FBI Director Mueller vows to investigate FBI as Weapon of Mass Destruction for creating 911, the Oklahoma City bombing, First World Trade Center bombing, Waco, Ruby Ridge, Cincinnati Vote Fraud, JFK assassination, Robert Kennedy assassination, Martin Luther King assassination, The Franklin Coverup, The October Suprise. He will use your taxdollars to create new department.
New FBI Division To Probe Weapons Terrorists May Use
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 27, 2006; Page A23
The FBI yesterday announced the creation of an investigative division focused on weapons of mass destruction, part of Director Robert S. Mueller III's latest reorganization plan aimed at gathering intelligence and preventing terrorist attacks.
In addition to the new WMD Directorate, Mueller told reporters he has hired an associate deputy to oversee finances and other administrative duties, and is adding or reshuffling several other senior positions.
The plan also includes a new science and technology branch encompassing the FBI Laboratory and other technical support services.
Mueller, who has overseen a series of realignments since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, characterized the latest moves as the third phase of a process aimed at making the FBI into an agile and modern domestic intelligence agency. Previous changes included a dramatic increase in the number of counterterrorism agents and the creation of a directorate focused on intelligence gathering and analysis.
"We have grown as an organization substantially since September 11," Mueller said. "It made sense in my mind to evolve the organization to what you see today."
Mueller's new associate deputy director -- FBI veteran Joseph L. Ford -- will be the No. 3 official and will oversee branches including human resources, information technology and finance. Ford, a special agent since 1981, worked on the Enron corporate fraud investigation and was head of the FBI's San Francisco office.
The WMD Directorate will be headed by Vahid Majidi, a former manager and scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory who served as chief science adviser to the Justice Department.
Mueller said that the FBI and other intelligence agencies need to pay special attention to the catastrophic threat posed by weapons of mass destruction, particularly if they get into the hands of terrorist groups. "This is a reflection of the necessity of focusing our efforts on preventing weapons of mass destruction from being utilized in the United States," Mueller said.
The FBI has exploded in size over the last five years, especially in counterterrorism and counterintelligence. But Mueller has acknowledged difficulties in several areas -- including a failed effort to overhaul the FBI's antiquated case-management system -- and the bureau has been criticized by lawmakers and outside analysts for being slow to modernize itself.
The transformation has been complicated by turnover as dozens of high-ranking FBI executives have been lured to the private sector by fat salaries and generous benefits. Mueller said that while he is "not asking anyone to sign a blood oath," he hopes the reorganization will help with retention. "My expectation is that we'll be stable for the foreseeable future," he said.
CampusActivism.org
Forum for Student and Youth Activists
first FBI agents cut off her hands
23 posts • Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
first FBI agents cut off her hands
by joeb on Fri Jul 28, 2006 1:01 pm
Last edited by joeb on Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
- joeb
- Regular
- Posts: 3371
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:19 am
by joeb on Sun Jul 30, 2006 4:38 pm
This story is brought to you as a reminder of the local police collaboration with the FBI. It was the local LAPD who collaborated with FBI agents in the assassination of Robert Kennedy; it was local Dallas police who collaborated with the FBI in the President Kennedy assassination and allowed Oswald to be shot; it was local Memphis police who collaborated with taxpayer funded FBI agents in the assassination of Martin Luther King and it was a Memphis cop who fired the shot that killed MLK. The Memphis police chief at the time was a former FBI agent.
a species that hires bodyguards to protect it looses the ability to protect itself and is doomed to extinction
75 officers failed city drug tests
Cocaine use most prevalent, raising concern
By Suzanne Smalley, Globe Staff | July 30, 2006
Since Boston police started annual drug testing in 1999, 75 officers have failed the tests, and 26 of them flunked a second test and were fired, newly released statistics show.
Acting Police Commissioner Albert Goslin said an additional 20 of the officers who tested positive left the department on their own, which he said is because they could not handle the frequent follow-up checks.
Of the 75 officers, 61 tested positive for cocaine, 14 for marijuana, two for ecstasy, and one for heroin, according to the figures, obtained by the Globe through a public records request. (Some officers had more than one drug in their system).
Some specialists and department observers said they were alarmed by the number of officers testing positive for a ``hard" drug such as cocaine and questioned the department's policy that allows an officer to remain on the force after a positive drug test. An officer is not fired until a second positive test.
``It seems like it's a chronic problem," said Darnell A. Williams, president and CEO of the Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts. ``Here we're trying to deal with the guns and the drugs on the street level, but we have a more strident problem inside the department when we have that many people testing positive for drugs, especially cocaine."
The department's drug testing policy is already under scrutiny, after reports that the alleged ringleader in a corruption case tested positive for cocaine in 1999, yet kept his job under the rules that call only for suspensions and treatment even for positive tests for drugs such as cocaine and heroin.
Unlike Boston, the New York and Los Angeles police departments dismiss officers after a first positive drug test.
Eugene O'Donnell, a former New York City police officer who is now a professor of police studies at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, said he believes the Boston police may have an unusually high number of hard-drug users because of its two-strikes policy. The New York Police Department has a very low drug test failure rate because of its zero tolerance policy, he said.
``Once you establish that people are fired, it does change the complexion," he said. ``If an agency says you can use drugs . . . it stands to reason you're going to have a higher rate of people using drugs."
While 75 Boston officers failed drug tests out of a total force of about 2,000 sworn officers since 1999, at the much larger Los Angeles Police Department, 14 officers have flunked the drug test since March 2000. It employs 9,354 officers, of whom about 3,000 are subjected to random urine tests each year.
A spokeswoman for the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration said that of the 150,000 federal employees who took random drug tests in 2004, 0.4 percent failed .
In 1999, when the most Boston officers failed drug tests, the rate was more than double that, about 1.1 percent. Goslin said the testing policy and treatment have cut the number of positive tests since then.
Boston police test for cocaine, heroin, amphetamines, PCP, and marijuana -- the standard list recommended by the federal government for workplace testing. Officers can also be tested for other drugs with reasonable suspicion.
Officers are tested before they join the force, again while on probationary duty, then annually within 30 days of their birthday. They are also tested if they get promoted or assigned to a special unit such as narcotics or organized crime.
If they test positive for any drug, officers receive a 45-day unpaid suspension and must get treatment. Once they return to duty, they are subject to random testing for three years, in addition to regular testing.
Goslin said it is not fair to compare the department to other law enforcement agencies, which he said typically use a less sophisticated urinalysis test that does not detect drugs taken more than a few days before the test.
He said the Boston police method of testing officers' hair is more reliable and can catch drug use dating back three months. ``I would expect our rate to be higher," Goslin said in an interview.
Los Angeles police test urine for drugs, and New York police test hair.
Goslin also said that Boston police test every officer annually, which is more regularly than many police departments, where a smaller number of officers are tested at random each year. Therefore, he said, all officers aren't screened consistently.
The annual testing began in 1999 after years of negotiating with the city's powerful police unions, which had objected to the tests. In exchange for salary and benefit increases, the unions agreed to a system that gives officers warning by scheduling tests within 30 days of their birthday.
The city's hair-testing method has also been disputed.
Fifty-seven percent of officers who failed an initial drug test since 1999 were African-American, which troubles critics who believe blacks are more likely to get false positive results because of the texture of their hair. Last year, seven former Boston police officers -- all African-Americans who lost their jobs because of what they say were false positives -- sued the department, alleging the hair test is biased. The suit is pending .
Goslin defended the test. ``The science is very good and can withstand any level of scrutiny," he said.
Goslin said he is not surprised that the vast majority of officers who failed the tests had used cocaine. ``In the '60s it would be marijuana; now it seems to be cocaine," he said.
But Mark A. de Bernardo, a labor lawyer in Virginia who is executive director of the Institute for a Drug-Free Workplace, said he is startled by the number of Boston officers who used cocaine. He said that while no one tracks national numbers on law enforcement officers who test positive for drugs, it is unusual for so many of the positive results to be for cocaine.
``In typical drug testing, the number of marijuana positives is going to be three, four, five times the number of cocaine positives," he said. ``That's alarming that cocaine would seem to be the drug of choice for the drug abusers in the Boston Police Department."
He said the number of drug-using officers might be higher than what the testing shows because of the predictability of Boston's annual testing.
``Anybody who fails a drug test when they know a year advance within 30 days of when it's going to be . . . is a person who I consider to be an addict," he said. ``I'd assume that this is just a percentage of those that actually engage in actual drug use because it's not true random testing."
He also said that by giving officers a second chance, Boston police are straying from the standard set by most other employees where workers are responsible for public safety.
However, the Urban League's Williams said he believes the department is right to give officers a second chance, especially since in many cases it seems to work. Of the 75 officers who tested positive since 1999, only about a third failed a second test.
Goslin said after the initial wave of positive tests in 1999, the policy has successfully cut drug use. ``People took the policy seriously and went to get help on their own, and that caused the numbers to drop drastically," he said. ``And it dropped every year the policy has been in existence."
a species that hires bodyguards to protect it looses the ability to protect itself and is doomed to extinction
75 officers failed city drug tests
Cocaine use most prevalent, raising concern
By Suzanne Smalley, Globe Staff | July 30, 2006
Since Boston police started annual drug testing in 1999, 75 officers have failed the tests, and 26 of them flunked a second test and were fired, newly released statistics show.
Acting Police Commissioner Albert Goslin said an additional 20 of the officers who tested positive left the department on their own, which he said is because they could not handle the frequent follow-up checks.
Of the 75 officers, 61 tested positive for cocaine, 14 for marijuana, two for ecstasy, and one for heroin, according to the figures, obtained by the Globe through a public records request. (Some officers had more than one drug in their system).
Some specialists and department observers said they were alarmed by the number of officers testing positive for a ``hard" drug such as cocaine and questioned the department's policy that allows an officer to remain on the force after a positive drug test. An officer is not fired until a second positive test.
``It seems like it's a chronic problem," said Darnell A. Williams, president and CEO of the Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts. ``Here we're trying to deal with the guns and the drugs on the street level, but we have a more strident problem inside the department when we have that many people testing positive for drugs, especially cocaine."
The department's drug testing policy is already under scrutiny, after reports that the alleged ringleader in a corruption case tested positive for cocaine in 1999, yet kept his job under the rules that call only for suspensions and treatment even for positive tests for drugs such as cocaine and heroin.
Unlike Boston, the New York and Los Angeles police departments dismiss officers after a first positive drug test.
Eugene O'Donnell, a former New York City police officer who is now a professor of police studies at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, said he believes the Boston police may have an unusually high number of hard-drug users because of its two-strikes policy. The New York Police Department has a very low drug test failure rate because of its zero tolerance policy, he said.
``Once you establish that people are fired, it does change the complexion," he said. ``If an agency says you can use drugs . . . it stands to reason you're going to have a higher rate of people using drugs."
While 75 Boston officers failed drug tests out of a total force of about 2,000 sworn officers since 1999, at the much larger Los Angeles Police Department, 14 officers have flunked the drug test since March 2000. It employs 9,354 officers, of whom about 3,000 are subjected to random urine tests each year.
A spokeswoman for the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration said that of the 150,000 federal employees who took random drug tests in 2004, 0.4 percent failed .
In 1999, when the most Boston officers failed drug tests, the rate was more than double that, about 1.1 percent. Goslin said the testing policy and treatment have cut the number of positive tests since then.
Boston police test for cocaine, heroin, amphetamines, PCP, and marijuana -- the standard list recommended by the federal government for workplace testing. Officers can also be tested for other drugs with reasonable suspicion.
Officers are tested before they join the force, again while on probationary duty, then annually within 30 days of their birthday. They are also tested if they get promoted or assigned to a special unit such as narcotics or organized crime.
If they test positive for any drug, officers receive a 45-day unpaid suspension and must get treatment. Once they return to duty, they are subject to random testing for three years, in addition to regular testing.
Goslin said it is not fair to compare the department to other law enforcement agencies, which he said typically use a less sophisticated urinalysis test that does not detect drugs taken more than a few days before the test.
He said the Boston police method of testing officers' hair is more reliable and can catch drug use dating back three months. ``I would expect our rate to be higher," Goslin said in an interview.
Los Angeles police test urine for drugs, and New York police test hair.
Goslin also said that Boston police test every officer annually, which is more regularly than many police departments, where a smaller number of officers are tested at random each year. Therefore, he said, all officers aren't screened consistently.
The annual testing began in 1999 after years of negotiating with the city's powerful police unions, which had objected to the tests. In exchange for salary and benefit increases, the unions agreed to a system that gives officers warning by scheduling tests within 30 days of their birthday.
The city's hair-testing method has also been disputed.
Fifty-seven percent of officers who failed an initial drug test since 1999 were African-American, which troubles critics who believe blacks are more likely to get false positive results because of the texture of their hair. Last year, seven former Boston police officers -- all African-Americans who lost their jobs because of what they say were false positives -- sued the department, alleging the hair test is biased. The suit is pending .
Goslin defended the test. ``The science is very good and can withstand any level of scrutiny," he said.
Goslin said he is not surprised that the vast majority of officers who failed the tests had used cocaine. ``In the '60s it would be marijuana; now it seems to be cocaine," he said.
But Mark A. de Bernardo, a labor lawyer in Virginia who is executive director of the Institute for a Drug-Free Workplace, said he is startled by the number of Boston officers who used cocaine. He said that while no one tracks national numbers on law enforcement officers who test positive for drugs, it is unusual for so many of the positive results to be for cocaine.
``In typical drug testing, the number of marijuana positives is going to be three, four, five times the number of cocaine positives," he said. ``That's alarming that cocaine would seem to be the drug of choice for the drug abusers in the Boston Police Department."
He said the number of drug-using officers might be higher than what the testing shows because of the predictability of Boston's annual testing.
``Anybody who fails a drug test when they know a year advance within 30 days of when it's going to be . . . is a person who I consider to be an addict," he said. ``I'd assume that this is just a percentage of those that actually engage in actual drug use because it's not true random testing."
He also said that by giving officers a second chance, Boston police are straying from the standard set by most other employees where workers are responsible for public safety.
However, the Urban League's Williams said he believes the department is right to give officers a second chance, especially since in many cases it seems to work. Of the 75 officers who tested positive since 1999, only about a third failed a second test.
Goslin said after the initial wave of positive tests in 1999, the policy has successfully cut drug use. ``People took the policy seriously and went to get help on their own, and that caused the numbers to drop drastically," he said. ``And it dropped every year the policy has been in existence."
- joeb
- Regular
- Posts: 3371
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:19 am
by joeb on Wed Aug 02, 2006 4:11 pm
Dead Police Officer And
OKC Bombing Coverup
FBI Falsified Reports, Ignored Evidence
Won't Release Murrah Building Surveillance Tapes
5-8-2001
Former Oklahoma State Rep. Charles Key (R), who spearheaded a major independent inquiry into the Oklahoma City bombing, was the guest on the April 15 broadcast of The SPOTLIGHT's weekly call-in talk forum, Radio Free America, with host Tom Valentine.
Key and his Oklahoma Bombing Investigating Committee are preparing to release a 500-page report explaining their findings which point clearly toward the fact that neither convicted bomber Timothy McVeigh nor the federal authorities who built the legal case against McVeigh are telling the truth about what really happened.
What follows is the second part of an edited transcript of the interview with Key. Valentine's questions are in boldface. Key's responses are in regular text. The first part of the transcription was published last week in The SPOTLIGHT.
TV: There is evidence that the government had advance knowledge about a possible bomb attack on the Murrah building. There is also evidence about other unexploded bombs being taken out of the Murrah building. Is any of this perhaps related to the strange death (after the bombing)-supposedly a suicide-of Oklahoma City Police Officer Terrence Yeakey?
CK: We don't know whether Yeakey's death is connected to this, but his story is interesting in itself.
Yeakey was one of the very first rescue workers on the scene. He knew a lot about the bombing, according to his wife, and was very concerned about things that he knew. He expressed this to his wife and mother, and his sisters and brother-in-law.
The Oklahoma City Fire Department got a call from the FBI the weekend before the bombing to tell them to be on readied alert for something that could be taking place in the next few days. The Police Department also had some information that came through to them. While they've been very "mum" about that, we've got bits and pieces from some police dispatchers and others.
Evidently Officer Yeakey didn't feel right about keeping his mouth shut about things that he saw that just didn't look right to him.
The evidence itself shows that he obviously was murdered, even though they say he committed suicide. Yeakey was found in the outskirts of the city. He allegedly walked out into a fenced area off the road after having cut both wrists twice and then made another cut on his elbow and then cut both areas of the jugular vein on his neck.
Having lost tremendous amounts of blood in his car and elsewhere, he supposedly then walked all of this distance and then decided to shoot himself. He didn't shoot himself with his service revolver. When a law enforcement officer dies, there is almost always an autopsy. They did not do an autopsy in this case. They proclaimed it a suicide. His family is not satisfied and his wife is not satisfied.
TV: Officer Yeakey, who was a black man, by the way, was very widely liked and respected in Oklahoma City. Was he about to blow the whistle on what he knew about the bombing?
CK: Yes, according to his wife, he was ready to talk. Whoever killed him took his briefcase out of his car. The family finally got the briefcase after some time, but it had been in the custody of the police, who didn't want to give it up to the family. It's also believed by the wife and family that he not only had evidence in that briefcase, but that he may have also stashed other evidence somewhere else, at a storage unit. But that's never been found.
TV: That's a shocking story. What about Jayna Davis, the reporter from Chan nel 4 television (an NBC affiliate) in Oklahoma City? She uncovered some amazing evidence of Tim McVeigh having been involved with Iraqis in Oklahoma City.
CK: Miss Davis and some other reporters, including, primarily, Brad Edwards, had done some really great investigative work in the early days after the bombing.
Because of their work, a lot of people in Oklahoma City do know that there's much more to the story and were not willing to buy the government's version early on.
Miss Davis and her colleagues did a lot of work on the other "John Doe" figures in the case and the Middle East connection. There were so many witnesses who de scribed a John Doe or John Does who were on the scene with McVeigh and others right in front of the Murrah building on the day of the bombing and on the days before the bombing that it seems clear that there must have been a Middle Eastern connection of some type.
Miss Davis pinpointed an Iraqi im migrant as one of the John Does.
What a lot of people around the country don't know, and what even a lot of reporters in Oklahoma City didn't know at first, was that right after the Persian Gulf war there were just under 5,000 Iraqi soldiers who had deserted Saddam Hussein's army who were looking for asylum in another country. No country would take them so the United States let them come here. They were dispersed throughout the country and a group of them were placed in Oklahoma City.
One of these Iraqis was one of these John Does identified by several people, as having been in McVeigh's company, including being in a Ryder truck the day of the bombing. He and others who were either former Iraqi soldiers or other Middle Easterners became the subject of the investigation by Jayna Davis who has put together some real blockbuster information about this.
There is no doubt in my mind that there is some kind of Middle Eastern connection to this. And this is in our report.
TV: This Iraqi sued Jayna Davis, but she won.
CK: It was a federal lawsuit. What happened was that Channel 4 talked about this individual, but not by name. When they showed some surveillance video that they used to investigate him, they never showed his face or used his name. Then other television stations criticized Chan nel 4. However, this Iraqi came to another station and revealed himself and then turned around and sued Channel 4 for allegedly revealing his identity. Then the federal case ensued. It stopped everything for about two years. However, Miss Davis and Channel 4 had to show their evidence and the judge ruled in their favor, saying it was all reasonable evidence, including many witnesses.
Yet, the rest of the media in the United States did not report any of this.
In addition to most of what we call the "mainstream" media being controlled, they will also lose credibility by this story finally coming out. They totally just blew it. With this case coming out, it will show what a terrible job the media (both local and national) did in covering the story. There's both an ego factor and a credibility factor.
TV: Surveillance tapes from outside the Murrah building are being kept under wraps by the FBI. You would think that if these tapes backed up their story that McVeigh was traveling alone that they would be glad to release those tapes to the public.
CK: There are at least 22 surveillance tapes. There were two functioning tapes from the front of the Murrah Building that would have shown close-up views of the truck and the occupants of that truck. It would have shown who got out of it and exactly what they looked like. In addition, there were tapes from the nearby Regency Towers apartments, the Journal-Record building, Southwestern Bell and others.
There is-right now-a freedom of information act lawsuit filed by independent investigator David Hoffman. His lawsuit started out as a simple freedom of information request. However the FBI, to this day, refuses to release any of those surveillance videotapes.
At this point, there are no outstanding trials to be conducted. They already got their convictions. They shouldn't have anything to hide, but obviously they've got a lot to hide.
TV: Didn't you have witnesses who said that they told the FBI that they saw an Arab-looking guy and McVeigh parting company near the Murrah building but then the FBI turned around and told these witnesses, "No, you didn't see that," and then recorded the witness interviews on the FBI 302 forms incorrectly?
CK: That's correct. There are at least two times I know for certain that this happened and we believe it happened at least another three times. We've got documented two times where the FBI agents did as you described (or something close to that), where a witness said, "Here's my testimony as to what happened."
In another case, two deputy reserve sheriffs had a conversation with U.S. Rep. Ernest Istook (R-Okla.) where Istook said that the government had "blown it" and that they knew about this impending bombing since about April 9 and that they had information about a radical Islamic extremist terrorist organization.
The deputy said to Istook, "Excuse me, sir?" Then the congressman repeated it all back to him again. When the deputy reserve officer gave his testimony to the FBI, the FBI agent said that he (the agent) was going to put it down [in a different way].
TV: It must have been tough for you to put Istook on the spot in this way, since he had been a longtime personal friend and fellow Republican political colleague.
CK: Yes, it was difficult.
TV: How would Istook have known about government foreknowledge of a possible attack on the building?
CK: He obviously had some information that was imparted to him. It's reasonable to speculate that since he was the congressman from that particular area he would have been told. In addition, it was known that Oklahoma City had the second largest population of Middle Eastern Islamic immigrants and that there was a mosque that was under surveillance by law enforcement several weeks before the bombing. Also, consider Jayna Davis's information about these Iraqi immigrants. Who knows what else? It's reasonable to speculate that a congressman from the area had been told something either officially or unofficially.
TV: Radio Free America used to be carried locally in Lawton, Okla., and Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) was on the program several times. I have visited with him in his office in Washington for several years.
Once when I visited him and asked him questions about the Oklahoma City bombing, I could see in his face that it was really painful and he didn't want to talk about it. I'm sure he knows a lot more than he will say and it's bothering him very much.
CK: Oh yes. We've got a lot of information that suggests that he definitely knows a whole lot. Inhofe is a good guy, though.
We can hope that some day Jim Inhofe will tell us what he knows. I doubt that Governor Frank Keating will ever do so.
I'd put my money on Inhofe, more so than the other guys. I'll only believe it when I see it when an elected official finally speaks out.
TV: McVeigh's attorney and others have alleged that the FBI falsified hundreds of their 302 witness report forms.
CK: We need to get the word out to enough people for them to become aware of how corrupt our federal government has become. It's not like we are indicting all federal employees. Far from it. It's simply that there's a high level of people inside some of these agencies who will do anything and they control the reins of power.
You have to wonder what their motivation is in keeping all of this under wraps. Even if it were a sting operation by the FBI or BATF that went bad, it wouldn't be so bad for them to admit it as it is for them to not tell us the truth. So for that very reason, I don't think it was simply a sting gone bad.
We keep getting a lot of new information as time goes by. I will tell you that we think we have found this Robert Jacques who has been the subject of a lot of government investigation. If our information is true and we believe that it is, the government may not have wanted to find that guy, just as they didn't want to find the other John Does.
TV: What about this group at Elohim City?
CK: I don't know really how much the people there were involved in this, except for Andreas Strassmeir, the West German. I'm convinced that this guy was a government agent. He was either working for our government or with the knowledge of our government.
TV: Is it possible that Strassmeir was somehow McVeigh's "handler," on behalf of the government or somebody?
CK: There's such a large body of information that we have received which indicates that Strassmeir was in direct contact with McVeigh up until the day of the bombing, at least the night before the bombing, and it would appear that yes, Strassmeir, was a "handler" of McVeigh. It would seem from this information that McVeigh didn't realize that until after the bombing.
TV: Is there any other information we should hear about at this point?
CK: Well, I must be very circumspect, at this juncture, but I was able to talk to a federal government official who told me how this whole Oklahoma City affair evolved. They told me that it was planned right after the Waco event as a sting operation by the BATF for publicity's sake-to make the BATF look good. So the genesis of it all was a sting. The person wasn't suggesting that it was a sting operation that went wrong.
Based on what I've learned, there appears to be a whole lot more at work. It was originally a sting, but there were two over-lapping operations. There was a group of other people, whatever their plan was, and they turned the tables on the folks who thought there was just a sting going on.
We have information that shows that there were efforts, in the early morning hours before the explosion, by bomb squads who came down, trying to locate the truck or the informant or someone. It appears they lost track of them as they were surveilling them, expecting them to come into the city.
The official report of the Oklahoma City Bombing Investigating Committee has not been released. Mr. Key, president of the committee, will give a comprehensive review of the report at The Barnes Review Second International Conference on Authentic His tory and the First Amendment in Wash ington, June 15. Copies of the report will be available at the conference.
OKC Bombing Coverup
FBI Falsified Reports, Ignored Evidence
Won't Release Murrah Building Surveillance Tapes
5-8-2001
Former Oklahoma State Rep. Charles Key (R), who spearheaded a major independent inquiry into the Oklahoma City bombing, was the guest on the April 15 broadcast of The SPOTLIGHT's weekly call-in talk forum, Radio Free America, with host Tom Valentine.
Key and his Oklahoma Bombing Investigating Committee are preparing to release a 500-page report explaining their findings which point clearly toward the fact that neither convicted bomber Timothy McVeigh nor the federal authorities who built the legal case against McVeigh are telling the truth about what really happened.
What follows is the second part of an edited transcript of the interview with Key. Valentine's questions are in boldface. Key's responses are in regular text. The first part of the transcription was published last week in The SPOTLIGHT.
TV: There is evidence that the government had advance knowledge about a possible bomb attack on the Murrah building. There is also evidence about other unexploded bombs being taken out of the Murrah building. Is any of this perhaps related to the strange death (after the bombing)-supposedly a suicide-of Oklahoma City Police Officer Terrence Yeakey?
CK: We don't know whether Yeakey's death is connected to this, but his story is interesting in itself.
Yeakey was one of the very first rescue workers on the scene. He knew a lot about the bombing, according to his wife, and was very concerned about things that he knew. He expressed this to his wife and mother, and his sisters and brother-in-law.
The Oklahoma City Fire Department got a call from the FBI the weekend before the bombing to tell them to be on readied alert for something that could be taking place in the next few days. The Police Department also had some information that came through to them. While they've been very "mum" about that, we've got bits and pieces from some police dispatchers and others.
Evidently Officer Yeakey didn't feel right about keeping his mouth shut about things that he saw that just didn't look right to him.
The evidence itself shows that he obviously was murdered, even though they say he committed suicide. Yeakey was found in the outskirts of the city. He allegedly walked out into a fenced area off the road after having cut both wrists twice and then made another cut on his elbow and then cut both areas of the jugular vein on his neck.
Having lost tremendous amounts of blood in his car and elsewhere, he supposedly then walked all of this distance and then decided to shoot himself. He didn't shoot himself with his service revolver. When a law enforcement officer dies, there is almost always an autopsy. They did not do an autopsy in this case. They proclaimed it a suicide. His family is not satisfied and his wife is not satisfied.
TV: Officer Yeakey, who was a black man, by the way, was very widely liked and respected in Oklahoma City. Was he about to blow the whistle on what he knew about the bombing?
CK: Yes, according to his wife, he was ready to talk. Whoever killed him took his briefcase out of his car. The family finally got the briefcase after some time, but it had been in the custody of the police, who didn't want to give it up to the family. It's also believed by the wife and family that he not only had evidence in that briefcase, but that he may have also stashed other evidence somewhere else, at a storage unit. But that's never been found.
TV: That's a shocking story. What about Jayna Davis, the reporter from Chan nel 4 television (an NBC affiliate) in Oklahoma City? She uncovered some amazing evidence of Tim McVeigh having been involved with Iraqis in Oklahoma City.
CK: Miss Davis and some other reporters, including, primarily, Brad Edwards, had done some really great investigative work in the early days after the bombing.
Because of their work, a lot of people in Oklahoma City do know that there's much more to the story and were not willing to buy the government's version early on.
Miss Davis and her colleagues did a lot of work on the other "John Doe" figures in the case and the Middle East connection. There were so many witnesses who de scribed a John Doe or John Does who were on the scene with McVeigh and others right in front of the Murrah building on the day of the bombing and on the days before the bombing that it seems clear that there must have been a Middle Eastern connection of some type.
Miss Davis pinpointed an Iraqi im migrant as one of the John Does.
What a lot of people around the country don't know, and what even a lot of reporters in Oklahoma City didn't know at first, was that right after the Persian Gulf war there were just under 5,000 Iraqi soldiers who had deserted Saddam Hussein's army who were looking for asylum in another country. No country would take them so the United States let them come here. They were dispersed throughout the country and a group of them were placed in Oklahoma City.
One of these Iraqis was one of these John Does identified by several people, as having been in McVeigh's company, including being in a Ryder truck the day of the bombing. He and others who were either former Iraqi soldiers or other Middle Easterners became the subject of the investigation by Jayna Davis who has put together some real blockbuster information about this.
There is no doubt in my mind that there is some kind of Middle Eastern connection to this. And this is in our report.
TV: This Iraqi sued Jayna Davis, but she won.
CK: It was a federal lawsuit. What happened was that Channel 4 talked about this individual, but not by name. When they showed some surveillance video that they used to investigate him, they never showed his face or used his name. Then other television stations criticized Chan nel 4. However, this Iraqi came to another station and revealed himself and then turned around and sued Channel 4 for allegedly revealing his identity. Then the federal case ensued. It stopped everything for about two years. However, Miss Davis and Channel 4 had to show their evidence and the judge ruled in their favor, saying it was all reasonable evidence, including many witnesses.
Yet, the rest of the media in the United States did not report any of this.
In addition to most of what we call the "mainstream" media being controlled, they will also lose credibility by this story finally coming out. They totally just blew it. With this case coming out, it will show what a terrible job the media (both local and national) did in covering the story. There's both an ego factor and a credibility factor.
TV: Surveillance tapes from outside the Murrah building are being kept under wraps by the FBI. You would think that if these tapes backed up their story that McVeigh was traveling alone that they would be glad to release those tapes to the public.
CK: There are at least 22 surveillance tapes. There were two functioning tapes from the front of the Murrah Building that would have shown close-up views of the truck and the occupants of that truck. It would have shown who got out of it and exactly what they looked like. In addition, there were tapes from the nearby Regency Towers apartments, the Journal-Record building, Southwestern Bell and others.
There is-right now-a freedom of information act lawsuit filed by independent investigator David Hoffman. His lawsuit started out as a simple freedom of information request. However the FBI, to this day, refuses to release any of those surveillance videotapes.
At this point, there are no outstanding trials to be conducted. They already got their convictions. They shouldn't have anything to hide, but obviously they've got a lot to hide.
TV: Didn't you have witnesses who said that they told the FBI that they saw an Arab-looking guy and McVeigh parting company near the Murrah building but then the FBI turned around and told these witnesses, "No, you didn't see that," and then recorded the witness interviews on the FBI 302 forms incorrectly?
CK: That's correct. There are at least two times I know for certain that this happened and we believe it happened at least another three times. We've got documented two times where the FBI agents did as you described (or something close to that), where a witness said, "Here's my testimony as to what happened."
In another case, two deputy reserve sheriffs had a conversation with U.S. Rep. Ernest Istook (R-Okla.) where Istook said that the government had "blown it" and that they knew about this impending bombing since about April 9 and that they had information about a radical Islamic extremist terrorist organization.
The deputy said to Istook, "Excuse me, sir?" Then the congressman repeated it all back to him again. When the deputy reserve officer gave his testimony to the FBI, the FBI agent said that he (the agent) was going to put it down [in a different way].
TV: It must have been tough for you to put Istook on the spot in this way, since he had been a longtime personal friend and fellow Republican political colleague.
CK: Yes, it was difficult.
TV: How would Istook have known about government foreknowledge of a possible attack on the building?
CK: He obviously had some information that was imparted to him. It's reasonable to speculate that since he was the congressman from that particular area he would have been told. In addition, it was known that Oklahoma City had the second largest population of Middle Eastern Islamic immigrants and that there was a mosque that was under surveillance by law enforcement several weeks before the bombing. Also, consider Jayna Davis's information about these Iraqi immigrants. Who knows what else? It's reasonable to speculate that a congressman from the area had been told something either officially or unofficially.
TV: Radio Free America used to be carried locally in Lawton, Okla., and Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) was on the program several times. I have visited with him in his office in Washington for several years.
Once when I visited him and asked him questions about the Oklahoma City bombing, I could see in his face that it was really painful and he didn't want to talk about it. I'm sure he knows a lot more than he will say and it's bothering him very much.
CK: Oh yes. We've got a lot of information that suggests that he definitely knows a whole lot. Inhofe is a good guy, though.
We can hope that some day Jim Inhofe will tell us what he knows. I doubt that Governor Frank Keating will ever do so.
I'd put my money on Inhofe, more so than the other guys. I'll only believe it when I see it when an elected official finally speaks out.
TV: McVeigh's attorney and others have alleged that the FBI falsified hundreds of their 302 witness report forms.
CK: We need to get the word out to enough people for them to become aware of how corrupt our federal government has become. It's not like we are indicting all federal employees. Far from it. It's simply that there's a high level of people inside some of these agencies who will do anything and they control the reins of power.
You have to wonder what their motivation is in keeping all of this under wraps. Even if it were a sting operation by the FBI or BATF that went bad, it wouldn't be so bad for them to admit it as it is for them to not tell us the truth. So for that very reason, I don't think it was simply a sting gone bad.
We keep getting a lot of new information as time goes by. I will tell you that we think we have found this Robert Jacques who has been the subject of a lot of government investigation. If our information is true and we believe that it is, the government may not have wanted to find that guy, just as they didn't want to find the other John Does.
TV: What about this group at Elohim City?
CK: I don't know really how much the people there were involved in this, except for Andreas Strassmeir, the West German. I'm convinced that this guy was a government agent. He was either working for our government or with the knowledge of our government.
TV: Is it possible that Strassmeir was somehow McVeigh's "handler," on behalf of the government or somebody?
CK: There's such a large body of information that we have received which indicates that Strassmeir was in direct contact with McVeigh up until the day of the bombing, at least the night before the bombing, and it would appear that yes, Strassmeir, was a "handler" of McVeigh. It would seem from this information that McVeigh didn't realize that until after the bombing.
TV: Is there any other information we should hear about at this point?
CK: Well, I must be very circumspect, at this juncture, but I was able to talk to a federal government official who told me how this whole Oklahoma City affair evolved. They told me that it was planned right after the Waco event as a sting operation by the BATF for publicity's sake-to make the BATF look good. So the genesis of it all was a sting. The person wasn't suggesting that it was a sting operation that went wrong.
Based on what I've learned, there appears to be a whole lot more at work. It was originally a sting, but there were two over-lapping operations. There was a group of other people, whatever their plan was, and they turned the tables on the folks who thought there was just a sting going on.
We have information that shows that there were efforts, in the early morning hours before the explosion, by bomb squads who came down, trying to locate the truck or the informant or someone. It appears they lost track of them as they were surveilling them, expecting them to come into the city.
The official report of the Oklahoma City Bombing Investigating Committee has not been released. Mr. Key, president of the committee, will give a comprehensive review of the report at The Barnes Review Second International Conference on Authentic His tory and the First Amendment in Wash ington, June 15. Copies of the report will be available at the conference.
- joeb
- Regular
- Posts: 3371
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:19 am
by joeb on Wed Aug 02, 2006 9:28 pm
Don’t believe the hype
Phony ‘terror plots’ mask U.S. war crimes
The following statement was issued by the New York City branch of the Party for Socialism and Liberation on July 10, 2006.
We have all seen the headlines. “Terror plot uncovered!” “Qaeda bomber behind plot to hit train tunnel.”
Child victims of U.S. massacre in Ishaqi, Iraq
Photo: Reuters/Reuters TV
After the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center, New Yorkers have a right to feel nervous. The U.S. government is waging a worldwide war, and that war came home.
But the screaming headlines of plots to blow up tunnels and trains are not written to make us feel safer. They are a cover to justify continued war and repression in the Middle East and right here in New York.
The most recent case—the alleged attempt to blow up PATH train stations linking New Jersey and New York City— was full of holes from the day it was announced. The supposed ringleader, Assem Hammoud, has been in jail since April 27 in Beirut, Lebanon. The “principal players” had no money and no weapons, and had never even been to the United States, much less New York City.
The government claims it broke up the attack before it started. But can we trust them?
The last “terrorist threat” was the June 22 arrest of seven Black men, including two Haitians, in Miami. They were supposedly trying to bomb the Chicago Sears Tower.
The seven were poor and had no means to carry out any attack. It was entrapment. They were set up and knocked down by an undercover FBI agent who whipped up the religious group, with no history of violence, into a fantastic plot—then had them all arrested. Puerto Ricans will be reminded of the 1978 case of Cerro Maravilla, where an FBI agent planned an attack on an electrical tower and provided two youths with explosives—then had the two independence supporters shot and executed.
Behind the hype: U.S. massacres
Why is the government putting out wild press statements every few weeks talking about supposed terror plots? To keep the public’s eyes off the real news—the murders and massacres carried out by U.S. troops in Iraq.
First there was the November 2005 Haditha massacre, when U.S. troops gunned down 24 Iraqi civilians—the youngest was a 2-year-old girl. In March, U.S. soldiers killed 11 civilians in Ishaqi, north of Baghdad. The victims ranged in age from 6 months to 75 years.
Then came the July 3 revelation that U.S. soldiers raped a 14-year-old girl, and then killed her and three other members of her family.
The government claims that these are “isolated incidents.” The reality is different. George Bush, Congress and the generals are waging a terror war against the people of Iraq.
Every one of these politicians and generals—from Bush on down—need to be on trial for war crimes, for crimes of terror against humanity.
Working people in New York have more in common with the people of Iraq than we do with the billionaires who are profiting from the criminal wars in the Middle East—the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan and the U.S.-backed Israeli repression against Palestine.
We can fight back. If working people join together against the corporate elite who rule this country for their own profit, we can end the war—and enjoy real peace and solidarity with the peoples of the world instead of living from one supposed terrorist threat to the next.
Phony ‘terror plots’ mask U.S. war crimes
The following statement was issued by the New York City branch of the Party for Socialism and Liberation on July 10, 2006.
We have all seen the headlines. “Terror plot uncovered!” “Qaeda bomber behind plot to hit train tunnel.”
Child victims of U.S. massacre in Ishaqi, Iraq
Photo: Reuters/Reuters TV
After the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center, New Yorkers have a right to feel nervous. The U.S. government is waging a worldwide war, and that war came home.
But the screaming headlines of plots to blow up tunnels and trains are not written to make us feel safer. They are a cover to justify continued war and repression in the Middle East and right here in New York.
The most recent case—the alleged attempt to blow up PATH train stations linking New Jersey and New York City— was full of holes from the day it was announced. The supposed ringleader, Assem Hammoud, has been in jail since April 27 in Beirut, Lebanon. The “principal players” had no money and no weapons, and had never even been to the United States, much less New York City.
The government claims it broke up the attack before it started. But can we trust them?
The last “terrorist threat” was the June 22 arrest of seven Black men, including two Haitians, in Miami. They were supposedly trying to bomb the Chicago Sears Tower.
The seven were poor and had no means to carry out any attack. It was entrapment. They were set up and knocked down by an undercover FBI agent who whipped up the religious group, with no history of violence, into a fantastic plot—then had them all arrested. Puerto Ricans will be reminded of the 1978 case of Cerro Maravilla, where an FBI agent planned an attack on an electrical tower and provided two youths with explosives—then had the two independence supporters shot and executed.
Behind the hype: U.S. massacres
Why is the government putting out wild press statements every few weeks talking about supposed terror plots? To keep the public’s eyes off the real news—the murders and massacres carried out by U.S. troops in Iraq.
First there was the November 2005 Haditha massacre, when U.S. troops gunned down 24 Iraqi civilians—the youngest was a 2-year-old girl. In March, U.S. soldiers killed 11 civilians in Ishaqi, north of Baghdad. The victims ranged in age from 6 months to 75 years.
Then came the July 3 revelation that U.S. soldiers raped a 14-year-old girl, and then killed her and three other members of her family.
The government claims that these are “isolated incidents.” The reality is different. George Bush, Congress and the generals are waging a terror war against the people of Iraq.
Every one of these politicians and generals—from Bush on down—need to be on trial for war crimes, for crimes of terror against humanity.
Working people in New York have more in common with the people of Iraq than we do with the billionaires who are profiting from the criminal wars in the Middle East—the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan and the U.S.-backed Israeli repression against Palestine.
We can fight back. If working people join together against the corporate elite who rule this country for their own profit, we can end the war—and enjoy real peace and solidarity with the peoples of the world instead of living from one supposed terrorist threat to the next.
- joeb
- Regular
- Posts: 3371
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:19 am
by Slaughtermeyer on Sun Sep 17, 2006 12:17 pm
I wonder why there's no mention of 9/11 as one of the crimes for which Osama bin Laden is wanted on Osama's most wanted poster on the official FBI website. Maybe someone high up in the FBI is on the side of 9/11 truth?
- Slaughtermeyer
- Regular
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 12:20 am
by joeb on Tue Nov 14, 2006 1:51 am
http://www.hnn.us/articles/31634.html
click link for full story
11-13-06
What Did the FBI Know About the Execution of Anna Mae Aquash?
By Steve Hendricks
Mr. Hendricks is the author of The Unquiet Grave: The FBI and the Struggle for the Soul of Indian Country, recently selected by Publishers Weekly as one of the 100 best books of 2006. His website is http://SteveHendricks.org.
On February 24, 1976, a Jane Doe was found frozen in the Badlands of South Dakota. In the story the FBI told, there was no sign of violence to the body, and an official autopsy found that she had died of exposure. The corpse was so decayed that fingerprints could not be taken at the autopsy, so, in an unusual procedure, the hands were chopped off and shipped to the FBI lab in Washington. A few days later, the rotting body had to be buried for the sake of public health. The grave was unmarked.
Hours after the interment, the FBI lab announced that the severed hands belonged to Anna Mae Aquash, a leader of the American Indian Movement (AIM) and nemesis of the FBI. Aquash’s friends and family, incredulous that the savvy Aquash had taken an underdressed midwinter stroll and succumbed, demanded the body be exhumed. It was, and seconds after seeing the body, a pathologist for the family found a grossly obvious entrance wound at the base of Aquash’s skull. Anna Mae Aquash had died of exposure, alright: exposure to a .32-caliber, copper-jacketed bullet.
In time it would emerge that the FBI had lied about whether police officers and FBI agents had seen the bullet wound, about the impossibility of taking her fingerprints in Dakota (and thus the need to dismember her), about the need to rush her corpse into the ground, and probably about whether agents knew all along that the Jane Doe was Aquash. Indians theorized that the FBI was lying to protect someone or something, perhaps an FBI operative who had been too close to the murder. It was not an irrational suspicion. The FBI had sent any number of spies and provocateurs into AIM, as it had with other activist groups of the era. The job of the provocateurs was to sow dissent, for example by spreading rumors that activists were informers. Often as not, the activists descended into finger-pointing and paranoia. Movements imploded. In some cases, people were killed. Aquash, long dogged with false rumors that she was an informer, appeared to be one such case.
It was this sorry history, or something like it, that Indians suspected the FBI wanted to keep hidden. As decades passed and the FBI failed to solve Aquash’s murder, the suspicion grew more potent. The FBI called the conjecture hogwash: its agents had no clue—almost literally—how Aquash had been killed. But documents I recently won from the FBI in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit say otherwise.
The documents, which I obtained for my new book, The Unquiet Grave: The FBI and the Struggle for the Soul of Indian Country, show that mere days after Aquash’s murder in late 1975, an informer in Denver told the FBI the details of the killing. AIM, the informer said, had kidnapped an Indian woman in Denver, driven her to South Dakota, interrogated her, and executed her. The informer even named the three triggermen—names the FBI will not release. Independent investigations would eventually show that the informer got the story pretty much right. The only key detail he left out was that the triggermen had acted at the behest of AIM leaders who had become paranoid about FBI infiltrators and ordered Aquash murdered.
The informer’s tip came to the FBI at a time when the bureau was doing everything in its power to cripple AIM. A few months earlier, two FBI agents were killed in a shootout with AIM, prompting the FBI to launch the largest investigation in its history. AIMers everywhere were probed and prosecuted for crimes large, small, and (in some instances) fabricated. Yet when the Denver informer told the FBI that AIM had committed a murder, the FBI apparently did nothing—nothing at all—with the tip. Later, after Aquash’s body was found, agents confirmed that the tip was accurate, but still they did nothing. The inaction is both stunning and damning: for decades the FBI had lied that it could not solve the murder because it had no good leads.
Lately the FBI has been trumpeting its progress in the case. In 2003 federal prosecutors indicted two of the three alleged triggermen. One, Arlo Looking Cloud, was convicted of killing Aquash in 2004, while the other, John Graham, is fighting extradition from Vancouver. (The third suspect is supposedly incapacitated by Alzheimer’s.) But the feds only brought the charges after lay investigators, angered at the FBI’s inaction, publicly named the triggermen in 1999. And even then, the government waited four years to bring the charges and still have brought none against any of the senior conspirators.
Was there an FBI operative among those conspirators? Is that why no charges have been brought against them? It isn’t certain. But two well-placed sources have said that one AIMer who took part in talks about Aquash’s fate had at least offered to spy for the FBI. Since this man was deeply involved with the AIMers who were wanted for killing the FBI agents, it is hard to imagine the FBI turned down his offer—if indeed he made one.
November is Native American Heritage Month. Instead of marking it with the usual limp paeans to Indian culture, perhaps Congress and the president could demand the FBI come clean about Aquash’s murder. It would be one small step to understanding how the FBI helped undermine the foremost Indian rights movement of the last century.
click link for full story
11-13-06
What Did the FBI Know About the Execution of Anna Mae Aquash?
By Steve Hendricks
Mr. Hendricks is the author of The Unquiet Grave: The FBI and the Struggle for the Soul of Indian Country, recently selected by Publishers Weekly as one of the 100 best books of 2006. His website is http://SteveHendricks.org.
On February 24, 1976, a Jane Doe was found frozen in the Badlands of South Dakota. In the story the FBI told, there was no sign of violence to the body, and an official autopsy found that she had died of exposure. The corpse was so decayed that fingerprints could not be taken at the autopsy, so, in an unusual procedure, the hands were chopped off and shipped to the FBI lab in Washington. A few days later, the rotting body had to be buried for the sake of public health. The grave was unmarked.
Hours after the interment, the FBI lab announced that the severed hands belonged to Anna Mae Aquash, a leader of the American Indian Movement (AIM) and nemesis of the FBI. Aquash’s friends and family, incredulous that the savvy Aquash had taken an underdressed midwinter stroll and succumbed, demanded the body be exhumed. It was, and seconds after seeing the body, a pathologist for the family found a grossly obvious entrance wound at the base of Aquash’s skull. Anna Mae Aquash had died of exposure, alright: exposure to a .32-caliber, copper-jacketed bullet.
In time it would emerge that the FBI had lied about whether police officers and FBI agents had seen the bullet wound, about the impossibility of taking her fingerprints in Dakota (and thus the need to dismember her), about the need to rush her corpse into the ground, and probably about whether agents knew all along that the Jane Doe was Aquash. Indians theorized that the FBI was lying to protect someone or something, perhaps an FBI operative who had been too close to the murder. It was not an irrational suspicion. The FBI had sent any number of spies and provocateurs into AIM, as it had with other activist groups of the era. The job of the provocateurs was to sow dissent, for example by spreading rumors that activists were informers. Often as not, the activists descended into finger-pointing and paranoia. Movements imploded. In some cases, people were killed. Aquash, long dogged with false rumors that she was an informer, appeared to be one such case.
It was this sorry history, or something like it, that Indians suspected the FBI wanted to keep hidden. As decades passed and the FBI failed to solve Aquash’s murder, the suspicion grew more potent. The FBI called the conjecture hogwash: its agents had no clue—almost literally—how Aquash had been killed. But documents I recently won from the FBI in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit say otherwise.
The documents, which I obtained for my new book, The Unquiet Grave: The FBI and the Struggle for the Soul of Indian Country, show that mere days after Aquash’s murder in late 1975, an informer in Denver told the FBI the details of the killing. AIM, the informer said, had kidnapped an Indian woman in Denver, driven her to South Dakota, interrogated her, and executed her. The informer even named the three triggermen—names the FBI will not release. Independent investigations would eventually show that the informer got the story pretty much right. The only key detail he left out was that the triggermen had acted at the behest of AIM leaders who had become paranoid about FBI infiltrators and ordered Aquash murdered.
The informer’s tip came to the FBI at a time when the bureau was doing everything in its power to cripple AIM. A few months earlier, two FBI agents were killed in a shootout with AIM, prompting the FBI to launch the largest investigation in its history. AIMers everywhere were probed and prosecuted for crimes large, small, and (in some instances) fabricated. Yet when the Denver informer told the FBI that AIM had committed a murder, the FBI apparently did nothing—nothing at all—with the tip. Later, after Aquash’s body was found, agents confirmed that the tip was accurate, but still they did nothing. The inaction is both stunning and damning: for decades the FBI had lied that it could not solve the murder because it had no good leads.
Lately the FBI has been trumpeting its progress in the case. In 2003 federal prosecutors indicted two of the three alleged triggermen. One, Arlo Looking Cloud, was convicted of killing Aquash in 2004, while the other, John Graham, is fighting extradition from Vancouver. (The third suspect is supposedly incapacitated by Alzheimer’s.) But the feds only brought the charges after lay investigators, angered at the FBI’s inaction, publicly named the triggermen in 1999. And even then, the government waited four years to bring the charges and still have brought none against any of the senior conspirators.
Was there an FBI operative among those conspirators? Is that why no charges have been brought against them? It isn’t certain. But two well-placed sources have said that one AIMer who took part in talks about Aquash’s fate had at least offered to spy for the FBI. Since this man was deeply involved with the AIMers who were wanted for killing the FBI agents, it is hard to imagine the FBI turned down his offer—if indeed he made one.
November is Native American Heritage Month. Instead of marking it with the usual limp paeans to Indian culture, perhaps Congress and the president could demand the FBI come clean about Aquash’s murder. It would be one small step to understanding how the FBI helped undermine the foremost Indian rights movement of the last century.
- joeb
- Regular
- Posts: 3371
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:19 am
by joeb on Sat Nov 18, 2006 12:49 am
Judge sets trial date for cops charged in beating 64-year-old
November 17, 2006
NEW ORLEANS: Two former New Orleans police officers charged with second-degree battery in a beating videotaped last year in the French Quarter are scheduled for trial March 12.
An officer who is still on the force will be tried March 14 on a misdemeanor charge of simple battery against an Associated Press Television News producer. The APTN cameraman with him taped both confrontations.
State District Judge Frank Marullo said he wanted fired officers Robert Evangelist and Lance Schilling tried before he hears the case of Officer Stewart Smith to avoid the chance that reports about Smith's case might affect the former officers' jury in the felony case.
He also said attorneys should subpoena two FBI agents who were present when Robert Davis, 64, a retired teacher, was arrested and beaten. Prosecutors dropped charges against Davis in April.
Franz Zibilich, who represents Schilling, asked about the FBI agents during Friday's hearing.
"If they were involved, why weren't they charged?" Marullo asked.
Dustin Davis, the assistant district attorney handling the case said evidence indicated that, although the agents "did participate to a certain degree," they did not commit any crime.
"It seems to me that's at least the definition of a principal" to a crime, Zibilich said. He said he wanted to see if the agents' statements — and any internal investigation by the FBI — might tend to clear his client.
FBI officials in New Orleans were not immediately available for comment when called Friday afternoon.
The beating was recorded a few weeks after Hurricane Katrina, which struck New Orleans Aug. 29, 2005.
Robert Davis had returned to New Orleans to check his property. He said he was looking for a place to buy cigarettes in the French Quarter when police grabbed him. The Oct. 8, 2005, beating was videotaped by an APTN crew covering the aftermath of the hurricane.
The tape shows an officer hitting Davis at least four times on the head. Davis twisted and flailed as he was dragged to the ground. One officer kneed Davis and punched him twice. The tape also showed Davis lying on the sidewalk, blood flowing from his wounds into the gutter.
Evangelist and Schilling were fired after the beating. In addition to the second-degree battery charge, Evangelist also was charged with false imprisonment with a weapon.
Smith was suspended for 120 days, then returned to work.
After the beating, Davis was booked on municipal charges of public intoxication, resisting arrest, battery on a police officer and public intimidation — all of which were later dropped. "I haven't had a drink in 25 years," Davis said in an interview earlier this year.
November 17, 2006
NEW ORLEANS: Two former New Orleans police officers charged with second-degree battery in a beating videotaped last year in the French Quarter are scheduled for trial March 12.
An officer who is still on the force will be tried March 14 on a misdemeanor charge of simple battery against an Associated Press Television News producer. The APTN cameraman with him taped both confrontations.
State District Judge Frank Marullo said he wanted fired officers Robert Evangelist and Lance Schilling tried before he hears the case of Officer Stewart Smith to avoid the chance that reports about Smith's case might affect the former officers' jury in the felony case.
He also said attorneys should subpoena two FBI agents who were present when Robert Davis, 64, a retired teacher, was arrested and beaten. Prosecutors dropped charges against Davis in April.
Franz Zibilich, who represents Schilling, asked about the FBI agents during Friday's hearing.
"If they were involved, why weren't they charged?" Marullo asked.
Dustin Davis, the assistant district attorney handling the case said evidence indicated that, although the agents "did participate to a certain degree," they did not commit any crime.
"It seems to me that's at least the definition of a principal" to a crime, Zibilich said. He said he wanted to see if the agents' statements — and any internal investigation by the FBI — might tend to clear his client.
FBI officials in New Orleans were not immediately available for comment when called Friday afternoon.
The beating was recorded a few weeks after Hurricane Katrina, which struck New Orleans Aug. 29, 2005.
Robert Davis had returned to New Orleans to check his property. He said he was looking for a place to buy cigarettes in the French Quarter when police grabbed him. The Oct. 8, 2005, beating was videotaped by an APTN crew covering the aftermath of the hurricane.
The tape shows an officer hitting Davis at least four times on the head. Davis twisted and flailed as he was dragged to the ground. One officer kneed Davis and punched him twice. The tape also showed Davis lying on the sidewalk, blood flowing from his wounds into the gutter.
Evangelist and Schilling were fired after the beating. In addition to the second-degree battery charge, Evangelist also was charged with false imprisonment with a weapon.
Smith was suspended for 120 days, then returned to work.
After the beating, Davis was booked on municipal charges of public intoxication, resisting arrest, battery on a police officer and public intimidation — all of which were later dropped. "I haven't had a drink in 25 years," Davis said in an interview earlier this year.
- joeb
- Regular
- Posts: 3371
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:19 am
by joeb on Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:10 pm
Background checks stalled grandmother's application
By Kelly Thornton
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
November 22, 2006
Fadumo Dirir wasn't troubled to be at the end of a line of more than 1,000 immigrants slowly making their way into Golden Hall yesterday to take the oath of citizenship.
SCOTT LINNETT / Union-Tribune
Fadumo Dirir and more than 1,000 immigrants swore their allegiance and became U.S. citizens yesterday at Golden Hall.
The two-hour wait was nothing compared with the years she'd been in limbo, wondering if this day would ever come.
Dirir, a 78-year-old grandmother from war-torn Somalia, held a small American flag in one hand as she raised the other to swear allegiance to her new country at the concourse in downtown San Diego.
“I'm very excited,” Dirir said, using her niece as an interpreter. “I feel happy today because I'm a citizen in America, because America has done a lot of favors for me.”
Dirir was sworn in about two months after she filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government in San Diego federal court over the prolonged FBI background checks that delayed her citizenship for more than three years.
Dirir was one of nine plaintiffs in the San Diego case. All are from Somalia and all were told in letters from the immigration service that they must wait indefinitely to pass an FBI “name check” mandated after the Sept. 11 attacks.
Advertisement
They had been waiting between 10 months and three years after their citizenship interviews, according to the suit.
By law, immigration officials either must grant or deny a citizenship application within 120 days after a petitioner's interview and English and history exams. If it takes longer, an applicant can petition a federal judge to force a decision.
In Dirir's case, a judge never had to intervene. She was notified about a week ago that she had been approved to take part in yesterday's ceremony.
Dirir and three of the other plaintiffs – Zawahir Ali, Abdirizak Yusuf and Abshir Hassan – were granted citizenship at the ceremony, and another is scheduled to receive the coveted benefit Dec. 13, said their lawyer, Mahir Sherif. The four remaining cases are pending.
“It would have never happened without the lawsuit,” Sherif said. “I am thrilled that I could fulfill the yearning of these people to become U.S. citizens. To play a role in that process is something I never dreamed of.”
Dirir lived a life of hardship before coming to the United States in 1993.
She watched her husband die of a heart attack while the family walked across Somalia to escape civil war. A son and daughter-in-law were shot to death in front of her by warlords. As violence raged, she was separated from some of her 10 children and ended up at refugee camps in Africa.
Once safely in the United States, Dirir applied for citizenship in 1998. She passed the interview and history and English tests three years ago.
Dirir's lawsuit is one of a growing number by immigrants nationwide who are suing to expedite citizenship applications. Many of the them are desperate to gain citizenship because time is running out on benefits.
Many are about to lose – or already have lost – benefits under the Supplemental Security Income program, which allows blind, elderly or disabled refugees and other noncitizens who are legal residents to receive benefits for no more than seven years.
After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the FBI was asked to conduct additional background checks. Those who apply for citizenship must undergo two types of checks: fingerprint and name checks. Immigration officials said 80 percent of background checks are completed in two weeks, and 99 percent are finished within six months.
The remaining 1 percent of applicants – like Dirir – are those whose names triggered a red flag. Sometimes the person has a common name, or one that matches a name on a watch list, said Marie Sebrechts, spokeswoman for Citizenship and Immigration Services. The service has a responsibility to be vigilant in protecting Americans.
It's unclear why Dirir's name prompted further background investigations. Sherif speculated that it could have a religious connection.
“After 9/11 I'm sure there has been a reluctance on behalf of immigration officials to grant citizenship to Muslims for a number of reasons,” Sherif said. “I'm sure the agents don't want to be the one that makes a mistake and grants citizenship to that one potential terrorist. They're paralyzed, I think.”
Yesterday, Dirir wore a wide smile, red fingernail polish, a special dark-green head scarf with shimmering gold beads and a black, floor-length dress underneath.
Most family members were working and couldn't join her, but she brought the niece along to share the moment.
Before the swearing-in, Dirir used her asthma inhaler as she walked slowly to the end of the line, which snaked around the block.
When finally inside, she found herself in yet another line. But again she was undaunted. She checked in, picked up her American flag and found a seat.
She said she can't wait to vote and travel freely as a U.S. citizen.
By Kelly Thornton
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
November 22, 2006
Fadumo Dirir wasn't troubled to be at the end of a line of more than 1,000 immigrants slowly making their way into Golden Hall yesterday to take the oath of citizenship.
SCOTT LINNETT / Union-Tribune
Fadumo Dirir and more than 1,000 immigrants swore their allegiance and became U.S. citizens yesterday at Golden Hall.
The two-hour wait was nothing compared with the years she'd been in limbo, wondering if this day would ever come.
Dirir, a 78-year-old grandmother from war-torn Somalia, held a small American flag in one hand as she raised the other to swear allegiance to her new country at the concourse in downtown San Diego.
“I'm very excited,” Dirir said, using her niece as an interpreter. “I feel happy today because I'm a citizen in America, because America has done a lot of favors for me.”
Dirir was sworn in about two months after she filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government in San Diego federal court over the prolonged FBI background checks that delayed her citizenship for more than three years.
Dirir was one of nine plaintiffs in the San Diego case. All are from Somalia and all were told in letters from the immigration service that they must wait indefinitely to pass an FBI “name check” mandated after the Sept. 11 attacks.
Advertisement
They had been waiting between 10 months and three years after their citizenship interviews, according to the suit.
By law, immigration officials either must grant or deny a citizenship application within 120 days after a petitioner's interview and English and history exams. If it takes longer, an applicant can petition a federal judge to force a decision.
In Dirir's case, a judge never had to intervene. She was notified about a week ago that she had been approved to take part in yesterday's ceremony.
Dirir and three of the other plaintiffs – Zawahir Ali, Abdirizak Yusuf and Abshir Hassan – were granted citizenship at the ceremony, and another is scheduled to receive the coveted benefit Dec. 13, said their lawyer, Mahir Sherif. The four remaining cases are pending.
“It would have never happened without the lawsuit,” Sherif said. “I am thrilled that I could fulfill the yearning of these people to become U.S. citizens. To play a role in that process is something I never dreamed of.”
Dirir lived a life of hardship before coming to the United States in 1993.
She watched her husband die of a heart attack while the family walked across Somalia to escape civil war. A son and daughter-in-law were shot to death in front of her by warlords. As violence raged, she was separated from some of her 10 children and ended up at refugee camps in Africa.
Once safely in the United States, Dirir applied for citizenship in 1998. She passed the interview and history and English tests three years ago.
Dirir's lawsuit is one of a growing number by immigrants nationwide who are suing to expedite citizenship applications. Many of the them are desperate to gain citizenship because time is running out on benefits.
Many are about to lose – or already have lost – benefits under the Supplemental Security Income program, which allows blind, elderly or disabled refugees and other noncitizens who are legal residents to receive benefits for no more than seven years.
After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the FBI was asked to conduct additional background checks. Those who apply for citizenship must undergo two types of checks: fingerprint and name checks. Immigration officials said 80 percent of background checks are completed in two weeks, and 99 percent are finished within six months.
The remaining 1 percent of applicants – like Dirir – are those whose names triggered a red flag. Sometimes the person has a common name, or one that matches a name on a watch list, said Marie Sebrechts, spokeswoman for Citizenship and Immigration Services. The service has a responsibility to be vigilant in protecting Americans.
It's unclear why Dirir's name prompted further background investigations. Sherif speculated that it could have a religious connection.
“After 9/11 I'm sure there has been a reluctance on behalf of immigration officials to grant citizenship to Muslims for a number of reasons,” Sherif said. “I'm sure the agents don't want to be the one that makes a mistake and grants citizenship to that one potential terrorist. They're paralyzed, I think.”
Yesterday, Dirir wore a wide smile, red fingernail polish, a special dark-green head scarf with shimmering gold beads and a black, floor-length dress underneath.
Most family members were working and couldn't join her, but she brought the niece along to share the moment.
Before the swearing-in, Dirir used her asthma inhaler as she walked slowly to the end of the line, which snaked around the block.
When finally inside, she found herself in yet another line. But again she was undaunted. She checked in, picked up her American flag and found a seat.
She said she can't wait to vote and travel freely as a U.S. citizen.
- joeb
- Regular
- Posts: 3371
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:19 am
by joeb on Wed Nov 29, 2006 5:44 pm
Ex-FBI leader's sentencing is postponed (5:41 p.m.)
By Louie Gilot / El Paso Times
Article Launched:11/28/2006 05:31:03 PM MST
The sentencing for former FBI special agent in charge in El Paso Hardrick Crawford was postponed to Dec. 18, according to court documents.
It was scheduled for Wednesday.
Crawford was convicted in federal court of making false statements to investigators looking into his friendship with a Juárez racetrack owner suspected of drug trafficking and money laundering.
Crawford could get probation but he could also get up to five years in prison and be fined $250,000 for each count, officials have said.
By Louie Gilot / El Paso Times
Article Launched:11/28/2006 05:31:03 PM MST
The sentencing for former FBI special agent in charge in El Paso Hardrick Crawford was postponed to Dec. 18, according to court documents.
It was scheduled for Wednesday.
Crawford was convicted in federal court of making false statements to investigators looking into his friendship with a Juárez racetrack owner suspected of drug trafficking and money laundering.
Crawford could get probation but he could also get up to five years in prison and be fined $250,000 for each count, officials have said.
- joeb
- Regular
- Posts: 3371
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:19 am
by joeb on Thu Nov 30, 2006 4:56 pm
Posted on Thu, Nov. 30, 2006
COLOMBIA
DEA data leaks by Colombian official alleged
BY GERARDO REYES
El Nuevo Herald
BOGOTA - The former director of Colombia's FBI, known as DAS, ordered that information compromising agents of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration be leaked to drug traffickers, former DAS official Rafael García has told government investigators.
García, once chief of DAS' computer systems, confirmed to El Nuevo Herald in a telephone interview from prison that he has told Supreme Court investigators that Jorge Noguera ordered him to deliver the information to the traffickers.
''I carried the information in hard disks or in USB memory, per instructions from Noguera,'' said García, who this month was sentenced to 18 years in prison for corruption.
García has made several allegations against Noguera, who resigned from the DAS last year. Prosecutors are investigating Noguera, but he has been out of the country.
According to García, he delivered the top-secret information to intermediaries for Rodrigo Tovar Pupo, an alleged trafficker and one of the top leaders of Colombia's illegal paramilitary groups.
García said he specifically remembered delivering details of a vast operation being prepared by the DEA, together with Colombian antidrug agencies, to tap the telephones of drug traffickers.
He delivered the information from late 2002 until late 2004, García said, when he was fired from the DAS on charges that he had deleted the records of drug traffickers from DAS computers.
While testifying before the Supreme Court, García said that Noguera ''almost made me feel that [Colombian President Alvaro Uribe] knew of and approved what we were doing,'' according to records.
Uribe has denied knowing of the alleged DAS corruption.
Noguera, who is now in the United States, last week declared through his lawyer that he does not have the financial means to return to Colombia to face the charges filed by prosecutors on the basis of García's accusations.
COLOMBIA
DEA data leaks by Colombian official alleged
BY GERARDO REYES
El Nuevo Herald
BOGOTA - The former director of Colombia's FBI, known as DAS, ordered that information compromising agents of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration be leaked to drug traffickers, former DAS official Rafael García has told government investigators.
García, once chief of DAS' computer systems, confirmed to El Nuevo Herald in a telephone interview from prison that he has told Supreme Court investigators that Jorge Noguera ordered him to deliver the information to the traffickers.
''I carried the information in hard disks or in USB memory, per instructions from Noguera,'' said García, who this month was sentenced to 18 years in prison for corruption.
García has made several allegations against Noguera, who resigned from the DAS last year. Prosecutors are investigating Noguera, but he has been out of the country.
According to García, he delivered the top-secret information to intermediaries for Rodrigo Tovar Pupo, an alleged trafficker and one of the top leaders of Colombia's illegal paramilitary groups.
García said he specifically remembered delivering details of a vast operation being prepared by the DEA, together with Colombian antidrug agencies, to tap the telephones of drug traffickers.
He delivered the information from late 2002 until late 2004, García said, when he was fired from the DAS on charges that he had deleted the records of drug traffickers from DAS computers.
While testifying before the Supreme Court, García said that Noguera ''almost made me feel that [Colombian President Alvaro Uribe] knew of and approved what we were doing,'' according to records.
Uribe has denied knowing of the alleged DAS corruption.
Noguera, who is now in the United States, last week declared through his lawyer that he does not have the financial means to return to Colombia to face the charges filed by prosecutors on the basis of García's accusations.
- joeb
- Regular
- Posts: 3371
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:19 am
by joeb on Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:02 pm
NAIROBI - 6 March 2007 - 640 words
Kenya: FBI agents fail to attend inquest of murdered priest
Francis Njuguna
The inquest into the death of Fr John Kaiser, which was scheduled to re-open yesterday in Nairobi, did not take place, as three witnesses from the American FBI failed to appear.
The three senior FBI officers are: Tom Neer, a specialist in behavioral analysis; Dr Vincent Di Maio, a forensics specialist; and Bill Corbett, who has worked in counter terrorism.
When the inquest resumed briefly, Kenyan senior state counsel, Mungai Warui said the three officers had communicated early last month that they would be in Nairobi on 5 March, to testify at the inquest. But last week the FBI, sent a note saying that the would not be available to attend, due to "other unforeseeable assignments" the senior state counsel, explained to the principal magistrate, Maureen Odero. He said they would only be available in "mid March"".
Ms Odero said: "Mid March is a bit vague. We cannot keep on waiting for them as they keep putting up new dates. They need to be concrete as to when they can avail themselves for us, for we are running short of time and we cannot wait for ever".
She ordered the senior state counsel to communicate with the FBI and request the officers to appear on 19 March, when the inquest would resume.
Defence lawyer for the Catholic Church, the Mill Hill Order and the family of the late Kaiser, Mbuthi Gathenji, complained that the FBI seemed to be continually putting off coming to Nairobi to testify.
He said: "I'm not happy with the way, the FBI keeps on giving us new dates. They have failed to honour this court. We might be forced to seek for diplomatic powers of intervention to have them in Nairobi."
Mr Gathenji said the inquest would close immediately the FBI testifies.
Father Kaiser, a 67-year-old priest, worked in Kenya for 36 years. His advocacy for human rights led to his expulsion from the country in 1999, but the government revoked its decision after an outcry in the Kenyan media and appeals from the country's bishops.
On 23 August, 2000, Fr Kaiser was found shot dead at Morendat, 85 kilometers northwest of Nairobi. Newpaper reports said he had angered some members of the Moi government after testifying against two Cabinet ministers in an inquiry on tribal clashes.
The first police officers on the scene thought he had been murdered, but in 2001 the FBI ruled his death a suicide, and the Kenyan government agreed.
The Kenyan Bishops' Conference almost immediately dismissed the FBI results and questioned why it considered the information of only the government pathologist, not the three additional doctors it had sent to the scene to collect evidence. They said that, based on ballistics reports, suicide was a physical impossibility as the bullets had been fired from some distance behind him.
The bishops said that if Father Kaiser committed suicide he "involved himself in rather difficult contortions while in the process."
They said that, although a doctor's report said Father Kaiser had bloody finger marks inside his pants pockets, the FBI failed to explain how he got his hands into the pockets after allegedly blowing off his head. They also said no reasons were given as to why photographs taken from the crime scene were blurred, and no explanation was given as to why fingerprints were found on the priest's vehicle but not on the gun.
Moi lost the presidential election in December 2002, after 24 years in office. Several months later the Kenyan government ordered the inquest.
© Independent Catholic News 2007
Contact Independent Catholic News tel/fax: +44 (0)20 7267 3616 or email
Back to World News
Kenya: FBI agents fail to attend inquest of murdered priest
Francis Njuguna
The inquest into the death of Fr John Kaiser, which was scheduled to re-open yesterday in Nairobi, did not take place, as three witnesses from the American FBI failed to appear.
The three senior FBI officers are: Tom Neer, a specialist in behavioral analysis; Dr Vincent Di Maio, a forensics specialist; and Bill Corbett, who has worked in counter terrorism.
When the inquest resumed briefly, Kenyan senior state counsel, Mungai Warui said the three officers had communicated early last month that they would be in Nairobi on 5 March, to testify at the inquest. But last week the FBI, sent a note saying that the would not be available to attend, due to "other unforeseeable assignments" the senior state counsel, explained to the principal magistrate, Maureen Odero. He said they would only be available in "mid March"".
Ms Odero said: "Mid March is a bit vague. We cannot keep on waiting for them as they keep putting up new dates. They need to be concrete as to when they can avail themselves for us, for we are running short of time and we cannot wait for ever".
She ordered the senior state counsel to communicate with the FBI and request the officers to appear on 19 March, when the inquest would resume.
Defence lawyer for the Catholic Church, the Mill Hill Order and the family of the late Kaiser, Mbuthi Gathenji, complained that the FBI seemed to be continually putting off coming to Nairobi to testify.
He said: "I'm not happy with the way, the FBI keeps on giving us new dates. They have failed to honour this court. We might be forced to seek for diplomatic powers of intervention to have them in Nairobi."
Mr Gathenji said the inquest would close immediately the FBI testifies.
Father Kaiser, a 67-year-old priest, worked in Kenya for 36 years. His advocacy for human rights led to his expulsion from the country in 1999, but the government revoked its decision after an outcry in the Kenyan media and appeals from the country's bishops.
On 23 August, 2000, Fr Kaiser was found shot dead at Morendat, 85 kilometers northwest of Nairobi. Newpaper reports said he had angered some members of the Moi government after testifying against two Cabinet ministers in an inquiry on tribal clashes.
The first police officers on the scene thought he had been murdered, but in 2001 the FBI ruled his death a suicide, and the Kenyan government agreed.
The Kenyan Bishops' Conference almost immediately dismissed the FBI results and questioned why it considered the information of only the government pathologist, not the three additional doctors it had sent to the scene to collect evidence. They said that, based on ballistics reports, suicide was a physical impossibility as the bullets had been fired from some distance behind him.
The bishops said that if Father Kaiser committed suicide he "involved himself in rather difficult contortions while in the process."
They said that, although a doctor's report said Father Kaiser had bloody finger marks inside his pants pockets, the FBI failed to explain how he got his hands into the pockets after allegedly blowing off his head. They also said no reasons were given as to why photographs taken from the crime scene were blurred, and no explanation was given as to why fingerprints were found on the priest's vehicle but not on the gun.
Moi lost the presidential election in December 2002, after 24 years in office. Several months later the Kenyan government ordered the inquest.
© Independent Catholic News 2007
Contact Independent Catholic News tel/fax: +44 (0)20 7267 3616 or email
Back to World News
- joeb
- Regular
- Posts: 3371
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:19 am
by joeb on Thu May 17, 2007 4:48 am
News and Views for British Columbia
Submit email
Views
Today: Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Delivering 'Framed' John Graham
Graham at home in Yukon
He faces a US murder warrant. New evidence suggests he's the victim of smears.
By Rex Weyler
Published: May 16, 2007
email this article print this story
TheTyee.ca
On Thursday, Tuchone-Canadian John Graham, from the Yukon, enters a Vancouver courtroom to appeal his extradition to the United States on the charge of killing fellow activist Anna Mae Aquash 31 years ago. Graham says he has been framed by the U.S. to cover the government's own complicity in the murder.
Meanwhile, a week ago, a former UBC professor and Amnesty International veteran, Dr. Jennifer Wade, received a chilling letter from U.S. prisoner Leonard Peltier that lends credibility to Graham's story. In April, former American Indian Movement (AIM) member Bob Robideau toured B.C., claiming to represent Peltier and accusing Graham of the murder. The Peltier letter casts doubt on Robideau's claims.
Background in Indian Country
In the 1970s, Graham from Yukon and Aquash from Nova Scotia traveled independently to South Dakota, where vigilantes had killed literally hundreds of traditional native leaders. Some 300 murders of native people in and around South Dakota's Pine Ridge Reservation, during a "reign of terror" in the 1970s, remain unsolved. The FBI arrested Aquash many times and urged her to become an informant. She later told AIM lawyers that agent David Price threatened that if she did not cooperate "you won't live out the year." A South Dakota rancher found her body on February 24, 1976.
Although she had been shot with .32 calibre bullet in the back of the head, an FBI pathologist reported that she died of exposure. FBI agent Price claimed not to recognize her, and the government buried her in a nameless pauper's grave after severing her hands. When the body was later exhumed, the FBI story unraveled. Now, 31 years later, they claim AIM ordered the murder and that Graham pulled the trigger. Naturally, many native leaders suspect dirty tricks.
Dark forces or goofballs?
In March and April 2007, Bob Robideau toured British Columbia. He claimed to represent the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee, but his public events appeared designed to denounce John Graham. Robideau repeatedly accused Graham of murder, claimed to know who "ordered the execution" and created unrest among local native groups. Robideau avoided established Peltier supporters and local First Nations groups. His tour was sponsored by the "Indigenous Rights Action Project" (IRAP), which has few, if any, actual indigenous members, and is linked to "Fire this Time" (FTT), a group with its own history of disrupting B.C. progressive organizations.
ADVERTISEMENT
Check out Tyee's Book section.
I attended a UBC "forum" staged by IRAP on March 30, 2007. Lyn Highway -- from the Vancouver Native Youth Movement and Anishnabeg Outreach program, which helps secure education and employment for aboriginal youth -- confronted Robideau and IRAP representative Aaron Mercredi. She accused Mercredi of being a "dupe," and accused Robideau of being a "traitor to his people" and "a rat." She told Robideau: "You are a collaborator. You are working with the FBI. You are spreading divisiveness, suspicion and demoralization." Robideau shoved Ms. Highway against a wall, and Mercredi called the police, who arrested Ms. Highway for disrupting the forum.
I asked Robideau to explain on what evidence he accused Mr. Graham of murder. Robideau called me a "white man," true, and a "pig." He offered no evidence and ordered me to leave. I stayed and asked several more questions about his claims concerning Graham. Later, in an e-mail, I asked Robideau what he would say in his defence against Ms. Highway's accusations that he was a "rat." Robideau wrote that those "like you" at the forum, including Ms. Highway, "cast the shadow of guilt in your community over Graham. With individuals such as yourself I simply need to appear on the scene, and all of the work you accuse me of doing will be assured by you and the other screaming women."
Dr. Jennifer Wade attended the forum and reported, "Robideau had nothing new or interesting to say about Leonard Peltier. Rather, he seemed determined to prejudice Canadian opinion against John Graham, whose life hangs in the balance." Wade suspected Robideau of "misrepresenting his role within the Peltier defense team." She wrote to Peltier in his U.S. prison to ask him about Robideau.
Peltier's response, written on April 18 and received by Wade on May 10 is unequivocal: "Do I support Bob [Robideau] in his efforts to get John [Graham] railroaded into prison? Hell No! . . . if the truth be known he did not even know her. . . . You will notice Bob does not go and make these statements on Pine Ridge or anywhere in Indian Country. He would get his ass beat down bad! A dry snitch is just as bad as a snitch! And that is what he is doing, dry snitching, saying shit he has no proof of." In prison jargon, a "dry snitch" refers to someone who is misguided, has been duped, or is serving the government's prosecutorial interests out of ignorance.
I phoned Aaron Mercredi of IRAP, who hosted the tour, and asked him about his relationship with Robideau. "I won't talk to you about this," he said and hung up. Wade believes Robideau's tour was intended to prejudice the Canadian court case this week in Vancouver. Wade speaks from experience. She attended the extradition hearing of Leonard Peltier 31 years ago in Vancouver and raised the same concerns.
Fabricating evidence
In 1976 the U.S. successfully extradited Leonard Peltier from Canada using affidavits signed by one Myrtle Poor Bear from Pine Ridge. These affidavits were later proven, in a U.S. courtroom, to be fabricated. Poor Bear -- a destitute single mother, who suffered clinical psychosis and depression -- testified in court that FBI agent Price kidnapped her, held her in a hotel room, threatened her children, and intimidated her into signing three false and self-contradictory affidavits. She told the court that Price showed her pictures of the dead Aquash and told her, "if I didn't do what they said, I'd be dead like Anna Mae Aquash." Nevertheless, on this "evidence" Canada sent Peltier to the U.S.
Justice minister at the time, Ron Basford, signed the extradition order on December 18, 1976. His boss, former solicitor general Warren Allmand acknowledged later that the extradition was based on completely phony evidence and he formally apologized, first in Macleans magazine in 1979, and many times thereafter. Nevertheless, Peltier remains in a U.S. jail. He wrote in his letter to Wade, "It looks more and more every day that I will die in prison."
Due to similar phony evidence submitted by the U.S. in the Graham case, Wade wrote a letter to Warren Allmand this week. "Canada seems about to make another mistake by allowing John Graham to be extradited on May 17. Please do what you can to prevent this from happening to help make right the wrong that was done Peltier when you were Solicitor General for Canada in 1976."
Dead witness
Graham's attorney, Terry LaLiberte has already shown in a Canadian courtroom that U.S. Attorney Robert Mandel, who filed the U.S. request to extradite Graham, presented spurious evidence. In a letter dated January 26, 2004, Mandel assured Canada that "the evidence . . . is available for trial."
For witness number one, Mandel told Canada that spiritual leader and elder Al Gates would testify that Graham was present at the murder. This is false. Mr. Gates had been dead for nine months when Mr. Mandel put his name forward.
Arlo Looking Cloud, the only alleged witness to Aquash's murder, says the FBI induced him with heroin and alcohol to give a false statement. He now insists he will not testify against Graham. A third witness, Frank Dillon, has denied making any incriminating statements against Graham, and claims Mandel's letter misrepresented him.
LaLiberte and Graham have said they would welcome a trial in Canada, where the fake evidence could be exposed. LaLiberte says he wants Mandel to explain in court the gaps, misrepresentations, and flaws in the extradition request. "In Canada," says LaLiberte, "I could drive a truck through the holes in this case."
Leonard Peltier believes, as he states in his letter: "He [Mr. Graham] will not receive a fair trial if he is returned."
The extradition agreement with the US
In the Vancouver courtroom on Thursday, LaLiberte will ask the court for a new hearing, based on a Supreme Court of Canada decision that suggests our extradition treaty with the U.S. conflicts with the Charter of Rights and may put any Canadian at risk.
LaLiberte says that during Graham's first hearing, before Justice Elizabeth Bennett in December 2003, "Justice Bennett felt that the U.S. request for extradition was unsatisfactory, as we showed, but she also felt constrained by the extradition law since she had no authority to actually review the evidence."
Our extradition treaty gives the U.S. the authority to seize any Canadian citizen on the mere say-so of a U.S. Attorney. The U.S. is only required to deliver a summary of evidence, and case history has traditionally denied Canadian courts the right to investigate the evidence or confirm its accuracy.
"However," LaLiberte points out, "the case law has changed. The Canadian Supreme Court has broadened the scope. An extradition hearing is no longer just a rubber stamp process."
Supreme Court challenges extradition treaty
In July of 2006, Canada's Supreme Court, with Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin presiding, expressed concerns that the Extradition Law, as it stands, may violate the Charter of Rights. In a case brought to the court by attorney Edward Greenspan, the court established a new test for judges when deciding whether or not an accused should be sent to the U.S.
The court stated that evidence to extradite must amount to a case that could go to trial in Canada and potentially result in a guilty verdict. In common language: No dead witnesses, no intimidated witnesses, and no phony affidavits. The court ruled that "This may require the extradition judge to engage in limited weighing of the evidence."
Justice McLachlin also wrote that the extradition process must be "independent in appearance and in substance" and "must provide real protection against extradition in the absence of an adequate case against the person sought." John Graham and his attorney LaLiberte would welcome a new hearing under these conditions.
As Bertolt Brecht once remarked about the absurdity of the world: "In the contradiction lies the hope."
John Graham's appeal hearing is Thursday May 17th, 9 a.m., at the B.C. Law Courts, 800 Smithe Street, Vancouver.
More reading on this topic:
* "Who killed Anna Mae Aquash?"
by Rex Weyler, Vancouver Sun, January 8, 2005
* Noam Chomsky on John Graham's threatened extradition from Vancouver
* Bob Newbrook, attending officer at Leonard Peltier's arrest raises doubts about John Graham's arrest
Rex Weyler first covered the Peltier and Aquash cases for the New Age Journal in the 1980s. His book, Blood of the Land, about U.S. and Canadian aboriginal movements received a Pulitzer Prize nomination in 1984. His most recent book, Greenpeace, was a 2004 finalist for the Shaughnessy-Cohen Award for Political Writing. He lives in Vancouver.
Submit email
Views
Today: Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Delivering 'Framed' John Graham
Graham at home in Yukon
He faces a US murder warrant. New evidence suggests he's the victim of smears.
By Rex Weyler
Published: May 16, 2007
email this article print this story
TheTyee.ca
On Thursday, Tuchone-Canadian John Graham, from the Yukon, enters a Vancouver courtroom to appeal his extradition to the United States on the charge of killing fellow activist Anna Mae Aquash 31 years ago. Graham says he has been framed by the U.S. to cover the government's own complicity in the murder.
Meanwhile, a week ago, a former UBC professor and Amnesty International veteran, Dr. Jennifer Wade, received a chilling letter from U.S. prisoner Leonard Peltier that lends credibility to Graham's story. In April, former American Indian Movement (AIM) member Bob Robideau toured B.C., claiming to represent Peltier and accusing Graham of the murder. The Peltier letter casts doubt on Robideau's claims.
Background in Indian Country
In the 1970s, Graham from Yukon and Aquash from Nova Scotia traveled independently to South Dakota, where vigilantes had killed literally hundreds of traditional native leaders. Some 300 murders of native people in and around South Dakota's Pine Ridge Reservation, during a "reign of terror" in the 1970s, remain unsolved. The FBI arrested Aquash many times and urged her to become an informant. She later told AIM lawyers that agent David Price threatened that if she did not cooperate "you won't live out the year." A South Dakota rancher found her body on February 24, 1976.
Although she had been shot with .32 calibre bullet in the back of the head, an FBI pathologist reported that she died of exposure. FBI agent Price claimed not to recognize her, and the government buried her in a nameless pauper's grave after severing her hands. When the body was later exhumed, the FBI story unraveled. Now, 31 years later, they claim AIM ordered the murder and that Graham pulled the trigger. Naturally, many native leaders suspect dirty tricks.
Dark forces or goofballs?
In March and April 2007, Bob Robideau toured British Columbia. He claimed to represent the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee, but his public events appeared designed to denounce John Graham. Robideau repeatedly accused Graham of murder, claimed to know who "ordered the execution" and created unrest among local native groups. Robideau avoided established Peltier supporters and local First Nations groups. His tour was sponsored by the "Indigenous Rights Action Project" (IRAP), which has few, if any, actual indigenous members, and is linked to "Fire this Time" (FTT), a group with its own history of disrupting B.C. progressive organizations.
ADVERTISEMENT
Check out Tyee's Book section.
I attended a UBC "forum" staged by IRAP on March 30, 2007. Lyn Highway -- from the Vancouver Native Youth Movement and Anishnabeg Outreach program, which helps secure education and employment for aboriginal youth -- confronted Robideau and IRAP representative Aaron Mercredi. She accused Mercredi of being a "dupe," and accused Robideau of being a "traitor to his people" and "a rat." She told Robideau: "You are a collaborator. You are working with the FBI. You are spreading divisiveness, suspicion and demoralization." Robideau shoved Ms. Highway against a wall, and Mercredi called the police, who arrested Ms. Highway for disrupting the forum.
I asked Robideau to explain on what evidence he accused Mr. Graham of murder. Robideau called me a "white man," true, and a "pig." He offered no evidence and ordered me to leave. I stayed and asked several more questions about his claims concerning Graham. Later, in an e-mail, I asked Robideau what he would say in his defence against Ms. Highway's accusations that he was a "rat." Robideau wrote that those "like you" at the forum, including Ms. Highway, "cast the shadow of guilt in your community over Graham. With individuals such as yourself I simply need to appear on the scene, and all of the work you accuse me of doing will be assured by you and the other screaming women."
Dr. Jennifer Wade attended the forum and reported, "Robideau had nothing new or interesting to say about Leonard Peltier. Rather, he seemed determined to prejudice Canadian opinion against John Graham, whose life hangs in the balance." Wade suspected Robideau of "misrepresenting his role within the Peltier defense team." She wrote to Peltier in his U.S. prison to ask him about Robideau.
Peltier's response, written on April 18 and received by Wade on May 10 is unequivocal: "Do I support Bob [Robideau] in his efforts to get John [Graham] railroaded into prison? Hell No! . . . if the truth be known he did not even know her. . . . You will notice Bob does not go and make these statements on Pine Ridge or anywhere in Indian Country. He would get his ass beat down bad! A dry snitch is just as bad as a snitch! And that is what he is doing, dry snitching, saying shit he has no proof of." In prison jargon, a "dry snitch" refers to someone who is misguided, has been duped, or is serving the government's prosecutorial interests out of ignorance.
I phoned Aaron Mercredi of IRAP, who hosted the tour, and asked him about his relationship with Robideau. "I won't talk to you about this," he said and hung up. Wade believes Robideau's tour was intended to prejudice the Canadian court case this week in Vancouver. Wade speaks from experience. She attended the extradition hearing of Leonard Peltier 31 years ago in Vancouver and raised the same concerns.
Fabricating evidence
In 1976 the U.S. successfully extradited Leonard Peltier from Canada using affidavits signed by one Myrtle Poor Bear from Pine Ridge. These affidavits were later proven, in a U.S. courtroom, to be fabricated. Poor Bear -- a destitute single mother, who suffered clinical psychosis and depression -- testified in court that FBI agent Price kidnapped her, held her in a hotel room, threatened her children, and intimidated her into signing three false and self-contradictory affidavits. She told the court that Price showed her pictures of the dead Aquash and told her, "if I didn't do what they said, I'd be dead like Anna Mae Aquash." Nevertheless, on this "evidence" Canada sent Peltier to the U.S.
Justice minister at the time, Ron Basford, signed the extradition order on December 18, 1976. His boss, former solicitor general Warren Allmand acknowledged later that the extradition was based on completely phony evidence and he formally apologized, first in Macleans magazine in 1979, and many times thereafter. Nevertheless, Peltier remains in a U.S. jail. He wrote in his letter to Wade, "It looks more and more every day that I will die in prison."
Due to similar phony evidence submitted by the U.S. in the Graham case, Wade wrote a letter to Warren Allmand this week. "Canada seems about to make another mistake by allowing John Graham to be extradited on May 17. Please do what you can to prevent this from happening to help make right the wrong that was done Peltier when you were Solicitor General for Canada in 1976."
Dead witness
Graham's attorney, Terry LaLiberte has already shown in a Canadian courtroom that U.S. Attorney Robert Mandel, who filed the U.S. request to extradite Graham, presented spurious evidence. In a letter dated January 26, 2004, Mandel assured Canada that "the evidence . . . is available for trial."
For witness number one, Mandel told Canada that spiritual leader and elder Al Gates would testify that Graham was present at the murder. This is false. Mr. Gates had been dead for nine months when Mr. Mandel put his name forward.
Arlo Looking Cloud, the only alleged witness to Aquash's murder, says the FBI induced him with heroin and alcohol to give a false statement. He now insists he will not testify against Graham. A third witness, Frank Dillon, has denied making any incriminating statements against Graham, and claims Mandel's letter misrepresented him.
LaLiberte and Graham have said they would welcome a trial in Canada, where the fake evidence could be exposed. LaLiberte says he wants Mandel to explain in court the gaps, misrepresentations, and flaws in the extradition request. "In Canada," says LaLiberte, "I could drive a truck through the holes in this case."
Leonard Peltier believes, as he states in his letter: "He [Mr. Graham] will not receive a fair trial if he is returned."
The extradition agreement with the US
In the Vancouver courtroom on Thursday, LaLiberte will ask the court for a new hearing, based on a Supreme Court of Canada decision that suggests our extradition treaty with the U.S. conflicts with the Charter of Rights and may put any Canadian at risk.
LaLiberte says that during Graham's first hearing, before Justice Elizabeth Bennett in December 2003, "Justice Bennett felt that the U.S. request for extradition was unsatisfactory, as we showed, but she also felt constrained by the extradition law since she had no authority to actually review the evidence."
Our extradition treaty gives the U.S. the authority to seize any Canadian citizen on the mere say-so of a U.S. Attorney. The U.S. is only required to deliver a summary of evidence, and case history has traditionally denied Canadian courts the right to investigate the evidence or confirm its accuracy.
"However," LaLiberte points out, "the case law has changed. The Canadian Supreme Court has broadened the scope. An extradition hearing is no longer just a rubber stamp process."
Supreme Court challenges extradition treaty
In July of 2006, Canada's Supreme Court, with Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin presiding, expressed concerns that the Extradition Law, as it stands, may violate the Charter of Rights. In a case brought to the court by attorney Edward Greenspan, the court established a new test for judges when deciding whether or not an accused should be sent to the U.S.
The court stated that evidence to extradite must amount to a case that could go to trial in Canada and potentially result in a guilty verdict. In common language: No dead witnesses, no intimidated witnesses, and no phony affidavits. The court ruled that "This may require the extradition judge to engage in limited weighing of the evidence."
Justice McLachlin also wrote that the extradition process must be "independent in appearance and in substance" and "must provide real protection against extradition in the absence of an adequate case against the person sought." John Graham and his attorney LaLiberte would welcome a new hearing under these conditions.
As Bertolt Brecht once remarked about the absurdity of the world: "In the contradiction lies the hope."
John Graham's appeal hearing is Thursday May 17th, 9 a.m., at the B.C. Law Courts, 800 Smithe Street, Vancouver.
More reading on this topic:
* "Who killed Anna Mae Aquash?"
by Rex Weyler, Vancouver Sun, January 8, 2005
* Noam Chomsky on John Graham's threatened extradition from Vancouver
* Bob Newbrook, attending officer at Leonard Peltier's arrest raises doubts about John Graham's arrest
Rex Weyler first covered the Peltier and Aquash cases for the New Age Journal in the 1980s. His book, Blood of the Land, about U.S. and Canadian aboriginal movements received a Pulitzer Prize nomination in 1984. His most recent book, Greenpeace, was a 2004 finalist for the Shaughnessy-Cohen Award for Political Writing. He lives in Vancouver.
- joeb
- Regular
- Posts: 3371
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:19 am
by joeb on Fri May 18, 2007 2:59 am
freejohngraham_1.jpg
freejohngraham_1.jpg
In a 1999 public letter, Leonard Peltier stated "Anna Mae was murdered because she was a skilled organizer and leader for our people," and that he does not want to be part of a murder investigation carried out in part by Robert Ecoffey.
Ecoffey was a Bureau of Indian Affairs cop on Pine Ridge who worked with the FBI agents who Peltier was framed for killing. Ecoffey also took part in the shoot-out at Oglala on the side of the US governent agencies and testified against Peltier in his trial for the murder of the agents.
In public statements released in 1999 and 2003 and in an affidavit that Peltier submitted to John Graham's defense against extradition, Peltier stated that Robert Branscombe visited him in jail and told him that if he cooperated with the government in their prosecution of the case he would be let out of prison. Of course, Peltier refused.
In Peltier's 2003 statement on the arrest of John Graham in Vancoouver, he said, "It is obvious to anyone who looks at the past few years with an open mind and a remembrance of COINTELPRO, that the FBI's program of misinformation and discrediting of activists is alive and well. I encourage all who come into contact with this finger-pointing behavior to also look at the person pointing."
In 2004 statement, Peltier said, "The Arlo Looking Cloud trial was nothing more than an indirect presentation of another Myrtle Poorbear to discredit AIM and myself, and to extradite John Graham. I am an innocent man. The government knows that, and Kamook knows I am innocent as well."
In Arlo's trial, Kamook Banks testified that Peltier had admitted to her that he killed the FBi agents.
Peltier's said in his 2004 statement on John Graham's extradition hearing that FBI Agent David Price tried to cover up Anna Mae's death, but when this was no longer possible, due to the findings of an independent pathologist, "the FBI issued a false press release implying that some of her own people murdered Annie Mae because they believed she was an informant."
In the book "The Life and Death of Anna Mae Aquash" by Johanna Brand, Anna Mae Pictou Aquash of the Mi'kmaq Nation is quoted as saying, "My efforts to raise the consciousness of Whites who are so against Indians in the States are bound to be stopped by the FBI."
Brand quotes from a letter Anna Mae wrote to her sister Rebecca Julian, after her November 1975 arrest in Oregon by state troopers acting on FBI information.
http://www.freewebs.com/our-freedom/leonar...
freejohngraham_1.jpg
In a 1999 public letter, Leonard Peltier stated "Anna Mae was murdered because she was a skilled organizer and leader for our people," and that he does not want to be part of a murder investigation carried out in part by Robert Ecoffey.
Ecoffey was a Bureau of Indian Affairs cop on Pine Ridge who worked with the FBI agents who Peltier was framed for killing. Ecoffey also took part in the shoot-out at Oglala on the side of the US governent agencies and testified against Peltier in his trial for the murder of the agents.
In public statements released in 1999 and 2003 and in an affidavit that Peltier submitted to John Graham's defense against extradition, Peltier stated that Robert Branscombe visited him in jail and told him that if he cooperated with the government in their prosecution of the case he would be let out of prison. Of course, Peltier refused.
In Peltier's 2003 statement on the arrest of John Graham in Vancoouver, he said, "It is obvious to anyone who looks at the past few years with an open mind and a remembrance of COINTELPRO, that the FBI's program of misinformation and discrediting of activists is alive and well. I encourage all who come into contact with this finger-pointing behavior to also look at the person pointing."
In 2004 statement, Peltier said, "The Arlo Looking Cloud trial was nothing more than an indirect presentation of another Myrtle Poorbear to discredit AIM and myself, and to extradite John Graham. I am an innocent man. The government knows that, and Kamook knows I am innocent as well."
In Arlo's trial, Kamook Banks testified that Peltier had admitted to her that he killed the FBi agents.
Peltier's said in his 2004 statement on John Graham's extradition hearing that FBI Agent David Price tried to cover up Anna Mae's death, but when this was no longer possible, due to the findings of an independent pathologist, "the FBI issued a false press release implying that some of her own people murdered Annie Mae because they believed she was an informant."
In the book "The Life and Death of Anna Mae Aquash" by Johanna Brand, Anna Mae Pictou Aquash of the Mi'kmaq Nation is quoted as saying, "My efforts to raise the consciousness of Whites who are so against Indians in the States are bound to be stopped by the FBI."
Brand quotes from a letter Anna Mae wrote to her sister Rebecca Julian, after her November 1975 arrest in Oregon by state troopers acting on FBI information.
http://www.freewebs.com/our-freedom/leonar...
- joeb
- Regular
- Posts: 3371
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:19 am
by joeb on Mon Aug 20, 2007 3:03 pm
INVESTIGATION TIMELINE
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Since January, the Kalamazoo Gazette has been investigating public-records disclosures by the city of Kalamazoo and its Department of Public Safety. The Gazette's early findings revealed residents were less likely than the newspaper to receive the records they requested. And the newspaper was receiving more of what it had requested only after appealing the city's denials.
One case the Gazette examined was a 2003 prostitution sting, which until recently had not been publicly disclosed. Here's how the Gazette's investigation has unfolded thus far:
March 27: The Gazette filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents related to a 2003 Kalamazoo Department of Public Safety prostitution investigation.
Advertisement
April 16: The city responded with heavily edited records.
June 22: The Gazette appealed, claiming the city's response ``fails to comply with -- and, in many respects, outright violates -- the governing FOIA law.''
July 1: The Gazette published its first story on the handling of the prostitution investigation based on records provided, which indicated that police suspected the prostitute's clients may have included Kalamazoo area police officers, attorneys and prominent businessmen. No arrests were made. Police reports said the case was passed to the FBI because it revealed a ``conspiracy'' beyond the city's jurisdiction.
July 2: The City Commission acted on the Gazette's appeal and hired an outside attorney to review how the city has handled requests for public records.
July 8: The Gazette reported that an FBI agent may have lost his job as result of the prostitution investigation and that a Kalamazoo police sergeant who worked undercover was suspended. Police used an affidavit -- a document that tells what police are looking for and why -- to obtain a search warrant for the woman's apartment. That document is not in the court file as affidavits typically are.
July 22: District Judge Richard A. Santoni said he would ask police to provide more information about why Public Safety did not return search-warrant paperwork to the court file.
July 30: Santoni told the Department of Public Safety it had until Aug. 7 to return search records from the investigation to the court's public files.
July 31: KDPS complied with the order seven days before Santoni's Aug. 7 deadline. The records were accompanied by a letter from Kalamazoo Valley Enforcement Team Capt. Joseph Taylor that states Santoni had told officers ``these documents were not to be filed with the court'' at the time of the 2003 investigation. It also stated that Santoni had made redactions to the search affidavit. Taylor asked Santoni to give officers time to alert confidential informants that their names would be made public.
July 31: Santoni responded to Taylor's letter, telling Public Safety Chief Dan Weston to ``correct these erroneous statements.''
Aug. 3: Santoni issued an order to all area law-enforcement agencies, saying District Court will immediately begin retaining original search warrant and affidavit paperwork, making them subject to public release.
Aug. 6: Kalamazoo City Attorney A. Lee Kirk, who came under scrutiny over his office's handling of Freedom of Information Act requests, announced he is retiring, effective Aug. 7.
Aug. 15: Santoni told the Gazette he's considering suing Public Safety for libel and slander, claiming the department was using ``grotesque fabrication'' to involve him in a ``cover-up'' of the 2003 prostitution investigation.
Aug. 16: Weston sent an apology to Santoni for Taylor's July 31 letter, saying Taylor did not intend to imply judicial wrongdoing; Capt. Larry Belen, now retired, had believed there was consent to the search so the warrant was not executed; Deputy Chief Mike McCaw had misinterpreted Belen's report; and Taylor had misunderstood McCaw.
Aug. 17: Santoni accepted the apology, saying his name has been cleared, and attributed the misunderstanding to flaws in Belen's 2003 report.
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Since January, the Kalamazoo Gazette has been investigating public-records disclosures by the city of Kalamazoo and its Department of Public Safety. The Gazette's early findings revealed residents were less likely than the newspaper to receive the records they requested. And the newspaper was receiving more of what it had requested only after appealing the city's denials.
One case the Gazette examined was a 2003 prostitution sting, which until recently had not been publicly disclosed. Here's how the Gazette's investigation has unfolded thus far:
March 27: The Gazette filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents related to a 2003 Kalamazoo Department of Public Safety prostitution investigation.
Advertisement
April 16: The city responded with heavily edited records.
June 22: The Gazette appealed, claiming the city's response ``fails to comply with -- and, in many respects, outright violates -- the governing FOIA law.''
July 1: The Gazette published its first story on the handling of the prostitution investigation based on records provided, which indicated that police suspected the prostitute's clients may have included Kalamazoo area police officers, attorneys and prominent businessmen. No arrests were made. Police reports said the case was passed to the FBI because it revealed a ``conspiracy'' beyond the city's jurisdiction.
July 2: The City Commission acted on the Gazette's appeal and hired an outside attorney to review how the city has handled requests for public records.
July 8: The Gazette reported that an FBI agent may have lost his job as result of the prostitution investigation and that a Kalamazoo police sergeant who worked undercover was suspended. Police used an affidavit -- a document that tells what police are looking for and why -- to obtain a search warrant for the woman's apartment. That document is not in the court file as affidavits typically are.
July 22: District Judge Richard A. Santoni said he would ask police to provide more information about why Public Safety did not return search-warrant paperwork to the court file.
July 30: Santoni told the Department of Public Safety it had until Aug. 7 to return search records from the investigation to the court's public files.
July 31: KDPS complied with the order seven days before Santoni's Aug. 7 deadline. The records were accompanied by a letter from Kalamazoo Valley Enforcement Team Capt. Joseph Taylor that states Santoni had told officers ``these documents were not to be filed with the court'' at the time of the 2003 investigation. It also stated that Santoni had made redactions to the search affidavit. Taylor asked Santoni to give officers time to alert confidential informants that their names would be made public.
July 31: Santoni responded to Taylor's letter, telling Public Safety Chief Dan Weston to ``correct these erroneous statements.''
Aug. 3: Santoni issued an order to all area law-enforcement agencies, saying District Court will immediately begin retaining original search warrant and affidavit paperwork, making them subject to public release.
Aug. 6: Kalamazoo City Attorney A. Lee Kirk, who came under scrutiny over his office's handling of Freedom of Information Act requests, announced he is retiring, effective Aug. 7.
Aug. 15: Santoni told the Gazette he's considering suing Public Safety for libel and slander, claiming the department was using ``grotesque fabrication'' to involve him in a ``cover-up'' of the 2003 prostitution investigation.
Aug. 16: Weston sent an apology to Santoni for Taylor's July 31 letter, saying Taylor did not intend to imply judicial wrongdoing; Capt. Larry Belen, now retired, had believed there was consent to the search so the warrant was not executed; Deputy Chief Mike McCaw had misinterpreted Belen's report; and Taylor had misunderstood McCaw.
Aug. 17: Santoni accepted the apology, saying his name has been cleared, and attributed the misunderstanding to flaws in Belen's 2003 report.
- joeb
- Regular
- Posts: 3371
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:19 am
by joeb on Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:08 pm
Manny Fried shares his story
At 94, Fried highlights his life as an actor, playwright, union leader and FBI target
By Colin Dabkowski NEWS ARTS WRITER
Updated: 09/04/07 8:36 AM
Robert Kirkham/Buffalo News
Manny Fried, rehearsing for “Boilermakers and Martinis,” which includes many of the watershed moments of his career and of his relationship with his wife.
In the dimly lit theater of Road Less Traveled Productions, Emanuel Fried sat stalwart in the front row, casting a derisive glare at the walker and cane propped against the stage. For the 94-year-old actor, playwright, union leader and sometime public enemy, these tools are the remnants of a hip replacement in April, the first signs of deceleration in a life lived at full throttle.
“They told me that in four weeks I’d be walking without any help,” Fried said. “They were lying!”
Fried grudgingly uses that walker and cane in rehearsals for his latest play, an autobiographical look at his years as a union leader, his troubles with the FBI and his relationship with his wife, Rhoda. He calls it “Boilermakers and Martinis,” after the alcoholic staples of his two disparate loves: the hardscrabble world of union workers and his wife, Rhoda Lurie Fried, an artist whose wealthy family owned the Park Lane Restaurant.
“A boilermaker was something, in the factory, the guys who were trying to get me drunk would buy it for me: a shot of whiskey with a beer chaser,” Fried said with a smirk. “And a martini was Rhoda’s favorite drink.”
Scott Behrend, executive director of Road Less Traveled, opened his theater’s new space in Main Street’s Market Arcade complex last year with Fried’s most produced and acclaimed play, “The Dodo Bird,” the first in the theater’s ongoing Emanuel Fried Retrospective.
Behrend stopped short of saying that “Boilermakers” will be Fried’s final show, but at 94, even the irrepressible Fried suggested that this production will likely be his swan song. The last surviving member of his immediate family, Fried has watched eight siblings pass away. The last, Gerald, died in mid-August. His parents lived to the ripe old ages of 97 and 99 and were, Fried said, never sick. “They just stopped one day,” he said.
He asked aloud the question that has been on the minds of his fans and detractors alike for years: “How much longer can one live?” For Behrend and director Phil Knoerzer, the answer to that question is a shrug of the shoulders. But there’s no doubt a sense of urgency accompanied the decision to produce the show.
“I want to make sure this story gets told,” said Behrend. “I think it’s important that now — right now — when Manny is still here, that we hear the story from Manny.”
Behrend, who got to know Fried while he was starring in “Tuesdays With Morrie” at Studio Arena Theatre in 2005, could barely believe his ears after Fried befriended him and began reciting what seemed to be fantastical stories.
There was, for instance, the letter Fried received from Albert Einstein commending him for refusing to testify before the House Un-American Activities Committee. There were the stories about being singled out as “the most dangerous man in Buffalo,” an accusation leveled against Fried for his union activities. And then there were the thousands of pages of a dossier compiled by the FBI over six decades, documenting a systematic attempt to discredit Fried among his employees, friends and family.
“We’d go to lunch every day and he’d tell me these stories about his life. It was ‘My Lunches with Manny’ during ‘Tuesdays with Morrie,’ ” Behrend said. “It got to the point where I had trouble believing him, like, ‘Are you kidding?’ ”
But Fried was dead serious, as he always has been.
But, after seven productive decades, Fried has guts to spare. He had them when he was called before the House Un- American Activities Committee twice and refused to testify, an action for which he risked indictment and imprisonment. Like many citizens called before the committee’s anti-communist investigations, Fried hoped the FBI would issue an indictment and force his case before the courts. But, he says, they balked on the indictment and went after his reputation, his career and, finally, his wife.
“They just couldn’t stomach that I wouldn’t break,” Fried said of the FBI and other government agencies. “They felt, and properly so, that I was providing an umbrella for other people to speak up.”
Fried may be a bit older, and maybe not quite as light on his feet, but he’s still the same ironwilled man he was in his union days. So says Mary Loftus, a longtime friend of Fried and a fellow actor in the Buffalo theater scene. She hailed Fried as much for his union activities as for his acting days in New York, where he worked on- and off- Broadway with the likes of John Garfield and Elia Kazan, using the stage name Edward Mann.
“He knew Elia Kazan and all those guys, and some of them testified [before HUAC] and he was furious about it. He was called before the Un-American Committee and he refused to testify. He told them to go to hell,” Loftus said. “And he hasn’t changed. He would still do the same thing today.”
Loftus, who often drives Manny to appointments and plays while he is still recovering from his hip surgery, said that he shows no sign of slowing down, much less throwing in the towel. She noted that he just started another semester of teaching at Buffalo State College, where he is a professor emeritus of English. He is also an instructor with the Alleyway Theatre’s Western New York Playwrights Workshop, where he has mentored dozens of successful playwrights since 1983.
“Boilermakers and Martinis” includes many of the watershed moments in Fried’s career set against the backdrop of his long relationship with his wife, who died in 1989 at 71. Part scathing indictment of the FBI and part love letter, “Boilermakers and Martinis” embodies the major contradiction of his life. In essence, that relationship was an unlikely collision of two worlds.
Fried, who started his first factory job at the DuPont plant in the Town of Tonawanda straight out of high school, was blue collar to the bone, a working man with working values that haven’t wavered an inch in 94 years. Rhoda, on the other hand, was from a well-off Buffalo family that owned the Park Lane Restaurant, a historic hot spot that in its heyday was the hub for power lunches and bigwigs citywide.
“He had to bounce around the boilermaker world and the martini world,” Behrend said, “and the way he describes it is pretty fascinating stuff.”
Back in the Road Less Traveled Theatre, about to hit the stage for a rehearsal, Fried issued a stark warning to Behrend about the play.
“You’ll probably be contacted by the FBI, because they take a beating in this,” Fried said.
That, Fried said, was just one of the reasons why he feels it’s been more difficult to produce his plays here than in New York and Los Angeles, where several of his productions have garnered positive reviews. He praised Road Less Traveled for “having the guts” to do the play.
All indications are that the FBI has stopped seriously keeping tabs on Fried, although his file contains information collected as recently as 1998. Behrend seems unconcerned.
Fried, on the other hand, has reason to be critical, if not apprehensive. Though he has outlived most of his enemies by decades and still has plenty of friends, he still has a lingering distrust of the organizations and people who turned against him in the ’50s and ’60s. Today, Fried’s massive FBI file — some of which he was able to acquire through a Freedom of Information Act request — serves more as a testament to his perseverance than a chronicle of shame.
“My daughter said, with the thousands of pages they have, ‘Dad, they spent millions of dollars on you,’ ” Fried said. “They literally did.”
And what, for all that time and money, did the FBI get for their efforts?
“Crap!” said Fried. “I’m still here.”
At 94, Fried highlights his life as an actor, playwright, union leader and FBI target
By Colin Dabkowski NEWS ARTS WRITER
Updated: 09/04/07 8:36 AM
Robert Kirkham/Buffalo News
Manny Fried, rehearsing for “Boilermakers and Martinis,” which includes many of the watershed moments of his career and of his relationship with his wife.
In the dimly lit theater of Road Less Traveled Productions, Emanuel Fried sat stalwart in the front row, casting a derisive glare at the walker and cane propped against the stage. For the 94-year-old actor, playwright, union leader and sometime public enemy, these tools are the remnants of a hip replacement in April, the first signs of deceleration in a life lived at full throttle.
“They told me that in four weeks I’d be walking without any help,” Fried said. “They were lying!”
Fried grudgingly uses that walker and cane in rehearsals for his latest play, an autobiographical look at his years as a union leader, his troubles with the FBI and his relationship with his wife, Rhoda. He calls it “Boilermakers and Martinis,” after the alcoholic staples of his two disparate loves: the hardscrabble world of union workers and his wife, Rhoda Lurie Fried, an artist whose wealthy family owned the Park Lane Restaurant.
“A boilermaker was something, in the factory, the guys who were trying to get me drunk would buy it for me: a shot of whiskey with a beer chaser,” Fried said with a smirk. “And a martini was Rhoda’s favorite drink.”
Scott Behrend, executive director of Road Less Traveled, opened his theater’s new space in Main Street’s Market Arcade complex last year with Fried’s most produced and acclaimed play, “The Dodo Bird,” the first in the theater’s ongoing Emanuel Fried Retrospective.
Behrend stopped short of saying that “Boilermakers” will be Fried’s final show, but at 94, even the irrepressible Fried suggested that this production will likely be his swan song. The last surviving member of his immediate family, Fried has watched eight siblings pass away. The last, Gerald, died in mid-August. His parents lived to the ripe old ages of 97 and 99 and were, Fried said, never sick. “They just stopped one day,” he said.
He asked aloud the question that has been on the minds of his fans and detractors alike for years: “How much longer can one live?” For Behrend and director Phil Knoerzer, the answer to that question is a shrug of the shoulders. But there’s no doubt a sense of urgency accompanied the decision to produce the show.
“I want to make sure this story gets told,” said Behrend. “I think it’s important that now — right now — when Manny is still here, that we hear the story from Manny.”
Behrend, who got to know Fried while he was starring in “Tuesdays With Morrie” at Studio Arena Theatre in 2005, could barely believe his ears after Fried befriended him and began reciting what seemed to be fantastical stories.
There was, for instance, the letter Fried received from Albert Einstein commending him for refusing to testify before the House Un-American Activities Committee. There were the stories about being singled out as “the most dangerous man in Buffalo,” an accusation leveled against Fried for his union activities. And then there were the thousands of pages of a dossier compiled by the FBI over six decades, documenting a systematic attempt to discredit Fried among his employees, friends and family.
“We’d go to lunch every day and he’d tell me these stories about his life. It was ‘My Lunches with Manny’ during ‘Tuesdays with Morrie,’ ” Behrend said. “It got to the point where I had trouble believing him, like, ‘Are you kidding?’ ”
But Fried was dead serious, as he always has been.
But, after seven productive decades, Fried has guts to spare. He had them when he was called before the House Un- American Activities Committee twice and refused to testify, an action for which he risked indictment and imprisonment. Like many citizens called before the committee’s anti-communist investigations, Fried hoped the FBI would issue an indictment and force his case before the courts. But, he says, they balked on the indictment and went after his reputation, his career and, finally, his wife.
“They just couldn’t stomach that I wouldn’t break,” Fried said of the FBI and other government agencies. “They felt, and properly so, that I was providing an umbrella for other people to speak up.”
Fried may be a bit older, and maybe not quite as light on his feet, but he’s still the same ironwilled man he was in his union days. So says Mary Loftus, a longtime friend of Fried and a fellow actor in the Buffalo theater scene. She hailed Fried as much for his union activities as for his acting days in New York, where he worked on- and off- Broadway with the likes of John Garfield and Elia Kazan, using the stage name Edward Mann.
“He knew Elia Kazan and all those guys, and some of them testified [before HUAC] and he was furious about it. He was called before the Un-American Committee and he refused to testify. He told them to go to hell,” Loftus said. “And he hasn’t changed. He would still do the same thing today.”
Loftus, who often drives Manny to appointments and plays while he is still recovering from his hip surgery, said that he shows no sign of slowing down, much less throwing in the towel. She noted that he just started another semester of teaching at Buffalo State College, where he is a professor emeritus of English. He is also an instructor with the Alleyway Theatre’s Western New York Playwrights Workshop, where he has mentored dozens of successful playwrights since 1983.
“Boilermakers and Martinis” includes many of the watershed moments in Fried’s career set against the backdrop of his long relationship with his wife, who died in 1989 at 71. Part scathing indictment of the FBI and part love letter, “Boilermakers and Martinis” embodies the major contradiction of his life. In essence, that relationship was an unlikely collision of two worlds.
Fried, who started his first factory job at the DuPont plant in the Town of Tonawanda straight out of high school, was blue collar to the bone, a working man with working values that haven’t wavered an inch in 94 years. Rhoda, on the other hand, was from a well-off Buffalo family that owned the Park Lane Restaurant, a historic hot spot that in its heyday was the hub for power lunches and bigwigs citywide.
“He had to bounce around the boilermaker world and the martini world,” Behrend said, “and the way he describes it is pretty fascinating stuff.”
Back in the Road Less Traveled Theatre, about to hit the stage for a rehearsal, Fried issued a stark warning to Behrend about the play.
“You’ll probably be contacted by the FBI, because they take a beating in this,” Fried said.
That, Fried said, was just one of the reasons why he feels it’s been more difficult to produce his plays here than in New York and Los Angeles, where several of his productions have garnered positive reviews. He praised Road Less Traveled for “having the guts” to do the play.
All indications are that the FBI has stopped seriously keeping tabs on Fried, although his file contains information collected as recently as 1998. Behrend seems unconcerned.
Fried, on the other hand, has reason to be critical, if not apprehensive. Though he has outlived most of his enemies by decades and still has plenty of friends, he still has a lingering distrust of the organizations and people who turned against him in the ’50s and ’60s. Today, Fried’s massive FBI file — some of which he was able to acquire through a Freedom of Information Act request — serves more as a testament to his perseverance than a chronicle of shame.
“My daughter said, with the thousands of pages they have, ‘Dad, they spent millions of dollars on you,’ ” Fried said. “They literally did.”
And what, for all that time and money, did the FBI get for their efforts?
“Crap!” said Fried. “I’m still here.”
- joeb
- Regular
- Posts: 3371
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:19 am
23 posts • Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest