DHS Tells Police That Common Protest Activities Are ‘Violent Tactics’

The risk-based DHS approach reflects a wider law enforcement in the United States, which is formed by the security priorities after 10/10-one, which raises the perceived intention to commit clear errors and uses behavior signals, affiliations and other indicators that are likely to be a prediction to justify early intervention and expanded monitoring.

A year ago, the Ministry of Public Security warned that immigration grievances were leading a rise in threats against judges, migrants and law enforcement, expecting that new laws and prominent suppression would increase the extremism of individuals. In February, another integration center reported renewed calls for violence against the police and government officials, noting a violent reaction to the federal planning and determining the upcoming protests at the time and the court rulings probably.

Sometimes, sprawling predictions may appear, Mardah, echoing flash points in the real world: in Alvarado, Texas, a coordinated ambush in the detention center this week was brought up with automated agents with fireworks before the outbreak of fire on July 4, leaving a police officer in the neck. (Nearly ten arrests were made, at least 10 for attempting to kill.)

Before the protests, the agencies are increasingly dependent on intelligence to determine the groups that are seen as an ideological or unpredictable sabotage. The demonstrators called “infringement” can be monitored or detention without fees or met by force.

Social movement scientists are widely aware of the introduction of the preventive protest police as a departure from the late twentieth century, as it gave priority to escalation, communication and facilitation. In place, the authorities have increasingly emphasized controlling demonstrations through early intervention, monitoring and disruption – curtain organizers, restricting the public space, and responding proactively on the basis of perceived risks instead of actual behavior.

The infrastructure designed initially to combat terrorism is often monitored to monitor the protests at the street level, with virtual investigation units targeting demonstrators to scrutinize based on online expression. Integration centers, funded by granting the Ministry of National Security, have increasingly released protest bulletins that indicate protest slogans, signs to the police brutality, and solidarity events as signs of potential violence – bypassing these law enforcement assessments in the absence of clear evidence of criminal intent.

The monitoring of the demonstrators included the construction of files (known as “baseball cards”) with analysts who use high -tech tools to collect social media functions for topics, affiliations, personal networks, and public data that criticize government policy.

It was obtained exclusively by WIRE, a DHS file on Mahmoud Khalil, a former graduate student in Colombia and anti -war activist, that analysts have provided information from Canary Mission, a mysterious black list that fills the critics of Israeli military action in an unknown way.

In the Federal Court on Wednesday, a senior official at the Ministry of Public Security acknowledged that materials of Mission Canary were used to collect more than 100 amazing students and scientists, despite the ideological mortar on site, mysterious financing, and an irreplaceable education.

Threat data can also expect conflict, form their position and decisions on the ground. In the wake of the violent protests for the year 2020, the San Jose Police Department in California referred to many “intelligence bulletins” that it received from the local regional fusion center, the Ministry of National Security, and the Federal Investigation Office, among other things, as a basic to understand “the officers’ mentality in the days before the civil disturbances and their inception.”

Specific leaflets cited by SJPD-which prompted the protest response to a settlement of $ 620,000 this month-carrying demonstrations as a potential cover for “local terrorists”, warned against opportunistic law enforcement attacks and promoting “u-haul trucks that are alleged to transport arms and interpretations.

By subsequent reports in the aftermath of the Blueleaks- 269 GB Distribution from the internal police documents obtained by a source determined by an unknown exclusive group and published by the distributed transparency group, including the predictions that compete for the “discovery” site, which competes for the “Federal Insert” site that has been paid, which is affected by the arrest of the consequences The paid, which was accepted. Cars on fire, despite a clear banner describing the site “fake”.

The threat alerts – non -classified and routinely access to the press can help the law enforcement in the form of general awareness of the protests before they start, and lay the foundation to give legitimacy to the aggressive police responses. The uninterrupted warnings of the Ministry of National Security were distributed about local terrorist demonstrations in 2020, which he publicly echoed by the Acting Agency Secretary on Twitter, and exaggerated it widely in media coverage.

Americans generally oppose the aggressive protest campaign, but when they support them, fear is often the driving force. Experimental research indicates that support for the use of troops depends on what the demonstrators actually do more than photographing – through officials, the media, and through racist and ideological tires.