nolympics submits:

"Extraordinary Times:

Dissent and the New Model of Homeland Defense"
J Pupovac, December 1, 2003

Miami is the land of opportunity for your typical South American drug king pin, the narcotics agent that spent years pursuing him and the flaming Cuban salsa instructor he had an affair with years ago. So why does a middle-class, white suburban activist chick have such a hard time getting along? Well, I'll tell you why. The activist is the only one who gives a damn about the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), a hemispheric trade agreement that seeks to expand NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement), a botched plan for trade "liberalization" that has had a devastating effect on the working class of Mexico, the US and Canada.The FTAA, like NAFTA, is being negotiated by the
elites on both sides of the border, behind closed doors. This is reason to be
concerned, considering that, as an international agreement, it will have more
legal weight than any local, state or federal law, including those embodied in
the US Constitution. And as in NAFTA, any regulation that favors people or the
environment over big business, and thereby impedes "maximum return on
investments," is grounds for a corporation to actually sue the host
government. All of this in what will be the biggest "free" market to date,
a place where investments (but not people), roam freely seeking the lowest
bidder at any cost. An agreement of this weight and magnitude should involve
debate and consultation at every level of society and government. However, this
is so far from the case that not only is no one talking about these issues, but
the few who attempt to draw attention them and have a voice in the process face
an increasing climate of intimidation and repression.

From November 19 to 21st, thousands of people from throughout the hemisphere
converged in Miami, Florida, the site of the most recent FTAA plotting session,
to express their passionate opposition to the agreement, draw attention to this
urgent issue and present each other and the world with viable alternatives.
Thanks to a remarkable stroke of luck, I won a last-minute trip to the party,
courtesy of the Chicago Religious Leadership Network (CRLN).

On the first day, we attended teach-ins and meetings and visited with old
friends over mojitos, in the Miami fashion. The second day, we marched and
danced and sang and yelled and expressed our resistance, in all of its many
forms.

Before, during and after, we were very aware of the physical threat of the
heavily armed riot police, the conspicuous surveillance cameras on every rooftop
and the numerous helicopters, constantly swarming overhead like flies in the
potato salad. But we had come to deliver a message, and although our numbers
were fewer than we had hoped due to the cost and location of the Ministerial
site, we went forward with our plans.

After the vibrant and massive march, union members (who were out in full force
-- the AFL-CIO alone sent 10,000), religious leaders, students, human rights
activists, undercover cops and curious locals meandered in the open area
directly facing the permitted rally. Despite the excessive police presence, the
atmosphere was festive and friendly until we were unexpectedly attacked -
without warning - in a forceful and alarming display of police brutality.
Police officers used batons, wooden poles, concussion grenades, tear gas, pepper
spray, and other chemical agents against us indiscriminately. They shot rubber,
wooden, and plastic bullets. Leah, Frank and Dick, three fellow CRLN delegates,
the latter two retired gentlemen from Chicago, were pepper sprayed in the face.

After clearing out the open space in front of the rally, the police continued to
chase the crowd for six city blocks, as protestors fled and attempt to help each
other out of harms way.

Near the rally site was the official "Wellness Center," a free clinic
established by volunteer doctors for the occasion. One officer targeted the
center, releasing pepper spray directly into the building, thereby contaminating
the space where wounded protestors were seeking treatment. Eowyn Rieke MD, a
family physician, was inside the Wellness Center treating patients at the time.
"The cops [were] completely out of control and in total disregard for the
safety and well being of health care workers and the patients they [were]
treating."

Dr. Rieke estimated that the center treated over 125 people for injuries that
day, among them serious facial lacerations, bone fractures, head wounds and
exposure to chemical ailments. Twelve of the victims required hospitalization.

At one point, I was trapped in a sandwich shop as police advanced past the
building. From behind police lines, I saw undercover cops dressed like punks
emerging from the crowd, unscathed. I saw police preparing to charge, waving
wooden bats in the air and yelling as they ran in a military march towards the
protestors like soldiers at war. Police vans pulled in, picked up people or
empty ammunition canisters, and sped away.

At least 150 arrests were made that afternoon.

Information Management

"It is not a matter of what is true that counts, but a matter of what is
perceived to be true." -- Henry Kissinger

Free Speech TV immediately released a documentary on the Miami melee, entitled
"Trading Away the Americas." In it, New York Independent Media Center's (IMC)
Brandon Jourdan, a cameraman documenting the event, reported that many of his
colleagues were robbed on their way out of the protests. He was robbed of
footage "documenting police violence against demonstrators,"right outside
of his car by two well-dressed, clean-cut men carrying stun guns. They did not
steal his car, but asked only for his camera bag, and told him to "get the
fuck out of Miami." Another videographer who reported being robbed of
documentation of "police brutality" was Tony Shawcross of Free Speech TV.
His tapes were stolen at gunpoint as police cars drove by. Brandon claimed that
various members of the independent media received reports from locals, including
one anonymous police source, stating that they had been encouraged by the
police, prior to the protests, to "rob protestors and to get things like video
cameras." Unfortunately, documentation of these reports was among the footage
stolen.

The local media that night reported the arrests of many "suspected anarchists,"
showing very selective footage of "our fearless police force keeping the peace
in the face of sometimes violent protestors."

Part of the reason for the contradictory reports is the fact that most of the
corporate media agreed to being "embedded" with the police force, rather than
roaming freely among the crowd. The practice of embedding the media, which the
Pentagon reports is working quite well in the Iraq occupation, ensures that the
reporters will go only where the police lead them and will report the story as
told by the authorities.

Ana Norguiera of Democracy Now! reports that as she was videotaping in Miami,
her press credentials in plain sight, she was pushed and tear gassed with a
group of protestors as she taped the police violence. One of the officers asked
another, "Is she with us?" and when the answer was negative, took her into
custody. While being processed, Ms. Norguiera was forced to take off her
contaminated clothing in the presence of male officers and was held in custody
until 3:00 the next morning, when she was bailed out by one of her colleagues.
Other independent media reporters spent much more time in jail, and with stiffer
sentences. Apparently, freedom of the press does not apply.

On to the Peach State

The next day, the CRLN gang hopped into our van and headed to Fort Benning,
home to the Western Hemispheric Institute for Security Cooperation, or WHISC
(the military base formerly known as the School of the Americas). WHISC/SOA is
a training center for Latin American soldiers. It's graduates have been
ambassadors of US foreign and economic policy in their respective countries.
Many have gone on from the SOA to become notorious assassins, rapists and
dictators. The annual rally to shut the school down commemorates the murder of
six Jesuit priests, their co-worker and her teenage daughter, massacred in El
Salvador in 1989. A US Congressional Task Force reported that those responsible
were trained at Ft. Benning.

When we finally arrived in Columbus, Georgia, I received a call from friends
still in Miami informing me that the climate there had not yet cooled. Earlier
that day, a group of approximately 300 people gathered outside of the jailhouse
to demand the release of prisoners, only to face a scene similar to that of the
day prior. Looking on the Democracy Now! website, I saw a good friend of mine
being held by policemen, her arms twisted behind her back and a look of sadness
on her face. Approximately 60 more arrests were made. At that point, over 250
arrests in all were estimated.

Legal observers and the IMC were receiving reports from people in jail
denouncing cases of excessive brutality and sexual assault. Many were being
subject to cavity searches. One woman claimed that while being processed, four
male officers in biohazard suits cut off her clothing. At least one Latino man
was in Intensive Care for an injury he received after being beaten by an
arresting officer. People were also being denied access to attorneys,
visitation rights, and access to essential medication and medical attention.

Confronting Authority: The Non-violence Debate

When I told my friends in Georgia about this, many responded with the question,
"were they confronting the police?"

The first day of protests, there were a small number of people (perhaps 10-20 at
any given time) who set about to get as close as they could and to deliver their
message as loudly as possible. One might argue that their tactics were less
than productive, but they were armed with banners, musical instruments and
cameras and were verbally "confronting" a group about twenty times their size,
supplied with masks, helmets and pads and bearing guns and chemical weapons so
potentially damaging that they are illegal in international warfare treaties
that the US is a party to. They did not physically attack the police, but
delivered their message to the nearest authorities, and here in the United
States of America, they still have that right. The attempt to justify excessive
police brutality in response to the verbal antagonisms of an unarmed group
making a political statement is a dangerous, slippery slope. The
disproportionate response of the authorities to the very small threat level is
unjustifiable and inexcusable and we do a disservice to our fellow activists and
ourselves if we gloss over that fact.
That said...

Homeland Security vs. Homeland Repression

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety [and they will very quickly lose both]." --
Benjamin Franklin

In Miami, mayor Manny Diaz's "model for Homeland Defense"consisted in the
collaboration of over 40 law enforcement agencies, from the FBI to the
Department of Fish and Wildlife, and was financed by $8.5 million from the
recent $87 billion Iraq spending bill (New York Times, 11.27.03). A key element
of this model, beyond the physical force, was a calculated campaign of
obstruction of movement and intimidation. Thirteen vans organized by The Florida
Alliance of Retired Americans were prevented from entering Miami. Protestors
were randomly harassed and detained all week long for crimes such as
"loitering." City ordinances were passed especially for the occasion prohibiting
"materials or substances that are capable of being thrown," giving the
police carte blanche authority to harass and arrest just about anybody. Repeated
statements published in the local press vilified the demonstrators and their
political beliefs, warning locals that they were coming to "vandalize and
terrorize our city." In effect, Miami Police Commissioner John Timoney
orchestrated nothing less than a massive, paramilitary assault on those who came
to Miami to protest the FTAA and on our first amendment rights.

What happened in Miami is not an isolated event. Rather, it is part of a
burgeoning, coordinated effort to discourage dissent in America.

The Bush Administration has recently filed the first ever criminal suit against
an activist organization for the free speech activities of members. Greenpeace
is awaiting trial this month for a non-violent direct action that aimed to draw
attention to an illegal shipment of Brazilian mahogany back in April 2002. The
environmental organization is being prosecuted under an archaic "sailor
mongering" law only used twice before, both times in the 19th century. If
convicted, it could devastate the group and send a alarming message.

Then there is FBI Intelligence Bulletin no 89, recent evidence received by the
New York Times pointing to a return to Cointelpro, a Cold War program launched
by the FBI to infiltrate protest groups. Although the Bulletin claims to
contain "relevant terrorism information developed from Counterterrorism
investigations and analysis," why activists are associated with terrorists is
never elaborated upon. Classified as a yellow (elevated) threat level, it
provides an overview of organizing, recruiting, fund-raising and demonstration
tactics used by the anti-war and economic justice movement (available at
www.aclu.org).

Back in Georgia

On Monday, November 24, I sat in the Columbus, Georgia courthouse, observing the
arraignment hearings of over 40 fellow activists who had been arrested for
entering Ft. Benning as an act of protest. Among them was a Notre Dame nun who
had taken a vow against possessions and therefore did not have a home, an
automobile or a savings account. Judge Faircloth, the presiding judge, asked
her if she was a member of "the SOA organization."

"Yes," she replied.

"Bail set at $1,000."

Defense lawyer Bill Quigley objected. It is illegal, he said, to prosecute
people disproportionately based on their political beliefs or affiliations.
Such a high bail is not customary for a Class B misdemeanor, not in that court
or any other. Such a fine is clearly intended to "discourage their
opportunity to dissent."

The judge's response: "These are extraordinary times."

"American" Values

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government." --
Thomas Paine

As heirs of a revolutionary people who overcame the oppression of a tyrannical
world power, we have the right to a voice in our governments policies and a
responsibility to use it. Our forefathers based their "experiment in democracy"
on lessons learned (and lessons not yet learned), deciding that freedom of
speech, assembly and expression and the right "to petition the government for
a redress of grievances," were so important, they belonged in the very 1st
Amendment to their Constitution.

We do live in extraordinary times, times in which our military power is
unrivaled in world history, times in which we are seeking to expand our model of
democracy around the world, times in which multi-lateral and bi-lateral trade
agreements seek to give corporations unprecedented authority over our
communities, our families and the world. It is in such times that dissent is
not only healthy, it is vital.

Supporters of such policies of intimidation and repression might argue that, in
a time of heightened national security, it's "reasonable" to quell dissent or to
be suspicious of dissenters. But they're on the wrong side of history. Dissent
what ended slavery, gave women the right to vote and continues to give us hope
for a better future. History smiles upon her rebels.

The United Steelworkers of America has been a strong voice of opposition to not
only the FTAA, but the "model of homeland repression" used in Miami. On
November 24, they called for a Congressional investigation into the "massive
police state" created in Miami. "How can we hope to build democracy in Iraq
while using massive force to dismantle it at home?" asked USWA President Leo W.
Gerard.

The National Lawyers Guild and the American Civil Liberties Union are also
planning on launching civil suits.

What is at Stake

"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as
necessary in the political world as storms in the physical." -- Thomas Jefferson

On my way out of the Miami airport, I decided I had better stop to give the cute
Latino skycap my bag. "Were you here to protest the FTAA?" he asked I wondered
if it was a security question or if he was just looking for an argument. I was
not in the mood.

"Yes, I am," I admitted.

"Thank you for coming to Miami." He responded.

"Wow. I think you are the first local to say that to me. A lot of people hate
us here."

"A lot of people don't know what is at stake," he replied.

The reverence we have for freedom to dissent is the standard by which we should
judge our democracy. It is the promise that my, and many other Americans'
ancestors, crossed the ocean to encounter and it is the most potent weapon we
have against tyranny.

However, what is at stake is more than our democracy. It is more than such
ambigous ideals such as freedom. It is nothing less than food security, the
risk of perpetual war over natural resources and the health of our planet.
November 2003 will go down in history as the day the US proved that it is
willing to resort to the same policies of violent repression against its own
people that it has shamefully supported for decades throughout the global south.
Whether it will mark an isolated tragedy or a turning point in how the US
government relates to its citizenry depends on how we respond right now to this
outrageous and blatant violation of our rights. So let's respond
accordingly.