FBI Document—“[REDACTED]” Plots to Kill Occupy Leaders “If Deemed Necessary”

ironman25dc

A Smug Cunt Who Loves The Cock
Jun 1, 2004
6,583
3,908
588
Chicago, IL
#1
FBI documents just obtained by the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF) via the organization's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) demands reveal that from its inception, the FBI treated the Occupy movement as a potential criminal and terrorist threat even though the agency acknowledges in documents that organizers explicitly called for peaceful protest and did “not condone the use of violence” at occupy protests.

Would you be shocked to learn that the documents obtained via the FOIA request reveal that the FBI knew that some organization-- possibly another law enforcement agency, or a private security outfit or an individual or group had contingency plans to assassinate the leadership of Occupy and did nothing to intervene?


An identified [DELETED] as of October planned to engage in sniper attacks against protestors (sic) in Houston, Texas if deemed necessary. An identified [DELETED] had received intelligence that indicated the protesters in New York and Seattle planned similar protests in Houston, Dallas, San Antonio and Austin, Texas. [DELETED] planned to gather intelligence against the leaders of the protest groups and obtain photographs, then formulate a plan to kill the leadership via suppressed sniper rifles. (Note: protests continued throughout the weekend with approximately 6000 persons in NYC. ‘Occupy Wall Street’ protests have spread to about half of all states in the US, over a dozen European and Asian cities, including protests in Cleveland (10/6-8/11) at Willard Park which was initially attended by hundreds of protesters.)
http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/06/27/fb...ill-occupy-leaders-if-deemed-necessary/print/


Would you be surprised to learn that this intelligence comes not from a shadowy whistle-blower but from the FBI itself – specifically, from a document obtained, via a FOIA request, from Houston FBI office last December?

The question, then, is: What did the FBI do about it?

WhoWhatWhy contacted FBI headquarters in Washington, and asked about this document—which, despite its stunning revelation and despite PCFJ press releases, was (notwithstanding a few online mentions) generally ignored by mainstream and “alternative” press alike.

The agency confirmed that it is genuine and that it originated in the Houston FBI office. (The plot is also referenced in a second document obtained in PCJF’s FOIA response, in this case from the FBI’s Gainesville, Fla., office, which cites the Houston FBI as the source.) That second document actually suggests that the assassination plot, which never was activated, might still be operative should Occupy decisively re-emerge in the area. It states:

On 13 October 20111, writer sent via email an excerpt from the daily [DELETED] regarding FBI Houston’s [DELETED] to all IAs, SSRAs and SSA [DELETED] This [DELETED] identified the exploitation of the Occupy Movement by [LENGTHY DELETION] interested in developing a long-term plan to kill local Occupy leaders via sniper fire.​

Asked why solid information about an assassination plot against American citizens exercising their Constitutional right to free speech and assembly never led to exposure of the plotters’ identity or an arrest—as happened with so many other terrorist schemes the agency has publicized—Paul Bresson, head of the FBI media office, offered a typically elliptical response:

The FOIA documents that you reference are redacted in several places pursuant to FOIA and privacy laws that govern the release of such information so therefore I am unable to help fill in the blanks that you are seeking. Exemptions are cited in each place where a redaction is made. As far as the question about the murder plot, I am unable to comment further, but rest assured if the FBI was aware of credible and specific information involving a murder plot, law enforcement would have responded with appropriate action.​

Note that the privacy being “protected” in this instance (by a government that we now know has so little respect for our privacy) was of someone or some organization that was actively contemplating violating other people’s Constitutional rights— by murdering them. That should leave us less than confident about Bresson’s assertion that law enforcement would have responded appropriately to a “credible” threat.

FULL ARTICLE:
http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/06/27/fb...ill-occupy-leaders-if-deemed-necessary/print/

LINK TO ALL OF THE DOCUMENTS OBTAINED VIA THE FOIA REQUEST:
http://www.justiceonline.org/commentary/fbi-files-ows.html#documents

On a personal note, while I believe that the Occupy movement had some major flaws which led to their overall ineffectiveness at being a catalyst for change; the information from the FBI itself is quite telling and raises a ton of questions.

In this current environment that the US Government loves nothing more than to pat themselves on the back for stopping very questionable terror plots (cultivating potential terrorists through carefully orchestrated sting operations aka entrapment) or stopping terror plots which they actually did not stop (Times Square bomber, Underwear bomber, Shoe bomber; all stopped by alert citizens; you have to ask yourself why the public has heard nothing about this plot being stopped... Understand that each time a government agency "stops" a "terrorist plot" those agencies budget requests rise and blindly approved by Congress.

This is most interesting in light of the current privacy encroachments... It is alarming that this has not been reported.
 

gleet

What's black and white and red all over?
Jul 24, 2005
22,541
13,853
608
Idaho
#3
Yawn. We also have detailed plans to invade Canada and England and New Jersey. It's what planners do.
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,247
12,977
438
Atlanta, GA
#4
Yawn. We also have detailed plans to invade Canada and England and New Jersey. It's what planners do.
We also have plans to parachute elephants into whatever country we're at war with at a given moment to placate the tribal leaders there.
 

gleet

What's black and white and red all over?
Jul 24, 2005
22,541
13,853
608
Idaho
#6
We also have plans to parachute elephants into whatever country we're at war with at a given moment to placate the tribal leaders there.
How many C-17s will be needed for Sanford, FL after the trial?
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#9
Occupy being funded and organized by people who were actual threats could be the reason for such preparation.
 

OilyJillFart

Well-Lubed Member
Sep 26, 2008
2,877
1,141
483
#12
So, they are playing the bleep game with documents.
Fill in the blanks any way that gets them some attention..
 

Ballbuster1

In The Danger Zone...
Wackbag Staff
Aug 26, 2002
103,743
16,904
919
Your house, behind the couch
#15
Occupy being funded and organized by people who were actual threats could be the reason for such preparation.
Exactly. The royal monkey loved the occupy movement.
It was who was funding it and some of the people they
recruited for it that made it a potential problem.
 

ironman25dc

A Smug Cunt Who Loves The Cock
Jun 1, 2004
6,583
3,908
588
Chicago, IL
#17
So, they are playing the bleep game with documents.
Fill in the blanks any way that gets them some attention..

If you take the time to read the documents and understand what they say, you'd realize it is not "fill in the blanks" but actually quite specific.
 

Psychopath

I want to fuck your girlfriend.
Dec 28, 2008
19,179
3,690
393
Constant sate of misery
#19
I think we should kill anyone involved in that fucking movement. The streets should run red with the blood of those scumfucks. They are the modern hippies. Just look how that turned out, we have political correctness and warning labels on everything. I weep for the future.
 

ironman25dc

A Smug Cunt Who Loves The Cock
Jun 1, 2004
6,583
3,908
588
Chicago, IL
#21
You're damn right I'm dismissing a site full of 9/11 conspiracy shit. You should do the same.
WhoWhatWhy provides extensive sourcing of almost all their material, when I read something from them that interests me I check their sources and do my own digging to determine it's value. I'm not going to engage on your 9-11 remark because that event isn't one that I tend to read about it any publication. Of the material of the site that I read, 95% of it checks out.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#22
Unfortunately every other source you use is shit, as well. You really do suck at picking sources.
 

ironman25dc

A Smug Cunt Who Loves The Cock
Jun 1, 2004
6,583
3,908
588
Chicago, IL
#23
Unfortunately every other source you use is shit, as well. You really do suck at picking sources.
In your opinion; I should note that you haven't disproven the factualness of anything I've posted.

What sources would you recommend Don?
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#24
In your opinion; I should note that you haven't disproven the factualness of anything I've posted.

What sources would you recommend Don?

If it looks like a blog, it's not a good source. Didn't you go to college? If you couldn't use it in a research paper, it's not good.
 

ironman25dc

A Smug Cunt Who Loves The Cock
Jun 1, 2004
6,583
3,908
588
Chicago, IL
#25
If it looks like a blog, it's not a good source. Didn't you go to college? If you couldn't use it in a research paper, it's not good.
Specific sources please.

I mean according to you official FBI documents (documents that I linked to in the OP) don't meet your standard for sources, so I need you to be a touch more specific as to what passes your litmus test.