This morning I came across this article published October 13, 1985 – and saw the light.
“John F. Kennedy had his Irish Mafia, Carter his Georgia Mafia, and Reagan’s Justice Department harbours the Alameda County Connection, it headed by Attorney General Edwin Meese.”
Meese was instrumental in prosecuting Mario Savio and 700 members of the Free Speech Movement with the help of his mentor J. Frank Coakley the District Attorney of Alameda County. Frank’s daughter lived up the street from me and befriended all the Presco children. Meese was recently chosen by the Koch brothers to lead their covert war against the Democrats. Ed went to Oakland High School as did my father and his two sons. Ed worked with Erl Warren who headed the Warren Commission. Coakley backed Warren in his bid to be the President of the United States.
Here is an article that shows how the political career of Ronald Reagan took off after he went after the Free Speech Movement and beatniks. J. Edgar Hoover encouraged Reagan to use the Free Speech Movement to catapult himself into high office.
When JFK was assassinated he feared there would be race riots, and a war with the Soviet Union. Johnson does not SAY he feared riots on our college campuses, after all, Jack was a college man, their ideal. The question is – did he fear demonstrations by Young Bright and Liberal Students? What would their demands be? Is this not the first groups of Americans to SPEAK OUT after their champion was murdered? Did not Johnson resign when the voice of students was heard all over America?
Look at the photo of Mario Savio and Lee Harvey Oswald who claimed he was a "patsy" I claim Mario was a "patsy" for the covert right-wing establishment that was given great covert powers, and they misused this power when they employed it against U.S. Citizens. They used Mario to jockey for covert power behind the scenes. They used Mario and the Bohemians as a scapegoat. I suspect Oswald was used the same way. What is my proof? THE RESULTS!
Look at the photo of two President out on the water with their wives. Ronald must have hated Jack's Hollywood looks, and wanted to take his place. Eventually – he did – with the help of his Oakland Mafia WHO CHOSE TO NOT GO AFTER THE REAL MAFIA! Instead they went after 'Hippie' because they knew he was innocent, had not connection to the Mafia or the Reds, but, because 'Hippie' stepped forward and opened his mouth about a 'Cause' it was open season – from every dark cover!
Ed Meese and Frank Coakley, along with Hoover, conducted a CHARACTER ASSASINATION OF HIPPIE – and gained incredible political power. Erl Warren got his – too!
When ask yourself why Ronald Reagan did not go after the Mafia in order to make a name for himself, you have to ask this of Meese, Coakley, and Warren – who was aware of the LA Mafia. The answer is, Reagan's Justice Department, and Reagan himself, had connections with the Mafia, had been compromised by them, or, learned to get along with them – and share the COVERT POWER!
On the news today the right-wing plan "to kill" Obamacare was reveal – made overt! Obama dare speak out for a GOOD CAUSE and has been in the assassin's crosshairs, hence!
I found a covert program called 'Garden Plot' which was established to combat UNREST in the 60's. It would allow the Military to SHOOT HIPPIE – THE PATSY! Coakley and Meese had to know Jack Ruby!
My mother made porno movies for Big Bones Remmer. All of Rosemary's children became hippies. On child would be elected the scapegoat, the patsy, everything that went criminally wrong, blamed on him. I have contended in my blogs, that the right-wing has spent a trillion dollars to GET ME – JUST ME! The Last Hippie standing! Every shot they take at me drops cold bars into their tray of covert operations. I am the Supreme Boogy Man – after the President of the United States.
J. Frank Coakley convicted members of the Black Panther Party. How many folks did Erl Warren arrest after he close his commission who shot JFK?
Do you think Garden Plot is referring to planting 'Dirty Hippies' 'Flower Children' in their graves – after pinning this label on the back of their head 'Communist Agitator'?
Here's the bottom line…The Covert Folks have invented a new way to put THEIR folks in office without employing the old overt way of empowering the overt voice, and overt vote of We the Overt People.
1. Not openly practiced, avowed, engaged in, accumulated, or shown: covert military operations; covert funding for the rebels. See Synonyms at secret.
2. Covered or covered over; sheltered.
1. Open and observable; not hidden, concealed, or secret: overt hostility; overt intelligence gathering.
2. Of, relating to, or being military or intelligence operations sanctioned or mandated by Congress: overt aid to the rebels.
Kerr was fired three weeks after Reagan took office. The act was the culmination of a process that began long before, when then-FBI director J. Edgar Hoover first tried to persuade Kerr to crack down hard on Berkeley students involved in the 1964 Free Speech Movement, which Hoover alleged was a front for communist sympathizers. Unable to convince Kerr, Hoover turned to gubernatorial candidate Reagan, a rising conservative star. As revealed by a 2002 investigation by San Francisco Chronicle reporter Seth Rosenfeld, Reagan and the FBI interacted throughout the campaign about dealing with Kerr and the student protesters.
Smelser, assistant chancellor for educational development at the time Reagan ran for office, recalled that "Reagan took aim at the university for being irresponsible for failing to punish these dissident students. He said, 'Get them out of there. Throw them out. They are spoiled and don't deserve the education they are getting. They don't have a right to take advantage of our system of education.'"
Reagan had two themes in his first run for office. The man who later became known as "The Great Communicator" vowed to send "the welfare bums back to work," and "to clean up the mess at Berkeley." The latter became a Reagan mantra.
If any civil disturbance by a resistance group, religious organization, or other persons considered to be non-conformist takes place, under Appendix 3 to Annex B of Plan 55-2 hereby gives all Federal forces total power over the situation if local and state authorities cannot put down said dissenters. Annex A, section B of Operation Garden Plot defines tax protesters, militia groups, religious cults, and general anti-government dissenters as Disruptive Elements. This calls for the deadly force to be used against any extremist or dissident perpetrating any and all forms of civil disorder. Under section D, a Presidential Executive Order will authorize and direct the Secretary of Defense to use the Armed Forces of the United States to restore order.
The FBI has long denied investigating the university as an organization, and that much is true. But a legal challenge I brought under the Freedom of Information Act, entailing five lawsuits over the course of 27 years, forced the bureau to release more than 300,000 pages of its confidential records concerning individuals, organizations, and events on and around the campus during the cold war, from the 1940s through the 1970s. This is the most complete record of FBI activities at any college ever released. The documents reveal that FBI agents amassed dossiers on hundreds of students and professors and on members of the Board of Regents; established informers within student groups, the faculty, and the highest levels of the university's administration; and gathered intelligence from wiretaps, mail openings, and searches of Berkeley homes and offices in the dead of night.
Although the bulk of the documents were released in the mid-90s, continuing litigation has compelled the FBI to release more than 50,000 additional pages, some as recently as this year, that provide a clearer picture of the agency's relationship with Reagan and suggest that it profoundly influenced his political development. These records—including material from the FBI's infamous COINTELPRO operation to discredit domestic political organizations—also provide a more complete account of Hoover's activities concerning the university, and the bureau's covert efforts to stifle dissent and circumscribe academic freedom.
In court papers asserting its right to withhold documents, the FBI maintained that its activities were lawful and intended to protect civil order and national security. But the records show bureau officials used intelligence gleaned from these clandestine operations not only to enforce the law, or to prevent violence, or to protect national security.
As U.S. District Court Judge Marilyn Hall Patel ruled in 1991, the FBI's own records show that its initial investigation to determine whether the Free Speech Movement protest violated federal laws soon evolved into political spying, and that it likewise investigated Kerr unlawfully. As she found, "The records in this case go [to] the very essence of what the government was up to during a turbulent, historic period of time." The FBI appealed, but the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed virtually all of Patel's ruling. Having reviewed the uncensored FBI records in chambers, the court concluded that the documents "strongly suggest" the bureau's investigation of the Free Speech Movement became an effort to "harass political opponents of the FBI's allies among the Regents, not to investigate subversion and civil disorder." The court also found that the records "strongly support the suspicion that the FBI was investigating Kerr to have him removed from the UC administration, because FBI officials disagreed with his politics or his handling of administrative matters. Conspicuously absent from these documents is any connection to any possible criminal liability by Kerr."
2 TAB A APPENDIX 1 TO ANNEX S USAF CIVIL DISTURBANCE PLAN 55-2 EXHIBIT POR:SGH, JCS Pub 6, Vol 5, AFR 160-5 hereby provides for America's military and the National Guard State Partnership Program to join with United Nations personal in said operations. This links selected U.S. National Guard units with the Defense Ministries of "Partnership For Peace." This was done in an effort to provide military support to civil authorities in response to civil emergencies. Under Presidential Decision Directive No. 25, this program serves to cement people to relationships between the citizens of the United States, and the global military of the UN establishments of the emerging democracies of Central and Eastern European countries. This puts all of our National Guardsmen under the direct jurisdiction of the United Nations. Section 3:This plan could be implemented under any of the following situation: (1) Spontaneous civil disturbances which involve large numbers of persons and/or which continue for a considerable period of time, may exceed the capacity of local civil law enforcement agencies to suppress. Although this type of activity can arise without warning as a result of sudden, unanticipated popular unrest (past riots), it may also result from more prolonged dissidence. This would most likely be an outgrowth of serious social, political or economic issues which divide segments of the American population. Such factionalism could manifest itself through repeated demonstrations, protest marches and other forms of legitimate opposition but which would have the potential for erupting into spontaneous violence with little or no warning. (2) Planned acts of violence or civil disobedience which, through arising from the same causes as (1) above, are seized upon by a dedicated group of dissidents who plan and incite purposeful acts designed to disrupt social order. This may occur either because leaders of protest organizations intentionally induce their followers to perpetrate violent acts, or because a group of militants infiltrates an otherwise peaceful protest and seeks to divert it from its peaceful course. Subsection C: (2) Environmental satellite products will be continue to be available. (d) Responsibilities. Meteorological support to civil disturbance operations will be arranged or provided by AWS wings. The 7th. Weather Wing (7WW) is responsible for providing / arranging support for Military Airlift Command (MAC) airlift operations. The 5th Weather Wing (5WW) is responsible for supporting the United States Army Forces Command. (3) SITUATION. Civil disturbance may threaten or erupt at any time in the CONUS and grow to such proportions as to require the use the Federal military forces to bring the situation under control. A flexible weather support system is required under control. A flexible weather support system is required to support the many and varied options of this Plan. ANNEX H: XXOW, AWSR 55-2, AWSR 23-6, AFR 23-31, AR 115-10, AFR 105-3. Subsection B: Concept of Environmental Support. Environmental support will be provided by elements of Air Weather Service (AWS) in accordance with refs a-f. The senior staff meteorologist deployed int the Task Force Headquarters (TFH) will be the staff weather officer (SWO) to the TFH. Centralized environmental support products are requested in accordance with AWSR 105-18. (4) Weather support is provided by weather units located at existing CONUS bases or by deployed SWOs and / or weather teams to the objective areas. (5) Support MAC source will be provide in accordance with the procedures in MARC 103-15. MAC forces will be provided in accordance with the procedures in AFR 105-3. (a) Air Force Global Weather Central: Provides centralized products as requested. REFERENCES : JCS Pub 18 – Doctrine for Operations Security AFR 55-30, Operations Security 1. GENERAL Opposition forces or groups may attempt to gain knowledge of this plan and 'use that knowledge to prevent or degrade the effectiveness of the actions outlined in this plan. In order to protect operations undertaken to accomplish the mission, it is necessary to control sources of information that can be exploited by those opposition forces or groups. OPSEC is the effort to protect operations by identifying and controlling intelligence indicators susceptible to exploitation. The objective of OPSEC, in the execution of this plan, is to assure the security of operations, mission effectiveness, and increase the probability of mission success. 2. RESPONSIBILITY FOR OPERATIONS SECURITY (OPSEC): The denial of information to an enemy is inherently a command responsibility. However, since the operations Officer at any level of command is responsible to his commander for the Overall planning and execution of operations, he has the principal staff interest in assuring maximum protection of the operation and must assume primary responsibility instibility for ensuring that the efforts of all other staff elements are coordinated toward thisend. However, every other individual associated with, or aware of, the operation must assist in safeguarding the security of the operation. 3. OBJECTIVES: a. The basic objective of OPSEC is to preserve the security of friendly forces and thereby to enhance the probability of successful mission accomplishment. "Security" in this context relates to the protection of friendly forces. It also includes the protection of operational information to prevent degradation of mission effectiveness through the disclosure of prior knowledge of friendly operations to the opposition. b. OPSEC pervades the entire planning process and must be a matter of continuing concern from the conception of an operation, throughout the preparatory and execution phases, and during critiques, reports, press releases, and the like conducted during the post operation phase. 4. Specific operations orders and standard operating procedures "MUST be developed with the awareness that the opposition may be able to identify and exploit vulnerable activities. Reference Material: Released under Freedom of Information Act on March 30th, 1990. All material presented here has been declassified and supersedes USAD Operations Plan 355-10 of July 16, 1973. Information released by USAF under supervision of Alexander K. Davidson, BRIG. GEN, USAF, Dep. Director of Operations. APPENDEX 5 TO ANNEX E TO USAF CIVIL DISTURBANCE PLAN 55-2 Annex Z. Other References: 10 United States Codes 331,332,333,8500,1385, MARC 105-1, MARC 105-18, AR 115-10, AFR 105-3, PDD-25.
Additional backup documents will be found on another site at
That is a good site to read this type of material. Lots of curious stuff.
If I can give anyone credit for this great file, I give to the guys in the "cafes". Thanks, guys.
Please notice that your "faithful" political servants did not tell you about this law. But they wrote and passed it. It took someone about there years to find it. And they had to force it out into the open. Congressman Gonzalez admits that it exists. Gee, thanks a lot, you guys.
Another thing which I did, was I established a very close rapport and liaison between the district attorney's office and the police departments.
― 79 ―
We work very closely with the police departments. Whenever they had any problems, we would meet them. If there was a threat of a riot, or a threat of any kind of disturbance, civil disobedience or campus unrest, we had some pretty good undercover information. It kept feeding us what the people were talking about doing.
I would call a meeting of the chiefs of police of the places involved, the sheriff, the state representatives like the national guard, army, navy, highway patrol and these people, and we would meet. I'd sit as the head man to plan out what to do about it if it happened. We knew what the trouble makers were talking about doing, when they were going to do it, and where they were going to do it, so we would be ready for them when they did it, and be able to control it. It wouldn't get out of hand. As a result of that, there was no really full-scale, full-grown, Watt's type riot in this county. There never has been.
In 1965, the spring of 1965, the United states Department of Commerce published an extensive study which had been made of racial tensions all over the United States. In this report they said that there are eleven cities in the United States, where there was a strong probability of racial riots, rioting. Two of those cities were west of the Mississippi. One was Los Angeles and the other was Oakland. The study which they made showed that the complexion of the population and the tensions which existed, and the activities of the agitators, Communists and other agitators, were such that there was a strong possibility of a riot. Nine of the cities were east of the Mississippi. There was Harlem; there was Patterson, New Jersey; Philadelphia; Detroit; Chicago, and cities like that.
All right. Along came 1965, and they had the big blow-up in Watts in Los Angeles, a full-blown riot, for a week. Millions and millions of dollars lost and thirty-four people were killed. We had a few close calls here, but we always controlled it. We knew how to control it. We had demonstrations of all kinds, at the University of California and various other places in the county, and we controlled them. We got through without having any fires or any great amount of damage or riot. Anybody who violated the law in that respect
― 80 ―
was promptly prosecuted, promptly charged and prosecuted.
The campus unrest started at the University of California in 1964 with the Free Speech Movement. There were 773 people arrested. They were all prosecuted. They were all convicted. They took it on appeal clear up to the Supreme Court of the United States and we were upheld all the way.
After the arrest of the Free Speech offenders, for a generation of college students in this county, we had no serious overt unrest incidents until 1969 when the People's Park episode occurred, and the national guard was sent into Berkeley. There were prosecutions of persons involved in People's Park and the city of Berkeley episode. There has been no large scale overt concerted criminal activity since then, which confirms my thinking that good competent law enforcement is an effective deterrent.
Now, there are a lot of other things like this which are beyond the pale of the average type of case that the district attorney's office handles. These were on a broader plane. We saw the thing developing and we thought we should be prepared to handle it, and we were. It was handled right under my direction, as the chief law enforcement officer of the county. People in the office were trained to know what to do. The police patrol were instructed through their chiefs and through the higher echelons of the police departments. So this was the job. So far, we haven't had a full-blown, Watts-type riot, although it was predicted that there would be one. Now there's something that really is rather important. I think it's very significant from a law enforcement standpoint.
You know, people take a lot of things for granted. They think, well, unless it happens there's nothing said about it. But we did it very quietly. I'd have these meetings with the chiefs of police and the sheriff, and heads of responsible agencies. No publicity about it at all. If something happened, the police were ready, and they got out and they did their job.