Want to support RAND, here's yer chance

Networks and Netwars: The Future of Terror, Crime, and Militancy

Edited by: John Arquilla, David Ronfeldt

Netwar-like cyberwar-describes a new spectrum of conflict that is emerging in the wake of the information revolution. Netwar includes conflicts waged, on the one hand, by terrorists, criminals, gangs, and ethnic extremists; and by civil-society activists (such as cyber activists or WTO protestors) on the other. What distinguishes netwar is the networked organizational structure of its practitioners-with many groups actually being leaderless-and their quickness in coming together in swarming attacks. To confront this new type of conflict, it is crucial for governments, military, and law enforcement to begin networking themselves.

See Also:

News ReleaseBook Review

Support RAND Research — Buy This Product!

Paperback Cover Price: $25.00

Discounted Web Price: $22.50

Pages: 380

ISBN/EAN: 0-8330-3030-2

Contents

Preface PDF

Summary PDF

Acknowledgments PDF

Chapter One:
The Advent of Netwar (Revisited) PDF

Part I: Violence-Prone Netwars

Chapter Two:
The Networking of Terror in the Information Age PDF

Chapter Three:
Transnational Criminal Networks PDF

Chapter Four:
Gangs, Hooligans, and Anarchists - the Vanguard of Netwar in the Streets PDF

Part II: Social Netwars

Chapter Five:
Networking Dissent: Cyber Activists Use the Internet to Promote Democracy in Burma PDF

Chapter Six:
Emergence and Influence of the Zapatista Social Netwar PDF

Chapter Seven:
Netwar in the Emerald City: WTO Protest Strategy and Tactics PDF

Part III: Once and Future Netwars

Chapter Eight:
Activism, Hacktivism, and Cyberterrorism: the Internet As a Tool for Influencing Foreign Policy PDF

Chapter Nine:
The Structure of Social Movements: Environmental Activism and Its Opponents PDF

Chapter Ten:
What Next for Networks and Netwars? PDF

Afterword (September 2001): The Sharpening Fight for the Future PDF

Contributors PDF

About the Authors PDF

The research described in this report was performed under the auspices of RAND's National Security Research Division.

The monograph/report was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1993 to 2003. RAND monograph/reports presented major research findings that addressed the challenges facing the public and private sectors. They included executive summaries, technical documentation, and synthesis pieces.

Permission is given to duplicate this electronic document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit the RAND Permissions page.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.

* RAND research is conducted across divisions, centers, and projects; these organizational components are represented in the "Related RAND Divisions" section above.

Mohawk faces 12 years in jail for CN protest

Wednesday October 24th 2007, 12:36 am

Mohawk faces 12 years in jail for CN protest
Sue Collis, wife of Mohawk activist Shawn Brant, brings facts and context to McGill students

By Martin Lukacs
The McGill Daily [Montreal, Canada]
Oct 22, 2007

Sue Collis accused the Canadian government of criminalizing her husband, Mohawk activist Shawn Brant, for his involvement in CN Railway blockades, in a talk she gave at McGill Thursday.

After spending two months in pre-trial custody, Brant faces nine charges, including six “mischief” charges from two blockades outside the Tyendinaga community near Kingston, Ontario, the second of which took place on the aboriginal National Day of Action on June 29.

“They want to make an example of him,” Collis said. “Shawn acted as a spokesperson for the community of Tyendinaga, and not only did he give a voice to the suffering that exists [in native communities], but he compelled Canadians to look with a new clarity…at the legacy of the Canadian government.”

When the trial begins in January 2009, the Crown prosecution will seek a minimum sentence of 12 years. Until then, Brant’s bail conditions include curfew, a ban on travel outside Ontario, and a ban from attending any protest. Along with two members of Tyendinaga, Brant is also the subject of a CN Rail lawsuit for damages from the rail stoppage.

“[The railway blockades] find their origins in issues of poverty and suicides on reserves, poisoned drinking water, and the mess that is the land claims [process],” Collis said.

The actions, Collis said, were precipitated by the development of a 140-home sub-division, set to begin construction in November 2006, which Tyendinaga Mohawks asserted was on a parcel of land that is rightfully theirs.

In 1995, Tyendinaga filed a specific claim for the Culberston Tract, a 923-acre parcel near their territory. In 2003, as part of the land claims negotiations, the Federal Government acknowledged that the Culbertson Tract had never been surrendered, but rather than return the land, wanted Tyendinaga to take a cash buy-out.

Meanwhile, the Ontario Ministry of the Natural Resources continued to issue a provincial license to Thurlow Aggregates, a company that was removing thousands of tons of gravel from a quarry within the Culberston Tract.

“Essentially, the very land that was being talked about was being slipped out the back door, through this quarry,” Collis said.

In response, the Tyendinaga community members gave notice to the quarry’s owner in January that he had 60 days to shut down operations. In March, they occupied the quarry and announced that a campaign of railway or highway blockades would commence if the quarry’s license was not revoked.

On April 20, Tyendinaga community members blockaded the CN railway for 30 hours, after which Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) Commissioner Julian Fantino ordered Shawn Brant’s arrest. He was released, but then arrested again after the blockade of the CN railway and highway 401 on June 29.

Railing for justice

For the mischief charges, Brant’s lawyer Peter Rosenthal said they would use a recognized defence known as the “colour of right.”

“If you have an honest belief in a factual situation, it would legally and criminally justify your actions,” Rosenthal said. “We will argue that Shawn Brant had an honest belief that it was Mohawk land, and so he had a right to put a bus on the train tracks.”

For the civil suit, Rosenthal said there are strong defence arguments because of precedents of ill-treatment and bad faith negotiations by the government.

“We will be alleging that given the history of CN’s treatment of native peoples, and the federal and provincial government’s treatment of indigenous peoples, such as the licensing of the quarry, those historical facts justify, criminally and socially, the actions [of Shawn Brant].”

Rosenthal questioned the motivation behind the lawsuit.

“I think they’re not going to specify [the sum] until the trial, but it’s in the millions. You have to ask, why are they bothering?” he asks.

Mark Hallman, a public relations officer for CN Rail, said that the company’s civil law suit relates to damages from the blockades. Hallman says that they lost $100-million in the value of goods, but would not reveal the sum CN would be seeking in the lawsuit.

Despite the lawsuit, Hallman indicated they are interested in good relations with native communities.

“We have a policy of long-standing support for First Nations,” Hallman said. He pointed to their aboriginal program, which includes awards for native students, and a letter sent in 2006 to ex-Indian Affairs Minister Jim Prentice, encouraging the government to speed up to settle land claims. Hallman said the company would not disclose the letter.

Canadians not on board

The Tyendinaga Support Committee in Toronto has called for the Attorney General of Ontario to drop the criminal charges, for CN Rail to abandon its lawsuit, and for the federal and provincial governments to return all lands that rightfully belong to the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte. The office of the Attorney General of Ontario did not respond to The Daily’s request for an interview.

Collis mentioned an Angus Reid Poll conducted in July that showed 71 per cent of Canadians believe the federal government should speed up the resolution of land claims.

“Whether Canadians agreed or not [with the tactics], they recognized there was a problem. A lot of people have said Canada is going down the path towards a ticking-time bomb,” Collis said, citing a Canadian Senate report published in December 2006. Entitled “Negotiation or Confrontation: It’s Canada’s Choice,” the report argues that if the federal government doesn’t quickly resolve the grievances of indigenous communities and settle land claims, more occupations and blockades can be expected.

“There’s a recognition that things like railways and highways like the 401 fall on Indian land,” Collis said. “There’s a power in that if people choose to use it. I’m sure there’s considerable concern about that.”

New Zealand’s police accused of repressing indigenous Maori

Maori Solidarity Committee condemns arrests, protests outside UN building in Montreal

By Ezra Black
News Writer

Over 100 New Zealand police raided the homes of several well-known Maori sovereignty activists last week to allegedly search for evidence related to “terrorism” offences.

Supporters of the activists are condemning the government’s actions as an act of repression under the guise of fighting terror, and say that the activists are in fact peaceful.

The 17 mainly-Maori activists arrested face mostly weapons charges, although terrorism charges may follow. New Zealand’s Counter-Terrorism legislation, passed in 2002, gave police unprecedented powers, including imprisoning anyone “who intends to cause significant disruption to commercial interests or government interests,” according to the Privacy Commissioner’s report to the Minister of Justice.

“New Zealand is now waging a militarized campaign against Maori sovereignty,” said Shannon Walsh, a member of the Maori Solidarity Committee, a Montreal-area group.

“Our goal was to show solidarity with those in New Zealand who continue to be persecuted by legislation that criminalizes dissent.”

The group organized a protest in front of the UN Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity in Montreal, coinciding with protests held around the world this week in support of the sovereignty campaigners and in opposition to New Zealand for labelling its indigenous political dissent movement as “terrorist.”

This follows demonstrations Friday in Whakatane, a town in northern New Zealand, where 1,500 protestors rallied in solidarity with those arrested and carried banners proclaiming, “We are not terrorists – we’ve been terrorized.”

“We hope [the government of New Zealand] feels embarrassed, especially since they announced their candidacy for the UN Human Rights Council last week,” said Walsh.

New Zealand’s treatment of indigenous activists has been compared to similar treatment in Canada. Mohawk activist Shawn Brant faces nine charges for two blockades earlier this year outside the Tyendinaga community near Kingston, Ontario.

Brant has also been branded a criminal and, like Iti, he was denied bail and will soon face trial.

“We think Canada is such a progressive society, but we see a history of repression of [indigenous] peoples in Canada, from the Ipperwash Crisis where [native protestor] Dudley George was killed, to the recent imprisoning of Shawn Brant, and we need to pay attention,” Walsh said.

Last month, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and the United States were the only four countries to vote against the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The UN General Assembly adopted the declaration by a vote of 143-4, with 11 abstentions.

In response to the outcry in New Zealand over the raids last week, Global Peace & Justice Auckland, a network that works on peace and justice issues, demanded the country’s parliament wait until tensions cool before passing the Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill, a proposed amendment to current terrorism laws that was reported back from the Parliament’s Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee yesterday.

If the bill is passed, courts could not review designations of terrorists or terrorist organizations, and they would be decided by the UN list, which has been largely drawn up by the U.S. Critics have claimed that the new bill would harm legitimate political protest and remove civil rights safeguards at the same time.

“We blatantly refused to sign the declaration when clearly the struggles are present here,” said Walsh.

Tomorrow has been designated an international day of solidarity for the so-called “Urewera Seventeen,” named after the region where they were arrested.

TASERING: SADISM ON CAMPUS, SADISM COMING EVERYWHERE

Leftist Blogs Defend Police Brutality In Student Tazering
Partisan bickering obscures heart of the issue as Fox News, MSNBC set up phony debate by making Kerry's behavior focus of story, not oppressive actions of thug cops

Prison Planet | September 18, 2007
Paul Joseph Watson

Media coverage of a University of Florida student being tazered by cops for asking a question didn't spark a debate about ongoing police brutality and political persecution, but instead prompted partisan bickering and mindless ninnying about John Kerry's behavior during the incident, while leftist blogs defended the actions of the police.

Andrew Meyer was grabbed by cops yesterday after he asked the former presidential candidate why he didn't challenge the rigged election of 2004 and about his membership of the skull and bones secret society. Meyer asked police what he was being arrested for as they dragged him to the back of the University Auditorium before manhandling him to the ground.

As the photo above shows, two female officers, one with some kind of gangland tattoo on her arm, seem to be smiling with pleasure as they move in to seize Meyer.Only when Meyer was immobile and had five officers on top of him did the police decide to send 50,000 volts of electricity coursing through his prostrate body, seemingly waiting until Meyer begged them not to do it so as to enjoy the maximum power trip from administrating the torture.

Watch the video.

Fox News, MSNBC and others relentlessly replayed the video yesterday - not as a shocking indictment of the police's actions during the incident, but to discuss John Kerry's behavior and the fact that he continued taking questions while Meyer was being brutalized.

This prompted leftist blogs like News Hounds to slam Fox for endlessly showing the footage as Democrat websites closed ranks and either ignored what was a savage act of police brutality and political persecution or simply claimed Fox News were hyping the story.

They even defended the actions of the police in stating the cops were right to tazer Meyer as he lay on the floor. Imagine if this had happened during a town hall meeting with Bush - liberals would have screamed bloody murder and rightly so - but in this instance they applaud the police for their act of torture simply because Meyer dared question their idol John Kerry.

Another detail left out of press reports is Meyer's political affiliation - he is not a Neo-Con who was attempting to put John Kerry on the spot as Fox News has tried to portray - he was a 9/11 truther. Meyer links to the 9/11 Mysteries documentary from the home page of his website.

Beyond the mindless partisan ninnying, the heart of the issue is that this was another act of wanton police brutality and torture by means of tazering.

The police are now trained that "pain compliance," a euphemism for torture, is acceptable in apprehending anyone even if that person poses no physical danger.

In many cases, cops will tazer someone even if they offer no resistance whatsoever, simply for the sick enjoyment of the power trip as the victim begs and pleads not to be tortured. They also seem to get a kick out of tazering young children and even toddlers.

Take the case of UCLA student Mostafa Tabatabainejad (video above) , who was stunned over and over again for refusing to show his ID at a campus library.

Tabatabainejad agreed to leave and was on his way out of the building before cops tazered him and then proceeded to order him to get back on his feet just so they could shock him over and over again as he cried and moaned for them to stop.

The bottom line is that Taser use is being abused by police all over the country as cops are trained that torture is a perfectly acceptable response to somebody who asks the wrong question or refuses to show their papers.

"ONE RULE OF LAW FOR ALL CANADIAN CITIZENS...",

has been the cry of many CANADIANS, however they are referring to the illegal imposition of their 'law' on sovereign nations, us the Six Nations Confederacy. The cry has also included equal treatment and application of the 'law' for Ongwehonweh (the real people) and Canadians.

Well, let's have it.

In CANADA all who are in 'contempt of court' or are 'violating a court order' or 'fail to acknowledge or respect the rule of law' are subject to arrest and detention and will go through the process of criminalization CANADA has laid out.

On April 20, 2006 @ Kanonhstaton (Douglas Creek Estates) CANADA, ONTARIO and the OPP set the standard for executing a 'contempt of court' injunction.

They declared it an acceptable standard of arrest for a 'contempt of court' charge to taser young children, drag women around by the hair, handcuff and assault 70 year old men, pepperspray unarmed women, men and children, beat grandmothers at a ratio of 5 to 1.

They declared it an acceptable standard of arrest to point high calibre weapons at close range at sleeping 10 month old and 2 year old babies and new mothers.

They declared it an acceptable standard of arrest to use snipers carrying all types of heavy artillery to chase down unarmed women and children in the dark.

They declared it legal and an acceptable standard to assault, threaten and terrorize unarmed, sleeping Natives of all ages.

Well, now let's talk about equal treatment under the 'law'.

Who drug Marie Trainer around by the hair for inciting violence on Native women? NOBODY.

Who is being held accountable for all levels of CANADA for not upholding section 35 of their constitution and breaking their own laws? NOBODY.

Who is being held accountable for UPPER CANADA stealing Six Nations' money from the GRAND RIVER NAVIGATION COMPANY to build the LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA? NOBODY.

One rule of law, yeah right.

The fight against discrimination against Ongwehonweh in the legal system is just beginning.
The very foundation of CANADA'S legal system is based on theft, fraud and deceit.

Theft of our land, theft of our lease money, forged documents, etc.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THE LAW...

ON TUESDAY AUGUST 21, 2007
FROM 10:00AM TO 12:00PM
@ The Law Society of Upper Canada
@ 130 Queen Street West in Toronto.

A peaceful gathering to speak about the accepted and legislated discrimination against Natives, the true history of the Law Society of UPPER CANADA and the CANADIAN "Rule of Law".

We need your support.
skennen, niawen.
(peace, thank you)

Janie Jamieson
Six Nations