6 ms·

After George Floyd’s murder, police built a surveillance machine in Minnesota

110 points by jbegley 5y ago

tremon 5y ago
spokesperson Doug Neville wrote that OSN is “not an ongoing operation.” However, according to emails obtained and reviewed as part of our investigation, the operation does appear to be actively ongoing [..] as “OSN 2.0” This whitewashing of illegal/unethical activities by simply renaming them is so common, it must have a name?
- falcolas 5y ago
  Not just a name, a version number. -_-
- boomboomsubban 5y ago
  Rebranding? I think the term applies, but is more general than what you're asking for.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
mmcgaha 5y ago
If they had not been monitoring intelligence and something big happened then they did not do enough; if they do enough and nothing big happens then they are abusing their power. No matter which way it goes we all get to wiggle our finger and be outraged.
- jdbernard 5y ago
  What is your suggestion for what they should have done then? Culturally we need to decide what our priorities are: do we sacrifice privacy and freedom for the appearance of safety or do we accept less promises of safety for more freedom and privacy. You're right, we can't have it both ways.
  - adgjlsfhk1 5y ago
    not murdering people and then setting up massive surveillance of the people protesting the murders would be a good start.
    - jdbernard 5y ago
      My point was not to support the decision the police made. It was, rather, let's not give the police a pass because they're "damned if you do, damned if you don't." I agree with you. I would rather the police have a principaled stand for freedom and privacy, and not murder people. Then if something big happens, as GP opined, we as a society need to not crucify them. The police are not and should not be a guarantee that bad things won't happen. We should hold them accountantable for what they do, not hold them responsible for preventing all evils.
  - mmcgaha 5y ago
    If we get to vote on it, I vote to limit government surveillance of citizens. Short of society making that decision and understanding the consequence, I will try to have empathy for the folks who have to make hard decisions that have no correct answer.
    - landemva 5y ago
      You get to vote every day when you continue to contribute taxes which pay for the schemes.
- AlexandrB 5y ago
  I don't get it. By "something big" do you mean another incident of police misconduct? Or the natural, outraged response to that misconduct? Otherwise how is this catch-22 relevant to the events surrounding George Floyd's murder and the surveillance measures established in response to the protests?
  - mmcgaha 5y ago
    I can not enumerate the list of possible threats but at the extremes would be plans use molotov cocktails on police cars up to plans to blow up public buildings (think Oklahoma City level). Anything between these extremes is possible and in a situation as hot as the Floyd murder protests, the police are expected to protect the public even if they caused the problem to begin with.
- QuikAccount 5y ago
  This is an odd comment because it reads like something you would post on a thread about the FBI or CIA. I have to assume you didn't read the article and just posted something in response to the headline. This is a system to surveil protestors and protect status quo among the police. Literally the first sentence in the article would tell you such: > Law enforcement agencies in Minnesota have been carrying out a secretive, long-running surveillance program targeting civil rights activists and journalists in the aftermath of the murder of George Floyd in May 2020. Run under a consortium known as Operation Safety Net, the program was set up a year ago, ostensibly to maintain public order as Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin went on trial for Floyd’s murder.
  - mmcgaha 5y ago
    I did read it and I use intelligence instead of "secretive, long-running surveillance" because it is a word that describes the same thing without spicing it up with evil intent.
    - zwkrt 5y ago
      But it /is/ evil intent!
RobertRoberts 5y ago
Decades ago I was warning people about surveillance state, and it's too late now to stop it. I perceive these programs only exist now _because_ protests that have turned into destructive mobs and previously leaders on the fence (in private) now are being persuaded to take the only action they can, secret programs. Social justice movements are their own worst enemy. We all want change, but when a leaderless group of people make too many people nervous about the randomness of the results they achieve, you get these kinds of results from the government.
- AlexandrB 5y ago
  And when a group with a leader and a concrete goal achieves results you get COINTELPRO[1]. There's a reason modern protest movements are "leaderless". It's in part to avoid the kind of disruption operations hierarchical groups are vulnerable to. There's no objectively "winning" hand here. Governments are always going to try to surveil and subvert protests and protestors. Peaceful or otherwise. Thinking that this is a new phenomenon seems ahistorical. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
- danuker 5y ago
  It is not too late to stop anything. With enough political will, anything is possible. Albeit very slowly and painfully.
  - serverlessmom 5y ago
    Totally agree “There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen” – Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
- pjc50 5y ago
  > you get these kinds of results from the government This is basically because the government involved were willing to anything other than actually prosecute Derek Chauvin. As soon as it got to actual court there was no need for further protests on behalf of George Floyd. It is shameful that it took that much street protest to get the government to do something that it should have done anyway.
rootusrootus 5y ago
We really need someone to watch the watchers. Like internal affairs but not part of the police. A group that has police powers over the police but not over the citizenry, and who is not subject to police authority. Give them legally mandated access to all police records. It seems obvious. Which probably means I'm missing something. Or it could just be that the police apparatus is so deeply embedded into the state political system already that it's not possible to put a check on their power. Although some US states have citizen initiatives, so we could force the issue. But then again, many citizens like a strong, unaccountable police force, so that is hardly a guarantee of success.
- pjc50 5y ago
  In the UK, this is between HM Inspectorates of Constabulary: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-inspectorate-of-constabulary-and-fire-rescue-services https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-inspectorate-... (splendid name) and the police complaints commission https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/independent-police-complaint-commission https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/independent-poli... > many citizens like a strong, unaccountable police force Indeed.
- stonemetal12 5y ago
  >who is not subject to police authority How would you police these people? They would be like diplomats, only without a home country to keep them in line.
  - zwkrt 5y ago
    I assume this meant only that their org chart didn’t eventually merge with the police’s. Kind of like SREs at google.
    - stonemetal12 5y ago
      That makes more sense. I get that it is mostly a states rights issue, but I have always thought that Police crime should be handled by FBI + Federal courts.
sebow 5y ago
After 9/11, the government built a 'secretive' surveillance machine. Resuming this fundamental issue to a per-basis case normalizes it to the point where people only care given certain circumstances, which is why the government keeps getting await with it.(terrorism, protect the children, police violence, etc.)
olliej 5y ago
So they spent a bunch of money monitoring people saying "you don't get to kill people because you feel like it" instead of a surveillance system for the people doing the murders?
donclark 5y ago
If we got rid of Police unions and held them accountable for wrongdoings, would this steer them in the right direction?

110 points by jbegley 5y ago

spokesperson Doug Neville wrote that OSN is “not an ongoing operation.” However, according to emails obtained and reviewed as part of our investigation, the operation does appear to be actively ongoing [..] as “OSN 2.0” This whitewashing of illegal/unethical activities by simply renaming them is so common, it must have a name?

falcolas 5y ago
Not just a name, a version number. -_-
boomboomsubban 5y ago
Rebranding? I think the term applies, but is more general than what you're asking for.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

mmcgaha 5y ago

If they had not been monitoring intelligence and something big happened then they did not do enough; if they do enough and nothing big happens then they are abusing their power. No matter which way it goes we all get to wiggle our finger and be outraged.

jdbernard 5y ago
What is your suggestion for what they should have done then? Culturally we need to decide what our priorities are: do we sacrifice privacy and freedom for the appearance of safety or do we accept less promises of safety for more freedom and privacy. You're right, we can't have it both ways.
- adgjlsfhk1 5y ago
  not murdering people and then setting up massive surveillance of the people protesting the murders would be a good start.
  - jdbernard 5y ago
    My point was not to support the decision the police made. It was, rather, let's not give the police a pass because they're "damned if you do, damned if you don't." I agree with you. I would rather the police have a principaled stand for freedom and privacy, and not murder people. Then if something big happens, as GP opined, we as a society need to not crucify them. The police are not and should not be a guarantee that bad things won't happen. We should hold them accountantable for what they do, not hold them responsible for preventing all evils.
- mmcgaha 5y ago
  If we get to vote on it, I vote to limit government surveillance of citizens. Short of society making that decision and understanding the consequence, I will try to have empathy for the folks who have to make hard decisions that have no correct answer.
  - landemva 5y ago
    You get to vote every day when you continue to contribute taxes which pay for the schemes.
AlexandrB 5y ago
I don't get it. By "something big" do you mean another incident of police misconduct? Or the natural, outraged response to that misconduct? Otherwise how is this catch-22 relevant to the events surrounding George Floyd's murder and the surveillance measures established in response to the protests?
- mmcgaha 5y ago
  I can not enumerate the list of possible threats but at the extremes would be plans use molotov cocktails on police cars up to plans to blow up public buildings (think Oklahoma City level). Anything between these extremes is possible and in a situation as hot as the Floyd murder protests, the police are expected to protect the public even if they caused the problem to begin with.
QuikAccount 5y ago
This is an odd comment because it reads like something you would post on a thread about the FBI or CIA. I have to assume you didn't read the article and just posted something in response to the headline. This is a system to surveil protestors and protect status quo among the police. Literally the first sentence in the article would tell you such: > Law enforcement agencies in Minnesota have been carrying out a secretive, long-running surveillance program targeting civil rights activists and journalists in the aftermath of the murder of George Floyd in May 2020. Run under a consortium known as Operation Safety Net, the program was set up a year ago, ostensibly to maintain public order as Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin went on trial for Floyd’s murder.
- mmcgaha 5y ago
  I did read it and I use intelligence instead of "secretive, long-running surveillance" because it is a word that describes the same thing without spicing it up with evil intent.
  - zwkrt 5y ago
    But it /is/ evil intent!

RobertRoberts 5y ago

Decades ago I was warning people about surveillance state, and it's too late now to stop it. I perceive these programs only exist now _because_ protests that have turned into destructive mobs and previously leaders on the fence (in private) now are being persuaded to take the only action they can, secret programs. Social justice movements are their own worst enemy. We all want change, but when a leaderless group of people make too many people nervous about the randomness of the results they achieve, you get these kinds of results from the government.

AlexandrB 5y ago
And when a group with a leader and a concrete goal achieves results you get COINTELPRO[1]. There's a reason modern protest movements are "leaderless". It's in part to avoid the kind of disruption operations hierarchical groups are vulnerable to. There's no objectively "winning" hand here. Governments are always going to try to surveil and subvert protests and protestors. Peaceful or otherwise. Thinking that this is a new phenomenon seems ahistorical. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
danuker 5y ago
It is not too late to stop anything. With enough political will, anything is possible. Albeit very slowly and painfully.
- serverlessmom 5y ago
  Totally agree “There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen” – Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
pjc50 5y ago
> you get these kinds of results from the government This is basically because the government involved were willing to anything other than actually prosecute Derek Chauvin. As soon as it got to actual court there was no need for further protests on behalf of George Floyd. It is shameful that it took that much street protest to get the government to do something that it should have done anyway.

rootusrootus 5y ago

We really need someone to watch the watchers. Like internal affairs but not part of the police. A group that has police powers over the police but not over the citizenry, and who is not subject to police authority. Give them legally mandated access to all police records. It seems obvious. Which probably means I'm missing something. Or it could just be that the police apparatus is so deeply embedded into the state political system already that it's not possible to put a check on their power. Although some US states have citizen initiatives, so we could force the issue. But then again, many citizens like a strong, unaccountable police force, so that is hardly a guarantee of success.

pjc50 5y ago
In the UK, this is between HM Inspectorates of Constabulary: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-inspectorate-of-constabulary-and-fire-rescue-services https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-inspectorate-... (splendid name) and the police complaints commission https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/independent-police-complaint-commission https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/independent-poli... > many citizens like a strong, unaccountable police force Indeed.
stonemetal12 5y ago
>who is not subject to police authority How would you police these people? They would be like diplomats, only without a home country to keep them in line.
- zwkrt 5y ago
  I assume this meant only that their org chart didn’t eventually merge with the police’s. Kind of like SREs at google.
  - stonemetal12 5y ago
    That makes more sense. I get that it is mostly a states rights issue, but I have always thought that Police crime should be handled by FBI + Federal courts.

sebow 5y ago

After 9/11, the government built a 'secretive' surveillance machine. Resuming this fundamental issue to a per-basis case normalizes it to the point where people only care given certain circumstances, which is why the government keeps getting await with it.(terrorism, protect the children, police violence, etc.)

olliej 5y ago

So they spent a bunch of money monitoring people saying "you don't get to kill people because you feel like it" instead of a surveillance system for the people doing the murders?

donclark 5y ago

If we got rid of Police unions and held them accountable for wrongdoings, would this steer them in the right direction?