Police Teargas peaceful anti-war protestors

This will be a short diary since I can't say very much without using lots of four letter words. Roughly 100 protestors were demonstrating at Tacoma Washington, to protest the war and rally against a shipment of Stryker vehicles to Iraq.  They did not attempt to block the shipment, they were orderly, and the area they were at was approved by the authorities.

Though the demonstrators were singing and sitting for the most part, the police eventually broke up the protest with the use of tear gas and rubber bullets.  The protestors claim that they were completely non-violent.  The police claim they were getting rowdy. Rather this being a deal of their word against the police's, we thankfully have video evidence.

Two videos from the protest:

http://www.youtube.com/...

http://www.youtube.com/...

As our freedoms continue to erode away, perhaps one day we'll fondily remiss with our grandchildren about the days when we had the right to protest.  How long until we have our first Iraq war protestor killed by the authorities?  If diaried, I'll gladly delete.

•  Edge of the crackdown

  This is what I'm expecting, the crackdown.  What bnot so long were specially protected rights of speech, assembly and petition are now criminalized and subject to severe repression.  Expect more of this not less in the months ahead as the antiwar movement continues to gain steam.  They know  that the movement now has massive public support, they're going to try to counter that by creating the impression of "violent protest"--by direct acts of unprovoked state violence.  Their plan is to provoke actual violent protest in retaliation.  We cannot falter one way or the other.  We must not back off; nor must we succumb to our own violence.

  Thank you for helping get this story out!

  by ActivistGuy on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:16:46 PM PDT

  •  Agreed

    ..and we must not let them pull the agent provacateur crap, where certain people pretend to be part of the protest and start trouble, giving police the excuse they need. It's an old tactic, and it would be completely unlike this unscrupulous regime not to use it.

    by rhetoricus on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:53:57 PM PDT

    •  honestly

      i'm not sure that they even care enough anymore to bother with that shit, when they can just tear gas people peacefully sitting and get away with it. not that it isn't always a good idea to watch out for agents provacateur, to be fair.

      by wu ming on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 10:59:29 PM PDT

•  You need some people on the city council up there

  time for some people to be looking for new jobs, especially the ones that are in charge of your police.

  by norahc on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:26:08 PM PDT

•  I never thought I'd live to see it again.

  I was among peaceful demonstrators teargassed in Seattle in a previous era.  We were convinced we were changing the world, and as soon as I regain my composure after the heartbreak of seeing these video images (thanks for sharing them), perhaps I'll regain some sense that in significant ways we did.  I suppose I need these reminders of how much more remains to be done, lest, God forfend, I lapse into complacency.

  by jgilhousen on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:34:17 PM PDT

  •  I remember marching on I-5 in Seattle in 1970

    But my last encounter with tear gas in Seattle was at the WTO protests on November 30th 1999.

    by Lefty Coaster on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:41:11 PM PDT

    •  Wow.

      It was the I-5 1970 protest to which I was referring.  I rode up with a bunch of friends from Portland.  The previous day's rally had been such a high... I can still see the clouds parting as "Here Comes the Sun" was being sung, or maybe it's a romanticized reminiscence.  The next day was decidedly less heady.

      The several days surrounding those incidents have shaped much of the rest of my life.

      by jgilhousen on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:08:47 PM PDT

      •  WTO was more intense than any Viet Nam Dem. I saw

        That week was probably the most tumultuous week of my life.

        by Lefty Coaster on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 09:04:40 PM PDT

•  The police attack was on the local news tonight

  here in Western Washington on chanel 5

  Gas attack

  by Lefty Coaster on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:34:46 PM PDT

  •  Oh, great! Hope it comes east.

    by bunny99 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:36:58 PM PDT

  •  Wow. The media almost never covers police attacks

    I've been at several protests which the police attacked and the media ignored. I've been at some where the media accuse us of attacking the police.

    by Mike Erwin on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:33:38 PM PDT

    •  I was changing the chanels to see who covered it

      Only one of three I saw did cover it tonight.

      by Lefty Coaster on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:54:16 PM PDT

  •  thanks for the link

    good to see a UPS kid out there keeping it real, it makes this alum proud.

    by wu ming on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:01:09 PM PDT

•  You need to get this out

  This shit has been going on for years.  A friend of mine was peacefully protesting the WTO in Miami two or three years ago, and the police used tanks and teargas to clear the crowd!  Can you believe that? TANKS!  On Americsn civilians! In fact, I think one girl was injured by a tank.

  Bush really, really, hates protestors.  

  by bunny99 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:36:15 PM PDT

  •  Reagan used tanks

    He sent them against students at Berkeley when he was governor.

    by baba durag on Sun Mar 11, 2007 at 03:33:51 AM PDT

•  Ah, Tacoma's finest...

  protecting military weapons and gassing civilians.

  by Diaries on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:36:55 PM PDT

  •  Is this the new Martial Law in effect?

    Any moron had to know this too would be abused.  I really wonder when the Dems are going to get it.
    They can't be trusted for shit!

    by bunny99 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:39:58 PM PDT

•  OK

  I respect the right to protest, it's the most basic form of expression in Democracy. This does disturb though.

  This will be a short diary since I can't say very much without using lots of four letter words. Roughly 100 protestors were demonstrating at Tacoma Washington, to protest the war and rally against a shipment of Stryker vehicles to Iraq.

  These people are protesting the shipping of advanced weapons to our troops in the field? I disagree with this, and am disturbed by it.

  I did a search of this news via Google, and found an interesting news article.

  Around 11:30 p.m., demonstrators began climbing a fence to enter private property and police used pepper spray to stop them, Ellis said.

  This would definitely contradict your.

  They did not attempt to block the shipment, they were orderly, and the area they were at was approved by the authorities.

  comment.

  The crowd had dwindled to around 35 by 2:30 a.m. Saturday when some protesters threw wooden road barriers onto the street and sat in the roadway, Ellis said. Police launched tear gas at the crowd when people refused orders to leave.

  Again hardly the act of a peaceful protest, protesting is one thing but blocking the street via road barriers is quite another.

  No offense to the poster, but I urge others to look read this news article.

  Here

  by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:41:13 PM PDT

  •  Count me as someone against

    "sending advanced weapons to our troops". The only things we should be sending in that direction are C-130s ready to transport us out of Iraq.

    by Diaries on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:44:34 PM PDT

    •  I don't like troops

      Being used as fodder to make political statements, you want the Iraq war to end.

      More power to you, call your congressman and ask why the hell the Democrats aren't ending the war, they own Congress.

      Until then I expect this country to continue to support the very best of us, with whatever they need. Including the proper equipment.

      by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:46:56 PM PDT

      •  Sending weaponry isn't going to keep them

        from turning into cannon fodder. The only surefire way to do that is to get them out of the country.

        by Diaries on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:50:52 PM PDT

        •  It will only hurt

          Them if there not given their equipment.

          by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:54:40 PM PDT

          •  What will hurt them...

            is people fostering the illusion that giving them guns will help them in the long run, instead of getting them the hell out of the country and allowing them to lead normal, non-killing lives as civilians in the US.

            by Diaries on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:00:45 PM PDT

            •  Well...

              The Democrats own Congress, ask them why there still funding the war. Until then I expect the troops to be properly supplied.

              by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:10:40 PM PDT

              •  Stop asking me to "ask" this and "ask" that...

                If you want the troops out of Iraq, taunting me by referencing our do-nothing Democrats is a pretty piss-poor way to achieve your goals. This, of course, presumes you're more interested in having them leave the country (alive) than you are in sending more and more guns there to keep them company.

                Regardless of this "properly supplied" canard, I'm just going to quote my previous post, since you seem to be doing little more than repeating yours over and over again.

                   What will hurt them...

                   is people fostering the illusion that giving them guns will help them in the long run, instead of getting them the hell out of the country and allowing them to lead normal, non-killing lives as civilians in the US.

                by Diaries on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:16:40 PM PDT

                •  Don't get upset

                  If you want the troops out of Iraq, taunting me by referencing our do-nothing Democrats is a pretty piss-poor way to achieve your goals. This, of course, presumes you're more interested in having them leave the country (alive) than you are in sending more and more guns there to keep them company.

                  I'm sorry if not agreeing with you doesn't agree with you. Still it's congress who now have the power to end this war, and maybe people who support them should be asking why there not doing it.

                  I of course want our troops to come home safely, but I also want them to have the proper equipment to fight when they need to.

                  This is really no reason to get upset.

                  by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:26:11 PM PDT

                  •  I'm not upset...

                    you'd know if I were upset.

                    It's just interesting how you seem to be more interested in the weapons end of the equation than the  getting out part. I've had this discussion with a couple of different people here at DK, and it's always fun trying to figure out which directions the rationalizations come from.

                    by Diaries on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:30:16 PM PDT

                    •  I'm not

                      But the above blog did say they were there to protest

                      roughly 100 protestors were demonstrating at Tacoma Washington, to protest the war and rally against a shipment of Stryker vehicles to Iraq.

                      not against the war itself.

                      Now you could argue by proxy they were protesting against the war and I would believe you. Still that above is exactly what the blogger said.

                      So I get a little worried when people start protesting the supplies our troops depend on.

                      by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:34:36 PM PDT

                  •  That said, I must get something to eat...

                    late night reading and music always get up my appetite.

                    by Diaries on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:31:46 PM PDT

                  •  They can't do it because...

                    ...the Republicans (your party) won't let them. If the Republicans do let them, the Chimp-in-Chief will veto the legislation.....and then eat a banana.

                    by Bensdad on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 09:00:51 PM PDT

      •  "The very best of us"

        Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.

        by pontechango on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:53:18 PM PDT

        •  I didn't mean that in a religious matter.

          by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:55:07 PM PDT

        •  I ignored that...

          but thank you for addressing it. The idea that the troops represent the "best of us" by virtue of their presence in Iraq is a warm glass of Kool-Aid I never intend on drinking.

          by Diaries on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:59:39 PM PDT

          •  Misunderstood me

            I meant our troops represent the best of us for their willingness to serve in the military, at grave personal hardship.

            by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:04:29 PM PDT

            •  Nope, I understood - and still disagree.

              The troops are human beings - just like the rest of us. My heroes aren't automatically people who serve in the military, regardless of their reasons for doing so. And I'll remind you that a fair number of people in the military (particularly the 18-24 crowd) joined simply out of a desire to be able to afford college educations - and a far larger number are currently trapped in a merry-go-round of blood that takes them to Iraq again and again, simply to feed the war machine.

              by Diaries on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:10:35 PM PDT

              •  Figures to back those up?

                And I'll remind you that a fair number of people in the military (particularly the 18-24 crowd) joined simply out of a desire to be able to afford college educations - and a far larger number are currently trapped in a merry-go-round of blood that takes them to Iraq again and again, simply to feed the war machine.

                That is a strong generalization to make, I would be interested in some statistics from reputable sources supporting those facts.

                Because there are many reasons to join the military.

                by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:13:46 PM PDT

                •  It literally took me five seconds to use Google.

                  Try it yourself, and see!

                  http://www.diversityworking.com/...

                  by Diaries on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:17:53 PM PDT

                  •  Ok..

                    That was not an actual statistic but someones opinion with no.. information behind them.

                    Did I missing something?

                    Only numbers I found were

                    In a recent survey, almost 35% out of the 100 interviewees responded that they wanted to help the American soldiers find Osama Bin Laden and bring down the forces of Al Qaeda.

                    Sorry, this really doesn't support your claim.

                    by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:31:21 PM PDT

                    •  They believe that........

                      ...because George Bush told them that Saddam Hussein was linked arm-in-arm with Al Qaeda I (he was actually suppressing Al Qaeda) and because George Bush told them that Saddam Hussein was seeking "quantities of uranium .....[drumroll]..from AFrica".

                      They believed him. Many died believing him. And yet, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Most of the hijackers were Saudi Arabian.

                      by Bensdad on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 09:04:58 PM PDT

                      •  Heh

                        because George Bush told them that Saddam Hussein was linked arm-in-arm with Al Qaeda I (he was actually suppressing Al Qaeda) and because George Bush told them that Saddam Hussein was seeking "quantities of uranium .....[drumroll]..from AFrica".

                        You don't know that, Iraq is never mentioned. They could be refering to Al-Qaeda and Osama in Afghanistan.

                        by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 09:24:12 PM PDT

                •  man

                  you are talking to someone who recommended a diary comparing our military to suicide bombers.

                  by EnderRS on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:26:03 PM PDT

                  •  Hmm..

                    Well seeing as I never recommended a diary in my short span of having an account, I can only summarize you mean the nice chap I'm talking to.

                    I find debate with a true believer very refreshing, for it's through debate that one can prove the strength of their position.. or the weakness.

                    by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:28:15 PM PDT

                    •  and

                      you are doing a fine job of it. Debating that is.

                      Yes, I did mean the person you are talking to. It was either not one of his finest moments or a general reflection of his beliefs. Based on seeing a whole bunch of his other comments I'd bet on the latter.

                      by EnderRS on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:42:38 PM PDT

                      •  Ah well thank you

                        For that remark, I do try.

                        Still I would have to agree with you that a persons comments reflect their beliefs. No matter how...interesting they are.

                        by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:59:06 PM PDT

                •  Yes...here are some reasons:

                  • You are poor.
                  • Your parents are poor.
                  • You want to go to college, but you are poor........
                  • You want health care.........

                  by Bensdad on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 09:02:18 PM PDT

      •  It's the warhawks

        that use troops as fodder to make political statements, the whole damned war was fodder to make political statements, see the IWR vote.  We just want to bring them home.

        Make your value judgement as you will.

        by ActivistGuy on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:53:55 PM PDT

        •  I will

          The fact remains, is that stopping supplies from reaching our troops would be a direct act of hurting them.

          The GOP did this when it sent them in without proper body armor.

          When someone is protesting the shipment of supplies, then I will make a judgment.

          Just like I judge the GOP for there acts.

          by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:01:15 PM PDT

          •  OK

            So you watc hed the videos and concluded that the use of tear gas and rubber bullets was appropriate?  Good.  Tells me all I need to know.

            by ActivistGuy on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:06:20 PM PDT

            •  56k connection

              Doesn't allow one to view files from Youtube, regrettable but sometimes we make do with what we have.

              I will say though that video's can be made to support ones agenda, I have no idea if that is the case here but it's worth noting.

              by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:09:27 PM PDT

              •  I'm sorry dude

                But you really shouldn't be debating this vigorously until you watch the videos.  You allusion to the problems of trickery through editing are warranted, but you've been riffing on the importance of solid objective evidence throughout this convsersation without having looked at the evidence I brought to the table in the original diary.  The video literallt depicts 50 people sitting down and singing "give peace a chance," and 1 minute into it tear gass is fired smack into the middle of them.  It's really, really bad.

                by SouthSideDem on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:12:52 PM PDT

                •  Perhaps

                  You do make a point about my debating without access to all the resources, very civilly made point I note.

                  Still how long is this video anyway? I hear it's quite short.

                  by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:15:17 PM PDT

                  •  Thank you

                    I try to be civil.  Ad hominems don't really bolster any point.  The first video is 2 minutes.  The second is 5 minutes.

                    by SouthSideDem on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:18:42 PM PDT

                    •  Hmm...

                      Once I'm doing debating with that nice chap above, I will check them out.

                      I think I hurt my modem cry...

                      by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:32:17 PM PDT

                      •  I'm curious

                        As to what you think of the video after you watch it.  Please comment on it.

                        by SouthSideDem on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:56:26 PM PDT

      •  No, Republicans have the power to stop...

        ...the Democrats whose hold on Congress is shakey, at best. No one was using the troops as fodder for a political statement. It was exactly the opposite. The political statement being expressed was "We need to stop wasting the lives of the troops who a mad commander-in-chief dropped into the middle of a civil war".

        It is true they may have taken it too far (climbing fences), but it is a sad day when we give so little leeway to free speech that you we break out the bullets, tear gas and riot gear just because someone is climbing a fence.

        Wear normal police clothes, go over and arrest them humanely, if you must.

        What is this? Pre-war Nazi Germany?

        by Bensdad on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:59:25 PM PDT

        •  More and more so, every day. n/t

          by Kurlan Naiskos on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:57:20 PM PDT

      •  the troop have been used for POLITICAL STATEMENTS

        (and political ends) FOR FOUR YEARS NOW.

        They were not sent to Iraq to keep America safe or to find the imaginary WMDs, you fool!

        by dancewater on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:24:37 PM PDT

  •  Well

    I'm personally against sending "advanced weaponry" to Iraq because I don't want one more single tax dollar, piece of equipment, or American life being sent over there.  I want them all out, and I want them all out now.

    As for blocking, the road was already blocked.  As for the protestors getting violent, the police are claiming this but A) There is no evidence the support these claims, and B) A good friend who was still there at 2:30 am swore to me that no one was throwing anything at the cops.  If a longer video gets posted on youtube, I'll update.

    by SouthSideDem on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:47:39 PM PDT

    •  Catch 22

      That is your right not to want any more money or life sent there, still what should we do if them staying there is unavoidable?

      We can't ignore that.

      As for blocking, the road was already blocked.  As for the protestors getting violent, the police are claiming this but A) There is no evidence the support these claims, and B) A good friend who was still there at 2:30 am swore to me that no one was throwing anything at the cops.  If a longer video gets posted on youtube, I'll update.

      I will keep watching for more news on it, but really no offense intended but you can't see how perhaps some one who as protesting might no be considered a neutral source?

      by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:53:55 PM PDT

      •  bias

        "but you can't see how perhaps some one who as protesting might no be considered a neutral source?"

        I'm biased as all hell, and that's why I hope a longer video is released.  A picture is worth a 1000 words.

        by SouthSideDem on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:56:46 PM PDT

        •  Yes it is. We agree there.

          by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:59:25 PM PDT

  •  "hardly the act of a peaceful protest"

    Uh.. yeah.  OK.  You're entitled to your opinion but that is not violent by any stretch of the imagination.  

    by pontechango on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:49:23 PM PDT

    •  According to my info

      The protesters throw up barriers and one tried to jump a fence, if confirmed both of those are pro-active acts meant to cause more ruckus. I'm only going with the most readily available neutral information.

      by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:56:41 PM PDT

      •  New Info

        I just read this.

        But Tacoma Police say what you don't see in the video is that just before the tear gas canisters were fired, some demonstrators had started  to throw barricades at officers, and the crowd was told to disperse.

        "A large number of protesters started to cause a disturbance. They picked up some of these sawhorses and started throwing them in the direction of officers, and then started sitting down to blockade the street." said Det. Brad Graham. "At that point officers had to move in and disperse the crowd."

        It would seem the cops did put up the barriers but if the protesters did start trying to throw them.. then it's a riot not a protest.

        Remember, I'm going with what is available.

        by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:58:45 PM PDT

        •  Do you believe everything cops say?

          They have an incentive to lie.  The aggressiveness of the police simply isn't justified by the actual evidence in the video.

          by pontechango on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:00:20 PM PDT

          •  No

            I don't believe everything they say, but that doesn't suddenly put the protesters on some moral high ground either.

            Both sides have an agenda.

            by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:02:57 PM PDT

            •  Moral High Ground

              Sorry, but getting teargassed and shot w/ rubber bullets w/no hint of violence qualifies as a moral high ground.

              by pontechango on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:06:02 PM PDT

              •  I never said the cops have it, neither does.

                by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:07:43 PM PDT

        •  I say bullshit until there's more info

          I don't believe what the cops say on this one.

          by bunny99 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:02:04 PM PDT

          •  That is your right, I'm merely repating it.

            by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:03:16 PM PDT

            •  Yes, thanks. Now we need the truth

              by bunny99 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:05:13 PM PDT

              •  Truth

                Will hardly be found from the mouth pieces of the protesters and cops, it will be found by looking at every available fact from every source and figuring out whose messing up what.

                by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:07:19 PM PDT

                •  I think I've met my match PureCynic

                  I found a link to some interesting info on the protest here:http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2007/03/tacoma_proteste.html

                  There is even a video posted by that Fascist Malkin, and I didn't see any hooligans in it.
                  The funny part of Malkins description of the liberal behavior is calling the cops douchebag.
                  hahahaha!  You have to read it to believe it.

                  by bunny99 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:18:46 PM PDT

      •  Well, I wasn't there but

        I sure as hell wouldn't take the police word for it.  What you consider "neutral" is anonymously sourced second-hand information.

        by pontechango on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:59:07 PM PDT

        •  I examine all information

          With a healthy grain of skepticism, both sides are biased. So I will await for the truth to seep in from the lies.

          by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:02:16 PM PDT

          •  I'll bet you a hundred dollars

            that the cops won't release video evidence of the demonstration.  If anything, they will confiscate and destroy it.

            by pontechango on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:03:40 PM PDT

            •  Can I get that sent to my paypal?

              If the cops have a video, and it proves there claims I  doubt they would with hold it. Still I will look at each side with skepticism.

              by PureCynic on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:06:05 PM PDT

              •  Surely, at this point,

                the police videotape anytime there is an event of this type.  Like you, I rather think protesters have to be totally non-aggressive to not hurt the cause.  I will be a little more suspicious of the actions of the police if no tape, or a highly edited tape, comes from them.

                by TracieLynn on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 10:48:09 PM PDT

•  Instead of a tip jar, some advice

  When protesting, please come prepared.  Make sure you and all those around you never ever ever get violent.  Under any circumstances.  Even if violence is excercised against you.  Bring water, bring a gas mask if you have one (an S10 goes on Ebay for $50) but only  take it out if needed.  To emphasize, it's ok to go to jail for what you believe in, but not to hurt someone else.

  My father has a large FBI file on him afetr he got his head cracked open while protesting Nam in DC way back when.  The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

  by SouthSideDem on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 07:44:16 PM PDT

  •  Gas masks are pretty conspicuous.

    I prefer swim goggles.

    by ben masel on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:37:14 PM PDT

    •  Damn skippy

      That's a good call.  Then again, no badass bonus points for swim goggles.

      by SouthSideDem on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:39:48 PM PDT

    •  I've read enough

      of your comments to know that you've been in the protest game for quite a while now.  Maybe you should write a diary with all these helpful hints.  It could be that many, many more of us will need to know this stuff.

      by TracieLynn on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 10:38:39 PM PDT

  •  Write the phone number of a bail bondsman

    on your arm.
    Bring paper towels, water, and vasaline to  wipe off tear gas.
    Wear long sleaves; jeans, and all clothing should be stuff you won't mind geting torn or abused beyond further use.
    Wear sneakers or running shoes, not sandles or boots.
    Bring minimal ID, 1 credit card for bail, no other extra credit cards, library cards, Costco cards, etc. as ther may become "lost". Do not carry cash for bail, it will become "lost" during processing. DO NOT BRING YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY CARD. Identity theft is a great way to mess with dirty hippies.
    Bring food  bars and water, there's a chance you won't be transported fro a while, and you may have a chance to eat/drink on the bus. (This is not likely, you'll probably be in plastic cuffs on the bus)
    If possible have a buddy, or group that you can be "processed" with. People of the same sex, they seperate genders when they put you on the bus. (Oddly, if your at a gay rights protest, they put all the boys on one bus and all the girls on another, too.)
    Have your cellphone ready to autodial your, or a friend's answering machine. Once,recently, an "open" cellphone recorded the sounds of the bus. Nothing really useful, people singing, background conversation, etc. but if you're recording your initial arrest,it could be useful.
    SAY NOTHING. AT THE MOST SAY; "At this time I choose to not speak without a lawyer present" then SHUT UP. They'll have your name from your ID, and if ANYONE you don't know says "Isn't it a nice day?" STFU!
    This list is incomplete, going from 30 year old memories, please help our brothers and sisters by adding to it.

    by Kurlan Naiskos on Sun Mar 11, 2007 at 12:19:03 AM PDT

•  Second round.

  From last Sunday...

  Charges against the 3 arrestees have already been dismissed.

  by ben masel on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:35:39 PM PDT

•  Thanks for posting this

  I am 51 and from Chicago; so I had a real deja-vu-all- over-again moment watching this. The only thing I can think to do is send the link to news media AND KEEP UP THE PRESSURE. And understand this isn't happening in a vacuum -- it is time to step up pressure for the impeachment of Bush and his criminal lackeys.  

  by crankyinNYC on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:36:26 PM PDT

•  The giveaway

  If there was widespread convictable activity from the protesters, why did the police employ dispersal techniques rather than arrests?

  by ben masel on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 08:44:39 PM PDT

•  I'm a graduate

  of 68 in Chicago. The worse thing we did was disrupt their coms. They went beserk. I have a three inch scar just above my right eye. The blood from the billy club hit, sealed my eye shut. I worried for 2 days that I would never see out of it. I got medical care after 2 days in jail, then I could see out of it again.

  My nephew still has trouble with his security clearence, they bring up his uncle every time he is up for review.

  It's getting to be time for me to give up my left eye.

  Nothing like the smell of tear gas in the morning.

  by Avalon on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 09:11:27 PM PDT

•  images

  

  

  

  

  

  by neecie100 on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 09:14:15 PM PDT

•  we need more protrests

  everywhere across this land. Maybe, rebellion! People can only take so much, afterall.

  It's like prerevolutionary France here in the USA. What this nation needs to do is gather enough people onto the nations capital to storm the Bastille.

  Bush and Cheney will be detained at the Hague where they will be treated in accordance with the U.N. declaration of Human rights.

  Rumesfeld, Rice, and others in this administration will  stand trial for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

  by xjac on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 09:27:14 PM PDT

•  Chilling.

  That cop in the second video throwing that canister (?) at the camera operator.  Looks right at him and wings it.

  Man, those were some scary sitting protestors.  Very threatening.  Hell, I'd throw something at people sitting and singing if I could.

  I can't believe we're doing this again.

  by edsbrooklyn on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 10:15:25 PM PDT

  •  i suspect it'll get a lot worse

    before it gets better. between 1990s drug war/anti-gang militarization of police depts, and 2000s war on terra/anti-anti-globalization militarization, they've got a lot of hardware to use, and a collective seige mentality that sees dissenting citizens as enemies of the state.

    i just hope things don't get all the way to live police fire on unarmed protesters. seriously, it's hard to rule it out, with the way this country's heading.

    by wu ming on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:04:41 PM PDT

    •  At the protests at the1980

      Democratic National Convention here in NYC, my friend --  a woman -- was hit in the belly with a billy club and ended up in the hospital.  And things were supposedly peaceful.  The stakes are a lot higher now.

      i just hope things don't get all the way to live police fire on unarmed protesters. seriously, it's hard to rule it out, with the way this country's heading.

      The anniversaries of Kent State and Jackson State are coming up.

      by edsbrooklyn on Sun Mar 11, 2007 at 05:21:23 AM PDT

•  a friend who is a Vietnam Vet

  swears there will be blood in the streets of the USA before we end this war.

  by dancewater on Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 11:32:26 PM PDT

  •  I hope he's wrong, but I think he's right. n/t

    by Kurlan Naiskos on Sun Mar 11, 2007 at 12:22:43 AM PDT

•  Excellent piece

  Just a heads up, but I linked you at my blog. There is a matching diary here at DK.

  by pegwinn2 on Sun Mar 11, 2007 at 07:18:17 AM PDT