Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Our forefathers thought so much of these four basic rights that they made them the very first amendment to the Constitution of the US. So why have so many official authorities in this country, sworn to uphold that Constitution, spent so much; time, money, and energy to suppress them?
Miami, Fort Benning, New York, Minneapolis and Pittsburgh have shown that police reactions to First Amendment events have escalated at a very serious rate, with training in the works for even more. We will look back to the FTAA protest in Miami in 2003 and trace the escalation through the G-20 in Pittsburg in September of this year, including the training of an “elite” squad of police, looking at the tactics that the police use and the weapons they have at their disposal.
Miami, November 2003, FTAA—In anticipation of protest against the FTAA (Free Trade Areas of the Americas) Miami enacted new ordinances specifically to deal with demonstrators; these ordinances limited the number of people gathered in a public place without a permit to seven, limited the size of signs and the sticks used to display the signs. The Miami ordinances were struck down by the courts, however other municipalities have enacted the same ordinances, and many have gone unchallenged.
Leading up to and during the actual event the police used several different tactics to suppress the crowd, including:
1. Harassment—the police harassed everyone, including churches that were providing logging and sanctuary to the groups and organizations and individuals that were involved in the demonstrations. This was done using the fear tactic that the people churches and organizers were supporting were violent and dangerous and included threats that the police might not be able to assist in case there was trouble. Brian Stevens, the head of Catholic Charities for the Archdiocese of Miami, reported that every church that was supporting the Root-Cause march (a three day 26 mile march just prior to the opening of the ministerial) was visited by the police weeks before the event with the above warning. Other harassment centered around the Convergence Zone, the warehouse in Lake Worth Florida (60 miles north of Miami) where puppets were being made for the different events. Essentially, anyone who looked like they would be demonstrator was harassed.
2. Snatch and grab—mobile police units rolled through the streets indiscriminately picking up protesters and arresting them. There were over 250 arrests and 0 convictions.
3. Chemicals and gas—both teargas and pepper spray were used on protesters. This was done to a peaceful gathering at 4:00 p.m. and without warning. In fact, at 3:58 an announcement was made that “if the protest remained peaceful it would be allowed to continue.”
4. Non-lethal weapons and concussion grenades—these are similar to the concussion grenades used by the Israeli Security Forces against Palestinians protesters. They give off a very loud noise that will leave anyone close by stunned. I (Ray) personally experienced one in the morning of November 20, (the day of the main protest) that left me disoriented for several minutes and with some permanent hearing loss. In the afternoon at about 4:15 the police opened fire with bean-bag bullets, pepper-balls, and other so-called non-lethal munitions. This was done in a totally indiscriminant manner to create confusion and panic in the ranks of the protesters; it was nothing less than police terrorism. This attack caused physical injuries, including the loss of an eye and other head injuries, as well as bleeding, welts and bruises. The Miami police also used tasers at several locations, mostly on small groups and out of sight from witnesses. But most damaging, perhaps, is the lingering fear of police reaction to peaceful protest.
Fort Benning, GA, SOA Watch—protesters “crossing the line” into the US Army base at the annual SOA Watch event now face up to one year in jail and a fine. This is a drastic change from the former policy of arresting the protesters who crossed line into the base, loading them on buses, driving them out of the base to a location a few miles away, then releasing them. Another tactic used here was loud music, anthem and marshal music projected at the SOA Watch demonstrators by the US Army. The technique of blasting loud music as “psychological operation” has been used by militaries around the world. Also at Ft. Benning the Columbus police department started to run all those participating in the SOA Watch vigil through metal detectors. They have since stop the using metal detectors and the army has stopped the use of loud music.
New York City, 2004, Republican National Convention—mass arrest was the most used tool by the police. The NYPD rented an old contaminated warehouse, converted it into a holding and processing facility for arrestees, and then proceed to make mass arrests. The cops would use the tactic of corralling protesters; this is done by surrounding a group of people with orange plastic fence material, entrapping all inside, then arresting all of them, no matter whether or not they broke the law. Arrestees then were hauled off to the holding facility, where they were held for up to five days. Many experienced sickness there because the warehouse was a former toxic waste site. Over 1800 were arrested in a seven day period.
Minneapolis, 2008, Republican National Convention—preemptive raids and harassment of non-corporate media were favorite police tactics here.
1. Harassment of non-corporate media was apparently a high priority, intended to disrupt the independent media’s ability to cover these events. In most cases indy-media is the only source of information of what is happing on the streets and they have been targeted from Miami to Pittsburgh. In Minneapolis, the most famous case was the arrest of Democracy Now co-host Amy Goodman. After being notified that two Democracy Now producers, Sharif Abdel Konddous and Nicole Salazar were arrested, she was arrested herself; her crime was asking a cop if she could speak to a supervisor about the producers’ arrests.
2. Preemptive raids, with arrests, based on the claim that such raids prevent trouble before it happens, were widely used. This tactic is a very serious affront to first amendment rights. In fact, these raids are reminiscent of the Palmer raids in 1919-1920, where the Feds raided the IWW and other leftist organizations, confiscated records and arrested their leaders.
Pittsburgh, 2009, G20 Protests—once again, police used preemptive raids and, for the first time, LRADs (Long Range Acoustic Devices) against demonstrators in the US.
1. In Miami, Minneapolis, and now Pittsburgh, police raided organizing meetings, arresting the organizers, and all done days before the events would take place. In some cases the arrestees were held until after the event was over. Obviously this disrupts the ability to organize large protests. It would seem that is the goal, that and discouraging future organizing efforts.
2. LRADS where used on protesters. In fact, not only where they used on the protesters, but they were used in residential neighborhoods, so that residents not involved in the actions were subject to them.
3. So what is an LRAD and why should you care? These are military weapons, developed to ensure safe zones around U.S. military vessels after the attack on the USS Cole in 2000. Crew members can use the device to warn approaching craft to change course, sending the message at 120 dB. If the craft is not responsive, the volume can be cranked to 151 dB, moving from “loud” to “painful” volume. Police can use smaller versions of this device to instruct or warn crowds. Human rights groups and hearing specialists have warned that sounds over 90dB can damage hearing. Another effect of the more advanced LRAD’s is to cause the lost of bowel and bladder control; the sound waves they produce penetrate the whole body and not just the ear. Because the device does not distinguish between protesters and folks living in the neighborhood, much less between peaceful and other protesters, this represents an especially dangerous escalation in the use of so-called non-lethal weapons.
4. Police actions in Pittsburgh are especially troubling for multiple reasons. First, the police used almost every device, tactic, and procedure described above. Second, and more important, this was the first anti-globalization protest of the Obama administration. Police actions showed that nothing has changed in the streets when it comes to suppressing first amendment rights. That Obama dismissed the protestors as ignorant speaks volumes.
Miami, 2009—In late spring of this year CBS4 in South Florida reported the development of a new, elite police squad, the “Rapid Deployment Force,” the first of its kind in the country. The print version of the story tells us that the squad is intended to bring a “peaceful ending to potentially life threatening situations, such as civil disturbances, critical incidents, special events and natural disasters.” [emphasis added] The video tells a somewhat different story. Envision a visual of a number of police officers, all in riot gear, as the announcer excitedly tells you that: “It looks like they’re gearing up for combat!” It does. Later, we see 8 or more riot-clad officers in a line, simultaneously performing: “They see their target, drop their shields, and fire.” We are told this squad is to be used for, among other things, crowd control. One cannot help but think of the depiction of the Amritsar Massacre in the film “Gandhi”
It is clear that police not only continue to suppress the expression of first amendment rights, but are escalating the intensity of, and tools used in, that suppression. In its first test, the new administration did not show itself to be a strong defender of free speech. The plain truth is that whenever people rise up in against an unjust system, the powers protecting that system will react and that reaction will be oppressive. This has been the story in the US for a very long time. Between the Patriot Act and the militarization of domestic police forces, it looks to continue for the foreseeable future. For us and our movement, this means we must struggle all the more to protect and expand our rights. We cannot complacently allow ourselves to be herded into “free speech zones,” told what signs we can use to send our message, and allow the police to determine when and where we will speak to the public. Even when we are not prepared to perform civil disobedience, we have to resist repression to the extent that we are able, have to struggle against the Patriot Act and militarization of the police. We have the right to free speech only as long as we are prepared to exercise and defend that right.
