Jump to content

Fbi Raiding Activists Homes

Recommended Posts

History repeating itself, shades of the sixties man.





If the FBI was hoping to silence the anti-war movement by raiding the homes of activists across the country, as critics claim, they don't appear to have succeeded. In fact, the bureau may just have given the movement -- which indisputably waned with the election of Barack Obama -- the spark activists say it needed.


Last week, FBI agents raided a half-dozen homes and offices of activists in Minneapolis -- all organizers of protests outside the 2008 Republican Convention -- and the homes of two others in Chicago, part of what the bureau claims is an investigation into whether members of the anti-war movement provided "material support" to designated terrorist organizations, such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and Hezbollah. Around a dozen others were also reportedly issued subpoenas to testify before a grand jury next month.


"It’s an attack on all of us," says Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the group Code Pink, speaking to Change.org outside FBI headquarters in downtown Washington. Around 40 activists demonstrated outside the building on Tuesday in a show of solidarity with those raided.


Benjamin says those targeted by the FBI were only supporting peace processes in the Middle East and Colombia, and that the bureau is really engaged in more of a fishing expedition than real terrorism investigation. Indeed, despite last week's raids and salacious allegations, not a single arrest was made. "These were search warrants only," said FBI spokesman Steve Warfield.


But if the goal was to divide and silence the anti-war community, Benjamin says they sure haven't succeeded.


"They made a big mistake because they picked Minneapolis and Chicago," she says, "two places where there are huge progressive communities, very tight communities, and areas of the country where people are very proud of their First Amendment rights and their independent spirits." (Read more after the jump.)


In a sign of the strength of activist communities there, hundreds of activists on Monday rallied outside federal buildings in both cities to protest the FBI's raids. Solidarity rallies were also held across the country this week, from Salt Lake City to Philadelphia.


Yet despite the fact that all those targeted in the raids were members of explicitly anti-war organizations -- and avowed proponents of non-violence -- they could still face criminal prosecution thanks to the government's extremely broad definition of what it means to provide "material support" for terrorism, a definition that extends to counseling others to embrace peace.


While the law is ostensibly aimed at actual terrorists and their supporters, former President Jimmy Carter said in a statement released by the ACLU this past that the government's interpretation of "material support" -- upheld by the Supreme Court this past June -- threatens the humanitarian work not only of his own Carter Center, but "the work of many other peacemaking organizations that must interact directly with groups that have engaged in violence." The "vague" wording of the law, he said, "leaves us wondering if we will be prosecuted for our work to promote peace and freedom."



But at Tuesday's rally in Washington, protesters -- chanting "FBI, stop the raids, we won't back down, we're not afraid" -- said the government's investigation into activists' alleged support for terrorism would only spur them to redouble their efforts to oppose U.S. militarism.


One speaker, Rev. Graylan Hagler, a long-time progressive activist and senior minister at the Plymouth Congregational United Church of Christ in northeast Washington, said the raids were a sign not of the government's strength, but of its fear of dissent.


"I’ve got news for you: in the eyes of the FBI, each of you who are standing out here -- you’re terrorists," said Harlan. "Why? Because you bring terror to the status quo." While the government promotes injustice at home and abroad, "we choose to stand on the side of justice. And we choose to be in solidarity with people who are oppressed. They will come after us, but I’m going to tell you, we will not be silent."


Code Pink's Medea Benjamin, meanwhile, says the terrible irony is that while the FBI raids peace activists, "the real terrorists are walking freely right here in Washington, DC, and around this country -- the ones that took us into these disastrous wars. And it’s absolutely outrageous that those of us who believe that we shouldn't’ be bombing other people around the world and we shouldn’t be supporting dictatorial regimes are the ones whose homes are raided."


But there may be a bright side, she says, as the FBI's raids have drawn attention to -- and appear to have awoken -- the previously moribund anti-war community. "I think it was a huge mistake and I think we can use it to our advantage to reenergize our movement."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The FBI is a rogue fascist organization and has been converted from a personal fiefdom of corruption to a tool of corporate fascism. Do a search on COINTELPRO if you really want to be disgusted by your own tax dollars at work




Now thanks to the Patriot Act most of what was considered illegal acts by COINTELPRO agents are LEGAL. Our Constitution is quickly becoming just another leftover hemp rag

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our Constitution is quickly becoming just another leftover hemp rag



The government has achieved the ability to rule by statute or decree, without the vote or consent of the ruled. We have covered this territory before, However the more I study this the scarier it gets. Here is why.


Senate report 92549 was written in 1973, and it says surprisingly that the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency since 1933. This would mean that we are living under emergency rule. Allegedly 470 laws have been put on the books since 1933 that have steadily increased the power of government. With these laws the president can seize property and order troops to go anywhere without public or congressional approval. If The president sees fit, he could institute Martial Law. Under martial law, travel can be restricted, and all forms of communications can be controlled.


President Roosevelt was the man who declared this emergency. This took the United States from a Constitutional republic, to a Constitutional dictatorship, from there left unchecked, we could easily change to a Unconstitutional Dictatorship.


Roosevelt took for granted the idea, that those who followed him in office would dissolve the law however, Truman Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush and Clinton have decided not to change the law. In the movie the Siege I believe that when Martial law was declared, the term "acting presidential" was used. So don't kid yourself, the president can do what he wants because of these official orders, that have been in place since 1933. It answers a lot of questions doesn't it? So the ugly question is, If what I have just said is true, is the constitution unfit to exist? Is it responsible for the government we have now? You see, either there are loopholes in the constitution that are exploited, or something, or some one has been able to overpower, the cherished freedoms that were fought for during the revolutionary war.


There are many people who believe that the constitution only applies to people who lived back then. These same people believe that the founding fathers could not have imagined the indecency, or political opposition that exists today. The Founding fathers could not have imagined the Internet, or television, or radio. So we must tamper with Freedom of speech. There are others who believe that the founding fathers could not have imagined that people would abuse the use of a handgun. So there are many that believe it is time to put limits on that Constitutional right. You now need a permit to stage protests. So, I must say that they who think this are an impressive group of people.


On Nation Under Control

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Politics' is a 'business'.


'Politicians' are just like any other group of like minded people that receive their income from the same source ... they 'protect' themselves.


Once in public office they pass laws that will extend their own power and their own 'welfare'.


And NO AGENCY set up by the 'political governance machine' wants its 'budget cut' or their 'powers' reduced.


That is why we see 'NO CHANGE' coming about in Washington.


One hand washes the other. The 'politicians' give the 'agencies' the money and people they want and the 'politicians' get protection along with a lifetime income... and of course.... FREE HEALTH CARE.


And all of this also occurs on the 'local' level right here in our own State... put a microscope on Lansing and you'll see all the underlying rot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Create New...