As many of you might be aware, Elliott Madison, a 41-year old social worker, is under grand jury investigation, and facing felony charges for violating the Federal Riot Act that could land him up to fifteen years in prison. I would like to submit my perspective, since Elliott is a good friend of mine. He was charged with violating his constitutional right to protest. He works with the Tin Can Group, a collective of volunteers who disseminate sundry information relevant to the protest. Elliott was scanning police radio frequencies – monitoring police communications is legal and publically available –at last week’s G20 summit held in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. In turn, he used his cell phone to tweet protesters of police movements to help avoid police confrontation, and to counter the U.S. government’s strategy of preventing Americans in exercising their right to freely remonstrate against the policies of their government.
Here is a link to Elliott's tweets before his "capture." (Courtesy of Twitter) What we know -- from my own experience, those of fellow activists, and certainly a number of Kossacks -- it’s common practice for government forces to go out of their way to restrict protester movements. Their purpose is to disrupt and disperse the crowd – that is to eviscerate a lawful gathering of citizens. A further strategy is to encircle protestors so as to ensure they wind up in places where police, and in this case the military, can conjure an excuse to engage in arrests. They use harsh tactics too: horses, sound trucks, police-wielding batons, and undercover faux-protesters encouraging illegal activities: these actions take place in public spaces far from the scene where the "Masters of the Universe" hold their event, which shows that more than protection of G20 members is involved. Instead, their purpose is to impede and prevent the demonstration – which happens to be a breach of the constitution.
Elliott was working out of a motel room legally booked under his name. Not long after the demonstration began, police entered his motel room, guns drawn, and kept Elliott and his friend handcuffed for several hours until handed a list of charges under seal. The following week the Joint Terrorism Task Force, including the FBI, busted into Elliott’s and his wife’s home brandishing some 50 guns, held his family and roommates in handcuffs for hours while removing almost all of their possessions. They took his computer, the two political books he had written, much of his library, posters, and anything politically related. The FBI even removed a list of a hundred mentally ill clients with whom he works.
I noticed a couple of instances where Elliott was labeled a Kook because he happens to be an anarchist. I find such ad-hominem attacks anti-intellectual, offensive, and politically motivated. I have a significant issue with liberals who condemn anarchists as out of the meainstream, as if to harbor such views should make one suspicious instead of protective. As an aside, I submit that anarchism fits nicely within the mainstream American tradition. Elliott is a down-to-earth and extremely hard-working person. He is a leader in his field, highly respected in his place of work for his knowledge, smarts, and the generosity he shows toward his clients to enable them to become productive members of society. Incidentally, he traveled from New York to New Orleans to help out victim of Hurricane Katrina.
Under constitutional law - of course, much post-9/11 legislation is rife with illegality – Elliott conducted himself fully legally. According to his counsel, Martin Stolar, the criminal case against Elliott Madison now sitting in front of the grand jury is constitutionally unprecedented.
My first links go to the utterly inane and the stupid, as well as, the anti-First Amendment New York Times. The inane and stupid: Should Phone Radar-Detecting Apps Be Illegal?
Colin Moynihan's anti-First Amendment article: Arrest Puts Focus on Protesters’ Texting - Especially noticeable in this article is the lack of reference to the number of individuals who had broken window(s), as compared to the thousands of peaceful marchers. The numbers engaged in non-lethal violence is exaggerated by the same police who themselves commit unnecessary violence, yet whose opinions are dutifully facsimiled by Times reporters. (A protester informed me that a single window had been broken) By its refusal to qualify its statement, the NYT implicitly labels all protesters as violent. One would think it admirable that only a handful of individuals out of thousands had engaged in non-lethal violence under the particular circumstances in which they are found. Protestors are cowed, intimated, forcefully confronted, and arrested without reason; and all committed illegally. It is admirable that so many can peacefully put up when confronted with violations of Article III of the Bill of Rights: "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances": Police actions which flagrantly violate the constitution only serve to highlight the authoritarian nature of our government.
The NYT, unfortunately as a paper of import, supports unconstitutional activities to the extreme. Sure, this is not news in of itself, but this case is vital because it deals with a new phenomenon - the internment of political dissidents for expressing their views through the use of unprecdented legal claims. Who will be next? This is a slimy, invidious piece by Colin Moynihan, who should be ashamed to call himself an American! The title Arrest Puts Focus on Protesters’ Texting reads more like Moynihan's own focus on protesters' unreasonableness in their claim to march.
Kudos to Michelle Nichols from Reuters UK, on her piece comparing American policy to those of Iran and China. Experts See Double Standard in U.S. Twitter Arrest.
More constitutionally minded journalists:
Huffington Post: Criminalizing Twitter
The Guardian: Elliott Madison Accused of Using Twitter to Tweet Police Actions at G-20
CNN: Twitter Anarchist Raided Under anti-Riot Law
The Huffington Post: Elliott Madison Accused of Using Twitter to Tweet Police Actions At G-20.