By
Dave Lindorff on Jun 27, 2013
Would
you be shocked to learn that the FBI apparently knew that some
organization, perhaps even a law enforcement agency or private security
outfit, had contingency plans to assassinate peaceful protestors in a
major American city — and did nothing to intervene?
Would you be surprised to learn that this intelligence comes not from
a shadowy whistle-blower but from the FBI itself – specifically, from a
document obtained from Houston FBI office last December, as part of a
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by the Washington,
DC-based Partnership for Civil Justice Fund?
To repeat: this comes from the FBI itself. The question, then, is: What did the FBI do about it?
The Plot
Remember the Occupy Movement? The peaceful crowds that camped out in
the center of a number of cities in the fall of 2011, calling for some
recognition by local, state and federal authorities that our democratic
system was out of whack, controlled by corporate interests, and in need
of immediate repair?
That movement swept the US beginning in mid-September 2011. When, in
early October, the movement came to Houston, Texas, law enforcement
officials and the city’s banking and oil industry executives freaked
out perhaps even more so than they did in some other cities. The
push-back took the form of violent assaults by police on Occupy
activists, federal and local surveillance of people seen as organizers,
infiltration by police provocateurs—and, as crazy as it sounds, some
kind of plot to assassinate the “leaders” of this non-violent and
leaderless movement.
But don’t take our word for it. Here’s what the document obtained from the Houston FBI, said:
An identified [DELETED] as of October
planned to engage in sniper attacks against protestors (sic) in Houston,
Texas if deemed necessary. An identified [DELETED] had received
intelligence that indicated the protesters in New York and Seattle
planned similar protests in Houston, Dallas, San Antonio and Austin,
Texas. [DELETED] planned to gather intelligence against the leaders of
the protest groups and obtain photographs, then formulate a plan to kill
the leadership via suppressed sniper rifles. (Note: protests continued
throughout the weekend with approximately 6000 persons in NYC. ‘Occupy
Wall Street’ protests have spread to about half of all states in the US,
over a dozen European and Asian cities, including protests in Cleveland
(10/6-8/11) at Willard Park which was initially attended by hundreds of
protesters.)
Occupiers Astounded—But Not Entirely
Paul Kennedy, the National Lawyers Guild attorney in Houston who
represented a number of Occupy Houston activists arrested during the
protests, had not heard of the sniper plot, but said, “I find it hard to
believe that such information would have been known to the FBI and that
we would not have been told about it.” He then added darkly, “If it
had been some right-wing group plotting such an action, something would
have been done. But if it is something law enforcement was planning,
then nothing would have been done. It might seem hard to believe that a
law enforcement agency would do such a thing, but I wouldn’t put it past
them.”
He adds, “The use of the phrase ‘if deemed necessary,’ sounds like it
was some kind of official organization that was doing the planning.” In
other words, the “identified [DELETED” mentioned in the Houston FBI
document may have been some other agency with jurisdiction in the area,
which was calculatedly making plans to kill Occupy activists.
Kennedy knows first-hand the extent to which combined
federal-state-local law enforcement forces in Houston were focused on
disrupting and breaking up the Occupy action in that city. He
represented seven people who were charged with felonies for a protest
that attempted to block the operation of Houston’s port facility. That
case fell apart when in the course of discovery, the prosecution
disclosed that the Occupiers had been
infiltrated by three undercover officers from the Austin Police department,
who came up with the idea of using a device called a “sleeping dragon”
-- actually chains inside of PVC pipe -- which are devilishly hard to
cut through, for chaining protesters together blocking port access. The
police provocateurs, Kennedy says, actually purchased the materials and
constructed the “criminal instruments” themselves, supplying them to the
protesters. As a result of this discovery, the judge tossed out the
felony charges.
FBI Response
WhoWhatWhy contacted FBI headquarters in Washington, and asked about
this document—which, despite its stunning revelation and despite PCFJ
press releases, was (notwithstanding a few online mentions) generally
ignored by mainstream and “alternative” press alike.
The agency confirmed that it is genuine and that it originated in the
Houston FBI office. (The plot is also referenced in a second document
obtained in PCJF’s FOIA response, in this case from the FBI’s
Gainesville, Fla., office, which cites the Houston FBI as the source.)
That second document actually suggests that the assassination plot,
which never was activated, might still be operative should Occupy
decisively re-emerge in the area. It states:
On 13 October 20111, writer sent via
email an excerpt from the daily [DELETED] regarding FBI Houston’s
[DELETED] to all IAs, SSRAs and SSA [DELETED] This [DELETED] identified
the exploitation of the Occupy Movement by [LENGTHY DELETION] interested
in developing a long-term plan to kill local Occupy leaders via sniper
fire.
Asked why solid information about an assassination plot against
American citizens exercising their Constitutional right to free speech
and assembly never led to exposure of the plotters’ identity or an
arrest—as happened with so many other terrorist schemes the agency has
publicized—Paul Bresson, head of the FBI media office, offered a
typically elliptical response:
The FOIA documents that you reference are
redacted in several places pursuant to FOIA and privacy laws that
govern the release of such information so therefore I am unable to help
fill in the blanks that you are seeking. Exemptions are cited in each
place where a redaction is made. As far as the question about the
murder plot, I am unable to comment further, but rest assured if the
FBI was aware of credible and specific information involving a murder
plot, law enforcement would have responded with appropriate action.
Note that the privacy being “protected” in this instance (by a
government that we now know has so little respect for our privacy) was
of someone or some organization that was actively contemplating
violating other people’s Constitutional rights— by murdering them. That
should leave us less than confident about Bresson’s assertion that law
enforcement would have responded appropriately to a “credible” threat.
Houston Cops Not Warned?
The Houston FBI office stonewalled our requests for information about
the sniper-rifle assassination plot and why nobody was ever arrested
for planning to kill demonstrators. Meanwhile, the Houston Police, who
had the job of controlling the demonstrations, and of maintaining order
and public safety, displayed remarkably little interest in the plot:
“We haven’t heard about it,” said Keith Smith, a public affairs officer
for the department, who told us he inquired about the matter with senior
department officials.
Asked whether he was concerned that, if what he was saying was
correct, it meant the FBI had not warned local police about a possible
terrorist act being planned in his city, he said, “No. You’d have to ask
the Houston FBI about that.”
Craft International Again
Sniper action by law enforcement officials in Texas would not be
anything new. Last October, a border patrol officer with the Texas
Department of Public Safety, riding in a helicopter,
used a sniper rifle to fire at a fast-moving pickup truck carrying nine illegal immigrants
into the state from Mexico, killing two and wounding a third, and
causing the vehicle to crash and overturn. It turns out that Border
Patrol agents, like a number of Texas law enforcement organizations, had
been receiving special sniper training from a Dallas-based
mercenary-for-hire organization called Craft International LLC. It
seems likely that Houston Police have also received such training,
possibly from Craft, which has a contract for such law-enforcement
training funded by the US Department of Homeland Security.
Efforts to obtain comment from Craft International have been unsuccessful, but
the company’s website features photos of Craft instructors training law enforcement officers in sniper rifle use
(the company was founded in 2009 by Chris Kyle, a celebrated Army
sniper who last year was slain by a combat veteran he had accompanied to
a shooting range). A number of men wearing Craft-issued clothing and
gear, and bearing the company’s distinctive skull logo, were spotted
around the finish line of the April Boston Marathon, both before and
after the bombing. Some were wearing large black backpacks with markings
resembling what was seen on an exploded backpack image released by the
FBI.(For more on the backpacks that allegedly contained the bombs, see
this piece we did in May.)
An Activist Responds
Remington Alessi, an Occupy Houston activist who played a prominent
role during the Occupy events, was one of the seven defendants whose
felony charge was dropped because of police entrapment. He says of the
sniper plot information, which first came to light last December as one
of hundreds of pages of FBI files obtained by PCJF, “We have speculated
heavily about it. The ‘if deemed necessary’ phrase seems to indicate it
was an organization. It could have been the police or a private security
group.”
Alessi, who hails from a law-enforcement family and who ran last year
for sheriff of Houston’s Harris County on the Texas Green Party ticket,
garnering 22,000 votes, agrees with attorney Kennedy that the plotters
were not from some right-wing organization. “If it had been that, the
FBI would have acted on it,” he agrees. “I believe the sniper attack was
one strategy being discussed for dealing with the occupation.” He adds:
I assume I would have been one of the
targets, because I led a few of the protest actions, and I hosted an
Occupy show on KPFT. I wish I could say I’m surprised that this was
seriously discussed, but remember, this is the same federal government
that murdered (Black Panther Party leader) Fred Hampton. We have a
government that traditionally murders people who are threats. I guess
being a target is sort of an honor.
There, Alessi is referring to evidence made public in the Church
Committee hearings of the 1970s which revealed that the FBI was
orchestrating local police attacks (in Chicago, San Francisco and New
York) on Panther leaders. (For more on that, see
this, starting at p. 185, esp. pp. 220-223; also see
this .)
Alessi suspects that the assassination plot cited in the FBI memo was
probably developed in the Houston Fusion
Center (where federal, state and local intelligence people work
hand-in-glove). During our trial we learned that they were all over our
stuff, tracking Twitter feeds etc. It seems to me that based on the
access they were getting they were using what we now know as the NSA’s
PRISM program.
He notes, correctly, that in documents obtained from the FBI and
Homeland Security by the PCJF’s FOIA search, the Occupy Movement is
classed as a “terrorist” activity.
Ironically, while the Occupy Movement was actually peaceful, the FBI,
at best, was simply standing aside while some organization plotted to
assassinate the movement’s prominent activists.
The FBI’s stonewalling response to inquiries about this story, and
the agency’s evident failure to take any action regarding a known deadly
threat to Occupy protesters in Houston, will likely make protesters at
future demonstrations look differently at the sniper-rifle equipped
law-enforcement personnel often seen on rooftops during such events.
What are they there for? Who are the threats they are looking for and
potentially targeting? Who are they protecting? And are they using
“suppressed” sniper rifles? Would this indicate they have no plans to
take responsibility for any shots silently fired? Or that they plan to
frame someone else?
WhoWhatWhy plans to continue doing this
kind of groundbreaking original reporting. You can count on it. But can
we count on you? We cannot do our work without your support.
Please
click here to donate; it’s tax deductible. And it packs a punch.
GRAPHIC: http://cdn.motinetwork.net/demotivationalposters.org/image/demotivational-poster/1005/dissenting-vote-suddenly-dies-down-sniper-election-from-the-demotivational-poster-1273925293.jpg
FBI Documents (click on each to enlarge)
The Right Scoop
