This past Thursday I was invited by the group World Can't Wait to talk about impeachment and Bush's preparations for war against Iran at a Philadelphia rally--part of the group's Oct. 5 "Drive Out the Bush Regime" campaign of 170 such rallies around the country. Assembled on the mall in front of the Rizzo Municipal Offices building in central Philadelphia in front of me were some 300 people, mostly young, and all well-behaved, if high spirited.
While I was talking about the Bush administration's impeachable crimes against the American people and the Constitution--in particularly the ramming through Congress of a bill that, for the first time since American patriots drove the British out of the 13 colonies, authorizes indefinite detainment without charge and imprisonment of American citizens without the right to a trial--I noticed two men in sunglasses with a high-quality video camera and a high-quality still camera with telephoto lense filming the assembled crowd.
After I spoke, I walked over to the two men and asked what station they were with. I was pretty certain they were police, despite their total lack of identification, because normally news organizations plaster their cameras with their station call letters and these cameras had no such identification on them. When I pressed them, both men turned their cameras directly on me, from just two feet away, filming me as I denounced their intimidation.
"You should be ashamed of yourselves," I said, as young people around me looked on in surprise. "This rally has a police permit, and all the people here are legally exercising their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and freedom of assembly."
The two men remained silent, and continued to grimly film and photograph me as I spoke. I began telling everyone around me who the men were and what they were doing, and some of the young people began to pester the officers themselves.
I later saw a member of the Philadelphia Police Department's Civil Affairs Unit, a Captain William Fisher, who unlike the camera detail, was clearly identified as a police officer by both a card pinned to his shirt, and by a prominent armband saying: Philadelphia Police Department.
Asked why the men were filming the crowd, he responded briskly, "This is a free country. This is a public space. You're free to be here, and they're free to come too and to take your picture."
I allowed as this was true, technically, but that clearly there was an element of intimidation involved when police come and film the faces of everyone who comes to an event that is about criticizing the government.
"Oh, you're so '70s," he said, looking at my gray beard and balding head. "This is the 21st Century. Get with it, man."
Indeed, he's right.
It is the 21st Century.
When I was a newspaper reporter in Los Angeles in the late 1970s, it was discovered that the Los Angeles Police Department was sending unmarked police officers like these armed with video cameras to press conferences at places like the Los Angeles Press Club, where they were setting up and filming certain events as part of a campaign of keeping tabs on activist groups.
This revelation caused a sensation, with front-page articles in the Los Angeles Times, and inquiries into the practice by irate members of the Los Angeles City Council. In the end, the police were forced to back down and cease the practice, at least for a time.
Now, here in Philadelphia, birthplace of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, this trampling of the freedom of assembly and speech seems to merit no attention at all in the local mainstream media. When I called the Inquirer's police reporter, Barbara Boyer, to alert her to what had happened, her response was "Well, I could take your picture on the sidewalk, too, if I wanted. It's not illegal."
Apparently the Philadelphia Police Department and most of the local media think that it's appropriate for police to film people who are exercising their Constitutional rights, and that this is what we do in "21st Century America." To me, though, this seems more like 1930s Germany, or 21st-Century China.
Dave Lindorff, a columnist for Counterpunch, is author of several recent books ("This Can't Be Happening! Resisting the Disintegration of American Democracy" and "Killing Time: An Investigation into the Death Penalty Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal"). His latest book, coauthored with Barbara Olshanshky, is "The Case for Impeachment: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office (St. Martin's Press, May 2006). His writing is available at http://www.thiscantbehappening.net
Mandatory- the second change brought because of VultureTX
Excuse me Dave, how the hell did you know they were not Freepers. Or independents doing a documentary on the loony left? OR just concerned citizens. Because it is still a free country, they had the right to film your little propaganda speech.
BTW You do realize had you tried turning the crowd on the recording crew in Texas, you could have ended up with murder charges? And yes I am dead serious about the possible results of your little confrontation stunt. Given Texas Law and the likelyhood of an armed recording crew who were not LEO, you would have wished for govt. detention instead of death by legal injection after being tried for multiple murder counts.
/Self Righteous Fools with Agendas. 'Cause October 5th was just oh so succesful. Not!
by
Vulture (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 150 comments)
on Sunday, October 8, 2006 at 4:55:27 PM
Mandatory- the second change brought because of VultureTX
You talked to their boss the next DAY! After you incited a crowd against two "civilians" who were recording your tirade. Do you not understand that they could have not been LEOs? That you can't tell some civvies from LEOs without reading their IDs.
/You are still a fool for inciting a crowd against two people who were recording you in a public place. Would you not defend someone recording the police's action in a public venue? Yet somehow you are "special" , and can lead a potential mob against those who annoy you.
//And yes this is how it will be portrayed.
///Lucky it was not Texas.
by
Vulture (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 150 comments)
on Sunday, October 8, 2006 at 10:31:14 PM
But I spoke with the offier in charge that day--Capt. Wm Fisher--BEFORE accusing them of anything. He confirmed that they were cops. Not only that--I first went to them and asked them who they were. Instead of identifying themselves, which any camera person including a freelanceer or private citizen would be happy to accomodate, the cameraman swing his camera around and, just two feet from my face, proceeded to tape me, even as I politely asked his identity.
His behavior was blatantly an act of intimidation, so, recognizing that he was there for no good purpose, I went to the civil affairs officer--Capt. Fisher--and demanded to know if he was a cop, at which point I got confirmation.
then I announced the information widely, which is not incitement, but merely providing information. People have a right to know they're being taped by the police.
You're calling that action "incitement" is precisely what's wrong with this kind of thing. You think that speaking truth is a criminal act. The police and the leaders who direct them think that holding a rally is a potential crime, or perhaps is a crime itself.
That is the kind of attitude that lead to the rise of Hitler in Germany, and it's the kind of attitude that is leading to a rise in fascism here.
Thank you for illustrating the mindset in a public space.
by
Dave Lindorff (354 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 163 comments)
on Monday, October 9, 2006 at 8:30:11 AM
You are changing your story theie Dave. Revising the facts and timeline, is not one of your accusations in your book.
And no people DON'T have to identify themselves to you. Once again you are acting like a totalitarian leftist. Most Freepers who were professional would not have said anything. Nor would my associates here in Texas. Why because you are not a LEO asking for identification. You see if does not matter if their motives were benign. What matters here that you were "inciting" the crowd against them. Next I would point out that the word "incite" correlates to if anactual assault by the crowd that gathered occurred. The two are related and are possible as shown by the word "IF".
/Argue all you want but just be glad no one got hurt.
// Be gladder you did not pull that stunt in Texas.
/// That you can not see your actions were wrong only provbes my original asssertion.
BTW I am basing all this on your original post not your creative revisions, because it is what you said.
by
Vulture (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 150 comments)
on Monday, October 9, 2006 at 10:03:51 AM
5 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
