Forum Post: undercover nypd infiltrating churches where protesters are staying - report by nytimes
Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 18, 2011, 2:59 a.m. EST by zootsuit
(34)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I also posted the link to reddit, you can vote up if you wish so others are aware how far the nypd will go to shut down the occupy movement. http://redd.it/mgq55
Who cares?
Subvert Them!!!
Not with anger - with Peace!! truth!! and the Weight of Public Opinion!!!
(chant)
N Y P D
Who Do You Serve?
Who Do You Protect?
(repeat)
...
Fractal InfoBot and Peace. Science of information. Dont let the OWS person think he is a not a college graduate too. So information spy under let us say the Patriot Act tells a lot about the patient!!!
thankyou!!!!
they are scary.
Obviously.
Very good post. Thank you for the link. Police are conducting surveillance which is overly invasive and possibly unlawful.
Possibly unlawful? I thought US citizens had agreed to be patriotic and that's why US now has the Patriot Act which lets the government be pretty much as invasive as it wants.
Read the article.
And it's not called the "Patriotic" Act. I believe you're referring to the USA PATRIOT Act. Read up on that, too.
I can't access the article. It asks me to sign in first.
I'll copy/paste the relevant paragraphs:
QUOTE from NY TIMES:
Police officers may enter a place of worship if they have suspicion of unlawful activity, said Donna Lieberman, the executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union.
However, if they are conducting surveillance without cause, and “got in by fraud and deception” if their bathroom visit was only a pretense, “that is trespassing,” she said.
“It raises concerns about whether this is in keeping with the limitations on police infiltration of political activity under the Handschu agreement,” which proscribes procedures on police surveillance, she said.
ENDQUOTE
WHAT IS THE HANDSHU AGREEMENT?
The Handschu agreement is a set of guidelines that regulate police behavior in New York City with regard to political activity.
In 1971, 21 members of the Black Panther Party were tried for conspiracy to blow up police stations and department stores. They were acquitted of all charges after only 90 minutes of jury deliberation. The trial revealed the extent to which the NYPD had infiltrated and kept dossiers on not only the Black Panthers and other radical groups, but also on anti-war groups, gay rights activists, educational reform advocates, religious groups, and civic organizations.
A large coalition of activist groups accused police of compiling information to punish and repress lawful dissent. Barbara Handschu was a lead plaintiff in the 1971 class action suit Handschu v. Special Services Division. In the 1985 ruling, the court sided with Handschu, finding that police surveillance of political activity violated constitutional protections of Free Speech. The ruling brought about the agreement.
IS IT STILL BEING ADHERED TO IN POST 9/11 NYC?
NYPD requested relaxation of restrictions on surveillance in 2002. Status is unclear. In 2007, a judge upheld a complaint involving Handshu but then reversed himself when the prosecution "provided more evidence"
The lawyer quoted above seems to think it still applies.
NYPD has in fact been conducting intensive surveillance of Muslim communities in NYC and even in neighboring NJ - this was exposed earlier this year, so who knows if it is "unlawful" or not - but as I stated, the lawyer quoted in the Times article seems to think it is "possibly unlawful".
I would say the Patriot Act is above this. The police only have to show cause for probable terrorism and they can simply point to the Occupy movement for that. With the Patriot Act, all types of invasion tactics can be used. It's just a matter of saying there is a terrorist threat. A Iranian born Canadian was held for one year and a half in US prison without a charge (and obviously no trial) simply because he was coming from Iran and transiting in a US airport. In the end, the guy had done nothing wrong.
BTW - Thanks for taking the time to repost the article. Interesting.
What's done in the airports is done by our Federal government.
What is being done in regards to the protests is done by the local police.
The lines have been blurred since 9/11, true, but still local police forces do not have the power that Federal agents do. In addition, American citizens still have a few more rights than non-citizens to be free of this kind of intrusion, so using an example of how a foreign national gets treated is not really an example that applies to the situation of an American citizen exercising first amendment rights.
The Patriot Act affects all law enforcement agents, not only Federal agents. Read it carefully.
I think I will go with the NYCLU attorney's opinion above that of a Canadian living in Indonesia who is not a lawyer.
Thanks for your insight, though.
No problem. She might be right. If you have time though, I do suggest you read the Patriot Act in full since it does concern you directly. It is a document that gives powers to all law enforcement, not only federal agents. That is clear as crystals, as the wording in the document cannot be mistaken.
You've read it all, yet you've been calling it the "Patriotic Act" up until the moment I corrected you, when you then edited your post.
Again, thanks for the advice. I think I have a pretty good handle on how the Act might effect me personally. And in other cases, where I am not directly involved, I rely on what reliable sources such as the ACLU and the NYCLU have to say.
Ya, I made a mistake and called it the Patriotic Act. People make mistakes, that's life. But yeah, I did read it all and it is clear it applies to all law enforcement officials, not only federal agents.
However, I don't think you should take my word for it. You should read it for yourself. It's a clear document and can be found quite easily. Every American should read it. It has some nasty implications for your privacy. You should know about it. Knowledge is power.
It was a mistake you made more than once. You've called it the "Patriotic" Act numerous times, including in messages under your other user name.
Yet, you have the nerve to condescend to me and tell me I "should know about it".
Thanks for the advice, faceless non-lawyer Canadian message board character.
That, and a metro card will get me a ride on the NYC subway.
Making a mistake is normal, and making the same mistake more than once is also normal. Claiming your opponent's arguments are flawed because he makes mistakes is an ad hominem. Everybody makes mistakes. In the end, you are the one using logical fallacies, not I. If you believe the Patriot Act only applies to federal agents, then, again, I urge you to read the document and learn what it really states. Understanding the laws of one's country is the first step towards true freedom. May your study bear fruits.
It's not an ad hominem, it is called "evaluating the source".
click the reddit link, i posted article there
I did, and it gave me the same problem. It redirected to the NY Times login screen.
sorry, try this http://www.reddit.com/r/occupywallstreet/comments/mgq55/undercover_nypd_intelligence_division_cops
Holy crap. How can they be undercover if they identify themselves as undercover police officers? Dumb cops. What if it was police officers posing as OWSers posing as police officers?
It's funny how you cannot see that the Churches are traps. The Church will try to help the police. They see it as a lawful issue. The police have instructed the Church in the sting operation. Don't blame the Churches. They are only following the orders of the police.