No, Chicagoans' free speech and civil rights -- and possibly our physical wellbeing -- will be under dire threat. Mayor 1% has already started repressing public mobilizations opposed to this gathering of warmongers and austerity boosters, and his police chief has extensive experience in violently repressing both demonstrators and ordinary people in New York and New Jersey.

Ranm's efforts to quell dissent, to destroy the unalienable rights of protesters to petition their governments for redress will cost the city money.

Since the 1968 Democratic convention and the resulting police riot (See Walker Commission Report) it has been proven, over and over, from Miami 2003, Seattle 1999, Toronto 2010, that the Police cause violence, create conditions in which it is favorable and begin the fighting by using heavy handed tactics.

Rahm is pushing to be the sole contract signer for these international events, ensuring outside consulting firms, specializing in brutal repression of protesters give orders to the Chicago Police Department. When this is over, if history is a predictor, the City of Chicago will be on the hook for millions of dollars for the various civil suits that will need to be filed by those that are only trying to exercise their rights and have been met with Marshall Law and Police brutality.

Rahm has come out swinging, using a blueprint for hindering civil rights and liberties known as The Miami Model. Already using the ridiculous "NewSpeak" of the Miami Model he has shown that he will have no problem following through on the rest.

Establishment of joint, unified, multi-agency command/control network.
Mass purchase of surveillance equipment, riot gear and other supplies.
Training of local law enforcement in "crowd control tactics" and less lethal weapons.
Public relations, "information warfare", newspeak/spin:

"terrorists/violent protesters coming" vs "well trained officers".
"event meaningful target for terrorism."
"police will protect the right to protest."
"anarchists and criminal elements", dramatic Seattle WTO or London imagery.
display of confiscated "weapons" prove malintent.
"unpermitted protests can continue" due to police good will.
independent media targeted, cameras, video confiscated.
March and event permits denied or delayed; delay tactics.
Pro-event/anti-demonstrator promotional tools developed/used in community.
Reluctant officials, civic groups pressured to comply with plan by Secret Service/DHS.
Locations strategically valuable to protesters reserved by law enforcement.
Anti-protest ordinances and other legal hurdles to prevent lawful assembly begin.
Surveillance and disruption of protest organizers begins.
Attempts to divide protest groups and organizers begins in media and meetings.

I don't think Chicago will be any more or less safe than any city hosting summits that are sure to attract protests. I do think however that the more restrictions and denials placed on protests and protesters the greater the probability that those advocating more extreme measures will be listened to.

Most protesters and groups in past demonstrations have been inclined toward peaceful protest. When you start making arrests for not having permits (which were applied for and denied) or refusing orderly protests to occur where the summit attendees will actually see or hear them, that is when people, who would normally be peaceful, start to listen to those who urge more extreme action.

The 1968 convention in Chicago and more recently the Occupy protests in some places
should show that the time things are most likely to turn dangerous or destructive is when protesters are most restricted or denied.

I believe that our mayor and police chief will work closely together to keep our city and citizens safe. Peaceful protests are never an issue and most protestors are peaceful. However, at times, there is a minority that tries to be confrontational and force the city to react. In those situations, the city should be prepared to handle such threats appropriately. I value liberty but my first priority is safety.

Will Chicago remain safe during the NATO/G-8 Summit? No, not if Mayor Emanuel proceeds on his path to restrict freedom of assembly and free speech of the many protesters that will be in and coming to Chicago. Sadly, Mayor Emanuel is already creating an atmosphere for confrontational by calling for massively increased fines for arrest and expansive new curfews in city parks. The Mayor has a entire organization geared to welcoming and opening the city to NATO & G-8 officials, but has not set up a committee to facilitate the free speech and assembly rights of those who are opposed to many NATO & G-8 policies and practices. If Chicago is to respect and welcome the NATO/G-8 Summit to Chicago, it should also respect and welcome protesters who come to challenge the wasteful global militarism of NATO, and failed economic policies of the G-8.

Here's what I just wrote on the Office of Mayor's FB page:

Rahm is setting himself up to go down in history books like "The Boss" Mayor Daley and how he handled the 1968 Democratic Convention protesters, re: this extreme path he's on for the NATO-G8 protests. He's using the guise of law and order to squelch 1st Amendment rights and incite violence. 21st Century technology cannot keep down this worldwide 21st Century revolution we are experiencing. With all the global media compared to '68, Rahm is setting up Chicago to be the epicenter of our nation's "Arab Spring." How he handles this will show his true colors more than any other actions he takes this entire year.

Will a peaceful demonstration turn into a riot? It's all up to the police. Remember, in Chicago, police aren't here to create disorder, the police are here to preserve disorder, so I guess it's all in the hands of the Mayor.

The people who are a part of the G8 Summit will be safe. Tax paying Chicagoians might not be as safe from police brutality.

I think your coverage of the security for the G8/NATO talks is excessive and can create anxiety which may make the situation more volatile. I can understand an occasional report, but there seems to be an obsessive focus on this issue, almost daily.

sorry - duplicate post in Online Privacy - editor you may remove if you see fit:
Downstate/Oglesby

saw the Anonymous threat video you aired .. maybe do an episode on the Illinois 1 way surveillance taping law - sure to be an issue* .. the blogosphere could squelch this issue and save the courts/taxpayers the time/expense

* since this G8 is a world event - world rules should prevail in a Temporary-Federal-District