Chicago Preparing For Protests At G8 And NATO Summits
The city of Chicago, at the behest of Mayor Rahm Emanuel, has taken rigorous steps to ensure enforcement of laws in anticipation of protests during the G8 and NATO summits that will take place in Chicago during May. But protesters are showing little fear in response.
The Mayor now has the ability to permanently install surveillance equipment, deputize federal law enforcement officers from the FBI, ATF, DOJ, as well as state and county police, and even hire private contractors for independent security thanks to a new ordinance that passed the City Council in mid-January.
“I think the city and the mayor have created a circumstance that is unnecessary,” said Ed Yohnka, the director of communications for the Illinois ACLU on Friday.
He said it would have been a better idea for the city to converse about the notion of free expression and encourage it.
“I think what is vexing and is troubling is that there was this sort of hysteria that was built around this, that caused people to overreact and the administration contributed to that with these 'get tough' ordinances,” said Yohnka.
Emanual said in a press release after the ordinance granting him greater security powers was passed, “Working collaboratively with our federal partners, we will provide public safety services for residents and visitors while fulfilling our obligation to protect the public and enforce the laws of the city.”
Meanwhile, AdBusters, the anti-consumerist magazine that put out the call to Occupy Wall Street, has recently released a tactical briefing asking their supporters to Occupy Chicago on May 1. They’re calling it the “Showdown in Chicago” and calling for over 50,000 people to attend.
“This time around we’re not going to put up with the kind of police repression that happened during the Democratic National Convention protests in Chicago, 1968 … nor will we abide by any phony restrictions the City of Chicago may want to impose on our first amendment rights,” States AdBusters’ “tactical briefing.”
Protesters and journalists that have been covering the movement were discussing the call to Occupy Chicago at a crowded sandwich shop in Washington DC on Wednesday.
Sam Jewler, an Occupy DC media group member, called Emanuel a fascist in the way that he’s handled Occupy Chicago. In October, police arrested over 300 protesters for attempting to establish a camp at Grant Park. Despite this, Jeweler said protesters wouldn’t be deterred.
“I think it will be bigger than Occupy Congress,” said Jewler, in reference to the DC gathering on January 17 that attracted over 1,000 Occupy protesters.
Michael Patterson, a particularly vociferous DC protester, said “This will be our Saratoga.” He emphasized the importance of protesting a gathering of the leaders of the most powerful governments and most powerful military alliance in the world.
Luke Rudkowski, a videographer that has gained a following as an activist, said he’d be heading to Chicago to film the protests. Rudkowski has covered and participated in other protests around the world. In 2009, he was in Pittsburgh for the G20 conference of finance ministers and central bank governors.
“I can’t even tell you the respect I lost for humanity there,” said Rudkowski. He said he was pepper-sprayed, beaten and held for half a day shackled in a bus with other protesters. His videos on YouTube from the event show officers using an LRAD sound cannon and him and others being quickly surrounded by police while protesting in a park.
Journalists coming to cover the protests also have to deal with an outdated Illinois law that states it’s a felony to audiotape police activity on public streets or in public parks.
Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick wrote a long article about the law. She noted that Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy told a panel at Loyola University that he endorses video and audio recording of police.
“There’s no arguments when you can look at a videotape and see what happened.” Said McCarthy at the panel.
Tim Pool, a livestream journalist that gained notoriety during Occupy Wall Street, said he will be streaming the protests in Chicago.
“There’s going to be cameras everywhere,” said Pool, who didn’t worry about being singled out by police.
However, Occupy Chicago livestreamer Keilah Becker said she had a run-in with police over the law on Jan. 29. She said she was streaming an arrest during a march when a female police officer came behind her and took her phone. Becker said the officer cancelled her video and didn’t save it to the UStream servers. When the officer asked her what she was doing, Becker told her she was recording what happened around her.
“[The officer] told me I was talking myself into a felony charge,” said Becker. Although eventually the officer relented and gave the phone back, said Becker.
When told of this incident, Yonkah said, “The unfortunate thing is that as of this moment the Illinois law that makes it a felony to audiotape police activity is still in place.”
Questions sent to the Chicago Police regarding the enforcement of this law and the plan for policing the protest were not returned.
However, with the city’s strong stance against Occupy Chicago in October and the new powers granted to the Mayor, it would seem that police appear ready for a showdown with protesters in May.
This aught to be a regular laugh riot. Emphasis on the riot.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Especially for the strange things some folks take pleasure and find humor in.
This can be a very sick world we live in.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
do you?
Hasa Diga Eebowai
I thought you were just some internet jockey drooling in auto-erotic anticipation at the uproarious violence you hope to see inflicted on nonviolent foreigners. Instead, you were a professor making an uber-intellectual reference to Sophocles who's connection is simply unfathomable to lesser minds.
Oops. My mistake. That's so "awesome."
Corruption favors the wealthy.
I thought you were just some mindless knee-jerk holier-than-thou internet jockey drooling over the prospect of seeing the inevitable confrontations that this little festival must bring. Care to share a drool bucket?
Hasa Diga Eebowai
These "inevitable confrontations" you find so funny and entertaining will be happening in my back yard. Those clubs, and sprays, and horses and other implements of your cop porn will be aimed at me and other Chicagoans.
So no, asshole, I'm not "drooling over the prospect." Of course, even were this not going to happen in my home town, there's no way I'd ever consider such sick anticipatory celebration. A festival, huh? Just what kind of authoritarian pervert considers the prospect of assaults on nonviolent protestors a "festival"?
Canada, you can keep this POS. Of course, we've little doubt he'll continue to keep his twisted pleasures hidden in public. It's only anonymously on the internet where such cowardly depravity is given free rein.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
So if I've got this clear you have some strange right to attribute motivations to me that I don't have in return. And, of course, you also uniquely have the right to free speech and will defend to the death the right of anyone who agrees with you to possess that right as well. That's a very Republican characteristic. If your constant misrepresentation of the Democratic party was not sufficient evidence of your true motivation this surely is.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to speak without criticism.
It never did.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
is it Fiver? Generally you and Ixnay always phrase your "arguments", if that's what you what to call them, to suggest that I, as a scurrilous foreigner, have no right to speak at all. You use this technique on just about everyone you disagree with. Everyone else is a troll aren't they? I would have thought by now that you would realize that I don't give in to intimidation. Feel free to indulge in your name calling. It bothers me not at all.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Nor would I ever want to so phrase it. I'm glad you continuously come here to parrot the American corporate media's talking points. Few trolls have such endurance or lack of shame.
We can consistently count on your fearless imitation of a right wing talking head even when, like now, such imitations would cause most people to slink away in disgrace. You're a useful and reliable foil, Peter.
Of course, you have every right to your speech. And of course, "though I disagree with everything you say, I will defend to the death your right to say it." But please don't pretend that this demands some sort of respect for the content of what you say - especially now when you're getting your hateful glee on at the prospect of lefties being beaten by your television heroes.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
I, as a scurrilous foreigner, have no right to speak at all.
Not fiver or ixnay ever say such to me (another foreigner). Curious.
far left loon >.<
"Scurrilous."
And I think we'd have to go with "scurrilous foreigner expatriate" wouldn't we? ;)
Corruption favors the wealthy.
...that you have a right to block the entrance to an abortion clinic or occupy the floor of a meeting for which you aren't credentialed by the elected government of your country, in the same way that you can legally advocate for the legalization of heroin but can't legally possess it. There's a big difference between speech and actions.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
given that your response is laughter
for a small business owner. :) I guess we should be honored that you take so much time out of your busy schedule to let us stupid hippies know how futile and counterproductive street protests really are.
What would a C&L post about citizen activism be without a plethora of Peter G comments reminding us of our stupidity?
I guess we deserve our tasering, tear gas, and dog cages ... I mean free speech zones.
But at least you have our back on the culture wars, right?
the tactics proposed by Adbusters are pretty stupid and utterly pointless. They will defend to the death their imaginary right to occupy the floor of the G8 conference, to buttonhole the elected leaders (you know, the people who actually have some proof they represent others) and personally tell them what they think of them. Naturally, because they have no such right, there will be lines of of police officers to prevent them from doing any such thing. Confrontations will occur when screaming idiots decide that the police must stand as the surrogates for the people they imagine they have the right to personally scream at. Tempers will rise. Shit will happen. Things will be broken, including almost certainly some heads. Statements will be issued attributing all violence to agent provocateurs. In other words the usual. As predictable as I said above, as a Greek Tragedy. What else could one expect from a movement that declares itself leaderless than a mob?
Hasa Diga Eebowai
way too much free time for a supposed business owner then?
CTHULHU 2012 "Why vote for a lesser evil?"
is free to spend as I wish. I do not generally spend a lot of it thinking up stupid and ineffective ways to try to intimidate others into silence. You are a very slow learner.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
seeming to have way too much free time for a supposed business owner then?
Thanks, you didn't have to...
CTHULHU 2012 "Why vote for a lesser evil?"
We're not supposed to protest anything, according to you. We're just supposed to keep engaging in these jolly elections every two years and stand merrily by while Democrats enact hitherto Republican policies.
The right of protest is unquestioned and you will have a very hard time finding a statement I have made that denies that. Because none exist. Do I think protester's rights abnegate everyone else's rights? No I do not. Because they don't.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
art form so that you can criticize protesters and glitter throwers, etc., while still maintaining your abstract support for protest.
You are like the poll respondents who claim to agree with the occupy movement but abhor their tactics. "We want change, but we hate anyone who actually tries to effect change."
40 years ago, John Lennon and Jimi Hendrix were radical threats to the establishment. Today, the establishment is falling all over itself to use John Lennon and Jimi Hendrix songs for their ads. "Thanks, fellas, for doing what we hated back when you were doing it. Here's a postage stamp for you."
Hendrix and Lennon? They were considered radical threats by whom? Best I remember Lennon pissed of some folks with his remarks comparing th popularity of the Beatles to Jesus. But threats? Come on.
Sorry, there I go again parsing language. Only I call it pointing out inaccuracies in comments and posts that are so obvious only drooling ideologues with fifty year old conspiracy fantasies fail to notice the errors as such and get mad when they are pointed out.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
The FBI for example. At least that the case here on planet Earth, your mileage may vary on your planet though.
CTHULHU 2012 "Why vote for a lesser evil?"
the fbi amassed a 400-page file on lennon and nixon attempted to deport him because he compared the beatles to jesus
and your rationale for why the fbi targeted hendrix? because his guitar was too loud?
of Lennon's 10-year immigration struggle? Or, as Ixnay points out below, the hours and hours of tapes that the FBI made, some of which came from bugs within Lennon's house?
I was on planet reality. What planet were you on?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/sep/23/arts...
Being on Nixon's shit list and under FBI scrutiny was hardly evidence of being an establishment threat. Just a prominent person and threat to Nixon was enough to qualify you. His problems with the INS lasted a little over three, not ten years.
Didn't Jimmy Carter invite Lennon to his inauguration?
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
Nutopia, I thought you lived there.
(just some fun, ricky, not to worry)
far left loon >.<
whose own language makes them wave little white flags
like automatons.
But thanks for your continuing efforts to prove you ignore me.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
Hell, being part of the establishment got you on the express train to the top of Nixon's and Hoover's lists, especially Hoover's- the guy was a master of extortion.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
but now that there's a memorial to him on the national mall, i guess we should strike him off the list of real revolutionaries
Hey, he's a capitalist business owner. Underlings do the lifting.
bour·geoi·sie [br waa z]
n
1. exploitative middle class: the social class that, according to Marxist theory, owns the means of producing wealth and exploits the working class
2. middle-class people: affluent middle-class people characterized as conventional, conservative, or materialistic in outlook
I didn't say it. Quoting Marx, "according to Marxist theory"
far left loon >.<
?
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
? is right
(what's your point)
far left loon >.<
...on your hands, too. A lot more than I have, and about as much as Peter has.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
Andy, we've been through this before. If you will recall my time zone is 14 hours different from yours and I'm a very early riser (4 am today).
far left loon >.<
I'm at work now, but it's a break in my schedule. I figured you might like if I report in, to you, now and then. I just finished a class. Next one starts in about 45 minutes.
far left loon >.<
ol' Jedidiah G., on the dock with Sam Adams and John Hancock saying "tossing tea in the harbor is stupid and utterly pointless. You're just going to anger King George, you know, the monarch who actually has some proof he rules over you. The British East India Company is just doing its business as mandated by the Crown."
on the same mission, bravely dressed as Indians so they'll get the blame, with a fallback story about it all being agent provocateurs when the shit goes awry.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
They didn't dress up as indians so that the indians would "get the blame." They did it in order to remain inconspicuous to the guards. Indeed, the tea dumpers didn't evade blame. There was a price on John Hancock's head for many years to come.
“There, I guess King George will be able to read that." upon signing American Declaration of Independence?
Corruption favors the wealthy.
.
master deceiver of otherwise brilliant progressives has done gone and made us buy insurance from Mr. Hancock's descendants.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
He was wanted by the Brits for smuggling.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
IIRC, Peter, you happened to agreed with the Tea Party because it was "the rightish thing to do." Need I do a C&L site search?
far left loon >.<
you know, the people who actually have some proof they represent others
They shouldn't beat the people they claim to represent.
far left loon >.<
when militarized police use excessive, brutal force on unarmed civilians ... wouldn't it be a gut-buster if, instead of just bleeding and being hauled away, someone actually died?
People can protest all they want as long as they do it where the ruling elite are not bothered, disturbed, inconvenienced or any other way made to feel uncomfortable.
.. like law-abiding citizens.
When will government of the people, by the politicians, for the corporations perish from this Earth?
Not soon enough!
Oh, man, this is going to be sweet. Rahm is finally going to get to test out all that surplus military junk our glorious police departments have been receiving from the Feds on the toxic, tent-peeing hippies.
Extra bonus points if the Occupy anarchists and puppy beaters tip over any beloved Chicago landmarks, models of Chicago landmarks, or enter public buildings, but only if they get it on film that can be shown in a loop on the networks.
Wonder if they will hire Blackwater, er Xe, no wait, now it's Acadami. Tax dollars at work.
Hire the private contractors to do what? I'm guessing to start up the violence that will be necessary for the crackdown to begin.
on the streets of chicago
http://illinoiscrimecommission.com/news/conte...
i wonder if this is part of obama's jobs for veterans plan
Chicago Militarizes for G8/NATO Summits
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VorxvetHgrQ
But Chicago's just the beginning.
Tampa and Charlotte are next.
RNC/DNC Cities Will be Police States
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24FnMMlISd0
When will government of the people, by the politicians, for the corporations perish from this Earth?
Not soon enough!
Not the type of job creation we hoped for.
Protesting and civil disobidience, but just ONCE, G8 protestors, can we do it without the usual violent, rioting assholes? The ones who seem to think that a protest march is an excuse for violence?
"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing." -- Robert E. Howard
Emanuel will react like Mayor Daley did and there will be blood-splatter broadcast worldwide. Romney will then pivot towards "law and order", paint the Democrats as weak, and a terrified nation will go all in on a Republican landslide. I wonder whether this has crossed Emanuel's mind yet.
But all is not lost! If it were to happen this way, it would bring about the permanent death of the Democratic party that might then make way for something else to take its place. What? I don't know. We'd have to wait and see.
You know these protests will always be met now with horrendous governmental response. It is the new standard. It seems that the protests have to take a new form---something that cannot be interpreted as civil disobedience but maybe just withdrawal from a rotted system. Stop all interactions from anything construed as supportive of SOPA, War, NDAA, etc. It's gonna be hard for the swat team to turn on their sound blasters and yell, " you must use your debit card now" "you must post on FACEBOOK now" or face nonlethal force.
Going to mass demonstrations is just crazy. Half the crowd is probably informers or put there to cause trouble. The weapons you are facing from the police make 1968 Chicago look like a water fight.
Change the tactics. They are not going to change their plans---their plan really was Brave New World all the time. Obama gave us Rahm Emmanuel and he is going to appear as the new savior once more as he takes on the Darth Romney or the other one.
bys1955
do a more Ghandi like action.
Silence can be golden. I think more people would be inclined to join if they knew that all everyone would be doing would be holding simple signs with a simple message.
We need to re-think our actions. The thought of throngs of riot police on horseback with all their militaristic gear on against thousands of silent protesters sends a more powerful message than the usual screaming and yelling and sometimes anarchic violence that occurs.
"The US has an army of 90,000 soldiers in Afghanistan and is spending $100bn a year, but has still been unable to defeat 20,000-25,000 Taliban who receive no pay at all." - Patrick Cockburn
1) not everyone who shows up is peaceful
2) even if everyone who shows up is peaceful the police start a riot - it's their job - cuz then the press can decry the violence and marginalize the protest ..
When will government of the people, by the politicians, for the corporations perish from this Earth?
Not soon enough!
a theme song for this:
Songs for Beginners
Some forty years ago
"security" during the g8 ... they'll get $20-30 per hour and the possibility of permanent, full-time employment (just in case we chicagoans get long-term uppity), and they won't be hampered by any pesky police policies and procedures
haditha ... chicago ... what's the diff? just a bunch of civilians getting in the way of corporate interests
http://illinoiscrimecommission.com/news/conte...
just a bunch of civilians getting in the way of corporate interests.
a very insightful comment, there is no difference. here/there, samey, samey. internal colonization, ghettos, displacement camps can't be far behind.
The mentality that tolerates authoritarian crackdowns on the people's right to assemble began with the "freedom cages" (or whatever they were called) that GW Bush used to incarcerate American citizens while he was in the neighborhood.
What happened to the democratic party, that such things are allowed to happen in the United States?
it was bought by multinational corporations ... what differences they maintain between themselves and republicans are merely intended to mollify the more progressive and/or democratic-minded masses
It actually began, oh, about 1740 or so (if not earlier) here in North America. And it ebbs and wains throughout the next 250 years. Pull out your copy of Zinn and reference "Bacon's", "Shay's" "Pinkerton's", IWW, Dubois, etc, etc, ad nauseam.
Zinn's "People's History of United States"
Online -
http://www.historyisaweapon.com/zinnapeoplesh...
When will government of the people, by the politicians, for the corporations perish from this Earth?
Not soon enough!
I don't recall the democratic party's response to Bacon's Rebellion, Pocatello. Refresh my memory.
reduces to the idea that because the Chevy Volt didn't exist until a couple of years ago.... there where no Chevy's before then?
OK....good argument
might also want check on that whole "blood of tyrants" thing the teabirchers like so much...Jefferson on Shay's.
Then there's Washington:
And Madison:
If there is a cancer in the Occupy Movement, it can hopefully be removed in time to save it.
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_cance...
Embrace diversity
Seig heil!
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
Well, one out of three ain't bad for a blogger. The Mayor has no power to install any surveillance equipment of deputize the feds thanks to the new ordinance. That the author did not know on its face the notion of a Mayor being granted the authority to deputize any law enforcement personnel from any federal agency was absurd on its face is a sad comment on this blog. He was given new short term contracting authority for all manner of services related to the event.
I am glad we have Mr. Jewler, self appointed spokesmodel of #Occupy Commenting on events which happened half a continent away, and comparing the Jewish Mayor of a faraway city to fascists. It is good to see Mr. Jewler is in a crowded sandwich shop after calling off his hunger strike to obatin DC statehood at the request of his mom and dad. Has he moved back in with them now that his tent in the park is no longer available?
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
Here's the three things that you said I got wrong, according to the municipal code of Chicago:
http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Illinois/chicago_il/title2citygovernmentandadministration/chapter2-84departmentofpolice?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:chicago_il$anc=JD_2-84-053
In addition to any other authority provided in this Code, the superintendent of police shall have the authority to enter into agreements to form law enforcement task forces, and other cooperative agreements, with the following law enforcement agencies: United States Drug Enforcement Administration; Federal Bureau of Investigation; Illinois Department of State Police; Illinois Attorney General; United States Department of Justice; United States Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms; State’s Attorney of Cook County; and other law enforcement agencies determined by the superintendent of police to be necessary for the fulfillment of law enforcement functions. The superintendent is also authorized to enter into agreements with public or private entities concerning placement, installation, maintenance or use of video, audio, telecommunications or other similar equipment. The location of any camera or antenna permanently installed pursuant to any such agreement shall be determined pursuant to joint review and approval with the executive director of emergency management and communications. Agreements entered into pursuant to this section shall be subject to approval by the corporation counsel as to form and legality. Such agreements may contain provisions to indemnify or hold harmless participating agencies and their personnel in connection with the purposes of the task force or other agreement. The agreements may not authorize the deployment of city personnel or use of city equipment unless the city council has duly appropriated funds for such personnel and equipment. The superintendent of police shall notify the chairman of the city council committee on police and fire with respect to multi-jurisdictional agreements entered into in accordance with this section.
If you'd like even more information about the changes the ordinance made read this column by the head of the political science department at the University of Chicago in the Guardian - http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/jan/19/outlawing-dissent-rahm-emanuel-new-regime
Neither you nor the guy you say is head of the Political Science Department at the University of Chicago apparently know how yto read existing law or proposed laws (or ordinances as is the case with Municipal codes).
The link in your first comment takes you to the City of Chicago's code as it existed prior to the changes made in January. You chose to highlight language that was in code before Rahm Emmanuel was even elected. Notice at the bottom of the section you quote in the source to which you link is a date which tells you when that section was last amended. What is the date Andrew? Please tell your readers so I don't have to. The authority to enter into agreements with federal and state law enforcement agencies and place surveilance cameras existed already.
Now the good professor thinks he knows what has changed. He doesn't. I read his column before writing my comment. He links to a draft ordinance from December, which was changed by the time his column was posted. That draft. as is the case with most proposed laws and ordinances, gives even the casual reader the ability to know what powers are new or changed because the NEW LANGUAGE IS UNDERLINED. The only new language is the power to deputize other law enforcement officials. All the other power prexisted this. But even then you and the professor get it wrong.
Let's read what you said in this post: "The Mayor now has the ability to...." Read the language. I believe the power and ability are conferred on the "superintendent of police" not the Mayor. And any political science professor who argues that a local ordinance can ever give a local official, be it the Mayor or police superintendent, the power to "deputize" law enforcement officials from superior political jurisdictions, from Cook County, the State of Illinois, or the United States, needs to take high school civics again. The ordinance clearly intends to give the police superintendent the authority to deputize local law enforcement agents from outside Chicago to act with the authority of a Chicago police officer if brought into the city during these events as supplements to the Chicago PD. You probably could have found that out by contacting someone in Chicago instead of reading an online version of a British paper and talking to #Occupy spokespersons in crowded DC sandwich shops.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
"What is the date Andrew?", he asked insouciantly. Hearing no response, he went to the link Andrew conveniently provided to the online publication of Chicago ordinances. There he found the exact wording posted by Andrew, framed by two lines which Andrew ommitted. The ommitted lines are highlighted.
2-84-053 Authority to enter into task force agreements.
In addition to any other authority provided in this Code, the superintendent of police shall have the authority to enter into agreements to form law enforcement task forces, and other cooperative agreements, with the following law enforcement agencies: United States Drug Enforcement Administration; Federal Bureau of Investigation; Illinois Department of State Police; Illinois Attorney General; United States Department of Justice; United States Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms; State’s Attorney of Cook County; and other law enforcement agencies determined by the superintendent of police to be necessary for the fulfillment of law enforcement functions. The superintendent is also authorized to enter into agreements with public or private entities concerning placement, installation, maintenance or use of video, audio, telecommunications or other similar equipment. The location of any camera or antenna permanently installed pursuant to any such agreement shall be determined pursuant to joint review and approval with the executive director of emergency management and communications. Agreements entered into pursuant to this section shall be subject to approval by the corporation counsel as to form and legality. Such agreements may contain provisions to indemnify or hold harmless participating agencies and their personnel in connection with the purposes of the task force or other agreement. The agreements may not authorize the deployment of city personnel or use of city equipment unless the city council has duly appropriated funds for such personnel and equipment. The superintendent of police shall notify the chairman of the city council committee on police and fire with respect to multi-jurisdictional agreements entered into in accordance with this section.
(Added Coun. J. 1-14-98, p. 60005; Amend Coun. J. 9-5-07, p. 6879, § 2)
The first highlighted line is merely the official section number and title. The second, in parenthesis, is not law, it is a statement of when the law was created and amended. Notice this section has been on the books for fourteen years, since January 14, 1998. It was amended September 5, 2007. The other information tells you where in the Chicago City Council Journal you can find the official record of this taking place. And in between damned if it does not give the authority to the superintendent of police, not the Mayor.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
Thank you. The ordinance, as passed, gives Rahm the ability to coordinate federal police entities with Chicago police as well as install surveillance equipment and possibly hire independent contractors, he does give orders to and oversee the actions of the superintendent of police, right? You're technically right that the power is given directly to the superintendent, but in a back door way it's also given to the mayor. The Mayor appoints the superintendent. The line, as passed, which was changed as part of the ordinance SO-2011-9473 states "the superintendent of police shall have the authority to enter into agreements to form law enforcement task forces, agreements to deputize certified law enforcement personnel."
Here's what CBS News wrote, they got it all wrong also, right?:
existing ordinance prior to January, 2012 amendments. I began my first comment with what I learned by reading the link provided by your professor/columnist. The authority granted to the superintendent of police to enter into agreements with other law enforcement agencies existed prior to Rahm Emanuel becoming Mayor. So did the authority to develop, place and operate surveillance equipment. It is not a "draconian new power" ascribed by your erroneous professor, either for the Mayor or his superintendent of police. If it is draconian, it has been for quite a while.
You ask if CBS got it wrong? Sort of. They really don't say whether the ACLU and "protesters and other critics" have their facts straight. CBS just reports those folks have complaints. No surprise to me and it should not be to a blog which calls itself Crooks and Liars and features regular criticism of our errant engines of the press. The problem you have here, and others have as well, is you seem willing to hold them up as authorities when their coverage agrees with the viewpoint you are expressing when you choose to cite them. Some people who cite such sources then turn around and attack them mercilessly when a differing view is expressed and errors can be found.
I have no sympathy with how Chicago has handled issues related to free speech and assembly.
I just have a bigger problem when those criticizing others do so with such egregious disregard for facts. I think Rahm himself once had a colorful description of such actions.
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
Comments are restricted to registered users only.
Login - Register