Commentary: The secret police are everywhere. Do they really need the masks?
www.latimes.com
Federal authorities are increasingly hiding their identities, refusing to answer basic questions about their affiliations and deceiving the public to make arrests.

The alleged officers detaining hundreds if not thousands of people each day in California and across the country are often masked. They sometimes refuse to answer questions, including which agency they represent. They threaten force — and even use it to make arrests of bystanders — when they are challenged.

In the first video I watched, a man in an unmarked car detains another man sitting on a bus bench in Pasadena. The man presumed to be a federal agent has on a vest that simply says “Police” and a cheap black ski mask that covers every bit of his face — the kind that looks like it was purchased on Amazon and that we have previously most associated with criminals such as robbers and rapists. A few of his colleagues are in the background, some also seemingly masked.

If these men approached me or one of my kids dressed like that, I would run. I would fight. I would certainly not take his word that he was “police” and had the right to force me into his car.

In the second video, another presumed federal agent jumps out of his unmarked vehicle and draws his weapon on a civilian attempting to take a photo of the license plate.

Yes — he points his gun at a civilian who is not threatening him or committing a crime. Folks, maybe you consider it a bad idea to try to photograph what may or may not be a legitimate police operation, but it is not illegal. This alleged officer appears to have simply not liked what was happening, and threatened to shoot the person upsetting him. The man taking the photo ran away, but what would have happened had he not?

These actions by alleged authorities are examples of impunity, and it is what happens when accountability is lost.

  • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
    102·
    17 hours ago

    There’s a nice story i heard a while ago about why russian street infrastructure sucks so much.

    Russia was worried about getting invaded by the US. Invasions (permanent ones especially) happen over the land, more than over the air. So they have to move a lot of land troops (soldiers, vehicles, tanks) over a significant distance. By keeping the russian infrastructure weak, any invader would face significant logistical difficulties, where they couldn’t move troops through the country quickly.

    By the winter, the troops would get stuck, food re-supplies would be difficult, and they would starve.

    Or so i was told. Maybe it’s a myth, but i like the idea: Invaders (especially if they have more soldiers, more weapons, more power) are best fought by disabling their biggest advantage: their flexibility and speed. Disable the street infrastructure. Make it difficult for cars to pass in and out of the area.

    A nice analogy for today might be to not take on ICE agents directly (i.e. one-on-one fist fight or sth), but instead disable their mobility. Slash their car’s tires. Put obstacles in their paths. Park other cars in front of theirs while they are operating. They might be surprise-predators, but their biggest advantage is that they appear out of nowhere, abduct someone, and leave. If you can slow them down, make them stuck for an hour, bystanders / community has a chance to organize and fight back.

    Here’s what i meant by “russian street infrastructure”, in case anybody finds it interesting :) (i do)