April 28, 2005
Debunking Today's 'Oregonian' JTTF Coverage
Unto The Breach Once More, Before The Vote
How many licks does it take to provide the context The Oregonian manages somehow to miss on the Joint Terrorism Task Force debate? Let's find out.
First, there's their front page story, in which the City's alleged terrorism expert rears his head once again.
"What this basically says is that Portland is a very politically correct and very naive city that is also very paranoid," said Gary Pearlstein, a criminology professor emeritus at Portland State University who opposes leaving the task force. "I'm not sure that's going to surprise anyone, but it might surprise the City Council to know that J. Edgar Hoover is dead."
Pearlstein, whose grandfather, a labor organizer, was investigated by the FBI under suspicion of being a communist, says federal law enforcement practices have changed since the days when Hoover and his agents kept detailed files on the personal lives of political enemies.
Readers may remember Pearlstein (or Perlstein, depending on what source you believe), because we took a look inside his mind one month ago today. That look found stories on how Perlstein isn't much respected in his field, and has expressed support for investigating someone "because he was a Muslim, used a computer, transferred large sums of money".
He's also not very infomed on the subject upon which the local media asks him to pontificate, as evidenced by his contention that "law enforcement practices have changed since the days when Hoover and his agents kept detailed files on the personal lives of political enemies". As we've repeatedly pointed out -- and as has been repeatedly ignored by the traditional press in this town -- more recent history has sown the JTTF out in Denver in fact was caught spying on people for their political and/or religious activities.
We understand that this fact -- which demonstrates the dangers of JTTFs without proper oversight -- is fairly inconvenient for proponents of participating in our own JTTF without proper civilian oversight of Portland police officers, but it's really not the job of the newspaper of record to continually ignore facts that are inconvenient to their editorial position.
Ah, their editorial position. That brings us back around to the paper's abuse of its op-ed pages, which we most recently recapped in an item about the paper's publisher expressing support for the World War II internment of Japanese-Americans.
Since the debate over JTTF oversight began in earnest, in addition to the editorial board's own published comments, they have used the op-ed pages almost enirely to support their own position, rather than to reflect both sides of the debate and community conversation, which is the traditional purview of the op-ed page, a facet of American newspapers never meant to simplybe a rubber-stamp of the paper's own editorial positions.
In today's editorial, the paper mainly praises Commissioner Dan Saltzman for being a "voice of reason" on the issue. Why? Because (lo and behold) the paper today also published an op-ed piece by him.
Here are the important problems with Saltzman's piece. First, he compresses and reduces the entire debate over proper JTTF oversight to the premise that it's possible to "be concerned about the far reach of the USA Patriot Act and still support the Joint Terrorism Task Force". We don't dispute that premise, since it's a perfectly legitimate position to take.
But the problem with it is that the debate has never merely been about the USA PATRIOT Act. It's been about the very real potential for abuse of people's civil liberties, as evidenced by the previously-mentioned -- and always ignored -- case involving the JTTF in Denver.
Ignoring the evdience that such abuses are very, very possible under the JTTF system allows Saltzman to dodge the responsibility of offering up some solutions of his own to the problem of proper civilian oversight of Portland officers assigned to the JTTF. It's extraordinarily convenient for him, especially given this bit: "We must continue to work to ensure that the Patriot Act and the rest of our homeland security laws adequately safeguard the civil liberties that are at the core of our American values."
How, precisely, does he suggest we continue to work to ensure those things? If not by demanding proper oversight of our own police officers, then how? Saltzman, sadly but unsurprisingly, is entirely silent on that. As we said: How convenient for him.
Then there's the moment at which Saltzman comes dangerously close to pulling a Jack Peek and claiming rhetorical ownership of the spectre of 9/11. "It's difficult to imagine looking a New Yorker in the eye and explaining our rationale for withdrawing from the terror task force," he says. "It would feel disrespectful to even attempt to do so."
We lived in New York State, and for some of that time in New York City. We continue to know many people who live in New York City, who were there on that particular fateful day. Many of those New Yorkers we know fully support the premise that the war on terrorism cannot be used as an excuse to turn a blind eye to maintaining proper oversight of our nation's -- or our cities' -- law enforcement officials.
We repeat what we've said here before, also one month ago today: "You don't own that day. It isn't yours alone. It belongs to all of us." Stop using it as a convenient political weapon to advance your own beliefs.
Finally, for those on either side of this debate who wish to witness the vote, City Council resolves the matter of participation in the Joint Terrorism Task Force this evening at City Hall, in a session to begin at 6:30 PM.
Comments (11)
torridjoe on 28 Apr 2005
I applaud your fisk of Saltzman and The O, but given the apparent 4-1 vote, let them have their moment of dissent. Once the decision is made and the transfer of resources completed, this story will disappear entirely. Unless, I suppose, there's a terrorist attack...!
The One True b!X on 28 Apr 2005
I'd only really be willing to go along with letting them have their moment of dissent if they hadn't been abusing their op-ed page this entire time to slant the public discussion in their direction. That's not what op-ed pages are for.
wg on 28 Apr 2005
Seminal moment it is.
Jeff on 28 Apr 2005
In the Willamette Week, the Nose made a surprisingly strong argument for pulling out. I'm too apathetic to get the link, but it's at their website (wweek.com).
nader on 28 Apr 2005
An argument I've been putting forth for quite some time is that pulling out of the JTTF is the right thing to do, even if there was no indication that the FBI was engaging in inappropriate investigations.
It's a matter of internal constitutional hierarchy and dual-sovereignty. Simply put: State elected officials are responsible for state officers, Federal elected officers are responsible for federal officers. That's the end of it. If a city mayor is responsible for city police officers, then they cannot be given orders by federal officials.
If there is a real fear that the feds are not able to adequately investigate federal crimes without co-opting state law enforcement officers, then the feds need to ask Congress for a bigger budget - that shouldn't be such a hard sell to the new breed of spend-happy GOPers in Congress and the modern trend (e.g. USA PATRIOT Act) of broadening Justice Dept investigatory authority.
Jack Bog on 28 Apr 2005
"Pulling a Jack Peek." Heh.
Saltzman knows he's outnumbered on this, and on some other things. Fireman Randy and Constable Tom are ready to pounce all over him when he tries to cut their outrageous pensions, and Opie will go with the flow so long as he gets his toys to play with. So Dan gets to play right-winger for a while, knowing there's no real consequence. Except posturing for his upcoming re-election bid.
Who will run against Saltzman? Somebody credible, I hope. I assume Nick Fish is too burnt out to try again, and if it were Saltzman vs. Matt Hennessee, I'd write in Jack Peek.
Kendall Auel on 28 Apr 2005
Law enforcement does not make us safer from any criminal activity in a direct way. Instead, it makes life more dangerous for those who would harm us or otherwise break the law. So does this move by Portland make any terrorist feel safer? No way. We have struck against the terrorists by strengthening our commitment to due process, civil rights, and individual liberty. So if anything, the terrorists should feel less safe tonight and congratulations to Tom Potter for having the good sense and courage to push this forward.
Remember, the only way law enforcement works is by making a segment of the population less safe. For this reason, oversight is incredibly important, lest the danger creep into the lives of the very citizens it is designed to protect. And above all, never expect that any agency can "guarantee our safety". It could only do that by guaranteeing the danger to law breakers, and there is no way to do that in a free society. The Mayor understands this implicitly, because he has been a very dangerous guy in the past, and I thank him for that.
Randy Leonard on 28 Apr 2005
Thanks, Jack.
Jack Peek on 28 Apr 2005
"investigating someone "because he was a Muslim, used a computer, transferred large sums of money".POSTED ON PDXCOMMUNIQUE
Follow the money:
An Internet web site frequented by Islamic terrorists and terrorist sympathizers is asking for donations to further the cause of jihad - after all, it takes money to fund terrorists' activities. Laura Mansfield, associate Director of the Northeast Intelligence Network and founder of Strategic Arabic Translations (link below), found the call for funds yesterday. The post requests that funds be sent to the Arab Bank in Gaza for use in jihad efforts throughout the "Islamic Ummah".
The Northeast Intelligence Network has notified federal authorities that donations are reportedly being accepted at:
The Arab Bank
Palestine, Gaza
Under Account number: 045821
The message asks all good Muslims to contribute what they can from their salaries to assist the efforts of the Mujahjideen in "Palestine" for armed struggle. "For Allah above said: 'fight hard in Allah's name with your money and your work." Citing the Qu'ran, Surah: The Repentence, Verse 41. "Each of us must exert ourselves to give what we can so that we can encourage our brothers to give what they do." Those who can donate anything from their money, and who can sacrifice anything for this cause, will be recorded in the account of Allah, the Exalted, the Majestic.
"Your support is the support of Islam and of Muslims"
FOLLOW THE MONEY!!!
Then there's the moment at which Saltzman comes dangerously close to pulling a Jack Peek and claiming rhetorical ownership of the spectre of 9/11. "It's difficult to imagine looking a New Yorker in the eye and explaining our rationale for withdrawing from the terror task force," he says. "It would feel disrespectful to even attempt to do so."
Your all so cowardly it "sucks!"
Ask a NYC FIREMEN , not a cardcaring member of "Moveon.org!"
Ask a relative of anyone who worked on the 99th floor and doesn't know if they burned to death or jumped.
I dispise Saltzman as I do Leonard for the same reason...both flat lied when they said "if elected ...yada yada yada..and the "criminally insane grouphome is still parked next to a SE PDX grade school with as many as 200 plus more,"ALL DRESSED UP, AN NO PLACE TO GO", as Caldwell's paper writes.
I called Dans office today, ...I THANKED HIM!
In this town, he maybe playing a role, but maybe Dan is sick of the BS, when lives really are on the line.
Follow the money...bank accounts, right here, were tracked overseas to the "badguys", B!x never mentions a convicted an sentenced terror cell member in the mayors office, he never mentions the planning by the "six" or seven, to pull a school or church shooting. As long as his place wasn't targeted..."WHATEVER" ....WHO CARES!
Bogdanski.....well what can I say, He wants someone other then he to do his fighting for him, maybe that's why he left Buckman. The "neighbohood" was getting a little rough,(AND IT WILL GET WORSE!
Dan stood up...he, as Sen Smith will get publically nailed, as when Smith said what was, and is getting known, about a place of "higher learning" right in our own backyard.
Since B!X will not run for office, nor Bog,(really easy to comment behind a computor screen),some of us have at least tried to change the dead end street we are on.
A lady I know who worked in Lisa Naito's office warned me years ago..that the "numbers" were stacked against what I have fought for...DAMMIT,I wish I had listened. So, it will not be 3000 dead, it maybe 30,000 or more, it maybe like Florida and dead kids, before idiot lawmakers listen to the real people impacted, and not the ACLU, before we fix once an for all what is killing us, as for sure as we are being lined up against a wall.
lisa on 29 Apr 2005
The whole JTTF thing IS about terrorism--- the President of the United States' terrorizing of US, keeping our minds off the fact that our country is going bankrupt, even making freekin creepy ol' Stickel feel safe in suggesting we "round em all up."
So, to the two families my carpool sees three mornings a week, dropping off their kids to school in inner Southeast Portland in HUMVEES -- TELL ME WHERE THE MONEY GOES THAT YOU SPEND ON GAS EVERY WEEK. Follow THAT money for me, Peekster.
Let me help you: Saudi Arabia produces more crude oil than any other single nation on earth, and the United States uses more than any other nation on earth.
Are you with me? Osama bin Laden, the super-rich son of one of Saudi Arabia's wealthiest families. Saudi Royal Family: implicated repeatedly in giving material aid and protection to terrorist groups (including Al Qaida -- but have we bombed THEM yet?). So, all the drivers with monstro-vehicles as big as apartment buildings, with little American flag decals on the bumper.....JTTF Task Force, take them away! They're giving money to terrorists! L
Jack Peek on 29 Apr 2005
I drive a GEO METRO...SCREW..---