The FBI's History Of Political Repression -- A Well Written Article By Ward Churchill Regarding The Bureau's Anti-American Doctrine

On a day when most Americans are celebrating freedoms which they no longer have, the result of a fascist oligarchy which has quietly subverted our own government, Ward Churchill's article on the FBI's oppressive and Orwellian tactics is more applicable than ever. Especially in a day and age where the FBI is colluding with the NSA to utilize its SIGNALS INTELLIGENCE technology to both electronically satellite track and use as spying devices, unwitting American citizens who are unaware that such technology even exists, much less that they can be targeted for it without their knowledge or consent.

With the NSA's Electronic Brain Link Technology, we now have before us, a society of American citizens who can at anytime be quite literally used as human spy cameras, in which the visual cortex regions of their brains can be tapped into by way of the NSA's artificial intelligence computers (via the NSA's spy satellite network), to retrieve what the targeted persons are seeing in real time.

This is domestic (Orwell's THOUGHT POLICE) spying on the cutting edge of technology. And given the NSA's ability to remotely read our minds by tapping into our sub vocalized thoughts (the ultimate spy tracking technology -- known as the NSA's "Two Way Dial Up Remote Neural Monitoring Satellite Tracking System"), something so horrifying that it must be exposed both nationally and internationally, before these federal spying agencies can cause further irreparable harm to us as both a citizenry as well as species.

The FBI has always been a treasonous agency with designs on controlling the US Federal Government through its covert spying and use of blackmail, in efforts to keep our politicians in line. And the NSA's SIGNALS INTELLIGENCE spy network, only further enhances the FBI's ability to dig dirt on anyone in this country, while in the most egregious ways ever documented, violating their rights under the US Constitution.

And something MUST be done about this, since we cannot ignore such a blatant and grievous attack on our rights as Americans any longer. In truth, it has been our own apathy and ignorance which have gotten us to this point, since we allowed those whom we trusted to completely sell us out, for their own profit. The result is that this country is now driven by corporatism. And it is this ideological fascism which has corrupted our politicians to the point where they can no longer be trusted.

They certainly don't represent the needs of the average American citizen. And if Barack Obama ever attempts to seriously make changes which would be of benefit to the American proletariat, those in power will remove him from office, just as they did John F. Kennedy. John McCain is their boy. A career politician whose focus is on authoritarianism, by financially enhancing our Military to the point where it completely overruns us as a people, as well as every other country on this planet.

The U.S. Congress could not give a damn about you. All they want from you are your votes, which they need to empower them, and your money which keeps them in power.

Moreover, it is these same corporatists who control the US Military Industrial Intelligence Media complex, who are quietly attempting to destroy the United States of America and her people, as well as the very freedoms which once made this country the envy of all others.

Freedoms which as a result of such domestic NSA and FBI spying, are no longer anything but an illusion. Therefore, is it any wonder that the Department Of Homeland Security has requested its own spy satellites? In comparison to agencies like the NSA, DHS is emasculated in the present day, with its US Intel brethren having access to better spying technology. And like the jealous sibling, they want equal time as well as the same "stuff" that their other siblings have.

While US Intel is homongenized in regard to their doctrine of domestically spying on us, they are fiercely competitive with one another; something typical of the type of corruptiblity that results from being endowed with more authority than they can handle.

Furthermore, this government orchestrated take down of our rights as citizens of this country, is only being further fueled by the propagandized war on terror that we have been fed since 9-11. Next to the privately held Federal Reserve Bank and IRS scam to steal trillions of dollars from the American workforce, this bogus war on terror, has been the biggest hoax in U.S. History.

The Bush Administration's war on terror is complete and utter BUSHIT! It is a LIE perpetrated by the aforementioned and treasonous complex, to disenfranchise Americans from their rights as citizens of this country. And they had better arrive at this realization soon, or they will find themselves first mentally and eventually physically enslaved by these well financed New World Order fascist reprobates.

Those who seek to destroy us as a nation.


FBI Political Repression
A Snapshot of COINTELPRO

by Ward Churchill

The FBI, by infiltrating and spying on selected groups in American society, arrogated to itself the role of a thought police. It decided which groups were legitimate, and which were a danger;by FBI standards;to the Republic. It took sides in social and political conflicts…deciding, for example, that those opposed to the war in Vietnam, or whose skin was black, should be targets for FBI attention. Since the FBI acted secretly, it distorted the political process by covertly acting against certain groups and individuals. In short, the FBI filled the classic role of a secret political police.

From some point in 1955 until mid-1971, the Federal Bureau of Investigation conducted a formal but highly secret operation designed to "disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or otherwise neutralize" what it considered to be politically objectionable individuals and organizations in the United States and its Caribbean colony of Puerto Rico.1 Dubbed COINTELPRO&endash;a cryptonym denoting "domestic counterintelligence program"&endash;in classified bureau documents, this campaign of raw repression was not only unconstitutional in its objectives, but patently illegal in the tactics used in pursuit of such goals. As analyst Brian Glick has observed, "COINTELPRO involved a unique experiment. Though covert operations have been employed throughout FBI history, the COINTELPROs were the first to be broadly targeted and centrally directed. FBI headquarters set policy, assessed progress, charted new directions, demanded increased production, and carefully monitored and controlled day-to-day operations."2

The thinking underlying this development was perhaps best articulated in a congressional study of "internal subversion" in the U.S. prepared by the Doolittle Commission in 1954, toward the end of the post-World War II period of generalized political repression conventionally referred to as "McCarthyism."3

As long as [anti-communism] remains national policy, an…important requirement is an aggressive covert psychological, political and paramilitary organization more effective, more unique, and if necessary, more ruthless than that employed by the enemy. No one should be permitted to stand in the way of the prompt, efficient, and secure establishment of this mission.4

From the commission’s perspective, the FBI was ideally suited for fulfillment of such requirements, given certain minor structural adjustments. These were accomplished through solidification of an inherent overlap between two theoretically discrete components within the bureau. First, there was the Internal Security Section, created to detect and prevent consummation of ambitions of treasonous elements among the citizenry to attempt an impairment or overthrow of the federal government by force of arms. Secondly, there was the Counterintelligence Division, mandated to thwart spies, saboteurs and other agents of foreign powers working within U.S. jurisdiction.5

In practical terms, what COINTELPRO did was combine many of the methods utilized by the Counterintelligence Division in dealing with its peculiar range of targets, unencumbered as these techniques were by concern over the basic rights to which all U.S. citizens (or subjects) are by definition entitled, with the focus of attention taken by the Internal Security Section. The latter should be construed as any person or group subscribing to a political ideology not acceptable to the U.S. socioeconomic/political status quo. COINTELPRO thus had the effect of arbitrarily removing constitutional protections from an entire sector of American society and causing the citizens within it to be accorded essentially the same treatment as the FBI visited upon Soviet espionage agents.6

The bureau’s first comprehensive and fully operational domestic counterintelligence program was undertaken against the Communist Party (CP) during the late 1950s and used as a sort of laboratory by which the methodologies of repression later used against others were perfected. As has been noted elsewhere, "The programs directed against the Communist Party were continued through the 1960s with such interesting innovations as Operation Hoodwink from 1966 through mid-1968, designed to incite organized crime against the Communist Party through documents fabricated by the FBI, evidently in the hope that criminal elements would carry on the work of repression and disruption in their own manner, by means that may be left to the imagination."7

From the evidence now available, it appears that the first disruption program (apart from the CP) was launched in August 1960 against groups advocating independence for Puerto Rico. In October 1961, the "SWP Disruption Program" was put into operation against the Socialist Workers Party.8

By 1963, several civil rights organizations, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) and the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) among them, had also been targeted.9 These were followed at mid-decade by virtually the entire movement to end the war in Vietnam as well as groups, such as Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), belonging to the so-called "New Left."10 Thereafter, especially virulent programs were developed against black nationalist entities like the Revolutionary Action Movement (RAM), Republic of New Afrika (RNA) and the Black Panther Party (BPP).11

During the period in which COINTELPRO functioned, tens of thousands of American activists, overwhelmingly comprised of those holding leftist or anarchist points of view, were publicly and privately defamed, evicted from their homes and offices, expelled from school, fired from their jobs or denied employment, and/or suffered disruption of their personal lives as the result of FBI disinformation deployed against them because of their political orientation.

Thousands of burglaries&endash;called "black bag jobs" by bureau operatives&endash;were carried out in the residences and offices of those designated political "deviants" or "extremists" by FBI analysts. Both the personal and organizational mail of such people was routinely intercepted and screened by FBI personnel who then determined whether it should be delivered or "lost."12

Similarly, uncounted warrantless telephone were taps were installed, rooms bugged, informants recruited and infiltrators inserted into targeted groups to monitor the attitudes and activities of members.13 In many cases, infiltrators were cast in the role of classic agents provocateurs for purposes of fomenting disruption: spreading rumors to sow the seeds of distrust among organizational members and to exacerbate tensions or disputes within and between dissident groups, sabotaging community organizing efforts, stealing organizational funds and mailing lists, making misrepresentative and inflammatory public statements "in behalf of" the targeted organizations, and sometimes convincing bona fide group members to engage in the sort of conduct which would create a basis for their conviction and consequent imprisonment.14

During these years, FBI provocateurs repeatedly urged and initiated violent acts, including forceful disruption of meetings on and off university campuses, attacks on police, bombings, and so on… One FBI provocateur resigned when he was asked to arrange the bombing of a bridge in such a way that the person who placed the booby-trapped bomb would be killed.

This was in Seattle, where it was revealed that FBI infiltrators had engaged in a campaign of arson, terrorism, and bombings of university and civic buildings, and where the FBI arranged a robbery, entrapping a young black man who was paid $75 for the job and killed in a police ambush.15

At equally sinister levels, the bureau’s COINTELPRO specialists habitually collaborated with local and state police red squads to arrange the systematic and repeated harassment arrests of those they designated as "key activists." During the late summer of 1967, for example, the Special Agent in Charge (SAC) of the FBI’s Philadelphia field office proudly reported that his agents had arranged for members of RAM to be "arrested on every possible charge until they could no longer make bail" and that they consequently "spent most of the summer in jail" with no indication there was ever a serious intent on the part of the arresting authorities to prosecute them for their ostensible crimes.16

Tellingly, FBI headquarters quickly instructed all 41 field offices to adapt Philadelphia’s strategy within thirty days for application to other targets.17

In numerous instances, the bureau went much further, manufacturing evidence used at trial to bring about the imprisonment of targeted individuals on utterly baseless charges. In other instances, evidence was suppressed which might have exonerated politically targeted defendants. One example is that of Los Angeles Black Panther leader Elmer "Geronimo ji Jaga" Pratt, convicted in 1972 of a murder committed in Santa Monica, California, on December 18, 1968.

Although Pratt contended, accurately, that he had been attending a BPP Central Committee meeting in Oakland&endash;some 350 miles from the murder scene&endash;on the night in question, and that FBI logs of its electronic surveillance (ELSURS) of the meeting would corroborate his story, an agent testified under oath that no such surveillance had occurred. After Pratt’s conviction, it was revealed that the agent had perjured himself. The bureau then claimed to have "lost" the relevant ELSURS logs. At present, Pratt continues to serve a life sentence after 23 years imprisonment.18

When such subversion of the judicial process failed, as it sometimes did, techniques of physical violence were often utilized. These included the deliberate fomenting of conflict between rival political groups and/or provoking assaults on such groups by criminal gangs (ala Operation Hoodwink). In Chicago, for instance, it is well documented that the FBI attempted to dupe Jeff Fort, head of the Black P. Stone Nation street gang, that BPP leader Fred Hampton was seeking to assassinate him. The objective was plainly to convince Fort to defend himself against this nonexistent threat by eliminating Hampton.19 Although Fort failed to respond in the desired fashion, a similar COINTELPRO gambit intended to pit Ron Karenga’s United Slaves (US) organization against the Panthers on a national basis was more successful, as is evidenced by an August 26, 1969, FBI document stating that, by that date, six BPP members had been killed by US gunmen.20

Meanwhile, government agencies financed, helped organize, and supplied arms to right-wing terrorist groups that carried out fire-bombings, burglaries, and shootings, all with the knowledge of the government agencies responsible&endash;in most cases the FBI…21

Outright assassination of selected opposition leaders, an expedient usually orchestrated by the FBI but carried out by surrogates of one kind or another, also occurred from time to time.

Perhaps the most shocking story concerns the assassination of Fred Hampton and Mark Clark by Chicago police directed by the state’s attorney’s office in December 1969, in a predawn raid on a Chicago apartment. Hampton, one of the most promising leaders of the Black Panther Part&endash;particularly dangerous because of his opposition to violent acts or rhetoric and his success in community organizing&endash;was killed in bed, perhaps drugged. Depositions in a civil suit in Chicago reveal that the chief of Panther security and Hampton’s personal bodyguard, William O’Neal, was an FBI infiltrator.

O’Neal gave his FBI "contracting agent," Roy Mitchell, a detailed floorplan of the apartment, which Mitchell turned over to the state’s attorney’s office shortly before the attack, along with "information"&endash;of dubious veracity&endash;that there were two illegal shotguns in the apartment… The availability of the floorplan presumably explains why "all the police gunfire went to the inside corners of the apartment, rather than toward the entrances… Agent Mitchell was named by the Chicago Tribune as head of the Chicago [COINTELPRO] directed against the Blank Panthers and other Black groups… For his services, O’Neal was paid over $10,000…22

There was, of course, absolutely no legal basis upon which the bureau could conduct itself in this fashion. Hence, the very existence of the program was denied until its exposure when documents describing it were removed by a group calling itself the Citizens Committee to Investigate the FBI from the bureau’s Media, Pennsylvania, resident agency on the night of March 8, 1971.23 At that point, in an effort to contain potential damage as a result of this disclosure, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover rapidly ordered that use of the cryptonym be suspended.24

The cost of COINTELPRO to political liberty in the United States was and remains incalculable. Aside from the myriad lives marred, ruined or terminated by the use of such methods of official repression, scores of political organizations, each of them supposedly protected from such abuse by U.S. constitutional guarantees, were undermined to the point of obliteration.25 What effect these groups might have had upon America’s political consciousness had they fulfilled their agendas&endash;or merely survived, for that matter&endash;can only be speculated upon.

The same can be said with regard to the untold number of people who have been deterred from exercising their right to political expression as a result of witnessing the fates of those who refused to back down.26 How things might be had they felt free to follow their conscience without fear of official retribution is a matter of guesswork. It can be said with certainty, however, that the net effect of COINTELPRO has been to skew the American polity much further to the Right than might otherwise have been the case.

It is important to note that most of this has long-since been amply substantiated by the FBI’s own intendedly secret internal documents, compulsorily declassified and disclosed by congressional investigating committees during the "Watergate Era" of the mid-1970s.27 In their published reports, these committees often drew appropriate conclusions relative to what they had discovered in the course of examining the bureau’s performance. As California Congressional Representative Don Edwards, himself a former FBI agent, put it in 1975:

Regardless of the unattractiveness or noisy militancy of some private citizens or organizations, the Constitution does not permit federal interference with their activities except through the criminal justice system, armed with its ancient safeguards. There are no exceptions. No federal agency, the CIA, the IRS, or the FBI, can be at the same time policeman, prosecutor, judge, and jury. That is what constitutionally guaranteed due process is all about.

It may sometimes be disorderly and unsatisfactory to some, but it is the essence of freedom… I suggest that the philosophy supporting COINTELPRO is the subversive notion that any public official, the President or a policeman, possesses the kind of inherent power to set aside the Constitution whenever he thinks the public interest or "national security" warrants it. That notion is the postulate of tyranny.28
The significance and intrinsic illegality of COINTELPRO is therefore not a matter of radical hyperbole or exaggeration. By and large, its implications have been conceded at the highest levels of government.

Even former FBI Assistant Director (and national COINTELPRO head) William C. Sullivan admitted as much when he testified before Congress in 1975 that, "During the ten years I was on the U.S. Intelligence Board…never once did I hear anybody, including myself, raise the questions: ‘Is this course of action we’ve agreed upon lawful, is it legal, is it moral and ethical?’ We never gave any thought to this realm of reasoning… The one thing we were concerned with was this: will this course of action work, will it get us what we want, will it reach the objective we desire to reach?"29

The criminality of such an attitude and the behavior attending it are blatant. But not one FBI agent or higher official ever spent a moment in jail as a result of his participation in COINTELPRO, regardless of how illicit the specific activities in which he engaged are admitted to have been. To the contrary, there is no indication that, with but two exceptions, anyone in the bureau experienced even a tangible professional disadvantage because of such criminal behavior.30 The vast majority of the personnel involved were not only retained on active duty, more than a few were promoted to higher positions because of services rendered while carrying out domestic counterintelligence assignments.31

The record in this respect strongly suggests that, whatever congressional handringing over FBI "excesses" may have occurred for public relations reasons in the context of Watergate, the bureau’s pattern of political repression enjoyed a tacit official sanction even then. Certainly the apportionment of FBI attention and resources reflected in the Media documents suggests that the bureau’s political emphasis was so pronounced, and of such long standing, that it could hardly have been mysterious to the government officials who professed such amazement at it in open hearings.

1 percent [of the documents taken at Media] were devoted to organized crime, mostly gambling; 30 percent were "manuals, routine forms, and similar procedural matter"; 40 percent were devoted to political surveillance and the like, including two cases involving right-wing groups, ten concerning immigrants, and over 200 on left and liberal groups. Another 14 percent of the documents concerned draft resistance and "leaving the military without government permission." The remainder [a mere 15 percent] concerned bank robberies, murder, rape, and interstate theft.32

Independent examiners, such as Yale Law Professor Thomas I. Emerson, could not avoid the "inescapable message of [such material] is that the FBI jeopardizes the whole system of free expression which is the cornerstone of our society… At worst it raises the specter of a police state… In essence, the FBI conceives of itself as an instrument to prevent radical social change in America… The Bureau’s view of its function leads it beyond data collection and into political warfare."33 Yet not only were the FBI personnel involved in the activities which so concerned Dr. Emerson rewarded rather than punished, the bureau itself was left essentially unchanged in the wake of public revelations concerning COINTELPRO. The most that can be said is that, in 1979, it was subjected to a "rechartering," the terms of which it itself had taken a most prominent role in formulating.34

Small wonder that, to all appearances, the types of activities once aggregated under the heading of COINTELPRO have been continued by the bureau into the present, albeit under new and different captions.35 Small wonder, too, that, upon closer scrutiny, we encounter the actuality that such activities hardly began with the formal inception of formalized domestic counterintelligence programs during the mid-50s. Rather, their antecedent forms may be traced back to the origination of the FBI itself and, in many ways, to points long before that. From this, it may be accurately adduced that COINTELPRO-style political repression is and has always been salient among the bureau’s raisons d’etre. Correspondingly, it must be seen as an ever-present hallmark of American political life.36

Notes
1. Memorandum dated August 25, 1971: Director, FBI, to Special Agents in Charge (SACs) of all bureau field offices.

2. Brian Glick, "Preface: The Face of COINTELPRO," in Ward Churchill and Jim Vander Wall, The COINTELPRO Papers: Documents from the FBI’s Secret Wars Against Dissent in the United States (Boston: South End Press, 1990) p. xii.

3. A fine summary of the McCarthy period and its implications may be found in Murray Levin, Political Hysteria in America: The Democratic Capacity for Repression (New York: Basic Books, 1971).

4. Quoted in COINTELPRO Papers, p. 49.

5. Good explanations of the respective spheres of interest assigned the Counterintelligence Division and the Internal Security Section are contained in Sanford J. Ungar, FBI: An Uncensored Look Behind the Walls (New York: E.P. Dutton, 1975).

6. For analysis, see Ken Lawrence, The New State Repression (Chicago: International Network Against the New State Repression, 1985).

7. Noam Chomsky, "Introduction," in Cathy Perkus, ed., COINTELPRO: The FBI’s Secret War on Political Freedom (New York: Monad Press, 1975) p. 14.

8. Ibid.

9. For details, see David J. Garrow, The FBI and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.: From "Solo" to Memphis (New York: Penguin Books, 1981); Kenneth O’Reilly, "Racial Matters": The FBI’s Secret Files on Black America, 1960-1972 (New York: The Free Press, 1989).

10. A good overview will be found in Brian Glick, War at Home: Covert Action Against U.S. Activists and What We Can Do About It (Boston: South End Press, 1989).

11. O’Reilly, "Racial Matters". Also see William A. Van Deburg, New Day in Babylon: The Black Power Movement and American Culture, 1965-1975 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992).

12. An participant’s account, corroborating much of this, will be found in former agent M. Wesley Swearingen’s FBI Secrets: An Agent’s Exposé (Boston: South End Press, 1995).

13. Overall, see Athan Theoharis, Spying on Americans: Political Surveillance from Hoover to the Huston Plan (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1978).

14. Frank J. Donner, "The Agent Provocateur as Folk Hero," Civil Liberties Review, September 1971; Gary T. Marx, "Thoughts on a Neglected Category of Social Movement participant: The Agent Provocateur and the Informant," American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 80, No. 2, September 1974.

15. Chomsky, "Introduction," COINTELPRO, pp. 14-5.

16. The complete text of this report, dated August 30, 1967, and addressed to FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, appears in Ward Churchill and Jim Vander Wall, Agents of Repression: The FBI’s Secret Wars Against the Black Panther Party and the American Indian Movement (Boston: South End Press, 1988) pp. 45-7.

17. Memorandum, dated September 3, 1967, from the FBI Director to all SACs.

18. Amnesty International, Proposal for a commission of inquiry into the effect of domestic intelligence activities on criminal trials in the United States of America (New York: Amnesty International, 1980).

19. The matter is covered rather thoroughly in U.S. Senate, Select Committee to Study Government Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, The FBI’s Covert Program to Destroy the Black Panther Party (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976).

20. Ibid. Also see Imamu Ron Karenga, The Roots of the US/Panther Conflict (San Diego: Kawaida Publications, 1976).

21. Chomsky, "Introduction," COINTELPRO, p. 14.

22. Ibid., p. 16.

23. Theoharis, Spying on Americans.

24. Memorandum date April 3, 1971; FBI Director to all SACs.

25. SNCC, SDS, RAM and the BPP, among many other targets no longer exist.

26. A good analysis of the "chilling effect" at issue here may be found in Michael Parenti, Democracy for the Few (New York: St, Martin’s Press, 1980).

27. See, e.g., U.S. Senate, Select Committee to Study Government Operations with Respect to Intelligence Operations, Hearings on Intelligence Activities, Vol. 6: The Federal Bureau of Investigation (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975); Final Report: Supplementary Detailed Staff Reports on Intelligence Activities and the Rights of Americans (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976).

28. Quoted in COINTELPRO Papers, p. x.

29. Quoted in COINTELPRO Papers, p. 33.

30. The two exceptions are former acting Associate Director W. Mark Felt and former Assistant Director of the Domestic Intelligence Division Edward S. Miller, who were indicted in 1978, along with former Director L. Patrick Gray and former a former supervisor of the New York field office’s Squad 47, John Kearny, for COINTELPRO tactics they ordered or sanctioned against the families and friends of Weatherman fugitives, circa 1970-71. Felt and Miller were convicted by a jury in 1980 and lost their jobs permanently as a result. They were quickly pardoned by President Ronald Reagan, however, before serving any of their sentences. See Eve Pell, The Big Chill (Boston: Beacon Press, 1984) pp. 193-4.

31. For two prominent examples, former head of the Internal Security Section Richard G. Held, promoted to Associate Director, and his son, Richard W. Held, promoted from agent to SAC, San Juan, see Ward Churchill, "COINTELPRO as a Family Business: The Case of the Two Richard Helds," Z Magazine, March 1989.

32. Chomsky,"Introduction," COINTELPRO, p. 18. He relies upon Paul Cowan, Nick Egleson and Nat Hentoff, State Secrets (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1973).

33. Thomas I. Emerson, The System of Free Expression (New York: Vintage Books, 1971) p. 71.

34. U.S. Senate, FBI Statutory Charter&endash;Appendix to Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Administrative Practice and Procedure, Part 3 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1979).

35. Louis Wolf, "COINTELPRO Gets a New Name," Covert Action/Information Bulletin, No. 31, Winter 1989; Ross Gelbspan, "COINTELPRO in the ’80s: The ‘New’ FBI," Covert Action/Information Bulletin, No. 31, Winter 1989.

36. For an exhaustive study, see Robert Justin Goldstein, Political Repression in Modern America: 1870 to the present (Cambridge/New York: Schenkman/Two Continents, 1978).