here's that submission for the print section. my name is jennifer bleyer,

give it whatever title you want. thanks!!!


What began as a peaceful, festive march through downtown Los Angeles

became violent tonight as police officers shot high-pressure water and pepper

spray pellets at protesters, and later chased them down on horses while beating

them with batons.


The afternoon

thanks for the detailed description of last night's events

outside the Staples Ctr. mainstream reports from the news services seem to indicate that 40 or so black clad protesters from inside the concert compound area started the violence by chucking bottles, bricks, and chunks of concrete over the 15 foot fence that separated the partiers from the police. you seemed to witness something else: protesters tossing lighter weight stuff at police only after they were provoked. estimates of festival crowd size were placed at 8-9000 in the news reports, yours had the crowd at 50,000. could you further clarify these discrepencies?

I've also heard the 8-9000 figure being tossed around consistently in the corporate press. Based on the account above, this would seem to be (possibly) a post-rally, pre-confrontation count (?). Anyway, if anyone has any photos showing actual crowd-size during the RATM show, could you upload them here so that those of us in other cities could get a better idea of what actually took place? A picture is worth a thousand words. TIA.

MDN

I've read and heard numerous accounts that the police provoked the confrontation last night. They provoked it by their tactics. It was also clear that they came looking for trouble, because they were armed to the hilt. On the other hand, the concertgoers didn't bring tear gas, rubber bullets, batons, and pepper spray to the concert. The instigators in this situation are clearly the police.

The cycle's always the same. A few guys decide to have a bit of a fight, the cops have an excuse to ambush a huge crowd, then the city sides with the cops because all the people being trampled were 50,000 dangerous anarchist agitators in black with gasoline bombs (I have heard a cop source call the protests just that, WAY WAY off the record.)

The cops are playing army. They know no other way. Their chain of command (right up to the mayor) told them they are soldiers in a war, that 50,000 armed and dangerous anarchists were attacking the city, and that they had to hold at all costs, using overwhelming firepower with no previous escalating force. This is the truth. The brass fouled up the tactical plan again. These guys are in a bad war movie. Most of the line officers don't like it either.

I'm really sick of this crap going down in my city. I'm open to any ideas on how to make it stop. A good start would be to finally force the LAPD glass-house inner circle, kicking and screaming, into the real world where cops protect and serve.

1. I was there all day yesterday and left when Rage finished playing, so I did not see the violence. However, given how tightly controlled the situation was all day (on both sides) the violence last night offers itself to two interpretations: A) the police WANTED violence, either to continue the PR about violent protests in the press (which convinces all the locals to stay at home), or for some other reason.

B) it was a random event created by a few immature protestors whipped into an omnipotent frenzy by Rage. Either way the consequences will be played out today.

2. It is important to note that RATM was only allowed to play very quietly, and so the crowd (as a whole) was NOT out of control at all. In fact the entire concert but confusing the momentum of challenging authority with being entertained KILLED the momentum of the day. People wanted to hear some music not speakers - I felt that we were rounded up and pacified.

3. THIS IS NOT A BROAD MOVEMENT: Don't be deluded by Seattle. The presence of organized labor (which is clearly tied to the Democrat power structure and will continue to be absent from any further radical political action) was a singular event. All the harping about 'teamsters and turtles' serves more to help old 60's people consumate their marxist fantasy of a student-worker alliance. The rhetoric yesterday that we were "the people" was ignorant and counter-productive. We are a group of mostly young (often hairy and smelly) people that - on the surface - have little in common with the rest of america. If one is dreaming of a marxist revolution - as young Chicanos we're suggesting yesterday - that's okay - but then don't be surprised when you are executed like the panthers. We have to recognize that at best we are a growing resistance to the totalizing reality of our contemporary society. Our presence their further legitimized the Democrats - basically we were asking for crumbs. For over 30 years people have been continually saying that the Democratic party was a dead horse with nothing in common with the people. We must return to our communities and organize - we must look past the obvious differences and ally ourselves with the rural disenfranchised and their spokes people in the militias (I'm not kidding).

I appreciate your analysis minus the "smelly and dirty" part. You could keep your personal problems to yourself.

As far as a broad/narrow coalition goes, you're wrong. It's a broad coalition in which labor is supporting even if they don't directly participate. And the best news is the coalition is growing as more people realize they don't have to take this crap anymore.

Organize!

We are living in a police state. The actions of the "authority" in both Philly and L.A. are further proof of the actual state of the union. The protesters are fenced into an area, protesting to each other while Clinton broadcasts to millions of sheep across the country. The moment freedom of assembly disrupts traffic or the sensibilities of the PD, violent action is taken. The LAPD was armed and prepared for violence, all they needed was a hint of provocation. We have a right to protest these conventions, contrary to what the mainstream would like everyone to think. The only hope is to organize, and enter these conventions with a force they can not fence in.

The best way to show something is wrong to the general public it seems, is to have the overly armed and equiped police terrorize people including reporters, bystanders, etc. etc. etc. It increasingly seems like the quickest way to "radicalize" someone. When black storm troopers begin terrorizing people, no matter what they say and what the mainstream media says, people can see and they can reason.

If there was a ton of people throwing bricks, glass bottles, and such at cops, certainly the mainstream media would have caught those images. What is seen is people up against the fence, some throwing plastic bottles and very small projectiles (which may be a problem if thrown in a crowd of normal people, but is pretty meaningless when thrown at people heavily equipped). The supposed concrete/bricks is just some parking stop ripped up or something. Possibly someone threw this at cops, who knows...if that was the case, go after that person or just take it.

So, what people see is these armed military-looking people charging at unarmed protesters, shooting endlessly...gas, plastic bullets, batons, horses, masses of people running in fear...all while the mainstream media narrater tries to explain how all of this force is justified...considering it's a "Free country" and all. So, you know...some people threw bottles and fired metal balls...which the defenseless police could only handle by hurting and terrorizing people.

I hardly think 4 rows of police officers would be the instigators against 8-9000 protesters. Considering their job is to protect ALL individuals concerned. Let's try to keep things in perspective. If the protestors had not began to throw items over the fence, the officers would not have reacted as they did. For every action there is a reaction and clearly the protestors were looking for someone other then themselves to blame.

perhaps you object to the smelly and dirty insight because you are so fouled within your own filth that all objectivity has been lost on your part.

Simmer down.

When you reek and stink and sweat it obscures your good judgement, although I must admit a good stinking is a great purging event from time to time. Funk on and loosen up; overt seriousness causes manic heart attacks. You yourself are only to blame.

Frank Fledman

Funk to Death

This is a totally objective assessment of the situation. I stood along the fence where the demonsrators got into it with the cops. While Rage played, about 100 people, not just the black bloc, but others too, gathered at the fence facing Staples Center. They were taunting a small police skirmish line situated on the other side of the fence. This group of cops changed in size throughout the Rage show. At first there were only 20-25 cops in the line. As the demonstrators grew in numbers, so did the cops.

Initially the demonstrators were just taunting the cops, calling them pigs, flipping them off, etc. Most of the cops kept their cool, a few approached the fence and pointed their weapons at the crowd and started yelling stuff. As the RATM show come to a close, the demonstrators started throwing stuff at the cops-plastic water bottles (some filled with water), rocks, debris, nothing too major. Around this time one demonstrator climbed the fence and sat at the top of it. He was repeatedly sprayed with mace or pepper spray, amazingly he didnt seemed to be to bothered by it. More stuff was being chucked at the cops, I saw the sling shot guy throwing some kind of rocks at the cops, hitting one on the head. More cops maced the crowd, I saw one guy walk out with his eyes bandaged.

By this time, RATM had finished playing. There were some speakers on the stage and Ozomatli were setting up their gear. By the time they started playing, some girl tried to climb the fence, she got pepper sprayed and immediately fell to the ground. Shortly after that a second guy climed the fence. He too got sprayed but he stayed on the fence.

The demonstrators then started throwing more stuff at the cops, there were now about 50-60 cops there. I saw a no parking sign being lifted and tossed towards the fence. This sign was about 8-10 feet tall with a big concrete base at the bottom. I dont know if it made it over the fence or not. Ozomatli had just finished playing their first song at this point, then someone came onstage and asked the people to be cool. As the second song started, I could see more and more shit being thrown at the cops. Ozomatli stopped playing in the middle of their song, and someone from Culture Clash came out again and asked the demonsrators to be cool or the cops will stop the show. The band resumed for another minute or so when everything onstage went black and the sound died. Then a cop came on and said the event was declared unlawful and everyone had 15 minutes to clear out or be arrested. Although only about 1% of the crowd was starting trouble, everybody else was being cool.

To be fair, if you go around throwing rocks, bottles, and street signs at cops, guess what? They're going to respond.

Like it or not, that's their job.

Interestingly, the media didnt catch the little demonstration that went on north of 11th and Fig. As my cousin and I headed up Figeuroa to leave the site, we ducked into a bar for a beer. When we were finished, we walked back out onto Fig where members of Ozomatli were leading a small band of about 200 demonstrators north on Fig. They were chanting, "Whose streets?", "Our Streets!" We saw a police skirmish line about 3 or 4 deep tralining them. We walked ahead of the crowd on Fig, where they blocked every intersection, stopping traffic for a few minutes at a time. They went north till they got to 6th street where they turned right. They walked a few blocks east on 6th when the cops advanced on the demonstrators, they then stared shooting rubber bullets into the crowd. The demonsrators would run, then reconvene about a block away, where the cops would shoot again. This carried on until the crowd arrived at Pershing Square, at which point I cut out.

In summary, the cops were provoked, but they may have overreacted.

I happened to be standing at the fence by the Staples Center when the first red smoke bomb went over and landed among the cops. I turned around and saw those 40 or so anarchy kids in the black t-shirts rushing toward me in a group. At that point I moved over to the left, still at the fence where I could see pretty well.

The stuff that was being thrown at the cops looked pretty lightweight to me, mostly plastic bottles, but I did hear some glass breaking and saw some sticks and such going over. The cops were still lined up on the opposite side of the street. After a couple of minutes a row of them moved up to the fence armed with the pepper spray paintball guns. That's when they started spraying the anarchy kids from time to time, along with the 2 kids who climbed up on top of the fence. That went on for fifteen minutes or so before they declared the illegal assembly.

The rest of the night I thought the cops' tactics were mostly smooth but heavy (from what I could see retreating north on Figueroa.) They fired rubber pellets a few times and ran motorcycles up the street at one point. I didn't personally see anybody get hurt.

40 organized kids deliberately provoked the cops, and the response was that thousands of peaceful people were pushed out of the protest area and up the street for blocks, some of us all the way back to Pershing Square. Seems like there ought to be a better way of handling this kind of thing.

"40 organized kids" sounds almost exactly like the group that did that window-smashing binge up here in Seattle (although the police had already been gassing and pepper-spraying the hell out of people for almost two hours at that point). Deja vu.

MDN

it was more like ten thousand, half of which were there to see the free concert.

I never believed that the mainstream media was objective, but its portrayal of last night's Staples Stampede provided ample evidence that it is overwhelmingly biased. The accounts provided in these postings are not only much more accurate (40 organized youths embracing anarchy's most mild tactics --- not a huge crowd of violent concert-goers), but also present self-reflection and a questioning of our own methods of protest.

LAPD was, in effect, providing not only protection, but political insulation to the corporatized Democratic National Convention. The venue's very name, "Staples Center," belies this hideous collusion. This election year has been hijacked by the entreched powers: established politicos, corporations, and the media elite.

Insulation leads to exclusion. Exclusion leads to revolution. We need a better solution.

As I read articles and watch the videos, I notice that not much is mentioned about the timing involved in the police action. I think it very interesting that the delegates were held inside untill the area was cleared, and they did not see anything. I personally don't think that there was any relationship between when the police stopped the show and told the people to leave and the fact that the delagates were about to get out. Right. The police needed a confrontation to prove they needed the mass front they were putting out. They might have been provoked, but they overreacted for thier own reasons.

Although I was not at the concert personally, at the Spokescouncil meeting in the Convergence Center their were reports by activists in attendance at the march/concert that would corroborate what David asserts above.

It is lamentable that some cannot control their actions when nonviolent guidelines are the order on which we stand. It would be beneficial to all concerned if the few who must remain in this sort of childish behavior to find other constructive ways to vent their frustration and anger. Violent behavior is not conducive to peace for anyone. What was the point? Who was served by this stupid behavior? It surely was not the movement nor the rest of us who adhere to nonviolence.

Peace and love, Mike

i was also there on the frontlines and able to keep a clear view (not-literally) of the situation. i was cheering for the people climbing the fence and the general non-violence of even the anarchists. destroying a chain link fence and throwing smoke bombs and plastic bottles is not necessarily violence. some things need to be done to get some change. i got shot with a rubber bullet, teargassed several times with my shirt over my face and sprayed twice with that pepper-spray/mace pellets and liquid. thankfully, D.A.N. medics were there and those guys rocks. thats all i have to say. the police needed to be there but they CLEARLY overreacted last night. shooting rubber bullets indiscriminately into a crowd instead of bouncing them off the ground like they are supposed to is plain stupidity. and shouldn't the lapd have known that penning the protestors all up in one around surrounded by a fifteen foot chain link fence surrounded by hundreds of police in riot gear and shotguns, shouldn't they have known that that's just asking for trouble? why give people something to rebel against when there are so many things already?

Well Blah, you pepper sprayed, tear gassed and shot with a rubber bullet. Sounds to me like you got what you wanted. If you don't what to get shot with rubber bullets then leave when the police telll you to. You and others like you wanted trouble and would do anything you can to provoke it. Think the lapd is overreacting, in the workers paradise of China they use AK-47's.

anarcy sucks

yes, ak-47's do seem to be a bit impracticle for the police to employ, but don't patterns of police action or government sanctioned action in general demonstrate that the established force will always go to the limit of what is possible in delivering force or brutality or wrongdoing? if shooting could be gotten away with, would restraint suddenly seem like an option?

what i wanted to say though, is that as far as the media, with its false portrayal of the situation and the shutdown of the indymedia center, is this not a TERRIFIC parallel to censorship elsewhere? is not milosevic trying to squelch opposition media in serbia, and isn't beijing closing some internet sites they find objectionable? and even if it is more subtle in the US, is it not censorship none the less? (especially when keeping in mind the corporate sponsors who need not to be upset or have their agenda's ruffled).

it would make an interesting study/paper on parallels between in censorship east-west. maybe someone knows about existing work on this and will share it here...

justin

just for your information, i did leave when the people said disperse, not from civil obidience, because i could barely see anymore and my skin was burning. when i left, at the exit, what did i meet? more cops in riot gear shooting more rubber bullets and more pepperspray at the people LEAVING. why? i have no idea. they tell us to leave, we start leaving. they shoot at us for leaving. doesn't make any sense. i DID get what i want, i stood for what i believe. civil DISobidience is how things are done. not doing what the governement tells you to, and when they tell you to. rebellion brings about change, and thats what is needed. i didn't throw anything at the police, didn't climb the fence, i did nothing but yell, hold signs and stand there. and about the ak-47s, did i say that was better than us? just because the LAPD used pepper spray, doesn't mean we should do whatever they say. because they use temporary "riot-control" equipment doesn't mean they are humanitarian and want to protect everyone. no offense, but it sounds to me like you weren't even there. you probably found out all your "facts" through corporate media.

Well Kevin, just as you say that Blah (I think you mean David Williams?) got what *he* wanted (being pepper-sprayed, tear gassed, shot with rubber bullets), I think you too got what you wanted with the dispersal of thousands of peaceful, law-abiding attendees of a political gathering. My assessment of your statement is perhaps as presumptuous as the one you make of Williams’, but I think it to be dead on nonetheless. And I have some comments for you and those who think as you do (or pretend to think, anyway).

This notion that one should, without question, do as the police order is nauseating. It is this sort of mindless complacency that is equally as destructive as the mindless rebellion we *all* oppose. Just as inexcusable as the moron who wears a bandana over his face and burns buildings just because he has heard, in a song, that this would be a cool thing to do (rather than doing it for a cause), is the idiot who bows down to the police, or any perceived authority, simply because they are the police. Are the police always just? Kevin, you seem to believe that they are. But this confuses the notions of what ‘is’ and what ‘should be’; it confuses the ‘moral’ and the ‘legal’, blurring the two categories, making them one in your eyes. Yes, the police do have the legal right to shoot unarmed, dispersing people *in the back* (this did happen, I did see this!) and to club them between the shoulders (not on the joints) *on the back* (this did happen, I did see this!), but they do *not* have the moral right to do these things. There is little debate between about the way things currently are; the debate is whether or not they *should* be as they are. And this is what the protesting this week is about.

If one would like to argue that there should not be a distinction between the legal and the moral, that the legal is what we should be interested in and abide by, I will remind that person of segregation, the exclusion acts, and so forth that once enforced what we generally would condemn as being immoral practices. And if we are only interested in the legal, then strictly speaking, those who protested against these atrocities were themselves in dessert of the harshest penalties that the so-called authorities could employ. And, those who fought for equal rights would deserve our scorn as lawbreakers. Do we accept this absurdity? Or, do we acknowledge that just because the law says something, and just because the police order something, this is not to say that what is being said or ordered is right? And if it is not right, do we shrug our shoulders and say “Well, that’s the law…” or do we try to improve? And if we do choose to improve our lot, how do we do it? These are the real questions that the convention protests have forced us to consider.

You seem to believe that things should be as they are; that to improve upon the law is, in effect, breaking the law and thus any attempt to do so should be punished. If this is the case, I can only shake my head in grief for the types of personalities that this system that you would defend has produced, and point to those like yourself as wonderful examples of why changes need to be implemented. You advocate a “do what you’re told or you’ll be abused” approach to government. This is contrary to democracy, it is contrary to republicanism (in the political sense, not the party sense), it is contrary to what this country claims to be about. In this, your approach is self-stultifying: you want to defend the ideals of this country (which I take from your China comparison) by violating the rights that make this country possible and its ideals coherent.

And Kevin, please concede that nobody has so far made the argument that China is the “worker’s paradise.” This it is is *your* statement, and a particularly revealing one at that. Only, you decline to come out and say what you really intend, which everyone else on this page has done. You alone stand out as a coward behind the catchphrases. If you associate all of the activities of the demonstrators with communism (which is your implication) then I, sir, have no alternative than to associate your ideology with fascism. This is what we call the system that labels all of those with dissenting opinions as “enemies of the state” or “troublemakers” or whatever label you would feel most comfortable with.

Having said that, I would advise you that if you really cannot distinguish between Chinese communism and Marxist communism (the distinctions are, of course, quite clear), then you have further comprehension (or perhaps educational) issues that should first be remedied before you open your mouth or tap your fingers across a keyboard and make those who are on your political side, who have well thought-out and interesting things to say, look bad. For your sake and theirs, please consult a reliable source on such matters. Understand that the communism that oppresses free speech, the communism that fails to address the needs of the people, the communism that fences people in and suppresses opposition is not communism at all; no more than the “democracy” that ignores the people is any democracy at all. These are perversions of ideals. All your statement is good for is a red herring.

However, if your suggestion is that communism cannot be any better, in our world, than it is in China, then I might concede that you may be right. However I would ask that you concede that the United States flourishes because of trade, as do Britain, Spain and Germany. But what have most of the communist nations in our history shared? Inflicted isolationism in which non-communist nations have denied trade with them. It may be argued that it is this oppression that causes the economic struggles that communist nations have experienced, making them less than a “worker’s paradise.” But I digress in trying to unpack and answer what you’ve implied.

I did not gather from your brief blurb whether or not you were in attendance. Let me be clear that I was. I was standing beside the stone and fence barricade. I watched as police in riot gear let pepper-spray pellets go into the concert area both during and after the concert. I saw water bottles thrown at officers after the order to disperse had been given. I was there when Commander David Kalish promised the dispersing crowd “as much time as was necessary” to disperse (as even he recognized, the crowd was cooperating), a promise that came fewer than two minutes before the police rushed in on horseback and *blocked the exits* that we were told to use. I was there when a young man was hit in the chest with a bouncing rubber pellet. I was there when another young man was hit in the back with a non-bouncing rubber pellet. I heard rubber pellets whiz by in the air, I was there when the pigs herded a dispersing group of young people into an alley where another column of LAPD officers were waiting for them and beat the hell out of the kids as they came around the corner. And so forth. I am just curious to know if you were there, and if so, did you find the media coverage to be in accord with what you witnessed?

That Chinese soldiers overreact is not to say that the LAPD did not overreact. I hope that the contrary was not your reasoning, but an alternative does not present itself. You seem to believe that if the reaction is not death, it is not bad. But I would argue that while being shot in the back with an Ak-47 is bad, so is being shot in the back with a rubber bullet, as is being hit in the back of the head with a nightstick. While death is the worst, there are other degrees of abuse, and we should recognize this. We need not draw the lines at these extremes and place all acts of violence at these poles. Otherwise, the Soviets under Stalin (who employed perverted communism) were pretty, so I suppose that the Chinese are not as bad as you had first proposed? Or are the Chinese bad to a differing degree? Is the Mexican government’s abuse of its people bad to another degree? Or are these later two okay in light of the Soviets under Stalin?

But at the end of the day, make no mistake about it: the violent anarchists, which you seem to lump Williams in with (do you not see a distinction between spectators and violent anarchists?) did *not* get what they wanted by being sprayed and shot. I believe the preference would have been the spraying and shooting of the pigs who instigated the entire disruption and have held the streets of Los Angeles for the weeks leading up to this convention. And understand that the pigs in LA do not use Ak-47’s because we have them too. The oppressed people in China do not. But I’m certain that our time will come, very shortly after losing our right to assemble and our right to free speech. But then we will not need them, for we will have no rights left to defend.

And by the way, to those of you who read this, I implore you: Revolution begins first with an education which itself typically begins with lessons in practical grammar and spelling (which can be facilitated with the use of a spell checker for those who choose to skip this first step). Once one knows how to spell the things s/he is in arguing for (say, democracy and equality) as well as what s/he is against (such as anarchy, with three a’s rather than two), then one can articulate his or her position and prove more persuasive. It is difficult to follow the scattered thoughts of a seeming illiterate. One such as this would never be my leader.

And understand: the police will shoot and city officials will try to shut you down. But what will you do? Will you just complain that you’ve been hit with a rubber bullet? Or will you stand up for yourselves?

You now know the risks of being there, but do you understand the benefits? Our country has it problems, but the advantage that we have over others is that we have the freedom (at least for now) to speak freely and address those problems and affect a change. But if we give up our rights, if we fail to exercise them, we will lose them forever. If you are not in downtown this week being counted, you are being ignored. If you are not exercising your rights you are allowing them to be taken. We will get the government we deserve. We must demand better, not settle for less.

Many people did get hurt by the cops. Including a homeless man who was taken to the hospital after being knocked down by a rubber bullet that struck his chest. Some people claim that since they where there, and did not "SEE" any acts of police brutality, that none of it happend. Well obviously they didn't see everything. I was there and the cops started firing their tear gas and rubber bullets as I was walking to my car. I didn't hear about it until I heard from friends and gathered information from Independent Media resources... So even though I was there, I did not see the cops fire their stupid rubber bullet guns or pepper spray. However, I'v seen the video and pictures of what took place as I was leaving. As I looked over my shoulder I could see the cops moving in. I could not see what was in front of them because there was so many of them. If 20 anarchists started to throw bottles at police officers then good. They deserved it. How can you "protect and serve" in the "land of the free" when you defend rich greedy criminal liars, and then arrest those who fight back for justice? Do a few hundred cops even need to rush 20 anarchists? Some day the protestors will have to rush the cops. - Raisethefist.com

Ahhhh the Romans would have been so proud. The tactics they employed to dispell the food riots 1800 years ago still work. Nothing like an armed line with a good 'ol horse charge to break up the rucus. Its funny when the havenots complain that the police used excessive force. How about the police who were hit with rocks? Weren't they victims too? If my job was to provide security at an event and things started to get out of hand I'd be a little pissed when people started taunting me and throwing things at me. If you push them hard enough they will bite back. And like it or not the majority of people support them. Society employs police to keep the peace, not to fight people for the "corporate" media's entertainment.

Its too bad for the innocents but you kind of ask for it when you try to take on the powers that be.

As for the anarchists: the corporations aren't holding you down. You're holding yourself down. You will never win by causing mayhem. It will only harden the public's cause to keep you off the streets. The sad thing is that you hurt the cause you suppossedly stand for by stiring things up.

Looks like the LAPD knows their history and how to take care of unruly mobs. :)

Who started it?

It's an interesting debate and for people like me who aren't there it's an opportunity to hear the stories (both sides) I would otherwise not see in the mainstream media.

I'm almost fifty.

I'm ashamed that I'm not protesting.

They did use real bullets on people of my generation, so the comparison to China and their ways of dealing with dissent doesn't hold up. It was a while ago, but they do kill protesters in America (or beat them up pretty badly, or jail them for most of their lives) they are just more clever about it and uphold the actions in courts of law.

What can't be debated are the causes people are fighting for.

What can't be forgotten is civil disobedience, or as I have read recently, civil obedience to ones conscience, has always brought profound change.

While some may 'scold' young people for striking out in anger, I hold them in the highest esteem.

I sit here at home, like so many millions, wringing my hands at the injustices of our country and our world.

My anger is so great I spend my days raging in silence, writing ineffective letters that nobody ever prints.

The only reason I haven't thrown anything is that I am a coward, I am restrained, I am adjusted to the hypocrisy after so many years of living in it. I've lost the ideals of my youth, and I don't think we can change things anymore.

Then I see Seattle. Then I see Philadelphia. Then I see LA.

Then I see people, young people rising up. People who realize that we ARE waging war for our freedom.

Maybe it isn't over.

I was going to write a whole scpeihl about my thoughts and opinions on what I've read about what happened at the convention verses what happened in Seattle but that's just a waste time. I was there in Seattle and KNOW how it is and how it will always ever be. To anyone who ever has the idea: "cops are just doing they're jobs", "they were provoked" "if a cop says leave, then leave" is just plain BLIND. Nothing will ever be accomplished that way and no one will ever achieve any sort of revolution. Cops are tools are should be treated as such. WHy should anyone have to listen to what the police say? They are irrelevant. If yer protesting then you should believe what yer protesting. You shouldn't have to worry about being pepper gassed, shot with plastic bullets. If a cop tells you to leave, you don't have to...if you do, then yer giving up.

Don't GIVE UP!

If they want to put police against us instead of confronting us themselves then it's obvious they don't want to have anything to do with us. If "they're police" get hit with plastic bottles (they should be hit with something heavier) then oh well.

NO SYMPATHY

I, too, was at the demonstration Monday evening to hear Rev. Lawson, Dolores Huerta and

Rage and feel that Stephenj's account was accurate. I also thought his commentary was interesting. I take issue,however, with his remark that he could not follow a leader who was illiterate. Isn't that a bit fascistic? After all, that is the argument that has been used by corporate(western) culture to displace indiginous peoples for centuries. Wouldn't we be all better off if we'd listened to the Native Americans, the Aborigines, the U'wa who may not have a sophisticated written heritage but who have an intimate and sacred attachment to the land?

Pardon me if my passion surpasses my ability to spell.

I have heard some speak about the protesters intimidating the cops but what about the intimidation I endured walking block after block seeing phalanxes of police in black riot gear, helmets with dark visors that covered their faces, positioned in battle ready stance with batons and rifles drawn and ready? When I saw the "Pen", the protest sight in front of "The Center" surrounded on three sides by 13 ft. walls, all I could think of was scene from "Gandhi" where government troops fire on a group of protesters who defied a law restricting the right to assembly killing 400; or was I thinking of the '68 student protest in Mexico City, where the blood was quickly washed away to make the city sparkle for the Olympics; or was I thinking of Tiananmen Square; or was it '70 at Kent State - 4 students (2 walking to class) shot by National Guardsmen. Maybe it was '14 Ludlow, Colorado where 20 people (including children) were killed by state militia in a strike for the 8 hour work day; or the'32 Washington DC "Bonus March" where President Hoover ordered Generals MacArthur and Patton to attack WWI veterans and their families, many of whom were homeless and hungry.

You get the idea. What's amazing to me is how restrained 99+% of this audience was in response to police provocation. From my vantage point the "anarchists" who were throwing things could not throw them directly at the cops but had to lob them over the 13 ft. fence, giving the cops plenty of time to move out of the way. One incident that underscores how out of control and heavy-handed the cops were is the fact that the homeless activist, Ted Hayes, they wounded was one of their fiercest allies. Weeks before the convention he had been saying he was going to use his resources and try and capture protesters on camera and videotape then turn the information over to the cops.

In closing I would like to thank The IMC for this opportunity to share ideas and urge people to stand up for their civil rights. If we don't now, next time the cops will be using AK-47s.

I'm horrified once again by the actions of police against protesters. If a few water bottles were thrown, ticket the person who threw it. If they cannot find that person they have no right to do what they did. They can't hurt hundreds for the acts of ten. They wonder why they're losing respect everywhere they go. I hope to God that their is video focused on specific incidents to prosecute the police for their unlawful actions against a peaceful protest.

Ahhhh, more comments from the peanut gallery in support of the gutless wonders who hide behind masks and only provoke the cops when they can hide behind "peaceful protesters". Then they cry foul when the police overreact.

This seems remarkabky similar to the Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP). These people alsi espoused "revolution" and advocated more violent means of attaining it than the "peaceful hippies". But they were unable to attract the multitudes that are necessary for such a revolution. As a matter of fact, they were unable to attract dozens of people. So they would attend rallies and demonstrations organized by people who believed that only through non-violence would we be able to change the world. Then they would provoke the police, and try to get everyone to feel that the police caused the problems.

While I am not a person who thinks that the police are doing a good job at the demonstrations, nor an apologist for them, I do somewhat understand some of the reactions from them. People say it is non-violent to throw water bottles, etc. at the police, either because the cops are armed and dressed protectively, or simply because they are cops. This is ludicrous. I wonder how many "anarchists" would remain cool, calm and collected if a number of people were to throw these things at them, due to their looks, lifestyles or beliefs. I contend that they would react, if not overreact, if this were to happen. The police are essentially working class people. They have jobs that I feel suck, and they tend to worry more about the wealthy and powerful, as well as the property of the same, than they do about the poor and working class. But violent and/or provocative confrontation will not suddenly cause them to have an epiphany. Only by discussing situations with them, and appearing to be reasonable, sane and intelligent individuals, will we evoke change.

Witness the non-violent demonstrations for civil rights, women's rights and the end of the war in Viet Nam. It was non-violence that caused the masses of people to get behind these issues. If people are afraid that a small group of people will provoke the police or military, then they will not attend meetings, rallies, demos, etc. We must do everything in our power to make it safe for the children, the elderly, the people of color who are harassed daily by the powers that be, the working class and everyone else who is concerned about our planet to attend these rallies, etc. Provoking the police is counter productive to such inclusion.

SLin claims to have been in Seattle, as if this makes one an expert. I have been attending protests since 1970, when I went to demonstrations against the Viet Nam war at the age of 14. I cofounded Seed of Peace in 1986, and Shundahai Network in 1993. I have been arrested around 60 times, for squatting, being homeless, protesting nuclear weapons, nuclear power, homelessness, and other issues. I was arrested at the Festival of the Oppresed during the Chicago Democrapic Convention in 1996. I helped organize the World Bank/IMF protests in DC and was raided at the Convergence Center in the District of Corruption and in Philadelphia at the Republican Convention.Yet I still do not feel I am an expert. I have seen peaceful demonstrations change the attitudes of police and people who work within "the system". Violence and property destruction at large events only helps make the corporate media and the police look correct when they belittle and downplay what we believe in. All too often, the police will overreact anyway, so why give them an excuse to hide behind? It only plays into the corporate interests.

The only way to effect change in the USA is through non-violent civil obedience. We must take to the streets, disrupt the "powers that be" a get the word to the masses that we will not be silenced. We must get millions of people to march in the streets, and show the world that we all are opposed to beiong maipulated by the multinational corporations.

But to those whose idea of change is monkey wrenching and property destruction, then organize your own actions. When a grouop of people consense to non-violence and no property destruction, it is disruptive and selfish to violate consensus, and acting as if your ideas and ideals are the on;y ones that matter. THe internet can be a valuable tool for revolution. Use it to organize your own actions, with your own set of guidelines, or lack therof. I might even feel compelled to attend.

Guin