Victory at the Oakland Docks!!

is effectively over and call it a victory? party protest is kinda boring. staying at home is just as fun.

The Port of Oakland operates 24 hours a day. In fact it was announced before our march began that APL had re-scheduled their 7:00 p.m. shift of workers to start at 3:00 a.m. instead. Obvious reason: because of the demonstration. The fact that there were no violent confrontations does not mean our actions were not effective. On the contrary, several hundred people were able to delay part of the business of the war machine by a peaceful protest. Now THAT beats staying at home!!

I was there and it looked like the protest was seen only by others in the protest. All of the port workers were gone for the day and there was little activity on the docks. Even the police didnt care. What kind of victory is this?

Yes it was a clear victory for people power and nonviolent direct action backing off two multinational corporations and the OPD. We have to claim and celebrate victories when we win them.

Their was an evening work shift that was cancelled by APL and SSA-- to back down on having a confontation and allowing our pickets to shut it down, which we would have. According ILWU members, this has NEVER happend before. There was a ship in at SSA which was not touched last night. There was a ship scheduled to be in at APL, which was delayed so as not to be in during our picket. So we imposed both an economic, political and social cost on these corporation, while educating about corporate war profiteering, the corporate invasion of Iraq, and challenging the myth that the war and the anti-war movement are over.

Addtionaly, until friday the Oakland Police Department had planned to stop the community picket and force us into a protest pen a mile away at 7th and Maritime. The community backed them off with pro-active media work and by pushing on the OPD politicaly--demanding a meeting with Chief Word on our terms with our allies to present our demands. Direct Action spokespeople were empowered by affinity groups at the DASW spokescoulcil to present and push the demands, but not negotiate anything else. Many allied community groups like Pueblo, Copwatch, Ella Baker Center, National Lawyers Guild, Not in Our Name, Peoples Nonviolent Response Coalition, ILWU members and many affinity groups. People also phoned and e-mailed Oakland City Council members to urge them to push the OPD to back off. Chief Word, realizing that a broad sector of the community would make it more very politicaly expensive for the OPD to interefere with the pickets, was forced to agreed to several of the demands, and forced to stick to his agreements. In essence the threat of people prepared to take direct action to win back the right to community picket, boacked up by alliance building and broad community support backed off one of the most notorious police forces in the US.

One challenge is to see if we can maintain some the alliances formed in the wake of April 7th. Can direct action/anti-war folks now back up Pueblo and the April 7 Response Coalition efforts to push back the OPD-- not just for one protest-- in Oaklands neighborhoods, with their day to day britality against communities of color.

Can we imagine and realize a movement of movements that can stand up to corporation and governments, not just for one shift, but for good?

This may involve working with people we are not used to, challenging our comfort levels, letting go of rigid ideologies and political lines, creating new ways of changing things and relaxing and opening up to possibilities, rather than remaining rigid and predictable.

Let's go there!

>>The community backed them off with pro-active media work and by pushing on the OPD politicaly--demanding a meeting with Chief Word on our terms with our allies to present our demands. Direct Action spokespeople were empowered by affinity groups at the DASW spokescoulcil to present and push the demands, but not negotiate anything else. <<

Well OK, but y'all still negotiated with the police. Bad protestor, bad. Please don't make decisions on the back of people who don't have the priviledge to be at the table as part of your "consensus" process, especially when they involve negotiating with the OPD, on-site or off. Better yet, don't have meetings with the OPD at all.

Rufusing to celebrate a hollow (point?) victory,

anon

I'm with Xylem on this

No, not the end of the war or empire. Not the end of police violence in Oakland. Not that big a victory. But a victory nevertheless.

*1*: We made our point. We confirmed our ability to conduct such a demo. This matters.

*2*: The 5/12 demo shows up well in the mass media. For all of their deficiencies, the mass media do matter, and the coverage will help us win the hearts of members of those public with in-between opinions.

*3*: We had a really good time. The sense of celebration as we marched back to BART was deep and sustaining. In reply to "You show up", who writes, "party protest is kinda boring. staying at home is just as fun": I'd say, if you'd just get bored, perhaps you in particular should stay home. For the rest of you, I hope that enough of you get it, and do show up, so that such events work. The 5/12 picket would not have worked very well with a turnout of 50 or so.

*4*: anon writes, "y'all still negotiated with the police. Bad protestor, bad." Don't agree. First, non-communication doesn't help. Second, from the 2nd-hand reports I've seen, we didn't lose anything by talking to them. 3rd, we are educating the police in ways of peace. In fitful, partial ways, the police are learning. They screwed up big time on 4/7. Part of their error was that they thought they could run big trucks through the middle of a large demonstration, just blow us off. They did not repeat that error last night.

"Paths of victory we shall walk." -- Bob Dylan

Carl

the cops love pre-orchestrated demonsrations. last night we scored a small victory because the ILWU was on our side and didn't show up to work. everyone involved, including the cops and bosses, knew that it was a brief and contained action. there was no reason for the cops to become brutal.

try shutting down the docks with any frequency, without prior consultation, and see how much the police have "learned."

hey aaron, what's your alternative view? should we have not gone back to the docks?

or gone back to the docks without letting anyone know about it? how are you going to shut down anything without heavy publicity? the cops learn about this stuff before most of the public outside the spokescouncil does (infiltrators abound, always have)...trying to keep info from going public just keeps the public from showing up.


i'm seeing a lot of negativity in your posts and not a lot of suggestions for doing it better next time.

to Meddle et. al.:

Oh, please don't start with the negativity stuff. That's just new agey trash-talking.

That being said, here are my suggestions:

1. Don't negotiate with the police in preparation for a direct action. It allows the cops to gather information, to attempt to splinter the action, and to find your weak points.

2. Respect the communities you're in. Not only is negotiating with the cops a bad idea, it also is putting your organization in the position of utilizing your privileged position viz a viz the cops. Most people in Oakland don't get to negotiate when they're in the sights of the OPD.

3. Check your priviledge. Do you really think that all this would have happened if DASW was a people of color led organization? And please don't bother saying "we're a consensus organization," there are obviously some folks who have lots more power than others.

4. Don't post anything where the cops may see it, because after all, they may be able to detect who you are by your computer's signature...D'oh! Excuse me, someone is knocking on my door very loudly... ;-)

Lastly? I'd appreciate it if you actually asked around about the points I've made, and not just to middle class white folks in DASW -- and then wait a week before you respond. Otherwise, I may call you (oh, the horror) "negative". That was a joke, honey.

anon

The docks weren't operating BECAUSE of the demonstration. APL had to divert a ship to another dock. That in itself is a victory, plus we reasserted our right to be there. I was at the ILWU convention, recently, and there is a lot of outrage by ILWU members, from all area, about the conduct of the police, as well as Jerry Brown, and Ignacio del Fuentes. The picture of Sri Louise, taken soon after she was shot, is hanging on the wall of ILWU Local 23, in Tacoma, WA-Ken Morgan, member, ILWU Local 6

I was responding to Carl's assertion that the cops are in the process of learning not to be brutal. This is specifically what he said:

<we are educating the police in ways of peace. In fitful, partial ways, the police are learning. They screwed up big time on 4/7...>

this, to me, is dead wrong. it implies that cop brutality is chiefly due to ignorance and lack of sensitivity and fails to confront the fact that capital absolutely requires violent thugs to defend its interests and enforce its rule. Oakland cops are notorious for their thuggery and it's the height of pacifist conceit for Carl to say that
(let's face it: predominately white) activists are teaching them some great lesson in the art of peace.

Further, i question whether it's accurate to say that the cops "screwed up big time on 4/7". They were pretty damn effective at squashing a strategically smart, and militant, demonstration held BEFORE THE WAR HAD OFFICIALLY ENDED, as far as I can tell.

Now, i'm all for yesterday's demonstration. It was great, and Ken Morgan is right in pointing out that without the pickets the ILWU would have gone to work. There was a good symbiosis, for which all the organizers and participants deserve much credit.

Lastly, i don't know why you think i'd be opposed to publicity. i never said any such thing.

>>The docks weren't operating BECAUSE of the demonstration. APL had to divert a ship to another dock. That in itself is a victory, plus we reasserted our right to be there. <<

OK. Point by point?

>The docks weren't operating because of the demonstration

True, although I'm not sure that meeting with the police was necessary to achieve that goal -- and if so, it certainly shouldn't have happened the way it did.

> APL had to divert a ship to another dock

OK, that's fine -- although I've heard a rumor that there were trucks backed up to go into APL that pulled in as soon as we left. I'm not sure the win matches the price (being surveilled, meeting with the police, negotiating with hostage squads) in this case.

> We asserted our right to be there

After setting a precedent for direct action to mean negotiating with the OPD in the midst of a lawsuit -- not to mention that asserting that right is a pretty hollow (point) victory when most of Oakland would have been shot if they tried to assert said right. I'm not saying that we shouldn't have been there, just that the way we ended up there is pretty dubious, in my opinion.

Lastly? This whole thing has left a bad taste in my mouth. Where is the joy, the spontaneity, the active resistance of March 20th? We are quickly becoming buried in political agendas and power maneuvers. If that is the way you want to change the world, I don't know what to say; in my experience, all this results in is more of the same, as in "here comes the new boss, same as the old boss". This situation makes my heart sick. And I don't do things that make my heart sick for long. Life's too short.

anon

ps: this whole movement could do itself a big favor by getting the IWW anthology "Rebel Voices" and reading the Mr. Block cartoons. This whole situation reads as if it was pulled straight from those pages, and they were written nearly 100 years ago.

>the police are learning

that they are -- they get better at surveillence and SWAT team formations every time. Come on -- do you really believe that hippie BS? Ever hear of COINTELPRO?

anon

anon: do you really believe that hippie BS?
Carl: Hostile passersby sometimes call me a "hippie." The passersby aren't 100% accurate, but I still take pride in that.

anon: Ever hear of COINTELPRO?
Carl: Of course, but I don't see the relevance of your reference.

anon: I don't do things that make my heart sick for long.
Carl: See *3* in my original post.

A few important responses for the die hards who actualy read these posts. It's important to claim our victories-- big or small--when we get them. On May 12th two corporation and the Oakland Police clearly backed down as a result of organizing, nonviolent direct action and community support.

Anon, with all due respect, you have been taking up quite a bit of the talking space after everyone of the photo series from May 12 and kind of talking down to us. What is you actual experience with the struggles you tell us about-- workplace organizing and organizing against police brutality. Most of us just don't have that much time to sit in front of the computer and aren't as prolific. Rigidity and disrespect are qualities that doomed many opposition movements last century.

POLICE MEETING
The meeting with the OPD intiated after some supportive groups that did come out-- PUEBLO, labor folks, community groups-- encouraged it. Their concern was that May 12 picketers refusing to meet with police would appear to look closed and secretive to our allies and the community and allow the police to look good and cooperative. Also, the Oakland police had told Direct Action to Stop the War and labor unions that they were going to stop us from going out anywhere near the docks and force us into protest pens.

A set of demands were agreed to by the spokescouncil of affintiy groups of Direct Action to Stop the War (demands below). Spokespeople, including John, a student who had two fingers broken by OPD wooden bullets, were empowered to present and asert the demands, but not to share any info or negotiate anything else. In a tense meeting they did their best. The meeting was open to spokes from all affinity groups and organizations actualy involved in the organizing of the picket and in supporting the response to April 7. OPD initialy refused to have the meetings on our terms-- open to allies and at a church and with our agenda and facilitation, they would only meet at their station with only 4 of spokes. City Council members Jean Quan and Nancy Nadel pressured Chief Word into meeting with us. At that meeting people from wide sectors of the community told the police to back off our right to picket and Word was pushed on the demands-- several of which he was pressured into agreeing to-- and actualy sticking to. Also as result of Ella Baker Center and National Lawyers Guild bringing it up, Captain Yee who was in charge on April 7 and ordered the shootings, was not in charge on May 12th. Also the media folks had Channel 7 call Captain Yee on Thursday to ask about his plans to stop our picket and put is in a protest pen-- which he lied and denied. In short, had this meeting not happened with 25 affinity group and allied organization facing Chief Word and asserting demands-- not negotiating, many folks might have been attacked again when we refused to go to a protest pen and we might not have re-established our right to hold a community picket. Some groups like PUEBLO brought folks out, including people more likely tagetted by police and people with too many years to be able to run away, because they saw that every effort had been made to back off the OPD. A clear short term victory.

MEETING WITH YOUR OPPONENT
Meeting with ones opponent does not necesarily equal compromising. On the contrary, most movements dealing with actual survival struggles (re-read Rebel Voices about radical workers negotiating their demands with bosses) meet and negotiate their demands. It is marginalized and often priveleged folks who can afford to be "pure" and not engage their except at time and place of thier choosing. PUEBLO (People United for a Better Oakland) and folks fighting police brutality are meeting and negotiating their demands with the police and the City so they won't have more people killed, beat up or harrassed. The Zapatistas would have been wiped out had they not mobilized support and negotiated (at times) to back off the Mexican Government.

Movements have to be sohpisticated and use many of different levels of organizing to survive and to change the world. The "joy, the spontaneity, the active resistance of March 20th" was all that, but was built on months of organizing amonst very diverse folks (including white and middle class, but many working class, poor and people of color) and years of alliance building with out which it would have been marginal and sqaushed. While direct action is essential and spontanaiety is great, with out other levels of organizing, communicating, educating and asserting ourselves it is not enough.

A number of people from the docks pickets are working-- many folks at the pickets were already involved in community and labor struggles--with PUEBLO and the April 7 Response Coaltion to try to help back off the police from Oaklands communities, particularly communities of color. I'd encourage us all to get off these internet chat lines and support real life community struggles.


A better world is possible.

DEMANDS TO THE OAKLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT
Direct Action to Stop the War (DASW) brings the following concerns and demands, agreed to at the DASW spokescouncil, to the Oakland Police Department in relation to the May 12 Community Picket:

A) The Oakland Police Department should not be present at Community Picket or the gathering at West Oakland BART.

<sum> The Oakland Police Department has not acknowledged any wrongdoing on April 7 or assured the public of any significant change in their behavior in the future.
<sum> They have not indicated that they would not act again on behalf of SSA and APL corporations.
<sum> The money spent on The Oakland Police Department and possible civil suits is desperately needed for schools, healthcare and other basic services for Oakland.
<sum> As a diverse cross section of residents and taxpayers of Oakland and other Bay Area cities we believe that our civil liberties our physical safety and the interests of the community will be more secure without the presence of The Oakland Police Department.

B) If The Oakland Police Department is present the May 12 Community Picket present we demand that they:

<sum> Respect our right to free speech, to protest and to hold a community picket.
<sum> Do not bring any "non-lethal" wooden bullets, metal shot sacks, concussion grenades or other projectiles, chemical weapons or explosive devices or lethal weapons.
<sum> -That they agree to refrain from initiating any violence.
<sum> -That they designate Oakland Police Department liaisons with decision-making authority for each picket at which the police are present and overall liaisons that will listen, be responsive to and respect our chosen police liaisons. At the April 7th community picket, communication with DASW police liaisons was cut off before the police began assaulting us.
<sum> That they respect legal observers, who are clearly identifiable with bright green identifying signs. On April 7th legal observers were shot and arrested.

thanks for the explanation.

>>Anon, with all due respect, you have been taking up quite a bit of the talking space after everyone of the photo series from May 12 and kind of talking down to us. What is you actual experience with the struggles you tell us about-- workplace organizing and organizing against police brutality. Most of us just don't have that much time to sit in front of the computer and aren't as prolific. Rigidity and disrespect are qualities that doomed many opposition movements last century. <<

OK. ::deep breath::

The response you're giving is the one I frequently hear from white, middle class career activists. Yes, it is true that I've been posting a lot -- did it ever occur to you that the reason I'm doing that is that I have been trying to speak out, and I'm not being heard?

Further, if you consider that I'm talking down to you, well I'm sorry. Suffice it to say that I have experienced real oppression, real police brutality, and real poverty. I'm not about to go into details of my life here, because to do so would basically be telling the cops who monitor this board who I am -- and for that, my apologies. By virtue of being human and caring enough to show up at all, you deserve that. But I'm not stupid enough to give details on a public board.

That being said, I don't appreciate you automatically assuming that I'm doing this because I have loads of time on my hands -- I don't. I just think that this is really important, OK? As such, I'm not doing things that I probably should be dealing with to post here -- although you are right, this board is mostly die-hards, and my time would probably be better spent, oh, telling people in my neighborhood what a joke this whole thing is. Is that what you would prefer?

Lastly? If you want to see people who do this because they're full-time activists who are in this for power first and change when they get around to it, look at your own house in DASW. You may be surprised what you find.

anon

ps: it's not my responsibility to educate you -- that's your job. If you're really interested in constructive feedback though, read some of the other posts I put up last night.

pps: rigidity is as rigidity does -- if I was rigid, believe me, I wouldn't be here.

>It is marginalized and often priveleged folks who can afford to be "pure" and not engage their except at time and place of thier choosing. PUEBLO (People United for a Better Oakland) and folks fighting police brutality are meeting and negotiating their demands with the police and the City so they won't have more people killed, beat up or harrassed. The Zapatistas would have been wiped out had they not mobilized support and negotiated (at times) to back off the Mexican Government. <

You know, this is absurd. DASW planned the meeting, DASW facilitated the meeting, DASW had negotiators at the meeting, and you're talking about the Zapatistas. Nice try.

>Movements have to be sohpisticated and use many of different levels of organizing to survive and to change the world. The "joy, the spontaneity, the active resistance of March 20th" was all that, but was built on months of organizing amonst very diverse folks (including white and middle class, but many working class, poor and people of color) and years of alliance building with out which it would have been marginal and sqaushed. While direct action is essential and spontanaiety is great, with out other levels of organizing, communicating, educating and asserting ourselves it is not enough. <

So now DASW is a community organizing group? I thought you were doing direct action. Understand, I am well aware that community organizing is necessary -- but even if DASW was a community organizing group, it still wouldn't explain the lack of communication about the decision, and the secrecy around the meeting itself. To my ear, your letter sounds more like a spin job than an honest attempt to discuss what went on. Which is sad -- and that is why I brought up March 20th, it wasn't out of some desire for "pure" direct action to the exclusion of community organizing, but rather out of my heart-felt feeling that March 20th showed what well-organized direct action can lay the groundwork for. Your apparent attempts to make me out as some kind of middle class ideologue trouble me, but they're not gonna result in me shutting my mouth. Sorry.

My question to you is: when is DASW going to plan something on the scale of March 20th again? Because if you haven't noticed, the need for "No Business As Usual" is now more than ever -- while Homeland Security is chasing down Democrats in the Texas State Legislature (see http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0514-07.htm for details) and shoot to kill orders are being issued in Iraq (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0514-01.htm), y'all are talking community organizing one minute, and meeting with the police the next. Meanwhile, everything else is going to hell, and there are plenty of groups that, quite frankly, run circles around you when it comes to community organizing AND are grass-roots (which many of y'all are not, at least in the ways you're dropping lip service to). Stop playing games. Please.

>A number of people from the docks pickets are working-- many folks at the pickets were already involved in community and labor struggles--with PUEBLO and the April 7 Response Coaltion to try to help back off the police from Oaklands communities, particularly communities of color. I'd encourage us all to get off these internet chat lines and support real life community struggles. <

What makes you think that we're not already doing that? Besides, you first. Don't be cute, alright? This is being seen by people all over the world -- if you don't think it's important to have independent, interactive media, then go do something else.

As somebody who deals with the struggles you talk about daily, I find it really offensive that you would suggest that I not be here. You know, we are real people -- we don't just wait for the cameras to document (or not document) the next crisis, be the next Rodney King or Abner Louima, whatever. Or is this just a little too close for comfort? Welcome to the real world, baby...

anon

Question for anon and others

I have been reading the discussions at
http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/05/1610688_comment
and
http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/05/1610519_comment
, and have 2 of my own posts on the latter.

Previous posts have established that there is a substantial disagreement as to whether meetings with the police are ever a good idea. I have a question for "anon", "ntuit", "anarchist", and anyone else who shares their view that such meetings are never a good idea. (As previously stated, "direct actionist" and I take a different approach.)

Go back in your mind to the demo at Lockheed Martin on 4/22/2003. Whatever else we may disagree on, I think we can agree on these facts:

1. The cops were pretty provocative. (I was there at H Street when they forced a retreat.) They weren't anywhere near as gross as the Oakland PD on 4/7, but they were pretty provocative on 4/22.

2. Everybody was aware of 4/7.

3. We protesters threw not one single pebble.

My question to "anon" et al. is: Was the fact that we threw not one single pebble a good thing or a bad thing?

From my own point of view, it was very much a good thing. But "anon" et al. and I come from very different places, so if "anon" et al. come to the same conclusion, I suppose it would be for different reasons.

I will be out of town for a few days. I hope to see a response when I come back.

Carl 5/16/03

I really don't want to get into a back and forth about that. You want to know how I feel about the whole pacifism/non-pacifism thing? Read "Pacifism as Pathology" by Ward Churchill.

anon

come on, you're probably some silver-spooned, lily white, upper middle-class suv-driving professional. you ain't fooling no one. you wouldn't know the 'hood if your gps system guided you to one. ever really been to oak-town? doubt it.

>>come on, you're probably some silver-spooned, lily white, upper middle-class suv-driving professional. you ain't fooling no one. you wouldn't know the 'hood if your gps system guided you to one. ever really been to oak-town? doubt it.<<

honey, i don't even own a car, and i'm not lily white. like i said before, i'm not gonna give up details 'bout who i am because of who's watching. but i'm not who you're saying i am.

that being said, given this forum and who tends to post here, you're more than a little right to be suspicious. it's all good. see ya on the front lines and in the space between the spaces.

peace out,

anon

ps: if you want to expose some folks, look a little closer. You may be surpised what you find.

come on, you're probably some silver-spooned, lily white, upper middle-class suv-driving professional.

you got her number, one of the snooty Berkeley wanna be hippies. pretending to be back in the sixties!

Nonverbal communication w/ cops

APOLOGY FOR DELAY

First: It's been a week since I posted last. I have more to add to this thread, and I regret that I have not done so earlier.


INSTANCE OF NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION

"anon" et al. categorically oppose meetings with the police. At the Lockheed demo on 4/22, there was an incident in which a policeman and I exchanged points of view. This incident may help explain why I think meetings can be a good idea. I don't suppose that I will convince "anon" et al., but they may still find the incident illuminating; and some other readers might appreciate my approach.

*** Overall stories of 4/22 demo: ***

Some of it is at:
http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/04/1603131.php
and
http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/04/1603164.php

*** My particular story: ***

We were at the H Street entrance to Lockheed Martin about 11:25 am. Earlier that morning, some police (or fire dept under police orders) had cut the hand of a blockader at another entrance; this fact increased my foreboding. I was standing out of the street in a dirt area, back from the blockaders. I was wearing a cardboard sign:

"... the right of the
people peaceably
to assemble ..."
-- 1st Amendment

This sign had two main messages. The more important was an assertion of right, which the Oakland PD had grossly infringed on 4/7. (I wasn't there on 4/7, but I had been following the story closely.) A second message was to make my nonviolence explicit, whatever anybody else might do (note the word "peaceably"). I hung the sign around my neck so that my hands would be free.

I saw a squad of horse police come into view, and the general police level was greatly increasing. I didn't have any official role (legal observer, liaison, etc.), but I supposed that another set of eyes and notes might be valuable, and I had my little notepad handy.

I started to write down the situation, including the names on some of the officers' uniforms. Two of the officers had large-bore shotguns which I recognized from pictures of 4/7 as the tools for firing wooden dowels, rubber bullets, and such; on their uniforms, no name badges were visible. I was standing about 15 feet from one of these officers, and there was a nonverbal exchange. By gesture and appearance, the officer was conveying:
-- I'm ready to shoot you guys with less-lethal stuff, just like my buddies in Oakland did on the 7th. --

To this, by gesture and appearance, I was conveying a message to him:
-- If you shoot, I will not respond with rocks, but I am actively preparing to testify against you in an investigation or trial or media account, which is likely to happen. --

*** In this exchange: ***

-- No words were spoken at all.
-- Both of us had facial expressions of deep seriousness of purpose.
-- Neither of us claimed to be in any position to commit others.
-- Neither of us gave anything up.
-- Both of us had more understanding of what the other was likely to do. I don't know if "negotiation" would be a suitable word, but there was certainly an exchange of views.

*** A few minutes later: ***

The horse police came up. We retreated with the greatest possible dignity under the situation. I felt the horse officers ready to beat us up; but one policeman on foot spoke to me and from the tone of his voice, I could tell that this *particular* cop had no such intention. I've been to lots of demos over the years, and several of them recently, and this was about as hairy a situation as I can recall. We got through it as well as I could hope for.

*** And so when I heard about a meeting with the cops before 5/12: ***

It sounded like a good idea to me. Among other things, I considered the meeting to be a more formalized and verbal version of what I did on 4/22. I didn't participate in DASW's decision to go to such a meeting, but I did contact 2 members of the Oakland City Council, urging them to support the meeting. I continue to believe that the meeting was a good idea, and I thank "direct actionist" and "Some Dude" for their accounts. By the way, when "direct actionist" speaks of the pressure *from* Jean Quan and Nancy Nadel, I smile, knowing that I did my part in encouraging such pressure.


POLICE READING THE WEB

As "anon" and others have pointed out, police are reading websites. I find the coverage of the California Anti-Terrorism Information Center (CATIC) to be quite interesting. Here's one of the stories, citing the Oakland Tribune:

http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/05/1612726.php

In my opinion, this is an instance of incompetence on the part of CATIC. Among other things, CATIC was grossly inaccurate in its description of DASW. I suppose "anon" may interpret CATIC differently than I, but we would still agree that its work is bad. When "anon" states that he/she does not wish to provide identifying information to them, I respect that, notwithstanding our deep differences.


ANON'S CLASS ETC

"anon-exposed" and "mtbe" have criticized "anon" as being some sort of wannabe. Now "anon" uses "middle class" as an epithet, and when he/she got some of his/her own ad-hominem medicine, I got a bit of a guilty smile. But that's not a deep reaction. There's enough passion in anon's writing that it sounds genuine to me. Also, even if he/she were a wannabe, wannabes can still have opinions that should be responded to.


Carl

My comments refer in part to another thread on Indymedia on the topic of meetings with the police

http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/05/1610688_comment.php

Carl

Typical cop manuever to say "I'm being watched, so can't tell anything but abuse to you all." He/she is obviously a pig or something right-wing think tank hack.

FUCK OFF "anon"

b-p

Carl,

Thanks for your description of the Lockheed protests. I guess the thing that bothers me about the whole negotiation with the cops thing is that it's institutional -- by which I mean, it's contributing to the over-riding power of the police as a terror force, especially while a lawsuit is going on. Now individually? Sure, it's possible to negotiate, or more specifically in my opinion, de-escalate. I'm just not sure that it's going to work enough of the time to matter much.

For the record, the ad hominem business was more an attempt to raise alarm than to vent spleen (which admittedly there was plenty of as well on my part -- not apologizing, just confessing). Judging by the ongoing dialogue, it appears to have worked, and as far as being labelled a fed goes, well...at least I'm in good company. If you read the histories of the attacks on BP and AIM, all sorts of folks were labelled as such by the FBI themselves, and then once the shit-slinging really got going, by folks caught in the middle. I think that falling for that particular trap is the one of the worst things that could happen, which is why it's pretty common knowledge to not "out" people as a fed, although it can't be said enough, in my view. It's pretty much doing the FBI's (and now, Homeland Security's) work for them. But of course by saying this, I'm telling you what to do, which must *really* mean I'm a fed, no? (joke)

In any case, there's plenty of work to be done, we're all learning, and the movement is continuing -- and despite what some people may say, growing. Good things grow quietly sometimes. Thanks for the dialogue.

anon

PS: Notice how its not so easy to peg who I am when I change tone? Just an observation.

PPS: Tone, schmone -- actually, I'm not only lily-white, I am...(rips off mask) Donald Trump! Fooled you all.

PPPS: Oh wait, no I'm not. I need to stop drinking coffee. Damn delusions of grandeur...