We admire people who will take to the streets to make a statement -- we've even done a bit of that ourselves over the years -- but do you know what we don't get? People who demonstrate in a place like Portland with masks over their faces.
Come on, people, what kind of statement is that supposed to make? Is it that you honestly fear some sort of serious reprisal for being out there? Is it just to bait the cops? Or are we supposed to be afraid of what terrible thing you might do?
It's like anonymous posting on the internet. We can see it if you have something unique and valuable to say, and you have a compelling reason not to sign your real name. But to march around as part of a crowd? If you won't show your face, it's almost as if you aren't really there. You'd be a lot more effective with the bandana off your mug. Hiding who you are diminishes and marginalizes what you're doing.
Comments (27)
Fear of losing one's job might be one factor. A lot of employers look for any reason they can to reduce head count.
If you cannot express your opinion without wearing a mask maybe you should not be out there. For me, wearing of a mask implies that you really are not committed to making a statement. You have something to hide and maybe those with Portland United need to let these people know that they need to go home if they have so much to risk by revealing their identity. It also implies that you are their to cause trouble and or violence.
A) Demonstrators with legitimate concerns about being targeted by the police
B) 'Anarchists' with hopes of tearing up some property without being identified
C) Provocateurs sent in to discredit the movement
D) Undercover cops
I don't know about where you work, but my employers have always known what "at will" employment means and they never provided a reason to terminate anybody's employment unless they were a member of a protected class.
tommyspoon...Having put myself out there on numerous occasions; how is covering your face anything other than a statement that you are a thug? I certainly understand the risk of losing a job for taking a stand; however I stand by my comment. The mask says you are compromised and not really taking a stand at all.
I'm a bit puzzled too. Aren't roughly 90% of the people posting here basically anonymously? We might use the same pseudonym, but unless you use your full, real name (first names with a last initial don't count either), I can't definitively identify who you are. I think there's myriad reasons why that could be wise - finding employment is just one - contrary to what they think over at BlueOregon. And boy, hasn't that become (even more of) a lonely little echo chamber since they instituted their FaceBook policy?
Did you know that Bradley Manning was in isolation 72sqft cell 23 hours a day, and then shackled for the hour he could be outside of it? That he was forced to sleep and be physically inspected naked? That he was made to perform movements on command nude? I'm sure you would call it torture if you had to endure the same in a maximum security Marine Corps Brig.
I bet he wishes now he was anonymous in his revelations. Trust no one, there is little to gain from revealing personal information, anytime, anywhere, and especially when speaking truth to power.
Be thankful you can wear a tangible mask in public in OR:
"Since the start of the Occupy Wall Street protest on Saturday, at least five people have been cited for violating a little-known New York law that bans masks at gatherings of two or more people unless it's 'a masquerade party or like entertainment.'" http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/09/old_anti-mask_law_foiling_wall.html
In 1968, in Dutchess County -- the hereditary home of the currently local pusillanimous spawn of the family Fish -- people were arrested for painting their faces in a public park by none other than G Gordon Liddy, during his pearl-handled days as sheriff, a few years prior to his performance in the Watergate break-in.
Mr Liddy, of course, has been a character of many masks.
I marched up Broadway as a 99er and was proud to do it , but there were guys near me in masks and I don't blame them.
With cameras and videos shooting us from every angle , you know some of them were cops and spooks. Given that OUR government stated in the sunday NYT that it had the right to issue a secret memo to kill an American Citizen , and murder him in cold blood without a trial , we have to assume that we are Profiled and Marked as a 'criminal' now for marching up our street.
"Speaking truth to power" - Is that what we're calling espionage and borderline treason these days? I missed that change to Webster's. And yes, I can tell you from personal experience that a Marine Brig is not a place you want to spend any time. But Pvt. manning betrayed his country, and his oath to defend it. He is where he should be, and if convicted, where he should remain for the rest of his life.
With Carnegie Mellon's cloud-centric new mobile app, the process of matching a casual snapshot with a person's online identity takes less than a minute.... researchers at Carnegie Mellon were able to not only match unidentified profile photos from a dating website (where the vast majority of users operate pseudonymously) with positively identified Facebook photos, but also match pedestrians on a North American college campus with their online identities.
Heard a women interviewed on the radio yesterday from the Occupy DC demonstration, said with her colleagues they were commited to taking down the New York Stock Exchange from the internet. Since cyber warfare is a good way to earn hard time, can't blame 'em for wanting to be anonymous.
...how is covering your face anything other than a statement that you are a thug? I certainly understand the risk of losing a job for taking a stand...
Manning isn't a spy or traitor. He wasn't wasn't in contact with any enemies, he wasn't promised any rewards and received nothing of benefit from the ordeal. He wanted to help stop these Illegal Wars. Gee where did that word go Dems??
Meanwhile, in NY, where a mask in public can result in arrest, the Wall St arm of the Murdoch empire has proffered:
"New York's law dates back to 1845, when lawmakers tried to quell uprisings by tenant farmers who 'used disguises to attack law enforcement officers,' according to a later U.S. Court of Appeals ruling. A dip in the price of wheat left many in debt to landowner Stephen Van Rensselaer IV.
After Mr. Rensselaer moved to evict tenants, disgruntled farmers disguised themselves as 'Indians,' dressed in 'calico gowns and leather masks' and attacked agents of the landlords. The court papers said the tactics adopted by these rebel groups ranged from 'tarring and feathering' to murder, including a sheriff.
The law was amended in 1965 to prevent masked gatherings of two or more people, with a significant exception: 'a masquerade party or like entertainment.' It received substantial attention in 1999 when, on the basis of the law, the city rejected a request from splinter group of the Ku Klux Klan to hold a masked protest in Manhattan.
Eugene O'Donnell, a professor of police science at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, said arrests for violating the antimask laws are uncommon.
'It's just another tool that police have if they need to use it,' he said. 'Cops figure that if you're covering your face [at a protest], it's probably not for a good reason.'" http://on.wsj.com/nNZoLh
Perhaps if everyone in the Occupy Portland gathering wore UO/Nike football helmets with face shields, there would be no controversy here other than institutional rivalry. Demonstrators would certainly be safer.
BTW, anyone in a tent who has endured last night's rain and the rain of the previous days deserves more respect than has been accorded here.
In Cradle of the Revolution Boston, 129 people were arrested, beginning "at about 1:20 a.m.," allegedly, according to the mayor, because "'...you can't tie up a city'": http://bo.st/otYKNd
Unless, of course, you are not Occupy Boston demonstrators:
"Interstate 93 is backed up with traffic in both directions downtown this morning as a movie films near the Zakim Bridge, state police said in an advisory." http://bo.st/op5sGP
Gardiner Menefree,
Good Point.
We have a river city, I have brought up the subject of river transportation, ferries to transport people, guess that isn't part of the conversation. Instead we have more and more traffic congestion, thanks to pdx "plans."
Think some "unmasking" has already been done, and perhaps we need to unpeel more as to who has been benefiting from pdx "plans."
Charamba, Douro 2008
Horse Heaven Hills, Cabernet 2010
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills Pinot Grigio 2011
Avignonesi, Montepulciano 2004
Lorelle, Willamette Valley Pinot Noir 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2007
Mercedes Eguren, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Lorelle, Columbia Valley Cabernet 2011
Purple Moon, Merlot 2011
Purple Moon, Chardonnnay 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend No. 12
Opula Red Blend 2010
Liberte, Pinot Noir 2010
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Indian Wells Red Blend 2010
Woodbridge, Chardonnay 2011
King Estate, Pinot Noir 2011
Famille Perrin, Cotes du Rhone Villages 2010
Columbia Crest, Les Chevaux Red 2010
14 Hands, Hot to Trot White Blend
Familia Bianchi, Malbec 2009
Terrapin Cellars, Pinot Gris 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2009
Campo Viejo, Rioja, Termpranillo 2010
Ravenswood, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2010
Waterbrook, Reserve Merlot 2009
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills, Pinot Grigio 2011
Tarantas, Rose
Chateau Lajarre, Bordeaux 2009
La Vielle Ferme, Rose 2011
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio 2011
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir 2009
Lello, Douro Tinto 2009
Quinson Fils, Cotes de Provence Rose 2011
Anindor, Pinot Gris 2010
Buenas Ondas, Syrah Rose 2010
Les Fiefs d'Anglars, Malbec 2009
14 Hands, Pinot Gris 2011
Conundrum 2012
Condes de Albarei, Albariño 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2007
Penelope Sanchez, Garnacha Syrah 2010
Canoe Ridge, Merlot 2007
Atalaya do Mar, Godello 2010
Vega Montan, Mencia
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir, Marlborough 2009
Portuga, Rose 2011
Revelation, Chardonnay, Pays d'Oc 2010
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 2005
Monte Alto, Tinto Reserva 2005
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Cabernet, Indian Wells 2009
Espiral, Vinho Rose
Vin-Koru, Pinot Gris 2011
14 Hands, Hot to Trot Red 2009
Rodney Strong, Cabernet, Sonoma 2009
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #11
Portuga, White 2010
La Bourgeoisie, Red 2009
Januik, Red 2009
Three Rivers, River's Red 2008
Kirkland, Alexander Valley Merlot 2008
Muga, Rioja Rose 2010
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2009
Mauro Molino, Barbera d'Alba 2009
Garda Chiaretto Rose
Columbia Crest, Two Vines Vineyard 10 White
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Pinot Gris, Columbia Valley 2009
L'Hortus, Rose de Saignee 2010
Maculan, Pino & Toi 2008
McKinley Springs, Bombing Range Red 2008
Trader Joe's Pinot Gris 2009
Montes Alpha, Cabernet 2007
Gran Sasso, Sangiovese, Terre di Chieti 2009
Garda, Classico Chiaretto Rose
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 1999
Picos del Montgo, Tempranillo 2008
Chateau de Montmirail, Vacqueyras 2008
La Granja 360, Syrah 2009
Montgras, Carmenere Reserva 2009
Lange, Pinot Gris 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Cabernet 2008
Kirkland, Pinot Grigio 2010
Trader Joe's Coastal Syrah 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Merlot 2008
Trader Joe's Coastal Chardonnay 2009
Vieux Papes Red
Domaine de l'Aujardiere, Chardonnay 2009
Santa Rita, Cabernet, Medalla Real 2007
Penfold's, Koonunga Hill Shiraz Cabernet 2008
Guild, Red, Lot #02 2008
Dievole, Dievolino Sangiovese 2008
Laforet, Burgogne Chardonnay 2009
Columbia Winery, Merlot 2007
Bonterra, Cabernet 2008
Elk Cove, Pinot Gris 2009
Maquis Lien 2006
Scott Paul, Pinot Noir, Le Paulee 2007
The Occasional Book
Neil Young - Waging Heavy Peace
Mark Bego - Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul (2012 ed.)
Jenny Lawson - Let's Pretend This Never Happened
J.D. Salinger - Franny and Zooey
Charles Dickens - A Christmas Carol
Timothy Egan - The Big Burn
Deborah Eisenberg - Transactions in a Foreign Currency
Kurt Vonnegut Jr. - Slaughterhouse Five
Kathryn Lance - Pandora's Genes
Cheryl Strayed - Wild
Fyodor Dostoyevsky - The Brothers Karamazov
Jack London - The House of Pride, and Other Tales of Hawaii
Jack Walker - The Extraordinary Rendition of Vincent Dellamaria
Colum McCann - Let the Great World Spin
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince
Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
Emma McLaughlin & Nicola Kraus - The Nanny Diaries
Brian Selznick - The Invention of Hugo Cabret
Sharon Creech - Walk Two Moons
Keith Richards - Life
F. Sionil Jose - Dusk
Natalie Babbitt - Tuck Everlasting
Justin Halpern - S#*t My Dad Says
Mark Herrmann - The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law
Barry Glassner - The Gospel of Food
Phil Stanford - The Peyton-Allan Files
Jesse Katz - The Opposite Field
Evelyn Waugh - Brideshead Revisited
J.K. Rowling - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
David Sedaris - Holidays on Ice
Donald Miller - A Million Miles in a Thousand Years
Mitch Albom - Have a Little Faith
C.S. Lewis - The Magician's Nephew
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
William Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Ivan Doig - Bucking the Sun
Penda Diakité - I Lost My Tooth in Africa
Grace Lin - The Year of the Rat
Oscar Hijuelos - Mr. Ives' Christmas
Madeline L'Engle - A Wrinkle in Time
Steven Hart - The Last Three Miles
David Sedaris - Me Talk Pretty One Day
Karen Armstrong - The Spiral Staircase
Charles Larson - The Portland Murders
Adrian Wojnarowski - The Miracle of St. Anthony
William H. Colby - Long Goodbye
Steven D. Stark - Meet the Beatles
Phil Stanford - Portland Confidential
Rick Moody - Garden State
Jonathan Schwartz - All in Good Time
David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
Anthony Holden - Big Deal
Robert J. Spitzer - The Spirit of Leadership
James McManus - Positively Fifth Street
Jeff Noon - Vurt
Road Work
Miles run year to date: 21
At this date last year: 52
Total run in 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269
Comments (27)
Fear of losing one's job might be one factor. A lot of employers look for any reason they can to reduce head count.
Posted by Mr. Grumpy | October 10, 2011 11:02 AM
If you cannot express your opinion without wearing a mask maybe you should not be out there. For me, wearing of a mask implies that you really are not committed to making a statement. You have something to hide and maybe those with Portland United need to let these people know that they need to go home if they have so much to risk by revealing their identity. It also implies that you are their to cause trouble and or violence.
Posted by teresa | October 10, 2011 11:19 AM
A) Demonstrators with legitimate concerns about being targeted by the police
B) 'Anarchists' with hopes of tearing up some property without being identified
C) Provocateurs sent in to discredit the movement
D) Undercover cops
Posted by reader | October 10, 2011 11:40 AM
Mr. Grumpy...
I don't know about where you work, but my employers have always known what "at will" employment means and they never provided a reason to terminate anybody's employment unless they were a member of a protected class.
Posted by Mister Tee | October 10, 2011 12:12 PM
"If you cannot express your opinion without wearing a mask maybe you should not be out there..."
Last time I checked, the First Amendment didn't include a dress code.
Posted by tommyspoon | October 10, 2011 12:41 PM
As long as people are occupying whatever it means less competition finding a job :)
Posted by Anthony | October 10, 2011 12:42 PM
tommyspoon...Having put myself out there on numerous occasions; how is covering your face anything other than a statement that you are a thug? I certainly understand the risk of losing a job for taking a stand; however I stand by my comment. The mask says you are compromised and not really taking a stand at all.
Posted by teresa | October 10, 2011 1:25 PM
I'm a bit puzzled too. Aren't roughly 90% of the people posting here basically anonymously? We might use the same pseudonym, but unless you use your full, real name (first names with a last initial don't count either), I can't definitively identify who you are. I think there's myriad reasons why that could be wise - finding employment is just one - contrary to what they think over at BlueOregon. And boy, hasn't that become (even more of) a lonely little echo chamber since they instituted their FaceBook policy?
Posted by Ex-bartender | October 10, 2011 1:25 PM
I don't like the idea of wearing mask at protest, but I do understand why some people might. I have lost two jobs because of my political believes.
Posted by Evergreen Libertarian | October 10, 2011 1:57 PM
teresa-
Did you know that Bradley Manning was in isolation 72sqft cell 23 hours a day, and then shackled for the hour he could be outside of it? That he was forced to sleep and be physically inspected naked? That he was made to perform movements on command nude? I'm sure you would call it torture if you had to endure the same in a maximum security Marine Corps Brig.
I bet he wishes now he was anonymous in his revelations. Trust no one, there is little to gain from revealing personal information, anytime, anywhere, and especially when speaking truth to power.
Posted by Pistolero | October 10, 2011 2:14 PM
Be thankful you can wear a tangible mask in public in OR:
"Since the start of the Occupy Wall Street protest on Saturday, at least five people have been cited for violating a little-known New York law that bans masks at gatherings of two or more people unless it's 'a masquerade party or like entertainment.'"
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/09/old_anti-mask_law_foiling_wall.html
In 1968, in Dutchess County -- the hereditary home of the currently local pusillanimous spawn of the family Fish -- people were arrested for painting their faces in a public park by none other than G Gordon Liddy, during his pearl-handled days as sheriff, a few years prior to his performance in the Watergate break-in.
Mr Liddy, of course, has been a character of many masks.
Posted by Gardiner Menefree | October 10, 2011 2:17 PM
I marched up Broadway as a 99er and was proud to do it , but there were guys near me in masks and I don't blame them.
With cameras and videos shooting us from every angle , you know some of them were cops and spooks. Given that OUR government stated in the sunday NYT that it had the right to issue a secret memo to kill an American Citizen , and murder him in cold blood without a trial , we have to assume that we are Profiled and Marked as a 'criminal' now for marching up our street.
Whose Street , Our Street !
Stay Strong Bradley Manning
Posted by billb | October 10, 2011 3:15 PM
"Speaking truth to power" - Is that what we're calling espionage and borderline treason these days? I missed that change to Webster's. And yes, I can tell you from personal experience that a Marine Brig is not a place you want to spend any time. But Pvt. manning betrayed his country, and his oath to defend it. He is where he should be, and if convicted, where he should remain for the rest of his life.
Posted by HMLA-267 | October 10, 2011 4:34 PM
"Pvt. manning betrayed his country, and his oath to defend it."
I guess I missed the trial...
Posted by dman | October 10, 2011 7:24 PM
All in due time dman...
Posted by HMLA-267 | October 10, 2011 7:43 PM
Here's another good reason:
With Carnegie Mellon's cloud-centric new mobile app, the process of matching a casual snapshot with a person's online identity takes less than a minute.... researchers at Carnegie Mellon were able to not only match unidentified profile photos from a dating website (where the vast majority of users operate pseudonymously) with positively identified Facebook photos, but also match pedestrians on a North American college campus with their online identities.
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/09/cloud-powered-facial-recognition-is-terrifying/245867/
Posted by MWW | October 10, 2011 8:18 PM
Another article about facial recognition software:
http://www.alternet.org/news/152231/5_unexpected_places_you_can_be_tracked_with_facial_recognition_technology/?page=entire
Posted by Ex-bartender | October 10, 2011 9:24 PM
There are many forms of masks.
The activity of keeping something secret is also a mask.
Calling something one name while actions are doing something else is a form of a mask.
How about transparency in government, are those who pull strings on decisions made behind closed doors masked?
But then, when it comes to those protesting, and with the many cameras on them, they are the ones now who should be ever so transparent?
When we live in a society where transparency, justice and fairness is across the board,
maybe individuals wouldn’t feel the need to hide.
Posted by clinamen | October 10, 2011 9:58 PM
Fear of losing one's job might be one factor. A lot of employers look for any reason they can to reduce head count.
I really don't think that job security is an issue for the masked protesters in Portland.
Posted by Jon | October 10, 2011 11:15 PM
They are probably worried about losing their public union jobs.
Posted by poncho | October 11, 2011 12:57 AM
Heard a women interviewed on the radio yesterday from the Occupy DC demonstration, said with her colleagues they were commited to taking down the New York Stock Exchange from the internet. Since cyber warfare is a good way to earn hard time, can't blame 'em for wanting to be anonymous.
Posted by Newleaf | October 11, 2011 5:11 AM
...how is covering your face anything other than a statement that you are a thug? I certainly understand the risk of losing a job for taking a stand...
I think you answered your own question, teresa.
Posted by tommyspoon | October 11, 2011 6:49 AM
Manning isn't a spy or traitor. He wasn't wasn't in contact with any enemies, he wasn't promised any rewards and received nothing of benefit from the ordeal. He wanted to help stop these Illegal Wars. Gee where did that word go Dems??
I am surprised at Jack's silence on this issue.
Posted by Pistolero | October 11, 2011 7:33 AM
I really don't think that job security is an issue for the masked protesters in Portland.
Bingo! Which is one reason why many people - masked or not - are protesting.
Posted by Ex-bartender | October 11, 2011 8:53 AM
Meanwhile, in NY, where a mask in public can result in arrest, the Wall St arm of the Murdoch empire has proffered:
"New York's law dates back to 1845, when lawmakers tried to quell uprisings by tenant farmers who 'used disguises to attack law enforcement officers,' according to a later U.S. Court of Appeals ruling. A dip in the price of wheat left many in debt to landowner Stephen Van Rensselaer IV.
After Mr. Rensselaer moved to evict tenants, disgruntled farmers disguised themselves as 'Indians,' dressed in 'calico gowns and leather masks' and attacked agents of the landlords. The court papers said the tactics adopted by these rebel groups ranged from 'tarring and feathering' to murder, including a sheriff.
The law was amended in 1965 to prevent masked gatherings of two or more people, with a significant exception: 'a masquerade party or like entertainment.' It received substantial attention in 1999 when, on the basis of the law, the city rejected a request from splinter group of the Ku Klux Klan to hold a masked protest in Manhattan.
Eugene O'Donnell, a professor of police science at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, said arrests for violating the antimask laws are uncommon.
'It's just another tool that police have if they need to use it,' he said. 'Cops figure that if you're covering your face [at a protest], it's probably not for a good reason.'"
http://on.wsj.com/nNZoLh
Perhaps if everyone in the Occupy Portland gathering wore UO/Nike football helmets with face shields, there would be no controversy here other than institutional rivalry. Demonstrators would certainly be safer.
BTW, anyone in a tent who has endured last night's rain and the rain of the previous days deserves more respect than has been accorded here.
Posted by Gardiner Menefree | October 11, 2011 9:10 AM
In Cradle of the Revolution Boston, 129 people were arrested, beginning "at about 1:20 a.m.," allegedly, according to the mayor, because "'...you can't tie up a city'":
http://bo.st/otYKNd
Unless, of course, you are not Occupy Boston demonstrators:
"Interstate 93 is backed up with traffic in both directions downtown this morning as a movie films near the Zakim Bridge, state police said in an advisory."
http://bo.st/op5sGP
Posted by Gardiner Menefree | October 11, 2011 9:35 AM
Gardiner Menefree,
Good Point.
We have a river city, I have brought up the subject of river transportation, ferries to transport people, guess that isn't part of the conversation. Instead we have more and more traffic congestion, thanks to pdx "plans."
Think some "unmasking" has already been done, and perhaps we need to unpeel more as to who has been benefiting from pdx "plans."
Posted by clinamen | October 11, 2011 10:33 AM