14 ms·

Atlanta Police Monitoring of 'Cop City' Opponents' Political Activity

72 points by hn_acker 2y ago

hn_acker 2y ago
The full title is: > Internal Atlanta Police Records Reveal Monitoring of ‘Cop City’ Opponents’ Political Activity
simpaticoder 2y ago
The even greater problem is wider ambivalence, or even hostility, to revelations of wrong-doing of power. Edward Snowden revealed illegal NSA wire-tapping of American citizens, among other egregious violations of the law, and yet he still remains in exile. His standing among both liberals and conservatives remains poor. I do not understand why this is so, but it's not hard to understand how such treatment has a chilling effect on any reporting on abuses of power. It is hard to believe, but it appears as if the general public no longer has an interest in keeping power in check (or asserting their rights, which is the same thing). It feels as if something critical has changed in the zeitgeist. It felt like it was a point of pride, honor, integrity and courage to share with the wider public information about the abuse of power. It felt like, even if the organization might come after you, ultimately the backstop of reasonable public opinion (and the justice system) would have your back. I no longer believe that is the case, and it is a great loss. We despise our own heroes, now.
- fuzzer371 2y ago
  I think we can compare the leaks of Ed Snowden with the Pentagon Papers leaks of Mike Gravel. Post 9/11 (And even before) the US government began a widespread campaign against US citizens themselves under the guise of the "War on terror". People became so brainwashed that what we were doing was unequivocally "right" and what the other guys were doing was wrong. And it's continued to the point where the general public now thinks that we're the good guy's no matter what, without questioning authority. At the time the Pentagon Papers were leaked, it was the first time in a long time (In my opinion) that the general populous woke up and saw that we were doing some pretty horrendous things. The 3 letter agencies took this to heart, and learned from it. People haven't been taught to think critically in a long time, and that's on purpose.
  - ranger_danger 2y ago
    Sounds a lot like demoralization: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX3EZCVj2XA&t=4m49s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX3EZCVj2XA&t=4m49s
  - simpaticoder 2y ago
    The key difference between then and now is the structure of media. We do not have Walter Cronkite. We do not have the Fairness Doctrine. We do have Citizens United. This leads to professional zealous advocates dominating the information space. To blame individuals for a lack of critical thinking skills in this environment is like decriminalizing violent crime and then blaming bloodied individuals for a lack of firearm and hand combat training.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > it's continued to the point where the general public now thinks that we're the good guy's no matter what What? We're in a period of peak civic cynicism.
  - drewcoo 2y ago
    > I think we can compare the leaks of Ed Snowden with the Pentagon Papers leaks of Mike Gravel. Do you mean Ellsberg? Gravel's contribution was reading the Pentagon papers into the Congressional record.
marinmania 2y ago
I feel like the issue here is not necessarily that the surveillance happened, but it has the appearance of impropriety. I think a possible solution is to have a national law enforcement agency that can step in when local agencies run into issues that involve investigating their own. The number of protests involved here that turned violent is rather large. It would be silly to insist that local police not monitor public channels where protestors are organizing. We don't even get from this report if this was necessarily more work compared to a counterfactual where sit-ins or violent protests were against local schools or other government agencies. I get where people are skeptical, but that's why an outside agency could potentially be useful in doing the same exact work (if not more) while making it more clear there is no impropriety. >On March 6, 2023, it was reported that 23 people who had thrown large rocks, bricks, Molotov cocktails, and fireworks at police, as well having set buildings and equipment on fire, had been charged with domestic terrorism. Only two of them were from Atlanta. One was from France, and one was from Canada. >On January 18, 2023, Georgia State Troopers and other agencies launched another raid. During the raid a trooper was shot in the leg, and a protester, Manuel Terán, known also as "Tortuguita", was shot and killed by police.[24] Police stated that Terán fired on them without warning.[25] Multiple groups, including other protestors, two independent journalists who had previously interviewed Terán, and Terán's family, have questioned whether Terán fired first, pointing to the lack of body camera footage of the shooting and calling for an independent investigation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Cop_City https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Cop_City
- ethbr1 2y ago
  My litmus test for what sources to believe has narrowed to ones which declare both good and bad actions by any parties. Nobody does things correctly all the time, so if I read an article that lauds one side and has crickets as to their failings... it's clear the author's intent was spin. In which case, why would I trust what they say? It's statistically unlikely that any one side has a monopoly on righteousness and good ideas. Cops can abuse surveillance authorities and protestors can be violent. There's no requirement that only one party does bad things.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
TacticalCoder 2y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- dang 2y ago
  Please don't take HN threads on flamewar tangents. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
roenxi 2y ago
> The department must adopt ... a prohibition on surveillance of First Amendment–protected activity. This seems like a silly thing to call for. What is the problem with the police monitoring what was, in this case, public first amendment protected activity? There isn't any reason to prohibit government officers listening to public speech. The racketeering charges sound much more concerning and are a problem in line with the absurdist lawfare we've seen at the Federal level. The RICO Act abuse seems to be a problem. Maybe at some point the US public will cotton on to excess laws being a bad idea due to selective prosecution, but unfortunately if the mass public were going to acquire a case of principles we'd have seen more of it in the voting patterns of the last few decades.
- soulofmischief 2y ago
  Should the police maintain a list of every individual with a public social media account that speaks out against any policy which the police support?
  - krapp 2y ago
    The police probably already have such a list.
    - mulmen 2y ago
      The question is if they should, not if they do.
      - Am4TIfIsER0ppos 2y ago
        Definitely. They need to be able to round up $GROUP when the order comes down. I'm sure everyone has a group to fill in there.
        mulmen 2y ago
        I don't have a group to fill in there.
BirAdam 2y ago
This seems like a well written, balanced, principled, fair news article. Well done Reynolds and Gutiérrez.
mulmen 2y ago
> Seventy-six intelligence reports assembled by the department’s homeland security unit Why does a city police department even have a "homeland security" department? Isn't this just finding what they are looking for?
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > Why does a city police department even have a "homeland security" department? It looks like it's mimicking the NYPD's counterterrorism group [1]. The point of that group is to interface internationally. (It presumably also gets more leeway with surveillance.) Maybe this is the team that interfaces with the DHS's fusion centers [2]? [1] https://www.nyc.gov/site/nypd/bureaus/investigative/counterterrorism.page https://www.nyc.gov/site/nypd/bureaus/investigative/countert... [2] https://www.dhs.gov/fusion-centers https://www.dhs.gov/fusion-centers

72 points by hn_acker 2y ago

The full title is: > Internal Atlanta Police Records Reveal Monitoring of ‘Cop City’ Opponents’ Political Activity

The even greater problem is wider ambivalence, or even hostility, to revelations of wrong-doing of power. Edward Snowden revealed illegal NSA wire-tapping of American citizens, among other egregious violations of the law, and yet he still remains in exile. His standing among both liberals and conservatives remains poor. I do not understand why this is so, but it's not hard to understand how such treatment has a chilling effect on any reporting on abuses of power. It is hard to believe, but it appears as if the general public no longer has an interest in keeping power in check (or asserting their rights, which is the same thing). It feels as if something critical has changed in the zeitgeist. It felt like it was a point of pride, honor, integrity and courage to share with the wider public information about the abuse of power. It felt like, even if the organization might come after you, ultimately the backstop of reasonable public opinion (and the justice system) would have your back. I no longer believe that is the case, and it is a great loss. We despise our own heroes, now.

fuzzer371 2y ago
I think we can compare the leaks of Ed Snowden with the Pentagon Papers leaks of Mike Gravel. Post 9/11 (And even before) the US government began a widespread campaign against US citizens themselves under the guise of the "War on terror". People became so brainwashed that what we were doing was unequivocally "right" and what the other guys were doing was wrong. And it's continued to the point where the general public now thinks that we're the good guy's no matter what, without questioning authority. At the time the Pentagon Papers were leaked, it was the first time in a long time (In my opinion) that the general populous woke up and saw that we were doing some pretty horrendous things. The 3 letter agencies took this to heart, and learned from it. People haven't been taught to think critically in a long time, and that's on purpose.
- ranger_danger 2y ago
  Sounds a lot like demoralization: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX3EZCVj2XA&t=4m49s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX3EZCVj2XA&t=4m49s
- simpaticoder 2y ago
  The key difference between then and now is the structure of media. We do not have Walter Cronkite. We do not have the Fairness Doctrine. We do have Citizens United. This leads to professional zealous advocates dominating the information space. To blame individuals for a lack of critical thinking skills in this environment is like decriminalizing violent crime and then blaming bloodied individuals for a lack of firearm and hand combat training.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > it's continued to the point where the general public now thinks that we're the good guy's no matter what What? We're in a period of peak civic cynicism.
- drewcoo 2y ago
  > I think we can compare the leaks of Ed Snowden with the Pentagon Papers leaks of Mike Gravel. Do you mean Ellsberg? Gravel's contribution was reading the Pentagon papers into the Congressional record.

marinmania 2y ago

I feel like the issue here is not necessarily that the surveillance happened, but it has the appearance of impropriety. I think a possible solution is to have a national law enforcement agency that can step in when local agencies run into issues that involve investigating their own. The number of protests involved here that turned violent is rather large. It would be silly to insist that local police not monitor public channels where protestors are organizing. We don't even get from this report if this was necessarily more work compared to a counterfactual where sit-ins or violent protests were against local schools or other government agencies. I get where people are skeptical, but that's why an outside agency could potentially be useful in doing the same exact work (if not more) while making it more clear there is no impropriety. >On March 6, 2023, it was reported that 23 people who had thrown large rocks, bricks, Molotov cocktails, and fireworks at police, as well having set buildings and equipment on fire, had been charged with domestic terrorism. Only two of them were from Atlanta. One was from France, and one was from Canada. >On January 18, 2023, Georgia State Troopers and other agencies launched another raid. During the raid a trooper was shot in the leg, and a protester, Manuel Terán, known also as "Tortuguita", was shot and killed by police.[24] Police stated that Terán fired on them without warning.[25] Multiple groups, including other protestors, two independent journalists who had previously interviewed Terán, and Terán's family, have questioned whether Terán fired first, pointing to the lack of body camera footage of the shooting and calling for an independent investigation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Cop_City https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Cop_City

ethbr1 2y ago
My litmus test for what sources to believe has narrowed to ones which declare both good and bad actions by any parties. Nobody does things correctly all the time, so if I read an article that lauds one side and has crickets as to their failings... it's clear the author's intent was spin. In which case, why would I trust what they say? It's statistically unlikely that any one side has a monopoly on righteousness and good ideas. Cops can abuse surveillance authorities and protestors can be violent. There's no requirement that only one party does bad things.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

TacticalCoder 2y ago

[flagged]

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
dang 2y ago
Please don't take HN threads on flamewar tangents. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

roenxi 2y ago

> The department must adopt ... a prohibition on surveillance of First Amendment–protected activity. This seems like a silly thing to call for. What is the problem with the police monitoring what was, in this case, public first amendment protected activity? There isn't any reason to prohibit government officers listening to public speech. The racketeering charges sound much more concerning and are a problem in line with the absurdist lawfare we've seen at the Federal level. The RICO Act abuse seems to be a problem. Maybe at some point the US public will cotton on to excess laws being a bad idea due to selective prosecution, but unfortunately if the mass public were going to acquire a case of principles we'd have seen more of it in the voting patterns of the last few decades.

soulofmischief 2y ago
Should the police maintain a list of every individual with a public social media account that speaks out against any policy which the police support?
- krapp 2y ago
  The police probably already have such a list.
  - mulmen 2y ago
    The question is if they should, not if they do.
    - Am4TIfIsER0ppos 2y ago
      Definitely. They need to be able to round up $GROUP when the order comes down. I'm sure everyone has a group to fill in there.
      - mulmen 2y ago
        I don't have a group to fill in there.

BirAdam 2y ago

This seems like a well written, balanced, principled, fair news article. Well done Reynolds and Gutiérrez.

mulmen 2y ago

> Seventy-six intelligence reports assembled by the department’s homeland security unit Why does a city police department even have a "homeland security" department? Isn't this just finding what they are looking for?

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> Why does a city police department even have a "homeland security" department? It looks like it's mimicking the NYPD's counterterrorism group [1]. The point of that group is to interface internationally. (It presumably also gets more leeway with surveillance.) Maybe this is the team that interfaces with the DHS's fusion centers [2]? [1] https://www.nyc.gov/site/nypd/bureaus/investigative/counterterrorism.page https://www.nyc.gov/site/nypd/bureaus/investigative/countert... [2] https://www.dhs.gov/fusion-centers https://www.dhs.gov/fusion-centers