| Don't get me wrong. I respect the NYPD and I know how necessary good intelligence is in fighting terrorism. Given how badly the Bush administration has wrecked the American intelligence apparatus, we need all the help we can get. But good judgment is required, and we have reason to believe that the NYPD's judgment was atrocious. Every minute they spent spying on a bunch of pacifists from Schenectady was a minute they could have spent doing something useful to improve security plans. It was a minute they could have spent tracking real terrorists, if that's what they were trying to do. Instead, it was a minute they spent chilling freedom of speech.
The Post plays dumb: Sunday's gripe: Cops traveled far and wide "to conduct covert observations of people who planned to protest at the convention."
No wonder the convention went off without a hitch, most normal folks might think. Thank God! Good for the NYPD!
Clearly such a triumph by cops just doesn't sit well with Times editors.
Sunday's piece claimed that the NYPD's Intelligence Division "chronicled the views and plans of people who had no apparent intention of breaking the law."
Is that so?
But how can cops know a group's intentions unless they first review its actions - and maybe chronicle them? The Post asks: was this legal? Yes, they tell us.
Okay - so why doesn't the Bloomberg administration want to release the surveillance records? It if was legal, show us. The only excuse the mayor's lawyers are giving is that people might "fixate upon and sensationalize" the information. That's no excuse. The burden of proof is on Mayor Bloomberg's administration to show that it did not go over the line when it allowed the NYPD to spy on peaceful demonstrators - demonstrators whom anyone with any modicum of judgment should have known posed no harm to anything but the mayor's ego.
If the Post is so sure that everything was on the up and up, why don't they join the Times in demanding the release of the surveillance records? Then, if the records support their contention that the spying program was fruitful and not abusive, they can flaunt the "triumph" even more.
Instead, the Post resorts to scaremongering and casual contempt for those with non-Murdoch-approved opinions - and the temerity to express those opinions in the street.
But supporters of such domestic spying programs should be cautious. It was the excesses of COINTELPRO that led to the Handschu limitations on undercover surveillance. Some complain that Handschu places undue burden on intelligence-gathering activities. If that's the case, one would think that advocates for such domestic spying programs would want to be very careful to avoid another backlash - which could ultimately result in even tighter restrictions.
So let's see the evidence. Prove that this program was justified, rather than oppressive and wasteful. Release the surveillance records, Mayor Bloomberg.
Cross-posted at The Daily Gotham. |
