It’s finally beginning to look like we might be able to move on. These are images of the silent vigil held on 8th Avenue near 17th Street in Chelsea this evening, an echo of similar observances held all over the country at the same time. People gathered everywhere in their own communities in support of Cindy Sheehan’s own powerful vigil on the side of a road near Bush’s ranch in Crawford, Texas.
We cannot be marginalized this time.
Category: Politics
de Menezes in light jacket, walked casually, used transit card
British newspapers front pages, August 17, 2005 carry pictures of the body of Jean Charles…
Jean Charles de Menezes walked at a normal pace into the subway station on July 22, used his card to pass through the turnstile, and was sitting inside the car in his light, short denim jacket when he was shot several times in the side of the head by plainclothes police officers in front of horrified passengers. These events were captured on closed circuit television cameras. Yesterday it was reported in London that an official police investigation had determined the facts I describe above. They directly contradict earlier police accounts of de Menezes’s death. [see the Guardian site for more coverage]
But of course this could never happen here in the U.S., so the report, about the lies and incompetence of government antiterrorism agencies given extraordinary powers, a report which dominates the news across Britain and the rest of Europe today, appears on page three in our NYTimes this morning. In fact, the only thing that would likely never happen here is a report of official lies and incompetence. Our regime would never allow it. For security, don’t you know.
Vince [see the comment on my previous post] and many other readers already know that I have no illusions about either the comprehensiveness or the liberalism of the NYTimes, in spite of the frequency with which I cite my local rag on this blog, but I think I should make myself more clear on this point right now.
While I get most of my international news on line, I still like sitting at the table during my extended mid-day breakfast, listening to the birds and leafing through the Times‘s huge stash of hard-copy serendipity. It is my local paper, it is bigger than the others (thank the gods there still are others, especially Newsday), its extensive features do manage to entertain readers who might think they’ve seen everything, and sometimes it’s just so much fun to see the more obvious evidences of its biases and its agendae, and to broadcast them to a world which is persuaded it’s actually a Lefty newspaper.
[image and caption are from Agence France-Presse]
Heathrow mess: what’s the real story, the clients or the serfs?
are they invisible?
Is the story about lost or missed flights and the attendant inconvenience for thousands of travellers, or is it about humiliating and discarding hundreds of low-paid Asian workers struggling in a racist society?
There have been headlines about the British Air interruptions everywhere in the mainstream media since last Wednesday, but you’d have to be a very determined newsy indeed if you wanted to know what started the disruption.
Most American accounts, when they included any information about the origin of the toubles, referred to “wildcat ground staff strikes” or some equally vague and pejorative description of the original offense.
I did some digging and I’ve come up with some facts which have been reported almost nowhere within the reach of most U.S. news consumers. They must have been considered too complex for us to understand, or, more likely, too destructive of the conventional wisdom of contemporary American society about the evils of labor unions. Besides, images of people (especially attractive blond people, and most especially young women) stranded at Heathrow are a better sell to corporate media advertisers than the background facts and images which might assault their Olympian indifference to the people in real markets.
In a front-page article in the NYTimes this morning, at least four days after the [“unofficial strike,” in the brief, enigmatic description found in the piece’s first lines] you would have to read through thirteen paragraphs and move onto page 4 before you would find anything about the origins of the disruption in London.
And in fact, the dispute at the heart of the walkout – over employment practices at Gate Gourmet, an independent catering firm based in the United States [my italics] that provides food for British Airways and other airlines – is only indirectly related to the airline.
The strike began when the catering firm abruptly fired about 670 of its Heathrow-based workers on Wednesday, causing the rest of the catering staff to walk out in a show of support. On Thursday, about 1,000 other airport workers – including baggage handlers, bus drivers, ramp workers and check-in staff, walked out, too, for an unofficial strike.
To give the paper credit, the larger image accompanying the article on the inside page is of a group of Gate Gourmet [ex-?] employees assembled at the airport.
But the context of the firings is missing, as is any attempt to describe why they might have been kicked out in the first place.
I went looking and turned up this story on thisismoney, a financial website belonging to Britain’s [populist right-wing] Daily Mail/Evening Standard:
But what happened last Wednesday in a car park in Hounslow, near Heathrow, was everything that [Sir Rod Eddington, British Airways’ departing chief executive] says he condemns. It was crude, unintelligent and ultimately totally counter-productive.
When Gate Gourmet sacked 650 workers – some of them pregnant – by bellowing through a megaphone in the car park [italics mine again], it was, he believes. the inevitable trigger for retaliation.
In the closeknit Asian community around Heathrow, sacking lowly paid workers in such humiliating terms was an outrage.
Many Gate Gourmet workers had relatives employed by BA – not surprising since the airline sold its catering division to Gate Gourmet in 1997 for £60m.
The illegal sympathy strike action by 1,000 BA staff had the understanding and sympathy of all BA workers, even at the highest level.
Eddington, whose wife is Asian, has diplomatically refused to comment on Gate Gourmet’s management style. Publicly, he says: ‘I would like to apologise unreservedly to our customers who have suffered because we have been dragged into a dispute not of our doing.’
But he has not hidden his anger to close friends at the ‘stupidity’ of Gate Gourmet. ‘When you tackle change, you need to be clever and box clever,’ he said. ‘What happened out there was unintelligent and stupid,’ he is alleged to have said, adding ‘You can’t treat people in this way. They were not fat cats for God’s sake, they were hard-working lowly paid people.’
As for Gate Gourmet, it is satisfied it has not made any mistakes in its handling of the dispute, which started after an attempt to change working conditions and cut the workforce. A spokesman said it was haemorrhaging cash and unless there were agreed changes, the company would go into administration. As for sacking people by megaphone, he said: ‘ Sometimes the only way to communicate with the staff is by megaphone.’
Or whips?
[image by Andrew Stuart for the Associated Press via the NYTimes]
one for the revolution
This revolutionary [paint on panel] was spotted attached to the same wall as the arrow and the penis. The paving stone she’s hurling in anger would have made a better weapon than the large granite blocks of Wooster Street below her.
Real revolutions have been made in France, not here; I don’t suppose we can blame that on the size of our paving blocks however.
reign of terror
[North 4th Street, Williamsburg, on Sunday]
so, what was the difference this time?
the signs on Fifth Avenue read “Witness To Israeli War Crimes,” and that seems to have stuck in more than one important craw
Steve Quester and his remaining four co-defendents in the trial of the M26 arrestees were sentenced in New York Criminal Court this morning. It’s been more than two years since their involvement in a non-violent demonstration where they joined with others in blocking Fifth Avenue, protesting the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories and the invasion of Iraq.
The four are free today. Well, sort of free.
They were arrested on March 26, 2003 and later that year all 16 were convicted in Manhattan Criminal Court of disorderly conduct and obstructing governmental administration [interfering with vehicle traffic]. Twelve of the activists were sentenced to community service, a common punishment for a demonstration of this sort, and two of those twelve were given fines in addition to the sentence of community service. The Manhattan District Attorney unsealed prior dismissed and sealed arrest records as a basis for subjecting the four remaining protestors to up to one year in jail, but on July 6 the New York Court of Appeals ordered the protestors’ prior dismissed cases to be resealed.
Steve Quester reports that the four were sentenced this morning to 10 days each of community service. He himself was also sentenced to pay a $500 fine in addition to his service. There was no jail sentence, despite the District Attorney’s best efforts.
Each of the four was also sentenced to a year of conditional discharge. If any of them is arrested before August 1, 2006, she or he will go to jail on the M26 conviction. As Steve writes, this is still “a scary prospect, considering that in New York City one can get hauled in by the police for walking down the sidewalk or riding one’s bicycle.”
Steve continues, in an email sent this evening:
Our pre-sentencing statements will be going up on
www.m26.org soon, and I’ve copied mine, below. My
interview on www.actuporalhistory.org will go back up
when the webmasters return from vacation. Kate’s is
up.
Judge Stolz commented on my ACT UP Oral History
Project interview, from which he concluded that I’m a
“narcissistic, self-absorbed exhibitionist”. For the
record, I’m immensely proud of my years in ACT UP, and
am filled with admiration for people, like my
co-defendants Staci and Kate, who remain active in the
organization.
Stolz also commented strongly and negatively on my
argument that the district attorney was motivated by
political animus towards our solidarity with
Palestinian people rather than the pursuit of justice.
I think the facts of the case speak for themselves.
Occupation is a crime, from Iraq to Palestine.
ACT UP, fight back, fight AIDS.
Peace,
Steve Quester
I’ve copied Steve’s entire pre-sentencing statement below, because it answers the question posed in this post’s headline better than anything I could come up with – and because both his activism in New York and the directness of his statement are very much a piece with his volunteer work in the Middle East and his reports from Israel and Palestine published on this blog in the past.
The Manhattan District Attorney has turned from the
illegal�unsealing dismissed cases�to the merely
unethical�quoting an oral history project�in his
ongoing attempt to have us jailed. As a Rutgers
sociologist wrote this past Friday when she heard of
the D.A.’s new sentencing letter: “Any social
scientist who has done oral history would be
astonished by this invasive abuse of oral history by
the courts. When we do research on human subjects, we
are generally obliged, by the rules of U.S. Office of
Human Research Protection, to specify that none of our
respondents would be harmed by the research.”
So what’s going on here? Assistant District
Attorneys Glasser and Sullivan would have us believe
that Kate Barnhart and I are harmful to society, and
that only a jail sentence will get the message across
that we have to respect the law. But on March 22,
2004, Messrs. Glasser and Sullivan asked Judge Stolz
to jail all sixteen of us, even though most had no
record of any kind. This after a trial that never
should have happened; all sixteen of us offered for
months before the trial to plead to a lesser charge,
an offer the D.A. rejected in every one of the sixteen
cases. From what we have heard from other criminal
defense attorneys, it is nearly unprecedented that the
Manhattan D.A.’s office would take a case to trial
that concerned allegations of non-violent civil
disobedience, with no allegations of property damage.
So why this time?
The D.A. has always maintained that we were treated
differently because we were locked down. But
demonstrators using lock boxes in New York City are so
common that a police officer testified at our trial
about the training he received at the academy on how
to remove them. No locked-down demonstrators before
or since our action have been refused a plea agreement
and dragged through a trial, much less been subjected
to an illegal and unethical campaign to have them
jailed. What’s different this time?
When Mr. Morgenthau was inundated with letters and
calls from elected officials, angry at the March 22
2004 jail recommendation, his staff responded with the
infamous April 9 2004 sentencing letter, in which jail
was recommended for every defendant for whom they
could dredge up any excuse, however weak. One
defendant should be jailed, they told the judge,
because back in college in New Jersey he had been
busted for pot. They neglected to mention that his
conviction had since been expunged. Another should be
jailed because she was once arrested in Washington,
D.C. They neglected to mention that the arrest had
been nullified, without prosecution, when it came to
light that the police had simply swept up a crowd in a
park, regardless of individual actions. To the credit
of this court, the D.A.’s ridiculous justifications
were ignored when sentencing those particular
defendants in May of 2004.
On July 6 of this year, the system worked. New
York’s Court of Appeals resealed the records of the
remaining four of us, clearly establishing Mr.
Morgenthau’s illegal conduct. Undaunted, Messrs.
Glasser and Sullivan waited until the last business
day before our sentencing to present material from the
Internet they’d been sitting on since sometime before
March, oral histories that establish that Ms. Barnhart
and I are longtime activists. As if that were a
crime.
So what’s behind this extraordinary sequence of
events? It’s not the lockboxes. It’s not the traffic
jam. It’s not our activist histories. The same
factors have been present in dozens, if not hundreds,
of similar cases in Manhattan, but have never elicited
similar behavior on the part of the D.A., before or
since. The unique factor in this case is the
political message of our demonstration. Ten days
after the murder of American Rachel Corrie by an
Israeli soldier in the occupied Gaza Strip, images of
our action were beamed all over the world by CNN.
Business at the branch of Bank Leumi at the corner
where the demonstration occurred was disrupted that
day. Opponents of the war on Iraq often engage in
civil disobedience in New York City; Palestine
activists rarely do. The events of March 26 2003 gave
Mr. Morgenthau an opportunity to send a message:
Criticize Israel in New York City, and we will throw
the book at you.
Your honor, I’m not asking you to ignore the verdict,
or your own concerns about the events of March 26
2003. I am asking you to consider our motives, which
were to draw attention to a human rights disaster, in
the context of our lives of service for the public
good. I heard, loud and clear, what you said on May
12 2004 about ambulances. I risked my life riding in
a Palestinian Red Crescent Society ambulance in
Bethlehem in 2002 so that the EMTs would not get shot
by Israeli soldiers. I’ve been a healthcare activist
for a decade and a half. I’ve advocated for better
Medicaid coverage, for the inclusion of women and
people of color in clinical trials, for expedited
review of promising AIDS treatments. I’ve sat at the
bedside of many dying friends.
I have a keen sense of the need to support New York
City’s emergency services. In the months following
the September 11 attacks, I did what I could to
support our devastated fire department. When
firefighters said that they were having trouble
getting enough people to the hundreds of firefighter
funerals, I began attending and bringing friends to
the funerals not just of the firefighter I knew, Peter
Vega, but of firefighters I’d never met.
The idea that we didn’t consider the effect of our
actions on emergency services is mistaken. Had an
emergency vehicle needed to get through that day, we
would have seen to it that they did. Nothing in our
past, or in the many letters about us you’ve received,
would indicate otherwise. In fact, we posted
observers on the scene specifically to alert us of any
emergencies.
I am asking you as well to consider the district
attorney’s motives, which seem to be based in a desire
to suppress advocacy on behalf on Palestinians, rather
than to see justice done.
[image by Fred Askew from the M26 site]
what to do if stopped for a subway search
not so simple now, even for white guys, but maybe it never was
UPDATE: I received a very constructive comment on my last post, “bag the entrance searches, we need exits!“, from Matt of the “Flex your Rights Foundation,” and I thought it would be extremely useful as a post of its own.
Go here for The Citizen’s Guide to Refusing New York Subway Searches. The site includes an excellent introduction to its practical advice on how to “safely and intelligently ‘flex’ your rights”:
In response to the recent London terror attacks, New York police officers are now conducting random searches of bags and packages brought into the subway.
While Flex Your Rights takes no position on the usefulness of these searches for preventing future attacks, we have serious concerns that this unprecedented territorial expansion of police search powers is doing grave damage to people’s understanding of their Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.
In addition, as innocent citizens become increasingly accustomed to being searched by the police, politicians and police agencies are empowered to further expand the number of places where all are considered guilty until proven innocent.
Fortunately, this trend is neither inevitable nor irreversible. In fact, the high-profile public nature of these random subway searches provides freedom-loving citizens with easy and low-risk opportunities to “flex” their Fourth Amendment rights by refusing to be searched.
The site includes a handy guide-flyer which can be downloaded and printed for giving out to friends and strangers, dressing up a refrigerator or carrying in your . . . er, . . . bag.
[image of Norman Rockwell’s 1958 “The Runaway” from the artchive]
bag the entrance searches, we need exits!
the wrong kind of crowd control
It’s a good thing it was Penn Station, because virtually none of New York’s Transit system stations could be evacuated for either a real or a false alarm.
Chief Kelly and Mayor Bloomberg’s new policy of passenger searches absolutely will not prevent a terrorist hit in our subway system. A real terrorist will just take another train or set off a weapon on the spot. But if something does happen tomorrow, any survivors of an initial attack are likely already doomed by today’s official negligence.
They’ll never get out.
Sometimes there are a few regular low-bar turnstiles at a station, but most of the time passengers have to exit through ceiling-to-floor turnstile cages which admit only one person at a time. In addition, even though there are often a number of exit stairways in each station, during many hours of the day (or permanently) all but one of them is locked, even those which can only be used as exits!
There’s no chance a number of cars and a platform could be emptied in anyone’s definition of a hurry. Up to 2000 people may be on a single train, and many more might be on the platform, waiting or leaving, at the same time. Most everyone will have to pass through cages one at a time. I sounds to me like this could easily take a half hour or more.
In addition, it won’t help any of us to survive if the system’s emergency lighting is still connected to the third rail, as it is now. When train power is cut for whatever reason there is no light anywhere in the tunnels.
Looking to the near future, the MTA is still proceding with plans to eliminate clerks in the stations, conductors in the cars, and even motormen at the stick. Where is the sanity?
Our politicians and public guardians hope to give us the impression that they are making us all safer with unconstitutional searches. Certainly they know the policy is wrong and useless, so why are they not addressing a very real danger but jumping at the chance to push this obviously bogus remedy? I think it’s because sending the police in to go through the bags of people of color is much less trouble, much less expensive, and, above all, much less like an embarrassing admission of continuing incompetence – that is, until something really does happen.
For a personal account of our own experience of MTA incompetence in a real incident, fortunately with neither serious injuries nor terrorism involved, see this post.
[image from the MTA]
darkness settles over the land, this time maybe permanently
the Madtown Liberty Players portray the Fourth Amendment under attack (two years ago)
The House voted today to make the “Patriot Act” permanent. In what may be the least patriotic vote ever recorded in that chamber, our representatives effectively moved to revoke the Fourth Amendment for all time.
My countrymen are cowards. They are ignorant of themselves and of the world. The unknown is always what we fear, and this country has an enormous dark store of the nameless feeding its private terrors.
Americans don’t know who they are, and they don’t know the outside world. We never had to learn anything about either subject, and for pretty much the same reason: the country was just so big; we were busy filling it up and we could pretty much ignore everyone outside our borders and most of them inside. We don’t like people anyway, whether they’re from another continent, another city, another neighborhood, another family. I don’t even have to mention our class, racial and ethnic insularity, they are so well-documented. We don’t even like to be too close to those in our own families. We like the separation the oceans furnish us and we wish there were others on our northern, and especially southern, borders. We want as much space as we can manage to arrange between ourselves and the next fellow’s place, and everyone in the family should have a private room and bath, as well as his or her own car.
I’m appalled, but not surprised, by this cowardice on the one hand and on the other a welcoming, even enthusiastic, support for, excuse the expression, but I do know my history, clearly “fascist” concepts of political control that are being embraced by so many of our fellow freedom-loving Americans. These are people who will still boast tomorrow that they enjoy a unique island of liberty and democracy blessed by a god who favors their virtue.
America has indeed been terrorized. It was the work of a single brilliant and monstrous blow, but the land of the free and the home of the brave is now willing to trash its heritage for the mere illusion of security. While most of its people are willing to admit the trade, they don’t see the disconnect.
We’re doomed.
[image from Madison Indymedia]
more on Smolkatown
for picking weeds
It probably won’t be news to anyone in the new music scene, but this account of vicious New York city police thuggery may be a surprise to many of my readers, even those who have seen my Chief Smolka posts; and even those who are familiar with the police camp that the Village’s Washington Square Park has become in recent years. Smolka is in charge of the street crimes unit which assaulted the Broken Social Scene‘s Dave Newfield in the park last Thursday.
The cop’s official title is “Commanding Officer Patrol Borough Manhattan Assistant Chief Bruce Smolka,” according to the NYPD site. I call him very dangerous.
Who will protect us from those who say they will protect us?
This is an excerpt from the pitchforkmedia report:
So, [his friend] exchanges $20 with a dealer in the park while Newfeld stands by watching the events unfold. As Newf tells it: “We walk around the corner, and all the sudden I’m tackled in a football style attack, like a mugger would do, you know? You grab the person and catch them by surprise and they ambush in a football tackle. And then they’re like, ‘Police, police, police! Fucking put your hands behind you!'” Due to the lax drug laws in Canada [his home], Newfeld says he didn’t connect what he assumed to be a mugging with his schwag score, assuming the “police” claim was a ploy by thugs to keep their victims passive for an easy stick-up.
“They started punching me in the face and beating the shit out of me and throwing me on the ground, so I’m trying to get away– not fight them back, because I’m not capable of that, but just to escape. And then they threatened to break my hand and I’m like, “No, don’t break my hand! I’m a musician. I gotta fuckin’ play tomorrow! And so I’m really freaking out, and at that point I thought, ‘Just take my wallet, whatever. Don’t break my hand. My wallet’s not worth it.'” By now, Newfeld’s pal was cuffed on the ground, and finally decided it was time to break the news: “They’re cops! Submit!” Oh, and P.S., whoops!
After being thrown in the back of a paddywagon, Newfeld was left to sit with a handful of shady characters while the 5-0 went around picking up other perps. He was then taken back to the station in pretty poor shape, strip-searched (whuh-oh), and, having been left in a cell for an hour or two, taken to Bellevue Hospital to have his beatings checked out. It turned out he’d suffered two cracked ribs. While in his hospital bed, he was given a report detailing the charges against him– four counts of assaulting an officer and possession– which still stand as of press time.
[image from pitchforkmedia; story tip from a reader, whose email subject line read, “where’s there’s smolka, there’s fire…”]