The world is turning to shit
Tim Dunlop (among others) recently noted that the FBI is treating protestors as if they were terror suspects — notwithstanding the fact that the Bureau “possesses no information indicating that violent or terrorist activities are being planned as part of these protests”. Such heinous crimes as raising money to pay for lawyers and using the internet to recruit supporters were discussed, and people who attempted to videotape arrests were accused of trying to “intimidate” police officers. If they are intimidated by the prospect of having their actions scrutinised publicly, then one must ask serious questions about police tactics. The memo also mentioned protestors’ “training camps”, a term that connotes terrorist activity, while the reality, as described by Jason Raimondo, is “a bunch of hippies playing touchy-feely games with each other and training in techniques designed to minimise violence.”
In recent months massive paramilitary operations targetting protestors in Australia and England have been justified on the grounds that mass demonstrations could provide cover for a terrorist attack on George W Bush; in other words, a mythical threat requires people exercising their fundamental democratic rights to be treated as the worst kind of criminal. Meanwhile, the biggest link between protestors and terrorists/enemies of the state was drawn by the Miami authorities preparing for protests against the Free Trade Area of the Americas. Of the $87 billion budget passed to pay for the US’s increasingly shambolic war on Iraq, $8.5 million was spent on police in Miami. You would be forgiven for thinking Saddam had been spotted sunbaking, but that’s not what it was for — it was to equip a massive paramilitary force to deal with Americans exercising their constitutional freedoms of assembly and speech. Exactly how they jeapordised the Iraq war has not been made clear.
Police invested in an arsenal. They were decked out in camouflage fatigues, body armour and gas masks (but no identifying badges). They were armed with clubs, tasers, mace, tear gas, concussion grenades, devastating array of projectile weapons, shotguns, assault rifles, and of course their fists.
They travelled on motorcycles, pushbikes and horseback, in patrol cars, helicopters and armoured personnel carriers.
As if to make the comparisons between the protestors and Saddam’s Republican Guard complete, they even had embedded reporters tagging along, one of whom was seen repeatedly punching a protestor. I’m sure his coverage was completely unbiased.
Police Chief John Timoney made the terrorist link explicit, saying, “These are outsiders coming in to terrorize and vandalize our city.” The Miami Herald is hardly sympathetic to the protestors’ cause — it believes that “a truly integrated common market that would benefit all in the Americas” — yet it reported that “no significant acts of vandalism or property damage were reported during the day, and no disruptions erupted in outlying areas.” It also concluded that the protest included “few, if any, anarchists”, that “no one who was arrested was carrying a lethal weapon” and that “Property damage was nil.” But having spent all that money on equipping themselves, the police had to justify it. The fact that the protest was almost entirely peaceful, with no real intention to trash the city, would not get in the way of their plans — they managed to arrest and jail over 200 people, and hospitalise a dozen.
The police tactic was to use overwhelming force against even the most obviously peaceful demonstrators. Video footage shows a woman kneeling in prayer in a park. As hundreds of police advance towards her, she begins to run away. She is shot in the back with a rubber bullet. The cameraman who filmed the incident is then shot in the head.
Another film shows police tackling a man to the ground. A group of people tell them to get off him, as he has a broken hand. For their efforts, they are shot with a taser. Later, it shows a police officer using his perspex shield as a weapon, clubbing a protestor repeatedly in the face with its top edge. (A man’s voice can be heard saying, “You’re on tape, sir, calm down.” I guess that’s what the FBI considers “intimidation”.) Further footage shows a middle aged woman, dressed in a suit and doing nothing more offensive than walking on the road carrying a placard. She is shot repeatedly by police.
However, the police were desperate to ensure that it appeared the protestors were at fault. Several groups of police dressed up as Black Bloc anarchists (right down to anti-FTAA badges and stickers on their backpacks). Photos show them casually sauntering beyond the police lines, and eyewitness accounts have them picking fights before being whisked off in paddy wagons. They refused to identify themselves as police, even while arresting people. Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman write that “credible reports say some of those undercover agents may have been provocateurs, and when several of them emerged as some of the most brutal in attacking protesters.”
The United Steelworkers of America, who organised a march and rally during the protests, have called for Timoney’s sacking, and a Congressional inquiry into police brutality, outlining several examples in a letter (pdf) to Democratic and Republican leaders:
-
“When the wife of a retired Steelworker from Grantsville, Utah, verbally protested what she considered the abusive treatment of a student activist at the entrance of the AFL-CIO rally on Friday, November 21, she was slammed to the ground face down by police and a gun was aimed point blank at the back of her head. A Steelworker who witnessed the violent repression reported that she was so terrified that her entire body was literally vibrating.”
-
“In a case of blatant entrapment, a secretary in our International Headquarters in Pittsburgh, and a local Steelworker activist from Wisconsin who had worked all day as a parade marshal and was wearing a bright orange marshal’s vest emblazoned with the words “AFL-CIO Peace Keeper,” were returning to their hotel, when they were directed by armed police to abandon the sidewalk and to proceed down a set of trolley tracks. Once on the tracks, they were immediately pounced upon by armed riot police, handcuffed and arrested. They were forced to remain in cuffs for hours on end, even when visiting the washroom.”
-
“The Co-Director of Citizens’ Trade Campaign was forced to the ground and had a gun put to the back of her head while peacefully attempting to enter the AFL-CIO rally at the Bayfront Amphitheater. Furthermore, the headquarters of Citizens’ Trade and Global Trade Watch were surrounded and under constant surveillance by armed riot police.”
Police were not content with inflicting serious physical injuries on protestors; they also attacked the Wellness Centre, which was effectively a mobile hospital set up at the protest. An officer sprayed pepper spray into the area in which people were being treated for existing chemical burns, and sprayed the faces of witnesses to his action.
The police defended their actions by making outrageous claims — such as Chief John Timoney’s farcical suggestion that it was the protestors who had fired canisters of tear gas. “I got a lot of tear gas,” he said. “We all got gassed. They were loaded to the hilt.” When Sgt Denis Morales showed journalists a cache of items allegedly confiscated from protestors, he added the old bogey, “What you don’t see are the bottles of urine as well as the feces that they intended to throw.” It’s amazing that police are always having sewage thrown at them, yet they can never come up with any evidence. To present this as a case of protestors provoking police is not possible. The police were clearly there to pick a fight — one was overheard saying to nine colleagues, “Let’s go fuck ‘em up.”
Sadly, the violence did not stop with the initial arrests. Police also attacked a solidarity rally outside the lockup. After being told it was an unlawful assembly, protestors began to disperse. They were chased by police, cornered, assaulted with pepper spray and rubber bullets, and ultimately arrested — five blocks away. Reports of brutality while imprisoned continue to emerge. Several men claim to have been locked in small cages, without access to ablutions facilities, and sprayed with pepper spray and high pressure hoses. An Indymedia journalist claims his camera was stolen by police, and he has been locked in solitary confinement without access to a lawyer. His bail has been set at US$10 000. Amnesty International has received reports that “One woman [was] strip-searched by four male officers and left naked.”
So much for civil rights and democracy. The world is turning to shit.
I’ve said it before and I’ll keep saying it…..that’s one very sick society which responds to two extremes - gun and bible.
“a mythical threat”
20 seconds of googling:
MARGOT O’NEILL: Three Singapore-based Al Qaeda terrorist cells targeted not only the US military, but American, British and Australian embassies, as well as American businesses.
From the left-leaning ABC
Uh-huh. Al Qaeda is in Singapore, therefore we need to bring the army out against anti-FTAA protestors in Miami. Sorry. I was obviously wrong, I take it all back.
While you’re at it, oh great master of the truth, could you explain how the woman in the photos above was linked to Al Qaeda, and how kneeling on the grass demonstrated her intention to blow up an embassy, and how that necessitated shooting her repeatedly in the back so that part of her ear is now missing? Because I just can’t see it, sorry.
The cops need more training If firing repeatedly at her back and only hitting ear and look she is still walking. Can you go over and help them train.
How do you expect to be taken seriously, when all you do is whine about how protestors are treated - without ever taking a close, hard look at some of their violent, lawless, and irresponsible actions?
You might be simply voicing your opinion. You might obey the law. But a number of people in these protests are professional shit-disturbers, and are indeed violent/dangerous.
Freedom of speech and assembly is all well and good, so long as people behave themselves. In recent years, it’s gotten out of hand. Many of these protestors are ‘career protestors’. They are professional trouble-makers.
I defend their right to voice their opinion. I do NOT defend their right to break the law. Fuck ‘em. Theya re as bad as the people they speak out against. Two sides of the same coin. Each side believes that their violence is justifiable. Get it?
I support people’s right to non-violent civil disobedience — which may involve breaking the law and even destruction of private property.
I suspect you and I would not agree on much, but we’ll never know, will we, because you’re too gutless to put your name to your comments. And you use a different nickname each time. Brilliant! (How is Canada, by the way?)
1) Congratualtions, you know how to read an ip address. Wow! Such technical savvy.
2) We can debate my “gutlessness” for preferring to remain anonymous at some other time. Nice try at dodging the issue. Typical.
3) Glad to see that you actually admit you support the breaking of the law. Your’e right - you and I would probably agree on very little.
Where would we be if everyone thinks it’s ok to break the law, merely because they believe they are in the right? So easy to hold that position when youa re the “giver”, but I wonder how’d you feel if you were ont he receiving end of that law=breaking? Then you’d be howling.
Once you start down the slippery slope of your rationalization of law-breaking, where do we stop?
p.s. Perhasp YOUR world is turning to shit - but mine certainly isn’t. I think the world’s in the best shape it’s ever been. You come off like a drama queen. (”police state”). You should spend a few years in a real police state (as I have), then you’d have a clue what your’e talking about. Is this the same police state that lets you spew your stupidity without any censorship whatsoever on the Internet, thus enablign your message to be communicated around the world?
More people, have more wealth, more freedom, and more rights, than at any other time in the planet’s history. Stop with the hysterics. They reflect poorly on you.
TO: youareclueless
Hi,
My name’s Matt and I was the one who took the video of Nikki getting shot in the back, right before I was shot in the face an inch above my right eye. You say that “Freedom of speech and assembly is all well and good, so long as people behave themselves.” Well, I was behaving myself. Nikki was behaving herself. A dozen of my other friends who were shot multiple times were all behaving themselves. The police opened fire without warning, without any order that we disperse (which is their legal obligation).
You also said “I do NOT defend their right to break the law. Fuck ‘em. Theya re as bad as the people they speak out against. Two sides of the same coin. Each side believes that their violence is justifiable.” I also do not believe in violence - I was in Miami to peacefully protest in the AFL-CIO permitted march against the FTAA. When the march ended in Bayfront Park, however, the amphitheatre was closed off and minutes later the police began firing on us. I have been to protests before, and was acting under the assumption that nonviolent protestors would be treated with respect. I was wrong. IT WAS THE POLICE WHO BROKE THE LAW, when they opened fire on nonviolent protestors without warning and clearly aimed for people’s faces. If I had been hit an inch lower, I would have lost the sight in my right eye. For doing nothing, but exercising my first amendment right to dissent. I broke no law, I threw no stone, and neither did the others around me.
You say you have been to places where a police state existed. I grew up in South Korea, right next to the biggest college campus in Seoul. I know what real riots are like. The main difference I saw in Miami was that in Korea, before the cops started beating the hell out of students, the students would usually provoke them by hurling (literally) hundreds of molotov cocktails. In Miami, there was no provocation that I saw that warranted anywhere near the level of police violence I witnessed.
Why do you try to lump all of the protestors who were brutalized into the same category of lawless troublemakers? I know it is hard to believe, but we really were assaulted for no reason. I was on the front lines. Watch the video I took at www.tacitconsent.com and judge for yourself.
Matt,
Thanks very much for your reply. I appreciate it. You raise a number of interesting issues.
But let’s start at the top. The title to this thread is “The World Is Turning To Shit”. I disagree STRONGLY with that statement. There have forever been, and there will forever be, problems in the world. So I don’t see how certain incidents would lead one to reach the conclusion that the world is turning to shit. I can understand being frustrated and disheartened by certain events. I share in that. But one should look at the very BIG picture. Many great things about the world. People are always saying things like the world is turning to shit. They’ve been saying it since man was able to talk! heh. It’s nonsensical. Next…
if you were not breaking the law, and you were mistreated, then you should take legal action against whoever assaulted you. Period. Obviously I would never support those types of tactics. All parties involved - the police, the protestors, the anti-protestors, the government, et al have a RESPONSIBILITY to behave in a civilized and legal manner. My point was simple. As soon as one believes that merely because they think they are “right” about an issue that it in some way JUSTIFIES breaking the law, then we are all in big trouble. You can’t have it both ways. No matter which side someone is on, if they believe they are righteous in breaking the law, they are hurting all of us who believe in the rule of law. There are plenty of legal avenues to bring about change and make your voice heard. Those of us who want change should choose those avenues. Breaking the law is not an option. Some groups, like PETA and others, think it’s ok to hurt others all int eh name of their cause. I am disgusted by people who think that way. Because, if you think it’s ok to firebomb a location on behalf of “poor animals”, then you can’t speak out against a whacko who firebombs an abortion clinic. And so on and so on.
I have no way to verify your account of the events that took place. It’s not that I don’t believe you, but I have no PROOF.
You say there was no provocation. I don’t know if you’re right about that or not. But assuming you are correct, I have a feeling that events that have taken place at OTHER protests could have been what triggered the aggressive (re)action by the cops. Many of these protests over the past years have really gotten out of hand. I’m not saying that you or anyone at that particular demonstration deserved it. No, no. Just giving you what may be a PART of the reason that the authorities are getting tougher on the protestors, and perhaps “jumping the gun” when they shouldn’t.
BTW, I do not lump all of the protestors together. Not at all. I believe in treating people as individuals. Always have - always will. That is one reason I don’t like groups. When people are in groups, FREQUENTLY independant and careful thought goes out the window. People do things in groups that they would never do alone.
I do NOT have a hard time believing you. But I think there’s probably more to the story that you and I are unaware of. I’m sure it’s possible that there were things happening that you didn’t see, or were unaware of. Thanks for the link - I will watch the video.
All this because I chose a hyperbolic title for a blog post? Jesus… get a life!