Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring

justiceonline.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 81 posts

Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring

#51

Post by kaonashi »

rayiner wrote: post #26
sneak wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dissent: just one misinterpreted statement away from jailtime. ...because the FBI and DoJ have such a long and varied history of making sure that the free and legal exercise of one's first amendment rights are upheld.... riiiight. This is the same FBI that tapped the phones of MLK Jr. Fuck them. To DanielBMarkham: what fucking world do you live in where this is your reasonably-considered view?! Please go read some hi…

Did the FBI and DOJ jail MLK?

Jailing is the only possible constitutional violation?

Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring

#52

Post by [deleted] »

tokenadult wrote: post #23
k0nsl wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also funny to see the same Americans rake down on the RSHA of the Third Reich. America is ten times worse than Germany ever was. Actually, in comparison, the German Reich under Hitler appears to be more like a paradise. It's time for Americans to admit that they're doing precisely everything they ever accused the Germans of doing. But the Germans are always wrong and you are always right. Its nice, its a system.

Actually, in comparison, the German Reich under Hitler appears to be more like a paradise. You have violated the advice in the Hacker News welcome message http://ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html "Essentially there are two rules here: don't post or upvote crap links, and don't be rude or dumb in comment threads." and I have downvoted accordingly.

[deleted]

Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring

#53

Post by anigbrowl »

btilly wrote: post #46
anigbrowl wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The courts, that's why we have them. You might also like to recall that at least some of the occupy movements involved violent and wholly unecessary destruction of private property, eg Occupy Oakland. Sure, that was only a few fringe anarchists who had attached themselves to the ideologically pure movement, but that's little different from the 'few bad apples' excuse that is sometimes advanced to forestall criticism…

You are absolutely right about it being the responsibility of the courts. But when government, police and courts are all lined up against the people, then that which was formerly unthinkable - such as armed revolt - should become seriously considered options. When, and only when. In the case of Occupy Oakland, it is worth noting that the Oakland police were the first to escalate to violence. This is one of the centra…

But when government, police and courts are all lined up against the people, then that which was formerly unthinkable - such as armed revolt - should become seriously considered options. When, and only when.

I've visited several totalitarian countries. We have a hell of a long way to go before I take such suggestions seriously in the context of the US.

In the case of Occupy Oakland, it is worth noting that the Oakland police were the first to escalate to violence.

I live in Oakland and paid careful attention to the Occupy protests. The local anarchists did not attack the police first, but they were perfectly happy to trash buildings from coffee shops to convenience stores in furtherance of their disbelief in the idea of private property. Earlier last year, similarly minded people were perfectly happy to protest the shooting by police of a wanted criminal who produced a gun while running away from a transit fare inspector by trashing a subway station in San Francisco and smashing the ticket and fare machines: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2P5LIrFDXc

The person who got shot was on the run from Washington state, where he had raped and killed his ex-girlfriend. When challenged by a fare inspector he ran from the bus, produced and brandished a gun, then tripped and shot himself in the neck. The resulting protests, though ostensibly about police brutality (non-existent in this case), were organized by the same people who oppose any kind of transit fare increase ever and are continually trying to gin up civil disobedience actions with slogans such as 'can't pay - won't pay.'

I'm more familiar with their ideology than I want to be because they make a habit of plastering my neighborhood in Oakland with their 'revolutionary' agit-prop (using plaster makes them almost impossible to remove and creates an eyesore as the paper rots away over a period of a year or so). They also like to plaster and spray-paint their views on top of local community art projects like murals, on the theory that their revolutionary messages are 'more important.'

Fuck these people. This isn't armed revolt against a just cause, it's malicious vandalism.

Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring

#54

Post by btilly »

gojomo wrote: post #49
btilly wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are absolutely right about it being the responsibility of the courts. But when government, police and courts are all lined up against the people, then that which was formerly unthinkable - such as armed revolt - should become seriously considered options. When, and only when. In the case of Occupy Oakland, it is worth noting that the Oakland police were the first to escalate to violence. This is one of the centra…

...the Oakland police were the first to escalate to violence... What was the first act of violence by the Oakland police against Occupy Oakland assemblies?

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Occupy_Oakland it was the use of tear gas and beanbag rounds on Oct 25. This resulted in Scott Olsen (ex-marine and Iraq veteran) suffering a skull fracture and needing to be hospitalized.

That timeline gives Nov 2 as the first truly violent act by protestors, namely the setting of a police barricade on fire while the police were attacking the protestors with tear gas, etc. (I'm not counting the tearing up of deposit slips on Oct 22 as violent - and the protestors cleaned up the mess that they caused on that occasion.)

Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring

#55

Post by rayiner »

kaonashi wrote: post #51
rayiner wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did the FBI and DOJ jail MLK?

Jailing is the only possible constitutional violation?

My comment was in reply to the parent comment "dissent: one misunderstanding away from jail".

Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring

#56

Post by pyre »

anigbrowl wrote: post #50
pyre wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Canada, there is a product called Kinder Surprise. It's illegal in the United States, but it's just a hollow chocolate egg with a toy inside. The FDA says you can't put a toy inside of food. If you buy one at a convenience store in Canada, and come back across the border with it? Federal offence: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinder_Surprise#Prohibition_on_...

That doesn't support your argument very well. We've had this conversation before, and in it I suggested you stop focusing on anecdata and isolated examples and employ some statistical rigor instead.

What statistical rigor do you suggest? How do you gather stats on "people that unwittingly were convicted of Federal crimes that most normal people wouldn't know about (or wouldn't think are crimes)?"

Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring

#57

Post by dhughes »

btilly wrote: post #21
themgt wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The group that poses the biggest threat to civil order in the US are the elites who are looting the country as society collapses around them. And how exactly do you call yourself a "libertarian" and then support a national intelligence agency monitoring the non-violent political activities of private citizens? If the FBI was monitoring libertarian party members and events that would be kosher with you too, or is it j…

I am not a libertarian. I am a liberal. I broadly support the goals of the Occupy movement. I also support the principles of this action by the FBI (though almost certainly not all of the details). Why? Among other things, it is the job of the FBI to monitor situations that could turn into problems. The Occupy movement, as legitimate as it is, has the potential to attract easily radicalized people. These people could…

What goals? Seriously.

As much as they are in the news I hear 1,000 different complaints and I still have no idea what they want other than everything. No focus.

Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring

#58

Post by neumann_alfred »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #6

What kind of idiocy is this? This is the FBI's job -- to monitor both foreign and domestic groups of national scope that might present some kind of threat to civil order. They're not like the fire department, where they sit around waiting for something to happen. They're supposed to get out there and get proactively involved in all kinds of things from white supremacists to greens. As a libertarian I enjoy a good ran…

How, exactly, do you define "civil order"? Quiet robbery on large scale, while the nation watches TV? And have you ever heard of COINTELPRO? Seriously, wtf did I just read? You offered not one argument why you think Occupy might be a "threat to civil order" -- so your argument boils down to "since it's their job to monitor potential threats, anything they monitor is a potential threat". Well wow, isn't that quite the model citizen. Informed position? Then make with the info.

Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring

#59

Post by jlgreco »

pyre wrote: post #56
anigbrowl wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't support your argument very well. We've had this conversation before, and in it I suggested you stop focusing on anecdata and isolated examples and employ some statistical rigor instead.

What statistical rigor do you suggest? How do you gather stats on "people that unwittingly were convicted of Federal crimes that most normal people wouldn't know about (or wouldn't think are crimes)?"

Even more importantly, since the idea is not to arrest everyone but rather to be able to arrest anyone, how do you gather statistics on how many people are breaking laws without knowing it, and not being arrested for it?

Because that is, by design, what will happen the majority of the time.

Re: FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring

#60

Post by mindcrime »

themgt wrote: post #16
DanielBMarkham wrote: post #6

What kind of idiocy is this? This is the FBI's job -- to monitor both foreign and domestic groups of national scope that might present some kind of threat to civil order. They're not like the fire department, where they sit around waiting for something to happen. They're supposed to get out there and get proactively involved in all kinds of things from white supremacists to greens. As a libertarian I enjoy a good ran…

The group that poses the biggest threat to civil order in the US are the elites who are looting the country as society collapses around them. And how exactly do you call yourself a "libertarian" and then support a national intelligence agency monitoring the non-violent political activities of private citizens? If the FBI was monitoring libertarian party members and events that would be kosher with you too, or is it j…

And how exactly do you call yourself a "libertarian" and then support a national intelligence agency monitoring the non-violent political activities of private citizens?

As a libertarian myself, I am definitely not completely comfortable with this, but I can see where @DanielBMarkham is coming from. From a strict libertarian perspective, if they're not initiating force against anyone, they aren't doing anything really wrong. Passive monitoring may be distasteful (and I worry about the eventual repercussions of it), but it's not necessarily something a libertarian would find to be inherently wrong.

Post reply on HN