In MN, Massive Police Raids On Suspected Protestors

X0563511 alerts us to events in Minneapolis and St. Paul in advance of the Republican convention (which has been put on hold because of Hurricane Gustav). Local police backed by the FBI raided a number of homes and public buildings and confiscated computers and other material. From Salon.com: "Last night, members of the St. Paul police department and the Ramsey County sheriff's department handcuffed, photographed and detained dozens of people meeting at a public venue to plan a demonstration, charging them with no crime other than 'fire code violations,' and early this morning, the Sheriff's department sent teams of officers into at least four Minneapolis area homes where suspected protesters were staying. Jane Hamsher and I were at two of those homes this morning — one which had just been raided and one which was in the process of being raided." Here is local reporting from the Minneapolis Star-Tribune: "Aided by informants planted in protest groups, authorities raided at least six buildings across St. Paul and Minneapolis to stop an 'anarchist' plan to disrupt this week's Republican National Convention. From Friday night through Saturday afternoon, officers surrounded houses, broke down doors, handcuffed scores of people and confiscated suspected tools of civil disobedience ... A St. Paul City Council member described it as excessive, while activists, many of whom were detained and then released without charges, called it intimidation designed to quash free speech."

Comments

Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

FUCK THE POLICE!

Re:Oblig.

[Shakrai]

For the sake of the country, the people responsible for these raids must be fired (and very possibly sent to prison) for this

If you think that will actually happen, can I have some of what you are smoking?

Re:Oblig.

[24-bit Voxel]

We've almost hit rock bottom. It feels like the last 8 years were just a litmus test to see how much corruption we as a nation would turn our heads to. The answer appears to be all of it.

Re:Oblig.

[techsoldaten]

No joke. When did South Central police tactics become apros po for college kids and uppity hippies pushing 60? Easy must be having a laugh right now.

Something important to remember here is that the some of the groups being raided are the same ones who, in 2006, helped overturn over 400 bogus arrests where video directly conradicted sworn police testimony.

It's the cameras, and the citizen journalists, and the people on the Internet who the police are afraid of. I don't presume to judge every John Law out there but this is really bad what they are doing in MN.

Of course the networks pay it no heed :)

M

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's especially bad when you realize that this story is just more Republican bashing. Why? Because this is Standard Operating Procedure for police.

Boston police arrest dozens before annual festival - in an effort to prevent disorder before some local festival, the Boston police arrested dozens of suspected trouble makers for the explicit purpose of keeping them in jail for the duration of the festival.

Needless to say, the same type of thing happened before the DNC, too.

So this is just more Republican bashing, in that the only reason it's news isn't that it happens, because it's routine, it's because it's happening for a Republican event.

Note I'm not saying that it's OK because Democrats do it too - I'm saying that this type of thing happens all the time and almost no one bothers reporting it. It's wrong, no matter who does it, Republican or Democrat.

Re:Oblig.

[liquidsin]

this is scarier because of your reaction. if there had been any physical altercation, we'd be hearing about police brutality and terrorism, and we'd be hearing it a lot. but because people (like yourself) are willing to let it get swept under the rug when it's "dirty hippies" getting their voices silenced, the fascists will just continue to erode your rights. not oppression indeed...

Re:Oblig.

[Jafafa Hots]

It's interesting... in an earlier post of yours you talk about how it's perfectly legal for people to take photos in a public place where there's no expectation of privacy.

And now you post this. Do you realize that some of the people attacked (yes, attacked) by the authorities were NOT people planning protests, but rather people (and legal reps) planning merely to OBSERVE protests and videotape them to insure that people's rights are not violated? To make sure that the authorities don't commit crimes?

But no, you applaud this, because you're an authoritarian fuckwit hypocrite who is happy to see the law violated and rights trammeled upon, as long as the victims are people you don't like.

Actions like the police have done are eroding our civil rights - your civil rights. But you still have some. Stop now and think of those rights you still have. Now stop and realize, if you're capable of it, that the reason you HAVE those rights is because the people you detest - the liberals, the ACLU, the civil rights activists - fought for them. Fought for them in the streets and in the courts, against the attacks on them coming from people who think like you. People who are like you.

The people you detest fight for your rights against the attacks of people like you.

Re:Oblig.

[EriDay]

Your citation does not mention the feds being involved.

Denver police went to a house that had been rented by the protest group Unconventional Denver as a convergence center, and despite seeing no illegal activity, two protesters were arrested, with one reportedly slammed on his head during the arrest.

Sorry no comparison.

Re:Oblig.

[rtb61]

I really hate to break it to you but yes the state or your nation is generally bound to the competence or incompetence of your current administration. When crap like this occurs and they say nothing, then they are complicit. Of course not to throw all the blame upon the republican administration, although as the 'Administration' it is largely their responsibility but a share would also have to go to the US congress and Senate for failure to investigate these and similar abuses of justice.

The catch with it all in the US system, is most of the egregious behaviour falls to the State Governor to ensure the principles of law and justice are adhered to within the state excluding of course the political involvement of the FBI which is of course a federal abuse.

Of course your post has a clear political bias which manages to equate questionable arrests at public venues when people are attempting to express the political opinions, to pre-emptive raids in suburban neighbourhoods, complete with the blatant theft of computers and personal property (when the warrant is so clearly bull shit it is theft) added, to that the extreme danger of no knock, guns drawn warrants with trigger happy law enforcement with emphasis on force, represents to those communities and especially the victims of those raids (in this case they were definitely the victims and the police where clearly displaying criminal behaviour).

So if Republican administrations says nothing about it and gives it the tacit approval, then, yes, they are quite content for the authorities to stomp all over the people's rights. By the same token if the Democrats say nothing or fail to initiate an investigation of these abusive in the proper venue, then they can be painted with the same brush and, to bring it all home, if the typical US citizens fails to do something about it, then you can bloody well expect at lot worse to happen, good luck.

Re:Oblig.

[Al Al Cool J]

Right. Instead of blaming the Republicans, these widespread police state tactics should be blamed on whatever fuckwit party is currently running the oountry.

Re:Oblig.

[falconwolf]

First off people that pull of the gloves or at least threaten to should always be delt with in a manner that involves a punch in the teeth. That is what these groups do, and they got what they asked for.

Where's your proof any of the protesters threatened anyone with violence?

So what we had here was a bunch of people planning on making an ass of themselves by engaging in criminal/border line criminal behavior

Where's your evidence?

I grow weary of children who cry about how "bad" it's getting when they don't even know how bad it really was before they even came along.

I lived through the '60s and '70s, through COINTELPRO, and through Wstergate. Did you or were you too young, not born yet?

Falcon

Re:Oblig.

[artson]

What the hell is a hard core liberal? Is it like being a hard core free trader? A hard core choco-holic?

Re:Oblig.

[number11]

These people were sick fucks. Their "tools of civil disobedience" were buckets of urine, flammable liquids, knives, etc. If you have any sympathy for them you are a sick fuck too.

So can we assume that you yourself are not allowed to possess flammable liquids, knives, or urine?

If you were allowed to light a BBQ that uses charcoal (not one of those yuppie gas grills), you'd know that it's mostly done with a flammable liquid.

They had duct tape, too! Auto tires! Chicken wire! A slingshot! Maps! All seized by the vigilant Fearless Fosdicks. Sheer criminal masterminds, obviously. (Good thing it wasn't my house, because I've got all of those things and firearms, too!)

Re:Oblig.

[Astro Dr Dave]

The liberals only support some civil rights, and conservatives don't have all of them, either.

For example, one of the few rights we still have (in some states) is guaranteed by the 2nd amendment. And it provides another means of fighting for rights.

Re:Oblig.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's especially bad when you realize that this story is just more Republican bashing. Why? Because this is Standard Operating Procedure for police.

It has only recently become Standard Operating Procedure. Government, at all levels, has used "9-11" to increase their level of pro-active investigation of organized protests. After all, how do we _know_ none of those protesters intended to assassinate McCain? How bad would it look if the FBI knew about organized protests that later turned out to include blowing up the Xcel Center and they had done nothing?

Did the RNC ask jack-booted police to run about quashing free speech? Probably not. Probably no more than the DNC asked law enforcement to do the same in Denver. In both cases, it's simple over-reaction on the part of city and law enforcement officials who just want to show their city at its finest and have a major national convention go off without a hitch.

This is only Republican bashing if you blame the Republicans for the fear mongering that put us in the situation where raiding private homes and meeting rooms based on secret search warrants is Standard Operating Procedure.

Re:Oblig.

[Curunir_wolf]

So what? They are involved in all of it, not just at the RNC. They messed with people at the DNC, too, documented here, and here, and here.

The point being that they do this everywhere (with the FBI and other armed bureaucracies involved). So it's the same thing they always do. They aren't doing anything "special" for the RNC.

This is not how you stop riots...

[Foofoobar]

... this is how you START them. This coming from someone from Seattle who lived on Capitol Hill during the WTO riots and had police overreact and create a situation when none existed.

Re:This is not how you stop riots...

[Frosty Piss]

... this is how you START them. This coming from someone from Seattle who lived on Capitol Hill during the WTO riots and had police overreact and create a situation when none existed.

Yes, indeed. The "anarchist" morons from all over the country came to Seattle looking for a riot , the the equally brain-dead cops gave them a reason.

"Anarchists" and Repugnitans, a match made in heaven.

Re:This is not how you stop riots...

[Foofoobar]

Well a couple of brain dead anarchists breaking windows and throwing bottles does not create a riot. Cops over reacting to those couple of people and treating the entire crowd as IF they are those couple of people and then driving them all into a residential neighborhood of people who have nothing to do with any of it DOES create a riot.

Re:This is not how you stop riots...

[nizo]

Whelan says his roommate, Erin Stalmaker, went out to talk to talk to the police. She asked the officers why they were there. The officers asked why people were running away from them. Erin reportedly told the officers that their drawn automatic weapons probably had something to do with it. She was detained after asking to see a warrant.

http://firedoglake.com/2008/08/30/inside-an-rnc-raid/

If this is true (being arrested after asking to see a warrant; no warrant being produced), this is insane. Heads must roll for this; our country absolutely depends on it.

Re:This is not how you stop riots...

[Shark]

Well, if you'll remember the SPP meetings up in Canada, you'll also notice that it has been documented that the anarchists trying to start a riot sometimes *are* cops. Of course, they officially denied that. Check youtube for footage of these guys and tell me they behaved like peaceful demonstrators, rock in hand...

Re:This is not how you stop riots...

[nizo]

In a sane society, wouldn't the warrant be required before actually bashing down doors? Oh wait, I forgot that isn't necessary anymore. Obviously the new FBI powers aren't intended to only be used to protect us from terrorists, but from those damn protesters too.

Re:This is not how you stop riots...

[An Onerous Coward]

Counterargument: France. If anything, the government there is far more responsive to the demands of its citizens than the United States. Yet the French could totally school us in rioteering. The standard response is that they, unlike us sober and hardworking American folk, are self-entitled and corrupted by secular values. My view is that it means that the people are far more in control of the government than vice versa. That is both the cause and the result of their rioting.

Rioting has a strong cultural component, is all I'm saying.

Re:This is not how you stop riots...

[Steve Franklin]

Your country is lost. Might as well vote for McCain. No need to drag it out. Only thing gonna save you is retaking the Reality Studio. But that takes guts and you folks have been sittin' on your butts too long watchin' Judge Judy and American Idol and the great hypnosis machine where black is white and freedom is slavery and we spread democracy by murdering elected leaders.

Re:This is not how you stop riots...

[Foofoobar]

exactly. People seeing only the broken window and not the lost civil rights are losing site of what is TRULY being lost. At the end of the day which would you rather have: a broken window by a rioter or a broken jaw by a cop for speaking your mind?

Re:This is not how you stop riots...

[Mr2001]

Your country is lost. Might as well vote for McCain. No need to drag it out.

Nonsense. The reality is, McCain and Obama have very different policies on a number of significant issues, as do the Democratic and Republican parties in general. The outcome of this election will have a noticeable impact on the lives of millions of people.

This "oh, it doesn't matter, they're all politicians, maaaaaan" attitude has infested Slashdot for too long. Knock it off.

Re:This is not how you stop riots...

[Mr2001]

Either they were giving out gourmet donuts, or it was a deliberate tactic to entrap the protesters into committing crimes.

That word, "entrap", does not mean what you think it means.

The police didn't coerce or persuade any of those protesters to cross the bike line, or trespass on the hotel's property. In fact, as you said yourself, they told the protesters not to. The protesters decided to ignore the "good cops" and enter the hotel anyway, where they were met by the "bad cops". And you're telling us that's somehow the fault of the police? Why, because the cops outside weren't intimidating enough to stop people who were consciously willing to break the law anyway?

Re:This is not how you stop riots...

[Mr2001]

The police knew the protesters were predisposed to ignore warnings and proceed where there were not adequate physical barricades to obstruct them.

Yes, so what? Is that supposed to be an excuse: "the police knew we like to break the law, so they should've just let us do it"?

Look up the legal term "due diligence". The police did not exercise due diligence in preventing the protesters from committing crimes, nor warned them of the consequences.

The police aren't obligated to prevent crime -- well, IANAC, so maybe they are up there, but I doubt it. They certainly don't owe it to potential criminals to stop them from getting themselves in trouble, though.

As for the consequences... what exactly did the protesters think was going to happen when they ignored a warning from police, walked through a barricade, and trespassed on hotel property after being asked to leave? Perhaps they thought they could just shout "king me!" and the PM would have to accept their demands?

That is the very nature of entrapment, no different than manipulating the motivations of a lonely man into hiring a prostitute.

Sorry, but you're wrong. Entrapment is about convincing people to commit a crime they otherwise wouldn't have committed.

It's very different from manipulating someone into hiring a prostitute. No one was manipulated into crossing that barrier or staying on hotel property; in fact, they were told not to do it. That's about as far away from entrapment as you can get.

Re:This is not how you stop riots...

[Mr2001]

The outcome of every election has a notable impact on millions of people.

Yes, thanks for reinforcing my point. Elections matter.

If you believe that if one person gets elected that the country will go to shit, but if the other one wins there will be gumdrops and rainbows, you're deluded.

If you use those words, perhaps. But the outcome of an election can have a major impact on the direction the country takes and how well it does in the future. If 2000 had gone differently, for instance, we might not have spent $500 billion (and all our credibility) in Iraq, New Orleans might be in much better shape today.. hell, we might've even prevented the 9/11 attacks by following through on the intelligence we had.

Americans directly elect 537 people in Washington D.C. There are 3,000,000 federal employees and untold lobbyists and media. Your vote isn't going to change much.

A single vote rarely changes much, that's true. But the outcome of the election can change a lot. It's incorrect to draw any conclusions from the proportion of elected officials to other employees: the elected ones give the orders, the rest just carry them out. Even the lobbyists and media have to work within a framework built by elected officials.

In Soviet Russia.

[Whiney Mac Fanboy]

In Soviet Russia, you didn't have the right to peaceful assembly or to travel without showing your papers.

I wish there was a joke I could make here.

Re:In Soviet Russia.

[QuantumG]

Yes.. that's what "suppression" means.

Re:In Soviet Russia.

[Iamthecheese]

...ruin it for the peaceful protesters... Bullshit. If cause for arrest cannot be found for each person than arresting that person is a crime. "someone may commit a crime so lets round them all up" is the primary tactic of a police state.

Re:In Soviet Russia.

[Cyberax]

No, it was more complicated. You could stay for about 3 months without needing any permits. In fact a lot of students used to travel during summer to all parts of the USSR without any problems.

However, you needed a stay permit (it was called 'propiska') to permanently move to another city. Getting this permit was a quite different story.

PS: I'm not saying that USSR was a very nice place overall. But there were good parts which I miss...

Re:In Soviet Russia.

[tftp]

nstead, we ended up with a country that thought a large military class with many very poor proles with a wafte of communistic ideas was communism.

The "we" does not include the USSR. The abbreviation means "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics" and every child knew that they had socialism, not communism. There is a big difference.

It is also important to understand that USSR had no "military class" and not a single soul in any way benefited from military manufacturing, very much unlike the USA.

Not suprising

[Anonymous Coward]

seeing as all the same senior politicians in the WH today are the very same ones that where there in Nixons goverment, they just slinked into the background in the 60's hoping you would forget their names and misdeeds
and it worked ! except they are back with more vigor
torture, wiretaps, harrasing political groups, removing civil liberties, wiretapping
the list is endless and so it seems the Americans patience as they dont want to do a damm thing about it

a single clip could sort out a lot of troubles in this world

sad day

[stabiesoft]

Stuff like this really makes me sad. Just 20 or 30 years ago, demonstrations could get out of hand, but I think that is part of free speech. Now, any speech off script by either party is squashed as if it was soviet russia. Maybe mrs mccain should rethink the trip to georgia she just took. Maybe instead of taking democracy around the world, we could start by re-invigorating freedom here at home. I'm afraid to predict the next 20 or 30 years. I'm sure it will include many cameras, microphones, drone planes and fear.

also

[globaljustin]

FUCK THE POLICE!

And the sheriff's office, and the FBI, and DHS, and ICE, and the mainstream media, and us...

Yep, us too. Every US citizen bears some responsibility. We should demand media coverage of these obvious civil rights violations, these people aren't violent anarchists, they are citizens protesting the government. We should demand a police force that upholds the law instead of subverting it. We should elect the leaders who will do the most to protect our civil rights.

We've been tolerating this kind of behavior since 9/11 out of fear. It's time to admit to ourselves that we overreacted to the events of 9/11 and allowed our government to trash our civil rights in the name of protecting us.

We let fascists take our country from us in the name of making a 'war on terror.'

Vote. Email or write your local, state and federal representatives. Email local and national news. Protest.

Re:also

[CrimsonAvenger]

We've been tolerating this kind of behavior since 9/11 out of fear. It's time to admit to ourselves that we overreacted to the events of 9/11 and allowed our government to trash our civil rights in the name of protecting us.

Get a tiny bit of perspective - things have been like this before the Conventions since the '68 DNC Riots. Or did you not notice the guy who was arrested in Denver for checking into a hotel just before the DNC with a couple rifles? No reason to believe he was doing anything wrong, other than having a rifle near a Democrat, but that's the way it goes.

Admittedly, the Secret Service types have to be especially sensitive to the possibility of someone trying to do in Obama. I don't think it'll happen, but that opinion changes from day to day....

Re:also

[LGagnon]

Who said anarchists are violent? They are amongst the protesters, and they did not plan any sort of violence. Your stereotypical statement about them sounds like an attempt to legitimatize what the FBI did, not argue against it. It's ignorance like this that allows them to carry out raids like this.

Re:also

[TehZorroness]

Just look at all those confederate flags still flown down in the southern states. This country is still packed with fucking racists. I'm not religious or anything, but I pray for his safety as president.

Re:also

[Score Whore]

We should demand media coverage of these obvious civil rights violations, these people aren't violent anarchists, they are citizens protesting the government.

What? First, the RNC isn't "the government." Second, yes they are anarchists. From their website:

The RNC Welcoming Committee is an anarchist / anti-authoritarian organizing body preparing for the 2008 Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minnesota.

They intend to block the bridges into and out of the city. The blockades are going to be categorized as "red zones" (prepared for "self-defense"), "yellow zones" (peaceful but assertive), and "green zones" (aiming to avoid risk of arrest.) I don't see how holding public property by force is at all non-violent.

I agree however, people should protest. They should protest these hooligans who don't believe in the core basis of the USoA: that ideas will not be propagated by violence. Differing opinions will be discussed and if your opinion isn't the most popular you don't get to enact your ideas. Perpetrating acts of violence, intimidation and seizing property for long term use (a goal described on their website) aren't something any civilized country should be getting behind.

Re:also

[walshy007]

while I agree the country would have it's fair share of racists, there would be other reasons to be proud to fly a confederate flag, when the southern states economy was being sacrificed for the northerns piece of mind, they chose to secede. Basically a 'fuck you for not looking after us too', which is similar to what USA did to the english some time earlier,

lesson learned, try to secede, win and your considered heroes by the population, lose and you'll be cast the villain forever, the victor writes the history.

Re:also

[cduffy]

while I agree the country would have it's fair share of racists, there would be other reasons to be proud to fly a confederate flag, when the southern states economy was being sacrificed for the northerns piece of mind, they chose to secede. Basically a 'fuck you for not looking after us too', which is similar to what USA did to the english some time earlier,

...and then, post-secession, the Confederacy trampled all over the same states' rights it claimed that the secession was all about up-front.

My reference material is all at home, or I could provide citations here -- but prior to later (early-1900s) revisionism of its teaching in American textbooks (and certainly in its immediate aftermath), the Civil War was well understood to have had the issue of slavery at its heart.

Re:also

[ablair]

They should protest these hooligans who don't believe in the core basis of the USoA: that ideas will not be propagated by violence.

What?!? I must have completely misunderstood the modern US history of the last 8 years or so. I had no idea that the CORE BASIS of the USA was that ideas wouldn't be propagated by violence. Speaking as someone living outside the USA, your foreign policy hasn't led me to believe that either.

Come to think of it, maybe the violent rebels of 1776 should have rembered it too.

Re:also

[plasmacutter]

You do of course realize that this kind of "zone designation" is necessary because of authoritarian court appointees upholding "free speech zones" --conveniently located far enough away the hubble won't see the protest.

When you have a choice between protesting "lawfully" in the middle of yellowstone for an event in washington DC, or unlawfully where you will actually send a message, i know which option i'd take.

Yes, indeed.

[BitterOldGUy]

And I really hope the legal community (especially the lawyers who were arrested themselves) steps up to the plate - even if it means working for free.

Unfortunately, it will not be a PC thing to do considering the most folks believe that if yo do nothing wrong then you have nothing to worry about and the police are always right and never lie. I once actually tried to convince someone of this (stupid me) but he insisted that the cops are always right and always have a justifialble reason. I guess he saw too many cop TV shows where the cops are saints and the "bad guys" are always guilty.

If the lawyers get those folks acquitted, I'm sure the consensus will be that the sneaky, snarky, lying, greedy, lawyers got those dirtbags off because of a "technicality" and the poor innocent police who didn't have warrants or just cause are the victims.

When was the last time that caused a riot?

[khasim]

Bottles are broken every single day.

I see a different broken window at local businesses at least once a month.

Those events do not cause riots.

They are "minor". They are resolved by arresting / fining the idiot(s) who did it.

I am also in Seattle.

Re:When was the last time that caused a riot?

[Anonymous Coward]

So are a bunch of police in full riot gear gassing and shoving everyone they see.

Re:Disruption != peaceably assembling

[BitterOldGUy]

Let's say they did have a warrant. Why did they refuse?

The police have a higher standard to hold to because they're the professionals. If they can't follow the law then they have no business enforcing it.

And you guys want to bring democracy to others?

[Britz]

I mean I don't want to barge ahead. We only read the accounts of one side, but if it is even remotly true the US of A is far from being a free country. Why would the police even want to intimidate people that way? Only if there was a political reason. Semi-random police brutality is one thing, but the report looks like those were fairly large scale orchestrated moves by the police to influence politics. When the police stops working as law enforcment and starts working for a political party how far is that from a banana republic?

And then the W guy comes up and talks about spreading democracy in the middle east? How about spreading it in Minneapolis?

Re:And you guys want to bring democracy to others?

[shma]

And then the W guy comes up and talks about spreading democracy in the middle east? How about spreading it in Minneapolis?

I want to quote something directly from one of Greenwald's updates to the piece here, which directly addresses this point:

During the Olympics just weeks ago, there was endless hand-wringing over the efforts by the Chinese Government to squelch dissent and incarcerate protesters. On August 21, The Washington Post fretted:

Six Americans detained by police this week could be held for 10 days, according to Chinese authorities, who appear to be intensifying their efforts to shut down any public demonstrations during the final days of the Olympic Games. . . . Chinese Olympic officials announced last month that Beijing would set up zones where people could protest during the Games, as long as they had received permission. None of the 77 applications submitted was approved, however, and several other would-be protesters were stopped from even applying.

On August 2, The Post gravely warned:

Behind the gray walls and barbed wire of the prison here, eight Chinese farmers with a grievance against the government have been consigned to Olympic limbo. Their indefinite detainment, relatives and neighbors said, is the price they are paying for stirring up trouble as China prepares to host the Beijing Games. Trouble, the Communist Party has made clear, will not be permitted.

Would The Washington Post ever use such dark and accusatory tones to describe what the U.S. Government does? Of course it wouldn't. Yet how is our own Government's behavior in Minnesota any different than what the Chinese did to its protesters during the Olympics (other than the fact that we actually have a Constitution that prohibits such behavior)? And where are all the self-righteous Freedom Crusaders in our nation's establishment organs who were so flamboyantly criticizing the actions of a Government on the other side of the globe as our own Government engages in the same tyrannical, protest-squelching conduct with exactly the same motives?

Re:Disruption != peaceably assembling

[Shakrai]

Transportation Troubles - This includes blockades downtown (at key intersections), on bridges (10 bridges over the Mississippi River in the metro area), and other sporadic and strategic targets (busses, hotel and airport shuttles etc)."

Nothing like annoying thousands of people who are late getting to work to convince them that your cause is just.....

COINTELPRO 2.0

[mweather]

Does anyone get the feeling this has all happened before, then laws were enacted to stop it, then Bush was elected and said laws were repealed?

Re:Disruption != peaceably assembling

[Dogun]

They might have refused because they didn't want the person on whom they were serving a warrant to call up their lawyer and have him hover over the officers' shoulder to make sure they didn't overstep the bounds of the warrant.

Re:Unconventional weaponry

[garcia]

Thank you for marking this troll and proving that Americans just don't care about the atrocities being committed against our fellow citizens.

The other side?

[DoofusOfDeath]

In my experience, hearing just one side of a story almost always leaves out important facts.

Before we go apeshit, shouldn't we maybe get the government's / police's side of the story?

I'm not saying that nothing bad happened here, just that until we know (or at least give an opportunity to be voiced) both sides of the story, we're really flying blind.

Re:The other side?

[pcameron41]

Would you really trust this government's version of any story?

Re:No protesters at the DNC?

[fermion]

There were protests at the convention. One involved a bunch of veterans pulling a publicity stunt by blocking access to the convention. One of the spokespeople said they were hoping they could incite a response and prove that democrats did not care about veterans. In the end, the ringleader was allowed in to talk to an Obama staff member. You see that is what civilized people do. Talk out their grievances. When you over react and begin to violate civil rights, you simply prove that the corruption and greed they are protesting against is real. This is why the KKK is allowed to wander around aimlessly and harmlessly on city streets. They just want to start something, and blame the other guy. The protestors, like the terrorist, have won. The republican party has proven itself a bunch of whiners, unable to cope with the real world.

Re:Disruption != peaceably assembling

[TheRealMindChild]

They might have refused because they didn't want the person on whom they were serving a warrant to call up their lawyer and have him hover over the officers' shoulder to make sure they didn't overstep the bounds of the warrant.

TOUGH SHIT.

Re:Rock bottom

[Firehed]

Right, so what you're saying is that because it's not as bad as a century ago, it's OK? There was also a point where not actively following the state's religion would get you killed. That doesn't make today's religious hysteria acceptable, even if it's not as bad relatively speaking (though it seems we're headed back in that direction).

Please get out of the country now, for everyone's sake.

Re:Disruption != peaceably assembling

[Dachannien]

Were they planning on doing something illegal? I doubt it.

So they were keeping buckets of urine on hand because they liked the smell?

i call BS

[globaljustin]

You, sir are full of shit.

First, the RNC isn't "the government."

No, but the police, FBI, sheriff, etc. ARE part of the government. I didn't mention the RNC once in my post.

Second, yes they are anarchists

So what? Being an anarchist is not a crime. If you read TFA, you'd note that no search warrants were given, and that they were charged with 'conspiracy to riot.' I said they were not violent anarchists, in the sense that they were NOT planning violence or rioting.

"red zones" (prepared for "self-defense"), "yellow zones" (peaceful but assertive), and "green zones" (aiming to avoid risk of arrest.) I don't see how holding public property by force is at all non-violent.

I know that's not in TFA. Please cite a source. If you do not, then, well...

Re:Buckets of urine

[nizo]

If you have a house full of people waiting to protest and the toilet backs up, where else are you gonna go?

Also possessing buckets of urine, slingshots, bows 'n arrows, and guns is perfectly legal (or was the gun illegally registered, or otherwise illegal?) Certainly there are plenty of illegal things you can do with all of the above items, but unless there is actual evidence that crimes were to be committed with the items, simply having them isn't a crime.

So at this point it looks like we just have to wait and see what evidence comes to light, including a reasonable explanation of why there were informants in the groups to begin with.

Re:Rock bottom

[spire3661]

SO you are saying we should simply ignore a foundation of our government?

Re:Rock bottom

[NFN_NLN]

Your comment made me laugh, it really did. Go look at the civil liberties raped over and over by both sides during the American Civil War or during the First World War in the US, then compare/contrast to the current "erosion" of civil liberties.

You're a tool in every sense of the word. It's 'enablers' like you that try to justify every wrongful action. Who cares if it was worse a century ago, who cares if Mexico is worse. The only reason we're better NOW is because we iterated towards a better society.

How exactly is defending this going to make the world a better place? Indifference is the enemy of progress and you're worse. You're a piece of garbage weighted around the ankle of positive change.

Re:Rock bottom

[falconwolf]

I'm talking about the political and legal history of the United States since 1860. Compared to the American Civil War, the First World War and the Second World War, the crackdown on civil rights has been tame, compared to the dangerous faced with new asymmetrical weapons and tactics.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because what happened before was worse doesn't make this ok.

Falcon

Any eye witnesses among the /. posters?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just wondering if anyone among the posters to this article was at the scene of the raid when it took place (and can prove it) or is everyone reacting to what may be inaccurate press reports? We all know how precise the press has been in the past many years.

Old Story

[Steve Franklin]

First they came for the protestors. Then they came for the hackers. Then they came for the geeks. Then they came for the engineers.

Re:Selective Citations?

[gnud]

If, instead of a machete and some throwing knives, they police an automatic rifle and a NRA membership card, the protesters would be True American Patriots(tm), right?

And pretty please explain to me why it's illegal to have pvc pipes, chicken wire and duct tape.

Buckets of urine and feces - No Toilet duh

[gadlaw]

Why do some people continue to believe every bit of crap (ha, a pun) that comes from the police or Prosecutors? I heard the 'buckets' were from a guy who had no plumbing. Oh - you know when they characterize someone as having porn? Often times it's that old Playboy Magazine collection. It's the job of Police and Prosecutors to CYA -Cover your a**. And they are good at it. Some of you folks who call religious people gullible will just sit there and peep like hungry chicks when some authority figure in a suit and tie tells you all manner of BS.

Re:RTFA you twats

[Opportunist]

Well, I dunno where you pee when your plumbing is shot, but my neighbor got really pissed last time I used his door, so please enlighten me what would be a more suitable receptacle for my waste than a bucket.

Aside of that, what are "these kind of rally groups"? What gives you the goddamn right to assume I'm going to be protesting violently just because someone else has in the past? If I did, ok. It is under some circumstances allright to assume that I may protest violently again if I did in the past. To issue the recommendation back at you, RTFM. Nobody ever had any problem with those college kids whose houses were raided. So what visionary powers give you the idea that they would be?

Oh. Right. "these kinds of rally groups" are always like that. Ain't stereotyping fun? It saves the thinking.

IF they get violent, arrest them. Until then, I cannot see any good reason to use the force that was used.

Re:RTFA you twats

[Anonymous Coward]

"We know these things were going to be used as weapons," "

maybe you can explain away the other items (depending if they were "stockpiled") but buckets of urine? that shit was going to be flung at someone monkey style. given the track record of these kind of rally groups i'd say the cops were rightfully concerned, remember they planned on disrupting someone elses right to free speech, possibly in a violent manner. Or isn't that a problem because their republican?

iirc, a recent judgement affirming the right to bear arms was recently reached in Washington DC. They raided houses, if mine were raided, they would likely also find a gun, knives, flammable liquids, paint, slingshot with rocks, etc. These items are well withing my rights to have. Suspicious or not, no crime has been committed with them, and (depending on the context in which they were found) might have absolutely nothing to do with the protests (I highly doubt the gun would be used..). Yes, the urine buckets are quite suspect, but unless they have hard evidence it was going to be used in an illegal way, its well within their rights to have it (religious ceremony?).

As to excessive, I am holding my final opinion until more details come out, though my thoughts are it was a bit over the top. Six houses and several public spaces raided and they got A gun, A bow and arrows, other common household goods, etc. The only suspicious thing is the buckets of urine, which could have been one person's demented/stupid idea. The tactics described are also seemingly to spread fear and harass rather than to quell an actual threat. If it were a true threat, they would have been brought in on more serious charges than "firecode violation". Since when do people get booked for that?? Seriously, in todays post 9/11 police state, they would have been booked on some sort of terroristic threat charge.

Re:So peaceful!!!

[Opportunist]

You'll find those and other items in many houses. A quick glance through my apartment revealed the following suspicious substances and items:

Very sharp knives longer than 5 inches (I cook)
Precursors for biological weapons (I cook with very hot spices, good enough for pepper spray)
Nerve toxins (I smoke and drink coffee)
Percursors for explosives (aspirin)
Precursors for drugs (acetone)
Information and tools to invade computer systems (I work in IT security)
Dispensers for aerosols (my deodorant bottle)
Highly aggressive chemicals (toilet cleaner)
Camoflage kit (shoe polish)
Rubber gloves (I hate to touch my toilet without, especially with the cleaner involved)
Equipment to create an electronic bomb timer (welding gun and a few ATMegas)
Hydrogen peroxide (I wear contact lenses)
Drug containers (plastic bags and tin foil)
Equipment to create pamphlets and other propaganda material (I have a printer for my computer)
Equipment to remotely detonate an exposive device (I fly RC planes)
Heavy metals (lead, to balance out the planes)

Need I go on?

You will find a similar collection of "highly suspicious and potentially dangerous" items and "equipment" in many homes. There mere existance doesn't prove anything.

Re:Rock bottom

[slimjim8094]

But this isn't a war time, we're fighting an idea. You can't have a war against terrorism more than you can have a war against the dark. What do you fight?

You can't justify this as war time on the scale of the civil war or WWII

Republican bashing??? It's ILLEGAL!!!

[Jane Q. Public]

How in the hell can you say it's "Republican bashing"?? This is illegal activity by the authorities! No matter whose "side" it is on!

What the hell is wrong with you?

Re:Republican bashing??? It's ILLEGAL!!!

[jlarocco]

You're a dumbass. The OP clearly said he thought it was wrong regardless of who was doing it.

He was merely pointing out that somebody is pushing an agenda. The story submitter could have just as easily linked to *both* stories about illegal arrests before both conventions. Instead, they linked to the single story and spun it as "look what Republicans are doing."

Re:Republican bashing??? It's ILLEGAL!!!

[Mr. Slippery]

The story submitter could have just as easily linked to *both* stories about illegal arrests before both conventions.

Anyone who RTFA would see the author's observation that "...Denver was the site of several quite ugly incidents where law enforcement acted on behalf of Democratic Party officials and the corporate elite that funded the Convention to keep the media and protesters from doing anything remotely off-script. But the massive and plainly excessive preemptive police raids in Minnesota are of a different order altogether."

So if the submitter had an agenda to conceal that abuses happened in Denver, he did a crappy job of it.

However, the Denver abuses seem to have been mostly garden-variety police thuggery; these Minnesota raids involved the FBI and included months-long espionage and infiltration. One of the groups specifically targeted is "I-Witness Video", a group that did a great job capturing exposing thuggery and perjury by police during the 2004 Republican convention.

Nothing is wrong with protesting an event.

[falconwolf]

The problem comes in where protesters make a disruption at the event (usually during the middle of a speech). This seems to be an effort to stop that kind of activity.

Where is there any evidence anything illegal was planned? Or is this going to be an "oops, we made a mistake" after the convention is over?

Falcon

Re:Nothing is wrong with protesting an event.

[jlarocco]

From TFA:

Deputies seized a variety of items that they believed were tools of civil disobedience: a gas mask, bolt cutters, axes, slingshots, homemade "caltrops" for disabling buses, even buckets of urine.

I'm not saying it's right to raid their houses and arrest them just for having it, but I'm having a hard time coming up with legal ways to protest using buckets of urine and equipment for disabling buses.

Re:Rock bottom

[Mr. Slippery]

Compared to the American Civil War, the First World War and the Second World War, the crackdown on civil rights has been tame

And compared to Joe Stalin, Jeffrey Dahmer was a piker at murder. Your point?

I'll also note that WWI and WWII were actual declared wars. We are not in a state of war with any nation at the moment.

compared to the dangerous faced with new asymmetrical weapons and tactics.

More people die from drowning every year than were killed on 9/11; to claim that we face a terrorist danger necessitating that we abandon our civil liberties is ridiculous.

Re:Rock bottom

[kjots]

Your comment made me laugh ... [rambling nonsense omitted] ...

What makes me laugh is that America still calls itself the "Land of the Free" *snicker* and the "Home of the Brave" *guffaw*. You appear to be neither from over here. I'll probably be modded as flamebait or a troll for this, but really, after reading these types of articles again and again what else are we supposed to think?

I wouldn't care except that I am a citizen of the "Free World" and America styles itself as the "Leader of the Free World". What the fuck is up with that? Maybe we should vote on it; you Americans are okay with voting, right? Even if it means you might lose?

That's what I thought.

Re:Well...

[Eli Gottlieb]

But, there's a very fine line between preempting a crime, and just shutting up people you don't agree with.

No there is not. The police do not exist to preempt crime; that is not their purpose in any free society. The police exist to enforce the law when and ONLY when it has already been violated.

Welcome to the United Oligarchy of America. You've been here for 8 years already.

Re:Rock bottom

[RustinHWright]

So aircraft flying into some of the tallest buildings on Earth, and one flying to the largest office building on Earth and leaving 3,000 dead is an "idea"?

No, that isn't a war. That's a CRIME. Like a bank robbery or somebody going off to kill everybody in the local school or church or post office. Like, for that matter, Timothy McVeigh and his buddies. Oh, make no mistake, it was a horrific crime. One even more effective that the Japanese subway gas attacks. I assure you that I take no pleasure in being in the World Trade Center Health Registry, like all the tens of thousands of us who still don't know how much damage those attacks did to us.
But it was not an act of war. Especially since even if we want to blame the Taliban, most of the world's governments, including our own, were loudly proclaiming that they weren't the legitimate government of Afghanistan even before 9/11.

Re:Rock bottom

[plasmacutter]

Women still don't get equal pay for equal work

and from the other side, men still pay 25% more on average for medical, life, and auto insurance, and are treated in the media like emotionless "things" to be leeched from and divested in divorces of half their assets as a business.

The sexism cuts both ways.

Re:I have some news for you.

[Jane Q. Public]

(In reply to a low-scored comment many may not see:)

One more time: MOST of these last 8 years, the Republicans were in charge of both the White House and Congress. Trying to say that the Democrats are to blame "too" just doesn't hold water. THEY had the controls; it does not do any good to try to blame someone else.

And despite "rebate" checks, if you are an average American your taxes went UP during this Republican administration, not down.

"Pesonal citizen freedoms have not changed." ??? How do you try to justify this outrageous claim??? I am not the one smoking crack here, dude. It's easy enough to say (as you do more than once) that someone else does not have a clue, but you are supplying no clues of your own. In fact I really don't think it is me who is demonstrating lack of clues here. Please come back and chime in some day, AFTER you have done your research.

That was www.seattle.gov

[khasim]

Your cherry-picked YouTube propaganda do not change the reality that was documented by numerous major news organizations.

Are those the same news organizations that told us how there were "WMD's" in Iraq?

I'm linking to the seattle.gov web page.

Bullshit. You know very well that many downtown businesses suffered major physical damage.

No, they did not. Most of them lost money because it was the peak shopping season. Some were damaged. Unless you choose to define "major physical damage" as "broken windows".

I'll just stick to the facts. You can have your claims.

Re:That is uncivilised!!

[plasmacutter]

uh flamebait? lol.. me? why? oh boy.. that's too funny :)

people have a right to protest other peoples' allegiances.

Since the 60's the republican party has been about protecting corporate america and intolerant nutbags from individualism in any way shape or form, including the suppression of those annoying minorities, those lazy poor, and of course uppity people trying to point out the pools of molten rock formed from the friction of our forefathers spinning in their graves.

Re:That is uncivilised!!

[plasmacutter]

you're right, you can't have it both ways and call it fair. You can't grant the republican party the right to hold a convention there, and deny activists the right to stand in the streets and protest it.

whether it's juvenile or not has nothing to do with it.

They have every right to piss and moan about their convention in the streets outside.

whether it's good form or not (a subjective viewpoint) is not in question here.

Re:Weird....there are TWO FA's..

[JasterBobaMereel]

Gun - Legal (and quite normal) if you have the papers
Knife - Legal (in a private residence)
Bow and arrows - Legal
Flammable liquids - Legal
Paint - Legal
Slingshots - Legal
Rocks - legal
Buckets of Urine - Legal (odd, but Legal)

So they had this stuff in a private residence, all of it legal, and ....

Re:MN governor

[sumdumass]

Your making a mountain out of a mole hill just because coincidence supports your opposition.

I know it is easy and fun to do but your ignoring a lot of things like this isn't the first time something like this has happened. It has happened under Bush, Clinton, and the three presidents before him. It was increased after Reagan was shot and this type of activity was seen as a real threat. When a cop car was torched in California, they became a lot more proactive then reactive. Taking ancillary information and attempting to pursue a point of grand conspiracy is often what makes conspiracy nuts look like the NUT case that lends their name.

The bottom line is that cops-officials were able to infiltrate these groups and after learning of intended wrong doing, they waited until they started putting plans together and swooped in. It doesn't really matter who the part in power it or who the governor is at this point. Someone's right to protest does not include the ability to disrupt an event or cause physical damage to anyone or their property. "or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." does not infer damaging someone's property or attempting to take their free speech away. Something I have never understood is when people claim the speech is such a protected point that they have the right to stop others from using it. The constitution clearly says that no rights inferred or protected by the constitution shall be used to deny others of their rights of the same. But somehow, these groups manage to think their right to free speech means they have a right to stop someone else from their speech and when they are stopped in their tracks, they have people like you buffaloed into thinking some grievous infringement has occurred. It's simply amazing.

Re:Rock bottom

[Risen888]

I'm talking about the political and legal history of the United States since 1860. Compared to the American Civil War, the First World War and the Second World War, the crackdown on civil rights has been tame, compared to the dangerous faced with new asymmetrical weapons and tactics.

Really. Let's check the list.

Hobbling of the press. Check.
Illegal detainment of US citizens. Check.
Unconstitutional invasions of personal homes and effects. Check.
Unconstitutional use of federal agents and armed forces in civilian jurisdictions. Check.
Executive abuses of "war powers." Check, check, and check.

So how is this not exactly like the Civil War, or the First and Second World Wars? Well, there is one difference. We are not at war. Except with Eurasia. We've always been at war with Eurasia.

Re:MN governor

[Grim Beefer]

You're missing the point, and focusing on some hypothetical intentions by the victims of these crimes, instead of the crimes themselves. First off, no evidence of relevant criminal wrongdoing has been supplied, thus a grievous infringement has occurred. Your own defense of the cops is self contradictory, since these groups obviously had their rights removed without just cause. No amount of prior or current criminal activity by citizens ever merits stripping the rights of other people based on similarity of the individuals alone. Do you believe that it should be fine to randomly invade the homes of certain racial minorities because they have a higher per capita crime rate? Generalizing people to a political creed, and supporting oppressive measures to restrict that creed, is bigotry. Furthermore, it is wrong to arrest people for crimes before they commit them, based purely on suspicion or hearsay. Again, point me to any hard evidence of criminal wrongdoing by the INDIVIDUALS arrested or otherwise detained, and you might have an argument; otherwise you're just practicing apologetics for fascist tactics.

By your explanation, we should be A OK with living in a totally preemptive police state, since political figures have been assassinated throughout our national history, and security should demand such precautions to prevent a relapse. Does the gestapo style assassination of Fred Hampton seem like a conspiracy NUT "mountain out of a molehill", because this is a fine, modern, example of what you get when you let legal authority operate unchecked to demolish dissent. People making a "big deal" out of this are doing so in the hopes that we don't become a country where totalitarian practices are tolerated, and you are a fine example of why we should be afraid.

Re:Disruption != peaceably assembling

[Shakrai]

It seems to me that in this day and age (instant messaging, SMS, cell phones, blogs, etc) that it's going to take a lot more than disorderly conduct laws to stop people from assembling for political speech.

As with most things a balance needs to be struck. Your right to freedom of expression shouldn't trump my right to be left the hell alone if that's what I desire. There are ways to protest without disrupting traffic and "blockading" (to use their word) airports.

The Constitution...

[EvilIntelligence]

The Constitution was put in place, first and foremost, to protect the people from a tyrannical government. And now that is what we have. I'm starting to feel that if we don't force a change in direction, then the US will be the next Nazi Germany. After WWII, we asked "how could we have let that happen?" Now we know... It's back again folks. It's time we stand up and make a change.

Re:Rock bottom

[Anonymous Coward]

Women still don't get equal pay for equal work

Bullshit.

The way that this fallacy has continued to thrive is that people keep looking at an average of all workers in all jobs... which ignores the reality of the situation.

The fact is that when you compare men and women with similar job titles within actual buisnesses as well as qualifications you find that gender disparity in wages vanishes.