Activist Silenced for Fear of Surveillance
Jennifer Flynn is not a rabble-rouser. She’s not an aspiring suicide bomber. She doesn’t advocate the overthrow of the government. Instead, she pushes for funding and better treatment for people with HIV and AIDS.
Better keep an eye on her.
Wait! Somebody already did.
On the day before a rally by the New York City AIDS Housing Network at the 2004 Republican National Convention - a rally by an organization Flynn co-founded, and a rally that the NYPD had approved - she experienced something straight out of a spy novel.
While visiting her family in Hillside, N.J., Flynn spotted a car with a New York license plate parked outside the house. When she left to head back to her Brooklyn home that evening, the car followed hers. Shortly after leaving Hillside, two more vehicles, also with New York plates, seemed to be tailing her, too.
Trying to assure herself she wasn’t nuts, Flynn tested her hunch - changing lanes, making turns, pulling over and parking. The drivers in those three vehicles mimicked her actions.
At one point, she recalled, she slowed down and one of the other vehicles ended up alongside her car. She looked over to see several men in the vehicle. She gestured toward them. The men “threw up their arms as if to say, ‘We’re only doing what we’re told,’” she remembers.
On the New Jersey side of the Goethals Bridge, her followers pulled away. But later, when Flynn pulled up in front of her Flatbush home, she spotted another car, with two men inside, both with laptops. At 4 a.m., they were still there.
Is Flynn paranoid? Well, she is now. She did, however, jot down the license plate number of one of the vehicles in Jersey - a blue sport utility vehicle. When a reporter asked for the number, Flynn couldn’t find it. Recently, it was found in a file kept by Christopher Dunn, the civil liberties lawyer she called that day in a panic.
The license plate number traces back to a company - Pequot Inc. - and a post office box at an address far from the five boroughs. Registering unmarked cars to post office boxes outside the city or to shell companies is a common practice of law enforcement agencies to shield undercover investigators.
The NYPD, however, says it didn’t follow Flynn that evening. And the department’s Deputy Commissioner of Intelligence David Cohen has said no federal agency was involved in preconvention surveillance.
So who was following Flynn? And what, exactly, did they hope to learn about a woman the NYPD knew well, as it had been in regular communication with her about her organization’s rally?
The answer - well, part of it - is a 99-mile road trip from NYPD headquarters: uptown, into the Bronx, and onto I-87. A quick switch onto the Saw Mill River Parkway, then the Taconic Parkway. Fifty more miles to go, past the leaves turning color and the country club golf courses. After that, it’s the winding roads of tony Millbrook, with its horse farms and vineyards.
At last, we’re in Amenia, population 1,115. It’s so far from the city its dry cleaners actually clean horse blankets.
The street named on the license-plate printout exists, though the address doesn’t. An auto-shop worker on the block suggests checking with the post office. When Postmaster Bonnie Colgan and an assistant are shown the printout, they stop dead in their tracks.
There’s a Pequot Capital Management in midtown and a Pequot Construction in the Bronx. But no Pequot Inc. in Amenia.
“That’s not a real company,” the assistant says. “The people who used that box, they’re from New York. They used to come here and get the mail, but not anymore.”
Colgan is tempted to elaborate, but doesn’t.
“I can’t because of the sensitive nature of the issue,” she says.
Back in the city, Flynn takes a seat at a Starbucks near City Hall and shakes her head. She still feels as passionately about what she does as she did three years ago. But she concedes the experience has taken its toll.
“I feel like I’ve stepped back, in a way,” she says. “I feel I’m not as vocal as I was. I’m still going to sign a petition. I’m still going to organize a rally. I do it. But now I’m deathly afraid.”
Flynn, 35, may one day learn who was following her. Activists have decried police tactics at the GOP convention - 1,806 arrests, protesters hemmed in with orange netting, people arrested and held for hours and hours in a West Side pier warehouse. The New York Civil Liberties Union, which represents seven plaintiffs suing the city over their arrests, is pushing for the release of raw NYPD intelligence reports detailing police surveillance of activists and protest groups.
Flynn says the damage is done. She sees it in the attitudes of other activists. There’s less desire. More trepidation.
“When you use scare tactics, you really are curbing our right to dissent against the government,” she said. “The only thing this is serving to do is squash public dissent. By going after the organizers of a rally, you really are sending a message - ‘Don’t hold a rally.’”
© 2007 Newsday Inc.
Scare tactics are much more violent than being followed or having your phone tapped, email read, etc. Everyone can assume these in the suveillance state.
People in the US and around the world are jailed and killed for activism. Remember the Black Panthers and American Indian Movement? Their leaders were murdered and many are still in jail.
Those are scare tactics.
With all the $ directed to Homeland Security and/or Blackwater, the rationale for these bloated budgets has to focus on POTENTIALS of domestic unrest. Therefore ANY activist in any GOOD cause can now reasonable expect to become a target. The precedent set by the enormous mercenary force being used as adjunct to this senseless war of choice, also makes possible all sorts of pseudo-authorities being paid to do all sorts of things under the radar. The Statue of Liberty is shedding tears…
‘People should not be in fear of their governments. Governments should be in fear of their people’ - V for Vendetta
Jennifer get back on that horse, next time someone is parked outside, bake them some cookies, get to know them, you were half way there in the traffic exchange, take pictures of them and their license plates. Exposure is what they need. Stand up for your rights don’t give up the fight.
Also call a few buddies over to help confront the spies.
Put a big sign next to the car: ‘NARC’
Watch ‘em run.
We haven’t caught Bin Laden, but are spending money on this shit.
Way too obvious that this whole endeavor was to justify an attack on our own citizens rather than the farcical war on terror.
It’s like the Nietzsche saying, “Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.”
I don’t think NYPD, Homeland Security, Bushies, etc. have a clue about that.
This is like a scene out of a Soviet Union dissident’s story!
I will now give you a list of all the good things that Homeland Security has done with its 38 billion $ anual budget:
.
.
.
.
.
.
It is very important that you remember these things, since H.S. has yet to get its finances approved by an external auditor, as required by a law passed by (ho hum) the US Congress some years ago.
Start taking pictures of suspicious vehicles and their inhabitants. They usually leave immediately to protect their cover. Kinda like wtching the roaches scurry for cover when you turn the kichen light on.
I think Countersurveillance is appropriate.
Bring the cameras with you. If you are followed, go to a public area and film the followers. Put it up on YouTube. Let everyone know.
We’ve had similar experiences. The license plates were traced to the Dept. of Justice. Since then we have talked to new drivers and were told by “retired intelligence officers” that private contractors are not limited by the Constitution. We have also experienced seized banking and medical records, black bag jobs, playback of recorded phone calls, lots of guns, and some live gunfire. It is all theater, all highly visible. Our lawyers are very busy. It is hard to know how widespread this activity is.
They do not like cameras.
Anyone remember the VERY recent ‘infiltration’ of a peace march in Canada by police hoping to incite violence? And how when they were discovered, the riot squad appeared to ‘arrest’ the fake protesters, and threaten the legitimate ones?
This is FAR too typical. Jsut ask the preacher who had his leg broken in DC at the Petraeus hearings. Or the univercity student who was tasered for asking John Kerry an impertenant question or two.
Jennifer, I agree with White Rose. Get back on the horse. Anybody who demonstrates for or against something in America is put under surveillance — that’s reality. Heck, you don’t even have to hold demonstrations to be treated to surveillance.
I was very involved in the women’s rights movement in the late 60s and early 70s. We were watched all the time. We were followed home from meetings by the local police of whatever town we met in — we were a “dangerous” bunch of housewives with kids for the most part.
I’ve reached the point in my old age of believing that if you aren’t willing to stand up against those who’d silence you or watch you for some transgression, nothing’s going to change.
It’s smart to bake cookies for your would-be oppressors and then take their pictures if they still follow you around. Use them in a harassment lawsuit.
Your horse is right outside…
Of course, the piece of advice that’s ALWAYS missing from these stories (usually in the form of a Hollywood chase scene) is simple:
1) Get the license plates & make of the car(s).
2) Drive to the nearest police station.
3) Go inside and tell them you’re being stalked, provide all the data, etc. The stalkers may still be outside, and then maybe not.
Were the guys in the cars wearing Brownshirts?
Canuckchuck: Not yet…But check for red armbands.
Just keeping us safe.
…Now if you wouldn’t mind getting in this cattle car… showers will be provided at the processing center.
It occurs to me that this is a game that two can play. It would be great if Jennifer Flynn had a couple or three friends capable of being with her at all times with video cams with zoom lens.
They could walk up to the parked cars and take pictures of the personnel inside, scan the license plate numbers, maybe attempt to engage in conversation with these personnel. (This would be a natural for drama majors seeking to learn stage presence and how to interact with an audience)
There might even be an award winning documentary cum farce here!–New School are you listening?!
Even more fun would be tailing the tailers as they follow Jennifer around town. (Imagine a car with speakers on top blaring out “I Love a Parade”,”Me and My Shadow”, I’ll Be Watching You” and other similarly appropriate tunes!)
Having video cams record their moves (the way the traffic cops do with speeders!) and just staying with them all day long to help them get a taste of what the effect of their conduct is like would be an important exercise of civic duty. More importantly, turning the tables on the portrayers of this farce just might help them more clearly see the absurdity of it all.
On getting pictures of the agents… you would likely be charged with endangering the life of an undercover policeman ( a felony I believe), or with obstruction, or …well, I’m sure you get the picture. The laws do not apply to the ones beating you over the head.
And some people think this will all change when Bush leaves office.
This is very very depressing and not what I thought America was at all.
I received a Hallmark Christmas card from Bush postmarked from his ranch in Texas, via the RNC (Republican National Committee) and I have felt threatened ever since. I think they were telling me I’m on their list. (and I have been in opposition to Bush from the beginning and have never donated money to a Republican. I’m a registered Democrat)
I went to see a speech by Cindy Sheehan, which had fewer than 100 people there and a burly man took my photo and smiled at me. He did not fit in at that meeting and why take a photo away from the speaker and towards a side crowd?
I do not feel safe in America. The government is not protecting me or many of the others who are citizens exercising our rights.
I think the achilles heel in all this is the military. If the military veterans and the troops in the field say enough and there is dissent in the military that will put an end to the war in Iraq.
Its up to the military.
And thats why the Move.On ad was attacked so vehemently and why the march in Washington on Sept 15, where veterans spoke against the war, was under reported. The people in support of the war are worried about the troops not supporting the war…thats my opinion. If the troops start calling Petraeus, Be tray us then that is a severe problem for troop morale.
Petraeus gave a positive view of progress. Do the troops in Iraq agree or not? Do they think they are being successful or being used for political gains for Bush and Republicans? Are their lives being used to put off an inevitable failure in Iraq until a Democrat takes office? Meanwhile they suffer in a vicious war…?
Even that such questions are asked indicates a severe problem in the governance of America. The Bush regime has been a dismal failure and will not let go of power. People are afraid these right wing republicans will create a situation where they will not carry out the elections in 2008 or will interfere with the fair counting of votes. This should not be happening in America. People should not have these kinds of fears.
This is one of the lowest points in American history. As a person who has not been previously political I have not the slightest idea how to deal with this. I thought I had freedom but then I had never tested it. People are “free” until they start to exercise their rights as a citizen.
Colleen: A low point? A LOW point? You can’t get any lower. Morally the US is now in the same company as Hitler’s Nazi Germany, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, Idi Amin’s Uganda, Stalin’s Russia… do I need to go on?
Hey, Homeland Security goons have to do SOMETHING to earn their keep. Why not follow around and harrass a cute blond. They are falling all over themselves for that assignment. Its a much better beat then sitting outside of some tenament where a terror cell might be hatching the next bomb job, or outside a Mosque, snapping pics of “middle eastern looking men”. Jeez, that’s booorrrinnnggggg.
Thanks for Keep ‘merica safe from the Evil Doers’s Dubya, commander guy, decider chief…
That’s only if you know that’s who/what they are. It wouldn’t be unreasonable for the stalkee to conclude instead that they’re terrorists, a hate group, or gang members…
Galen,
Flynn would not know that they’re undercover agents. Someone following someone else is a stalker. Could be private mafia, run-of-the-mill crooks, mistaken identity, sexual predator, etc.
She should have driven to the NYPD or some other level of local law enforcement, give them the plates, and tell them she’s being stalked and concerned about personal safety. Could be that they, themselves, are doing the stalking. But if you’ve not broken any laws, nor are advocating for it, I highly doubt it. They’ve got better things to do.
Anney: And how many people have had their cameras confiscated for taking tourist pictures?
And when a ‘police officer’ or agent feels theatened these days, they tend to shoot first, and cover up the results by smearing the victim as a ‘potential’ terrorist. As noted earlier, ask the preacher who had his leg broken, or the student who was tasered. Or the reporter who was shot in the head with a rubber bullet in Florida a few years back. Or the woman in the wheelchair who was tasered to death.
Galen
One million innocent people have died in Iraq and they are in a civil war.
It still is not as bad as the purges the Russians experienced under Stalin, or Cambodia and its killing fields under the Khmer Rouge.
And it is still possible that the US could extricate itself from the neocon /Republican death grip.
Fear is their only weapon.
The colour of the shirts, black or brown, on the goons terrorizing citizens at Fascist checkpoints (any transportation terminal) all over the country makes no difference. What is Big Brother really afraid of? Nail clippers, shoes and tooth paste? Their aim is to instill FEAR in this nation of cows.
That fear will eventually turn to contempt, revulsion and revolutition. Until then, If you start snapping pictures, it’s best to use a disposible camera - pre-addressed and stamped for a quick drop into a letterbox.
They might kill us but they can’t eat us.
Colleen: If they are in a ‘civil’ war, why did it start AFTER the US invaded? Isn’t every single one of those deaths DIRECTLY attributable to the actions taken or caused by the US govwernment? The medical journal, Lancet, seems to think so. As does Amnesty International.
Oh, and Colleen… Bush will be remembered by history as an equal to Hitler, Stalin, Amin, Pol Pot and all the other horrendous human monsters.
Galen
Are you so scared you’ve fallen into fear-mongering? Not me. Those events make it even more imperative to stand up and be counted.
I’ll prepare no surrender speeches nor will I go hide in the basement. America’s forefathers fought and died to guarantee American freedom. Are Americans so soft and spoiled and coddled that they can’t even imagine standing hard and fast against those who’d take away those freedoms?
Galen
Yes that is attribulated to the US invasion. Iraq should not have been invaded. The war and the US military have made it worse not better imo.
Iraqi culture is too fragmented and there is too much hatred and too many people have an interest in gaining revenge. War will not solve those problems. Unfortuantely the way to solve those problems is viewed as being weak by most Americans, while they continue to bludgeon away with war and a military.
The military will not be able to solve these problems. War is NOT the answer.
I don’t think you can be prosecuted for putting pictures of stalkers on the web. If they identify themselves as officers and openly tail her then I think pictures would be a bad idea.
Of course, then I am thinking with that pesky Constitution in my mind. What would really be funny is have as many look-a-likes as you can get show up at her house and all leave in every different direction.
I ask … is it Fascism yet? I think it is but we are not willing to admit it. Brown shirts are not the American way. We would do it with Blackwater. Please, for crying out loud, WAKE UP.
The best approach to fear and anger is to cultivate a black hatred. Filth uses fight/flight to cause paralysis and demoralization. I’ve been tailed and I have had my car vandalized, but I hate these filth to the depth of my soul, so it doesn’t bother me.
After a Port Militarization Resistance (PMR) action in Grays Harbor, Wash., at which no one was arrested, dozens of vehicles were pulled over by police as they were leaving the nearby town of Aberdeen, none to my knowledge resulting in a ticket or warning; it was pure harassment.
In a better world, this kind of effort to scare people into silence and submission would be investigated by the U. S. Attorney General, and sanctions levied against law enforcement agencts behaving this way.
But we live in a protofascist nation now, with little protection apart from ourselves. Said protection is precious, and should be cultivated further so that countersurveillance, use of buddy-systems, riding two or more in vehicles, carrying cell phones with video capacity, small-group solidarity in general, and progressive community building become integral parts of our practice as seekers of peace, justice, and liberty.
I would love to see a followup on this story in which Jennifer Flynn reports that she is even more active than she was in the past, and with a spirited community of others alongside her.
Be it so!
The rulers have never liked the idea of civil rights. Until the Miranda decision, police were not required to inform people what rights they had when they were being arrested.
Sacco and Vanzetti have not been legally cleared even 86 years after they were railroaded.
No one was ever prosecuted over the violations revealed in the COINTELPRO papers.
In my home county, “America’s toughest sheriff” continues to mistreat people routinely before trial, during, and after trial. He gets elected everytime, and the Democratic governor not only dares not cross him, but eagerly collaborates with him.
We need to stop being nostalgic about ‘the freedoms our forefathers/founders fought for” — because they never did. They fought for their own privileges, not for anyone else’s rights.
Dichterfreund
You’d trash the Bill of Rights because our forefathers fought for their own privileges, not for anyone else’s rights?
Not me. They were definitely looking toward the future with the best government possible, though perhaps they didn’t look this far.
Jennifer, Yes you can be afraid, yes Blackwater might be involved, and yes without habeas corpus you could disappear … but, on the other hand think of the good you were doing for a very unserved population. Keep a record/diary with photos if you want, check in with friends on a frequent and regular basis,and then get back out there. I’d rather have my tax money ‘wasted’ following you than others who are political activists with a good chance to change things for the better. Hugs
whatfools: “They might kill us but they can’t eat us.”
You must never have watched Soylent Green
Welcome to Bush’s Murka.
The free country I learned that we deserved, that the founders dreamed we might someday realize, is shrouded by profit-chasing, fear-mongering, authoritarians who don’t give a damn about the Constitution. We got bonuses over and beyond the NeoCon’s “New Pearl Harbor”. This is what we get when we treat crimes as if they were committed by sovereign nations, and lie about the root causes of the motives of the criminals.
Time for restoration of Democracy in America. (Please reference Myannmar…)
Two people have mentioned this: “As noted earlier, ask the preacher who had his leg broken, or the student who was tasered.” I saw the videos of both of those events, and I didn’t like the behavior of the security officers in either case.
However, its important to note that both of those people *resisted physically*. The dear reverend, who had been barred from a hearing for no apparent reason, saw his chance to enter slipping away, the door was closing, so he tried to do what looked like an end-run around the security officers who had told him quite clearly that he would be prevented from entering. That was a serious mistake.
The student in Florida also resisted. Of course if he was not warned clearly before the officers laid a hand on him, then they are in the wrong. But– and someone else with more legal expertise can correct me if I’m wrong here– once you resist, it makes NO difference if you then plead “I’m not resisting” like Yearwood, or “I’ll go peacefully, just let me go” like the student.
I just don’t want people here to be stupid. Please resist, please fight injustice, but if a cop tells you to do something, and you resist physically, you are now challenging the authority of the police, instead of challenging the the authority or the power behind the police. Your message is going to get lost.
Saludos desde Puerto Rico,
Nada nuevo. Nothing new. Actions like these have been going on in Puerto Rico since the 1920s or before. Each and every member of the Puerto Rican Independence Movement has known for years that this could happen to him/her.
Yesterday we comemborated another anniversary of the 1868 Puerto Rican revolt against Spain in Lares. We also remembered the second anniversary of the FBI murder of Puerto Rican independence leader Filiberto Ojeda Rios.
Brave souls those FBI agents. It took over 200 of them to bring down a 72 year old man and terrorize a barrio.
Police State Boogie
The right to free speech has actually already been taken from us when you consider the limitations put on protestors over the past decades and more.
Any effort now to give voice to free speech is met with police brutality or the threat of it.
Grandmothers, women and children are being rounded up in orange netting; protestors confined to out-of-the-way areas so that the target of the protest doesn’t have to cope with dissent.
Who are these police officers who permit themselves to be used as fascist thugs?
Who are these soldiers who permit Bush to turn them into torturers?
We can all be disappeared now — and life is cheap in third world America.
ANNEY said, “I’ll prepare no surrender speeches nor will I go hide in the basement.” In response to that and FRESH 1, tonight I happened to be at a friend’s home in Alachua, Florida when in walked a guy who’s been in the news here on CD as well as Truthout. His name is Charlie Grapski (?) and he tape recorded an encounter with a city rep that led to his (false) arrest, etc. He told me he had renal failure, was tazered and nearly died. He explained–this is the same COUNTY where the young man was tazered at UF a few days ago–that the police now regard this as a rather banal tactic. It is considered legit for anyone resisting arrest, but also the murkier zone that he labeled “pain compliance.”
I never met him before and we rattled on about the many evident areas where civil liberties had recently been squashed. I asked if the ACLU was representing him for damages and he said they are almost of no use here in Florida. I inquired as to whether that was based on our near banana republic status, as per the 2000 election; and he explained that ACLU is rather niche-oriented, or perhaps I should say gains resonance from its own geographical locale. He told me someone has to stand up to politicians/power abusing its legal rights and privileges, and that he felt he was one of those someone, although it had cost him. I asked if he meant emotionally or financially, and he said both, along with a now ostensible compromise ON his health. Liberty ain’t free in the land of the indentured.
RAUL MAX: I lived in PR for almost a decade. I wonder if we know any of the same people? I stayed in Ocean park, Santurce, Old San Juan and Guaynabo.
“The only thing this is serving to do is squash public dissent. By going after the organizers of a rally, you really are sending a message - ‘Don’t hold a rally.’”
These thugs have been following and threatening people of conscience for decades and putting them on their outdated McCarthy-era lists. If you were breaking the law they would arrest you. On the other hand, if you’re not breaking any laws, continue on your path and wave hello to them when you see them tailgaiting you. Most of these people are just earning a living by following the directions of their masters.
They’re just warming up for the great crash of 2008, when the spy/police state will be in full effect.
People, like me at 63 years of age, should start suggesting an overthrow of this totalitarian, fascist government. Bush was elected twice by an illegal election, first in Florida and then in Ohio. He has committed every immoral, unethical, criminal act imaginable. We elected the Democrats to stop this and they have done nothing. The Constitution suggests overthrowing tyrannical governments, as people did against England. Evidently nothing else is going to stop this march toward dictatorship. We need to take back America and stop the Nazi like henchmen such as Cheney, Rice, Bush and company! I also suggest if the US invades Iran people stop paying taxes and take to the streets to shut down the military-industrial complex that has taken control over what once was a democracy and is no longer!
MASTERSHAKE: I don’t think it will be the crash of 2008, whatever the fiscal facts “on the ground” you know facades will be buoyed up at all costs to allow an election (Unless a false flag event is launched). My money is on 2009-2010 when the astrology shows quite an inflamed cosmic configuration. Cosmic short hand for “as above, so below.”
Well, I feel so much safer knowing that our country is keeping tabs on social activists like Jennifer Flynn. We must have tax dollars oozing from the coffers if manpower is spent tailing a woman who probably doesn’t even have a gun (or a network of suicide bombers). I’d like to re-purpose those G-men to finding the killer of, say, Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman. I don’t think those G-men would have a hard time tailing OJ. At least they might accomplish something, and the money would be much better spent. (Since they haven’t got the guts or the brains to go after real terrorists.)
If you allow yourself to be intimidated into silence, the Domestic Terrorist Enemies of our Constitution have won. Do not succumb to the fear, especially when the CIA, the FBI and most local law enforcement hate Cheneybush as much as the rest of the majority of Earth.
So why does everyone automatically jump to the conclusion that it is Big Brother himself watching. It could very well be any one of the myriad of Right Wingnut Ultra Conservation Religious Fascist groups that would rather see all of the homosexuals, who as they all know are the only one who spread it, die of HIV than help them. They are very well funded you know . . .
Is it my imagination or is the government trying to quench anything that does not have to do with making money or supporting your neighborhood corporate interests.
They want people to pay for health care but the affordibility is out of reach. The standard of organic foods are lowered because it is “too hard” for the corporation and the chemical companies want money.
The government wants people to be responsible for themselves while the cost of college continues to skyrocket.
The allow usury loans and credit card scams so the poor and middle class are entrenched in debt.
Doesn’t sound like they are looking out for us.
I don’t know if this kind of government harassement just started. I recall Perot and John Lennon alleged the government was harassing them.
Is there no more honesty and integrity left in today’s world?
Totally ignore them.
The people of Burma, lead by the Buddhist monks, are risking their lives right now in order to reclaim their country and restore their democracy. At any moment they know that machine gun fire could could open up upon them. At any moment they could be rounded up, mercilessly tortured and killed, and yet they march.
We should be ashamed if we allow ourselves to be silenced by orange netting, taser guns, and bumbling surveillance lackies.
Fresh1: However, its important to note that both of those people *resisted physically*. The dear reverend, who had been barred from a hearing for no apparent reason, saw his chance to enter slipping away, the door was closing, so he tried to do what looked like an end-run around the security officers who had told him quite clearly that he would be prevented from entering. That was a serious mistake.”
Fresh1, you are promoting the very thing that has turned us into a whimp nation. These fat ass pigs were stopping a citizen from exercising his rights–THEY ARE THE CRIMINALS. Quit makeing excuses for the cops–they are thugs with a badge and a gun…period. You still keep interjecting Mayberry rules–which is something the middle class and would-be-middle class keep doing. We are not dealing with Andy and Barney–even though many of them think like Barney. These pigs taser people, and otherwise abuse them. They threaten to plant dope on people to shut them up–and no doubt do plant gunss and dope on people. But why bother, if they go to trial, nice middle-class valued people like yourself will let them off with such platitudes as you cite above.
That bunch in state legislatures are guilty too, passing all of their nanny laws, treating adults like children to such an extent that the cops feel that they have the right to treat everyone like children in an orphan’s home. I’m sick of it. My grandaddy used to say the only good snake is a dead one–I’m beginning to feel that way about cops. Everytime I hear about one having been shot, I hate to admit it, but I always ask myself, “I wonder what guy was pushed over the edge by that bastard. I find it difficult to believe that any of them can be innocent of anything anymore. Let’s face it, I hate cops, and with reason. I have seen one or two that have the interest of the public at heart, the rest of them are pigs, pure and simple. The police are so corrupt, I can’t think a person with self-esteem would even want to be a part of that sorry breed.
Be assured, if you have written on Common Dreams discussions, you are being surveilled. Heck, if you use the internet, Congress gave the Pres legal means to look at all of us without oversight. If you’ve signed a petition, written your Congresspersons, etc. you are being tagged. I may sound paranoid, but this administration still surprises me with its audacious grasp for total power. And the Congress, media, and people are willing to give it away!
I read somewhere that this is a proto-fascist state - I drop the prefix.
But I won’t stop writing, standing up, being active for the Constitution. I’m a bit conservative compared to others who want to overthrow the gov’t, I just really want a nation that governs according to its Constitution, with checks and balances on the three branches, and of course cares for its weakest. I would like to see us be less in thrall of lassez-faire Capitalism.
And here’s to you Mrs Robinson
((c’mon everybody now!))
tlcs_3,
Let’s just be content that they govern by means of fear, paranoia and rumor-mongering. And not concentration camps — at least not yet. If it weren’t for threat of being surveilled, how many more people would come out of their political closets? But we (MSM notwithstanding) keep an eye on their political activities too, write about them, watch their hanky-panky, etc. There’s enough paranoia to go around.
They’re sure doing well at fostering a culture of cowardice. This, indeed, is the prerequisite for a proto-fascist state.
As for overthrowing the government, I think you’ve read most of the CD community wrong. Most of us advocate for a procedural/legal restoring and modernization of democracy and national standing in the global community, not an overthrowing of government. The overthrowing appears to have already occured.
Fear is poison. It is an internal enemy. Work at deleting it from your consciousness!
The light is on our side. Our victory is inevitable.
————-
The overcoming of fear
by Benjamin Creme
http://www.share-international.org/ARCHIVES/AgelessWisdom/aw_bcfear.htm
“were told by “retired intelligence officers” that private contractors are not limited by the Constitution.”
That’s bull when private contractors are acting as agents for the government.
If they’re NOT acting as agents for the government, then they are subject to civil and criminal law.
In this country nobody is above the law. NOBODY.
We just have to see that we ENFORCE the law.
Or there might as well not be any.
Liberty & Justice,
SJ
www.spartacusjones.com
I believe the old saying goes something like this: A civilisation is jusdged on how it treats the defenceless members of it’s society.
Therefore, intimidating an activist for the HIV/AIDS sufferers MUST demonstrate that the US is in the majority a society of drooling barbarians incapable of basic human decency.
You do your thing Flynn! I’ve been watched for years and its taken me years to get off the gov.s current lists. They watch me for this blog mostly now. If you don’t think its normal then you are wrong. All us protesters have our names flagged. Its worse for some. Especially if you are smart. Yes it just like in the movies. Its kind of creepy to be riding your bike in the middle of the night and hear your name in conversation from a party near by that is really a surveillance team watching you. “there goes jungle-boy, thats him” First and last name! Thats when I quit my (very public) protests. Our group was also infiltrated big time. Let them do it, but, don’t let them plan things for you.
“Please resist, please fight injustice, but if a cop tells you to do something, and you resist physically, you are now challenging the authority of the police, instead of challenging the the authority or the power behind the police.”
What muddled thinking! The authority of the police IS the authority behind them! If you obey the police enforcing an unjust law, or in these two cases, arbitrary denial of rights, you are implicitly giving them your approval! Please! Go out right now and rent a copy of the movie “Gandhi”.
Now you are correct in that you shouldn’t physically fight the cops; the traditional Gandhian thing was to simply stay seated and calm and make the cops carry you to the paddy wagon. But unfortunately, nowadays, this is exactly the situation where the cops use their tazer on you - then charge you with resisting arrest or even assaulting an officer anyway! I’ve seen it done to a protestor here. And there is something terribly insidious about the ytazer use in this manner - high-voltage electric shocks seem to be an order of magnitude worse than blows with billy clubs.
holymoly, I would like to add to your comments to Fresh1 and to every person reading this. Yes, and this goes for the “Freddies” following Flynn too. I apologize for the length, but I ask you to bear with me. It is well worth the read.
There are some serious misconceptions lingering in our society, mainly that we the people have only limited options when it comes to the unlawful behavior of government officials and their agents. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
The first major misconception is that our conduct as citizens is limited by the Constitution. Wrong. The Constitution is only the framework for our association known as the United States of America. It is the governing document for the structure and form of government, that’s all. The people’s authority actually stems from our original founding document, the Declaration of Independence.
The second major misconception is that these documents don’t matter, because after all they were drafted by 55 rich guys looking at keeping themselves rich. With all respect, this is a very foolish view. It does not matter what the reasons were for the documents origins. The only thing we need be concerned about, is that they exist. The very fact that the following passage appears in the Declaration of Independence is reason enough. The Constitution and the government are fully alterable by the people, period. Is the Constitution perfect? Hell no! But that also does not matter. Because it belongs to us, the flesh and bloods, not the fictitious entities a.k.a. government and corporations. Personally, I believe that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as the recent Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Persons needs to be incorporated into the Constitution. Anyway, the Declaration of Independence states:
“When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate & equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, & the pursuit of happiness: that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, & to institute new government, laying it’s foundation on such principles, & organizing it’s powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety & happiness. Prudence indeed will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light & transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses & usurpations pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty to throw off such government, & to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; & such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present king of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries & usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this let facts be submitted to a candid world.”
I include only the preamble to conserve space, however, the rest of the document reads as the listing of the crimes of King George to the people. More to the point, these crimes quite nearly mirror the crimes committed by the Bush Administration. Are you with me so far?
The third major misconception is that we the people are subject to the laws created by our elected officials, when those laws violate the provisions of the Constitution. Wrong. Numerous court cases, including several at the Supreme Court level, have upheld this fact. Marbury v. Madison (1803) U.S. Supreme Court established several things. I quote the following passages from that decision here.
…”This brings us to the second inquiry; which is,
2. If he has a right, and that right has been violated, do the laws of his country afford him a remedy? [5 U.S. 137, 163] The very essence of civil liberty certainly consists in the right of every individual to claim the protection of the laws, whenever he receives an injury. One of the first duties of government is to afford that protection. In Great Britain the king himself is sued in the respectful form of a petition, and he never fails to comply with the judgment of his court.
In the third volume of his Commentaries, page 23, Blackstone states two cases in which a remedy is afforded by mere operation of law.
‘In all other cases,’ he says, ‘it is a general and indisputable rule, that where there is a legal right, there is also a legal remedy by suit or action at law whenever that right is invaded.’”
—next quote, same case
…”The question, whether an act, repugnant to the constitution, can become the law of the land, is a question deeply interesting to the United States; but, happily, not of an intricacy proportioned to its interest. It seems only necessary to recognise certain principles, supposed to have been long and well established, to decide it.
That the people have an original right to establish, for their future government, such principles as, in their opinion, shall most conduce to their own happiness, is the basis on which the whole American fabric has been erected. The exercise of this original right is a very great exertion; nor can it nor ought it to be frequently repeated. The principles, therefore, so established are deemed fundamental. And as the authority, from which they proceed, is supreme, and can seldom act, they are designed to be permanent.
This original and supreme will organizes the government, and assigns to different departments their respective powers. It may either stop here; or establish certain limits not to be transcended by those departments.
The government of the United States is of the latter description. The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction between a government with limited and unlimited powers is abolished, if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts pro- [5 U.S. 137, 177] hibited and acts allowed are of equal obligation. It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that the constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it; or, that the legislature may alter the constitution by an ordinary act.
Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.
If the former part of the alternative be true, then a legislative act contrary to the constitution is not law: if the latter part be true, then written constitutions are absurd attempts, on the part of the people, to limit a power in its own nature illimitable.
Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is void.
This theory is essentially attached to a written constitution, and is consequently to be considered by this court as one of the fundamental principles of our society. It is not therefore to be lost sight of in the further consideration of this subject.
If an act of the legislature, repugnant to the constitution, is void, does it, notwithstanding its invalidity, bind the courts and oblige them to give it effect? Or, in other words, though it be not law, does it constitute a rule as operative as if it was a law? This would be to overthrow in fact what was established in theory; and would seem, at first view, an absurdity too gross to be insisted on. It shall, however, receive a more attentive consideration.
It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each. [5 U.S. 137, 178] So if a law be in opposition to the constitution: if both the law and the constitution apply to a particular case, so that the court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the constitution; or conformably to the constitution, disregarding the law: the court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty.
If then the courts are to regard the constitution; and he constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature; the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.
Those then who controvert the principle that the constitution is to be considered, in court, as a paramount law, are reduced to the necessity of maintaining that courts must close their eyes on the constitution, and see only the law.
This doctrine would subvert the very foundation of all written constitutions. It would declare that an act, which, according to the principles and theory of our government, is entirely void, is yet, in practice, completely obligatory. It would declare, that if the legislature shall do what is expressly forbidden, such act, notwithstanding the express prohibition, is in reality effectual. It would be giving to the legislature a practical and real omnipotence with the same breath which professes to restrict their powers within narrow limits. It is prescribing limits, and declaring that those limits may be passed at pleasure.
That it thus reduces to nothing what we have deemed the greatest improvement on political institutions-a written constitution, would of itself be sufficient, in America where written constitutions have been viewed with so much reverence, for rejecting the construction. But the peculiar expressions of the constitution of the United States furnish additional arguments in favour of its rejection.
The judicial power of the United States is extended to all cases arising under the constitution. [5 U.S. 137, 179] Could it be the intention of those who gave this power, to say that, in using it, the constitution should not be looked into? That a case arising under the constitution should be decided without examining the instrument under which it arises?
This is too extravagant to be maintained.
In some cases then, the constitution must be looked into by the judges. And if they can open it at all, what part of it are they forbidden to read, or to obey?
There are many other parts of the constitution which serve to illustrate this subject.
It is declared that ‘no tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state.’ Suppose a duty on the export of cotton, of tobacco, or of flour; and a suit instituted to recover it. Ought judgment to be rendered in such a case? ought the judges to close their eyes on the constitution, and only see the law.
The constitution declares that ‘no bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed.’
If, however, such a bill should be passed and a person should be prosecuted under it, must the court condemn to death those victims whom the constitution endeavours to preserve?
‘No person,’ says the constitution, ’shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.’
Here the language of the constitution is addressed especially to the courts. It prescribes, directly for them, a rule of evidence not to be departed from. If the legislature should change that rule, and declare one witness, or a confession out of court, sufficient for conviction, must the constitutional principle yield to the legislative act?
From these and many other selections which might be made, it is apparent, that the framers of the consti- [5 U.S. 137, 180] tution contemplated that instrument as a rule for the government of courts, as well as of the legislature.
Why otherwise does it direct the judges to take an oath to support it? This oath certainly applies, in an especial manner, to their conduct in their official character. How immoral to impose it on them, if they were to be used as the instruments, and the knowing instruments, for violating what they swear to support!
The oath of office, too, imposed by the legislature, is completely demonstrative of the legislative opinion on this subject. It is in these words: ‘I do solemnly swear that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich; and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge all the duties incumbent on me as according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably to the constitution and laws of the United States.’
Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no rule for his government? if it is closed upon him and cannot be inspected by him.
If such be the real state of things, this is worse than solemn mockery. To prescribe, or to take this oath, becomes equally a crime.
It is also not entirely unworthy of observation, that in declaring what shall be the supreme law of the land, the constitution itself is first mentioned; and not the laws of the United States generally, but those only which shall be made in pursuance of the constitution, have that rank.
Thus, the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void, and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.
The rule must be discharged.”
-end of court decision Marbury v. Madison (1803)
Now, continuing on misconception three; that somehow we the people are subject to unConstitutional laws; there is also the misconception that we the people must obey unlawful orders or submit to the unlawful behavior of law enforcement. Absolutely wrong! In the interest of not taking any more space with this comment, I refer you to a page on my website.
http://www.wtpnet.org/copwatch.html
I hope people take the time to consider my words. And they’re not just my words. I would be happy to answer any questions about myself, my sources, and my motivations. I don’t have any secrets. I don’t fear the government, or their surveillance.
The people who commented above regarding real activism, and the sacrifice that comes with it, i.e. the people in Burma standing up to the Military Junta, hit the nail on the head. If we ever want change for the better, we the people have to kick it up a notch. Support the Second Constitutional Convention. See We The People Network for more information at www.wtpnet.org
Peace and Solidarity,
Paul Fisher
mail@wtpnet.org
Thank you Paul Fisher, excellent read and good point about The Declaration of Independence vis a vis the Constitution.
“Anomalies, Prisons, and Geophysics: How Governments Use Data and How to Stop Them”
http://www.chycho.com/?q=anomalies_prisons
A common definition of an anomaly is “a deviation from the common rule, type, arrangement, or form.” This definition, however, can be simplified by stating that an anomaly “is a deviation from specific parameters.” The defining characteristic of an anomaly is that it can only exist in a comparative setting, implying that it can only be detected within a certain data set. Once a data set is obtained then parameters can be specified to filter out so called anomalies for evaluation. Depending on the type of data collected, these parameters can be specified to be anything occurring in any combination. If there is no data set, then there are no anomalies.
A prison can be defined as “a place of seeming confinement.” It is a place to incarcerate people who have lawfully or unlawfully stepped outside the parameters set in their society. This implies that inmates are anomalies within a community. However, these anomalies, unlike eccentrics and aristocrats, are deemed to be a threat to the establishment or the citizenry. Hence prisons are locations where we hold anomalies that we fear.
Geophysics “is a branch of science that deals with the physics of the earth.” Equipment is used to collect and interpret data from our surrounding world and, if required, to located anomalies within a region. User defined parameters needed to find most anomalies are usually inputted into computer programs, which extrapolate data, providing a detailed representation of a situation. As long as there is sufficient computer processing speed, good data, and a competent interpreter, anomalies can be flagged. In general, the more data acquired the better the controls of an investigation.
It should also be understood that anyone involved in a geophysical investigation, from the data collector to the interpreter, can create anomalies at will, anywhere at any time, either deliberately or erroneously. It is relatively easy to change certain parameters to obtain the anomalies that are desired. The isolation and/or extermination of any number, such as 2 or -5 or 600, can be achieved by running filters through a data set. In most cases, to compensate for any errors in data collection and to assure that the desired number is isolated, the number will be flanked. For example, to isolate the number 2, any number between 1.5 and 2.4 will be flagged. This will assure that any number that might be confused as a 2, or has the possibility of becoming a 2, will be removed from the community.
In the last few years certain governments around the world have passed laws to legalize the merging and collection of data for their populations. From credit card information, to medical records, to travel destinations and phone calls, it is all being recorded, tabulated and interpreted. Parameters are being set to flag people as anomalies who have stepped outside of specified boundaries. Those deemed to be existing outside of the limits set by the controllers, are investigated and in some cases removed from the community. The interpreters are so confident in their collection and evaluation of the data that they are passing laws to assure that those deemed to be a threat are unable to question their investigation or incarceration. Since most anomalies occur in batches, laws have also been passed to allow the controllers to have the ability to extrapolate information from captured anomalies by any means necessary, including torture. These laws will also protect government and private organizations from criminal prosecution.
At present the parameters set by those involved in these investigations are wide enough to allow the general public to feel relatively free. However, as time progresses and less anomalies are identified, tighter controls will be used in the analysis of the data to assure that no one will accidentally turn into an anomaly. Anyone associated with or related to an anomaly will find their private and public life scrutinized to convince the investigators that they have not been influenced or misdirected due to their close proximity to an anomaly. Fear of certain anomalies, justified or not, will become a prison for most of these societies and fascism the end result (pdf).
It is extremely important for us as a population to fully comprehend the power that this sort of broad data collection gives our governments. Those who control and interpret the data will have the ability to not only remove unwanted people, but also to restrict the movement of the entire populace. For example, it is relatively easy to place a location marker on all credit and bank cards, which when activated, will only allow the cards to be used within a certain area. If governments decide to restrict travel, then all they need to do is activate the location markers to restrict the use of financial activity to within a few kilometers (or miles) of a residence, creating a jail without physical walls. When this scenario is carried out, special permission will need to be obtained for anyone travelling outside of their zone.
There are numerous ways to gain freedom from these organizations whose purpose is to identify, isolate, incarcerate and even eliminate what they deem to be undesirable elements from society. The machine running these filtration programs can be halted if people stop providing governments and corporations with data. Reducing the number of transactions that are automatically fed into the databases will produce gaps and uncertainties in the data set, creating erroneous interpretation. If enough errors are made, a population loses confidence in the controllers and the system should correct itself. Providing these organizations with large quantities of false or distorted data can also reduce the efficiency of their system. Other methods may include the retraining of law enforcement officers, using cash whenever possible, disassociation and/or protection from insecure electronic activity, and private inquiry into the reasons for government acquisition of personal data. It is very important to grasp the concept that “if there is no data set, then there are no anomalies.”
The best way, however, to stop these entities is to make fundamental changes to the system itself. This requires us to be educated in the methods in which we are controlled, allowing us to understand the problems that exist in the current system so we can avoid its pitfalls. Placement, at the highest levels of government, of ethical civil servants that are accountable to the people and regard the privacy of individuals as the most important aspect of their duties is an essential starting point. It is crucial that during this transitional period alternative choices for leaders are present to avoid a power vacuum. By decentralizing our government and localizing our communities we can avert chaos during this process.
As a collective we must understand that democracy can only exist in a society with an educated populace, and the right for self-governance can only be obtained through knowledge. When a society embraces ignorance and forfeits its right to control its destiny, it has succumbed to apathy and can only deteriorate. In science, the analysis of anomalies contributes to our understanding of the physical world, improving our lives. In contrast, identifying anomalies in our society based on political doctrine has created fear and misunderstanding, restricting our lives. The lack of accountability from our leaders and our indifference to the consequences of their actions is diminishing our civil liberties. But it is not too late, we can prevent this from happening. We still have the ability to reclaim our future if we begin to educate ourselves.
Paul Fisher thanks for the info and the site information. I took a quick gander at it and find it very interesting and informative. I am going to read and digest your above post when I am not so tired–I have it copied to read tomorrow.
Salvia, didn’t Tom Cruise make a movie about this very thing: Minority Report??? Of course, they were using intuition of gifted ones, but these people you describe think they are the gifted ones–as you said, they feel so confident, they feel they can’t be wrong–and hey, better safe than sorry, right? “Safe” here meaning to err on the side of the establishment machine and removing any possible “kinks.”
I am just so angry at all the police brutality and the “prison planet” mentality. Like I said in a post on here elsewhere, I sat on a jury where cops chased a kid down and shot him because he had “dissed” them earlier in the day. He was a black kid from the ghetto side of town so the would-be middle class folk who served on the jury with me found every trite excuse not to hold the cops (city) financially responsible for his shooting. Forget holding them personally liable–it just ain’t gonna happen when people like Fresh can’t see that PEOPLE HAVE RIGHTS and that cops should be held to a higher standard in protecting those rights, not given a badge to kill because some kid “dissed” them or said “fuck you” to them. But American would-be middle class people are so frickin weird that a congressman once said during the Vietnam War, “if I send your kids to the jungle to die that is ok, but if I say a dirty word you want to run me out of office.” Time after time I am totally amazed at how completely illogical these people are. Oh my god, don’t say a dirty word, or watch a dirty movie, or get a blow job in the oval office, but if you want to invade a country, kill its citizens, steal its oil…well, you get the picture. Go figure. People are so frickin stupid!!!
I wish I could feel confident to make a reply to this issue, but I am afraid I can’t.
Paul Bramscher, you can’t go to the same people that one is being stocked and harrassed by. This can get really, really ugly.
These people have quite the influence on EVERYONE they want to.
A thought: if the security forces allow themselves to be seen while tailing someone then it’s a good bet that they *want* to be seen. My guess is that many police officers feel terrible about spying on AIDS activists and suchlike, and don’t take nearly the precautions they would if they were tracking a “real” suspect. The other explanation, however, is much darker: the goons don’t care if they are seen. And they don’t care because they will never have to answer for their actions. What a world we have made.
MA_Matriarch,
But Flynn had no idea who these people were. Don’t assume it was the NYPD. From the sound of it, and assuming this is a real story, I rather doubt it was the police.
In fact, there’s something in the texture of this story that doesn’t quite compute.
This reminds of one of Prime Minister Truedeau`s famous quotes “Just watch me!”
That Canada was supposed to watch him declare martial law is another story.
Smile and wave. Think of it as your very own police escort. Bring them doughnuts, or if you don’t want them to be insulted, pizza or burgers. Watching strangers through the night is a shitty job and it’s definitly not their idea. Chat’em up. In the face of ugliness give them warmth and comfort. They`ll never be able to hate you for it.
Just don’t ever ever ever ever let them make you think they`re going to hurt you. Don’t ever let them get under you skin and give up. It`s how they win.
If they were trying to find evidence of a crime or whatever else they would not let her see them. They`re just messing with her mind so she`ll stop trying to save “fag`s” lives.
Best… Smile
The biggest threat to America’s Freedom, is America.
Paul Bramscher, you are correct there is something in this story that doesn’t compute. That is one of the first things that happens. A person reports what they experience and people think the person is insane.
It doesn’t really do any good having photo’s or audio recordings either. After you validate that one is telling the truth your family and friends no longer want to be around you and attorneys are paid off.
Let me try that again……
Paul Bramscher, you are correct there is something in this story that doesn’t compute. That is one of the first things that happens. A person reports what they experience and people think the person is insane.
It doesn’t really do any good having photo’s or audio documentation. After you validate that one is telling the truth your family and friends no longer want to be around you and attorneys can be paid off.
How do we know it wasn’t local right-wing religious nuts who think that AIDS folks are carrying a scourge from God (Fallwell/Robertson/et. al.)? They dressed up in suits and decided to put a little pressure — for show — on Flynn?
Why are we to assume it was the NYPD?
If someone’s civil rights (and possibly safety) are being tread upon, file a report with the police. Get THEM to police the stalkers, whoever they are. That’s their job.
I have a problem with these stories, true or not, that promote “the wedge” down between ordinary people, who have the same class interests. The real challenge this country must eventually answer to — whether it wants to or not — is vertical in nature, between the remant middle-class (including soldiers, cops and activists alike) vs. perhaps some very crooked/incompetent persons above who may not even be answering primarily to American interests.
Two million people didn’t flee Iraq for nothing. I can just imagine what it is like there for civilians that are rebelling against the corrupt Corporate take over. I think that is what is referred to as an insurgent and by now I think it is quite apparent what is done to them.
I am not saying for sure it was the NYPD. What do you suppose the NYPD will do if it finds out someone from inside the government is taunting this lady? Do you really think they are going to arrest the people working for the higher ups? Do you honestly believe that is the way it works? There lies your problem.
I just read this quote in another thread and it describes what I am saying to the absolute T.
—————————–
Blackwater immune to prosecution? Imagine my (total lack of) surprise.
Can’t go having the new SS/Blackshirts being put on trial now can we? How else can we count on them to round up the dissident voicesspeaking out against their paymasters, Bushco?
Welcome to your Facsist Police State. Have fun
————————-
Thank Galan, you gave me the words I needed!
L. Paul Bremer III, the former U.S. administrator for Iraq, granted contractors immunity from prosecution in an order he signed the day before handing over sovereignty in June 2004.
Can you imagine that?