Fascism is the union of government with private business against the People.
"To The States, or any one of them, or to any city of The States: Resist much, Obey little; Once unquestioning obedience, at once fully enslaved;
Once fully enslaved, no nation, state, city, ever afterward resumes its liberty."
from "Caution" by Walt Whitman

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

During the 1990s, many clandestine agencies within the USA formed an agreement with all the monopolist IT companies who produced computers and software that such products shall contain hidden doors which the clandestine agencies shall have keys for.
Information about these hidden doors are persistantly made public without publicizing this reality of no privacy.
Worse, in fact, is the derision as "conspiracy theory" such information such as what follows entails.


2011-11-30 "Carrier IQ: Researcher Trevor Eckhart Outs Creepy, Hidden App Installed On Smartphones (VIDEO) (UPDATE)" by "The Huffington Post" by Gerry Smith
[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/30/carrier-iq-trevor-eckhart_n_1120727.html]
A security researcher has posted a video [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T17XQI_AYNo&feature=player_embedded] detailing hidden software installed on smart phones that logs numerous details about users' activities.
In a 17-minute video posted Monday on YouTube, Trevor Eckhart shows how the software – known as Carrier IQ – logs every text message, Google search and phone number typed on a wide variety of smart phones - including HTC, Blackberry, Nokia* and others - and reports them to the mobile phone carrier.
The application, which is labeled on Eckhart’s HTC smartphone as "HTC IQ Agent," also logs the URL of websites searched on the phone, even if the user intends to encrypt that data using a URL that begins with "HTTPS," Eckhart said.
The software always runs when Android operating system is running and users are unable to stop it, Eckhart said in the video.
"Why is this not opt-in and why is it so hard to fully remove?" Eckhart wrote at the end of the video.
In a post about Carrier IQ on his website [http://androidsecuritytest.com/features/logs-and-services/loggers/carrieriq/], Eckhart called the software a "rootkit," a security term for software that runs in the background without a user's knowledge and is commonly used in malicious software.
Eckhart's video is the latest in a series of attacks between him and the company. Earlier this month, Carrier IQ sent a cease and desist letter to Eckhart claiming he violated copyright law by publishing Carrier IQ training manuals online. But after the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group, came to Eckhart’s defense, the company backed off its legal threats.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation said the software that Eckhart has publicized "raises substantial privacy concerns" about software that "many consumers don’t know about." [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/11/carrieriq-censor-research-baseless-legal-threat]
Carrier IQ could not immediately be reached for comment. But the company told Wired.com that its software is used for “gathering information off the handset to understand the mobile-user experience, where phone calls are dropped, where signal quality is poor, why applications crash and battery life.” [http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/11/secret-software-logging-video/]
On its website, Carrier IQ, founded in 2005, describes itself as "the world's leading provider of Mobile Service Intelligence solutions." [http://www.carrieriq.com/]
*A Nokia spokeswoman said CarrierIQ does not ship products for any Nokia devices.

UPDATE 1: Grant Paul, a well-known iPhone hacker who goes by the screenname "chpwn", wrote on his blog that Apple has included Carrier IQ on the iPhone, but the software's default is disabled. [http://blog.chpwn.com/]
UPDATE 2: Want to find out if your phone is secretly tracking you? Check out our comprehensive list of the devices and carriers known to use Carrier IQ. [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/01/carrier-iq-iphone-android-blackberry_n_1123575.html?ref=technology]
UPDATE 3: Senator Al Franken, concerned that Carrier IQ's software may violate federal law, sent a letter to the company requesting an explanation of the software's purpose. (Click here to read more.) [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/01/al-franken-carrier-iq_n_1123942.html?ref=technology]
UPDATE 4: Carrier IQ has come forward with a statement regarding its "tracking" software [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/01/carrier-iq-verizon-apple-google-microsoft-att_n_1124779.html?ref=technology]. Many mobile carriers and device manufacturers have also responded to the controversy with statements of their own [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/01/carrier-iq-verizon-apple-google-microsoft-att_n_1124779.html?ref=technology].

Watch video of Eckhart explaining his findings:

2011-11-30 "Cal students sue over police tactics at protest" by Henry K. Lee from "San Francisco Chronicle"
[http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-11-30/bay-area/30461502_1_protesters-sproul-hall-cal-students]
 Two dozen UC Berkeley students and community members filed a federal civil rights lawsuit Tuesday, accusing university police and Alameda County sheriff's deputies of brutalizing them as they tried to set up an Occupy camp on campus.
The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, said law enforcement officers, under the direction of UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau, needlessly used their batons to jab nonviolent protesters outside Sproul Hall on Nov. 9.
The officers and deputies "conducted a planned, coordinated and violent attack against these peaceful protesters" by using "shocking, unconscionable and excessive force," states the lawsuit, which seeks unspecified damages.
The clash with police happened at UC Berkeley's Sproul Plaza, where protesters had tried to set up tents as part of an Occupy encampment. Videos of the confrontation led to several investigations and an apology from Birgeneau, who is named as a defendant in the suit along with several top university officials, campus Police Chief Mitch Celaya and Alameda County Sheriff Greg Ahern.
UC Berkeley spokeswoman Janet Gilmore said Tuesday that campus officials had not seen the lawsuit and could not comment. But she said of the investigations, "We look forward to learning the results. We're committed to a thorough investigation of what occurred to learn what we can."
Ahern said widely circulated videos of the confrontation failed to show protesters kicking and pushing at officers and deputies.
"My troops that have responded to these protests have done nothing wrong and have acted in response to assaults and attacks on them," Ahern said. "We don't tolerate the indiscriminate use of force, and it's not taught in our training."
2011-11-30 "A message to Occupy Philly: The police are not ‘our friends’" by "Philadelphia Workers World Party/Partido Mundo Obrero"
[http://www.workers.org/2011/us/a_message_to_occupy_philly_1215/]
Nov. 30 - Some members of Occupy Philly want to keep insisting that “the police are our friends.” They are “our relatives,” some say.
Some of our relatives may be right-wingers who support what the 1 percent does. That makes them politically “right” but not correct — just relatives. There is nothing one can do about who you’re connected to by blood — but any thinking person can choose whom you consider “friends.”
Friends do not beat up on other friends. Friends do not open cans of pepper spray into the faces and throats of their friends. Friends do not trample each other purposely on horseback. Friends do not stab one another. Friends do not arrest one another. Friends do not bring one another to court — or threaten to imprison one another. Friends do not purposely injure each other so severely that it leads to hospitalization.
When you say “We did nothing to provoke the police,” couldn’t this be interpreted in the oppressed communities that they “did something” to provoke the police? Is this the message the Occupy movement, which claims to stand for social change, really wants to convey?
We ask you to consider how this sounds to members of the Black and other oppressed communities, who also may have relatives who are police, but who have repeatedly been victims of police brutality. These communities are also part of the 99 percent — mostly on the bottom economic rungs.
Some members of Occupy Philly say that “Police are part of the 99%” or that they are “union members.” The Fraternal Order of Police claims to be a “union” representing police. But police have never functioned on behalf of the economically disadvantaged. That is not part of their history. Their role has been, and remains. one of protecting the private property interests of the 1 percent. Failing to do this, they would be fired.
The police have systematically been used to break strikes of other unions, thus calling into question the validity of their “union” status. It does not matter what class or economic strata an individual comes from. What matters is which class or economic strata they serve. The FOP has long ago given up the right to be classified as a “union.” Just ask Black police officers who have been forced to file charges of racism against this organization.
The police department in Philadelphia was formed in the 1800s by organizing gangs of Irish immigrants to be used against the growing Abolitionist movement and later freed Black people moving to the North. This racist history carries forth into the 20th century and to the present.

Black movements targeted by police -
During Frank Rizzo's tenure as police commissioner in the 1970s, the predominantly white police force was feared and hated in the Black and Latina/o communities because of its brutality and racism.
Police attacks on the Black Panther Party, the MOVE Organization and the public led to many demonstrations. This period is chronicled in the documentary film "Black and Blue."
Black journalist Mumia Abu-Jamal wrote about many of these cases. Abu-Jamal was also targeted by the police. In December 1981 he was shot, kicked and beaten by cops and subsequently sent to death row for allegedly killing police officer Daniel Faulkner. Abu-Jamal continues to maintain his innocence. Millions of supporters around the world maintain that he was framed by the cops, who were desperate to silence his "voice of the voiceless."
During a 1978 confrontation with police in Powelton Village, four cops dragged MOVE member Delbert Africa by his hair, then kicked him in the head, kidneys and groin. This brutality was captured on video and later led to the indictment of three officers on assault charges. In February 1981, a judge acquitted the cops. Delbert Africa was subsequently arrested and is now one of the MOVE 9, prisoners serving a 30-to-100-year term. The three acquitted cops went on to participate in the murderous assault on the MOVE house on Osage Avenue on May 16, 1985. A bomb was dropped on the house, killing 11 children, women and men and burning down the entire block.
Philadelphia police are not only brutal. They are notorious repeat offenders.
From 1989 to 1995, there were 2,000 documented citizen complaints against the Philadelphia Police Department. During a two-year period in the mid-1990s the city paid $20 million in damages to 225 people who were beaten, shot, harassed or otherwise mistreated by police. The 39th Police District scandal in 1995 led to the dismissal of 1,400 criminal cases where cops ignored suspects' rights and sometimes framed them outright.
In 2009, a group of Black Philadelphia police officers filed a federal lawsuit against their department, alleging an online forum geared toward city police is "infested with racist, white supremacist, and anti-African-American content.”
Early in the morning of November 30, 2011, hundreds of cops, some on horses, evicted Occupy Philly from City Hall after midnight. Some police violence occurred, with 50 arrested. The video can be seen here: [http://occupyphillymedia.org/video/police-attack-occupy-philly]
Similar raids and attacks took place in Los Angeles this morning. This is not by accident. Yes, the police could have demonstrated more brutality, as they have in numerous other cities where the Occupy movement has come under attack. That Philly and LA showed even limited “restraint” had more to do with the images that the two cities, which are most identified with police brutality, hoped to project, than any other factor.
Had this been a “protest” called by the right-wing Tea Party, there would never have been a police presence. The police would have looked the other way — as they have repeatedly when Tea Party activists show up in public bearing arms.
If the Occupy movement is serious about standing up for the rights of the majority of people whose living standards have been pushed down under the weight of a global economic crisis — which has only benefited the very wealthy — then we also have to be serious about the role played by the state apparatus that protects and defends the economic system that allowed this to happen.
While we were focusing our energy on the arrests of our friends, a piece of legislation passed the U.S. Senate today that should have all of us up in arms.
The Senate voted on a bill that would define the whole of the United States as a “battlefield” and allow the U.S. military to arrest and imprison “American citizens” in their own backyard without charges or trial. This should be sounding an alarm with every Occupy participant across the U.S. because this is directed against the movement we are part of.

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Occupy UC Davis becomes a GENERAL SRIKE!!!

2011-11-22 "5,000 protest at UC Davis: General strike on Nov. 28! Occupy camp re-established in aftermath of pepper spray assault" by ANSWER San Francisco with Esteban Hernandez and Silvio Rodrigues
 [http://www.pslweb.org/liberationnews/branches/sf/reports/5000-protest-at-uc-davis-11-21-2011.html]
2011-11-21 Photo by ANSWER Coalition

The report below was submitted by the San Francisco Bay Area chapter of the ANSWER Coalition. The Party for Socialism and Liberation is a member organization of ANSWER and participated in the demonstration at UC Davis.
Around 5,000 students, university staff and community members joined a mass demonstration at the UC Davis quad on Monday, Nov 21 in response to the cowardly pepper spraying of peaceful protesters by police officers just three days prior. ANSWER activists from Sacramento and San Francisco joined the demonstration in solidarity with UC Davis Occupy. The Occupy camp at UC Davis was re-established, and the General Assembly voted unanimously to call for a general strike in Davis on Monday, Nov. 28.
At the mass rally, several speakers called for UC Chancellor Linda Katehi to step down for her role in the violent police action against Occupy demonstrators. Katehi made a brief appearance in an attempt to save face, but was quickly escorted to her car as protesters chanted demanding her resignation.
Protesters had been occupying UC Davis when they were attacked by police on Friday. Police pepper sprayed students who were peacefully sitting on the ground with arms linked. At no point did the students pose a threat to police or anyone around them. Video of the attack quickly went viral on the Internet, and messages of solidarity as well as petitions and letter campaigns demanding justice and accountability have been circulating widely through Facebook and Twitter.
The UC Board of Regents has approved sharp tuition increases for two years straight, coupled with millions of dollars in budget cuts, including the elimination of important resources as well as layoffs and furloughs. The board has proposed a new 81 percent increase in fees and additional severe budget reductions.

 A quality & universal education is considered a Human Right because most industrialized socities have produced enough wealth to gurantee such a Human Right with no difficulty.
Fascist believe that Human Rights are "anti-Capitalist", and are dismantling the free education systems across the USA in order to replace them with profitable and unequal businesses whose service is "education", usually with little to no regulation over subject matters and no labor-unions to protect the Rights of the employees at these business establishments.

2011-11-29 "Should Schools Be Run for Profit?" by Diane Ravitch
 [http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/2011/11/should_schools_be_run_for_prof.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BridgingDifferences+%28Education+Week+Blog%3A+Bridging+Differences%29]
Dear Deborah,
 The next big idea in "education reform" is online instruction and cyber charters. I know that teachers are doing wonderful, creative activities with technology, and there is no doubt that technology can bring history, science, and other studies to life in vivid ways. But there is a cloud on the horizon, and that is the growth of the for-profit cyber charters. I confess that it troubles me to think of children sitting at home, day after day, with no opportunity for discussion and debate, no interaction with their peers, no face-to-face encounters with a real teacher.
 I recently read several shocking articles that have reinforced my concern about for-profit companies that provide virtual schooling. One must-read is Lee Fang's remarkable investigative article, titled "How Online Learning Companies Bought America's Schools." [http://www.thenation.com/article/164651/how-online-learning-companies-bought-americas-schools]
It is a chilling account of a well-developed campaign to persuade state legislatures to endorse for-profit virtual schools. Led by Patricia Levesque, an experienced lobbyist who works for former Florida governor Jeb Bush, the campaign has scored notable successes in the past year, promoting for-profit virtual charter schools.
 Lee Fang seems to have sat in the back row of many a "reform" meeting, quietly taking notes. At a conference last fall in San Francisco, he reports, Levesque recommended that "reformers should 'spread' the unions thin 'by playing offense' with decoy legislation. Levesque said she planned to sponsor a series of statewide reforms, like allowing taxpayer dollars to go to religious schools by overturning the so-called Blaine Amendment, 'even if it doesn't pass ... to keep them busy on that front.' She also advised paycheck protection, a union-busting scheme, as well as a state-provided insurance program to encourage teachers to leave the union and a transparency law to force teachers unions to show additional information to the public. Needling the labor unions with all these bills, Levesque said, allows certain charter bills to fly 'under the radar.'"
So, while the unions are fighting to stave off attacks, the virtual charter industry steadily moves forward, almost unnoticed. See also Dana Goldstein's description of the for-profit charter industry [http://www.thenation.com/blog/164680/explosion-lobbying-around-profit-k-12-programs]. In Michigan, 80 percent of charters are run by for-profit companies.
 What kind of record do these virtual charters (cyber charters) have? Not a very good one. Walt Gardner blogged about these issues last week [http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/walt_gardners_reality_check/2011/11/the_stealth_campaign_to_privatize_education.html]. He sees this movement as "the stealth campaign to privatize education." Gardner says there is no evidence to support the claim that students learn more by technology than in the traditional classroom.
A recent article in The Wall Street Journal ("My Teacher Is an App" [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204358004577030600066250144.html#articleTabs_slideshow]) said that full-time enrollment in cyber charters has grown nationally in the past two years from 175,000 to 250,000 students. It cited a study by the Colorado Department of Education showing that students in cyber charters had lower scores than those in traditional public schools, in reading, writing, and math, in every grade tested. [ADDED BY DIANE AFTER INITIAL POST: There is an ongoing debate in Colorado about the value of cyber charters. Please read the heated comments posted to this NPR commentary from Northern Colorado. [http://www.kunc.org/post/k12-inc-public-online-schools-private-profits]
 But, despite evidence that students do worse in cyber schools, for-profit entrepreneurs are vigorously lobbying state legislatures to permit for-profit virtual schools. A recent article in The Washington Post [http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/virtual-schools-are-multiplying-but-some-question-their-educational-value/2011/11/22/gIQANUzkzN_story.html?wpisrc=nl_headlines] detailed their efforts and included a review of the poor performance of cyber charters, such as "At the Colorado Virtual Academy, which is managed by K12 and has more than 5,000 students, the on-time graduation rate was 12 percent in 2010, compared with 72 percent statewide. That same year, K12's Ohio Virtual Academy—whose enrollment tops 9,000—had a 30 percent on-time graduation rate, compared with a state average of 78 percent." But details like these don't seem to have slowed their momentum. In Idaho, online companies supported the campaign of state Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Luna, who is a strong supporter of virtual instruction [http://www.idahostatesman.com/2011/02/20/1535065/a-reform-plan-a-long-time-in-the.html].
In Tennessee, one legislator pushed back. Representative Mike Stewart wrote to his colleagues to oppose for-profit virtual schools [http://www.newschannel5.com/story/14664377/online-schools-make-big-profits-from-tax-dollars]. He noted that the chief executive officer of the largest chain was paid $2.4 million each year and other executives also made outsize salaries. The promise of the cyber charter to the state, he said, was the prospect of saving money. The virtual charters do not have physical buildings or libraries or ball fields or janitors or nurses. They have class sizes of 50 students per teacher, instead of the 15.7 per teacher in Tennessee's regular schools. But, he said, the "savings" turn into profits for the company and its shareholders, not returns to the state.
 Stewart's appeal to the Tennessee legislature failed. The legislature authorized for-profit cyber schools, and in addition, it banned teacher collective bargaining, eliminated tenure for future teachers, and removed local oversight of charter schools. Public school teachers have certainly gotten their comeuppance in Tennessee, and the private sector has been unleashed.
 Deborah, don't get me wrong. I have no problem with businesses making a profit when they offer value for goods and services. But there is something about this for-profit education industry that feels unseemly. I find myself uncomfortable about the very idea of making a profit by providing public education. Isn't it—or shouldn't it be—a basic public service available to all at public expense? Shouldn't all the money go directly into improving education rather than paying exorbitant salaries and making money for shareholders?
2011-11-29 "The Global Occupy Movement Challenges the Transnational Corporate Class Propaganda Machine" by Peter Phillips from "Project Censored and Media Freedom foundation"
[http://dailycensored.com/2011/11/19/the-global-occupy-movement-challenges-the-transnational-corporate-class-propaganda-machine/]
The international concentration of wealth and military power is endangering not only the personal freedoms and life chances of billions of people, but the potentiality for life on earth to simply exist. The US-NATO military-industrial-media empire operates in support of transnational corporations and the central banks primarily as the enforcer of International Monetary Fund/World Bank’s fiscal policies and the protector of transnational capital flow. The combination of empire enforcers—both public and private military/police—in partnership with the private owners of production and capital’s need for constant growth and profits is resulting in a tragic decline of humanity into a freedomless state of global corporate fascism.
 We are not going to reform the empire of destruction globally through corrupt capital protecting legislative bodies controlled by millionaires and corporate money. We are not going to change the propaganda messages of corporate media—as they are deeply embedded in the destructive empire of power. Corporate media (singular) is the information control wing of the global power structure inside the transnational corporate class of the one percent. The corporate media systematically censors news stories that challenge the propaganda of empire. Specific mythologies of empire are that we live in a democratic societies with fair elections, that governments are primarily transparent and seek to protect the public, that evil lurks in the world waiting to challenge our freedoms, we fight fairly and morally while the others are evil terrorists, governments would never do anything to harm their own citizens, wealth trickles down, we are all trying to be green and capitalism will save us. Occupy challenges these myths of empire as lies and propaganda.
 The time is for the Occupy democracy movement to build our own news, and our own systems of decision making from the bottom up. We no longer need a majority to make change inside the empire. We need only active informed populations in the 10-20% range of society to initiate change producing social movements of resistance and non-cooperation with empire.
 Individually and collectively we can disconnect from employment that supports the empire of destruction, we can keep our work instead with community-based efforts at local sustainability, economic development, and caring. We can shop and bank locally and never enter the Wal Mart’s of empire. We can organize for resistance to counter the billions of dollars a year spent by the military to lie our children into serving the empire of destruction. We can turn off the corporate media filled with its propaganda and lies, and seek our own sources of news from within democracy movements worldwide.
 Power to the people

Monday, November 28, 2011

Banker's Dictatorship over the U$A

2011-11-28 "Democrat Calls for Hearing on 'Secret' Bank Loans from Federal Reserve" by Vicki Needham from "The Hill (Washington, DC)"
[http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/11/28-4]
A top House Democrat is calling for a hearing with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke following a report that the central bank secretly committed more than $7 trillion to save banks during the financial crisis.
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee ranking member Elijah Cummings (Md.) sent a letter on Monday [http://democrats.oversight.house.gov/images/stories/20111128_EEC_to_Issa_Hearing_Request.pdf] to panel Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) requesting the committee look into how banks "benefitted from trillions of dollars in previously undisclosed government loans provided at below-market rates."
“Many Americans are struggling to understand why banks deserve such preferential treatment while millions of homeowners are being denied assistance and are at increasing risk of foreclosure,” Cummings said.
The request comes on the heels of a Bloomberg report [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-28/secret-fed-loans-undisclosed-to-congress-gave-banks-13-billion-in-income.html] that said the Fed secretly committed more than $7 trillion as of March 2009 to rescuing the nation’s top financial institutions, and that these banks "reaped an estimated $13 billion of income" on the below-market rates.
"Unfortunately, officials from many of these financial institutions declined to comment about these loans, including officials from Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citigroup, and Morgan Stanley," Cummings writes.
Information about the loans was withheld from Congress as lawmakers debated and passed the Dodd-Frank financial regulatory reform bill and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, Cummings said. Banks also failed to disclose the information to their shareholders.
Kenneth D. Lewis, then CEO of Bank of America, told shareholders on Nov. 26, 2008, that the company was “one of the strongest and most stable major banks in the world.” According to the Bloomberg report, he failed to disclose that “his Charlotte, North Carolina-based firm owed the central bank $86 billion that day,” Cummings writes.
The Bloomberg report disclosed that total assets at the largest six banks increased by 39 percent and executive compensation increased by 20 percent in the past five years, or by more than $146 billion in compensation in 2010. 
This “secret financing helped America’s biggest financial firms get bigger and go on to pay employees as much as they did at the height of the housing bubble," according to economists cited in the report.
Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, said in the report that “getting loans at below-market rates during a financial crisis — is quite a gift.” 
When Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Act, it required the Government Accountability Office to conduct a one-time audit of all loans and other financial assistance from Dec. 1, 2007, to July 21, 2010. 
The report analyzed assistance — including mortgage-backed securities purchased through open market operations — with peak outstanding balances of only $3.5 trillion.

Sunday, November 27, 2011

Fascists against Occupy Seattle!

2011-11-27 "Community college bosses hold sham vote to kick out Occupy Seattle; Labor, community and students stand in solidarity" by Jane Cutter
[http://www.pslweb.org/liberationnews/news/community-college-bosses-hold.html]
On Nov. 23, in a sham of a democratic process, the Board of Trustees of the Seattle Community College voted unanimously to pass an emergency rule solely intended to shut down the Occupy Seattle encampment at the Seattle Central Community College campus. Following a national trend of excuses for attacks on Occupy camps, the stated reason for the shutdown was “health and safety concerns.”
Occupy Seattle mobilized to pack the emergency meeting held at noon the day before the Thanksgiving holiday. Only about half of the many people who signed up to speak in the “public comment” session were permitted to speak.
Among those who spoke in support of Occupy Seattle were the leaders of the campus unions, Karen Strickland of the Seattle Community College Federation of Teachers and Rodolfo Franco of the Washington Federation of State employees. Also speaking out were SCCC students affiliated with Occupy and community-based Occupiers.
Numerous members and supporters of Occupy Seattle spoke, pointing out that they had sought to work with college administration; the administration responded by attacking Occupy Seattle in the media. Occupy Seattle supporters pointed out that they, the Occupy movement, were fighting against budget cuts to higher education and thus were fighting for the community college.
After closing down the public comment session over the objections of those who had been denied the right to speak, the Board showed a mainstream media news piece on Occupy Seattle about an alleged attempted sexual assault at the camp. Occupiers had discovered and interrupted the incident. The alleged perpetrator was not a camp resident; in fact, he had been asked to stay away from the camp previously due to earlier problems.
The college administration is shamelessly exploiting legitimate concerns of women about violence and sexual harassment—concerns that are shared by women in the Occupy movement—as a reason to shut down the camp. Sexual harassment and assault as well as other forms of violence against women are endemic in our society and hardly unique to or more prevalent at Occupy encampments. 
Troy, an occupier, in addressing the concern about allegations of drug use at the camp (Occupy Seattle has adopted a no drugs/alcohol policy) pointed out that “there were drunks and junkies in Capitol Hill” long before Occupy Seattle moved its camp to the neighborhood. In fact, the South Lawn of SCCC was a known gathering site for drug dealers and users. Some of the conflicts that occurred at the camp had to do with the struggle to eradicate drugs from the site. Regardless of the source of the conflicts, the camp Peace and Safety committee has worked hard to resolve situations non-violently.
The policy of the Board of Trustees toward Occupy Seattle is not determined by safety and health concerns. These are mere convenient pretexts to suppress free speech activity and stifle the growing grassroots Occupy movement by a board that is hand-picked by the governor and which, faced with the grievances of a grassroots popular movement, will unequivocally side with the 1 percent.
After allowing members of the public a grand total of 17 minutes (one minute per person) to comment on the proposal, members of the board and administration were given unlimited time to utter innuendos and half-truths about Occupy.
Over and over again, they said that camping on campus was not part of the mission of the college—as if occupiers were just taking a vacation, sitting in their tents as Seattle's famous rainy season begins! They willfully ignored the point that occupying a public place is a means to the end of building a movement that, if victorious, will further the mission of the college to provide a quality public higher education.
There was one sign that the Board was on the defensive. Due to outrage over the recent incident in which 84-year-old Dorli Rainey and other non-violent protesters were pepper-sprayed and hit with bicycles by Seattle police, the board made it clear that they were not going to call for an immediate eviction of the camp. Chancellor Jill Wakefield stated that they would strive for “an orderly process” of transition. The emergency rule must be filed in the state capitol of Olympia on the next business day, which is Monday, Nov. 28. Once that has occurred, college staff will supposedly work with Occupy Seattle to help them make a transition to a new location.
Many options are now on the table as to how this movement will proceed locally. Many Seattle occupiers plan to go to Olympia Nov. 28 for the Occupy the Capitol protest against state budget cuts. Some may join the encampment there, which for now is being left alone by the local and state authorities. Currently, a small group of people who had been occupying at SCCC have independently taken over an abandoned house in the Central District and are occupying it with an eye to turning it into a community center—such occupations have a long and proud tradition in Seattle. Local organizers are mulling over other ideas as well.
Returning to camp after the meeting, the rain continued to pour down in near record-breaking quantities. Supporters from the community were dishing up turkey with all the fixings. Water was puddling up on the brick steps leading down to the lawn area. Three of the canopies used for the information and medical tents were in a state of collapse due to the rain and wind. Thomas, an occupier, was spearheading an attempt to rebuild the information and medical tent areas using some new donated tents. However, they needed to first go get some pallets to lay under the tents to keep water from seeping up.
This reporter donated some zip ties, twine and a tarp to the effort. I also collected some completely soaked jackets and pants from Thomas, which were washed and returned dry later that day. As I came into the darkened camp with the bag of laundry, the rain had abated. I found Thomas and others working at the site of the medical tent. About 15 pallets had been laid down and they were removing the broken skeleton of the old canopy. It was hard not to see symbolism in this scenario—despite efforts to crush it, Occupy continues. It is an embryonic form of a mass struggle that may ultimately clear away the wreckage of an exploitative society, and lay the foundation for a new society ruled by the 99 percent led by the working class.

Friday, November 25, 2011

2011-11-25 "Can moral nations abandon Palestine? UN membership for Palestine should hasten peace and avert an oncoming catastrophe" by Stephen Robert
The writer is co-founder of The Source of Hope Foundation, which provides food, water, health care, education and micro-finance opportunities to desperate populations. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relationsand was Chancellor of Brown University from 1998-2007.
---
The United States Congress is threatening to cut funds to UN agencies that admit Palestine as a state, along with roughly $500 million in USAID funds to the West Bank and Gaza Strip. That's on top of the $60 million the U.S. is withholding from UNESCO. The USAID mission for the West Bank and Gaza is preparing to dismiss half of its staff. For its part, Israel is withholding $100 million in tax receipts they collect for the Palestinian Authority.
Why does the United States punish the already beleaguered Palestinians for pursuing international recognition, for realizing that negotiating with a potent occupying force, backed by the world's sole superpower, simply isn't a winnable equation? The American government argues that peace can only come from direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians. But Palestinian membership in the United Nations does not preclude negotiations. More likely, membership would bring a two-party accord closer by leveling the playing field, and internationalizing the negotiations beyond Washington and its partners in the Quartet, which have proved dismally ineffective.
America is hurting itself. It is not in the country's interest to weaken the United Nations or reduce its voice on environmental issues, nuclear proliferation, the fight against AIDS, malaria, hunger, etc. Much of the world no longer views the United States as a reliable or effective force for Middle East peace. They have lost the moral high ground which served them and the world so well over the last 60 years.
Though a superpower, no longer is America seen as a benevolent protector of human rights.
Can a moral nation withhold humanitarian aid from 4 million desperate people?
Four million Palestinians will not forever tolerate living in an open air prison, no matter what Congress says. An infant born in the occupied territories today faces a life of hopelessness and desperation. Citizens of nowhere, they cannot leave the territories, nor are many foreigners allowed entry. Palestinians are often denied adequate water, medical care and work opportunities, to name a few missing human rights, yet the world dithers while watching a train wreck in slow motion. Like the Tunisians, Egyptians, Libyans, Yemenites, Bahrainis and Syrians, the Palestinians will demand their freedom. The longer we wait for the tipping point, the more likely its arrival will be ugly. Hopefully it won't be violent as well.
U.S. President Barack Obama's Cairo speech in 2009 gave hope to the world's 1 billion Muslims that the United States recognized them as full partners in addressing the great global issues. Obama must make good on that hope. Supporting retribution against the brutalized Palestinians diminishes the credibility of his elegant words. After decades of supporting abhorrent dictators in the Arab world, Washington now gives sustenance to the fledgling democratic movements that replaced them. Are the Palestinians an exception?
I was raised to be a strong supporter of Israel. I have been, and I remain one. Yet any system that denies millions of people their freedom is doomed to fail. The question is how many more lives will be ruined, how many more futures stunted, before America's politicians see the light. True supporters of Israel must not stay silent. They must remember that the strongest often stand alone.
A real friend does not let their friends drive drunk, as Thomas Freidman wrote. It is time for the moral majority to speak out, and demand that we stand on the side of freedom, equality and human rights; just as the Obama promised in Cairo.
UN membership for Palestine should hasten peace and avert an oncoming catastrophe. "We can easily forgive a child for being afraid of the dark," Plato said. "The tragedy is when grown people are afraid of the light." Only a Palestinian state can bring light to a Jewish-Arab conflict that has stained both peoples for too long. It is time we stopped being afraid.

Thursday, November 24, 2011

2011-11-24 "Resistance Up Against Nationwide Attacks" by Andy Zee
[http://www.countercurrents.org/zee241111.htm]
Andy Zee is the spokesperson for Revolution Books in New York City, and he is a writer for Revolution  newspaper, where this article first appeared (November 27, 2011 issue)
---
Two days before the two-month anniversary of the start of Occupy Wall Street, in the dead of night, Mayor Bloomberg cleared OWS from Zuccotti Park, in what mainstream media called a military operation with secret training and massive force. Encampments in Oakland, California; Portland, Oregon; University of California Berkeley; University of California Davis; Columbia, South Carolina; San Diego, California; Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Albany, New York; Salt Lake City, Utah; St. Louis, Missouri; and Denver, Colorado were assaulted and demolished in what has become increasingly clear were coordinated raids and an emerging ruling class consensus to stop the movement by shutting down its very essence—occupying public space in the face of the symbols of government, finance, and authority, spaces where people have left their “normal lives” behind and are putting their lives on the line every day to oppose and expose the brutal inequities of 21st century USA and in so doing enabling people to imagine, to think, and dream of new possibility.
 On the November 17th two month anniversary, tens of thousands protested in cities around the country and the world. They were inspired by the defiant stand of the Occupy movement against the deep suffering the economic crisis has wrought, the enormous inequalities in the U.S., and a broad feeling that the political system works against the people's interest. They were propelled as well by outrage at the massive police attacks that evicted Occupy Wall Street from Zuccotti Park as well as several other occupations nationally. The day ended in New York City with many thousands jubilantly marching over the Brooklyn Bridge.
We sat packed around a table in a famous pizza parlor under the Brooklyn Bridge late Thursday night, November 17, Wall Street Occupiers and revolutionaries—hungry and cold, really half frozen. Looking around the table there was a sense of accomplishment mixed with a battle-hardened determination reflected in our faces. We had just been through a day of struggle declaring that OWS was not over, defiant in the face of the police clearing of Zuccotti Park, joyous in learning about the protests around the country and the world. We spoke about the long day, the young Occupiers telling of having turned a corner in their lives and not wanting to go back. Sixteen hours ago, as dawn broke, these new comrades in struggle were part of surrounding the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE)—facing an army of cops, the young woman with us had been hit hard in the chest by a pig billy club and was still short of breath, one of the guys had been grabbed by the neck and a third beaten several times by rabid police who beat so often and freely that it was clearly the orders of the day. Somehow no one in this group got arrested in this morning.
As they told of the day, recounting the miles they marched, their tales wove with stories of their lives: a midwestern tale of watching a mother die of cancer because the family had no money or insurance; of a young Black man working without any prospects of a meaningful future in Cleveland; and a Black veteran from Brooklyn telling of walking into stores and watching shoppers clutch their bags tight while security kept an eye as if he were a criminal or alien. People spoke of lives of not being treated like a thinking human being and then in two short months being part of changing the world, standing up against all that is wrong—from getting arrested twice for doing nonviolent civil disobedience to STOP “Stop and Frisk,” to living outdoors in the shadow of Wall Street, claiming a patch of land for humanity and thereby exposing the venality and the huge injustices of this system.
The stories of their lives are echoed as you travel through the Occupy movement—by those living in the encampments and the tens of thousands more who visit and support. Students crushed by debt with no job prospects. From the long-term homeless to the recently foreclosed, from a young woman in the media tent in San Francisco volunteering while dying of cancer because she couldn't get insurance, to young doctors outraged and frustrated with how the system prevents them from really providing care for their patients, the Occupations have become magnets and poles of people saying Enough! This must change.
On the evening of November 17, as we marched across the Brooklyn Bridge, there was a giant projection on the Verizon Building that flashed messages of the 99% that were marching in 30 other cities. In New York the attempt to shut down the NYSE met an army of cops who effectively turned Wall Street into a totally locked down militarized zone with barricades, checkpoints, helicopters, and special vehicles. Police wantonly beat protesters with fists and billy clubs—with 170 arrested in the morning, and another 70+ throughout the day.
By mid-afternoon, thousands of college and high school students had walked out of school. Led by a banner that said “Revolution Generation,” students marching past the New School [university] looked up to see more banners hanging from upper floor windows saying, “Occupied.” This has begun spreading to campuses around the country from Ivy League to community colleges. University of California Berkeley became a flash point as a YouTube of police beating protesting students went viral. Students walked out at Harvard University and a tent city sprang up. Video can be seen online of police viciously pepper-spraying students directly in the face who are sitting in at UC Davis, as hundreds of others watch in shock. Swelling the ranks of the thousands who gathered at dusk to march over the Brooklyn Bridge were several unions, with a couple of City Council members and the local Service Employees International Union (SEIU) leaders getting arrested in a nonviolent civil disobedience at the beginning of the march.
The massive turnouts and determined protests in many other cities underscored that the Occupy movement has captured the imagination and aspirations for change of large numbers of people.
It has forced the enormous inequity and brutal injustice of life for millions, from the bottom of society that reaches up deep into the crushed middle class, into the consciousness of and discussion throughout society broadly. Every night for weeks now, local and national news has reported on economic and political inequality; in the actions of OWS, the defenders as well as those who would reform capitalism have argued their cases in op-eds while in the streets and the encampments, protesters were debating and imagining many different ways the world could be.
Revolution, once far from people's lips and minds, is now being discussed. Communist revolutionaries have been in the swirl—a Revolution Working Group was formed at OWS, hundreds of copies of Bob Avakian's BAsics  and dozens of Constitution for the New Socialist Republic in North America (Draft Proposal)  have been sold, and revolutionary communists have spoken at large mic-check gatherings and in small groups. On Thursday morning, very close to the New York Stock Exchange, a banner was hoisted on the side of a building that said: “For a Future Without Wall Streets—We Are Building a Movement for Revolution—revcom.us” in defiance of police orders and to the cheers of the crowd.
 All of this has been forced into the air because people put their lives on hold, occupied space in the eye of the empire, and set about each day to work together in new ways while taking to the streets to expose and fight against what this capitalist system is doing to humanity and the planet.
Zuccotti Park is one city block of inhospitable corporate marble, yet for two months it came alive with hundreds and thousands debating and acting for something new every day—the library, the collective empowerment of mic check, the communal kitchen, the continual dialogue, the hard yet exhilarating work of discussing the course of action for the day, the tents, and the beat of the drums with all of their rogue spirit and all the controversy, with efforts by the City Council to restrict their constant rhythm that served as yet another way to attempt to stifle this movement.
All of this has captured the imagination of millions.  It has stood in defiance and opposition to the dog-eat-dog of so-called normalcy of life in this most parasitically perverse of cities and cultures. Tour buses came to OWS from around the world. Teachers brought their classes, and one of the young revolutionaries told of how he always made a conscious effort to ask the kids what they thought of OWS.
Occupy Wall Street in its actual and its larger metaphorical occupation of this space, at this time, began to exert a beginning alternative authority that was felt around the world. This is what the capitalist class and their whole state apparatus cannot tolerate. OWS and the occupations around the world enabled people to peel the crust from their eyes that was skewing their vision so they believed that the world could never change, to think, to dream of a better world, to stand up and assert our humanity, defying the status quo, carving open the possibility that things don't have to be this way. All this now hangs in the balance.
All this political initiative needs to be pushed forward, opening up broader and deeper resistance and critical questioning. And this too will continue to have impact and import on the movement we are building for the revolution that is needed to put an end to all forms of oppression and exploitation.  In Bob Avakian's statement, “ A Reflection on the ‘Occupy' Movement: An Inspiring Beginning... And the Need to Go Further”—which really needs to be circulated widely, Avakian says:
“The main—and, up to this point at least, the overwhelming—aspect of these ‘Occupy' protests has been their very positive thrust: in mobilizing people to stand up against injustice and inequality and the domination of economic, social and political life, and international relations, by a super-rich elite class whose interests are in opposition to those of the great majority of people; and in contributing in significant ways to an atmosphere in which people are raising and wrangling with big questions about the state of society and the world and whether and how something much better can be brought into being. It will be a very good thing if these protests continue to spread and further develop, with this basic thrust and this positive impact. And these ‘Occupy' protests can be a significant positive factor in contributing to the revolution that is needed—IF this is approached, by those with the necessary scientific communist understanding, in accordance with that understanding and the strategic orientation and approach that flows from it... [and]... masses of people involved in them are won to, become firmly convinced of, the need to develop the struggle further, into a movement for revolution, with the necessary understanding and organization—yes, including the necessary structure and leadership—that is required to finally sweep away this system and bring into being a radically new system with the aim of ultimately abolishing all exploitation and oppression.” ( See full statement. [http://revcom.us/a/250/avakian_on_the_occupy_movement-en.html])
The question of whether and how Occupy Wall Street will continue is sharply posed. People continue to gather at Zuccotti Park, but tents, sleeping bags, even guitars and bicycles were not allowed the day after  the mass protest. And NYPD detectives prowled NYC churches that are housing some of the Occupiers, counting and observing. All this must be opposed with great determination and creativity. Will the outpouring of broad support in the streets on November 17 be marshalled to re-establish an occupation, or will it be dissipated, marginalized, or channeled into forms of protest that no longer put the ruling class on the defensive, that no longer galvanize people into active opposition to the injustices of the system, that no longer throw up big questions about the direction of society?
There are real stakes in standing up to the attacks and continuing to occupy space. Think about the effect if the movement is able to advance through the current challenges, forcing the ruling class to pay a political price, wrenching more space from which to oppose all that this system does to the people here and around the world. Think about how fighting forward through this can further undermine the legitimacy of an illegitimate, oppressive system. On the other hand, if these recent assaults result in squelching the Occupations one way or another, this will serve to shove the aspirations and anger of so many back under the rug.
The ruling class finds it an intolerable anathema to have the brutal reality of their system exposed through people stepping out of politics as usual and exerting even an embryonic alternate authority. Mayor Bloomberg, as arrogant and condescending as ever, tried to trivialize OWS while planning to crush it, opining: “It's fun and it's cathartic... it's entertaining to go and blame people”—meaning himself and his Wall Street cronies. Even when paying his obligatory, absurd lip service to First Amendment rights to protest while ordering massive and brutal police repression, Bloomberg could not conceal his disdain for the message and people of OWS. The New York Post  and New York Daily News  were filled for weeks with lurid and vile depictions of OWS. Long Island Congressman Peter King, echoing the Nazis' descriptions of Jews as vermin, or the KKK speaking of Black people, said: “These are people who were living in dirt, these were people who were involved with drugs, there was violence, there was rape ... they're angry people who are losers who are on the outside and screaming...”
It must be said that the evictions of the Occupy movement had absolutely nothing to do with public safety, concern for victims of sexual assault, prevention of crime, rules against tents, cleanliness or sanitation. Want to see vermin and filth—check out how well the New York Housing Authority does at keeping public housing fit for human beings. OWS mobilized people to form security, sanitation, and recycling committees that worked to deal with acute social problems in ways which actually serve and respect the humanity of those involved—with an approach precisely the opposite of what the NYPD and city agencies are able to do within the confines of a system where maximizing profit determines what will be done, and where the labor of people is viewed as a commodity to be exploited or discarded.
All of the vitriol about filth and crime was marshalled to develop pretext and garner support for forcefully bringing the full force of state power to wipe out OWS. When you see clubs swinging into the bellies of students at University of California, Berkeley, or rupturing the spleen of a veteran from the war in Iraq in Oakland, the pepper-spraying in the mouth and face of a young woman in Portland and of an 84-year-old woman in Seattle, the use of sonic cannon developed for war zones deployed to evict OWS from Zuccotti Park, and police with assault rifles and paramilitary uniforms in several cities, you witness the brutal strong arm of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, the capitalist class and their state apparatus. Lessons must be learned.
The “1%,” to use that term as evocative of the capitalist class, has a monopoly on the legitimate use of armed force and they will wield it any and every time they feel their interests and rule fundamentally threatened. The police are not part of the 99% but exist only to serve and protect the interests of Capital against all those they exploit and oppress. Thus far, their repression of OWS has been met by more and broader resistance, from the general strike in Oakland to the November 17 protests. Now, with several of the key Occupations temporarily evicted, others under daily assault, the movement needs to steadfastly rise to meet new challenges.
There are those who look at this movement and see opportunity to advance narrow agendas of seeking some reform to benefit a few—striving to bring the movement up under the wing of a section of the ruling class.  Others look at the power of the state and seek an easier path.
These views reflect and even emanate from those in power. Oakland liberal Mayor Jean Quan who ordered the brutal evacuation of Occupy Oakland after revealing that she was part of a 18-city conference call to develop strategy for the evictions, said: “...what I think you're starting to see is that the Occupy movement is looking for more stability. I spent a lot of last week talking to peaceful demonstrators, ones who wanted to separate themselves in my city away from the anarchist groups who had been looking for a confrontation with the police.”
The protests on November 17 across the country targeted bridges as symbolic of the crumbling infrastructure of the U.S. A potent symbol, yet also one that dovetails neatly with the Democratic Party's efforts to corral the Occupy movement to serve its objectives. “The McClatchy Report,” the website of a large newspaper chain in the U.S., wrote: “The protests Thursday in many cities included bridges as a backdrop—mirroring President Barack Obama's call for Congress to boost the economy by spending money on public projects. Indeed, the Washington protesters appeared at the same bridge where Obama appeared earlier this month to press Congress to pass his $447 billion jobs package, which calls for spending billions on road and bridge repair.”
Outpourings of protest where the goal increasingly becomes putting pressure on Congress or City Hall, and where tents become symbolic protest signs can ultimately only serve to channel the initiative away from what's urgently needed. Within the Occupy movement this can take the form of moving on from the encampments to working in communities for the illusion of tangible reforms. This is expressed in the pull to find some space to establish an encampment off to the side in a safe space—a micro protest that devolves into an ignorable part of protest ecology while imperialist plunder grinds on.
Bob Avakian writes in “ A Reflection on the ‘Occupy' Movement: An Inspiring Beginning... And The Need to Go Further :”
“As is demonstrated in the “Occupy” movement, there is a basis for a broad unity among these different sections of the people—in opposition to many of the manifestations of the oppressive and truly murderous nature of this system, and in a basic searching for a better way that human beings could relate to each other—but that unity cannot eliminate nor cancel out the reality and the effects of the profound inequalities that are so deeply rooted in this system and will continue to have force and effect so long as this system remains in power and its relations and dynamics set the fundamental and ultimate terms for things. This is yet another expression of the fact that nothing short of revolution, with a leadership grounded in a communist understanding and orientation, can fully penetrate to the depths of, let alone uproot, the relations that oppress and divide masses of people.”
 The national Occupy movement, with a concentrated expression at Occupy Wall Street in NYC, is at a crossroads that will require determination and creative strategies to build on and broaden while deepening the movement's stand against the whole way that capitalism is destroying people and the planet.
11/28 NYC PSC Calls For Mobilization Against Police Attacks And Tuition Hikes
from Sándor John, adjunct activist at Hunter College [s_an (@) msn.com] (writing in a personal capacity)
...The Professional Staff Congress -- our union -- has called to "mobilize our members" this coming Monday, November 28 starting at 4:00 p.m. in front of Baruch College at Lexington Avenue and 25th Street.
Large-scale solidarity is needed in response to the brutality that CUNY management and security (together with the NYPD) unleashed against CUNY students who were peacefully protesting tuition hikes at last Monday's Board of Trustees meeting, which was held at Baruch.
Defending CUNY students, defending the right to protest, standing up for unionism against the Board of Trustees, against tuition hikes and police brutality -- these are vital issues. (See posting below.)
Let's work together to make Monday massive -- a mass labor/student/community mobilization.
The union and others must reach out to the rest of city labor to come to Baruch en masse on Monday at 4.
Student organizations throughout CUNY and at other schools need to organize intensively to bring masses of student on Monday. GAs and other organizing bodies need to move fast to make sure this happens.
Outreach to community and activist groups fed up with police brutality and racism; with school closings and educational colonialism, tuition hikes and privatization -- to come massively on Monday to Baruch at 4:00 p.m.
Let's make Monday's protest a massive assertion of our rights.

P.S. If anyone asks why, tell them to watch these:
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkBGMULZKxY]
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSeNS77XJd0]
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGvO8TQSLQk]
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSeNS77XJd0]
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGMS5G3gxq8]
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdrwdsbCzKk]
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OHtlfLGf7I]

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

2011-11-23 "Destruction of Occupy Wall Street 'People's Library' draws ire; Mayor Bloomberg accused of waging 'crusade to destroy a conversation' as nearly 3,000 books lost in Zuccotti Park raid" from "[London] Guardian" newspaper
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2011/nov/23/occupy-wall-street-peoples-library]
When police seized an estimated 5,000 books from Occupy Wall Street's "People's Library" during the eviction of the camp at Zuccotti Park on 15 November, it drew condemnation from a host of writers and organisations, including the American Library Association and author Salman Rushdie.
The staff of Michael Bloomberg, the New York mayor who ordered the eviction, attempted to defuse the row by promising that property from Zuccotti Park "including the OWS library" was safely stored at a sanitation department garage and could be collected.
But when the librarians arrived to survey what remained of the books, some signed copies given by authors, including one donated the previous day by Philip Levine, the US poet laureate, they found "it was clear the books had been treated as trash", they said.
At an emotional press conference on Wednesday, the librarians laid the torn and damaged books they were able to recover from the garage on a table taking up much of a cramped room in an office block in Madison Avenue.
It was a sorry sight. Only 1,273 books - a third of the stock - were returned to them, they said, and around a third of those were damaged beyond repair. Only about 800 are still usable. About 2,900 books are still unaccounted for.
The librarians, authors and supporters spoke of the loss of what had become a potent symbol of the Occupy movement and called on Bloomberg to restore the library and a public space in which people can use it.
Norman Seigel, the former director of the New York Civil Liberties Union and civil rights attorney who chaired the meeting, said he was not aware of any other instance where a city or state had destroyed a library.
"History informs us that when books are burned there is almost immediately or subsequently universal condemnation of that act. Here, the Bloomberg adminstration lost, damaged and possibly destroyed books. That is wrong."
Seigel described the library as an impressive catalogue of books, including titles such as Shakespeare's Macbeth and Othello, Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment, the autobiography of Andrew Carnegie and even Bloomberg's own work, "Bloomberg on Bloomberg".
Seigel called on the mayor to replace "every single book" and to provide a space for a library. He said: "Bloomberg's administration needs to acknowledge that wrong has been committed and that should never happen again in this great city. We also want space for the People's Library."
One by one, the activists involved in building the library spoke of what it meant for the movement.
Mandy Hink, a professional librarian said: "I poured my heart and soul into this library. The heart of this movement is ideas and literature and sharing. The destruction of the library is an attempt to silence and destroy our movement. What type of people are we if we can't create a public space where we can share books and ideas with each other?"
Daniel Norton, a student in library science from the University of Maine at Augusta, said the library was "the creation of a community through a conversation and sharing ideas."
He accused Bloomberg of a "crusade to destroy a conversation" where people came to engage with each other.
William Scott, a professor of English at the University of Pittsburgh, a univeristy where Bloomberg studied and has a hall named after him, said: "This man threw away so many precious books. They embodied all the values that we struggle to defend in our country."
Scott, who is spending his sabbatical with Occupy, has told of how during the raid, he watched as Stephen Boyer, a poet and OWS librarian, read poems aloud from the Occupy Wall street poetry anthology to the riot police [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2011/nov/23/peopleslibrary.wordpress.com].
Writing in the Nation [http://www.thenation.com/article/164766/peoples-library-occupy-wall-street-lives], Scott said: "As they pushed us away from the park with shields, fists, billy clubs and tear gas, I stood next to Stephen and watched while he yelled poetry at the top of his lungs into the oncoming army of riot police. Then, something incredible happened. Several of the police leaned in closer to hear the poetry. They lifted their helmet shields slightly to catch the words Stephen was shouting out to them, even while their fellow cops continued to stampede us."
He recounted how the next day, an officer who had been guarding the entrance to Zuccotti Park said he was touched by the poetry and moved at how they cared enough about books to risk arrest to defend them.
Books were not the only items destroyed in the raid. One activist said she had never seen a computer come out of the sanitaion department that was not destroyed.
Gideon Oliver, a lawyer form the New York chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, described the destruction of the library as "illegal and unconscionable" and said they were looking into ways it might be addressed.
Watch video of the NYPD and Dept. of Sanitation destroying the OWS People's Library tent and throwing away all the books. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTkUjQwHf4I


NYCMayorsOffice 2011-11-15 Twitter
Property from #Zuccotti, incl #OWS library, safely stored @ 57th St Sanit Garage; can be picked up Weds yfrog.com/nzdr7ndj

2011-11-23 "The GOP’s Oath To The One Percent" by "ThinkProgress War Room"
[http://thinkprogress.org/progress-report/]
 One Oath to Rule Them All -
You’d think the oath that mattered most to our elected leaders would be this one:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."
Republicans, however, seem to be in thrall to an entirely different oath:
"I will: ONE, oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rate for individuals and business; and TWO, oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates."
That is the oath to Republican lobbyist Grover Norquist that almost every single Republican member of Congress and every single Republican presidential contender (except Jon Huntsman) has taken [http://s3.amazonaws.com/atrfiles/files/files/091411-federalpledgesigners(1).pdf].

Why does it matter?
Let’s take the example of the super committee. Here’s Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), one of the Democrats who served on the committee, explaining how Republican lobbyist Grover Norquist was the “13th member” of the super committee [http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/11/21/373269/supercommittee-norquist-13th-member/] and how his so-called “taxpayer protection pledge” solidified the GOP’s continued unwillingness to make the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share:
Kerry: “But unfortunately, this thing about the Bush tax cuts and the pledge to Grover Norquist keeps coming up. Grover Norquist has been the 13th member of this committee without being there. I can’t tell you how many times we hear about ‘the pledge, the pledge.’ Well all of us took a pledge to uphold the Constitution and to full and faithfully and well-execute our duties and I think that requires us to try and reach an agreement.”
And, as Grover Norquist proudly told 60 Minutes this past Sunday [http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7389006n], no Republican has voted for an increase in individual income tax rates since 1990 — 21 years ago.

What It Means: An Oath Of, By, and For the 1 Percent -
The GOP’s oath to Grover Norquist has serious practical consequences — consequences that are bad for our country. Here’s just a few examples of what Republicans oppose en masse as a result of the oath they apparently hold most dear:
* Republicans oppose making the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share
* Republicans oppose making huge corporations pay their fair share (or even any taxes at all in some cases)
* Republicans oppose ending unfair tax loopholes that allow millionaires and billionaires to pay a lower tax rate than middle class Americans
* Republicans oppose ending unfair handouts to hedge fund billionaires
* Republicans oppose ending tens of billions of dollars in handouts to Big Oil
* Republicans oppose ending unfair tax loopholes that pay companies to ship jobs overseas
* Republicans oppose ending unfair tax loopholes for vacation homes and yachts
* Republicans oppose ending unfair and ridiculous tax loopholes for things like wealthy horse breeders or corporate jets
And in these deficit-obsessed times, we know that unfair government handouts to millionaires, oil companies, and giant corporations have to be made up by cutting spending elsewhere in the budget. So refusing to make everyone pay their fair share means programs that benefit the other 99 Percent each and every day get cut deeper as a result of the taxpayer-funded handouts going to the top 1 Percent.
IN ONE SENTENCE:  The only oath our elected leaders should take is to the Constitution, not one to a Republican lobbyist who embodies an unfair system rigged to benefit the top 1 Percent.

 2011-11-23 "Republican Labor Board Member Threatens To Resign To Stop New Union Election Rules" by Pat Garofalo
[http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/11/23/375328/nlrb-gop-resigns/]
The National Labor Relations Board — which is the federal agency in charge of enforcing the nation’s labor laws — has proposed a new regulation for union elections, aimed at ensuring that employers can’t needlessly delay an election while engaging in union-busting activities. Currently, according to research by John-Paul Ferguson of Stanford Business School, 35 percent of all union elections are called off due to endless delays and often illegal employer opposition [http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/08/29/306759/gop-jobs-assault-labor/].
The NLRB’s proposed regulation would speed up the election process to help workers show their true feelings toward whether or not they want to form a union. However, the one Republican member of the NLRB has threatened to resign from the board if the rule goes forward, which would not only prevent that rule from becoming law, but would cripple the NLRB entirely [http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/business/brian-e-hayes-threatens-to-quit-labor-board.html?_r=1]:
[begin excerpt]
The labor board’s sole Republican member, Brian E. Hayes, has threatened to resign to deny the N.L.R.B. the three-person quorum it needs to make any decisions, according to board officials. Mr. Hayes has made his threat expressly to block the Democratic-dominated board from adopting new rules to speed up unionization elections, which the board’s other current members, both Democrats, intend to pass Nov. 30.
[end excerpt]
The Supreme Court ruled last year that the NLRB needs three members (out of a possible five) to legally operate [http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/06/17/103124/nlrb-supreme-court/]. Hayes’ resignation would bring the board down to two members, preventing it from making any decisions. The U.S. already has the weakest labor protections in the developed world, and leaving the NLRB toothless will only make the situation worse [http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/06/312182/us-weakest-labor-protections-oec/].
But this is just the latest episode in a wider GOP attempt to cripple the NLRB (though the first involving a member of the board itself) [http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/09/30/332865/house-budget-war-on-workers/]. Republicans have moved several pieces of legislation that would cut the board’s funding and limit its ability to make rules. The GOP also refuses to confirm Obama’s nominees to the board, which is what has left it so shorthanded in the first place.
“Given its recent activity, inoperable is progress,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has said of the NLRB [http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/business/brian-e-hayes-threatens-to-quit-labor-board.html?_r=1]. And now it seems that the Republican member of the board is planning to be complicit with the congressional GOP’s goal.
2011-11-23 “The Degree To Which You Resist Is The Degree To Which You Are Free” by Phil Rockstroh [http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/11/23]
I've noticed a meme beginning to fester among liberal insiders who are positing that the Occupy Wall Street movement is starting to "distract" the citizenry from the wicked machinations of Republicans of the legislative class.
Nonsense.
The OWS movement is not a distraction from—but serves as an alternative to—the disingenuous theatrics staged by the political hacks of this faux republic. Conversely, movement members have grasped that it is the hollow grandstanding--the modus operandi of the present U.S. political system itself--that serves as distraction from the realities of the day.
Those drawn to the OWS movement realize this: Vast sums of money are required to get the attention of and gain influence over the entrenched class of self-serving political insiders who hustle their wares in Washington, D.C.
Year after year, election cycle after election cycle, Washington’s political class has revealed whose interests it serves. Accordingly, let the 1% and their political operatives continue on their present myopic, self-serving, society-decimating course: By doing so, they will just bring more outraged people into the streets and hasten their own undoing.
Yet, because arrogant power, girded by duplicity and ruthlessly maintained, does not yield without a fight, we should expect more of the following:
Stories are circulating that Clark, Lytle, Geduldig & Cranford, a well-connected Washington lobbying firm, with ties to the financial industry, have floated a $850,000 plan to pillory Occupy Wall Street. This should not come as a surprise. Living in a society dominated by the power of massive corporations, and the inequitable wealth these self-perpetuating organizations have at their disposal, we will be relentlessly subjected to the narratives they generate.
"The most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed." — Steve Biko
Since birth, most of us have been enveloped by the consumer state's commercial hologram. Almost every daily act we perform and attitude we evince is in some measure determined by the dictates, demands and the incessant, commercial come-ons (the defacto propaganda) of the corporate state e.g. from what time you rise in the morning, to the food you eat, to what you clothe yourself in, to how you spend your days, to what time you go to sleep at night, to what stories you are audience to--the cultural myths you have internalized--by means of mass media saturation, to the manner you celebrate festivals and holidays, to how your illnesses and of those around you will play-out, even the circumstances of how you will approach and succumb to your death.
Because these are the waters in which we swim, most will accept societal and cultural circumstances as a given…believing, for example, that when they posit a political utterance that the opinion expressed has been formed exclusively of their own mind, by the exercise of free will.
Accordingly, a large percent of the populace of the U.S. believes consumerism is a form of freedom…that the exercise thereof mainly involves being at liberty to trundle to a mall and be in possession of the right to choose between a big-ass cookie or a giant Cinnabon…that freedom of choice is expressed by over-priced running shoes--or security can be found in a massive SUV.
In this manner, the propaganda campaigns of the corporate/national security state have proven effective at promoting and perpetuating the inequitable status quo in place at the present time. Do not underestimate the well-rewarded, professional con men employed in the criminal enterprise known as "public relations." Remember, these masters of deceit sell wars, fought by the poor, in which, the underclass kill and die for the profits of a ruthless few. War is a money train for the rich and connected but a death wagon for the rest of humankind.
Ready yourself to be buffeted by a barrage of virtual reality blunderbuss--volley after volley of mainstream media launched Big Lies--and the ground fire of social media small distortions. Don't walk unarmed into the line of fire.
Remember this: Most likely, the corporate state has, to some degree, colonized your mind, as it is well on its way to destroying the ecosystem of the entire planet.
Conversely, let your soul occupy you. While there might be an ongoing effort to scour Liberty Park of liberty, they cannot do likewise to your heart without your consent. Turn the tables on them: Evict the corporate occupiers from the public realm within--as all the while, you challenge propaganda whenever it crosses your path…on the streets, at your workplace, at family gatherings, and on social media-- because a lie left unchallenged begins to be accepted as truth. And worse, invades, colonizes and exploits (and often kills) a portion of the soul of the world.
Importantly, do not underestimate the ruthless nature of calcified power.
Regarding the subject: On Thursday, Nov. 17, near Foley Square, there was blood on Broadway. At the scene, I witnessed thuggish, NYPD motorcycle cops driving directly into groups of peaceful demonstrators, with the intent of antagonizing those gathered, and when people stood their ground and refused to be bullied--then phalanxes of blue shirt bastards, swinging nightsticks, waded into the crowd.
Even with my wife, tugging at the back of my jacket, attempting to tow, as we say down south, my narrow ass away from the direction of injury or jail, I could not contain my outrage; I growled at a smirking cop, gloating over the carnage, "just keep it up, you mindless thug, when you get folks angry enough, the boot just might be on the other neck...namely yours."
In hindsight, in my own defense: Being on scene and witnessing peaceful people attacked and brutalized, one is apt to become seized by rage.
But what is the mayor of New York City and his Police Commissioner’s excuse?
Mayor Bloomberg, Commissioner Kelley and the ranks of NYPD have proven themselves willing to barricade and checkpoint the city into chaos…as opposed to enduring ongoing moments of freedom of assembly and free expression.
And this is why we must not retreat. Their tactics of repression are very expensive to the city budget, and money is the only thing they love.
Hence, they have, in turn, provided us with a tactic we can use; we can hit them where they feel it. (Conversely, they can take blow after blow to their dignity--because they are devoid of that character trait.)
The ground is shifting below our feet and this phenomenon involves more than the echoing footfalls of marchers and the trudging of militarized formations of riot cops on city streets worldwide.
The first vibrations, closer to tremors, transpired because the ground below us has been fracked of dreams...the void engendered seismological activity. Now, from Cairo, Egypt's Tahrir Square to Syntagma Square in Athens, Greece to Liberty Park, in New York, New York to Oscar Grant Park, in Oakland, California, we have become like tuning forks, in sympatico with the resonances of the tormented earth.
Subsequently, the walls of the neoliberal prison are cracking…We are no longer isolated, enclosed in our alienation, imprisoned by a concretized sense of powerlessness; daylight is beginning to pierce the darkness of our desolate cells.
“The state can't give you freedom, and the state can't take it away. You're born with it, like your eyes, like your ears. Freedom is something you assume, then you wait for someone to try to take it away. The degree to which you resist is the degree to which you are free.” ~ Utah Phillips

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

2011-11-22 "Pregnant Seattle protester miscarries after being kicked, pepper sprayed" by David Edwards
[http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/11/22/pregnant-seattle-protester-miscarries-after-being-kicked-pepper-sprayed/]
A woman who was pepper sprayed during during a raid on Occupy Seattle last week is blaming police after she miscarried Sunday.
Jennifer Fox, 19, told The Stranger [http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2011/11/21/pregant-woman-blasted-with-pepper-spray-by-spd-reportedly-miscarries] that she had been with the Occupy protests since they started in Westlake Park. She said she was homeless and three months pregnant, but felt the need to join activists during their march last Tuesday.
“I was standing in the middle of the crowd when the police started moving in,” Fox recalled. “I was screaming, ‘I am pregnant, I am pregnant. Let me through. I am trying to get out.’”
She claimed that police hit her in the stomach twice before pepper spraying her. One officer struck her with his foot and another pushed his bicycle into her. It wasn’t clear if either of those incidents were intentional.
“Right before I turned, both cops lifted their pepper spray and sprayed me. My eyes puffed up and my eyes swelled shut,” Fox said.
Seattle Post-Intelligencer photographer Joshua Trujillo snapped a picture [http://www.seattlepi.com/local/gallery/Occupy-Seattle-Protests-32102/photo-1758710.php] of Fox in apparent agony as another activist carried her to an ambulance.
Seattle fire department spokesman Kyle Moore told The Washington Post that a [http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/pregnant-elderly-woman-among-occupy-protesters-hit-with-pepper-spray-in-seattle-incident/2011/11/16/gIQALfliQN_story.html] 19-year-old pregnant woman was among those that were examined by paramedics.
While doctors at Harborview Medical Center didn’t see any problems at the time, things took a turn for the worst Sunday.
“Everything was going okay until yesterday, when I started getting sick, cramps started, and I felt like I was going to pass out,” she explained.
When Fox arrived at the hospital, doctors told her that the baby had no heartbeat.
“They diagnosed that I was having a miscarriage. They said the damage was from the kick and that the pepper spray got to it [the fetus], too,” she said.
“I was worried about it [when I joined the protests], but I didn’t know it would be this bad. I didn’t know that a cop would murder a baby that’s not born yet… I am trying to get lawyers.”
The Scoville heat chart indicates that U.S. grade pepper spray is ten times more painful than the blistering hot habanero pepper, according to Scientific American [http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2011/11/21/about-pepper-spray/]. While law enforcement officials regulary claim that the spray is safe, researchers at the University of North Carolina and Duke University found that it could “produce adverse cardiac, respiratory, and neurologic effects, including arrhythmias and sudden death.” [http://web.archive.org/web/20000817004624/http:/www.ncmedicaljournal.com/Smith-OK.htm]
Watch this video from IowaBoyDave, uploaded to YouTube Nov. 21, 2011.
2011-11-22 "Former AIG CEO Sues Claiming Taxpayers Need To Pony Up $25 Billion More" by Ian Millhiser
[http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/11/22/374472/former-aig-ceo-sues-claiming-taxpayers-need-to-pony-up-25-billion-more/]
For many years, insurance behemoth AIG was so poorly managed that the American taxpayer eventually had to invest nearly $70 billion in the incompetently run company [http://projects.propublica.org/bailout/entities/8-aig] to prevent its collapse from taking the entire U.S. economy along with it (much of this money has since been repaid [http://www.marketwatch.com/story/aig-repays-69-bln-to-us-treasury-2011-03-08]). Former AIG CEO Maurice Greenberg, however, thinks that the American people haven’t done enough to protect his massive fortune, so his company filed a lawsuit demanding even more taxpayer money [http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/banking-financial-institutions/194871-government-sued-for-25-billion-as-aig-takeover-called-unconstitutional]:
[begin excerpt]
Starr International, the company run by the former head of insurance giant American International Group (AIG), has filed a $25 billion lawsuit against the federal government, arguing that the takeover of the insurance company at the height of the financial crisis was unconstitutional.
When the government took an 80 percent interest in AIG during the financial crisis, it did so without “due process or just compensation,” in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution, according to the suit filed Monday in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.
[end excerpt]
The unbridled arrogance of this lawsuit is astonishing. While the wealthy insurance baron is correct that the Constitution does not allow private property to be taken “without just compensation” — a requirement that generally requires the government to pay a property owner the fair market value for their property — his legal complaint can be rebutted with just one chart:

That’s the near total collapse of AIG’s stock price immediately after investors learned that the insurance giant was little more than a smoking pile of toxic assets. So, at the time when the federal government took a supermajority interest in AIG, the fair market value for this interest was only slightly north of zero. Rather than receiving zero dollars for AIG’s mix of toxic sludge, however, AIG received tens of billions of dollars from the American people.
Now, however, its former CEO wants even more.
2011-11-22 "FBI Claims It Does Not Have Any Documents on Occupy Wall Street" by Jason Leopold from Truthout
 [http://www.truth-out.org/fbi-headquarters-says-it-does-not-have-any-documents-occupy-wall-street/1321994542]
Horse-mounted police officers stand guard as Occupy Wall Street protesters stage a demonstration on the Brooklyn Bridge, in New York, November 17, 2011. (Photo: Michael Appleton / The New York Times)The Department of Homeland Security says it is processing a separate FOIA request Truthout filed with the agency in October for documents pertaining to Occupy Wall Street.
FBI headquarters in Washington, DC claims it can't find any internal documents the agency may have on the protest movement known as Occupy Wall Street, according to a letter the agency sent to Truthout in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.
Truthout filed a FOIA request with the FBI on October 31, seeking a wide-range of documents, including "emails, memos, audio/video, transcripts, reports, threat assessments," in which Occupy Wall Street was discussed internally by agency officers and/or senior officials and/or any correspondence the agency had about the protest movement with local law enforcement and/or with local government officials.
Our request also sought documents related to any discussions that may have taken place "between FBI personnel, including FBI field agents" and the "CIA and Department of Homeland Security (DHS), related to the protest movement known as 'Occupy Wall Street.'"
FBI FOIA Chief David Hardy responded to our FOIA request in a letter dated November 15, which said, "based on the information [Truthout] provided, we conducted a search of the Central Records System," a computerized database where most of the agency's records are indexed. "We were unable to identify main file records responsive to the FOIA."
We were surprised the FBI provided us with a final response to our FOIA request within two weeks, given the agency's FOIA backlog and the lengthy wait times we have faced in response to other requests we have filed. We were even more surprised to learn the FBI was unable to locate a single document in which officers and officials discussed Occupy Wall Street, a global movement which, in the past month, has resulted in violent crackdowns by local law enforcement in more than a dozen cities.
Our first reaction was that the FBI was not being forthcoming in its response to our FOIA request. We already know that Jordan T. Lloyd, a member of the FBI's cybersecurity team in New York, received dozens of emails about Occupy Wall Street he was sent by a man who identified himself as a conservative computer security expert and gained access to the group's listserv [http://gawker.com/5850054/meet-the-guy-who-snitched-on-occupy-wall-street-to-the-fbi-and-nypd]. Loyd responded to at least one of the emails.
Our suspicions about the veracity of the FBI's response were heightened when blogger Marcy Wheeler noted in a recent post that the Justice Department recently admitted that it had been lying in response to requests for certain documents related to ongoing investigations, informants and classified intelligence for more than two decades by stating "there exist no responsive records to your FOIA request." [http://www.emptywheel.net/2011/11/04/doj-admits-it-has-been-lying-for-24-years-journalists-applaud/]
Aside from that troubling revelation, the FBI has long had a deplorable record when it comes to conducting a thorough search of its records for documents responsive to FOIA requests. Indeed, a 2009 study conducted by George Washington University's National Security Archive (NSA) [http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20090313/index.htm], which publishes declassified documents and files numerous FOIA requests, noted that "during fiscal year 2008, the FBI gave 'no records' responses to 57% of the requests it processed, more than any other major agency."
“The FBI knowingly uses a search process that doesn’t find relevant records,” Archive director Tom Blanton said at the time.
Archive General Counsel Meredith Fuchs provided an example of this during an interview with a local Fox News affiliate in 2008 in which the NSA's request for records from the FBI on "Al Qaeda" was denied because the agency had "no records." [http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20080507/index.htm]
Still, despite those statistics (we were unable to obtain updated figures), Truthout determined that our FOIA request to the FBI fell short. For example, our FOIA request was filed directly with FBI headquarters. We did not file FOIA requests seeking documents pertaining to Occupy Wall Street with FBI field offices, such as the one in New York City.
According to the article, "FOIA Facts: Understanding FBI Records," published in 2007 [http://www.llrx.com/columns/foia43.htm], it's not that the FBI is "lying" when the agency claims it does not have "records responsive to FOIA, instead "they just have devised a system that makes requesters to [sic] go through hoops to find the information they are seeking."
"If a requester sends a FOIA request to FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C., the FBI will only check its Central Records System for main files indexed to the subject of the records that are maintained in Washington, D.C.," the article states. "However, many records are not indexed as main files to the FBI's Central Records System and many records are not maintained, in any form, at FBI Headquarters.
"As almost all investigations take place in a Field Office-not at FBI Headquarters, records of investigations are where the investigation was. While some of the records will be sent to FBI Headquarters, the Field Office will have a record of the investigations done there. So a request made to FBI Headquarters for an investigation may very likely get a 'no record' response if the investigation was never reported to FBI Headquarters.... Thus, it is important to make FOIA requests to [sic] not only to FBI Headquarters, but to FBI Field Offices. And it is important to ask for main files and 'cross' or 'see' references. If a request comes back as a 'no record' response, make sure to read the letter thoroughly to see what and where the FBI searched."
But filing FOIA requests directly with FBI field offices does not mean the agency would have handled Truthout's request any differently.
The NSA pointed out that a declaration submitted in federal court by Hardy, the FBI's FOIA chief, in
2009, explained [http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20090313/Hardy.pdf], "Unless a requester specifically asks for a broader search, the FBI will only look in a central database of electronic file names at FBI headquarters in Washington."
"When requesters send their requests directly to relevant field offices for processing, the FBI’s policy is to automatically route all requests back to headquarters for the same inadequate search. Until the requester files suit in federal court, the FBI will not perform a broader search," the NSA said.
It is our understanding, based on discussions with open government experts, that changes to the FBI's FOIA policy over the past two years means the agency is supposed to conduct a search for responsive records in field offices as well. But, in handling Truthout's FOIA request, it does not appear the FBI's search extended to its field offices since the email Loyd sent to the conservative computer expert who provided him with information about Occupy Wall Street did not turn up. We're still waiting for a FOIA officer to respond to our queries about the type of search the agency conducted and if that search included FBI field offices.

UPDATE 11/29/2011: Early Tuesday morning, David Sobonya, an FBI public information office who works in the agency's Record/Information Dissemination Section, told Truthout via email, "Per the new 2009 Attorney General guidelines, all field offices are search[ed] for potentially responsive records. You may however, submit additional FOIA requests." That makes moot the points raised in the 2007 "FOIA Facts" article and indicates Truthout's FOIA to the FBI was filed properly and should have resulted in the FBI locating responsive documents.
To be safe, Truthout has since filed a new set of FOIA requests for documents pertaining to Occupy Wall Street with FBI field offices around the country and we have formally requested the agency conduct a "broader search" of its records to locate responsive documents.
With that said, perhaps officials at FBI headquarters have not been discussing the protest movement or monitoring its activities, even though the agency has been closely watching and infiltrating other political movements [http://www.aclu.org/maps/spying-first-amendment-activity-state-state].
Additionally, Truthout sought comment from an FBI spokesperson Monday as to whether the agency has been engaged in discussions, either internally and/or with local law enforcement and local government officials, Occupy Wall Street and/or been involved in the recent sweep of crackdowns on the movement's encampments. The spokesperson did not respond to our email or voicemail message.
But the agency, in a carefully worded statement issued last week to the Huffington Post, flatly denied reports that it has been working with local law enforcement in response to Occupy Wall Street [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/18/occupy-wall-street-crackdowns_n_1101685.html].
"Recent published blogs and news stories have reported the FBI has coordinated with local police departments on strategy and tactics to be employed in addressing Occupy Wall Street protestors," the FBI said [http://www.examiner.com/top-news-in-minneapolis/were-occupy-crackdowns-aided-by-federal-law-enforcement-agencies]. "These reports are false. At no time has the FBI engaged with local police in this capacity."
Meanwhile, Truthout also filed a FOIA request with DHS on October 31, seeking the same documents we requested from the FBI as well as any materials that may show the agency and its field offices coordinated and/or worked with local law enforcement or provided any information and/or advice to local officials about Occupy Wall Street.
On Monday, a DHS FOIA officer contacted Truthout requesting we narrow "the scope of [our FOIA] request to include responsive records from senior DHS officials only" due to the numerous requests for documents the agency has been receiving, which has left DHS staff "overwhelmed."
The DHS FOIA officer indicated the agency has located documents relevant to our FOIA and granted our request for expedited processing.