The Police, in riot gear and carrying semi automatic weapons, raided houses on a purely political basis. This was done at the behest of the federal government.
They blamed “anarchists”. No, seriously. These raids were carried out for thought crime.
Ian Welsh is right in observing that the bleeding silence from the media and political class is enough to convict (emphasis mine):
It’s notable that as of this writing, at midnight, I see nothing on the NY Times front page or on their US page about the RNC harassment, arrests and snatch squads. I see nothing on the Washington Post’s front page, or its Politics page. As best I am aware no major Democratic politician has made a statement that warrants should be required before busting down doors, or that protesters have a right to protest, or that people even have a right to see a warrant.
Why is that? Is it that there’s a bipartisan consensus that civil liberties are just for talk, but when the handcuffs get slapped on people who have done nothing, when people are punished for crimes they haven’t commited, that it’s no big deal as long as they aren’t anyone important? Is it that Democrats stirring words about civil liberties were as sincere as many of their promises to vote against warrantless wiretapping?
I can only assume it is. But I’d certainly love to be proved wrong. So, perhaps a major newspaper might act interested in mass violations of basic constitutional rights like the right to free speech, the right to assembly and the right to be secure in ones own home and possessions and for the government to not be able to search and seize without a warrant. They covered the exact same sort of harassment by the Chinese government in Beijing against activists and journalists, but they don’t cover it when it’s the US government. Wonder why?
Because they have the same boss. Complacency is complicity. This is why members of the Accountability Now PAC are going against politicians from any party that tramble on our fundamental rights.
Activists planning protests around the Republican National Convention say they are being targeted in a heavy-handed attempt to chill dissent after police arrested five people, detained dozens of others, and seized computers and protest guides in raids Friday night and Saturday on private homes and the major meeting center.
Google News probably would have been a better place to check. It isn’t that these events were not covered. Direct censorship is easily noticed and countered. Soft censorship, that is to say covering an event a little but not promoting it, is a far more effective way to keep most people (the kind who would not think to search for “RNC Protest” on a news site) in the dark.
I hate to be brutal, but the 2008 election is about making a choice. The constitution is in tatters on the ground. We’ve got to choose between the man with the bloody knife and the man with a single band-aid. Perhaps I am being unfair, but Obama really needs to make a big stink about this. Its about as close to an easy win opening as the campaign is going to get. He needs to be the man between the constitution and the guy with the knife. And if I were him, I’d be armed too. Because the guy with the knife is just getting started. At least the Democrats didn’t have anything like this at their convention. Can’t wait to see what the Republicans do next.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tagged: Accountability, Censorship, Civil Liberties, Constitution, human rights, Law, McCain, Media, Police State, Politics, Protestors, Republicans, RNC, Wordpress Political Blogs | 10 Comments »