Posted on 08/18/2004 3:09:02 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - The FBI (news - web sites) anticipates violent protests at the upcoming Republican National Convention in New York but does not have enough evidence to move against any group or person, the bureau's top terrorism official said Wednesday.
New York officials have said they expect hundreds of thousands of people to stage demonstrations around the convention, which begins Aug. 30.
Concern over the convention comes amid heightened security across New York over fears that foreign terrorists might strike the city again. New York remains on a "high" terrorism alert level, while most of the country is on elevated alert.
Federal investigators have infiltrated some organizations and are monitoring plans for protests being published on the Internet. The FBI also interviewed some protesters around the country before last month's Democratic convention in Boston and in anticipation of the GOP convention.
"We don't have any specific plot where we have all the variables we need to go out and take pre-emptive and judicial action," said Gary Bald, assistant director of the FBI's counterterrorism division.
The FBI has noted that some activist Web sites critical of Republicans and the convention include links to a site that lists Molotov cocktails, slingshots and bolt cutters as appropriate "offensive weapons" to carry during protests.
Three Democratic lawmakers on the House Judiciary Committee (news - web sites) have criticized the FBI's interviews of protesters around the country. They asked the Justice Department (news - web sites)'s inspector general to investigate what they called "possible violations of First Amendment free speech and assembly rights."
The committee's ranking Democrat, Michigan's John Conyers, along with Reps. Robert C. "Bobby" Scott of Virginia and Jerrold Nadler of New York, said in a letter that the FBI "appears to be engaged in systematic political harassment and intimidation of legitimate anti-war protesters."
Bald, speaking with about 20 reporters at the bureau's headquarters, said FBI agents have interviewed only protesters they believed were plotting to firebomb media vehicles at the conventions or might have known about such plots. All these investigations are being treated as terrorism cases, Bald said.
"I've got more than enough to keep my people busy than to worry about if a protester is pro or con on some issue," Bald said. He called it "critically important that citizens have the ability to exercise their First Amendment rights."
Bald added, "We don't monitor rallies; we don't monitor people at rallies." But the FBI will open an investigation if it learns from tips, informants or other methods that protesters are planning to commit violent acts, Bald said.
The warning of a possible attack against media trucks, disclosed days before the Democratic convention, was based on claims by an informant who described an alleged plot by self-described anarchists in the Midwest to throw Molotov cocktails at television vans, a senior U.S. law enforcement official said.
Mark Silverstein, the Colorado legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites), said he was "very skeptical of the FBI's claim." The ACLU, which was contacted by some of the protesters who were interviewed by the FBI, said agents never asked directly about such an alleged plot.
Meanwhile, in New York, an anti-war group planning a massive demonstration the day before the GOP convention asked a judge Wednesday to overrule city officials and let protesters gather in Central Park. Lawyers for United for Peace and Justice argued that the city's denial violates the state constitution.
City officials had said the expected crowd at the Aug. 29 rally, which could exceed 250,000 people, would damage the grass.
Not only swing voters. Read a thread on DU a few weeks ago, they were discussing how counter-productive violent protests would be to the Dems, so even the rabid DUer's know it's not good for their party. But the Dem "ABB" and "hate Bush" bunch has gotten in bed with some bad folks and they won't be able to restrain their violence.
I'm sure Mr. Nadler will be on the front lines during the first amendment sanctioned peaceful protests.
... or he will be the front line.
To Nadler, Conyers and Scott, illegal demonstrations and protests without proper permits and the carrying and use of "offensive" weaponry is the same as "legitimate protest." Expect a democrat to come up with a constitutional right to break the law.
The Ruckus Society actually PUT A STATEMENT ON IT'S WEBSITE before the Democratic convention that they'd been ordered to stand down on their plan to protest it. The statemnt actually recommended the dear little members follow orders, then went on to enthuse about how they were gonna make up for it at the RNC.
"duplicate 1998 - of course I mean 1968."
That's okay, the schmucks caused trouble in 1998, too.
The left never blames their own misreading of events for anything that can be explained away by a good right-wing conspiracy. I have verbally and logically pinned them to the wall before with this stuff, but it's usually just a tiresome waste of time.
Eventually, some of them will grow up.
I pissed off a lib this morning when I told him that the Great Unwashed descending on NY were in alliance with the Democratic Party and their intention was to disrupt the Republican convention.
He's an old time Dem who still doesn't realize that his party has been hijacked by hard lefties, commies, Hollywood and billionaires. He still thinks they care about 'little people'.
Matter of fact, he called me a 'McCarthyite' and has been giving me the cold shoulder all day.
Bummer...
Rats, it's changed. I should have saved it. Now they're just organizing the disruption of New York.
I have already sent in a tip to the FBI concerning protests at the RNC.
I suggest if anyone else gets anything concrete, send it in as well. They have a web-based form.
Agree. For a history lesson the DemonRats should review how successful their protests were during the conventions of '68.
That's good, because the same sort of leftist thugs helped give Nixon a win in 1968.
I know, don't you love how the Rats think that Kerry acting like Reagan and pretending this RNC is the Chicago convention is going to get Bush out, as if the American people are that stupid! The Rats forget that everyone looked at the Rat protestors smearing feces on cops back then knew instantly whose buddies they were. That will happen here, too.
I would be very surprised if some of the violence expected in NYC isn't that of average people on the street beating up the scumball protestors.
I am concerned no so much at the loony protesters, rather that they create additional crowd conditions, pandemonium, havoc, chaos, noise (the list goes on and on), which will make it much, much easier for an Al Qaeda team (or teams) to use the unruly environment to gain operational mobility and set off bombs etc, undetected.
My hunch is that because there will be so many unruly types, it will be much more difficult to efficiently deploy and utilize manpower where legitimate threats exist. In essence, the hordes of radical professional protesters serve as a tactical smokescreen for Al Qaeda elements, similar to smoke grenades being used on a battlefield to cover troop movement.
In that sense, if there IS an actual terrorist attack, and critical manpower was dealing with anarchist BS, and prevented from engaging or disrupting a terrorist operation in progress, I would argue that the hordes of unruly protestors can be directly implicated in any terrorist attack, and prosecuted accordingly to the maximum extent of the law.
I am concerned no so much at the loony protesters, rather that they create additional crowd conditions, pandemonium, havoc, chaos, noise (the list goes on and on), which will make it much, much easier for an Al Qaeda team (or teams) to use the unruly environment to gain operational mobility and set off bombs etc, undetected.
My hunch is that because there will be so many unruly types, it will be much more difficult to efficiently deploy and utilize manpower where legitimate threats exist. In essence, the hordes of radical professional protesters serve as a tactical smokescreen for Al Qaeda elements, similar to smoke grenades being used on a battlefield to cover troop movement.
In that sense, if there IS an actual terrorist attack, and critical manpower was dealing with anarchist BS, and prevented from engaging or disrupting a terrorist operation in progress, I would argue that the hordes of unruly protestors can be directly implicated in any terrorist attack, and prosecuted accordingly to the maximum extent of the law.
FR might get hit.
I sincerely hope those arrested are charged as enemy combatants and sent to Gitmo!
Looks like any web site they deem as pro Bush will get a DOS
I meet a lot of older Dems who act as if their party has been in stasis since the days of Roosevelt and Truman. Say what you want about Franklin D., but a lot of the old-timers loved him.
Here's a clue for any of them that may be lurking here:
The 1940s were a long time ago. Political parties change. Your party pretends to be about 'the little guy'. It isn't anymore. You owe it to yourself to look a bit deeper than just saying 'I've always been a Democrat'.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.