Anthony Zurcher reports on the opportunistic “blame the protests” rhetoric over the murders of the two New York cops.
At the centre of the storm is New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, who has been heralded as a populist torch-bearer since his election in November 2013.
The mayor had previously expressed solidarity with protesters who had taken to the streets after a police officer was not indicted for the death of Eric Garner.
And he had publicly wondered if his biracial son was safe from police – rhetoric some are now arguing helped to create an environment that encourages violence against police.
Yes, and? Is protesting the killing of Eric Garner and the non-indictment of his killers so obviously terrible? Not to me.
Patrick Lynch of the PBA said what he said. Pataki said what he said. The cops turned their backs on De Blasio.
On Sunday night some police officers turned their backs on the mayor in silent protest as he walked to a press conference. It was a gesture that Mike Lupica of the New York Daily News says shows the gravity of the crisis.
“The mayor has to understand that if he does not step up and step forward now and admit mistakes he has made with the NYPD because of his obsession with playing to his base, then the image of those cops turning their backs on him will be a part of his permanent record,” he writes.
Well the image of Eric Garner lying on the pavement will be a part of the NYPD’s permanent record, too. Who is more in the wrong? It’s not clear to me that it’s De Blasio.
Mr de Blasio “lit the fuse” that led to the shootings, writes the New York Post’s Michael Goodwin.
“Again and again, he depicted the great and gallant NYPD as an occupying army of racist brutes,” he writes.
Gallant shmallant.
Many of them may be terrific, but some of them clearly are not. We are allowed to say that. The police have a job to do; they’re not our bosses or our monarchs or our priests; we’re not required to pay them unconditional homage. We are allowed to say they did a bad thing in any particular case.
A mayor is either with the police or against them, he says. “That fact is nowhere to be found in the progressive playbook, which sees everything through race and class,” he continues. “But it is how the real world works.”
Former New York City Police Commissioner Howard Safir, writing for Time magazine, says there currently exists “an atmosphere of permissiveness and anti-police rhetoric unlike any that I have seen in 45 years in law enforcement”.
He warns that if police aren’t supported it could lead to a return to a time in New York City when “gangs controlled the streets” and car theft and murders were rampant.
I tell you this crap is fascist. They don’t seem to realize it, but it is. This hero-worship of the people with guns is the essence of fascism, even more so than racism.
Now to hear from the other point of view.
“There is a yawning gap between the kind of reforms demanded by De Blasio and the protesters, and open hostility to police,” writes the New Republic’s Claire Groden. “Hundreds of deaths caused by police officers have gone unreported in federal statistics since 2007. Overly aggressive policing – such as the stop-and-frisk policies that de Blasio made a point of reforming – victimises minorities across the country.”
Activist and former basketball star Kareem Abdul-Jabaar calls the recent rhetoric a cynical ploy.
“This shrill cry of ‘policism’ (a form of reverse racism) by Pataki and the police unions is a hollow and false whine born of financial self-interest (unions) or party politics (Republican Pataki besmirching Democrat De Blasio) rather than social justice,” he writes in Time magazine. “These tragic murders now become a bargaining chip in whatever contract negotiations or political aspirations they have.”
Will Bunch of the Philadelphia Daily News says people like Mr Pataki and the police union leaders are “the usual array of bottom feeders” looking to turn the police murders into political advantage.
Mr de Blasio’s “biggest crime”, he says, “apparently was telling his black son to be extra sure to do what the officer says when he’s stopped”.
The police are not in charge of us. They are empowered to enforce the law where it needs enforcing, but that does not make them in charge of us. We are allowed to say they got it wrong, especially when they did in fact get it wrong.
This is why I love your blog, Ophelia. Great — and concise — commentary. You cut right to the heart of the insanity that passes for commentary and public discourse these days.
We are also seeing an atmosphere of police militarization and separation of the police from the communities they’re supposed to be serving unlike any that has existed in the history of our country. What about THAT??
When was the last time you saw a cop walking a beat – anywhere? When was the last time you saw a cop interacting amiably and casually with members of the community – anywhere?
The level of separation from the communities police are supposed to be serving, and the deadliness of the police toward the communities the police are supposed to be serving has reached unprecedented heights.
Are we going to address this? Or will it always be “You have to support the police no matter what, no matter what they’re doing, or you’re a bad person”?
Former New York City Police Commissioner Howard Safir is full of crap. The NYPD the subject of protests like this back in the 60s and 70s went it was riddled with corruption and NYC was the murder capital of the world.
I was taken aback at the surprisingly jingoist rhetoric I heard (on the CBC of all places) – they reported the incident as a shooting of two “members of New York’s Finest”.
I am also so fucking sick of “how the real world works”. Yeah, I’ll grant you that (though it can certainly be disputed), but we can do better. We create how the “real world” works, so we can change it.
I keep reading word in the post title as “coprocracy”… And thinking, “yeah, we kinda do.”
Sorry. 😉
Right there with you, Dunc.
What’s the point of having any sympathy for the colleagues and family of the murdered cops, if our sympathy is IMMEDIATELY co-opted into a blatant attempt to blame innocent citizens for exercising our basic rights? These belligerent fascists have been very quick to make up a story about (unspecified) inflammatory rhetoric and protests by (unspecified) troublemakers directly causing the murder of two cops. The same cops and bigots who last week were loudly demanding that everyone just shut up and follow orders to avoid being shot, because that’s what it takes for good white mayors to keep “those people” from killing each other, are now crying about alleged irresponsible rhetoric by the people who are protesting their irresponsible actions.
Almost as despicable is the fact that the cops have managed to manipulate the media into completely forgetting about that troubled killer’s other victim, his own girlfriend. I guess she had to be ignored because she muddled up the picture of a cold-blooded politically-motivated assassin.
@Dunc – glad someone said that – I’d been thinking the same thing since I read the title
into a blatant attempt to blame innocent citizens for exercising our basic rights?
When you march through the streets of New York calling for the death police officers, you are neither innocent, not exercising a ‘basic right’.
You’re a cheap, common criminal.
De Blasio had a duty AND a responsibility to put his foot down, right then and there, and not just to denounce such sentiments, but to arrest those expressing them.
He didn’t and thus committed an epic fail.
Ya see, it’s illegal to incite people to commit murder.
De Blasio isn’t up to the job. He should do the honourable thing and step down.
When you march through the streets of New York calling for the death police officers…
Who, exactly, is this “you” you refer to? Citation required.
I’m betting Decker is referring to the possibly doctored video of the protesters chanting that they wanted dead cops. Given the incident I pointed out in a previous thread (Faux Noise) had edited a video to make it say pretty much the opposite of what they were actually saying, I am with holding judgement on what actually happened.
Maybe some one who posts here at FTB was there?
“A mayor is either with the police or against them, he says. “That fact is nowhere to be found in the progressive playbook, which sees everything through race and class,” he continues. “But it is how the real world works.””
So, a mayor may never criticize the police. Nice to know the police are open to feedback.
“He warns that if police aren’t supported it could lead to a return to a time in New York City when “gangs controlled the streets” and car theft and murders were rampant.”
Meaning, I guess, that unless the police are never criticized and everybody kisses their asses, they won’t do anything. Maybe that means the whole department should be fired and replaced by people open to some kind of accountability.
I could cynically state that the cops ARE a gang that controls the streets, with the war on drugs and civil asset forfeiture laws pretty much turning them into a crime syndicate.
@Raging Bee.
It’s all over the net. Those chants have been talked to death in the press and you want a citation?
Decker (#14):
Well, if it’s on the net, it must be true!
Yes, Decker, I want a citation — preferably a link to the actual video footage of the alleged chanting, not just some tool in “the press” talking about it.
These cop-lovers are the same right-wingnuts who support open carry of firearms (because statistics show that cops hesitiate before shooting white folks), 2nd Amendment solutions (i.e.: assassinate politicians they don’t agree with) and the militarization of the police.
They also like to say that the tree of liberty must be watered periodically with the blood of tyrants.
So basically they are all for violent reveolution against the establishment as long as no one remembers that they are the establishment.
Well, if it’s on the net, it must be true!
It’s been talked to death in the press as well.
Have you been hibernating?
Given the incident I pointed out in a previous thread (Faux Noise) had edited a video to make it say pretty much the opposite of what they were actually saying, I am with holding judgement on what actually happened.
Ah, geez! And 911 was a controlled demolition!
busterggi: what makes the gun-nuts all the more despicable is that they openly support policies that ensure that any fool can get a gun for any reason and carry it anywhere, but then call themselves “friends of the law-enforcement officer” even as such officers get shot almost daily by fools carrying freely-available guns in their hands, and “Second Amendment remedy” rhetoric in their heads.
So basically they are all for violent revolution against the establishment as long as no one remembers that they are the establishment.
No, they’re for violent revolution against people they hate, whom they pretend are “the establishment.”
Still no citation, Decker? Because I certainly haven’t heard this alleged incident “talked to death” anywhere.
Mr de Blasio’s “biggest crime”, he says, “apparently was telling his black son to be extra sure to do what the officer says when he’s stopped”.
Yeah, isn’t that what the officers themselves have been telling us to do whenever they approach us? Why the fuck is DeBlasio suddenly in the wrong for saying the same thing?
Decker is referring to the footage of DC protesters that was edited by a Baltimore Fox affiliate to make it sound like they were saying “we won’t stop, we can’t stop, so kill a cop”. Find the unedited full video, and the chant is clearly “we won’t stop, we can’t stop, ’til killer cops are in cell blocks”. I look forward to getting this “fact” emailed to me for the next 2 decades by right-wing relatives.
[Source: Talking Points Memo]
The woman leading the chant was later interviewed by the news station (WBFF), and she was both outraged and scared:
Meanwhile, also via TPM, retired LAPD officers have a good laugh about Michael Brown being dead. But go on Decker, you were saying something?
Perhaps Decker is suffering a bout of copolalia?
themann1086: thanks for the clarification. Why am I not surprised?
Did any other Fox stations outside of Baltimore air the edited video?
If a local TV station deliberately edited a video — or even knowingly aired it with no serious fact-checking — how is that not “inciting to riot?” How is that not a damn good reason to yank that station’s broadcast license and make sure none if its executives ever gets on the air again?
While a copocracy would not be a good place to be by any stretch of the imagination, living in a CopRockracy might be entertaining…
Well. Looks like Decker, like a proper authoritarian bootlicker, can’t be bothered to return and cop (no pun intended) to the fact that he repeated a blatant slander against those protesters. When I read his original comment asserting that there were protesters calling for the death of police officers, I figured he was probably referring to that edited and doctored footage. Looks like I was right.
What a disgusting display of servility and suspension of critical reasoning in the service of authoritarianism and tyranny, Decker. The sad part is that you probably don’t even see what’s disgusting about your servility.
Actually, the sad part — or at least another sad part — is that he probably thinks his willful ignorance is the opposite of servility. Ignorance is strength, as they say.
Just leaving this here and seconding the question about how their broadcasting license isn’t revoked.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/tv/z-on-tv-blog/bal-wbff-apologizes-misleading-edit-videotape-of-protest-chant-20141222-story.html
I can answer that question too, via balloon juice:
Details about deregulation at the link
@17
The quote is actually “the tree of liberty must be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots.” It is supposed to imply that liberty cannot be taken for granted, that it is necessary, from time to time, to fight for it. It does not mean the same thing as a murderer screaming “Sic Semper Tyrannis” after shooting a President.
I was talking with a friend of mine the other day, and he made a good point.
There was a time in his life where, if a cop showed up, he’d assume the cop was an ally and a just individual, and react accordingly. This was before he married a black woman, and raised three sons with her. Now, if a cop approaches, he sadly but rightly assumes the cop is going to mistreat his sons. This naturally puts him and his sons on edge, which all in all, greatly increases the chance that the situation could grow out of control. That increases the danger to himself and his sons, but it also increases the danger to the cop as well. My friend is a good man, and doesn’t believe violence is an answer, but fully acknowledges that he doesn’t know how he would react if he saw a cop tazing one of his boys or putting them in a chokehold, and if that did happen to occur at a time he was carrying a weapon, he might use it.
My friend isn’t unique. One of the reasons I did not participate in the Occupy movement is because I acknowledge the part of me that, when attacked, attacks back.
It would be in the best interest of the cops to de-escalate, de-militarize, and make some effort to return to at least paying lip service to the idea of ‘office friendly, to protect and serve’. There are plenty of people out there who are genuinely nice, upstanding individuals, but whose ‘fight or flight’ reflex is most definitely not geared towards ‘stand still and take it’. Any police officer that initiates the aggression or escalates a situation should be reprimanded immediately.