Latvia is not defending freedom for the the thought it hates

Freedom of expression – what is it good for? For your neighbor to say that despite the clouds, it is a nice day? For your workmate to say she prefers mayonnaise to ketchup on her french fries? For some dude on the street to shout that he loves a sports team you absolutely despise? This is everyday stuff.

The real test of freedom of speech is how an allegedly free society treats its really extreme, repulsive, provocative and offensive crackpots. Can we truly grant freedom to the thought we hate? Latvia may be failing that test again in the case of Aleksandrs Giļmans, a member of For Human Rights in a Unified Latvia (PCTVL), a pro-Russian party that was voted out of the Latvian parliament or Saeima.

An article Giļmans said he wrote some six years ago was republished. In it, (according to press reports) he downplayed the deportation of some 15 000 Latvian citizens, saying it was not the tragedy that it is made out to be, and adding that Latvians themselves were involved in the deportation of their countrymen. There is probably some truth to the latter, or it is at least worth researching how the Soviet occupation authorities came over lists of whom to arrest and deport and where to to find them.

What has happened now is that the Latvian Security Police, no friends of free expression in the past, have started a criminal investigation of Giļmans for the “crime” of glorifying and justifying genocide,crimes against humanity, crimes against peace and denying that such crimes had occurred. It is the equivalent of a Holocaust denial case in countries where that is forbidden.

While extreme sensitivity to Holocaust issues may be understandable in Germany and Israel, to forbid the peaceful advocacy of a false and offensive viewpoint is, nonetheless, a serious restriction on speech. I am convinced that granting the state the power to punish any speech is more dangerous than the substance of what a private person without police, prosecutors and jails behind them, may say or publish. Giļmans assertions were answered by Latvian historians, who called them nonsense. In a free, democratic society, as a means of dealing with offensive opinion, that is enough. Call off the Security Police. 

Who let the dogs out - a clarification

To update and clarify my earlier post on the concerns I have about using a repressive police agency against some bad journalism, it was not the National Alliance Saeima deputy Jānis Dombrava who complained to the Security Police about coverage of the events of March 16 in a television news spot on the Russian language First Baltic Channel (PBK). Dombrava actually complained to the National Electronic Media Council (NEPLP, the Latvian abbreviation), which, in a sense, is the right place to go. It seems that the NEPLP then submitted the case to the Security Police - the agency that arrests economics lecturers for commenting on banks, the currency and the economy.
Dombrava explained his actions on Twitter but said he was pleased that the Security Police had taken the case. I find that worrisome, but I have set the facts straight as to how this case ended up in the hands of Latvia's neo-KGB lite. Sorry about the inaccuracy, Jānis.
Which brings me to the next point - should the NEPLP (or NEMC in English) be forging this kind of relationship with a repressive agency that has arrested and charged people for exercising free speech (which was clearly the case with the economist Dmitrijs Smirnovs in 2008)? The NEMC has its own means of censuring and administratively punishing the media. The Security Police should be kept as far as possible from any involvement in the content of electronic or other media. If anything, the case in question, where some anti-Semitic shouting on the soundtrack of a news spot was attributed or imputed, in the Russian translation, to the wrong person, merits this kind of censure or administrative action, at worst. There may also be a civil case by the man who was arguing (politely, with no anti-Semitic wording) with two representatives of the Anti-Fascist movement who were trying to restore the wreath they had laid (see the earlier post), since it was implied that he shouted "Jews do not belong here".  Not true, although someone did shout that and it would have been part of a story that, while the man, apparently representing the organizers of the Latvian Legion commemoration, was having a tense discussion with the Anti-Fascists, someone did shout something against Jews.
As for the NEMC, please use your own tools for settling matters with media distortions and inaccuracies. To use the Security Police is so post-Soviet. 

Nationalists turn dangerous dogs on bad journalism

Latvia’s National Alliance (NA), which I have always suspected to be discreetly (and sometimes not so) teetering on the edge between democracy and (crypto)authoritarianism, has called out the worst of the dogs in Latvia on what I will be the first to say seems to be a ratshit piece of distorted TV news.

Jānis Dombrava, a parliament or Saeima deputy from the NA filed charges with the Latvian Security Police (the guys who arrest college economics instructors for commenting on the economy) against the Russian language TV channel First Baltic Channel.  The reason was an alleged distortion of events ahead of the March 16 commemoration event for the German-drafted Latvian Legion.

I arrived too late at this event to see what happened myself, but from other news reports and You Tube footage, representatives of the Latvian Anti-Fascist Committee and Europarliamentarian Tatyana Zhdanok arrived some time ahead of the planned Legion (formally, Waffen-SS) commemoration and laid a wreath by the Freedom Monument in memory of  the victims of Nazism. The wreath even had a ribbon with these words in Latvian on it.

Some time after the wreath was laid, persons apparently somehow sympathizing with the organizers of the Legionnaire event arrived and covered the anti-Fascist wreath with tulips, then placed a red-white-red emblem representing the Latvian flag and the shoulder flash of the Latvian Legion over the defaced wreath. This was, by any standard, an act of vandalism, since the base of the Freedom Monument is often the site for flower and wreath-layings and different floral arrangements have always peacefully co-existed. Zhdanok and Josif Koren of the Anti-Fascist Committee noticed the defacement of their wreath from nearby and approached to try to restore it and move the large insignia.

At this point a confrontation started with someone who acted as if he represented the organizers of the Legion commemoration.  He tried to prevent Zhdanok and Koren from taking away the insignia and restoring their wreath. He firmly but politely asked them to leave, as “the next event” was about to start. On one of the You Tube videos, there is a point in the confrontation at which a voice off-camera shouts “ Jews do not belong here!” Koren is Jewish and I believe Zhdanok is also of Jewish descent, so this was a provocative and insulting remark, but it was not uttered by the man with whom both were having an argument over the wreath.

In the First Baltic Channel news item (I do not understand Russian, but got the gist of it), the sound of the male voice saying “Jews do not belong here” was attributed to the man with whom Zhdanok and Koren were arguing. From what I have seen, he said nothing of the kind, although the remark seems to have come from one of a not insignificant number of wackos who had gathered for the Legion commemoration.

The Russian language TV spot  appears to have been, to put it mildly, a manipulation of the truth that should be exposed, denounced and perhaps reprimanded by the National Electronic Media Council. Some journalist organizations should also censure this kind of thing.

However, whatever distortion the First Baltic Channel may have made, it is no reason to run to Latvia’s “neo-KGB”, the Security Police, whose record on free speech and press freedom is spotty, to say the least. While the TV channel’s violation of journalistic ethics is reprehensible, it is a greater danger to journalistic freedom to use a repressive police agency as a tool of enforcing “good journalism”. Even if the blatant distortions by the First Baltic Channel is not the best test case, dragging them before the Security Police, even getting the Security Police involved in media content in any way will have a chilling effect on all media (perhaps, especially, the Russian-language media).

All of which leads me back to the nagging thought that just under the surface of the NA’s nationalist and democratic veneer, there may be an authoritarian streak that grabs for the biggest and most (unpredictably) dangerous stick around, to invoke repression rather than criticism and debate. And while on the subject of March 16, it reminds me of a very interesting man, an American academic from Lithuania that I met on the fringes of the March 16 event. He is Dovid Katz, whose main activity is the study of Baltic dialects of Yiddish, but who also aligns with the Anti-Fascist view that yes, fascism is really coming back to the Baltics because some old geezers gather along with some younger wackos and neo-Nazis. I honestly believe that these anti-Fascist guys have the volume, brightness and contrasted jacked up all the way on their picture of things. No, the Nazis are not really coming back in the Baltics or Eastern Europe. Yes, there are wackos around, as in the US (where Nazis marched in Skokie in the 1970s, all kinds of crackpot racist and anti-Semitic or perversely philo-Semitic Jesus is returning to the Temple in Jerusalem so glory to Israel sects about) and that is about it.

As far as I know, the NA didn’t condemn the defacement of the wreath laid by Zhdanok and Koren, which would have been the right thing to do. They at times traipse around issues of anti-Semitism (one of their members, who was criticized for this, even used the term “intelligent anti-Semitism”, whatever that means). This is the kind of stuff that feeds the paranoia about the Nazis coming back. Calling in the Security Police feeds my paranoia about a party in the government undermining media freedom.

Latvia: Moving toward a "police state lite?"

I'm putting some pieces together, maybe too few, maybe not enough, but it is looking more and more like Latvia is drifting toward becoming a “police state lite”. Let's look at what has happened in recent weeks.

A court lifted a ban by the Riga city authorities on holding a march and flower-laying event on July 1 to commemorate the “liberation” of Riga from Soviet occupation in 1941 when Germany invaded the USSR. When one of the official organizers of the march, Uldis Freimanis, an activist for fringe causes, failed to show up for the event because he was summoned for questioning by the Security Police, the “regular” municipal and national police had a technicality on which to stop the march by some few tens of individuals. The main organizer was not present! One police force “helped” the other police to ban free expression that had been correctly sanctioned by a Latvian court.

Just to set the record straight as to where I stand.This march was a dubious undertaking, to say the least, since the Nazis were hardly interested in restoring an independent, democratic Latvia, but simply making the nation part of Ostland, a province of Hitler's empire. The Latvians were considered racially a few levels below the Aryan Germans, while Jewish Latvian citizens and any European (often Austrian) Jews, to whom Latvia had given refuge in the late 1930s were rounded up for extermination.

When Hitler started running short of cannon fodder, the German occupation regime in Latvia started drafting or otherwise strongly urging young Latvians to “volunteer” for two Waffen SS divisions formed to fight on the Eastern Front. The so-called Latvian Legion suffered enormous casualties. The formation of the Legion was, in effect, its own punishment for those who want to look at things in these terms.

However misguided, ignorant or simply pro-Nazi the organizers of the planned July 1 march were, they were correctly granted the right to express their views (and freedom of speech is tested by the expression of offensive views, not by public rallies to praise how blue the sky is or how fine it is that summer is warm). The police, it almost seems, conspired to prevent that free expression and even made a few arrests on July 1. Free expression, backed by a court, lost out to the police.

At almost the same time, the Security Police brought criminal charges against the author of an article in the Russian language portal gorod.lv, which is based in Daugavpils, for suggesting that the deportations and repression by the Soviet occupation authorities on June 13-14, 1941 was not harsh enough. For me, this is personal, since my grandfather, Andrejs Zeidaks and his family, were on the list of those to be deported in a later action (precluded by the arrival of the German army). However, this is not sufficient reason for me to celebrate anything other than my grandfather being saved by historical chance, nor to ask that freedom of expression be limited in Latvia. The crackpot author of the offensive gorod.lv article should be protected by the right to free speech, period!

Finally, there is the case, documented by the police's own video, of the Latvian theater and film director Viesturs Kairišs going home with his wife and a family friend/professional colleague after a night in the bars of the Old Town. Suffice it to say that Kairišs was not stone cold sober and was calmly walking with both ladies on his arms (this can be seen on the video). He apparently joked with a police patrol about getting a ride home, and this led to both him and a foreign opera singer getting arrested (the latter scuffling with police).

Even the police video shows that they were not dealing with aggressive, bellowing, stumbling, disoriented drunks (of which there sometimes is no lack in Old Riga as the night turns to early morning). The arrest of Kairišs and his companion (his wife was left alone) was a case of poor, perhaps malicious use of police discretion (if the police acted on every technical violation of the law, there would be hundreds of thousands of people in Latvia's jails). The cops simply didn't appreciate the man's sense of humor and punished him for it.

These incidents suggest to me that Latvia is continuing to move toward (or already is, with many unreported and unpublicized incidents) a “police state lite”. The most disturbing trend is in the repression of free speech that started with summoning a old lady who wrote an angry letter to then prime minister Aigars Kalvitis to the Security Police, followed by the detention of an economics lecturer from Ventspils, Dmitrijs Smirnovs, for published remarks about the stability of the national currency and the banking system (aren't those part of the economy and economists are, like, trained to comment and analyze the economy?).

I'm writing this post while in the US for a few days more (the land of the First Amendment, but not without problems of its own), so I may not be up on all of the details of what has been happening in Latvia since June 20, when I flew over here. But I think you don't need a weatherman to tell which way the wind blows...

Latvian State Chancellery asks Security Police to hound news agency reporter

The Latvian State Chancellery has reportedly asked the notorious Latvian Security Police to start surveillance on a senior reporter with the news agency LETA after she obtained details of how European Union (EU) funds were to be spent for "increasing the administrative capacity" of the agency.

Emilija Kozule, a reporter covering the Latvian parliament, the Saeima, told this blogger she was informed by a Saeima deputy that Gunta Veismane, the head of the State Chancellery, had threatened to have the Security Police wiretap Kozule' s phone calls and otherwise put her under surveillance on suspicion of disclosing confidential government information.

It is not clear whether a budget for spending EU funds can be considered confidential.

Kozule obtained the budget details during a meeting of the Saeima European Affairs committee on February 8 and published a story detailing the planned spending of LVL 6.39 million (almost USD 13 million). Members of the committee, who also had access to the budget, had expressed skepticism about some of the spending projects, including sums for various ill-defined "evaluations" and " assessments" .

One item proposes spending LVL 20 000 (USD 40 000) "evaluation of the possibility of centralization of support functions for the requirements of a functional audit." The budget, as reported by Kozule in her LETA story, contains many other items with similar phrasing.

The Latvian Security Police (Drošības Policija) gained notoriety in November, 2008, when they detained an economics instructor for public remarks made about the Latvian banking system and the currency, the lat.

Security police sought to recruit neo-Nazi to inform on journalists

The Latvian Security Police (Drošības Policija/DP) sought to recruit Valdis Rošāns, a self-proclaimed neo-Nazi, to inform on other radical nationalists as well as two "mainstream" journalists and bloggers.

Rošāns, who writes on the internet with the nickname Fēnikss (the Phoenix), has published an account on several Latvian-language website describing a raid on his residence by officers of the DP on December 10, 2008. The DP seized most of his computers, mobile phones, videos and DVDs and other electronic equipment. They also found two shotgun shells that could be used to bring weapons charges against Rošāns.

DP agents seized Rošāns' phone despite pleas that he needed it to arrange to pick up his grandfather at the hospital where he was being treated for cancer.

Rošāns was taken to a DP office for interrogation and was offered a chance to avoid serious consequences (charges of inciting national hatred as well as the weapons charge that could be hung on the two shell inadvertantly left by someone in Rošāns apartment) by becoming an informer for the DP. He was asked to inform on his radical nationalist cohorts (a questionable, but not irrational demand) as well as on this blogger and Māris Zanders, an internet columnist, editor and commentator at LETA at the time.

These requests apparently came after the December, 2008 search and interrogation, as the so-called Penguin Movement (pingviniem.lv), an informal, democratic and non-violent resistance group, did not appear until at least after January 1, 2009, the day after then Prime Minister Ivars Godmanis' New Year speech in which he compared the population during an economic crisis with " penguins who huddle in the cold". The Penguin Movement has no formal leaders, although Zanders was seen as a spokesman and organizer of a "walkabout" near the Latvian parliament, leaving appropriate "gifts" for deputies. All was in a spirit of mockery, irony and black humor.

The attempt to recruit Rošāns to spy on the Penguins is laughable, since he would not be admitted to any confidential plans or discussions of this informal group, whose basic values are democratic, non-violent and open. Of course, no one would prevent Rošāns or any other radical nationalists from coming to a Penguin meeting (there have been only a few in early 2009) to exchange views.

My own relationship with Rošāns has been one of heated debate on a couple of internet forums -- my own, largely inactive Latvian-language libertarian blog at blogiem.lv, and on the (non-crackpot) nationalist website www.zemessargs.lv. I have met him a couple of time in person. I think he is a person that can be influenced by argument and debate, although I disagree strongly with his views. I will not call the police because of what he says or writes.

There may or may not be some merit to the DP monitoring radical nationalists (they should be left alone, I believe, unless they are breaking laws involving direct harm to others), but it is more that dubious that the DP is using people to inform on mainstream, democratic political movements and journalists. It confirms my suspicion that the DP is a kind of neo-KGB, using the same methods as the Soviet secret police.

Paranoia runs deeper : Blogger questioned by Security Police

The Latvian Security Police have questioned a blogger who regularly contributes to a blog site maintained by Kristaps Skultelis (nickname Krizdabz), one of Latvia's better-known and popular bloggers. Writing under the pseudonym Ierindas Pilsonis (Ordinary Citizen), the man(whose first name is Raitis) has harshly criticized the Latvian state and government as being little more than a rapacious mafia and has said in some posts that revolutionary violence against such a system would be justified.
The blogger, who is at least 50 years old (he mentions an encounter with the Soviet KGB in 1978, when, presumably, he was an adult) describes being questioned by a polite young Security Police officer at a dingy regional Security Police office in Rēzekne, in eastern Latvia (Krizdabz comes from that area). He describes the office as poorly equipped and relates several bizarre incidents -- such as the officer reading excerpts from his earlier blog posts that had been faxed to the regional office. The officer also asked who prints "Ordinary Citizen's" blogs as if totally clueless that blogs are electronic media and are not disseminated in printed form (except as smudged faxes inside the Security Police). The blogger was also asked what political group or foreign country he was working for (as if his blog posts had been paid by someone). He was also questioned about his relationship with Krizdabz. The whole post in Latvian can be read here. I don't know how it would survive a translation with Google Language Tools, but worth a try.
The way things look -- with the Strategic Analysis Commission of the Latvian President's office saying that public trust in the institutions of government has collapsed -- the state is increasingly paranoid about anyone expressing angry criticism and is sending chilling signals not only to the critics, but to anyone giving them a forum. That does not change the fact that people in Latvia are increasingly frustrated and angry with what they see as a corrupt, incompetent (well, maybe not the current one) government that took the nation to the edge of bankruptcy and then brought on economic strictures (at least as applied by the government) that have devastated health care, education and pensions, with more devastation to come in the next round of budget cuts.

A subversive and revolutionary appeal?

Here is a quick translation of the anonymous call for a mass demonstration to protest government austrity on November 13. To find out (and prosecute??) those responsible, the Latvian Security Police have started an investigation.

Thanks to Didzis Melbiksis, fellow blogger (in Latvian and Swedish) and journalist for publishing it in his blog.

It should be a comfort to any terrorist sleeper cells or foreign spies that the Security Police are busy seeking the authors of this:

The state is only starting to save (cut spending--J.K).

It will take away more, and not from itself.

Therefore we must resist and show that we don't consent to this,

Let's continue a tradition and gather on the 13th, this time, in November in the Dom Square and by the Saeima (parliament building -- J.K.)

Let us show that we are not indifferent.

This information is being sent now, so you can make time and we can prepare for a MUCH larger picket.

Let us take along friends, parents, everyone.

Let us decide on our own salaries and say what we think of the government loudly!

\

Spread this news to others, together we will be able to do it!

Latvia seeks to upgrade thought police, increase the chill

The Latvian government is considering a proposal to increase the powers of the Security Police to question and issue warnings to persons whose behavior "shows signs of illegal activity that could harm state security" according to a recent report (in Latvian) in Diena.

If adopted, the expanded powers -- aimed clearly at speech and expression, not actions-- would increase the chilling effect of the Security Police on free expression and debate. It would allow Security Police officers to question persons (including a summons to police facilities) and demand "explanations" for their activity.

The Security Police have already shown that their threshold for intervention against expression is at times very low and inconsistent. Last fall, the Security Police detained Dmitrijs Smirnovs, a college economics lecturer, for saying in a public discussion that he though people should not keep money in Latvia's banks nor Latvian lats. The authorities also questioned a musician who joked about not running off to take money out the bank during a concert. These incidents brought international attention to violations of freedom of expression by the Latvian Security Police.

Since then, there have been hundreds of mentions and discussions of the possible devaluation of the lat, the soundness of the Latvian financial system, and the wisdom of Latvia's economic policies, ranging from Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman, The Wall Street Journal, the Financial Times (the former all being beyond the reach of the Security Police) to statements by local economists (Alf Vanags of BICEPS) and many bloggers and internet commentators. Except for Smirnovs, no one that I know of has been detained.

There have been cases of the Security Police acting against persons expressing radical political views, notably a neo-Nazi writing under the pen name Fenikss. His interrogation by the Security Police several weeks ago (the second in a year) indicates that the police of "prophylactic talks" dating back to the Soviet perestroika era KGB, was already being applied.

Before the late 1980s, the KGB would simply arrest dissidents, but it discovered (given its past as an all powerful institution of terror and repression) that it could silence or dampen dissent by the chilling effect alone. It was enough to have a talk with the KGB over coffee or tea to make one wonder whether expressing one's views was the smart thing to do.

Now the Security Police, looking more and more like the "liberal" era KGB (as it takes on the function of "overseeing" economic and political debate in society) is about to be handed more powers to exercise the "chilling effect" -- one of the most powerful arguments against any restrictions on free speech under at least US First Amendment practice. In other words, the mere threat of trouble will prevent people from speaking or writing who would otherwise do so.

Having, for the time being, abandoned its efforts to repress discussion of the economy and currency, the Security Police is now apparently being prepared to go after persons who discuss forms of resistance and disobedience to the current government's policies of extreme, sudden, and seemingly capricious cuts in public services and entitlements, effectively closing down the national health care system, reducing public education to a minimum and slashing pensions.

What the government fears is that there will be public discussion of such things as civil disobedience, tax resistance (why pay for nothing) and, of course, the harsher issue of street violence and rebellion as the fall draws closer and perhaps tens of thousands of Latvians will lose their unemployment benefits. While I believe violence will solve nothing, I think the possibility of new riots should be freely and openly discussed, without the Security Police interfering. If a person who has lost their job and unemployment benefit, who has seen one parent deprived of elective surgery and another retired but working relative (perhaps a surgeon) driven from their job by pension cuts, who sees their child's math teacher paid less than a street sweeper, that person understandably should be able to talk about the Latvian government and state in the words of the Bloodhound Gang: We don't need no water let the motherfucker burn!

More on efforts to ban Baltic Pride, neo-nazi re-arrested

The Riga City Council has succeeded in getting a re-hearing of whether the Baltic Pride march and public gathering should be allowed on May 16. The responsible commission will be meeting on Thurday, May 14. I comment this in the video.
Also, the Latvian Security Police have detained a young neo-Nazi for publishing what they call hateful, racist and homophobic comments on internet portals in Latvia. Again, it is a pure freedom of expression issue, just like the Nazi march in Skokie, Illinois in the US in the 1970s. One can find this guy's remarks repulsive, but that does not justify arresting him. He writes under the nickname Fenikss and should be freed with all so-called hate speech charges dropped. Fenikss was already detained once late last year and released.
Or may 34 members of the Riga City Council should turn themselves in along with the crypotfascist Reverend Janis Smits for writing hate speech about the Baltic Pride? :)

Latvian government approves totalitarian surveillance

The Latvian government has approved and will pass on to the parliament (Saeima) a law allowing the Security Police, without a court order, to track people's location through their mobile phones, to get records of their conversations and SMS traffic, as well as to track e-mail correspondence and fixed-line phone traffic.
This was reported by the investigative TV show Nekā personīga (Nothing Personal) on TV3 on April 5. According to the reporter, the police will be able to ask for records that are at least 18 months old, but it is unclear whether the Security Police and other institutions, such as the Criminal Police, the State Revenue Service and the Bureau for the Protection of the Constitution (SAB) could be able to obtain real time data.
The law was drafted by the Security Police, which says it has no difficulty getting court orders for wiretapping and tracking mobile phone users.
The TV3 investigators said there had been cases of police authorities threatening to conduct searches of mobile operators who failed to comply (this prior to the law being proposed or passed). Legal experts contacted by TV3 said the draft law represented a violation of European human rights laws.
One wonders whether this legislation is aimed at flash mobs, the Penguin Movement and any activities using e-mail and SMS to organize protests and, yes, civil disobedience and ultimately, violence against government institutions.
There is still some hope that a domestic and international outcry could deter the Saeima from passing this law.

Keep doing this work

There was a news report that the Latvian Security Police were going after some people who were forging and selling Latvian passports. This, plus watching out for real terrorist threats to Latvia, is a legitimate function of this agency. It's not like I think the Security Police are totally useless and repressive. When they attack free speech and try to chill debate in Latvian society, they are in their neo-KGB mode, but that is not to say that there aren't some legitimate functions. So, have a nice day, guys and gals.

Latvian Security Police Question Radio Journalist

The Latvian Security Police summoned Didzis Melbiksis,  a journalist from Latvian Radio, for questioning in connection with a post on what was apparently his private blog. Melbiksis told me this at an informal meeting of supporters of the Penguin Movement and I did not get all the details. What he posted, for informational purposes, was an anonymous document circulated on the internet ahead of the January 13 riots calling for a violent revolt against the Latvian government. While some of the suggestions in the document (such as preparing Molotov cocktails, which would have started fires and caused burns to anyone hit) were not carried out, the appeal was, in fact,  followed (perhaps through inspiration, not direct cause) by the riot.

I believe that even pamphlets calling for revolution are covered by the freedom of speech. One such example -- The American Declaration of Independence. The ideas of the Declaration could, by analogy, in some people's opinion,  be applied to the current situation in Latvia:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Criminal investigation against musican ended

The Latvian Security Police have ended a criminal investigation against the musician Valters Frīdenbergs for allegedly destabilizing the Latvian financial system by comments joking made at a concert in November 2008. No formal charges have been filed.
According to the LETA news agency, the criminal investigation against Ventspils University College lecturer Dmitrijs Smirnovs continues, and he is still banned from leaving the country. Smirnovs was arrested in Ventspils, brought to Riga and detained for questioning for two days in November following publication of a report in a newspaper of a public discussion where he said that people should not keep their money in Latvian banks and in the Latvian currency, the lat.
The farcical investigation against Frīdenbergs has ended, but the case of Dmitrijs Smirnovs, a blatant violation of free speech, must not be forgotten. The chilling effect of what was done to him by Latvia's Neo-KGB still affects him and others intimidated by the actions of the Security Police.
People should keep up the pressure and express their continued outrage that the criminal investigation continues against the Ventspils academic. E-mail your protests to dp@dp.gov.lv.

Latvian Security police praise "chilling effect" of their actions

The Latvian Security Police have praised the "chilling effect" of their own actions in detaining an economics lecturer, questioning a musician and starting criminal proceedings against both late last year.

Juris Leitietis, the head of the counter-terrorism unit of the Security Police said (according to press reports):

"Maybe some say that these two criminal proceedings are senseless, but already now one can say, that they have, to a certain degree, given results, because people think whether they are acting correctly when not thinking about their statements in the public space. Everyone--starting from journalists, show hosts and ending with individual (internet) chatters- after these criminal proceedings started to think somewhat how to express their thoughts," Leitietis said, adding that it was one of the goals, to ensure that people do not harm others, even unintentionally."

I am a journalist. I tend to write based on facts and different sources. I try to avoid imprudent assertions (though I will quote imprudent people as part of a good story)I am not intimidated by the authoritarian pig Juris Leitietis and his Neo-KGB. But I will make one statement of opinion about this kind of thinking: FUCK THE SECURITY POLICE! Clear and simple. 

Neo-Nazi reportedly released by Security Police

Valdis Rošāns, a Latvian neo-Nazi who published his vehemently anti-Semitic and homophobic views on several internet forums under the nickname Fenikss, has been released from custody by the Latvian Security Police.  This according to reports from his acquaintances.

At the time of his detention, Rošāns also had his computers and other electronics seized. They are to be returned to him, according to a source who messaged me through the Latvian social network draugiem.lv.

The source said that Fenikss was detained on a complaint from the Latvian  internet discussion portal dialogi.lv, a strong advocate of measures to restrain hate speech on internet forums. While dialogi.lv has hosted discussions on a number of issues, including inter-ethnic relations in Latvia (a subject that draws rants in any number of forums in this country), it has posted permanent links to its "Internet without Hatred" (Internets bez naida) initiative.

My earlier post on Fenikss' detention has drawn no comment, which is no surprise. While there must be some readers who agree with my free-speech absolutist position (governments should not be given the power to intimidate or arrest people for their expressions alone), there is little sympathy for the content of what Rošāns or people like him write or say. Standing up for a Holocaust denying (or even a Holocaust supporting) crank's free speech rights is not going to draw the big crowds in the blogosphere.

My point remains -- the Latvian Security Police claim the right and use their police powers to repress the free speech of individuals such as the economist Dmitrijs Smirnovs and the far less sympathetic Valdis Rošāns. They are acting as a thought police. 

They will stop acting as a thought police when they reject complaints based on expression alone. While the police have a duty to listen to my complaints, if I complain that my neighbor is wearing an irritatingly green shirt, the police should respond to this complaint by saying that there is no crime.  Taste is not regulated by the criminal law. Nor should the criminal law of any democracy regulate pure speech and expression -- written and spoken words outside the most stringently narrow definitions of, say, the largely rejected clear and present danger standard in the US. 

From economists to neo-Nazis

According to unconfirmed reports, the Latvian Security Police have detained Valdis Rošāns, a self-proclaimed neo-Nazi who has been writing his views extensively on the internet (in Latvian) using the nickname FENIKSS.
The Security Police are also said to have taken Rošāns computers, peripherals, disks and tapes. I have engaged in debates with Rošāns/FENIKSS on a Latvian language nationalist forum (where FENIKSS is also generally regarded as a crackpot) www.zemessargs.lv (zemes sargs means guardian of the land. I was invited to comment on the forum as representative of libertarian, "liberal" (this is a nationalist curse word :) ) and otherwise alien viewpoints by the forum administrator, Jānis Iesalnieks, a young Latvian lawyer and political activist in the Visu Latvijai (All for Latvia) youth-oriented nationalist political party.
Iesalnieks reported on Rošāns arrest, also disclosing his real identity, on the nationalist forum.
While I do disagree with many of the views expressed on www.zemessargs.lv, and while I find FENIKSS/Rošāns views pretty crazy and disgusting, I nonethless see a possible violation of free expression here.
I also think that by going after someone that both Latvians and world-opinion would find distasteful, the Security Police are trying to restore their image as fighters against extremists and possible terrorists (Rošāns republished some satirically violent cartoons of a little man shooting caricatures of Latvian politicians and public figures, something I saw as an ironic comment on angry thoughts we all have. The real cartoonist is unknown.). Indeed, there are other countries where views like those of FENIKSS/Rošāns would be prosecuted under hate speech laws. I don't think hate speech laws are a good idea, nor do the free expression advocates at Article 19, nor, for that matter, would the First Amendment of the US Constitution tolerate this kind of detention.
By harassing a young neo-Nazi crackpot, the Security Police may be trying to restore their image after their detention of economist Dmitrijs Smirnovs and questioning of musician Valters Frīdenbergs. This caused an international uproar.
I don't think too many people will rally around Valdis Rošāns, but his case should be put on the record. Should we feel comfortable as long as the police only go after people whose views we, and society in general, consider repulsive? No, think I.

Bank of Latvia: detentions "laughable, pathetic"

Bank of Latvia (the Latvian central bank) president Ilmārs Rimšēvics told the newspaper Diena on December 3 that the actions of the Latvian Security police in detaining a university lecturer, questioning a musician and starting criminal proceedings against both were "laughable and pathetic".
Rimšēvics said:

Logically, the detention of these two people in connection with spreading rumors is, unfortunately, laughable and pathetic, for they were not the true rumor-mongers. The real rumor-mongers are watching this and laughing. The rumor-mongers work with SMS messages, naming specific dates when decisions will be made, even saying what the new lats rate will be. No such person has been detained. I truly feel uncomfortable, seeing how singers and lecturers are detained.

This is fine and should be put on the record. But Rimšēvics also told the media in an earlier statement (that seemed to refer to the Security Police actions) that in other countries, rumor-mongers would be arrested within 15 minutes of expressing their views about the finance system or currency. One can only guess which authoritarian regimes and dictatorships would act this way.
And while we are compiling idiot statements of the month, we cannot forget what Mārtiņš Bičevskis, Finance Ministry state secretary said about the point of the Security Police action being to scare and intimidate. A valiant defense of the chilling effect, as expressed, if I am not mistaken, to the Wall Street Journal.

More blogs examine free speech violations in Latvia

They keep on coming...

I have found more blogs referring to the violation of the freedom of speech in Latvia by the Security Police (with the consent, I am sure, of the government):

The American Sentinel (a libertarian-leaning blog)

The openly libertarian blog, The Beacon, is worth quoting:

If the U.S. government were to attempt such suppression of criticism, it would have a big job on its hands. In this country, criticism of the government, the economy’s major institutions, and the present state of affairs is nearly universal, so a mass arrest might create a situation in which each guard had to oversee a million prisoners. But, of course, the government would not need to go to such extremes, because of little bit of well-publicized suppression goes a long way in persuading a multitude of potential critics to hold their tongues and keep their fingers off their keyboards.

The conservative National Review Online also mentions the incidents in Latvia.

A slightly strange German-language blog Porky's also writes extensively about this with the headline, freely translated: A Finance Crisis? TO JAIL!!!

The Norwegian internet newsletter E24 also picked up the story.

Nothing has gotten as much negative publicity and ridicule for Latvia in recent years as this idiot move by the Security Police and the government behind it. 

Mention the financial crisis, go directly to jail (and the kangaroos laugh)

Now they know Down Under. This is a piece by AFP's Riga correspondent Alex Tapinsh. The full text is available here. More laughs for the kangaroos.