At yesterday's demonstration outside of Bush's fundraising dinner in Los Angeles a man was brutally arrested for setting a U.S. flag aflame. At the sight of the fire, two police officers rushed into the crowd and tackled the man. Within seconds, angry demonstrators surrounded the now weak-legged "peace officers" (who were quite visibly shaking in their boots) demanding that the man be let go. Ten or twenty police officers then charged the crowd, swinging their beat-down sticks, and formed a circle around their endangered comrades. Needless to say, the flag-burner was carried away, but the crowd continued to taunt and confront the police as they retreated back behind their yellow tape. This came on the heels of an earlier incident wherein police had rushed the crowd and arrested a man who had set an efigy of Bush aflame.
Within minutes of the second scuffle, rally organizers and National Lawyers Guild representatives took hold of a microphone and claimed that the officers would be prosecuted for attacking the man's constitutional right to bun the U.S. flag.

Are we to believe that police officers will be reprimanded for arresting a rowdy man when they are hardly punished for putting bullets in unarmed citizens reaching for their cell-phones?

This outrageous claim on the part of organizers and lawyers guild reps was made in conjunction with a weak argument that the crowd stand down from police because "we" shouldn't let police provoke violent responses which will overshadow the demonstration's message when the events of the day were reported on the eleven o'clock news. Apparently ANSWER supports insurgency in populations abroad but fears media and police backlash when actual confrontation becomes possible at home. Obviously ANSWER must tone down its rhetoric to appeal to the peaceniks who attend their demonstrations. Such is obvious from a facetious rhetorical question, referring to today's demonstrations, on LA's Indymedia: "Did someone say the peace movement is dead?"

Today's mainstream activist's mantra that confrontation and "scuffles" with the police do nothing but taint the movement's image is a far cry from the long tradition of radicalism in the U.S. which demonstrates that engaging police in violent confrontation is the ONLY way to get a greater part of the population on "our" side. Arguably, if rally organizers had incited the crowd instead of trying to pacify it with ridiculous promises, the event would have raised more eyebrows and gained national, if not international, attention. In other words, news of the demonstration would have overshadowed news of Bush's fundraiser. This is not to say that demonstrators should have become violent. Rather, it would have been a perfectly suitable occasion to call for mass civil disobedience and militant non-violence. Demonstrators and demo organizers were too weak to seize the opportunity, and instead intimidated demonstrators with the idea that the big media would not be sympathetic to their cause if the demnstration turned ugly. Must the flaw in this logic really be pointed out? Is it not obvious that violence is perfect fodder for the media spectacle, and that peaceful demonstrators are lucky if their numbers are reasonably estimated by the media and the authorities?

The "peace movement" may not be dead, but it is certainly little more than a ghost, which is to say, it is undead. The chant "No Justice, No Peace" rings hollow in the mouths of demonstrators unwilling to upset the "peace" in the name of justice.

The man who was arrested at the A.N.S.W.E.R. rally was released to the custody of four FBI agents armed with semi-automatic weapons, who flew with him to Homestead Air Force base in Florida. From there, he was taken by a C-130 Hercules Transport to Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, where he is presently being held as an "enemy combatant." He'll be in front of a military tribunal next Tuesday, facing charges of "terrorism" for defacing a symbol of the state. If the man is lucky, he'll only face a 20 year sentence in a federal prison, instead of execution by firing squad.

how did you find out he was sent cuba?

The comment above and the post its replying to are
just thinly veiled attempts to coerce the activists to take
militant action next time the cops act like cops. As
tempting as it may be, from a strategic perspective its
a bad move. It gives some thin justification to the
current administration to crack down on our civil
liberties even more. I would imagine 'john' is a spook,
and the recent posts we've seen here urging activists
to get violent are also spooks.

Now don't get me wrong, i believe passive resistance
has its practical limits. But i don't think we're anywhere
near those yet. And until such a time has arrived that
violence is completely unavoidable, to embrace it
would only arm the enemy in the arena of public
opinion.

For example, consider the isreali/palestinian conflict. If the palestinians had never taken any sort of hostile action against isreal, the worlds public opinion would be firmly on their side. But because of such vile acts as the suicide bombings (not deplorable in themselves but their choice of targets is despicable. Go after military targets... leave the civilians alone), the world's view on the matter is understandably divided as neither side is completely virtous.

But thats not the case with the activists. As is the only
bad thing the opposition can say about us is that
we're 'ineffective'. Otherwise there's nothing of
substance to criticize. But the day we take up arms is
the day mr and mrs apple pie have something to worry
about. And when they get scared, they start tossing our
liberties out the window (patriot act) and we will only
further the descent into fascism.

I think if some of you feel so strongly about resisting
that you would be willing to take a knock for it, consider
the following. Go buy body armor. The good stuff. You
and I can buy it, swat quality stuff... Maybe not the
weapons but we can buy the body armor, maybe one
of those shields too. And the next time an opportunity
for resistance arrises, 'stonewall' with some other
similarly equiped activists and be prepared to get
gassed, beaten, shot with wooden bullets, etc. What
would this accomplish? Very little, but probably more
than active aggression, for reasons stated above but
also because if we can stonewall around an intented
victim of fascist tactics, the opportunistic little piggies
will possibly move on to easier targets. And as soon
as any video of a gang of armed cops doing everything
they can to beat down an unarmed group of protestors
gets out, it would garner much public support for our
tactics and methods. Especially if they failed in their
intimidation tactics.

Also, should such a day arrive as active, armed
resistance becomes unavoidable, body armor will go
a long way to survivability.

Personally, I'd place emphasis on getting a good
helmet, a good gas mask with spare filters and full
eye guard, a cup (for guys or girls, doesn't matter), a
bullet proof vest, good shin guards, in that order. Then
if need be, you could curl into a tight ball and probably
sustain only superficial injuries.

Pretty bleak I know but these are the days. Good luck.

So your suggestion for neutralizing the empire and dismantling the military industrial complex is to go out and shop for riot gear?

OH....I GET IT the good cops will show up someday to save us all from the ones who abuse their power

Thanks for clearing that up

(Have fun standing in your permitted [Caged] protest area, showing the ones in power that when they step too far-we just might go and get ourselves a permit and STOP them [just like how we stopped the war])

"So your suggestion for neutralizing the empire and
dismantling the military industrial complex is to go out
and shop for riot gear?" - Yes. Not a solution in and of
itself but from the sounds of it you would rather more
proactive measures be taken. If thats the case,
wouldn't you rather be protected by armor while taking
such proactive measures? Of course. So if you're
saying my suggestion of buying body armor is a bad
idea in lue of say, throwing rocks at the cops, what
you're actually saying is you want people to take action
but only ineffective action that has no tactical chance of
success against the better armed, better armored,
better networked, and more supported police force.
Why would you want people to take action they can't
win? What you seem to suggest could only benefit the
repressive regime that has taken over our county, and
so I suspect you are in their employ in one fashion or
another, and so, fuck you, dick.

kiddo: i suspect you either are "thinker" as well, or a co-
employee sharing a room/cubicle with him/her. I say
this because you both posted a reply to my statement
hours after I made it, but both your replies came within
10 minutes of each other, and they both basically say
the same thing. And so, fuck you too, dick. I'll address
your statement though, biased and selfserving as it is.
No i don't expect the good cops to show up. But if we
show ourselves to be unstoppable by traditional
means, their only course of action becomes to take
lethal measures. The day they do that, or even try, on
US soil, against non-violent unarmed protesters, is
the day a lot of fence-riders decide which side they're
really on. And that is how we can begin to win this.
Your little delusional fantasies of 10 or 100 or 1000
or 10000 unarmed protesters dismantling *anything*
is so completly unrealistic it marks you as either a
total idiot or a government shill, or i suspect, both. So
once again, fuck you, dick.

Both of you obviously tried to ignore what was probably
the most important part of my earlier statement, so i'll
repeat it for the benefit of those you would distract:

"Also, should such a day arrive as active, armed
resistance becomes unavoidable, body armor will go
a long way to survivability."

What part of that could you possibly refute? God damn shills... Wouldn't mom be proud of you now... helping an oppresive regime further its stranglehold on the populace of what was once the greatest country in the world. Congratulations for dragging us to the depths we now wallow in. I hope you never forget the part you played in destroying our country.

I agree with matt on this one.
Look around. If it wasn't for the naked cowardess of the
major portion of the american spoon fed population, we could never have been FRIGHTENED into attacking one of the weakest
beaten countries in the middle east.
Without an outraged and overwhelming support of our countrymen, we will see the only response the ruling class
knows how to deal with the trouble makers.
We need to deal in new tactics and let our organizations knit before we act in any overt resistance. That doesn't mean laying down to be crushed. It means getting ready by
preparing for the inevitable martial law and making ourselves into better than soft targets when the black clad
goons come for us. I know I will not submit quietly. They will pay in blood for this little dog if they try to use force.

It is very sad that the security state has become so unaccountable and vicious that Matts words ring true. We all knew that it would come to this, and now with psychopath president it seems to be spiralling that way. There will be a limit to peaceful protest, when and where that will be is beyond me...and I don't know how I got on their mailing list, but recently I have been getting bombarded with liberal Democ. party fundraising appeals. As if I would ever contribute $ to a group who has so disempowered themselves and their followers by becoming lapdogs of the rich and accentuating the nazification of america. I would invest in body armor instead.

We should all know how to do first aid. We should all know have access to gas masks and know how to use them. We should all know some basic ecotage skills. We need to protect Black Bloc people when they are attacked by killer cops. We need to also to be on the watch for infiltrators and agent provocaturs. As the economy continues to collapse, more people will be willing to sell out their friend so they can keep the feed trough wide open. and, of course, more people will be rounded up on trumped up charges, denied their conmstitutional and their human rights, and thrown in to concrete hells built with your tax monies.

Just for your information simplicius minded. I was not rowdy!! Ok, that guy there in the picture is me! And I was not being rowdy! Since when is burning a flag rowdy?

Thank You,

We cannot let ourselves be drawn into physical violence with police. This is all the excuse they need to get even more violent. The best strategy is to video tape acts od police violence. If they try to come after the camera, lower it, as if you aren't taping, but keep it on and get the audio. Have friendlies standing by to pass it off to in case they try to get the camera away from you. Then get it to indy media ASAP. Just my suggestions.

I was there, standing around the man, watching the cops dig in knees and swing boots... first a dozzen protesters, then more.. by the time the ten back up pigs got in there were near 50, going for 100 protesters in the area ralleying to a commrad fallen.

The Lawyers guild cooled things off, which is what they do... the blok cannot look to the lawyers or protest organizers to step forward and lead us in the moment. If we, the protesters surronding the police, had locked down, prevented their escape, then power would have been forced to take notice. Then Bush's suppresion of constintional rights, protected by the supream court, would have gathered media attention. The police would be seen for what they are, agents of oppresion.

But the point is this, we need to act as individuals, and we almost did.. we pulled together, just not in a tight enough circle.

we cant ask the lawyers guild or the organizers to act as catalysts for our solidarity.

Also... it is not unussual for this to happen.. the cops keep beating protesters, ussually individuals of a minority, as if to make a point. To use fear to prevent our gelling in solidarity. To plant doubt in our breasts, so when the next time comes we will remember the guy who was on the ground, and thus not stand up.. not speak out... not threaten their power structure.

And the good thing is, we let them know that we were not afriad. They felt our anger, fvrustration, the power of the people. Those cops backed down, and dispearsed, because they did not want a confrontation. The lawyers were trying to keep us from going off the hook... which, after the bro was already draged off would have been just emotional outletting, not consciouse action. I wish we could have gotten him unarrested. Perhaps next time.

Just rememebr, this kind of shit does go down when your speak truth to power.

So bring shinguards, bandanas, and goggles next time you exhert your free speech.

Orale jahwarrior, buen punto.

Burn a Bush not the flag. He should be routinely burned in effigy. Voodoo brotha- voo dooooo.

"Update on arrested man!
by John • Saturday June 28, 2003 11:21 PM

The man who was arrested at the A.N.S.W.E.R. rally was released to the custody of four FBI agents armed with semi-automatic weapons, who flew with him to Homestead Air Force base in Florida. From there, he was taken by a C-130 Hercules Transport to Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, where he is presently being held as an "enemy combatant." He'll be in front of a military tribunal next Tuesday, facing charges of "terrorism" for defacing a symbol of the state. If the man is lucky, he'll only face a 20 year sentence in a federal prison, instead of execution by firing squad."
=====================================

This sounds a little far fetched... is it true? If this is true we must make sure there are 10,000 flag burning, efigy burning Americans at the next one.