with me that day. I had printed out the name of every U.S. soldier killed in Iraq, and some ten thousand Iraqi civilians killed, and said I thought they would help remind us why we were there, that perhaps we might leave them with the senator’s staff. The judge interrupted me and asked if I carried those names around with me all the time. While unfortunately it’s now all too common for many of us to spend our time at demonstrations reading the names of the dead, I held back from saying, “Yes, don’t you? Don’t you care about the U.S. soldiers who’ve been killed, and the countless, innocent Iraqi civilians killed?” Instead, I said I always carried with me information about the war and how to stop it.

It was a grueling, exhausting eight-hour day. At the end, the judge returned with his verdict but then launched into a speech explaining why he believed the police and the senator’s staff person, and not us, particularly, not me. He said the fact that I carried with me the names of every U.S. soldier killed and some ten thousand Iraqi civilians killed proved I intended to be there a long time, and shut down business in the Federal Building. He basically called us all liars, and defended the government’s evil war.

I’m not so sure that on the day one year ago I did intend to shut the Federal Building down, as noble a nonviolent act that might be in such times. Only a few months before, I brought a group to meet with Governor Bill Richardson, and he received us warmly, and let me speak for twenty minutes about why he should work to end the war on Iraq, disarm Los Alamos and abolish our nuclear weapons, and end the death penalty in New Mexico. I didn’t rule out the possibility that in fact Domenici’s staff might be willing to hear us. In the end, however, the police themselves disrupted business as usual. They turned off the elevator. They shut down the Federal Building. They prevented us from visiting our elected representative’s office.

So what do we learn from this experience? What is the message from Federal Court in New Mexico? I suppose it’s this: Anyone who dares visit their Republican senator to speak against this evil war is liable of a Federal crime. Don’t presume you have any rights in this so-called democracy. Those days are over.

The judge said he would sentence us within thirty days, so there’s more to come. He asked each of us to submit a statement to him. We face 30 days in jail and a $5000 fine, which I certainly won’t pay.

Meanwhile, the real crime continues, and the real criminals get away with mass murder, with the crucial, full backing of our courts. The war goes on, the killings go on, and the lives of our sisters and brothers in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and elsewhere are shattered. Our government, in its race to become a global empire, has sunk to all new levels of corruption, lying, repression, and old fashioned hubris. Our task is permanent nonviolent resistance against the culture of war, nonviolence as a way of life, full-time non-cooperation with violence, war, and empire.

All things considered, then, it’s a great blessing to be found guilty of speaking out against this evil war. I hope more and more people will write their senators and congress people, especially Senator Pete Domenici of New Mexico, and demand that they end this war; that more and more people will sign up at www.declarationofpeace.org and keep building the movement against this war; that more and more people will march for peace, vigil for peace, organize for peace, agitate for peace, speak out for peace, fast for peace, cross the line for peace, pray for peace, and find themselves guilty of pursuing a new world without war. In such times as these, there may be no greater blessing.

Rev. John Dear is a Jesuit priest, pastor, and author of twenty-five books on peace and nonviolence. He lives in northern New Mexico. Reprinted from www.CommonDreams.org

[TOP]