Informants & Provocateurs
Individuals & groups may be used by federal & local law enforcement to create turmoil in order to justify a drastic change (solution). The chaos demonstrated by the Black Bloc during the WTO event in 1999 was apparently one of the main reasons for the implementation of Free Speech Zones, according to Wikipedia. The immediate result was a ban on protesting for 50 blocks around the convention center in Seattle where the meetings were taking place. "Most demonstrators were peaceful, marching and chanting, but police moved in swiftly when protesters attempted to block intersections, described the Associated Press on December 1, 1999. The eventual riots were caused by "demonstrators, who smashed windows, set spot fires and spray-painted obscenities on walls in a daylong melee yesterday. "We are winning," was a prominent graffiti message."
Video evidence exists which shows that this small group of 50 or so demonstrators called the Black Bloc, was completely separate from & denounced by genuine protestors.(*) The evidence also shows what appeared to be a stand-down by police, who stood back & watched the bloc cause chaos. The police were then released on the peaceful protestors. Referring to this anti-globalization rally in Seattle, the BBC News, reported on December 2, 1999 that, "The protestors were mainly peaceful," until "the black [bloc] anoraked anarchists came into play." The excuse for the police not interfering with the easily distinguished Black Bloc as they smashed windows & lit fires, was that they were "tied down, unable to get through the thick crowds." To the left is an image of a supposed Black Bloc protestor in the midst of what appears to be a spot fire at the WTO meeting in 1999 in Seattle.
What is this Black Bloc? Wikipedia describes the Black Bloc as a "cluster of affinity groups, that comes together during some sort of protest, demonstration, or other event involving class struggle, anti-capitalism, or anti-globalization." Black masks are worn to keep their identities secret. "Black blocs are differentiated from other anti-capitalist groups by their routine use of vandalism," states Wikipedia, & "property destruction to bring attention to their opposition to multi-national corporations." This group engages in building barricades, attacking police, vandalism, rioting, & fighting. Common targets of vandalism for the group, includes, "banks, institutional buildings, outlets for multinational corporations, [&] gasoline stations."
However, whether their rank & file members are aware of it or not, most probably they are run by the FBI & related federal law enforcement agencies. The controlling section is composed of provocateurs, & those on the lower faction are used as unwitting dupes. Like most other revolutionary movements, they are used as pawns by the financial elite (the exact same entity which they publicly oppose), to bring about radical change, that when scrutinized, only benefits the elite. Just as other groups & political ideologies which denounce financial elitists, such Communists & Nazis, were funded by Wall Street, so too this Black Bloc is certainly a creation of the financial elite.
An agent provocateur, explains Wikipedia, is "a person employed by the police or other law enforcement body to act undercover and entice or provoke another person to commit an illegal act. More generally, the term may refer to person or group who provokes another to perform a wrong or rash action, the deliberate purpose being to incite wider conflict or harm. ... Agents provocateurs are also used against political opponents..." It continued, "Here, it has been documented that provocateurs deliberately carry out or seek to incite counter-productive or ineffective acts, in order to foster public disdain for the group and provide a pretext for aggression against the group; and to worsen the punishments its members are liable for..."
I'd certainly say that the widespread use of Free Speech Zones is "counter-productive" to positive change. What does this Black Bloc have to gain by engaging in activities which, when examined, are fundamentally detrimental to the message of anti-globalization? Are they aware that they're actually helping the multinational corporations, by portraying them as the innocent victims? Their actions have resulted in protestors being moved out of view of the public/media, & punished by being banished to protest cages ½ mile away. Many peaceful protestors have also been beaten after being framed as Black Bloc anarchists. Who really benefits by these protest restrictions & Free Speech Zones?
"So," stated the BBC in their account of the WTO riot, "the masked figures roamed the downtown area, blocking traffic, shouting their slogans, spraying walls and windows with their graffiti and trying--and in some cases succeeding--in smashing windows of the elegant shops which are in the heart of Seattle. ... And so it went on all day on Tuesday, and into the night. The police had failed to protect the delegates and the street."
On August 24, 2007, Paul Joseph Watson of the independent media outlet Prison Planet, wrote, "The so-called "black bloc" anarchists are ... controlled by the security services and are routinely employed at major protest events to cause riots and demonize legitimate peaceful protesters." Prison Planet described that the riot at the WTO meeting in 1999 was instigated by a "small minority of hostile black bloc hooligans," that the police allowed to cause chaos. Referring to the documentary Police State II, by Alex Jones, Watson wrote, "The film presents clear evidence that the ... anarchist groups are actually controlled by the state..." He concluded, "anyone who still professes to be a member of the group is ... supremely naive." A clip of this documentary, which demonstrates that this group works for the state, can be downloaded here (57MB WMV).
The BBC reported that the Seattle Police Department said riots at the WTO meetings in 1999 occurred because they were, "caught off-guard." They quoted one protestor who said, "It didn't make any sense ... They gassed us to move us back five or six feet..." But, "When this stuff [blatant vandalism occurred directly in front of the police] was happening they didn't do anything." In all likelihood, the police hadn't failed; they had accomplished what they were ordered to do. They allowed it to happen... And it didn't make any sense to protestors & others because they may not have recognized it as being part of the PRS formula. "By that time police had bolstered their ranks with hundreds of unarmed National Guardsmen and Washington State Patrol troopers--the gentle approach, they said, had failed," wrote the BBC. Enter the solution.
On December 1, 1999 PBS reported that Mayor of Seattle Paul Schell, told them, "Oh, yes. We'd worked for months with all of the demonstrators ... who had promised a peaceful, non-violent (protest). And as I said, 99 percent of them were fine. There were some self-proclaimed anarchists from other parts of the country who infiltrated those marches and started throwing off M-80s inside." The mayor here is apparently referring specifically to the Black Bloc that moved through an otherwise peaceful protest & caused havoc while the policed stood by & watched them.
The Associated Press reported on October 31, 2001 that a judge upheld the WTO no-protest zone which paved the way for new measures for dealing with future protests. "Free speech must sometimes bend to public safety," wrote Judge Rothstein. "There is no evidence that the 'manifest purpose' of the city was to quell expression." Of course not, they had to make it appear as though they were being cooperative. And, continued the judge, "The evidence shows that the (city) had reason to implement the zone." Yes, they did, because they helped the federal agencies to create it, then allowed it to escalate. "Moreover," continued the judge, "the president had just arrived in Seattle and intended to appear at the WTO conference." But, "Chaos and vandalism continued unabated."
What was the end result of all this chaos? Free Speech Zones also known as First Amendment Zones were the solution. These zones are areas set aside in public places (sometimes cages) for protestors to exercise their free speech. Although they've been used sparingly since the 60s, around the year 2000 their use expanded greatly. According to Wikipedia, the chaos resulting from the World Trade Organization meeting in Seattle in 1999 was the primary impetus for the widespread use of these zones. The purpose of the zones is to protect the safety of those attending the political gathering, as well as the protestors themselves.
These drastic changes were then implemented at WTO protests in Washington, D.C., Detroit, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Miami, Chicago, Portland, & other places across the country, as well other countries including the UK & Canada. They are now regularly used during anti-globalization protests. During the 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston, the Free Speech Zones consisted of a cell of concrete walls out of public view. They're now used by law enforcement to "censor protesters by putting them literally out of sight of the mass media, hence the public, as well as visiting dignitaries," described Wikipedia.
On the top left we see one man exercising his right to protest near (or in) what resembles a cage, at the Democratic National Convention in 2004. The man below him is protesting a presidential visit to South Carolina in 2003, a half mile away from the event. These zones are out of public view & sometimes quite a distance from the activity area. In an article called, Silencing Voices Of Dissent, CBS described one man who protested during a presidential visit to South Carolina in 2002. He was told he couldn't be anywhere but the free speech zone," described CBS. "But that so-called "free speech zone" wasn't outside the hangar ... It wasn't across the street. Nor was it down the street. It was a half a mile away, where he couldn't be seen," they wrote.
In addition to being used during anti-globalization protests, they're also used to distant protestors from the media & public during presidential visits. Now, when the president (& future presidents) travel around the country, "the Secret Service visits the location ahead of time and orders local police to set up "free speech zones" described the San Francisco Gate, in their article, Quarantining dissent. Free Speech Zones are used as isolation areas where people opposed to policy are "quarantined." "These zones routinely succeed in keeping protesters out of presidential sight and outside the view of media covering the event," they wrote. The trend that is occurring across the country is that anyone carrying signs which are against government or New World Order policy is sent to these zones, but supporters are welcome near the target area.
The Gate continued, "police Detective John Ianachione testified that the Secret Service told local police to confine "people that were there making a statement pretty much against the president and his views" in a so-called free-speech area. ... Paul Wolf, one of the top officials in the Allegheny County Police Department, told Salon [Magazine] that the Secret Service "come in and do a site survey, and say, 'Here's a place where the people can be, and we'd like to have any protesters put in a place that is able to be secured.'"
"In a May terrorist advisory," sustained the Gate, "the Homeland Security Department warned local law enforcement agencies to keep an eye on anyone who "expressed dislike of attitudes and decisions of the U.S. government."" Mike van Winkle, the spokesman for the California Anti-Terrorism Information Center told the Oakland Tribune, "You can make an easy kind of a link that, if you have a protest group protesting a war where the cause that's being fought against is international terrorism, you might have terrorism at that protest. You can almost argue that a protest against that is a terrorist act.""
An articled called, Italian police 'framed G8 protesters' which appeared in the London Guardian on June 22, 2002, stated that the Italian police planted cocktail bombs in a school used by "anti-globalisation protesters" in order to frame them during a 2001 G8 Summit. One officer apparently also falsified a charge that a protester attacked him with a knife. According the article, the framing was used to portray the protestors as members of the Black Bloc that had engaged in rioting during the summit. And it resulted in a room full of cracked skulls with a floor covered with broken teeth.
"According to a magistrates' investigation," explained the Guardian, "the police improvised lies to justify a bloodsoaked raid at the Diaz school, which was being used by protesters as a headquarters. The raid, which left dozens injured after being kicked, punched and beaten with batons, prompted an international outcry. It emerged this week that senior police officers have been placed under investigation for allegedly making false statements as part of a cover-up." Interestingly, the attendees of the summit included George W. Bush, Tony Blair, & another man who is no stranger to the PRS formula, President Vladimir Putin of Russia. The Black Bloc serves the financial elite quite well actually. In reality, it helps them use federal & local police (which they control) to crack down on peaceful protestors whose only threat is the power of their words.
To the right we see members of the Black Bloc at an anti-war protest in Washington D.C. in 2003 (top) & 2005. This group seems to have a convenient habit of evading police as it moves through crowds of peaceful protestors like a virus & wreaks havoc. Unfortunately, peaceful protestors receive the backlash. Mainstream information suggests that almost all of the people who assemble at these rallies to protest the New World Order are non-violent. But when the general public hears stories or sees news flashes of this chaos, will they think that a small specialized group, which was obviously deliberately created for this purpose, is responsible? Probably not. Most people are likely to think that protestors "in general" are responsible.
So this seems to be a multi-attack by the Establishment. First to physically & mentally punish those who oppose them with physical violence & caged speech zones. Second, to lawfully limit their right to free speech. Finally, to associate peaceful protestors with, what is obviously intended to be, a terrorist squad of fake & deluded protestors dressed in black masks. Although this may sound ridiculous, consider their other actions which can't be denied. This is how they think!
Undercover police officers may also be used by the financial elite to provoke violence. On August 21, 2007, the Toronto Star declared, "Protesters are accusing police of using undercover agents to provoke violent confrontations at the North American leaders' summit... Such accusations," they said, "have been made before after similar demonstrations but this time the alleged "agents provocateurs" have been caught on camera." The Star described a YouTube video which showed three masked men (at least one holding a rock) who attempted incite violence. The three were apparently exposed as agent provocateurs by some experienced genuine protestors. "Rather than leave, the three actually start edging closer to the police line, where they appear to engage in discussions," depicted the Star. The video shows them being handcuffed & taken away.
According to the Star, photographs taken of the provocateurs during their staged arrest showed clearly that they had, not similar boots, but the exact same type of boots as the uniformed police. The article continued, "Police confirm that only four protesters were arrested during the summit--two men and two women. All have been charged with obstruction and resisting arrest." However, "The three [alleged provocateurs] do not appear to have been arrested or charged with any offence," the Star described. The "Video," echoed the Globe & Mail, "also shows the three eventually being led quietly away to police vans," but by contrast, according to witnesses, genuine protestors were roughed up & dragged away. The Star quoted one protester who stated, "But we see very clearly in that video three (other) men being arrested." He asked "How do (police) account for these three people being taken in, being arrested? Where did they go?"
"The Mounties and Quebec provincial police [SQ] deny using agents provocateurs at this week's Montebello summit," wrote the Globe & Mail, "despite incriminating video evidence that suggests undercover cops tried to incite violence. The denials yesterday did nothing to quell mounting outrage over police tactics. Anti-globalization and union activists joined with opposition politicians to demand an independent investigation. ... "I confirm [to] you that there are no agents provocateurs in the Sûreté du Québec," Constable Melanie Larouche said."
CBC News later reported that the SQ (Quebec Police) admitted that the alleged provocateurs were theirs. "Quebec provincial police admitted Thursday that three of their officers disguised themselves as demonstrators during the protest at the North American leaders summit," stated CBC. But instead of admitting that they were discovered when they attempted to provoke violence, the police claimed that they were identified as undercover police when they refused to throw objects. "Police said the three undercover officers were only at the protest to locate and identify non-peaceful protesters in order to prevent any incidents," said CBC.
It's clear to me that in addition to federal & local law enforcement fighting crime, they also act as a private security force for multi-national corporations. They are the financial elite's private army & ensure their continual rule. For those of you who wish to engage in peaceful anti-globalization or corporate protest, you can count on the financial elite using federal & local law enforcement to stage a barrage of illegal acts, using individual informants, the Black Bloc, or other groups. Their activities include framings, provoking violence, engaging in unnecessary violence, & using informants to instigate violence. When examined within the context of the Problem-Reaction-Solution formula, the chaos resulting from these activities appears to further globalist political objectives, by providing an excuse (solution), which allows them to legally neutralize dissent.
How can we retain the protest rights we still have? For as long as the government is controlled by corporations, a permanent solution won't be possible. Their onslaught will continue in a variety of forms. But letting fellow protestors know that these tactics may be used is probably a good idea. In addition to making legal arrangements for a big anti-globalism protest, contacting key people & groups in the area & letting them know that you're aware of this formula, may help.
I realize that you'd in essence be contacting some of the very people who would be complicit in the creation of the staged chaos. And if you do this, you may enjoy a protest without framings, but there will probably be other consequences. Because what you've done is exposed one of their most effective tactics. But the hour is late. Protestors are already being labeled potential terrorists. It's obvious to me that their objective is to eventually outlaw protests in general, by linking them to these state-run terrorist blocs. So, repercussions & all, letting them know that you know, may temporarily delay them from reaching their goal.
The chaos demonstrated by the Black Bloc: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_bloc; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone
Most demonstrators were peaceful: The Associated Press, Seattle officials declare no-protest zone around world trade talks, http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=4228
protestors were mainly peaceful: BBC News, The Battle of Seattle, A city under civil emergency December 2, 1999, Paul Reynolds, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/547581.stm
describes the Black Bloc: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_bloc
Just as other groups: Wall Street And The Rise Of Hitler, Professor Antony C. Sutton; The Shadows Of Power, James Perloff
an agent provocateur as: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_provocateur
the masked figures roamed: BBC News, The Battle of Seattle, A city under civil emergency December 2, 1999, Paul Reynolds
The so-called "black bloc" anarchists: Prison Planet, Canadian Police Caught Attempting To Stage Riots, August 24, 2007, Paul Joseph Watson http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2007/240807_stage_riots.htm
Seattle Police Department said riots: BBC News, Seattle police tactics under scrutiny, December 2, 1999, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/547302.stm
Mayor of Seattle Paul Schell: PBS, National Guard helps restore order, December 1, 1999, http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/international/july-dec99/wto_mayor_12-1.html
a judge upheld the WTO no-protest zone: The Associated Press, Federal court upholds WTO no-protest zone, October 31, 2001, http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=15273
These zones are areas set aside: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone
These drastic changes: Ibid; San Francisco Gate, Quarantining dissent, How the Secret Service protects Bush from free speech, January 4, 2004, James Bovard, http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/01/04/INGPQ40MB81.DTL
a cell of concrete walls: Ibid (Wikipedia)
literally out of sight: Ibid
CBS described one man: CBS News, Silencing Voices Of Dissent, December 4, 2003, http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/12/04/eveningnews/main586959.shtml
Secret Service visits the location: San Francisco Gate, Quarantining dissent, How the Secret Service protects Bush from free speech, January 4, 2004, James Bovard
the Italian police planted cocktail bombs: UK Guardian, Italian police 'framed G8 protesters', June 22, 2002, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/jun/22/globalisation.rorycarroll
room full of cracked skulls: Financial Times, Inside the Black Bloc, October 15 2001, James Harding, http://specials.ft.com/countercap/FT3BG4GLUSC.html
the police improvised lies: UK Guardian, Italian police 'framed G8 protesters', June 22, 2002
Protesters are accusing police: Toronto Star, Police accused of using provocateurs at summit August 21, 2007, http://www.thestar.com/printArticle/248608
led quietly away to police vans: The Globe & Mail (Canada), Police Planted Provocateurs, Protesters Say, August 23, 2007, Joan Bryden, http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/23/3368/
The Star quoted one protester: Toronto Star, Police accused of using provocateurs at summit August 21, 2007
The Mounties and Quebec provincial police: The Globe & Mail (Canada), Police Planted Provocateurs, Protesters Say, August 23, 2007, Joan Bryden
CBC News later reported that: CBC News, Quebec police admit they went undercover at Montebello protest, August 23, 2007, http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/08/23/police-montebello.html
labeled potential terrorists: The Village Voice, J. Edgar Hoover Back at the 'New' FBI, Classified FBI Bulletin Reveals Tactics at Protests, December 4, 2003, Nat Hentoff