BFP Exclusive: Can There Be A Military Response to the Occupy Movement?

Drones, NDAA & Killing of Americans Paints Frightening Scenario

By Anonymous Guest Author

drones1May Day developments have deepened concerns about a frightening scenario: the F.B.I. employing their well-practiced Muslim sting operations against the Occupy Movement with the intent of branding America's anti-corporate, pro-democracy protestors as “terrorists,” thereby subjecting them to arrest and even “legal” military action if the protests become uncontained.

What is certain is that the legal and operational basis is now in place for the government to kill American citizens on U.S. soil who it deems “terrorists” without providing any evidence.  At this point it is purely speculative whether this would be applied to a mass domestic movement that threatens “national security”--i.e., the corporate order.

But consider together these four items on the very day the Occupy Movement launched its peaceful Spring Offensive:

The Occupy demonstrations, which surprised authorities last year by the speed with which they spread across the country, are an attack on the legitimacy of Wall Street elites, corporate leaders and the politicians they influence. Even last year's relatively small protests shone a light on the sleaze endemic on Wall Street, in corporations and in government. Clearly authorities want to nip this protest in the bud before it flowers into a mass movement that challenges their stranglehold on wealth and power.

After the 2008 Wall Street crash that left millions of Americans without jobs and many without homes, there was nowhere for them to go. After a similar crash today, the millions affected would have a movement to join. That prospect is bound to send a cold sensation down backs on Wall Street, in Washington and in corporate boardrooms. That is why we have already seen aggressive policing of peaceful protests, with the now infamous pepper spray attacks, even against students sitting calmly on university greens.

But imagine if it can't be contained by local police? Would U.S. leaders react any differently than Mubarak or Assad or King Khalifa if masses of people take to the streets to demand regime change? And it is regime change that Occupiers are demanding, not a switch of parties in power in the corporate theater of elections, but a dissolution of the American regime that has grown in reach and power since the first Gilded Age of the late 19th Century: a nexus of Wall Street and corporate power and money financing politicians who control the military, intelligence and the police.

Only two things must be achieved to allow the blood-curdling scenario of military action against an uncontained mass movement.

drones2First the Occupiers must be smeared for the solidly conservative majority that believes the Noble Lie of democracy and collaborates with the regime. A May Day New York Post front page headline is illustrative: “OWS Bums to Foul up Working Folks in NY.”

But “bums” is not strong enough to convince a majority that violent suppression might be needed. Conditioned to believe almost everything they are told about the so-called War on Terror, “terrorists” would be more like it. If an American pro-democracy, mass movement can be shown to be riddled with terrorists and terrorist supporters, then all manner of violent repression could become acceptable.

One way is through the F.B.I. sting. So far the F.B.I. has conned Muslim men into 17 of these operations. The words of a federal judge who questioned the jury verdict in one of these cases is instructive. Judge Colleen McMahon said:  “The essence of what occurred here is that a government understandably zealous to protect its citizens from terrorism came upon a man [the supposed terrorism ringleader James Cromitie] both bigoted and suggestible, one who was incapable of committing an act of terrorism on his own … It [the F.B.I.] created acts of terrorism out of his fantasies of bravado and bigotry, and then made those fantasies come true … The government did not have to infiltrate and foil some nefarious plot – there was no nefarious plot to foil.”

It appears the same thing happened in Cleveland on May Day. But this time the target was not Muslim “terrorists”, but Occupy Wall Street supporters. The pattern was the same: none of the suspects were involved in terrorism before, they may have been predisposed to go along with it or were talked into it, but they did not initiate the plot, nor pick the target and the bomb was fake. The whole thing was made up by the F.B.I. Against Moslems it justifies the War on Terror on the home front. What would entrapping Occupy supporters justify?

After associating the movement in the public's mind with terrorism, the authorities would need legal authority to take very aggressive and if necessary military action against American citizens on U.S. soil. Last year President Obama signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which overturned the Posse Comitatus Act, allowing the U.S. military to more easily take part in law enforcement on U.S. soil for the first time since 1878.

With that in hand, a legal decision is needed to allow the government to kill American citizens.

Four American citizens have already been killed in drone attacks outside the U.S. On May Day, as the Occupy movement was re-energizing, an administration official spoke publicly for the first time about the previously highly secretive U.S. drone policy. According to the Los Angeles Times account John Brennan, Obama's counterterrorism chief, said that to be killed by a drone:

An individual must be deemed by U.S. intelligence to be actively involved in a plot to attack American forces, facilities or other targets, Brennan said. The intelligence is vetted at high levels, and the decision to fire a missile is made with "extraordinary care and thoughtfulness," he said.

Brennan did not outline who takes part in the discussions or what standards of evidence are sufficient to launch a missile.

Under this thinking, if protestors are plotting to attack U.S. facilities “or other targets” they could be targeted themselves, especially as

Four American citizens have been killed in drone strikes, including militant Anwar Awlaki in Yemen … and Awlaki's teenage son, who was not considered a militant, was killed in a strike weeks after his father's death.

Brennan provided little clarity on what safeguards are used in cases involving the targeting of U.S. citizens. "We ask ourselves additional questions," he said without elaboration.

"It is dangerous to give the president the authority to order the extrajudicial killing of any person, including any American, he believes to be a terrorist," said Hina Shamsi, director of the National Security Project at the American Civil Liberties Union. "The administration insists that the program is closely supervised, but to propose that a secret deliberation that takes place entirely within the executive branch constitutes due process is to strip the 5th Amendment of its essential meaning."

Attorney General Eric Holder says it is legal for the government to kill American citizens with drones if the government suspects them of being terrorists. Combined with the NDAA, an argument could be built that it is legal inside the U.S. to kill Occupy protestors whom the government suspects of terrorism.

And they might do it with drones at home too. Surveillance drones could at the least provide authorities live video of societal breakdown. Last week the Federal Aviation Administration released a list of agencies allowed to fly drones domestically. Among them is Homeland Security. On May Day, Fairfax County Police Chief David Rohrer said, “Drones will certainly have a purpose and a reason to be in this region in the next, coming years.”

Perhaps the authorities have not linked these developments in such a chilling scenario. Let's hope they haven't.

# # # #

The above analysis was provided to Boiling Frogs Post exclusively by a well-known and respected journalist who wishes to remain ‘Anonymous’ in order to maintain her/his current employment as a mainstream media reporter.

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVD .

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVDs.

Speak Your Mind