UK RIOTS: Police 'Agent Provocateurs' CAUGHT OUT AGAIN!

[jackovesk]

Have a good look at this so called protesters Police Issued Boots!

CAUGHT OUT AGAIN...

Notice the 'YELLOW DOTS' on the sole and the Press Conviniently right there to Snap The Picture!!!

http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2011/03/27/1226028/823067-london-protests.jpg

HAN-WAG GTX Combat Boots...

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=820665722124&id=ad1d53e3a7e4a6a16c71b846dfdb39f3&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.silvermans.co.uk%2fPortals%2f0%2fproductImages%2f70862-1R.jpg

Take your pick of the several Police/Military Issue Boots from this site! Unbelievable!

http://www.silvermans.co.uk/ProductDetails/tabid/89/Department/Military/Category/FOOTWEAR/Description/HAN-WAG+GTX+COMBAT+BOOTS/ItemId/2387/Default.aspx

...or from this site

Click the sole image of the boot (bottom - left)

http://www.lansdaleltd.com/prod.php/prod/HANGTX

[Lord Sidious]

The same thing happened in either Seattle or Vancouver I think.
The same yellow dots gave the game away.
And they were filmed burning police cars.

[Humble Janitor]

Oh, they're going to pay dearly for this one!

So much for peaceful protests. The minute I saw the news coverage, I knew the protests had been disrupted by agents.

[Icecold]

OK. Devil's advocate here.

Cannot these boots be purchased by the public?

What I'm saying is, though its highly unlikely a protester could afford the price of these boots, it is certain that these individuals are police?

Also why would the police be stuipid enough to allow their plants to wear part of a police uniform?

Sounds fishy.

[modwiz]

Porcine stupidity should not be underestimated.

[Flash]

For your help, here the Canadian police agents provocateurs with their booths story, when Bush was visiting Canada in Montebello, Quebec. You are right, those are police booths.

Icecold, police could be stupid enough to wear part of their uniform, they did in Montebello, although you may say it is understandable, they were Quebec provincial police, n'est-ce pas? lol


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNOV_W6UnbE

[jackovesk]

OK. Devil's advocate here.

Cannot these boots be purchased by the public?

What I'm saying is, though its highly unlikely a protester could afford the price of these boots, it is certain that these individuals are police?

Also why would the police be stuipid enough to allow their plants to wear part of a police uniform?

Sounds fishy.

As a Peaceful Protester, I would have my Camera Focussed Solely on these Masked & Hooded 'THUGS' that wear BLACK! and the Police Brutality! and the Press that Follow them around..! This is what's Fishy to me!

http://resources0.news.com.au/images/2011/03/27/1226028/823128-london-protests.jpg
A protester? throws a smoke bomb during the march in London against the government's austerity measures / AFP

UK Riot Photo Gallery starts here (Photo 1 of 20)...

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/photo-gallery/gallery-e6frf94x-1226028823814?page=1

[Icecold]

Well dressed and equipped anarchists? Doesn't ring true does it? A nice way to further discredit the freedom from authority movement. Trickey dickies aren't they?


Oh! what a tangled web we weave
When first we practise to deceive!


The Guardian, Review, Saturday, 27 March 2010, p.9


Appearing in the wake of allegations of assassination by Israel's Mossad and the British secret services' involvement in torture, the publication of Alex Butterworth's compelling and insightful book is well timed. Woven into the book's backdrop are the lives of some of the notable late-19th-century European revolutionaries radicalised by poverty, injustice, tsarist tyranny and the bloody suppression of the Paris commune of 1871. These were men and women who believed, in William Morris's words, that "No man is good enough to be another man's master", and who shared a vision of the world as it might one day be � a cooperative commonwealth rid of exploitation, oppression and conflict.

The main story, however, is of the penetration of these groups of often naive utopians by the sinister functionaries of the secret state whose job it was to protect the status quo: the policemen and spymasters who lurked in the shadows seeding uncertainty and dissent, cultivating tensions, beguiling with deceits, and luring credulous and impressionable idealists into committing crimes they may never have otherwise conceived.

All this has particular resonance for me as I've recently been attempting to identify some of the Franco regime's agents who infiltrated the clandestine Spanish anarchist organisations in exile during the last years of the dictatorship. Butterworth's exciting book illustrates how little the practices of this demi-monde have changed in the century and a half since the time of the book's leading protagonists: Colonel Wilhelm Stieber (1842-1882), secret counsellor to Bismarck's government, head of military intelligence for the North German confederation, and adviser to the tsar's infamous "Third Section"; Peter Rachkovsky (1881-1910), inheritor of Stieber's mantle as head of Russia's foreign Okhrana; Allan Pinkerton (1849-1880), Glaswegian Chartist turncoat, strike-breaker, anti-labour organiser and founder of the US Secret Service; and last, but far from least, Chief Inspector William Melville (1883-1917), superintendent of the Metropolitan Police Special Branch and later head of the Secret Service Bureau.

The criminal intrigues and conspiracies of these men were legion, including Rachkovsky's sponsorship of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and his role in establishing the fateful Franco-Russian alliance with its tragic consequences in the summer of 1914.

In radical and revolutionary politics, whose end is the destruction of domination itself, the ruthlessness of power elites presents a perennial problem. Anarchists and other opponents of tyranny place absolute faith in individual conscience, allowing validity to every "honestly held opinion", rejecting coercion, centralised power, and the concept of the "greater good"; but the corollary of this, as Butterworth points out, is that the movement is left "defenceless, almost on principle, against malicious infiltration and co-option [by those seeking to use] political idealism as a cover for criminal intent".

Butterworth describes how, in 1892, the spymaster William Melville exploited this naivety to engineer the so-called "Walsall Bomb plot" to frame six anarchists, four of whom were jailed. Melville's undercover operative was Auguste Coulon, a half-French, half-Irish, deep-entry agent and spy, who was also closely involved with Henry Samuels, another of Melville and Rachkovsky's creatures responsible for the 1894 Greenwich Park explosion that provided the plot for Joseph Conrad's The Secret Agent.

The Walsall plot was part of a Europe-wide strategy to discredit anarchists and Russian dissidents. David Nichol, one of the foremost defenders of the Walsall anarchists, recorded the human cost of such tactics with great pathos: "Romance and novelty there are," he wrote of the anarchists' life, "though sometimes the delightful vision comes to an abrupt termination, changing suddenly, like a lovely face into an opium vision of something horrible and devilish."

The World That Never Was is a compelling narrative history both of a generation of demonised and battered � but optimistic � revolutionaries involved in a Manichean struggle for progress and social justice, and of the political police forces ranged against them, serving the geopolitical and domestic political interests of tyrants, despots and privileged elites from St Petersburg to San Francisco. And protecting reputations isn't limited to safeguarding that of the current head of MI5, Jonathan Evans, against accusations of complicity in torture. For years the Metropolitan Police Special Branch fought tenaciously to prevent access to their files for the 1890s, the period of Melville's ascendancy. When Butterworth asked initially for them under a Freedom of Information application, he was told the files had been lost, pulped in the war effort, or destroyed by a bomb. Then, in 2001, they mysteriously reappeared, having been used as the basis for a doctoral thesis by a serving Special Branch officer. Following a ruling in his favour by the information commissioner and a reprimand for the Metropolitan Police's handling of the case, Butterworth finally received the 120-year-old files. All the names had been redacted.

Stuart Christie is the editor of The Chronicles of Farquhar McHarg: Pistoleros! 1:1918 (ChristieBooks).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/mar/27/world-never-was-alex-butterworth

[Icecold]

THE THIRTEEN COMMANDMENTS


Expect to be tricked
I can be turned at any time - so can you. Don't trust me.
There are fake whistle-blowers - trying to make you distrust whistle-blowers.
The only answer is to publicise everything - so people can make up their own minds
People in authority are bumbling too.
The most bizarre people in the world are spys. They cook up more 'conspiracy theories' than the rest of the world combined - except for the Catholic Church
Conspiracy theories are the lifeblood of the National Security State.
If you get too close to the truth they will come after you.
They don't mind collateral damage; they expect it - and use it.
Some old salts go off and get a conscience
Most of us are controlled through our money source.
If you want to bury something, set up a commission
The internet is a gigantic spying machine.




http://www.phillyimc.org/files/anarchism2.jpg

[Icecold]

Rhetorical Militancy for a Rhetorical Mass Movement? If Only We Could Make Them Like Us…


By John Garvey

The main purpose of this article is to address the questions of strategy and tactics in the anarchist movement with specific reference to the roles
the Black Block tactic, and militant direct action play in our movement.

Addressing these questions now is particularly important due to the debate that has re-erupted after the “Heart Attack” protest on Feb. 13 in Vancouver and the upcoming G8/G20 protests in Toronto.

I take it for granted that militant direct action and revolutionary violence are a necessary part of any movement that aims to be revolutionary in practice, as well as in theory and rhetoric. I reject the idea and practice of “revolutionary non-violence” as both theoretically misleading and historically inaccurate.

This isn’t to say that non-violent political action doesn’t have a large role to play in social movements. It is to say that social movements should be both theoretically and practically prepared to accomplish their goals through revolutionary violence if that is what will be most effective. That said, we need to clarify what “diversity of tactics” means, and to continually examine both the tactics we are using and our strategy in protests and in
movement building .

Let’s Keep Pushing: Physically and Analytically

At the peaceful protest in Vancouver on Feb. 12, after the black block had been asked to take the front lines against the police by the elders who were leading the march and to push through the police line in order to
reach the Olympic Stadium, there was a young woman who kept insisting that we push through the police line. If everyone there had been willing to push forward, if there had been greater unity, tactically speaking, we
probably could have done it and then we would have crashed the opening ceremonies…Imagine that! Sadly, there simply wasn’t enough people who were committed to pushing through the police lines to accomplish this.

All the attention that is currently focused on the issue of tactics and strategy and violence and non-violence has created an opportunity for those of us who want to see a militant movement to push back against the
idea that social movements are merely a leftish “loyal opposition.” It is an opportunity to argue for a greater diversity of tactics than currently exists as well and to continue subverting the hegemony of the pacified, “non-violent” social activism that has pervaded the “radical
left” in Canada for the past 4 decades.

In the last 10 years the radical left in Canada has been able to push the discussion called “diversity of tactics” far enough that it is a constant theme in mass mobilizations here. At the least it is a discussion that political activists of all stripes are familiar with, and many feel that
they have to engage with, either for or against.

In addition to all of this, the discussion around the “Heart Attack” demonstration has created an opportunity for the anarchist movement to engage in much needed discussion about strategy and tactics. Articles like those by Mick Sweetman , David Rovics and others, while I strongly disagree with many points they made, both involve anarchists thinking strategically about anarchist movement.

Push? Burn? Build? Strategy in the anarchist movement?

It’s outside of the scope of this article (and of my ability) to address all of the possible strategies for anarchist movement in Canada. Instead I will only point out some of what seems to me to be particularly important at this time.

Real discussion and debate about strategy is pretty limited in the anarchist movement (and the radical left) in Canada. Given the need for us to think before we act , this should be a significant concern to everyone
in the movement. There is more debate around tactics, but it is often stilted due the offhand acceptance of ideas and concepts (such as “diversity of tactics”) rather than critical interaction with them. A fair bit of the discussion that does exist conflates strategies with
different anarchist tendencies: anarchist-communists argue for building class power through worker and community assemblies; green anarchists denounce workerism and industrial capitalism and argue for sustainability.

The anarchist movement (and the radical left) needs to reprioritize theorizing and strategizing. This is a point that INCITE!, among others, have made. They also emphasize the resources that the Right has put into their theorizing, and they assert that this has played and important role in the right wing resurgence of the last 30 years . To be clear, this theorizing needs to be tightly connected to movement practices, should be informed by them, and should inform them.

I believe that the politics that are delineated by the combination of anti-capitalism, anti-imperialism and anti-oppression are a good starting place for the anarchist movement. I would also argue that an essential
part of anti-oppressive practice is a commitment to anti-authoritarianism. The first three principles are all part of the politics outlined by the journal Upping the Anti in their first editorial. In that editorial they also flag the fact that this starting place is purely oppositional, and the need for the radical left to find “conceptual and practical
alternatives to the system [and] strategies for getting there. ”

In addition to this we need to be clear about what we mean when we use the terms anti-capitalism, anti-imperialism and anti-oppression. Like the phrase “diversity of tactics” any and all of these terms can become devoid of meaning if we are simply repeating them. All three of these politics, as well as the connections and contradictions between them, need to be clarified.....

http://www.phillyimc.org/en/rhetorical-militancy-rhetorical-mass-movement-if-only-we-could-make-them-us%E2%80%A6

¤=[Post Update]=¤


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-LYAb3uri4&feature=player_embedded

[Icecold]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcnIkTQ2g_4&feature=related


According to attorney Brian Glick in his book War at Home, the FBI used four main methods during COINTELPRO:

Infiltration: Agents and informers did not merely spy on political activists. Their main purpose was to discredit and disrupt. Their very presence served to undermine trust and scare off potential supporters. The FBI and police exploited this fear to smear genuine activists as agents.

Psychological Warfare From the Outside: The FBI and police used a myriad of other "dirty tricks" to undermine progressive movements. They planted false media stories and published bogus leaflets and other publications in the name of targeted groups. They forged correspondence, sent anonymous letters, and made anonymous telephone calls. They spread misinformation about meetings and events, set up pseudo movement groups run by government agents, and manipulated or strong-armed parents, employers, landlords, school officials and others to cause trouble for activists.

Harassment Through the Legal System: The FBI and police abused the legal system to harass dissidents and make them appear to be criminals. Officers of the law gave perjured testimony and presented fabricated evidence as a pretext for false arrests and wrongful imprisonment. They discriminatorily enforced tax laws and other government regulations and used conspicuous surveillance, "investigative" interviews, and grand jury subpoenas in an effort to intimidate activists and silence their supporters.[18]

Extralegal Force and Violence: The FBI conspired with local police departments to threaten dissidents; to conduct illegal break-ins in order to search dissident homes; and to commit vandalism, assaults, beatings and assassinations.[18][19][20] The object was to frighten, or eliminate, dissidents and disrupt their movements.