Local police departments have received a memo from the Federal
Bureau of Investigation which provides guidelines to identify
possibly violent protesters ““ a memo some feel is an excuse
for the FBI to keep tabs on anti-war protesters.
The Oct. 15 internal memo, acquired by the New York Times and
published in an article Sunday, advised police to report suspicious
activity at protests to counterterrorism squads.
The Times reported that the memo was focused on
“identifying anarchists and “˜extreme
elements,'” which worries some student activists like
Germán Gurrola ““ a fifth-year anthropology and Chicano
studies student and an organizer for Conciencia Libre, a student
activist group.
“The question is who is considered an extremist,”
Gurrola said, adding that the FBI memo seems to be an outgrowth of
the USA PATRIOT Act.
However, Cheryl Mimura, an FBI spokeswoman, said the Times
report was inaccurate because it took the intelligence bulletin out
of context.
“What (the Times) wrote is not what the intelligence
bulletin was,” Mimura said.
The bulletin listed patterns of behavior that have been observed
to be characteristic of domestic terrorists, such as the
Environmental Liberation Front and the Animal Liberation Front,
Mimura said.
“It was just advising (law enforcement) of the profiles of
violent protesters,” she said. “We are not targeting
anyone.”
The memo cited tactics such as demonstrators bringing gas masks
to protests to protect against tear gas, the formation of human
chains and the erection of barricades, all of which were noted as
possible indicators of violent activity.
Although the memo said most protests are peaceful and there is
no information linking terrorism to protests, some activists were
alarmed to see that the memo categorized videotaping of arrests as
a method of intimidation against police officers.
Protesters do occasionally videotape arrests to document the
actions of police and protesters and to ensure no rights are
violated.
Jim Lafferty, director of the National Lawyers Guild ““ an
organization that observes protests to protect protesters’
rights ““ said the suggestion that people take pictures of
arrests to intimidate police is an attempt by the FBI to legitimize
abusing its authority.
The memo also said protesters sometimes use the Internet to
raise money and hold training camps to prepare for protests.
Many are concerned that this catalogue of possible danger
signals implies that the FBI is keeping tabs on people who oppose
the government, but Mimura said the memo merely gives police
officers background on tactics that violent protesters have used in
the past.
However, some activists are not convinced.
“It is a campaign of spying and disorientation,”
Lafferty said.
“It is a way of disparaging the anti-war movement and
making it seem un-American and dangerous,” he added.
Gurrola said he sees the memo as a cause for concern, but not a
new one. He added that he has seen plain-clothed policemen
videotaping demonstrations.
“Since Sept. 11, we have felt a heightened
surveillance,” Gurrola said, adding that several of his
friends had been approached by FBI officers at demonstrations.
The FBI said they were not monitoring protests and wrote a
letter to the Times to “set the record straight.”
“The FBI is committed to protecting the rights of all
Americans, including those who oppose the current policies of the
government,” Cassandra Chandler, an FBI spokeswoman, said in
the letter.
Chandler’s letter said the FBI does not maintain dossiers
on people based on their political activities.
Thus far, the memo has not changed the way local police handle
protests.
A spokesman for the LAPD said the force has not taken any new
action based on the memo because a change in policy requires a
special order which must pass the city council and the police
commission.
This is a lengthy process, but it is beginning, the spokesman
said.
UCPD has not received the memo, said Nancy Greenstein, director
of community services for UCPD.