There was some surprising news in the UK this week when undercover police officer Mark Kennedy, who spied on environmental groups and even organized national protests and direct action campaigns as “Mark Stone,” offered to cooperate with activists against the police.

The Guardian has had some excellent reporting on this story, and notes that Kennedy visited at least 22 countries over 7 years to gather information on political activists, and in some cases urge them to take illegal action. Kennedy’s spying was undertaken as part of a national police operation against so-called “domestic extremists,” including animal rights activists, environmentalists, and anarchists.

Kennedy has told his (former) friends he had a change of heart, and realized the importance of environmental work (and how he has betrayed people who he says became his friends). He was not alone in his work, though: Kennedy acknowledged the existence of at least one other undercover cop in the UK environmental movement.

I was on The Alyona Show last night talking about how this fits into the bigger picture of labeling activists as “eco-terrorists,” and the history of law enforcement informants and provocateurs sabotaging progressive social movements.

For instance, I recently wrote about an animal rights informant and FBI agent who discussed spreading rumors to discredit activists.

Let me know what you think of the video!

After filing a Freedom of Information Act request with the Richmond Police Department for police training documents, Mo Karn received much more than expected in return: homeland security and crowd control guides that show how the police target protests.

The police filed for an emergency court order yesterday to prohibit Karn from publicizing any of the documents, which should never have been released. The cops’ reasoning? “Defendant Mo Karn is a known and admitted anarchist.”

The documents, however, have already been published online. And buried in the training guides are insights into three trends in law enforcement that have been occurring not just in Virginia, but nationally: the demonization of protest, the militarization of police, and turning local cops into “terrorism” officials.

The Demonization of Protest

The Richmond Police Department’s Emergency Operations Plan
includes a section on “civil disturbances.” While this sounds innocuous, “civil disturbances” are defined so broadly as to include what the police call “dissident gatherings.”

“The City of Richmond is a target rich environment” for antiwar protesters, the document says. And it warns that police and homeland security have reason to be increasingly concerned:

“Current training and intelligence reveals that protestors are becoming more proficient in the methods of assembly.”

Militarization of Local Police

Such a depiction of “assembly” (a First Amendment right) as a “disturbance” and a threat is all the more troubling when put in the context of the other police department guides. Richmond’s Crowd Management Operating Manual is for the police unit assigned to large protests (no experience required). Among the tools that the crowd management team are issued include riot shields, chemical agents, cut tools, helmets, body armor, cameras, video cameras, batons, gas masks, and a “mass arrest kit.”

Deputizing Local Cops as Counter-terrorism Officials

This militarization of local police is accompanied by another trend in law enforcement since September 11th: deputizing local cops to becoming “homeland security” and counter-terrorism officials. According to the Homeland Security Criminal Intelligence Unit Operating Manual, “The Richmond Police Department is under contract with the FBI to provide assistance through staffing, intelligence and equipment.” And one member of the homeland security unit is assigned to the Joint Terrorism Task Force.

The result? Documents like the Virginia Terrorism Threat Assessment. The 2009 document was created by the Virginia Fusion Center, of which the Richmond Police Department is part. Fusion centers are ostensibly designed to gather terrorism intelligence from multiple police agencies, and make us safer. In practice, they routinely label activists as “terrorists.” Among the “terrorist threats” identified in Virginia were animal rights activists, environmental activists, and anarchists.

According to the threat assessment, “The Virginia Federation of Anarchists has held two conferences in Richmond in November 2007 and January 2008″ and “Anarchist protesters at the International Monetary Fund in Washington, D.C. spilled over into Prince William County.”

Karn, meanwhile, wears her scarlet circle ‘A’ with pride, and has no problem being labeled an anarchist. The FOIA was submitted by the Wingnut Collective, a Richmond anarchist group, as part of their police accountability project.

In his court motion warning that Karn is an “anarchist,” Richmond’s Deputy Assistant Attorney Brian Telfair doesn’t allege the possibility of any violence or property destruction. Instead, he cites a blog post by Karn about acquiring government information through legal requests. The title? “FOIA Rocks!”

Scott DeMuth pleaded guilty today to a misdemeanor conspiracy charge for releasing ferrets from a Minnesota farm. As part of the deal, he will no longer be charged with conspiracy to commit “animal enterprise terrorism” in relation to a University of Iowa Animal Liberation Front raid.

DeMuth had previously resisted a grand jury fishing expedition, and been labeled an “anarchist” and “domestic terrorist” by the government. His faculty advisor at the University of Minnesota has also been harassed by the FBI.

As part of the deal, he will not be forced to cooperate with the government. He faces approximately six months in prison for the misdemeanor charge.

The plea agreement comes as DeMuth was set to begin trial Tuesday. From the start, DeMuth has maintained his innocence in relation to the University of Iowa case. Prosecutor Cliff Cronk has re-indicted DeMuth twice, in response to arguments by defense attorneys that the government’s case is thin and vindictive: the second superseding indictment added an allegation of a raid at Lakeside Ferret, in Minnesota.

The government seems to have taken whatever it can get in this case: a lesser charge in lieu of “terrorism” charges, which fell apart. The terrorism investigation of the University of Iowa ALF raid, is likely not over, however. Recent FBI raids in other states have been part of that investigation, as have visits by FBI agents to local activists.

The government filed an emergency motion to keep an activist in jail because he is an “anarchist” and “domestic terrorist” who associates with a “subversive,” but in a response issued Monday, an Iowa district court didn’t buy it. Scott Demuth will be released pending his trial.

Demuth has been indicted on animal enterprise terrorism charges for alleged “conspiracy” as part of the 2005 Animal Liberation Front raid at the University of Iowa that rescued more than 300 animals.

He and another Minneapolis activist, Carrie Feldman, had been targeted by a grand jury focused on the ALF raid. Both Demuth and Feldman refused to testify on the grounds that the grand jury was a political witch hunt pressuring activists to speak, without an attorney present, about their political beliefs and political associations.

When Demuth was indicted, Judge Thomas Shields ruled that he could be released pending trial as long as he wore a GPS monitoring device and adhered to other criteria. Assistant U.S. Attorney Clifford Cronk filed an emergency motion to keep Demuth behind bars, arguing:

Defendant’s writings, literature, and conduct suggest that he is an anarchist and associated with the ALF movement. Therefore, he is a domestic terrorist.

Yes, you read that correctly. The government is arguing that First Amendment activity–writings, literature–and political beliefs are enough to make someone a terrorist.

Among the other reasons given to keep Demuth, a graduate student in the sociology department at the University of Minnesota, behind bars:

• He has political friends. According to the motion, he is an “associate” of Peter Young, “an outspoken and subversive animal rights activist who has been prosecuted for ALF activities and, after being indicted for animal enterprise terrorism, was a fugitive from justice for several years.”
• He protests. Demuth “participated in an anti-government demonstration in front of the courthouse” prior to the grand jury hearing.
• He has a network of support. There were individuals in the courtroom who supported him, Cronk argued, and many people had called into the U.S. attorney’s office opposing the grand jury “based upon their belief that the use of the grand jury was abusive and unconstitutional.”

[Here is the full motion.]

This is not an isolated incident. It is becoming increasingly common to see this kind of inflammatory, unfounded rhetoric coming from prosecutors who hope to smear activists as terrorists before they even stand trial.

For instance, in Hugh Farrell’s motion for bond, the government said he “has been observed advocating literature and materials which advocate anarchy.”

Stephanie Ernst summed up the threat of this pretty well in her comments over at change.org:

Wow. WOW. He’s suspected of being involved in a raid that involved vandalism and rescue, and he’s an anarchist, so “therefore, he is a domestic terrorist.” Forget the trial, folks! Verdict is in! How many people would be “domestic terrorists” if these were the criteria?

Two activists have been arrested for using Twitter to communicate during the G20 protests, another step in the continued, escalating attack on First Amendment rights in the name of combating “extremism” and “terrorism.”

Elliot Madison is a social worker and anarchist who was arrested in Pittsburgh on Sept. 24 and “charged with hindering apprehension or prosecution, criminal use of a communication facility and possession of instruments of crime.” In plain English: police say he used Twitter to spread information about police movements during the G20 protests in order to help activists avoid arrest.

Madison worked with a group called the Tin Can Communications Collective to help activists communicate during the G20, creating a decentralized version of Twitter. Journalists from around the world, including CNN, subscribed to the service and viewed the messages posted. Madison told Democracy Now: “We put on the—about different trainings. There was a Know Your Rights training. We talked about the—there were messages I received about the raid on the Just Seeds food bus. There was information about where meet-ups were for different marches, like the students’ march. To be honest, I didn’t see most of the messages, because I was arrested very early on Thursday.”

The message in question that apparently led to the arrest was an announcement that said that the police had issued an order to disperse. The police allege that the message was intended to hinder arrests and prosecution (by that logic, the police making the announcement to arrest would also be an example of hindering arrests and prosecution).

Madison’s home was raided, and police took, among other things, Curious George stuffed animals and a needlepoint made by his wife’s grandmother of Lenin.

To put this in context, police have used sonic weapons during the G20 protests, they have beat and tear-gassed protesters and students and random people, they demanded that crowds of non-protesting passersby disperse or be attacked. These are many of the same tactics used during the DNC and RNC protests. [In this political context I, as a journalist, would sure as hell love to know where the police are, if nothing else so I don't get beaten.]

Of course, the government is spinning the Twitter usage as a demon tool of anarchist organizers to incite violence. [Just as books are a demon tool of anarchists to, well, educate themselves]. We see this time and again at these mass protests–police beat random people in the streets while simultaneously trying to pick off certain individuals as “leaders.” During the RNC protests, organizers were arrested, demonized as “anarchists,” and hit with terrorism charges for spearheading local organizing with a wide-ranging coalition.

I ran across this article from last year, sent by a reader, about a U.S. Army intelligence report warning that terrorists may be using Twitter. An excerpt from the report:

“Twitter has also become a social activism tool for socialists, human rights groups, communists, vegetarians, anarchists, religious communities, atheists, political enthusiasts, hacktivists and others to communicate with each other and to send messages to broader audiences,” the report said.

It goes on to say, “Extremist and terrorist use of Twitter could evolve over time to reflect tactics that are already evolving in use by hacktivists and activists…”

It would be laughable if it weren’t so prescient.

As Madison told Democracy Now:

“We’re not—we’re not the first. We’re the first in this country. During the Twitter revolution going on in Iran, in Moldova, in Guatemala, in the earlier newscast about Honduras, in all those cases, repressive governments have arrested folks for using Twitter. The only difference is, in all those cases the State Department, the US State Department, has condemned the arrest of these Twitter activists and had gone so far in the Iranian situation, the State Department, according to an article, asked Twitter to postpone its regular maintenance so as not to interfere with Iranian protesters to be able to send out their tweets. So the only difference is we’re the first arrested here.”

I’ve been wary of Twitter, but I’m slowly growing to love it. Sign up to follow me on Twitter and try it out. Because if the government is concerned about activists using Twitter… well, I think that’s reason enough to give it a shot.

I sat down with the folks at Infoshop.org to talk about the Green Scare, the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, and this ongoing war on dissent.

[A recent example of this is Hugh Farrell, an environmental activist, being accused of “advocating literature and materials which advocate anarchy.”]

Here’s an excerpt:

J: When I hear about this stuff it just makes me not want to get out of bed in the morning, any advice?

WP: I feel like all the time, just by writing about this every day. But when you don’t know what to do, you have to do something. In a way the more you learn about all this stuff the more the cloud of fear cedes. And it stinks at first, to see it so brutally clear how corrupt our government is and how little respect they have for people’s constitutional rights. But at the same time it can be kind of empowering when you can look past the media spin and the government PR and you can see the picture clearly. It takes some of the mystery out of it. That’s my postivist rationalization on this sort of education, that the more you learn about this the less people retreat into despair and start using their anger for positive change.

Read the full interview at Infoshop.org. Please disregard the goofy photo.

Hugh Farrell and Gina “Tiga” Wertz have their first court date on July 14th: they’ve been charged with racketeering-–charges originally intended to target the mob–-for allegedly “conspiring” to engage in tree sits, participate in non-violent civil disobedience, and make an inflammatory blog post against the I-69 NAFTA superhighway.

When I reported on their arrest, though, I didn’t catch an interesting bit of information buried in the government’s motion for $20,000 cash bond. Mind you, these activists are not accused of any property destruction or violence, they’re accused of “conspiracy.” So how did the government attempt to justify the high cash bond?

According to Farrell’s motion for bond:

“The defendant has been observed advocating literature and materials which advocate anarchy, property destruction and violence, including ‘Ecodefense: A Field Guide to Monkeywrenching’ or ‘Recipes for Disaster: An Anarchist Cookbook.’”

In many ways, this is nothing new: the demonization of anarchists has existed as long as the term itself. But this is dangerous territory for a few reasons:

• It reflects more wasted resources on surveillance of First Amendment activity. Why was Farrell being “observed” by the law enforcement while allegedly “advocating literature” in the first place?
• It is intended to punish people for their political beliefs. Even if it is true that Farrell was observed advocating literature and that the literature advocated “anarchy,” how does this to relate to whether or not he’ll show up for his court date (which is what bail is all about)?
• Criminalizing books has no place in a democracy. Make no mistake, that’s what this is about: criminalizing dissent. The government isn’t burning the books, and it isn’t saying it is illegal to own them, but prosecutors are saying that if you *do* own them or “advocate” them it reflects negatively on your character.

  In that case, I’m guilty as well (and I’m sure I’m in good company with many of you). I own both of these books, and they are both available in countless bookstores and on Amazon.com. “Ecodefense” was a pivotal book in the history of the environmental movement, and includes an introduction by Ed Abbey. “Recipes for Disaster,” published by CrimethInc., isn’t the “anarchist cookbook,” you might expect: It has sections on coalition building and mental health.

As with so many of the cases I write about on this site, this isn’t about threats to public safety, it isn’t about property destruction, it’s about demonizing people because of their political beliefs. Well, in this case, it’s not even about that: It’s about demonizing people because of their books.

[The fact that prosecutors see these books as a threat is all the more reason to get yourself a copy or two. If you order them, please do so through the GreenIsTheNewRed.com Amazon account, below, and support this site at the same time! ]