
Demonstrations to protest NSA spying planned for July 4th - pvnick
http://restorethefourth.net
======
mtgx
If Brazilians can create a 1 million strong protest over a 0.1$ bus fare
increase, I'd hope Americans from the "land of the free, home of the _brave_ "
would be able to do the same over the revealing of a massive spying apparatus
that's used against Americans and completely infringing on the 4th amendment.

But even more importantly it's infringing on their human rights that should
guarantee that they don't have to live in fear in a surveillance state and
they have the right to anonymous speech or being able to have confidential
conversations with people, without having to think that everything they say is
being recorded by the government, and if if they even say the "wrong words"
they may end up on certain "lists" that are monitored more heavily.

~~~
mpyne
Is the protest over the bus fare increase? I was always told it was merely the
latest in a long string of events drawing in protesters.

Likewise, didn't the group that incited protests over the bus fare increase
later support ending the protests, since the protests are said to have been
co-opted by militants and fascists?

Likewise likewise, neither anonymous speech or confidential conversations have
gone away (that is, where they were possible before). But you may have to
choose to enforce that by technical means (a capability we _didn 't_ used to
have, by the way, just ask people who lived in the age of letters and phone
calls).

Likewise^3, the prioritization of who would be monitored by warrant is
certainly a legitimate function of the security apparatus, unless you're
trying to claim that picking random conversations to get a warrant for is
somehow more effective in breaking up terror cells or criminal conspiracies.

I would argue that taking action against people _merely_ for what they believe
in is screwed up, but I not only wouldn't blame people for keeping a closer
eye on those who advocate large changes to government, I'd be offended as a
taxpayer if they weren't doing exactly that.

~~~
outworlder
> Is the protest over the bus fare increase? I was always told it was merely
> the latest in a long string of events drawing in protesters.

Brazilian here, and you are right. The big protests started in one capital and
not all capitals raised their fares, at least not recently. One week before
that, in my city, we had thousands of protesters, who wanted something to be
done about the violence (873 people were murdered by gunshot in the first
quarter alone, out of a population of 2.5 million, giving over 60 per hundred
thousand people).

After the demonstrations in São Paulo, it spread like wildfire. Since not all
cities have the same problems (at least, not in the same priority), the
protesters had different agendas. But they were (and stil are) all over the
country.

------
diminoten
Okay, so let's not become the next Occupy movement with this, can we figure
out what it is we're protesting _for_ in the first place? And "FREEDOM" or
"PRIVACY!" aren't things you can protest for and expect to get. Maybe
something like, "We want to require the government to announce ALL FISA court
rulings" or "We want to require the government to declassify details about the
PRISM program" or something along those lines.

We no longer live in an age where rhetoric tears down walls and opens doors.
Somewhere along the line, people in power recognized they can just ignore
pretty words and they'll usually go away.

~~~
auston
I think it's fairly clear:
[http://www.restorethefourth.net/press/](http://www.restorethefourth.net/press/)

1\. Enact reform this Congress to Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act, the
state secrets privilege, and the FISA Amendments Act to make clear that
blanket surveillance of the Internet activity and phone records of any person
residing in the U.S. is prohibited by law and that violations can be reviewed
in adversarial proceedings before a public court;

2\. Create a special committee to investigate, report, and reveal to the
public the extent of this domestic spying. This committee should create
specific recommendations for legal and regulatory reform to end
unconstitutional surveillance;

3\. Hold accountable those public officials who are found to be responsible
for this unconstitutional surveillance.

~~~
tptacek
(1) Is never going to happen. Even _civil cases_ in the US can be conducted
under seal, and those very rarely pertain to national security. This is
exactly what the parent commenter was referring to when he said that people
should figure out exactly what their demand is; the demand in item (1) here is
totally unrealistic.

(2) and (3) seem very straightforward, realistic, and productive.

~~~
scythe
(1) should be broken among its parts. The state secrets privilege is hard to
get rid of, but it is realistic to call for the repeal of the "library records
provision":

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_records_provision#Secti...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_records_provision#Section_215:_Access_to_records_and_other_items_under_FISA)

Notably, Google itself has launched a campaign against the gag order related
to NSLs, which we should all (hopefully) support!

------
pvnick
Glad to see HNers are excited about this. Shameless plug - if you live in or
around Gainesville, FL, I encourage you to attend the one I'm organizing for
my town:
[http://gatorsrestorethefourth.com](http://gatorsrestorethefourth.com)

------
oddball28
This is just an opinion because my personal experience with protesting is
null, but isn't the strategy of protesting in hundreds of communities
ineffective?

It's easy to ignore or contain 50-1000+ protesters [1][2] at some 600
locations (see Occupy Wall Street), whereas a centralized protest (maybe in
DC?) of 70,000+[3] will hear their voices ringing across the world.

It's easy to feel like your working together and making a difference with
someone across the globe, but really to be heard you need to work together,as
a team, in close proximity. Change isn't easy.

[1] Wrong:
[http://img.timeinc.net/time/photoessays/2011/ows_gallery_121...](http://img.timeinc.net/time/photoessays/2011/ows_gallery_1212/ows_gallery_05.jpg)

[2] Meh, street performers pull bigger crowds:
[http://media.syracuse.com/news/photo/10265946-large.jpg](http://media.syracuse.com/news/photo/10265946-large.jpg)

[2] Here we go:
[http://wakingamericaup.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/i-have-a-...](http://wakingamericaup.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/i-have-
a-dream-2.jpg)

~~~
lettergram
You're probably correct, however starting off, if you start with say 10 people
protesting on a local public street you may get 10 new people to notice you.

After a time you can double, triple, quadruple, etc. your numbers. Then go to
DC with 70-100,000 and get attention.

~~~
oddball28
After giving this more thought, I agree. Large demonstrations don't happen
over night, and it's necessary to start somewhere and gain traction, with the
ultimate goal of snowballing into a large centralized demonstration.

Maybe what's needed is an agenda that clearly works towards such a
demonstration, one that's broken up into attainable goals/milestones. If
demonstrators don't feel that they're continually making progress, they lose
interest -- or maybe its hope that they lose. And at some point, you need
strong leadership to reign in all the pieces.

------
jdp23
If you're interested in getting involved, there's discussion Restore on the
4th's subreddit at
[http://www.reddit.com/r/restorethefourth/](http://www.reddit.com/r/restorethefourth/)
and daily IRC meetings at 5 p.m.

------
temp1234567
Just a quick note, remember to turn off your cell phones at these events.
Protestors are tracked by their cell phone records by the police and govt.

------
chrsstrm
I know setting the date of most of these events to the 4th of July is very
symbolic, but is that really the best choice? That is the one day that
Americans already gather in large numbers to celebrate. In DC alone the entire
national mall area and surrounding are gridlocked with people who come to see
the fireworks. How would you be able to tell who is there protesting and who
is there to celebrate? It seems like your protest message would easily be lost
in the noise of the Fourth.

Why not set it for the day before? 100,000+ people on the steps of the Capitol
or in front of the White House on the evening of the 3rd would get much more
coverage than doing anything on the 4th.

------
relak
If you want to spark mass protest, here's how you do it: cut all government
programs. Once people realize how much government is artificially inflating
their livelihood and how little corporations have really left for them, they
will get angry and start rioting. It no longer will fit the left/right
paradigm. If a Walmart employee can no longer feed their family because they
have no access to government programs and Walmart pays their employees an
awful wage, do you think they are just gonna take that? No. They'll demand
actual change.

------
bobwaycott
The only way public demonstrations are going to have an effect is for them to
be _massive_ and _concentrated_. That does not mean widespread protests are a
bad idea _per se_ , but that if none of the protests actually have mass, they
are going to be ignored by both officials and your fellow citizens as a
temporary annoyance for which they will hold little sympathy.

Development of public support _against_ greater security at the cost of
freedom is the only way to make meaningful change. Yes, marches/demonstrations
can be part of this. But small demonstrations do not alone capture the
public's interest. One must capture the public mind--and that means informing
the public and winning their support of having _less_ "security" where weaking
or violating the protections of their basic rights are concerned.

Right now, as various polls have showed, far too many Americans desire the
feeling and theater of security. They are content to be invaded at airport
security because _eventually_ they can still fly. They are content to have
their communications slurped up because they can still send that email and
make that phone call.

It's not until they're staring at a public fountain from which they are not
able to drink because it has a stupid printed sign above it that says "Whites
Only" that the public will accept that things have gone horribly wrong.

I think demonstrations would be excellent to see, but not if they're anything
like the Occupy movement, which the wider public opposed against their own
self interest. It is very difficult to get the public's attention when they do
not _feel_ the effects. The public is rather shitty at evaluating and
appreciating things in the abstract. Demonstrations that are massive and
concentrated would have a much more significant impact. Think of the Civil
Rights March on Washington. That level of mass and concentration. Doubling it
would be even better.

And yet, even that basic right to protest has been severely weakened by the
fact that one must get a _permit_ to protest in many of the locations that
would be tactically good choices. This is madness. The 4th is not the only
Amendment that the People have allowed to be weakened over the last two
centuries.

Americans have become very lazy where protecting their rights are concerned,
because the vast majority of Americans do not participate in protecting those
rights when they are violated against minority factions.

~~~
paulkoer
> The only way public demonstrations are going to have an effect is for them
> to be massive and concentrated. That does not mean widespread protests are a
> bad idea per se, but that if none of the protests actually have mass, they
> are going to be ignored by both officials and your fellow citizens as a
> temporary annoyance for which they will hold little sympathy.

This statement sounds a little defeatist and gives an excuse for not
participating in demonstrations (since the required _massive_ scale is likely
not reached, one might be better of not going).

Actually demonstrations, even if they do not effect immediate change, will
still have a number of positive outcomes. First, they will likely be reported
on in the news (at least that would be the case in Germany), raising
awareness. Second, demonstrators will meet like minded individuals with whom
they can network and form strategies. Third, demonstrators will realize that
they are not isolated and feel more empowered as a result. Last, it will at
least remind the public and politicians that some people do care about this.

Is any of this enough to affect change? Likely not. But it is a first step and
if we can't even go demonstrate against this then we might as well stop
caring. The possibility that demonstrations will not have the immediate effect
we desire should not stop us.

~~~
bobwaycott
Apologies. I did not intend to sound defeatist at all.

------
aclevernickname
Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I can't help but think this is the worst idea
ever. You have a highly-strung government, watching everyone for signs of
domestic terrorism, and then protest, which the government has considered an
act of aggression since at least the Dubya administration.

The only remedy we have in this country is lawsuits. Not class-actions,
either; individual lawsuits for $500k each, for egregiously prejudicing your
individual rights guaranteed by the constitution. ten thousand or so of those,
with the president's name in all caps (head of the Unitary Executive) listed
as the defendant.

or, you know, you could try to make a well-regulated militia of 3D-printed pea
shooters, so you can overthrow the largest and most heavily-armed military in
the history of the world. that'll definitely work.

Myself, I appreciate the disclosure I'm being given that Scott McNealy was
right all those years ago when he said we have zero privacy anyway. The
government has the right to do whatever they want with their property. if you
use/are their property (isn't that ARPAnet thing US military property?),
expect them to enforce their interest in that property.

TL;DR for the downvoters (+6 to -2 in less than 20 minutes? hilarious):
PROTEST BAD. LAWSUITS GOOD.

~~~
pvnick
>You have a highly-strung government, watching everyone for signs of domestic
terrorism, and then protest, which the government has considered an act of
aggression since at least the Dubya administration.

That's a terrible justification for not protesting. Free societies require
courage.

~~~
aclevernickname
Not wanting to be in harmony with the 800lb gorilla is a terrible
justification for not being in harmony with the 800lb gorilla.

As for being courageous in a free society: Let me know when you find one. we
can both move there and be courageous together. In the interim, I'm going to
play by the rules of the game, as I'm stuck in the system.

Perhaps you guys don't understand this: they have _really_ big guns. waaaay
bigger than anything we have. and they have the authority to use them when
they're threatened by acts of mass protest. the Executive's powers used at
Kent State ages ago have only gotten stronger. Don't be like those poor
bastards. or the Seattle WTO protesters. or the DNC/RNC protesters.

Seriously, they _want_ you to sue them. Just do it.

~~~
wavefunction
I guess we'll give you a call from the protests then. Look for us being mocked
on the TV, if we're not intentionally ignored by corporate media.

~~~
aclevernickname
please do. I'll be home all day on the 4th.

------
w0ts0n
Why is this US only?

~~~
bobwaycott
There is no reason it has to be.

However, invoking the 4th of July as part of the American public consciousness
is not guaranteed to resonate with the wider world population.

