Helen Brach & Joe Plemmens

The Tactics of Intimidation

In the book Agents of Repression, Ward Churchill and Jim Vander Wall successfully argue that the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s crime-fighting activities serve as a calculated ruse to cover-up and divert public attention from their true purpose which is maintaining the status quo by disrupting and crushing grassroots movements for social justice. They base this conclusion on the thousands of pages of classified files that a group calling itself the Citizens’ Commission to Investigate the FBI liberated from the FBI’s Media, Pennsylvania office in March 8, 1971.

These documents included internal memos about Counter Intelligence Operations – or COINTELPROs – designed to “disrupt, misdirect, discredit or otherwise neutralize” the leaders and groups of social justice causes. From these files, activists have gained insight on what types of activities the Feds – in conjunction with local police units and reactionary “private” groups – carry out against those of us trying to change society for the better.

Below is a list of their tactics so you can prepare for, identify, and lessen their impact when they are being used against you or other activists. This information is excerpted from the book Agents of Repression: The FBI’s Secret War Against the Black Panther Party and the American Indian Movement by Ward Churchill and Jim Vander Wall. Published by South End Press, 116 Saint Botolph St, Boston, MA 02115. No Compromise strongly encourages all activists to read this book so that we are all better prepared to counter the government’s actions against us.

Eavesdropping - A massive program of surveillance was carried out against organizations and individuals via wiretaps, surreptitious entries and burglaries, electronic devices, live “tails” and mail tampering. The purpose of such activities was never intelligence gathering per se, but rather the inducement of “paranoia” among those targeted by making them aware they’d been selected for special treatment and that there was “an FBI agent behind every mailbox.”

Bogus Mail Fabrication - of correspondence between members of targeted groups, or between groups, was designed to foster “splits” within or between organizations; these efforts were continued – and in many cases intensified – when it became apparent that the resulting tension was sufficient to cause physical violence among group members.

“Black Propaganda” Operations - “Black Propaganda” refers to the fabrication and distribution of publications “in behalf of” targeted organizations/individuals designed to misrepresent their positions, goals or objectives in such a way as to publicly discredit them and foster intra/inter-group tensions.

Disinformation or “Gray Propaganda” - The FBI systematically releases disinformation to the press and electronic media concerning groups and individuals, designed to discredit them and foster tensions. This was also seen as an expedient means of conditioning public sentiment to accept Bureau/police/vigilante “excesses” aimed at targeting organizations/individuals and to facilitate the conviction of those brought to trial, even on conspicuously flimsy evidence.

Harassment Arrests - The repeated arrests of targeted individuals and organization members on spurious charges was carried out, not with any real hope of obtaining convictions (although there was always that possibility, assuming public sentiment had been sufficiently inflamed), but to simply harass, increase paranoia, tie up activists in a series of pre-arraignment incarcerations and preliminary courtroom procedures, and deplete their resources through the posting of numerous bail bonds (as well as the retention of attorneys). Again this was so pervasive a tactic that it is impossible to give a comprehensive summary of its use during the 1960s.

Infiltrators and Agents Provocateurs - This widely used tactic involved the infiltration of targeted organizations with informers and agents provocateurs, the latter expressly for the purpose of fomenting or engaging in illegal activities which could then be attributed to key organizational members and/or the organization as a whole. Agents provocateurs were also routinely assigned to disrupt the internal functioning of targeted groups and to assist in the spread of disinformation.

“Pseudo-Gangs” - There is some indication that the Bureau had begun to spawn “pseudo-gangs”, phony organizations designed to “confuse, divide and undermine” as well as do outright battle with authentic dissident groups by the end of the COINTELPRO era.

Bad-Jacketing - “Snitch-jacketing” or “bad-jacketing” refers to the practice of creating suspicion – through the spread of rumors, manufacture of evidence, etc. – that bona fide organizational members, usually in key positions, are FBI/police informers, guilty of such offenses as skimming organizational funds and the like. The purpose of this tactic was to “isolate and eliminate” organizational leadership; such efforts were continued – and in some instances accelerated – when it became known that the likely outcome would be extreme physical violence visited upon the “jacketed” individual(s).

Fabrication of Evidence - A widely used FBI tactic has been the fabrication of evidence for criminal prosecution of key individuals and the withholding of exculpatory evidence which might serve to block conviction of these individuals. This includes the intimidation of witnesses and use of coercion to obtain false testimony.

Assassinations - The bureau has been implicated as cooperating in the outright physical elimination – assassination – of selected political leaders, either for “exemplary” reasons or after other attempts at destroying their effectiveness had failed. The Bureau almost always used surrogates to perform such functions but can repeatedly be demonstrated as having provided the basic intelligence, logistics or other ingredients requisite to “successful” operations in this regard.

For further reading on COINTELPRO and how it is used to destroy progressive movements, link to Brian Glick’s essay COINTELPRO Revisited. You can also link to Covert War Against Native Americans by Ward Churchill, co-author of Agents of Repression.

Main Menu - Latest - Features - News - Fight Back! - A.L.F. - Commentary - Trenches - Links

   DeleteReplyForwardSpamMove... 

Previous | Next | Back to Messages Save Message

yeah, give us the good stuff!!! come on!! we are all DYING (sp?) to know!!!

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><div class=“ip-ubbcode-quote-title”>quote:</div><div class=“ip-ubbcode-quote-content”>Originally posted by goldy:
Your spelling is terrible! Rally I think Gowdy might go with some of your amazing theories </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It’s a lot harder than you think to spell like that. It takes about 5 times longer to write. I have to try and keep the spelling consistent (or should I say inconsistent) from message to message.

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><div class=“ip-ubbcode-quote-title”>quote:</div><div class=“ip-ubbcode-quote-content”>Originally posted by pacificsolo:
WHAT is your favorite color?! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>“Blue. No, green! AGHHHHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhh!” explosion blows the knight off the bridge

And, Goldy…what is the flying velocity of a sparrow?

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><div class=“ip-ubbcode-quote-title”>quote:</div><div class=“ip-ubbcode-quote-content”>goldy
Working Hunter
Posted Sep. 11, 2005 11:29 AM
Joe I have set the stage for our debate. Please tell me when we will hold are debate! As I have said before please make it soon because I am not sure they will allow me to debate you in JAIL!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

where is Camilla Cleese when we need her???

I think that both his mom & dad have heart problems and that goldy said that it would be better for his dad to be in the US for both insurance and quality of medical care reasons.

I find it interesting that the foundation was set up prior to alot happening in this womans life. Oh and doing the search with and without " makes a difference.

This being from the google search:

Helen V. Brach Foundation
55 West Wacker Drive, Chicago, IL 60601
Phone 312-372-4417 | Fax 312-372-0290 |

Background
Helen V. Brach endowed this foundation in 1974 with funds from the estate of her husband, Frank Brach (d. 1970), who had been a principal and owner of the E. J. Brach & Sons Candy Company until he sold it in 1966.

Finances

for tax year ending 3/31/2003

Total Assets $89,822,608.00
Grants Awarded $4,969,525.00

Officers and Other Supporters

Name Position
James J. O’Conner Vice President
Toni Perille Associate Director
John J. Sheridan Secretary, Treasurer
R. Matthew Simon Board Member
Raymond F. Simon President
Charles A. Vorhees Board Member
Charles M. Vorhees Board Member

Top Grants Made

Funding To Activist Groups Total Donated Time Frame
Food Animal Concerns Trust $215,000.00 1998 ”" 2002
World Resources Institute $160,000.00 1999 ”" 2002
Animal Legal Defense Fund $125,000.00 1999 ”" 2002
Friends of Animals $100,000.00 1999 ”" 2000
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine $70,000.00 1992 ”" 2002
United Poultry Concerns $55,000.00 1995 ”" 2002
Ark Trust $55,000.00 1998 ”" 1999
Performing Animals Welfare Society (PAWS) $50,000.00 2001 ”" 2001
Earth Island Institute $40,000.00 1998 ”" 1999
United Animal Nations $40,000.00 2000 ”" 2001
Wilderness Society $20,000.00 2000 ”" 2001
Physicians for Social Responsibility $20,000.00 1999 ”" 1999
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals $20,000.00 1992 ”" 1995
Fund for Animals $10,000.00 1998 ”" 1998
Farm Sanctuary $10,000.00 2001 ”" 2001
Animal Protection Institute $10,000.00 2002 ”" 2002
Animal Rights International $10,000.00 1998 ”" 1998
Union of Concerned Scientists $10,000.00 2000 ”" 2000

Copyright © 2005 Center for Consumer Freedom. All rights reserved.
if (window.print) { window.print() } else alert('To print his page press Ctrl-P on your keyboard
or choose print from your browser or device after

Goldy, I believe you are who you say you are. I also believe you are motivated by the desire to clear your dad’s name. I think you have been amazingly honest at times, like telling us exactly who you are, admitting you drink some at night, telling us you are truly fearful of what might happen to you, but mostly to your Dad. I also understand that you cannot or do not want to give detailed information and why, at times, you get angry and frustrated by the responses to your posts.

In light of all that, I’m going to ask you, just for a moment, to understand things from our point of view. First, people come on these boards anonymously, and often paint themselves as someone very different than who they are. There have been some notorious fakes…not necessarily of well-known people, but creations of their own mind. Sometimes we call them “trolls” and they can lead us down some very distressing paths with their lies…(ie the poster Musical_Jumper, who asked repeatedly for our support and help for her horse who was not able to hold weight when winter was coming, while in reality, she was slowly starving him to death through neglect. And yes, the horse died, and we finally found out the truth.) Joe Plemmons came on (as I’m sure you are aware) with a pseudonym, and was posting on a thread about himself.

Another unique aspect of the BB, is that we have very little to go on to “size up” a poster. One of the few ways we use, is to judge how a poster expresses themselves, how clear and concise, whether they use proper spelling and syntax, and how they respond to criticism. They fact that these criteria might not be a good measuring stick of someone’s IQ, or the strength of their ideas and arguments, does not occur to many. They do not have my advantage of being married for 20 years to a man who can speak powerfully and persuasively to a group of over 500, yet frequently misspell or misuse the written word. A man who could start his own company at a young age and nuture it into a highly successful corporation, but, when writing a casual letter, use word choices and unique spelling that could make your neck hairs stand on end. But I’m smart enough not to mistake his lack of written fluency with his innate intelligence. Since not everyone knows someone like my husband, you will have to forgive us for this lack of insight.

Lastly, I think you might be making the mistake of believing you can convince this group of people to believe what you believe. That cannot happen. The BB has a collective life and a brain of its own, and is not privvy to the history and emotional connections that you are. No one person can control where a thread goes, and what the majority of posters and lurkers believe.

You set out an interesting hypothesis for us. Let us examine it, and think on it for awhile. It will do no good to criticize posters for not understanding or agreeing with you, especially when many of your posts are vague and full of innuendo, whether by necessity or not. I cannot promise the BBers will ultimately agree or disagree with you, but you have given us food for thought. And that might have to be enough for now.

No…No where near Snowbird. She’s on a mountain & I am not, so I guess that I’m out of luck.

Stay up late? Remember that there are different time zones in the world. We all don’t live on the east coast of the USA.

If you see some legal docs you will find that alot of info you get along with info on the computer that it is highly unlikely that Plemmons made this story up. He had alot of help to create these lies to to get 2-3 people convicted of killing Helen Brach. Pleemons makes out great and the Feds look like genius’s!!!

I’m just wanting to know if Goldy with all his criminal knoweledge and expertise if he can can tell us if Jimmy Hoffa is “REALLY” under Giant Stadium??

Well, I have to agree with you, LLDM, that was a weak theory. But I do feel Plemmons confession was orchestrated with the feds. The info was fed right to Goudie and the Tribune. ABC7 got off the ground with it first, but Plemmons didn’t name any names to Goudie at that point. Sometime later, Goudie gets a copy of the transcript with the names blackened out, THEN, he gets a and un-redacted copy. That had to have been leaked to him by the Feds. And given the symbiotic relationship between the feds and the media, there was a reason they got this copy to him. So my guess is they wanted him to have the names Plemmons gave them.

You are right on in your summation of the 9 others he named, (except the woman, whom he said he never knew anyway, not even her name.) Clearly, there will be no more forthcoming from him about her! And he makes such an unexpected whitewash of Bailey! Even if he didn’t realize it himself ( and I surely think he did) there was no way his statement was going to have the impact to affect Bailey’s sentence.

I think Goldy mentioned something about this being a huge red herring, a couple of pages back. I’m beginning to think he has a point. I cannot see Plemmon’s opening his mouth over something as financially “iffy” as a book, especially one written by a notorious liar and con man. (I guess one could find a publisher for that kind of drivel, but it would have to be filed under “fiction!”

So what do both he and the FEDs stand to gain by this last performance by Plemmons?
t

ROFLMAO!!

Hey, to keep this horse-related, do you think the lack of REAL horses was an asset or a hindrance to “Holy Grail”?

Yes he is. If they have their way they will use the Patriot ACt to put him back!

Andrew, methinks we will need something FAR more powerful to read the craziness our dear friend goldy has just written…I’ve read it three times and I can’t understand a thing goldy said

http://www.officer.com/news/IBS/wmaq/news-2526740.html
… Prosecutors are again taking up the 1977 disappearance case of candy heiress Helen Vorhees Brach … talked to since," said Ernie Rizzo, a private investigator who believes Matlick …

Snowbird, I believe the theory was it was a real estate agent/girlfriend of Bailey’s.

jetsmom- i may not be able to spell that great,but im sure that i rode a heck of alot better than you!

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><div class=“ip-ubbcode-quote-title”>quote:</div><div class=“ip-ubbcode-quote-content”>A friend told me about this BB last night–I am reading a answering as I go. I had horses at Northwestern stables for years–I’m 65 and know all the players. Snowbird you obviously did not see the taped interview of Joe Plemmons on ABC Channel 7–I did–he at no time said he shot Helen in the head twice–Furthermore he never even said he shot her. You can buy a tape from ABC news Chicago. No where in any interview taped or otherwice does he say that! I’m only on page six–I’m sure you will hear from me again. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Maybe it would be a good idea if you read the whole thread before you comment!