Police Repression and Brutality Used as a Means of Deterring Democracy

After returning home from the Quebec FTAA protests and talking to people who had watched the mainstream news coverage, I quickly became aware of the extent to which the events had been distorted by the media. Almost everyone that I spoke with had the image of rock-throwing \"hooligans\" burnt into their consciousness. They were shocked to hear a totally different account from an eyewitness; many of them still have trouble believing my version. The image of police brutality on quite a massive scale, in a \"democratic\" country, seems incredulous to them. Had they only been there. Had they tasted the clouds of poisonous gas that hung in the air for days (which is now allegedly contaminating the city\'s water supply). Had they seen the CNN reporter standing with his camera by his side refusing to film the police as they fired round upon round of plastic bullets into the crowd of people, they would begin to reassess their perceptions of the press and the police. I could not believe my own eyes when I saw Global News, Fox News, and other journalists huddling together behind the Global News truck ignoring the people being injured and those bravely fighting back. Upon my return, I learned that the vast majority of the broadcasts from major news networks highlighted angry rock-throwers and commented on the outstanding \"restraint\" exercised by the police.

The reality of the police tactics resembled those employed in third-world dictatorships. Those of us who spent our time near the wall witnessed a shocking level of police brutality that essentially amounted to torture. The police had an arsenal of chemical weapons at their disposal that included an appallingly painful form of pepper gas that induces an intense burning sensation on the skin as well as in the eyes and respiratory tract. The carcinogenic CS and CN gasses, which attack the digestive system causing nausea and diarrhea, also cause irregular menstruation in women and have been known to cause miscarriages. A Seattle Weekly report (Mar. 23rd-29th, 2000) stated that the chemicals used in the Seattle anti-WTO protests of November 1999 have been implicated in lung problems, eye damage, and even death. According to the manufacturer\'s documents, along with military and medical reports, CS and CN gasses carry both short and long-term health risks. In Seattle and Quebec, the police and summit security forces disregarded manufacturer\'s warnings and indiscriminately gassed vulnerable populations which no doubt had people with diabetes, asthma, allergies and heart problems, as well as pregnant women, children and the elderly. In a 1989 article published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, Howard Hu discussed particular concerns because of allegations that exposure to tear gas (CS or CN) has been associated with increases in miscarriages and stillbirths.

Furthermore, in situations such as in Seattle, where police admitted using a variety of chemicals, there is a potential for synergistic reactions. Solvents and propellants added to the mixture of pepper gas and CS might react under certain conditions to produce chemical mutagens and carcinogens. When used in confined areas, such as when the police gassed the Independent Media Centre in Quebec, there is a high potential for asphyxiation causing permanent lung damage and even death. Because of its greater toxicity the US army and NATO have removed CN gas from their arsenal and replaced it with CS gas. Despite this, CN was used in Seattle. Some of the gas that was unleashed on us was so potent that it induced convulsions and vomiting almost instantaneously. Why were Seattle and Quebec police authorized to use chemical weapons against protestors involved in peaceful disobedience while most police departments are forbidden to use incapacitating chemicals unless their lives are in imminent danger? How can \"democratic\" governments justify using these types of virulent chemicals on their own people, when they have been banned for use during war by international treaties?

Although I went prepared with a gas mask, I was unexpectedly gassed while attempting to get a drink of water. Within seconds I began to gag and vomit. My eyes and face burned and I was completely incapacitated by pain. I witnessed others convulsing on the ground while being treated by affinity group medics. For a minute I thought that they were using nerve gas. The police were using torture as a means of dispersing peaceful demonstrators. How could this have happened in Canada? Protestors did not initiate the violence on Friday afternoon. The police began advancing and gassing us for chanting peacefully while holding up peace signs. In many instances gas canisters were fired directly at the crowds with the intent to injure.

In addition to chemical warfare, the police were authorized to use deadly force and were thus given the green light to fire plastic and rubber bullets at will. These potentially lethal projectiles are 3.5 inches long and 1.5 inches in diameter, and are fired at 220 km/h (140 mph). I witnessed the police firing them into crowds of largely non-violent protestors-that is, protestors who refused to retaliate with rocks or other objects (La ligue des droits et libert