State police spying is dangerous repression

Well written. Bravo.

It's a bad sign when a Democrat will not honor state FOIA requests. Exactly what is O'Malley condoning here?

Current administration policies not only undermine the First Amendment. Illegal search and seizures, illegal detention of suspect without regard for evidence or trial go hand in hand with the further erosion of our Constitutional rights. We should all be frightened that this occurs not only at the national level, but now at the State level as well.

Any surprise that Ehrlich would take such a light view of the First Amendment? He's our home-grown George Bush. I guess in the Erhlich universe, free speech only counts on talk-radio.

What's the continual reference to the 1st Amendment for? No governmental entity interfered or inhibited the speech of these individuals. If you're going to reference the Bill of Rights here, try the 14th (please).

The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that membership roles of private organizations are none of the Government’s business. Perhaps a primer in the following case would aid in the above poster's sensitivity towards the issue; National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449 (1958). The court determined that "We hold that the immunity from state scrutiny ... is here so related to the right of the members to pursue their lawful private interests privately and to associate freely with others in so doing to come within the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment."

Recall that the 14th works both ways; i.e., it keeps the police out of liberals' business and it keeps liberal politicians (da Dems) from asking stupid questions like requesting membership roles at golf clubs (read fundraisers for Republicans).

Yeah, both have happend in the Free State and neither should have.

MDR wrote:

What's the continual reference to the 1st Amendment for? No governmental entity interfered or inhibited the speech of these individuals. If you're going to reference the Bill of Rights here, try the 14th (please).
The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that membership roles of private organizations are none of the Government’s business. Perhaps a primer in the following case would aid in the above poster's sensitivity towards the issue; National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449 (1958). The court determined that "We hold that the immunity from state scrutiny ... is here so related to the right of the members to pursue their lawful private interests privately and to associate freely with others in so doing to come within the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment."
Recall that the 14th works both ways; i.e., it keeps the police out of liberals' business and it keeps liberal politicians (da Dems) from asking stupid questions like requesting membership roles at golf clubs (read fundraisers for Republicans).
Yeah, both have happend in the Free State and neither should have.

Good point. Rights go both ways.

First amendment? Well this guy's full of hot air. Nobody stopped him from assembling or saying anything.

And weren't these public meetings? With open invitations? So the police weren't welcome? They should have stated that at the outset.

Surf52 wrote:

First amendment? Well this guy's full of hot air. Nobody stopped him from assembling or saying anything.
And weren't these public meetings? With open invitations? So the police weren't welcome? They should have stated that at the outset.

i look at it this way; the surveillance and infiltration of peace activists groups violates people's 1st amendment rights through intimidation and wrongfully entering their names into federal database for terrorist and drug traffickers. knowing this, some people are now afraid to go to the meetings and exercise their right to protest and free speech. they fear being labeled as a terrorist. this kind of policing is meant to keep people at bay so that the gov't can continue its work with less resistance.

sure the meeting is open but the goal of the msp and homeland security is to dismantle resistance; that's why they are collecting names of their detractors. it's very subtle which is why it happens and why it's so dangerous. this is not what america is about; we're not a police state and we want our people to think and act freely as long they are abiding by the law.

people need to be free; free of the fear that they won't be sequestered and labeled as terrorists just b/c they believe the iraq war is wrong and that FISA and bills alike are an intrusion on our civil liberties.

Indie wrote:

<quoted text>
i look at it this way; the surveillance and infiltration of peace activists groups violates people's 1st amendment rights through intimidation and wrongfully entering their names into federal database for terrorist and drug traffickers. knowing this, some people are now afraid to go to the meetings and exercise their right to protest and free speech. they fear being labeled as a terrorist. this kind of policing is meant to keep people at bay so that the gov't can continue its work with less resistance.
sure the meeting is open but the goal of the msp and homeland security is to dismantle resistance; that's why they are collecting names of their detractors. it's very subtle which is why it happens and why it's so dangerous. this is not what america is about; we're not a police state and we want our people to think and act freely as long they are abiding by the law.
people need to be free; free of the fear that they won't be sequestered and labeled as terrorists just b/c they believe the iraq war is wrong and that FISA and bills alike are an intrusion on our civil liberties.

Here is the MSP's Mission statement, from their website:

Mission

"The Mission of the Maryland State Police is to protect the citizens of the State of Maryland from foreign and domestic security threats, to fight crime, and to promote roadway safety by upholding the laws of the State of Maryland. This will be accomplished through aggressive patrol, investigation, intelligence gathering and interdiction efforts; and by providing leadership and assistance to state and local agencies. "

Where did you make up that list of goals, leftard?
Sounds like you need to be "observed."

If the protesters weren't breaking the law they had no reason to feel intimidated.

cant resist wrote:

<quoted text>
Here is the MSP's Mission statement, from their website:
Mission
"The Mission of the Maryland State Police is to protect the citizens of the State of Maryland from foreign and domestic security threats, to fight crime, and to promote roadway safety by upholding the laws of the State of Maryland. This will be accomplished through aggressive patrol, investigation, intelligence gathering and interdiction efforts; and by providing leadership and assistance to state and local agencies. "
Where did you make up that list of goals, leftard?
Sounds like you need to be "observed."
If the protesters weren't breaking the law they had no reason to feel intimidated.

leftard??? really witty and effective.

the MSP police can have any goals that they want as long as they are not violating the constitution and our civil liberities. it doesn't matter what you think peace protesters should or should not feel. the fact is, they do feel intimidated and if people want to simple voice their dissent about the war, they should be able to do so w/o being put into a fed database for terrorists. that is clearly a violation of rights.

i protested the war adamantly and now america, at least the majority, is against it like the whole world. i'm very patriotic and not a terrorist and do not want to be put in a fed database as such. that's fascism not freedom.

on the other side, if you support the war and capital punishment, you have the same rights to demonstrate your position and should not be put into a fed database as a terrorist or any other anti-american label. our views and ability to voice them is the essence of our country.

the fact that you're probably a right-tard (sounds kind of like another word, eh?) means that your pea brain can't comprehend such complex thoughts.

cant resist wrote:

<quoted text>
Here is the MSP's Mission statement, from their website:
Mission
"The Mission of the Maryland State Police is to protect the citizens of the State of Maryland from foreign and domestic security threats, to fight crime, and to promote roadway safety by upholding the laws of the State of Maryland. This will be accomplished through aggressive patrol, investigation, intelligence gathering and interdiction efforts; and by providing leadership and assistance to state and local agencies. "
Where did you make up that list of goals, leftard?
Sounds like you need to be "observed."
If the protesters weren't breaking the law they had no reason to feel intimidated.

also, right-ard, what laws did i make up? what are you referring to? i agree with the MSP's mission. it's all great. however, they were certainly not accomplishing that mission by spending 300 hours surveilling these peace activists. these people are quakers! the most peaceful people around; they are not a threat!!! and we shouldn't be spending valuable resources on such.

we need to be fighting terrorists and quaker doesn't fit into that definition, right-ard. how can you not understand?

and if they start observing me, that's more $$ spent down the drain that could have been spent in the city's drug infested neighborhoods that corrupt the innocent kids that grow up there. if they are looking for drug traffickers and terrorists, the quaker house is probably not the best place to look, right-tard. maybe the MSP can find some terrorists, guns, and drugs in balt city's rough hoods. oh wait, MSP are too busy getting fat, sitting in peace activists meetings, and spending time getting sued by the ACLU for violating laws. the ACLU wouldn't have been successful in suing the police multiple times if they didn't have a case to present to the very non-sympathetic courts we have in MD.

Domestic spying on citizens meeting peacefully? That we are required to cite the constitution in opposing this activity speaks to the damage done to our ideology of liberty (as embodied in our constitution) since right-wing opportunists latched onto terrorism after 9/11.

Republicans: Destroyinig America to save it.

Oh, and before you go any further...
Democrats: Anything to win but the hard decisions.

Impeach!

I don't understand. Did the "spies" stop you from gathering? Did they stop you from speaking? Did they stand up and interrupt your meetings? Or did they simply join your groups and observe the situation in case you were infiltrated by some less-than-savory individuals and get lead astray?

WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE WHEN OWE'MALLEY'S PEOPLE ARE DOING THE EXACT SAME THING?

http://omalleywatch.com/...

cant resist wrote:

WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE WHEN OWE'MALLEY'S PEOPLE ARE DOING THE EXACT SAME THING?
http://omalleywatch.com/...

Please give us one specific example.

EDITOR BALTPLCE -

Mike please do not use your real name on public forums, it has been extremely easy to find you using a basic google and whitepage search.

MikeAgriesti wrote:

<quoted text>
Please give us one specific example.

MikeAgriesti wrote:

<quoted text>
Please give us one specific example.

Did you bother reading the article, ace?

What is the height of hypocrisy from people all upset with the State Police is that the same people are as quiet as the grave when Conservatives like David Horowitz, Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin are , unlike Mr. Obuszewski and other protestors, PHYSICALLY assaulted by lefties trying to shout them down and shut them up everytime they appear in public to give a speech. That is where the real threat to freedom of expression and speech is coming from today , fascist left wingers, not the Maryland State Police.

Indie wrote:

<quoted text>
i look at it this way; the surveillance and infiltration of peace activists groups violates people's 1st amendment rights through intimidation and wrongfully entering their names into federal database for terrorist and drug traffickers. knowing this, some people are now afraid to go to the meetings and exercise their right to protest and free speech. they fear being labeled as a terrorist. this kind of policing is meant to keep people at bay so that the gov't can continue its work with less resistance.
sure the meeting is open but the goal of the msp and homeland security is to dismantle resistance; that's why they are collecting names of their detractors. it's very subtle which is why it happens and why it's so dangerous. this is not what america is about; we're not a police state and we want our people to think and act freely as long they are abiding by the law.
people need to be free; free of the fear that they won't be sequestered and labeled as terrorists just b/c they believe the iraq war is wrong and that FISA and bills alike are an intrusion on our civil liberties.

That may be their perception, but they are still free to assemble and speak as they choose. They were never barred from participating nor were they gagged in any manner.

Given the destruction to public property peace groups have caused in the past, I don't believe the surveillance was out of line.

Do I note a touch of surprise in that post? The First Amendment id past history, the Constitution is past history, as if the Land of the Free.Look around you, Maria and tell me what you see.

What is free speech and what inhibits free speach? We will have to wait for the investigation into the investigation to find out how it is applied to this one.

Does a camera monitoring a public space with a flashing light on it and a sign saying "police" violate either free speach or freedom of assembly- No.

Is it "spying" - No,

Is listening to public statements at public gatherings either spying or repressing freedom of assembly or freedom of speach - No.

Are there paranoid people in Baltimore who worry about someone seeing what they do - Yes.

Should people be allowed to do and say anything they want - Yes, so long as they do not break the law, hurt or cause some to be hurt.