COINTELPRO “… the systemic application of state-sanctioned public-funded anti-terrorism networks and resources; whole “Fusion centres” co-ordinating teams of operatives infiltrating meetings and surveilling activists’ convergence points, staging events and arrest situations, and reporting back to the central government hive for resources and further instruction.”
“Whether Occupy is infiltrated by these teams of paid saboteurs is no longer a debatable question. Whether or not we can re-embrace our core concepts of non-violence and decentralisation sufficiently to (non)combat it; is.”
Hella Occupy Oakland- COINTELPRO & Occupy: The War Within
One of the primary methods of COINTELPRO is to use suspicion to undermine progressive groups. Just the idea of an undercover is enough to destroy a movement when everyone is pointing fingers at one another. We need to be able to spot the shady suspects as well as find a way to build trust and cohesion in our movement.
According to Brian Glick the best way to deal with infiltrators is to establish a process to deal with anyone suspected of being an infiltrator. This is an important point and is definitely something worth developing. The closest thing I can think of that has been developed so far is the Safe Spaces Policy and Statement of Autonomy.
Glick argues it is best not to expose a suspect as in most cases it will do more harm than their continued presences particularly if you can limit their access to funds and information.
“They thrive on gossip about personal tensions, rivalries and disagreements. The more these are aired in public, or via a telephone which can be tapped or mail which can be opened, the easier it is to exploit a groups’ problems and subvert its work.” -Glick
If one is sure of an agent than it may be best to expose them directly and openly alerting other groups with images and descriptions of their tactics (Glick). This is especially true if you can discreetly limit the suspect’s access to funds, financial records, mailing lists, discussions of possible law violations, meetings that plan criminal defense strategy, and similar opportunities.
Signs you might be dealing with a Fed or Cop
It has been argued that some undercovers are drug tested. For this reason they will hit a blunt or joint and try not to inhale and that is acceptable. If this is true it has been said that a fat bong load is a good test. Or harder drugs for that matter. I’m not so sure about this one.
If someone always has money and no job and offers to pay for things or give rides to everyone that is a small sign. If they always need receipts for everything it could be for their boss.
If they push you to do illegal things that you aren’t sure about or haven’t done before and are very adamant about it. Going so far as to teach you and buy you the materials. Again a sign.
Disappearing for long periods of time without explanation.
A big red flag and primary tactic: if they are constantly accusing everyone else of being COINTELPRO. If their tactics are disruptive and damaging and they do not care at all. No matter what anyone says to them or how they affect others they just don’t care. This could be because they are mentally ill, a sociopath or because their goal is to be as disruptive as possible. If this is not the first political group they have disrupted. If they have a history of working their way into and severely disrupting political groups they are most definitely some kind of agent.
Dedicated to all of the Franks.
http://www.theweek.co.uk/politics/8705/how-spot-undercover-agent-your-midst http://gangstalking.wordpress.com/2007/03/16/dealing-with-cointelpro-infiltration/ http://www.whale.to/b/devoy.pdf
http://www.williambowles.info/spysrus/cointelpro2.html
InfoRev 