Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Police Disguise Protest Sabotage As Public Safety
The Occupy movements, in addition to being some of the most important activist movements to come along in the United States in several decades, have helped underscore several societal crises. For example, the failure of the establishment media and the rise of the beltway pundit class, the disappearance of public space, and also vanishing civil liberties, to name only a few.
Occupy has also served as a reminder of the ever-present police state, which rather than acting to "serve and protect," oftentimes crushes and suppresses freedom of expression. We've witnessed this in obvious, overt, batshit crazy behavior like police using horses to stampede into a Times Square crowd, and when Oakland police turned their city into a war zone. But there are subtler, far sneakier ways so-called public servants such as firefighters and the police, and by extension city officials, use the law as a weapon, or a convenient scapegoat, to control a rebellious faction of the population.
I'm going to examine two recent examples in this post, but they are by no means meant to be a complete list. To highlight all of the ways police use the law to suppress the Occupy movements would take a book-length effort.
First, there's the odd timing of the NYFD confiscating Occupy Wall Street's generators and fuel because they supposedly posed a danger. OWS has been in possession of these generators and fuel for quite some time, but the fire department chose to seize them the day before the first snow of the season is due. It's not unreasonable to suggest that Mayor Bloomberg, who previously lost a showdown with protesters over the cleaning of Liberty Park, now feels he needs to get creative with the eviction process.
Placing protesters under constant police surveillance hasn't scared them off, nor have mass arrests, or physical abuse by police officers. If anything, these kinds of assault by the city have strengthened the movement's public popularity. A recent Quinnipiac University survey reported that 67 percent of New York City voters said they agree with the protesters' views. A whopping 72 percent of voters said law-abiding demonstrators can stay "as long as they want." Throughout the occupation, Bloomberg has looked painfully out-of-touch and foolish on several occasions, and even inept as a city leader. Surely, that has provided him with enough motivation to disguise protest sabotage as public safety.
Then there's the outrageous example of Occupy Tucson, one of the comparatively smaller Occupy movements that has suffered a disproportionately large percentage of arrests. On any given weekday, there are about 100 occupiers demonstrating in city parks, according to Tucson Sergeant Maria Hawk. That's not exactly a wild surge in the population, or anything that should overwhelm the city. Yet, an astonishing 351 protesters have been arrested since the genesis of the movement. Hawk admits "most of the arrests were for remaining in a city park after hours." This was also one of the excuses given in Oakland, along with the usual, "your fuel tanks are going to raze the entire city to the ground" speech.
The citation carries a $1000 fine, a potential prison sentence of six months in jail, and up to three years probation. Tucson activists rightly view this as an effort by police to bleed the movement financially instead of using bad PR-generating pepper spray and batons. While Occupy Wall Street got its moments to publicly "battle" the police and display how a force gone wild stifles dissent, Tucson is being quietly suffocated in the dead of night, and most of the public will be none the wiser.
What's so deeply nefarious about this kind of civil rights assassination is that curfew and fire safety laws were created with genuine good intentions. It makes sense to not want individuals walking around in secluded, dark spaces at night, or not allow people to create bonfires in the middle of grounds covered in dry grass. But these well-meaning laws are now being used to crush the First Amendment.
Some readers might be asking themselves: But Allison, how can we tell the difference between when the cops are trying to protect citizens, and when they're using public safety laws to disguise protest sabotage? Well, it's quite easy. Here's an example: Let's give the OPD some credit and assume they really were concerned protesters were going to start a fire with their fuel. Why not walk in and seize the equipment? Why escalate the enforcement of a public safety regulation into full-blown warfare on the streets of Oakland, including critically injuring a war veteran? Unless, of course, what happened in Oakland was never about public safety, and all about crushing the will of the protesters. It's not very safe for the public to, say, shoot them with rubber bullets, tear gas them, and explode flash bang grenades in their midsts.
Another example: Let's assume the NYPD is super freaked out by OWS having generators. Why wait until the day before first snowfall to seize them? Were these generators not a public safety issue on the first day of the occupation? What was special about October 28, 2011 that suddenly turned generators into Public Enemy Number One? Unless, of course, this has nothing to do with public safety and everything to do with crushing one of the most successful branches of the Occupy movement.
The answers to these questions should seem fairly obvious to anyone who is familiar with how law enforcement agencies prefer to handle public dissent. The NYPD, OPD, and Tucson police don't want a bloody, drawn out war on their hands. It'll look terrible in the media, and public sentiment is already on the side of the protesters.
What police and city officials prefer is a death by a thousand subtle little cuts. Take the generators, issue tickets, pull down the tents, and make life unbearable for the protesters. Hope they give up and go home when it snows, and if that doesn't work, try to freeze the bastards out.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
25 Comments so far
Show AllInteresting, isn't it, that tea partiers walked around openly carrying handguns, and were not harassed.
Yet generators are a safety hazard that must be removed, lest... what? People are overcome with CO poisoning? The park burns down?
What a joke. And the larger joke is that the MSM has not made this comparison.
It's starting to feel like 1968 outside...
The second amendment does not guarantee the right to heat, only to pack heat.
LOL..Very Good Joe
Thomas Gilbert-
Not defending the TP, but the guns were legal (I don't own a handgun and don't want one). And not defending the actions of cops, but having a mix of crowded conditions, gasoline, tents, and (probably) more than enough city-types who don't know how to start a generator much less handle gasoline in dubious weather conditions...well, I'd have to give the benefit of a doubt to the cops. (Sorry kids.)
But yes, its starting to feel like 1968. Get your bus tickets to Charlotte now!
I can't verify, but I heard they were bio-diesel Which means they run on cooking oil.
Pulleeease, "city-types who don't know how to start a generator" - dude, you pull a rope or push a button! (Sorry old-fart)
Hmmm
What part of the "the right of the people peaceably to assemble" doesn't the government understand. Under our Constitution the government cannot stop people from peaceably assembling period. There are NO exceptions listed. Or did I miss something in the first Amendment? No! then every single time the government breaks up a peaceful assembly of the people the Government is BREAKING THE LAW.
Eventually people will peacefully assemble. And when the government tries to violate their inalienable right to do so the people are going to tell the government to leave them alone. The government will then attempt to forcibly violate their rights. At which point the people will exercise the intent of the 2nd amendment which is to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. Clearly what we are witnessing all over the country is the government trampling our civil rights. And eventually the people will say enough is enough.
Can you imagine what it would be like if we lib..lib...lib.... liberals were really "packing heat ". Why it would be a no-brainer, your right wing TV Hosts would be totally AWOL caused by the smell coming from their underware?
Thank goodness we still get some REAL independent news from folks like Allison Kilkenny and Amy Goodman, cuz faux (fox?) independents like NPR are whoring themselves daily for the powers that be.
And NPR is now blacklisting anyone who is even remotely associated with NPR (even if they don't work for NPR) if they so much as show support for OWS: Lisa Simeone, Caitlin Curran.
It appears that NPR's interim CEO Joyce Slocum has really clamped down with an iron fist.
Sieg Heil, Frau Slocum!
This just exemplifies TPTB's short term thinking. If the Occupy movement fails to get immediate results because they have to regroup to keep from freezing at the beginning of the winter, it just prolongs the inevitable outcome of even more of the 99% coming out to claw back their redress when they are freezing at the end of the winter from the economic inequalities that can no longer be born by said 99%. I'd rather start putting in my cold weather watches now, while we can hopefully direct our society into a soft crash, versus the hard crash DOA, GoldenSacks are engineering.
"all about crushing the will of the protesters."
the hidden message:
"you have the right to remain silent - USE IT!"
The second situation with the OPD, in which Kilkenny supposes: "Let's give the OPD some credit and assume they really were concerned protesters were going to start a fire with their fuel. Why not walk in and seize the equipment?"
was a hypothetical. aka playing devil's advocate. aka imagining the OPD might act with some calm prudence, which they most certainly did not. She's quietly and calmly mocking their passive aggressive attempts to undermine the movement.
What Kilkenny writes is perfectly clear. It's your critical reading skills that are off.
Are you looking to win some sort of award as Pedantic Dickhead of the Week? Piss off with your drivel.
Good, constructive criticism of the piece. I noticed it too. I still think it's a good article and perhaps your remarks will help her draft ever stronger pieces in the future.
The attitude of the elite is echoed in the infamous quote by Reich's Fuehrer Goebbels, when asked whether Germans should educate Poles. He said, "We will teach them just enough German to be able to read our street signs so they won't get run over by our tanks as they head east." For Americans elite just substitute Limos for tanks and The Hamptons for east and you have the picture.
Each Occupy is developing their relationship with the local cops.
Oakland has a history of police brutality, that obviously still exists.
The night of the incident, CBS showed the confrontation with no
mention of Scott Olson getting hurt. The local news here in
Santa Cruz did the same thing. The next night, CBS mentioned
Scott, but said it was not known how he was injured.
So what will happen when OWS protesters wake up to find with 6-8 inches of snow on top of their tents and tarps this weekend.
I truly hope the OWS movement will achieve SOMETHING via their efforts. Yet I question whether or not enough pragmatic realists will be able to influence the naval gazers enough to take the appropriate and NECESSARY steps to prepare for the winter......
This is not new. During the 1930's there was mass civil disobedience across the USA. They started as local strikes or occupation of Public spaces as happens here and ended with mass riots and the National Guard being called out to fire on US Citizens.
Much the same language came from the top. That is the groups were "rabble" or a "Threat to public safety". Or they were linked to "Communists" and threats to the American way of life.
This all might SEEM new.
Ultimately it was WW2 that put a stopper on those riots wherein the anger of the working class was turned against the Japanese and Germans rather then their own Government and The Wall Street Elites.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exuGv3HsV-U
Watch this. It a collage of riots that were happening across America along with the Police response. Note one woman indicating that she makes 3.50 a week to support a family of four.
Deja vu all over again.
Each Occupy seems to be different. Some are more militant, some are lifestyle anarchist, while some are run by liberals and mainstream NGOs that red-bait any radical voice out of their encampments. In the later group, you have the sad spectacle of self-appointed police of the occupations turning on their own members rather demonstrating solidarity against the system.
It'll be interesting to see how these different strands to develop, but I can already see the pathologies and paralyzing obsessions of American progressive politics coming to the fore.
The OWS movement chose this law-breaking method of protest, so son't blame the police for enforcing just laws.
If we wish to allow America to become a third-world nation we can begin to allow OWS to create a new paradigm for homelessness in America: we can allow homeless people to build shanty-towns on the public sidewalks and in public parks where they can cook, bathe, have sex, urinate, defecate, and sleep.
If we believe otherwise we should enforce the laws.
I suggest people begin doing their homework regarding OWS. OWS is an invasion/occupation/invasion movement. OWS first invades a public space, usually a public park; then they occupy this public space; then they go out to invade and occupy private businesses; then they return to occupy this public space and camp for the night.
Please Google: "ows otpor" and "the revolution business" to learn the truth behind the Arab Spring and OWS.
I have a very good solution.
Invite all the Tea Party Nuts to OWS. Take them in with open arms. Besides, they all own nice warm motorhomes. And it's damn hard to tow motorhomes that block the street crossways in protest. Their generators are approved by DOT, so phuck off stormtroopers. Invite retired police associations to join. Tell them all to pack heaters. I'm sure they can get permits.
Make the focus liquidating the banks, and returning that stolen, un-audit-able TARP money (obscene bonuses) to the US taxpayer. That's something everybody can agree on.
To reach critical mass, we've got to find common ground and coalesce with our fellow countrymen who are willing to stick their necks out for Citizen Justice.
It is doable if we just lower our standards a little bit.
TJ
Indeed, and the various disguises are based on city ordinances in violation of "make no law to abridge the right to peacefully assemble etc". My only criticism is that it is not the police who is responsible for the violations of the first amendment but the mayors and city councils who are the commanders of the police.
Good points, Crowsnest. Moreover, if prominent officials and politicians, as well as police departments were truly concerned about public safety, they wouldn't resort to the use of sonar cannons, rubber bullets, etc., or flash-bang grenades to enforce the laws that they've been taught to uphold by crushing public dissent, either.