News of Interest.TV
Politics

A Summary of Political Activism Issues

updated October 12, 2011

Members of the government sponsored provocateur group "The Black Bloc" prepare to infiltrate a peaceful demonstration.
Members of the government sponsored provocateur group "The Black Bloc" prepare to infiltrate a peaceful demonstration.

Many blockages exist to the political activist population’s effectiveness as well as the general public’s ”word of mouth” activist activity, but such blockages can be circumvented and effectiveness can be accelerated.

This article summarises issues including activist groups being infiltrated by government and law enforcement organizations using ”provocateur” groups and other methods, the effects of varying activist communication styles, the benefiets of activists shifting their focus, and many other issues.


This summary article is continually updated.












The Problem of Activist Group Infiltration

Political demonstrations and activist groups and are often infiltrated by individuals associated with government, law enforcement, or other organizations for purposes of spreading disinformation, spying on members, creating dissent within the groups, and attempting to discredit the activities of the groups by creating hostile behavior.

This section contains video clips and articles which help to illustrate such situations.







This article by Webster Griffin Tarpley explains how the ”Occupy Wall Street” protests are being co-opted by the Global Elite behind the scenes in order to shift the focus of the protests to supporting the Presidential candidacy of Barack Obama.


Webster Tarpley— ”Occupy Wall Street: Who Wants to Hijack the Movement?”

by Webster Griffin Tarpley
tarpley.net

October 7, 2011

Two higher level individuals in the Occupy Wall Street movement are pictured here, both are involved in relations with the news media.
Two higher level individuals in the Occupy Wall Street movement are pictured here, both are involved in relations with the news media.

Media spokesmen for the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations claimed that their operation is totally transparent, with everything subject to democratic discussion in a general assembly of all comers. But eyewitness reports from experienced observers on the ground in lower Manhattan indicate a much different reality behind these bland assurances. Forces appeared to be at work behind the scenes to manipulate the protest movement into a posture of supporting the presidential candidacy of Wall Street puppet Obama.

Eyewitness observers suggest that the deliberations of the general assembly are largely a diversion, and that real power is being increasingly concentrated in the hands of about 20 mysterious and anonymous individuals who appear to make up a kind of covert steering committee that pulls the strings on the general assembly, or else goes around it completely. The members of this cadre of mysterious operatives are not as young as the average demonstrator. The secret leadership is made up of people ranging in age from 25 to over 40, with the older ones occupying the key posts. Many of them appear to be active duty or recently retired military.


A Covert Steering Committee Behind the Scenes?

Attempts to ascertain the names of the behind-the-scenes leaders are met with stonewalling. When pressed to reveal her identity, one female leader gave her name as ”Mary MIA.” Another gave his name as ”Tony POW.”

If the leaders of OWS want to be transparent, let them make public at least the full names of the people who are actually running the show. No one wants to join a movement with anonymous leaders.

Observers have noticed that almost all of the likely members of the secret steering committee disappear from view between 4 and 6 p.m. each afternoon, right before the opening of the general assembly, for which they then re-appear. It is assumed that they are attending a closed-door meeting, but the general assembly is not officially informed of this fact.


Strange Bedfellows

Two individuals who appear to belong to the higher levels of the pecking order in Zuccotti Park are pictured above. The one on the left calls himself ”Brendan.” When newspaper correspondents and other media representatives arrive, he is often the one who handles relations with them. ”Brendan” looks old enough to be the father of many of the demonstrators.

The person pictured above on the right is a frequent speaker in the general assembly. He also has a role in relations with the press. According to one protester, he may have connections to the US military, but this has not been confirmed. Is his do-rag or bandana a fashion statement, or something else?

Who are these people? Who appointed them? To whom are they accountable?


Who Invited Michael Moore?

The general assembly is supposed to approve all major decisions. In reality, it appears to be occupied with endless deliberations about trivia while the really big decisions are being made someplace else. A case in point are the invitations which have obviously been extended to a whole series of discredited left liberal figures, many of them deeply implicated in inflicting the Obama presidency and continued Wall Street rule on our nation. Michael Moore, Naomi Klein, Mike Myers, and left-IMF ideologue Joseph Stiglitz have all appeared, and a visit by Noam Chomsky, a devoted supporter of the Bush theory of terrorism, is reportedly in the works. Eyewitnesses have reported that most demonstrators were not happy with the presence of the millionaire Michael Moore, who was using the demonstrations as props for his usual routine of self-promotion. But these objections carried no weight. Regular participants in the general assembly report that they were never consulted about whether to invite these left liberals. It is therefore a good guess that the invitations were actually issued by the secret steering committee. The general idea is once again to reduce the protest movement to a mere auxiliary in the effort to get Obama reelected.


The Consensus Straitjacket

The members of the secret steering committee have taken a leading role in imposing the unwieldy and time-consuming formalism of always reaching a consensus in the general assembly, meaning that any significant opposition can block the implementation of urgent actions. A simple up or down majority vote is not enough. (The last governing assembly of any major nation to give each member a veto over the actions of the whole body was the aristocratic Polish Diet of the 18th century, which was so dysfunctional that it led to Poland being obliterated from the map of Europe - not an example to be imitated.)

The consensus method provides immense comfort to the predatory speculators of Wall Street, since it virtually guarantees that no potent and controversial strategy to break the power of finance capital can emerge. Indeed, it guarantees that absolutely nothing will be able to emerge in an emergency after a rapid turn in the overall situation. The US Congress is paralyzed by a minority, but the consensus rules of the general assembly mean that it can be paralyzed by a tiny clique bent on sabotage. In the background, the covert steering committee is busy creating a series of faits accomplis.

The deliberations of the general assembly are one big filibuster. On October 4, much of the session was taken up with an agonized discussion of whether to buy or knit and sew sleeping bags as the nights became colder. Right-wing commentators hostile to the protests had a field day using this grotesque scene to mock the entire movement.

Those who run the General assembly sessions are known as facilitators. The relation of these facilitators to the secret steering committee is being investigated.


The OWS Declaration: Not One Concrete Demand for Americans

While the General assembly is occupied with questions like what to order for lunch as part of the shipments of free food that mysteriously appear at the demonstration site, the vital issue of program is left to a subcommittee. On October 5, the Olbermann evening news featured a reading of the Occupy Wall Street Declaration, written by protesters Ryan Hoffman and Lex Rendon. This document does not offer an analysis of the current economic crisis. Rather, it represents a laundry list of complaints, many valid and some spurious. Most important, this document contains not one concrete demand, measure, or program point on which the protesters are willing to pledge that they will be fighting for the interests of the American people. In that sense, it is a document of moral and intellectual impotence. It whines and complains, but it will do nothing to combat the widespread suspicion of the OWS movement felt in many quarters because of the Soros endorsement.

Economic demands are absolutely vital. The movement needs to offer specific solutions for the grave abuses and economic tragedies which are plaguing working people. These demands acquire a material power as they gain mass support. To get support from the inner-city ghetto, from the farm belt, from women, from labor, from the elderly, their vital concerns must be directly addressed. These groups absolutely do not need more analysis telling them how bad things are. They already know that. They need to see a social force which is ready to take leadership in accomplishing radical reforms -or else the revolution, as the case may be.


Student Loan Amnesty Now Paid for by 1% Wall Street Sales Tax

One obvious demand which needs to be included is an immediate amnesty or cancellation of all outstanding student loans. The zombie banks which have been bailed out by the United States government can and should eat their part of the $1 trillion which will have to be written off. The loans guaranteed by the government can be offset by new tax income from a 1% Wall Street sales tax on all financial turnover, including stocks, bonds, and derivatives. Estimates of the additional revenue from a Wall Street sales tax of this type start in the hundreds of billions of dollars and go into the trillions. The proceeds could be split between the federal government and the states, for the purposes of maintaining the social safety net and vital public services. Ordinary people pay sales tax, while bankers pay nothing. One bright spot in the demonstrations has been the presence of the nurses’ union, which has been militantly advocating just such a Tobin tax or financial transactions tax. Student loan amnesty now paid for by a 1% Wall St sales tax is a demand which could blow the lid off US politics once and for all.

Economic program is a science. It requires the mastery of many fields. Serious, intelligent people need to put their gifts to work mastering the science of economic program as part of their social responsibility to the American people.


The Indignados of Madrid: Europe’s Biggest Failures

According to reliable reports, the consensus method was imposed via the steering committee preparing for the demonstrations during the summer months. Individuals claiming to be students from Spain and Greece arrived and joined the steering committee, where they advocated the crippling consensus method. They pointed to the general assemblies held by the indignados of Madrid, a movement of youthful protesters concerned about austerity measures, youth unemployment, the excessive power of bankers, and economic injustice. But, even compared with Tunis, Cairo, Athens, and Reykjavík, the Madrid indignados must be judged as the biggest failure of them all, because of their total inability to oust the ”socialist” IMF agent Zapatero, the enforcer of genocidal austerity demanded by the banks, or to block any of the austerity cuts. The indignados had no positive impact whatsoever on Spanish politics. Why imitate failure? This is the side of the current protests which Wall Street predator George Soros was happy to endorse this week.


A New International Otpor?

Observers are reminded of Otpor, the organization created by the CIA and the National Endowment for Democracy for the purpose of overthrowing the Serbian strongman Milosevic in 2000. After that color revolution had occurred, the leaders of Otpor turned their experience into an immensely lucrative consultancy under which they were assigned by the CIA and the NED to Ukraine, Georgia, Lebanon, and Egypt to train the operatives that would overthrow national leaders which the US wanted to get rid of. Have indignados veterans opened a new counterinsurgency franchise of this kind?


The ”Theoretician”: Anarchist Peter Gelderloos, Fetishist of Consensus

Last night Occupy Wall Street spokesman Matthew Swaye appeared on the Ed Show of MSNBC, and announced that the main theoretician of the consensus straitjacket is anarchist Peter Gelderloos, author of the book Consensus. Swaye praised the ”intricate process” of the general assemblies, where votes are expressed by thumbs up or thumbs down. Gelderloos, who is almost unknown in the United States, was arrested in Spain in 2007, and during his trial became a sort of minor celebrity in certain circles there. This may explain why the indignados leaders were indoctrinated with his belief structure. Gelderloos’s system is a Procrustean bed on which not many in their right mind will be willing to lie down.

Television appearances by protesters Kelly Heresy, Tyler Combelic, Ryan Hoffman, Lex Rendon and Swaye in recent days all have one common characteristic - their absolute inability to formulate a single demand or program which would speak to the urgent needs of the broader American public. Instead, many of them used the few precious minutes they had extolling the virtues of the imbecilic consensus model as the basis for some future Utopia. Hard-pressed working people do not have time for these pipe dreams. American working people urgently need help in finding a job, in blocking a foreclosure, in obtaining health care, and in getting out from under the crushing burden of student loans. Who chose these spokespersons?

So far, the current Wall Street protests have offered these embattled Americans virtually nothing but an unfulfilled promissory note.

Sam Seder, a former broadcaster for the failed Air America network and Obama backer, has argued that the movement should never come up with a program of concrete demands. This is the choice that would suit Obama. Unless and until the protest movement tells the American people what it is willing to fight for on their behalf, it risks becoming a mere collection of roustabouts for the Obama reelection campaign.

The stakes are much too high to let this happen. If this movement fails, fascism may be much closer than many people think. It must succeed, and to succeed it immediately requires a series of intelligible goals.














”Black Bloc” provocateurs get green light to rampage at the 2010 Toronto G20 economic summit

  view individual page  |   view in popup windowRunning Time: 4 minutes 17 seconds  
This video clip describes the government sponsored provocateur group ”The Black Bloc” (spelled in this video ”The Black Block”) rioting in the streets, smashing windows, and setting fire to police cars on the streets of Toronto for an hour and a half while police only watched from a distance during the June 2010 Toronto G20 economic summit.

From the video’s YouTube page:

A photo Journalist describes his experience following the black block as they rampage through the streets of Toronto during the G20 Summit.

20,000 police and security officials and a $1 billion security budget were not enough to stop 75-100 black block anarchists from smashing windows and torching police cars during a 1.5 hour rampage. The Black Block were able to rampage through the street for 24 blocks until they reached the ‘official protest zone’ where they quickly changed clothes dispersed through the crowd of peaceful protesters and then left the site.

The police were fully aware of the rampage and watched the black block from a distance at a number of locations. It wasn’t until they had dispersed into a crowd of peaceful protesters who thought that they were in a sanctioned area that the police took action beating innocent people with batons and spraying them with pepper spray.

Why was this allowed to happen? Police abandoned police cars at Bay and King when they didn’t need to, why? Was this allowed to happen so the Harper government could justify an outrageous security bill when there was no credible terrorist threat (according to CSIS)? Who led this group of vandals? Were they infiltrated by government paid provocateurs as was the case in Montebello where police with masks and rocks attacked their own riot squad?

For more information about this incident, see the article Peaceful Protesters Attacked, Arrested While Cop-Car Arsonists Left Alone.









Seattle WTO Riots: Problem, Reaction, Solution

  view individual page  |   view in popup windowRunning Time: 9 minutes 55 seconds  
This video compilation from the Alex Jones documentary Police State II: The Takeover shows how demonstrations at the 1999 World Trade Organization (WTO) meetings in Seattle during the Clinton Adminstration were infiltrated by violent provocateurs sent by government groups in order to give law enforcement personnel an excuse to attack and suppress the peaceful legitimate protesters.

Video of the violence perpetrated by the group of over 30 government sponsored provocateurs is shown, followed by evidence including local news reports that shows how the group was housed and protected by law enforcement officials during the week of the demonstrations.








Behind the Big News: Infiltration of the Anti-WTO Movement

  view individual page  |   view in popup windowRunning Time: 6 minutes 28 seconds  
This video clip from the documentary ”Behind the Big News” explains Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) connections to the anti-WTO movement which are meant to ensure continued propagation of globalist agendas.


Street demonstrators turned the area of the World Trade Organization into a war zone. Over 500 National Guardsmen and State police are called in to restore order in what became known as the ”Battle of Seattle.”

The major media focuses on the chaos and the mob's demands, but they carefully avoided the issue as to how the groups on the street are organized and funded, or whether their leaders might have a hidden agenda. Instead the media portraits such demonstrations as natural outpourings of genuine grassroots concern.

For those who orchestrate these events, it's the illusion that counts.

William Norman Grigg, Senior Editor, New American Magazine: ”The familiar media melodrama of the anti-globalization movement that we have seen in Seattle and some of the other protest venues is really a classic example of the bracketing of false alternatives, because we are told that these people 'oppose' the global agenda— after all they are called 'anti-globalization activists.' Well, what it is they oppose? They don't oppose global government, they believe there is too much free market capitalism in the world, and government— at a global level— has to be more assertive in imposing controls over the free exchange of goods and services.”

William F. Jasper, Senior Editor, New American Magazine: ”You see that both of these sides are really calling for empowering the United Nations.”

The media further stage manages the illusion of conflict by promoting those designated as the official opposition. The media appointed spokesperson for the Anti-WTO forces is Lori Wallach, who heads up ”Global Trade Watch.” Ignored by the media is the fact that Wallach receives funding from the Ford Foundation, which is closely tied to the CFR. The friendly relationship between Wallach and the CFR agenda was made clear in ”Foreign Policy Magazine”— a major conduit for CFR thinking. This issue [of the magazine] signals media leaders that Lori Wallach should be represented as an ”expert” on trade issues. By ensuring that only false opposition is offered to its revolutionary agenda, the CFR internationalists can't loose.

Also see the article A Summary of the Documentary Video ”Behind the Big News” for more video clips from this documentary.








”Provocateur agents” caught attempting to incite violence at a peaceful Quebec demonstration

  view individual page  |   view in popup windowRunning Time: 5 minutes 23 seconds  
Peaceful protesters have caught on video and thwarted attempts by ”provocateur” officers to incite violence at a 2007 demonstration in Montebello, Canada. Video shows three men with faces masked by bandannas attempting to mingle with protesters while one held a rock in his hand, and after being confronted and exposed by peaceful protesters the men were ”arrested” by officers who have been shown to be associated with them.

The text in this article has been hilighted by News of Interest.TV.


SPP Agent Provocateur Cops Caught Red Handed Attempting To Incite Violence

Boots give away undercover cops as real protesters expose criminality

by Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Wednesday, August 22, 2007


Peaceful protestors at the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) summit in Montebello have captured sensational video of hired agent provocateurs attempting to incite rioting and turn the protest violent, only to encounter brave resistance from real protest leaders.

A video, posted on YouTube, shows three young men, their faces masked by bandannas, mingling Monday with protesters in front of a line of police in riot gear. At least one of the masked men is holding a rock in his hand, reports the Canadian Press.

The three are confronted by protest organizer Dave Coles, president of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada. Coles makes it clear the masked men are not welcome among his group of protesters, whom he describes as mainly grandparents. He urges them to leave and find their own protest location.


Notice how the ”anarchists” begin to become uncomfortable when Coles and others accuse them of really being cops, while pulling at their face masks. They are seen to edge closer to the uniformed police and engage in some form of discussion. The police then let them pass through their line with very little resistance and ”arrest” them in what is plainly a total charade.

Boots worn by protesters attempting to incite violence have been shown to be the same as worn by law enforcement officers.
Boots worn by protesters attempting to incite violence have been shown to be the same as worn by law enforcement officers.

More damning proof that the radicals were in fact cops was revealed with the release of photographs of the incident which show that the anarchists have exactly the same footwear on as the cops.

On the soles of their boots are yellow triangles, exactly the same as on the boots of a police officer kneeling beside the men.

While some have said the marks could represent Canadian Safety Industry seals, it seems very coincidental when placed in context with the way the rioters were ”subdued”.

To compound the evidence, police have stated that only 4 protestors in total have been arrested and charged, two of them being women. Veteran protest organizers have confirmed the identity of the four as genuine protesters.

So what happened to the rock wielding anarchists?

The few radical protestors at the summit have provided police with the pretext to use rubber bullets, tear gas and pepper spray on peaceful protestors.

Neither the RCMP nor the Surete du Quebec would comment on the video or even discuss generally whether they ever use the tactic of employing agents provocateurs, however it has been common practice at previous protests for authorities to employ police or special forces to intentionally infiltrate peaceful protests and cause violence.

In Seattle in 1999 at the World Trade Organization meeting, the authorities declared a state of emergency, imposed curfews and resorted to nothing short of police state tactics in response to a small minority of hostile black bloc hooligans. In his film Police State 2, Alex Jones covered the fact that the police allowed the black bloc to run riot in downtown Seattle while they concentrated on preventing the movement of peaceful protestors. The film presents evidence that the left-wing anarchist groups are actually controlled by the state and used to demonize peaceful protesters.

At WTO protests in Genoa 2001 a protestor was killed after being shot in the head and run over twice by a police vehicle. The Italian Carabinere also later beat on peaceful protestors as they slept, and even tortured some, at the Diaz School. It later emerged that the police fabricated evidence against the protesters, claiming they were anarchist rioters, to justify their actions. Some Carabiniere officials have since come forward to say they knew of infiltration of the black bloc anarchists, that fellow officers acted as agent provocateurs.

At the Free Trade Area of Americas protests in Miami in late November 2003, more provocateuring was evident. The United Steelworkers of America, calling for a congressional investigation, stated that the police intentionally caused violence and arrested and charged hundreds of peaceful protestors. The USWA suggested that billions of dollars supposedly slated for Iraq reconstruction funds are actually being used to subsidize ‘homeland repression’ in America.

Canadian Prime Minister Harper’s description of protestors at the SPP summit as ”sad” along with President Bush’s latest comments that critics of the SPP are peddling conspiracy theories, in spite of the the fact that heads of unions, law experts and House Representatives are deeply concerned over the program’s agenda, are indications of how much of a threat they see peaceful protesters and outspoken critics to be.

The globalist elite have demonstratively used provocateuring to demonize all demonstrators attempting to expose their criminality, the SPP summit is the latest in a long list of examples.


Also see the video clip Infiltration of an Activist Protest in Quebec showing a news report explaining that Quebec provincial police admitted that their officers disguised themselves as hostile demonstrators during the protest.







Infiltration of an Activist Protest in Quebec

  view individual page  |   view in popup windowRunning Time: 2 minutes 49 seconds  
View a video speaking about the Quebec provincial police admitting that their officers disguised themselves as hostile demonstrators during a protest at the North American leaders summit in Montebello, Quebec.








Tea Party Co-Founder Laments Hijacking of Movement
November 30, 2009
In an editorial posted on the CAIVN (California Independent Voter Network), Chad Peace, a co-founder of the original Tea Party movement, blasts the establishment Republican takeover of the movement.

Inspired by Rick Sabtelli’s now legendary rant on CNBC, Peace and a business partner set-up a tea party website. ”Within days, we received tens of thousands of e-mails and passionate pleas for government accountability. Our vision was to change the political debate focused on general divisions to one centered on specific solutions. We asked our supporters to question party-line politicians and demand that our leaders take a more independent and reasoned stance on the issues facing our country,” writes Peace.

It didn’t take long, however, for establishment Republicans to muscle in and hijack the idea. ”Knowing we had neither the financial means nor man-power to out-publicize political perverts, I was never-the-less convinced that this independent movement would not be overrun by golden idols,” Peace explains. He wrote to supporters and asked them ”to be weary of old Republican figureheads like Newt Gingrich and current political strategists Patrick Leahy, hiding their identity behind make-shift ‘grassroots’ websites. I was hopeful that the same talking heads, like Hannity and O’Reilly, that asked us to bend over blindly to past leaders would not have enough credibility to grandstand in front of an independent-minded movement.”

It wasn’t so much Hannity and O’Reilly that compromised the movement. It was mostly Glenn Beck. His 9.12 Project stole much of the thunder of the original tea party movement and channeled it into a Fox News segment complete with adverts from Big Oil and Big Pharma.

Beck declared he was formulating ”a 100 year plan... a book that will provide specific policies, principles and, most importantly, action steps that each of us can take to play a role in this Refounding.” He announced that on August 28, 2010, he will gather patriotic Americans ”at the feet of Abraham Lincoln on the National Mall for the unveiling of The Plan and the birthday of a new national movement to restore our great country.”

Few seemed to notice the obvious contradiction — a corporate media network calling for a restoration of American ideals while simultaneously working against those ideals. Fox News is owned and operated by a political player who supported the neocons and their murderous wars and then backed the political campaign of the wife of a former president who was ”anointed” for the presidency by the Bilderberg Group. Rupert Murdoch has played both sides of the fence and now one of his hirelings is calling for a restoration of the republic.

”Propelled by the moving mouths on TV and the talking heads of such ironically named organizations such as the ‘American Family Association’ (one must agree that for an admitted adulterer with three ex-wives heading the AFA is ironic, right?), the movement lost its focus,” Peace continues. ”No longer were tea partiers upset with the bipartisan corruption in Washington D.C., they are mad at the socialists communists Hitler-like Democrats. No longer did Constitutionalism mean respecting the rule of law, it meant Obama is not really our president. A movement founded on the principles of independent analysis, it has become a yelling fest for punch-drunk cynics armed with incoherent talking points.”

Beck’s ”new movement” was designed by the establishment specifically to destroy the threat posed by the original tea party movement. Glenn Beck’s rhetoric on ”Marxist” Democrats is a cynical attempt to perpetuate the false right-left paradigm and steer patriotic Americans back into a political safety zone controlled by the elite. Obama and the Democrats are not Marxist. They are the flipside of the same political system supported and perpetuated by the Republicans. Obama’s advisers are from Goldman Sachs and Wall Street, not the Communist International.

”Slowly, I’ve lost some of my unrealistic idealism,” Peace admits. ”As I pull back the blinders, I try to look at the tea party from the eyes of an outsider, the average American. What I see is a bunch of people reciting partisan political sermons, coddling fears, and perpetuating a superficial battle between ‘left’ and ‘right’; drowning the well intentioned idealists that remain.”

The coup d’état will be complete in February when the establishment holds its 1st Annual Tea Party Convention in Nashville, Tennessee. ”Minnesota 6th District Rep. Michele Bachmann will burnish her conservative standing when she appears,” reports MinnPost. The event ”also will feature former Alaska Gov. and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin. City Pages says Bachmann will give a breakfast speech, while Palin is the keynote speaker at the Saturday evening main event Feb. 6.”

It will not be an event for ordinary Americans. ”Tickets for the weekend convention are now on sale for $549 but don’t include accommodations at the Gaylord Opryland Hotel and Convention Center.” How many Americans — besieged by the bankers and witnessing their middle class lives slowly dissolving before their eyes — can afford to fork over several hundred dollars? More to the point, why would they want to spend that amount of money on a circus sideshow featuring a political hack groomed by the elite for higher political office?

The establishment is grooming Sarah Palin to lead a refashioned tea party movement.

”As the Tea Party Express makes its way across the country, Sarah Palin has emerged as a favorite daughter of the movement,” CNN reported in September. ”So far, no politician has emerged as a leader of the Tea Party movement - and the question of just who might eventually take up the mantle is a hot topic on the bus. Nobody may be better positioned than Palin.”

”Palin is the ultimate small-town renegade rising from the frontier to do battle with the corrupt establishment. Her followers take pride in the way she has aroused fear, hatred and panic in the minds of the liberal elite,” writes David Brooks, who straddles both sides of the false right-left paradigm as a journalist for NPR and The Weekly Standard.

Palin is no such thing. She is merely a new face plastered on the Republican party as it struggles to regain power from the Democrats. Palin is more attractive than the old Republican stalwarts. But as they say, beauty is only skin-deep. Her ”rogue” status is a carefully crafted establishment magic trick.

”As the battle rages, I have more faith than ever that an independent revolution will come,” Chad Peace concludes. ”When the absurdity of our political process rises to the point where tea bags become a right wing rally cry and the left still manages to drop in the polls, there is a growing opportunity for the increasingly disenchanted to drive a stake right down the middle.”

We can only hope. However, before disenchantment can work in our favor, a few million Americans need to tune out Glenn Beck and Fox News. They need to see Sarah Palin for what she is — a creature groomed by the same global elite that sold us the Obama change mantra that turned out to be the same refried dogma offered up by the Bush administration.








”Coffee Party” Founder is Obama Campaign Operative
March 3, 2010
Billed as an alternative grassroots movement to the Tea Party, which has been for the most part absorbed by mainline Republicans and Neoconservatives, the ”Coffee Party” promised to wake up politically minded Americans and offered a different avenue for the freedom movement.

However, the so called founder of the Coffee Party has been quickly exposed as an Obama campaign operative, whose caffeine concept was purely designed to undermine and co-opt the Tea Party ideology.

Described as ”a documentary filmmaker who lives outside Washington”, Annabel Park has amassed some 40,000 members via a Facebook page.

”We’re not the opposite of the Tea Party,” Ms. Park, 41, told the New York Times. ”We’re a different model of civic participation, but in the end we may want some of the same things.”

”We need to roll up our sleeves, put our heads together and work it out,” she said. ”That’s, to me, an American way of doing this.”

The slogan is ”Wake Up and Stand Up.” The mission statement declares that the federal government is ”not the enemy of the people, but the expression of our collective will, and that we must participate in the democratic process in order to address the challenges we face as Americans.”

At first glance this sounds like attractive stuff to concerned Americans who are sick and tired of big government ruling over their lives. However, a quick background search on Miss Park reveals her real intentions.

Park campaigned for Obama in 2008 and was one of the organizers and operators of the influential "United for Obama" video channel at YouTube.

”I found that people have little understanding of the change that Senator Barack Obama is advocating. I thought from my experience in using videos for civil movements that videos would be the best way to promote the need for change and for Obama. That’s why I decided to work for the Obama campaign,” Annabel Park said.

She made over twenty promotional videos for the Obama campaign that drew tens of thousands of views.

William A. Jacobson of Le-gal In-sur-rec-tion has the full story.

The revelation, along with the discovery that Park is a former Strategy Analyst at the NY Times, [Park's associated Linked In page has been taken down after drawing media attention] explains why she has received a great deal of mainstream media coverage recently.

The New York Times and the Washington Post [and later CNN] ran glowing articles on Park in the last week, a factor that immediately raised suspicion over her grassroots credentials.

Clearly, either the newspapers were incapable of googling her name or taking five minutes to look into her activities, or they were fully aware of Park’s intentions and background and chose not to include it in their pieces.


In addition, Park’s various tweets reveal that, far from being open to working with Tea Party activists, Park appears to have a vitriolic hatred of them:

[Following are some Titter messages she has sent..]

"We need to re-engage the grassroots movement that got Obama elected. We need to get busy. Cannot give it away to the tea baggers." - 2:32 PM, Jan 26, 2010

"We must deal with reality instead of indulging the paranoid fantasies of the #teaparty. join #coffeeparty." - 1:43 AM, Jan 27, 2010

"We're not going to take this tea crap anymore, let's work for change!" - 12:25 AM, Jan 27, 2010



”The Coffee Party simply is part of the perpetual Obama campaign, a means by which to subvert the real grassroots Tea Party movement by co-opting part of the message, but in a way which supports keeping Obama in power.” Jacobson writes.

”Much like a parasite which feeds off of and ultimately takes over the host.”

The author of the New York Times piece has since declined a request by Jacobson to update her article on Park with this information.

Unfortunately, the Coffee Party is simply another example of the entrenched political establishment piggy backing on the unstoppable grassroots liberty movement in an attempt to manipulate and control it.









Activist Issues in Raising Awareness of Political Issues

Common blockages exist to the activist population’s effectiveness as well as the general public’s ”word of mouth” activist activity, but such blockages can be circumvented and effectiveness can be accelerated.








The influence of individual activist communication style on the effectiveness of ideas being communicated


Deriving the Most Effective Communication for Creating Political Change
updated August 14, 2010
This article is a study of individual citizens’ politically motivated communication styles and the practical voting results arising due to that communication, by means of graphing theoretical voting results.

Activist communication style can either be ”communicative” to win the support of those being communicated with, or ”solidifying” which entrenches people's opinions on both sides of an issue. This article describes aspects of the two styles and conducts a theoretical study of the practical voting results of the styles being used against each other. It is shown by graphing theoretical voting results that effective ”communicative” style will always trump the effects of ”solidifying” style.

This article will define the terms used, offer graphical representations of the ideas being presented, and draw conclusions based on the results of study.







The problem of ”distraction activism” and the importance of activists shifting focus

One of the most common blockages of activist effectiveness occurs when activists focus on communicating only mainstream or relatively superficial issues, while ignoring or even unintentionally supporting the root causes of problems due to lack of awareness or fear of speaking about issues which are more disturbing and initially not as commonly spoken about. This could be compared to a paramedic arriving on the scene of an accident and administering bandages even though what really is needed is a tourniquet.

Distraction activism is particularly ineffective because when activists focus only on ”safe” and mainstream issues, the public gets the impression that those issues represent the extent of the most extreme problems that society is facing and thus they are not moved to action.

The media usually does its best to block issues from becoming ”mainstream” if public knowledge of those issues could result in an actual threat to the true corrupt agendas of the global elite, and this fact serves as an indicator of the ineffectiveness of activists committing too much of their resources to communicating issues which the mainstream media already covers in depth (unless the media needs to be corrected for communicating such issues inaccurately.)

Once way activists can counter the effects of distraction activism while also enabling a continuation of communication about more mainstream causes is for those activists to first become more informed about the full extent of the issues, and then to divide their activism efforts to ensure that they are also addressing the more fundamental and less frequently discussed topics. For example, assuming that 80% of the total activist population currently speaks only about the more mainstream issues, if 50% of those activists became more informed about the more fundamental and less discussed issues, and started to devote half of their resources to those issues, it would result in an initial 20% jump in total activist activity for those neglected issues. The new activist activity would be dispersed throughout entire activist population, which would encourage other activists to learn more about those issues as well. The total effect of the initial 20% jump would be astronomical, as the fundamental issues are usually more important than the mainstream issues and more likely to move people to action and encourage newcomers to become activists at a much higher rate.

Many activists are aware of many of the more fundamental issues, yet fail to communicate about those topics out of reasons of fear of appearing to be ”extremist.” Everyone has their own style of communication and in fact it is the ones who are currently the most concerned about appearing to be ”extremist” that could potentially make the most effective difference when communicating about those issues. Every activist who ”breaks the mold” of what a stereotype may be for an activist who speaks about a particular issue paves the way for many more to get involved who happen to identify with that activist over any particular stereotype, thus helping to break down such stereotypes.






The importance of the general public’s "word of mouth" activist activity

The general public’s ”word of mouth” activist activity is one of the most effective means of knowledge being propagated about any particular topic, and a threshold of public knowledge exists which must be reached before truly effective political change can take place. In order to reach this threshold, public interest must be jump-started by activist and alternative media activity, and many blockages exist to reaching this threshold in the populace.

Following is a list of some of the more common blockages to word of mouth activist activity and methods for countering those blockages:

Countering the indifference of individual citizens— Many citizens tend to be indifferent about information of corruption in government and the suffering of others because they are comfortable themselves and do not realize how they are personally affected. A way to counter such indifference is to make citizens aware of how they are actually affected by such issues and how they will increasingly be affected in the future.

Countering the distraction of individual citizens created by an excess of available entertainment programming— It is easy for individuals to be distracted by the wealth of available entertainment options. It would be helpful for important information to be increasingly integrated into such entertainment programming, such as through communication by entertainers. Celebrity endorsements help to spread the word about important issues, however most mainstream celebrities are knowingly or unknowingly beholden to corrupt interests which are the cause of most of the problems in the first place— a good example would be the organization MoveOn.org having endorsements of many Hollywood celebrities but actually being funded by corrupt members of the global elite such as George Soros.

Countering individual citizen’s fears of knowing the truth— Citizen’s individual fears of knowing the truth about disturbing issues is an important reason for information to be presented in as neutral of a manner as possible without additional unnecessary taste-specific layers that exclude portions of the potential audience; however another strategy could also be used which would be to present information in a way which is tailored to the taste of certain neglected demographics which previously have not been effectively communicated with.






Many people underestimate the extent of the difference that every individual person is capable of making

As an example of the relative differences in effectiveness between people only voting and their engaging in activist activity— in a voting population of 60 million citizens, when a citizen casts a vote they will make 1/60 millionth of a difference (assuming that the voting machines are not tampered with.) By contrast, if the same citizen starts to engage in activist communication, they could make a much bigger difference which could be unlimited in size depending on the methods of the activist. For example, many activists are individually responsible for informing millions of people through the creation and distribution of documentary films. Even if a citizen does not plan to create documentary films, any sort of activist activity does a great deal of good by encouraging debate, informing others, and inspiring others to communicate such important information as well.







Copyright (C) 2014 News of Interest.TV, A/V material and quoted information are copyright of their sources.