[News] Lessons from COINTELPRO: Building a movement in the face of repression

[Anti-Imperialist News]

 From Fault Lines - April/May 2006
LESSONS FROM COINTELPRO: BUILDING A MOVEMENT IN THE FACE OF OPPRESSION

By Claude Marks and Kelah Bott

Recent crackdowns on the animal rights and environmental justice 
movements have left many activists feeling that their communities are 
under siege. From the prosecution of the SHAC 7 to the arrests of 
thirteen individuals for arsons committed over a ten-year span, a war 
is being waged against these movements by the U.S. government. While 
all of this may seem terrifying in its unfamiliarity to younger 
activists, the tactics being employed by the FBI and Joint Terrorism 
Task Force are anything but new. Whisperings of 'COINTELPRO' have 
appeared in various articles about the backlash against eco-activism, 
but what does this generation really know about the 
Counter-Intelligence Program aimed at groups such as the Black 
Panther Party (BPP) and the American Indian Movement (AIM)? Today's 
activists are heirs to a history of social and political battles from 
wars that are not yet over. Without seeing today's struggles for 
animal rights and environmental justice in a broader historical and 
social context, we run the risk not only of repeating painful lessons 
of the past, but of isolating ourselves and weakening our movements.
Any FBI campaign against a particular group or movement is bound to 
expose certain weaknesses. After all, this is the intent of such 
government attacks. We need to build a culture of resistance and 
concrete support for people targeted by these government attacks, and 
also look seriously at the challenges revealed by this repression in 
order to prevent self-annihilation, mass fear, and demobilization. 
What we can learn from our own weaknesses can strengthen how we move 
forward and inform the movement we're building. Today, the 
criminalization of dissent and the labeling of acts of resistance as 
terrorism compel us to look at how COINTELPRO functioned and 
continues under the cloak of the Patriot Act.

COINTELPRO

The FBI's secret Counter-Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO) was 
initiated in 1956 under the leadership of J. Edgar Hoover and 
"officially" ended in 1971 when details of the program were widely 
aired in the mainstream press. Its stated purpose was simple: to 
"neutralize" groups that the FBI deemed a threat to national 
security. The program targeted groups or individuals that challenged 
the existing power structure and expressed opinions opposed to the 
policies (foreign or domestic) of the government of the United States.
In his book The War at Home, Brian Glick details four main COINTELPRO 
tactics used against groups like the BPP, the AIM, and the Puerto 
Rican Independence Movement: infiltration, psychological warfare, 
legal harassment, and extralegal force, including assassination.
Many FBI tactics served multi-layered purposes. Government informants 
infiltrated groups ranging from non-violent anti-war activists to the 
Black Panthers. They were used to gather information, disrupt 
political organizing, and generate an atmosphere of suspicion and 
fear. Infiltration, in combination with their campaign of 
psychological warfare, was used to "neutralize" dissent. In addition, 
the FBI attacked from the outside, like in 1968 when J. Edgar Hoover 
labeled the Black Panthers "the greatest threat to the internal 
security of the country" in order to demonize them and justify 
assaults against their members and offices.

THE FATE OF ONE GENERATION

Legal attacks and extralegal force were used extensively during 
COINTELPRO. At least 27 Black Panthers were killed, including Mark 
Clark and Fred Hampton in Chicago, Bunchy Carter and John Huggins in 
LA, and Bobby Hutton in Oakland. The FBI and other government 
agencies also targeted Martin Luther King, Jr., and Malcolm X. In the 
1970s, 60 AIM activists were killed on the Pine Ridge reservation 
alone. Angel Cristobal, a Puerto Rican Independista and Vieques 
activist, was murdered in a Florida prison, and the FBI and police 
agencies tortured captured activists. Many social justice 
organizations were disrupted or destroyed completely by these 
government attacks, and the groups were forced to divert their 
resources to defending activists who were arrested, harassed, and 
called before grand juries. Over 100 political prisoners, victims of 
COINTELPRO attacks and frame-ups, remain behind bars, many now in 
their second and third decades of imprisonment.

ECO-DEFENDERS AS TERRORISTS?

The similarities between COINTELPRO and present government repression 
are remarkable. Much like Hoover's comment about the threat of the 
Panthers, John E. Lewis, Deputy Assistant FBI Director, stated in 
2004 that "investigating and preventing animal rights extremism and 
eco-terrorism is one of the FBI's highest domestic terrorism 
priorities." What better way to discredit a movement in the post-9/11 
climate than to label its proponents terrorists?
The federal government, corporations, and the media have redefined 
the word "terrorist." Last year, animal liberationist Peter Young was 
indicted on "Animal Enterprise Terrorism" charges for liberating 
mink, marking the Orwellian nature of the current public discourse on 
terrorism. By including property destruction and any interference 
with business as usual under the ever-increasing umbrella of 
terrorism, the government has one more tool in their public relations 
campaign against eco-justice.
The FBI remains skilled in psychological warfare. Recently, the FBI 
disrupted a demonstration in support of grand jury resisters in San 
Francisco. They announced the increased reward for a fugitive subject 
of the grand jury. An agent that had been harassing activists in 
their homes attempted to distribute "wanted" posters among the crowd, 
a tactic that succeeded in drawing some of the media attention away 
from the political witch-hunt, catching the activists off guard, and 
diluting their message.
The grand jury itself remains one of the government's favorite tools 
of harassment. In the last year alone, federal grand juries convened 
to investigate animal rights and environmental justice activists in 
Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Sacramento, San Diego, New Jersey, 
and Colorado. The FBI's desperation to solve 'cold cases' means they 
have rounded up many suspects with little or no evidence. Desperate 
for information, they're coercing activists into talking before the 
statute of limitations can expire.
Since grand juries are secret proceedings, activists are often 
unaware of them until someone in their community is subpoenaed. Grand 
juries try to push activists who resist FBI and police visits to risk 
imprisonment for maintaining their non-cooperation. This coercion can 
keep activists occupied with court battles that divert them and their 
movements from their main political work. The shroud of secrecy and 
the fear of imprisonment succeed when people cooperate and implicate 
more activists or furnish information that reinforces the 
government's offensive.
Eventually grand juries result in indictments. The Eugene indictments 
of several people on conspiracy charges alleging their connections to 
the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) illustrate this point. With these 
indictments, we are also learning there are informants in our midst. 
Though most activists are aware of the theoretical existence of 
infiltrators, it is a different matter to learn of an actual act of 
betrayal and to witness the subsequent fallout.
Though we have yet to see the FBI or other government agents using 
the fourth main tactic of COINTELPRO in their "Green Scare"extralegal 
force and violence it is not from moral aversion. The government 
understands that the general public would not support such
tactics against the environmental justice or animal rights movements 
at this time. Yet they do feel unrestrained in terrorizing the Arab, 
Palestinian, and Islamic populations, and imprisoning innocent people 
of color without charges. They justify the torture at Abu Ghraib and 
Guantanamo but they realize that such tactics used against largely 
white, middle-class activists would be bad PR.

BUILDING THE MOVEMENT

So what do we do about the challenges ahead? What does a community do 
when the fear of imprisonment is a stronger motivating factor than 
commitment to principles? Now we have an opportunity to learn from 
history. For many the instinct is to withdraw and avoid talking about 
issues of substance, strategy, and increased resistance. Some people 
may even avoid talking to certain activists for fear of being seen by 
the government as guilty by association. Yet now, more than ever, is 
when we must fight those urges and do the exact opposite: 
communicate, find common ground, and come together.


We are facing a crisis in the eco-justice and animal rights 
movements. How we handle it will determine if we succeed or fail as a 
movement. One example of strength in the face of daunting obstacles 
is the case of the SHAC 7. Their fight with the government didn't 
begin last year when they were arrested for Animal Enterprise 
Terrorism. The feds had been trying to find a way to shut down Stop 
Huntingdon Animal Cruelty since the day they started making a 
difference in the struggle to close the notorious animal-testing lab 
Huntingdon Life Sciences. They even tried indicting some SHAC 
activists under the Hobbes (extortion) Act, a law designed to target 
organized crime. Though they faced constant harassment and the threat 
of imprisonment for exercising their rights to free speech, the SHAC 
7 neither wavered in their political commitment nor attempted to save 
themselves by implicating others.
Part of our strength lies in the support of our fellow activists in 
prison. In a recent statement, Jeff "Free" Luers, who was sentenced 
to an astounding 22+ years for a $40,000 SUV arson in Eugene, demands 
"recognition of political status for our prisoners. All incarcerated 
and accused members of the Earth Liberation Front and other Earth 
Liberation prisoners are political prisoners. Our actions that 
brought us to prison are political in nature. Our trials are about 
our politics. Our sentences are increased because of our political 
motives." We agree, and also see that there have been campaigns to 
recognize and free U.S. political prisoners for decades. Many 
political prisoners remain locked up despite national and 
international demands for their release and recognition as victims of 
government repression and frame-ups.
Some campaigns have succeeded in winning the release of framed former 
Panthers like Geronimo Gi Jaga and Dhoruba Bin Wahad, both of whom 
were imprisoned for over 20 years. A massive campaign in Puerto Rico 
and in the U.S. succeeded in freeing Puerto
Rican Nationalist prisoners held in 1979 after over 25 years of 
captivity. Eleven other Independistas were excarcerated in 1999. None 
of the people that continued to stand up for their principles, though 
the whole system was mobilized against them, could have maintained 
such strength without a strong movement behind them.

LEARNING FROM OUR ALLIES, MOVING FORWARD

Last year, a state grand jury was convened in San Francisco to 
investigate a 34-year-old case that involved the death of a police 
officer. Several former members of the Black Panther Party were 
subpoenaed to testify. Some of these men hadn't spoken to one another 
for at least two decades, yet when they received their subpoenas they 
all chose to resist. Men in their sixties and seventies were jailed 
for refusing to cooperate with the grand jury. Two of them had been 
recently harassed at their homes by the same San Francisco cops that 
participated in their 1973 torture in a New Orleans jail. Some had 
serious health issues, but they remained silent. The end result? The 
grand jury expired and to date no indictments have been issued. 
Victory was realized because these men understand that the movement 
is more important than any one individual.
A strong movement means embracing and living the ideals we espouse 
not just paying lip service to the fight for a just world. Although 
some may not want to admit it, this means leaving the "American" 
value of individualism behind. In order to succeed and remain a 
strong movement, the community must come before the individual. The 
right question to ask when faced with government pressure is not, 
"How can I make this easiest on myself?" but, "What will be best for 
my community, the movement we are trying to build, and the fight for 
social justice?" From that perspective, the choices are clearer, and 
do not include cooperating with government agencies, betraying 
friends, and compromising our vision and future.
We do not exist in a vacuum. Animal rights and environmental justice 
activists are natural allies in the struggle for a more just and 
healthy world. We have a responsibility to build connections and 
networks with groups that have similar goals. We can learn from their 
struggles, build alliances, and support common objectives while 
strengthening our movements and theirs. In the long term, building 
bridges is the only way to realize our vision of a more sustainable, 
just, and humane society.

BEHIND THE LIES:

"COINTELPRO targeted American citizens for opposing the Vietnam War, 
for advocating changes in Central American policies such as 
supporting brutal dictators, for supporting Civil Rights, Black 
Liberation, Women's Rights, or socialism. [The FBI] spied on 
law-abiding Americans, broke into homes, ripped open and read mail, 
tapped phones, harassed, isolated, threatened, and destroyed the 
lives of thousands of Americans, who merely opposed the U.S. 
government's policies. "
- MUMIA ABU JAMAL

"In 1980, former FBI Director L. Patrick Grey and Edward S. Miller, 
one-time head of Squad 47, the domestic counterintelligence unit in 
the FBI's New York Field Office, were convicted of having "conspired 
to injure and oppress the citizens of the United States." The context 
of their crimes was COINTELPRO, a secret, nationwide campaign 
conducted by the Bureau from 1956-1971 for purposes of destroying 
"politically objectionable" organizations and individuals through any 
and every means available to it. In 1975, an investigating committee 
headed by Senator Frank Church found that the operation had, from 
start to finish, be "fraught with illegality."
Neither Grey nor Miller ever spent a day in jail as a result of their 
convictions. In April 1981, President Ronald Reagan interrupted their 
appeals to announce that he was bestowing pardons on both men. The 
reason stated was that their misdeeds had occurred during an 
especially turbulent and divisive period in American history. It was 
time to "put all this behind us," Reagan said, and "to forgive those 
who engaged in excesses" during the political conflicts of the era.
At the time, it was pointed out that if this were to be Reagan's 
policy, it would be at least as appropriate for him to pardon the 
numerous victims of COINTELPRO as to forgive its perpetrators. We 
noted how the Church Committee had discovered that a COINTELPRO 
technique had been to use the courts to "neutralize" selected 
activists by obtaining false convictions against them, that the FBI 
typically involved local police in such endeavors, and that of all 
the groups targeted in this manner, the Black Panther Party (BPP) had 
been hit hardest and most extensively.
No action was taken by the Reagan administration in this connection, 
however, and former Panthers continued to serve time, many of them in 
cases showing clear signs of COINTELPRO manipulation. It would be 
another decade before the first such prisoner, a once prominent New 
York BPP leader named Dhoruba bin Wahad (Richard Moore), was finally 
released after spend-ing 21 years behind bars on a wrongful conviction. "
- WARD CHURCHILL, 1999

"It is my considered opinion, knowing of the car bomb explosion which 
injured Judi Bari and Darryl Cherney in 1990, and knowing of their 
speedy subsequent arrest on sensational criminal charges, that the 
apparent 'frame-up' of the two as supposed bombers is consistent with 
the history of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. That history, for 
many years before 1990, and continuing after that, shows that the FBI 
has repeatedly attempted to harass, injure, even cause the death of 
individuals in order to disrupt the activities of organizations 
critical of government and the Establishment.
That history indicates that in the pursuit of this disruption, the 
FBI has again and again violated the constitutional rights of 
Americans, including their right to freedom of speech and freedom of 
association. It indicates that the FBI would have been ready, willing 
and able to pervert the Constitution, and their own law enforcement 
responsibility under it, in the attempt to discredit and "neutralize" 
a movement like Earth First! and other allied forces working to 
preserve and protect the environment. "
- HOWARD ZINN, 2001


The Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
(415) 863-9977
www.freedomarchives.org 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20060503/bfe1188b/attachment.htm>