Boston has spent millions on no-bid contracts for analysts they claim couldn’t track racist demonstrators
Without First Amendment crusaders to catch our backs, journalists—along with educators, activists, and anybody else whose career or passion often requires that they take unpopular public positions—would be no more useful than a Putin fan zine published by the Kremlin.
Sadly, appeals to reason don’t stop reactionary media outlets like the Boston Herald from telegraphing the falsehoods being spread by ICE and pals.
“Increased patrols do not protect anyone ... they are actively harmful to poor and oppressed people who are routinely harassed, brutalized, and surveilled by the police in Boston and across the country."
In the midst of the media blitz about stoned driving, one might think that at least some outlets would note another story from a couple weeks ago, “Massachusetts banned from using [alcohol] Breathalyzer test pending reforms at state police agency.”
For now, the BPD wants to help officers more quickly locate and access footage. However, if the program expands beyond its small introduction—about 13 locations, according to BPD records—it could develop into a centralized surveillance network.
Of course not all cops are bad. But the fact that people feel like they have to begin all condemnations of corrupt police with that preamble is a testament to just how many rotten law enforcement officers there are, and to the way that many of them take out their aggression on those who point out the obvious, all evidence of their atrocities be damned.
As the debate over immigration increases in urgency, the Massachusetts sheriff and his department are about to enter into a cooperation agreement with ICE, which would operationalize local forces to assist Trump’s regime in deporting undocumented people on the Cape.
The still-anonymous officer is alleged to have “pushed his finger into” a journalist’s rectum and otherwise assaulted him as the arrests were being processed.