Bloomberg: Interpretation of Constitution Will ‘Have to Change’ After Boston Bombing."

[Skip Intro]

Bloomberg Says Interpretation of Constitution Will ‘Have to Change’ After Boston Bombing

http://politicker.com/2013/04/bloomberg-says-post-boston-interpretation-of-the-constitution-will-have-to-change/

In the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Monday the country’s interpretation of the Constitution will “have to change” to allow for greater security to stave off future attacks.

“The people who are worried about privacy have a legitimate worry,” Mr. Bloomberg said during a press conference in Midtown. “But we live in a complex world where you’re going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change.”

Mr. Bloomberg, who has come under fire for the N.Y.P.D.’s monitoring of Muslim communities and other aggressive tactics, said the rest of the country needs to learn from the attacks.

“Look, we live in a very dangerous world. We know there are people who want to take away our freedoms. New Yorkers probably know that as much if not more than anybody else after the terrible tragedy of 9/11,” he said.

----------

I'll be labeled a conspiracy theorist for this, and shamed by the cheerleaders chanting, "just believe what they tell you," but I don't care. Something smells about this whole bombing story to me. I was suspicious, but I also knew I could be wrong. My test was that at some point, if there is some movement toward further restrictions on our freedoms, using the Boston bombing as a reason, being suspicious would be warranted. I really didn't expect it to show up in black and white, plain English, yet there it is. Something ain't right about all this.

Flame if you like, but I didn't write the story.

on edit: NYT Link: http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/23/security-privacy-and-bloomberg/

[premium]

1. Well, what would you expect

from a 1% POS fucking asshole? He sounds just like that other POS fucking asshole, Bush.
I can't wait for a certain Bloomberg loving DU member to show up and defend Bloomie.

[Kurska]

2. "We know there are people who want to take away our freedoms." Yeah it is you arsehole

No idea why so many people here on DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND ride this "former" republican's nuts.

[SidDithers]

3. Spell it out. What are you saying?...nt

Sid

[freshwest]

4. Not about guns.

[Trillo]

5. Perhaps Bloomberg believes congress should be dissolved? NT

[freshwest]

8. My mistake. Deleting.

Last edited Tue Apr 23, 2013, 11:21 PM - Edit history (1)

[Skip Intro]

16. Doesn' sound like he's talking about guns.

[freshwest]

20. Not about guns and you found a good source. Deleting gun references.

[Skip Intro]

25. Why so nasty and personal? WTF? NYT says he's talking privacy rights.

We need to change our interpretation when it comes to privacy rights.

That's what he's talking about.

:smh:

[freshwest]

30. I'm deleting the gun references. And I'm not nasty, for you to call false flag is bad stuff.

[Trillo]

18. Huh? That's not what he says, it's right there in the OP.

He doesn't want us to have privacy.

[freshwest]

21. My mistake. Leaving the guns out of it. I've come to hate CT, though.

[Deep13]

7. No.

This is when we need the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments most.

[pipoman]

9. A caracture of an mad scientist is what I see when I think of him..

Doesn't he have some offshore shelter he should go tend to?

[Newest Reality]

10. Well,

neighbor Bloomberg, you are so special I have two things just for you:

[La Lioness Priyanka]

11. 'we know people want to take away our freedoms'

so in solidarity with these people, we will just give up our freedoms voluntarily

[brooklynite]

12. Unrec

That's the Obama Administration that's behind the Conspiracy, right?

[Skip Intro]

19. no idea, just got a bs meter steady at 10 n/t

[DonViejo]

13. someone posted this this a.m., noting there was something suspicious about it...

a Google search pulled up a multitude of web sites had published the article but, Politicker was their source for the story. No MSM outlet has, so far, reported this alleged quote.

[Skip Intro]

23. NYT - same quote. Link.

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/23/security-privacy-and-bloomberg/

This blind spot was in evidence at a press conference yesterday. In response to a question about security post-Boston, he said:

“We have to understand that in the world going forward, we’re going to have more cameras and that kind of stuff. That’s good in some senses, but it’s different than what we are used to. And the people who are worried about privacy have a legitimate worry, but we live in a complex world where you’re going to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution I think have to change.”


His comments, first, were a bit condescending. Americans are fully aware that they had to accept heightened security after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. But the idea that traditional notions about the rule of law and the Constitution are inadequate in the age of terrorism is not just wrong, it’s dangerous. That canard was used as an excuse after 9/11 for all kinds of excesses.

They were the trademark of the administration of President George W. Bush: warrantless wiretapping of Americans, extraordinary rendition, secret detention camps, Guantánamo Bay, torture. Excessive search and surveillance powers were enshrined in the Patriot Act and the expansion of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

[DonViejo]

24. Thanks! nt

[freshwest]

26. Okay, you're out of the doghouse now.

I'll delete my other comments, but you know you went there when you said this:

I'll be labeled a conspiracy theorist for this, and shamed by the cheerleaders chanting, "just believe what they tell you," but I don't care. Something smells about this whole bombing story to me. I was suspicious, but I also knew I could be wrong. My test was that at some point, if there is some movement toward further restrictions on our freedoms, using the Boston bombing as a reason, being suspicious would be warranted. I really didn't expect it to show up in black and white, plain English, yet there it is. Something ain't right about all this.

First birdies to sing the false flag song were Beck and Jones. So you are going to go there too?

[Skip Intro]

27. This post would be hidden if I said what I'm thinking.

but use your imagination

[freshwest]

28. I edited it. No imagination needed, there are many excellent ones on the net.

[HiPointDem]

46. is politicker supposed to be some kind of conspiracy site? it sure doesn't look like it.

PolitickerNJ is a virtual watercooler for the state’s political elite – officeholders, news makers, staff, party leaders, fundraisers, journalists, government employees, interest groups and policy wonks. It’s a necessary daily stop for politically-minded web surfers.

Since our launch on February 1, 2000, PoliticsNJ.com, now PolitickerNJ.com, has become a fixture of politics and government in New Jersey for people who want current and reliable information about campaigns, elections and politicians in New Jersey. Like Tip O'Neill, PolitickerNJ views all politics as local. Starting at City Hall and ending at the White House, we cover elections, party leadership contests, lobbyists, fundraisers, the media, and the business of how politicians select judges and prosecutors. We offer a close-up view inside politics for political insiders.

Meet the PolitickerNJ Team:


Darryl R. Isherwood, Editor (archive)

[email protected]

Darryl is the editor of PolitickerNJ, and its sister site State Street Wire. He has over a decade of experience as a reporter and has covered politics and government for news outlets in three states. As a business and politics reporter, Darryl's work has won national, regional and statewide recognition. Prior to joining PolitickerNJ he served as a senior reporter for Fox Business Network, where he covered real estate, financial reform and the intersection of money and politics. Before that he reported for the Morning Call in Allentown, PA. Darryl cut his reporting teeth at The Times of Trenton, where he spent more than five years covering state and local politics. Darryl began is career on Wall Street, working for 11 years in financial services as a broker, trader and later an auditor. He holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Richmond and a Master of Science from Boston University.

http://www.politickernj.com/about-politickernj-com-5633

politicker is associated with the ny observer.
http://observer.com/about-us/

he said it at a fairly obscure news conference according to the observer:

The Observer's Jill Colvin recorded the exchange during a press conference at the Lower Manhattan Security Initiative. According to his public schedule, the mayor was there to "Thank Counterterrorism Personnel with Police Commissioner Kelly."

[RGinNJ]

14. He justs wants to keep his stop and frisk

and other overbearing policies alive.

[Demo_Chris]

15. This is a "new" age where bad guys have guns and black powder bombs!!!!1

And yet it seems like many are sooo terrified they will go right along with anything. It's bloody ridiculous. This clown should be laughed right out of office for saying something this ridiculous.

[HiPointDem]

42. really. hi-tech stuff. oooh, we are defenseless against gunpowder!!!

[Demo_Chris]

48. Fortunately they have not yet discovered the dreaded Sling...

We better flush the Constitution before they catch on.

[Purveyor]

29. Peruse this thread and you will find many in agreement with Bloomberg:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2743726

[JVS]

31. And the thread stands.

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

At Tue Apr 23, 2013, 11:11 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Bloomberg: Interpretation of Constitution Will ‘Have to Change’ After Boston Bombing."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022744413

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Articles from Alex Jones and his assorted conspiracies are acceptable on DU?

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Apr 23, 2013, 11:16 PM, and the Jury voted 3-3 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: for fucks sake. that's all that needs to be said.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I don't see an alex jones article. And Bloomberg is an asshole who rides roughshod over freedom everyday. Just ask the innocent black youths that get "frisked" everyday.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: You have made a reasonable accusation. You have failed to demonstrate the veracity of your accusation. I'm not going to dig around and try to figure out who edits the website and what their agenda is just because you have a bee in your bonnet about someone criticizing Bloomberg's reaction/exploitation of a recent event.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: Here we go. Story can be found elsewhere on the internets but guess what? The only source is this article. I call shenanigans and vote to hide.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Skip Intro]

33. Thanks. Surprised it was alerted on.

Also surprised I'm surprised at that, lol.

[sarisataka]

32. Very clever

Look, we live in a very dangerous world. We know there are people who want to take away our freedoms

They can't take away what we do not have, so if we let the 1% take our freedoms we have nothing to worry about.

Speaking of worry-

The people who are worried about privacy have a legitimate worry

If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear...

Believe Minitrue, avoid thoughtcrime, Miniluv will keep you safe

[dixiegrrrrl]

37. So he is pushing to take away our freedom to protect us from those who would take away our freedoms.

Okkkkk...got it.

[sarisataka]

40. It is autoritarianism

but for our own good

[fishwax]

34. the fact that it will be used to argue limitations on freedom isn't evidence of a conspiracy

Because any inconvenience (let alone a tragedy of this magnitude) is likely to be used by someone to argue for limiting freedoms.

Frankly, I don't think fostering conspiratorial perspectives about this event helps the cause of defending civil liberties against those who would like to use this as a pretense to restrict them.

[Skip Intro]

35. Doesn't help the cause to ask what's going on? That's too bad. nt

[fishwax]

38. I don't think that's what I said (nor what I meant) n/t

[Live and Learn]

36. Ugh! nt

[X_Digger]

39. You know what? Fuck Bloomie and the authoritarian gilded carriage he rode in on. n/t

[yodermon]

41. "We know there are people who want to take away our freedoms"

So, let's prevent this by reducing our Freedoms.

[HiPointDem]

43. fuck bloomberg. i can't believe this was alerted on. it seems the crackdown

has already started for some people.

[Fire Walk With Me]

44. I believe it. And I'm disgusted as well. n/t

[Fire Walk With Me]

45. He's a Wall Street billionaire who calls NYPD his "private army". What could possibly go wrong? n/t

[JDPriestly]

47. Bloomberg's mentality is the same as the Indian hunters of yesteryear.

Increasing surveillance and denying Americans the rights guaranteed in our Constitution to a public trial, to confront our accusers, to have a lawyer, to remain silent and not incriminate ourselves, to have our privacy will not make us safer. To the contrary.

Simplistic solutions thought of by simple-minded people.

Watch the movie, "The Lives of Others," about surveillance in East Germany. Every other person was a spy (an exaggeration, but not that great an exaggeration).

As in the Boston bombing case, when too much data is collected, when you try to protect yourself against any and all dangers, you hamper your growth and creativity. You make yourself less safe, not more so.

One of these days, they will tell us that if we want to be absolutely safe, we should just stay home.

[MattBaggins]

49. "We know there are people who want to take away our freedoms."

Thanks Einstein. You need to take away some freedoms so that the people who want to take away our freedoms don't win and take away our freedoms.

Dumbass dumbass dumbass

[Bragi]

50. Boston lockdown shows views on rights have ALREADY changed

I think the Boston shutdown showed that most Americans have pretty well already decided that they are not just willing, but enthusiastic, about trading in their rights for promises of security. Until last week, I still thought the authorities would encounter significant resistance if they ever tried to lock down a whole city, and mount house-by-house (warrantless) searches, especially if the reason was that they believed a wounded 19 year-old suspect might be hiding and bleeding out somewhere in the city.

Boy, was I wrong on that. Even among "progressives" on DU, it appears that fear now totally trumps civil rights. I think Boston made it obvious that old fashioned constitutional rights of the sort that Americans used to cherish, might at best now be supported as a nice theoretical idea, but certainly aren't supported in practice when it actually matters, like when heavily-armed police dressed up in military camo costumes seize your streets, and enter and inspect their houses. That's fine now with most Americans. No Bloomberg-suggested rethink is needed.

[Smarmie Doofus]

51. Oh please. Make him stop. n/t

[librechik]

52. there is NO level of security that can protect us from random attacks like Boston.

Can we think about becoming better people so the other people on earth don't hate us so much?

I guess that is out of the question.

So yeah, get used to greater USELESS security and more and more attacks which can't be prevented.

[IDemo]

53. A noun, a verb, and "Boston"

What a refreshing change of rhetoric from one NY mayor to the next!

[TheKentuckian]

54. More bullshit streaming from the stinking maw of the authoritarian fatcat.

What the hell is wrong with New Yorkers tolerating this guy? He ought to be run out on a rail.

[rrneck]

55. Bloomberg's just another

disaster capitalist doing disaster capitalism. He's a soulless ghoul feeding on people's hopes and fears.

Fuck him.

[gejohnston]

56. given his authoritarian outlook on everything else

I'm hardly surprised. I still detest him.

[spanone]

57. fuck off mikey