<html>
<body>
<font size=3>
<a href="http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/441-occupy/10625-focus-dhs-documents-show-role-in-occupy-crackdown">
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/441-occupy/10625-focus-dhs-documents-show-role-in-occupy-crackdown</a>
<br><br>
</font><font size=4><b>DHS Documents Show Role in Occupy
Crackdown<br><br>
</b></font><font size=3>By Justice Online<br><br>
25 March 12<br><br>
<br><br>
Occupy Wall Street: Take the Bull by the Horns<br><br>
trove of documents released today by the Department of Homeland Security
(DHS) in response to a FOIA request filed by the Partnership for Civil
Justice Fund, filmmaker Michael Moore and the National Lawyers Guild Mass
Defense Committee reveal that federal law enforcement agencies began
their coordinated intelligence gathering and operations on the Occupy
movement even before the first tent went up in Zuccotti Park on September
17, 2011.<br><br>
On September 17, 2011, a Secret Service intelligence entry in its Prism
Demonstrations Abstract file records the opening of the Occupy Wall
Street (OWS) movement. The demonstration location that the Secret Service
was protecting? The "Wall Street Bull." The name of the
Protectee? The "U.S. Government."<br><br>
American taxpayers might find it odd to learn that the Secret Service was
on duty to protect the Wall Street Bull in the name of protecting the
U.S. Government. But there it is.<br><br>
The DHS's Game of Three Card Monte to Deflect Disclosure of Law
Enforement Operations<br><br>
These documents, many of which are redacted, show that the highest
officials in the Department of Homeland Security were preoccupied with
the Occupy movement and have gone out of their way to project the
appearance of an absence of federal involvement in the monitoring of and
crackdown on Occupy.<br><br>
On the street it would be called "Three Card Monte," a
swindler's game to hide the ball - a game of misdirection. The House
always wins.<br><br>
The DHS, as revealed in the newly released documents, has engaged in what
appears to be a effort to avoid looking for Occupy related materials
where it is likely to be found, including in Fusion Centers and DHS
sub-divisions such as the Operations Coordination & Planning
sub-division which is responsible for DHS coordination with local and
federal law enforcement partners.<br><br>
On November 16, DHS Press Secretary Matthew Chandler transmitted an
e-mail to top ranking DHS officials, including the Chief of Staff to
Janet Napolitano, the Chief of Staff to the DHS General Counsel, among
others, in which he reports:<br><br>
"We're getting inquiries from CBS, AP, Daily Caller and others on an
un-sourced Examiner.com piece that says that DHS and FBI are
collaborating with cities by providing tactics and information on
removing Occupy protestors. A check of I & A [Intelligence and
Analysis] and FPS [Federal Protective Services] shows that this type of
outreach is not occurring in any wholesale manner."<br><br>
The Press Secretary is careful to couch the official statement, that such
is not occurring in any "wholesale" manner, leaving the door
open to possible future revelations of such conduct.<br><br>
But this official statement was based solely on a mid-November inquiry to
two DHS sub-sections: Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) and Federal
Protective Services (FPS). And by the date of that statement, Federal
Protective Services and apparently also the I&A Directorate had
already purged, "restricted and/or rescinded," any Occupy
related intelligence products, as discussed further here.<br><br>
In other words, having looked into only two drawers - which had already
"restricted and/or rescinded" all Occupy related intelligence
products - it is not surprising that Press Secretary Chandler's statement
that no "wholesale' coordination of Occupy related actions is based
on incomplete information.<br><br>
The Press Secretary, following the script, conveniently avoided other
likely DHS repositories and departmental components, including the
personnel deployed to Fusion Centers or to the DHS Operations
Coordination & Planning sub-division, which according to the DHS web
site is "responsible for monitoring the security of the United
States on a daily basis and coordinating activities within the Department
and with governors, Homeland Security Advisors, law enforcement partners,
and critical infrastructure operators in all 50 states and more than 50
major urban areas nationwide."<br><br>
DHS Monitoring, Megacenters and Misdirection<br><br>
Before the first OWS action took place, the DHS Office Intelligence and
Analysis (I&A) produced a series of NCCIC (National Cybersecurity and
Communications Integration Center) alerts about the coming OWS
demonstrations. When this was picked up by the media and it generated
inquiry and press, the DHS learned its lesson: Misdirection.<br><br>
In an email exchange dated September 29, 2011, DHS officials discuss the
NCCIC alert and the fact that they will now need to respond to media
inquiries about DHS monitoring and involvement in the response to the
Occupy movement. The substantive discussion about how to handle the media
is redacted, with one participant writing, "Here it is. That answer
works-" and the rest is redacted.<br><br>
An October 5, 2011 document reflects that the DHS Philadelphia Megacenter
was monitoring the OWS demonstration in New York, titled
"Demonstration-Peaceful/Planned", and reporting on assembly and
movements "peacefully protesting union solidarity
issues."<br><br>
An October 30, 2011 document shows DHS' Battle Creek Megacenter also
reporting that a "peaceful/unplanned" "Occupy Wall Street
demonstration is taking place in Ilus W. Davis Park in Kansas City,
MO."<br><br>
These documents appear to be the tip of the iceberg, carefully submerged
by the DHS. While there is policy discussion as to the propriety of a
threat assessment regarding Occupy Pittsburgh, other emails reference
additional internal inquiries about OWS that were withheld from public
disclosure in response to this FOIA request.<br><br>
The Fusion Centers<br><br>
Moreover, the DHS documents evidence the misdirection to avoid civil
liberties issues by handing off OWS monitoring to DHS's project of Fusion
Centers and then failing to make inquiry for information to the Fusion
Centers or DHS personnel deployed to them, even though documents indicate
that a push-down of Occupy related information into the massive fusion
center clearinghouses was already in play.<br><br>
By November 16, when the PCJF filed this FOIA request, and when the media
was contacting DHS regarding its role in the Occupy crackdown one I&A
analyst, following such guidance, reported that I&A
"scrupulously avoided any connection with the Occupy
movement/protests/dismantlings. We cannot speak for any individual fusion
center or other departmental component..."<br><br>
On October 17, 2011, the DHS Intelligence Coordination Branch wrote in an
email titled "Guidance Requested: Occupy Wall Street" that in
response to requests for OWS information, "we have recommended…that
our intelligence Officers refer inquiries [i.e., requests for
intelligence information] to Fusion Centers and avoid the topic
altogether. That being said, given the number of requests that have
appeared, we would like to equip the field with formal
guidance…"<br><br>
DHS Guidelines on How To Justify Intelligence Gathering on Free Speech
Activities<br><br>
The DHS then undertakes to draft policy guidance on OWS. Within days,
however, the DHS concludes that formal policy guidelines are not going to
go into effect. Instead, on October 24, 2011, a redacted email chain
includes the recommendation that policy guidance changes have sought
"to take out language that indicates our guidelines are mandatory.
For instance replace ‘personnel must' with ‘personnel should'. I also
recommend that we advice only the DHS people and remain silent on whether
they should pass along our input to the Pittsburgh folks."<br><br>
On October 28, 2011, further exchanges on the guidance draft discuss
making the recommendations less specific, and that they should focus on
the "congruence concept." The "congruence concept" is
the creation of a supposedly criminal pretext for investigation into
First Amendment activities. It is so loosely applied that any
unsupported, unsourced tip - or agent provocateur statement on a website
- can create the basis for monitoring and investigation.<br><br>
When the final guidance is produced, it has no mandatory language and
states: "If you ever feel you are in put in a situation where first
amendment rights could be potentially violated, please refer to the below
guidance, which was created after we received a number of questions from
around the nation in reaction to the Occupy protests."<br><br>
The guidance then explains how to "justify research into and
creation of a product containing First Amendment protected
activity…" including the "congruence concept."<br><br>
Subsequent discussion on October 31, 2011 regarding how and when DHS can
"clear on any [intelligence] product on OWS" is significantly
redacted as is the author.<br><br>
Purging of DHS Files and the Carefully Constructed Media
Response<br><br>
A November 1, 2011 email reflects that following the internal guidance
issued to I&A, all Occupy related materials had been "restricted
and/or rescinded" including specifically by FPS. The email, from an
FPS official, reports that:<br><br>
"FPS was notified of the guidance to the I&A representatives to
restrict production of all Occupy products absent criminal activity
and/or life safety issues, FPS has followed this guidance and restricted
and/or rescinded all products (both internal and
pass-through)."<br><br>
By November 16, when the media was barraging the DHS with inquiries about
its role in the Occupy crackdown, the responses to media were carefully
crafted. "We're getting inquiries from [various media] on an
un-sourced Examiner.com piece that says DHS and FBI are collaborating
with cities by providing tactics and information on removing Occupy
protestors. A check of I&A and FPS shows that this type of outreach
is not occurring in any wholesale manner."<br><br>
As we now know, checking with I&A and FPS by November 16 was not
likely to lead to responsive information given that the DHS activity was
being carried out by other components and that a purge, restriction
and/or rescission of intelligence "products" had taken
place.<br><br>
At this point the DHS provided a prepared statement, given over and over
to the press, which includes a quotable paragraph and then
"background" points.<br><br>
Documents show that in the drafting of that paragraph, which is
disseminated repeatedly to the press, and shows up in numerous press
reports from the time, there is a second paragraph that is removed and
appears not to be given to the press. That sentence read: "We have
held standard coordination calls and face-to-face meetings with our
partners to ensure that the proper resources are available for operations
such as street closures, etc,"<br><br>
Showing the deficiency of response to the FOIA demands, there are no
records produced that reflect those "standard coordination
calls" and "face-to-face meetings."<br><br>
Evading a Complete FOIA Records Search<br><br>
In addition to these efforts to misdirect the press and the public, the
other tactic the DHS has used to stave off inquiry into DHS involvement
is to evade a responsive search to this and other FOIA requests. As we
stated previously, we had been told by the DHS that other media
requestors agreed to narrow their FOIA requests to consist only of
materials in the possession of select senior staff. We have not so
agreed, and will be pursuing further disclosure of information from the
DHS.<br><br>
Highly conscious of the demand for public disclosure of DHS actions, one
official wrote in November of their considered response to FOIA requests
and urged the department to release their policy guidance regarding First
Amendment activities. He wrote, "I understand we have already
received some FOIA requests regarding our possible reporting of the
"Occupy…" protests. I think should the FOIA experts find it
appropriate to release information about the manner in which this issue
was managed with DHS, it could only be perceived as a positive by those
in the public who closely observer [sic] the Department."<br><br>
So for those of you who wish to "closely observe" the
Departments responses, the PCJF is making the documents available in a
searchable format. We will also be disclosing and uploading more
materials obtained from our national campaign of federal and local FOIA
demands as they become available.<br><br>
Documents Received from Department of Homeland Sercurity:<br><br>
Pages 1 - 100<br>
Pages 101 - 200<br>
Pages 201 - 398<br><br>
<br>
</font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#008000">415 863-9977<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#0000FF">
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.Freedomarchives.org</a></font><font size=3> </font></body>
</html>