Oakland on the Verge of History and/or Riots [Archive]

Jimmie Higgins

8th July 2010, 22:52

As people wait to hear the verdict in the rare trial of a cop who murdered an unarmed young man (caught on numerous video cameras), tensions are incredibly high. Interestingly enough - tensions are high regarding different things for different people.

For most young people in Oakland and for a lot of African Americans, the tension is that this obvious case of murder is going to go down in an acquittal.

For the city establishment, media, and small businessmen the tension is that they think the city is going to burn to the ground. So a barrage of advertisements have been telling us "violence is not the answer" and the cities NGOs have closed ranks to prevent people from protesting in case the cop gets off.

The local liberal "free weekly" has a cover urging peace... it's an insult for all these people and groups who turn a blind eye to police violence on a regular basis to then turn around and lecture the community about being "peaceful".

http://www.eastbayexpress.com/ebx/be-cool/Content?oid=1897960

Here's my response that I'm sending to the editor (but I would much rather discuss it with my rad-pals here than with liberal newspaper wankers):

As a resident of Fruitvale and BART commuter (who was on the train New Years 2009), the cover of this issue was a slap in the face. Where were the covers demanding that the BART police be peaceful?

I'm against violence as much as anyone else, but the overwhelming criticism of and concern over protesters, rather than the police force from so-called liberal sources makes me sick. If people do not want to see violence, then they need to do something about police brutality first.

Why is it that in a county whose first response to 9/11 is to bomb unrelated people and countries for a decade, and the response to crime is to grant more weapons and resources to the police... that the people are the ones who are always told to remain "peaceful". But when Mixon shot 4 OPD cops, no one condemned the police for going after the suspect with guns blazing in an apartment complex. THAT'S violence, that's terrorism - breaking glass and burning a car is nothing in comparison to what the police have done over they years.

Disarm the police, provide jobs and decent housing for people, and stop recruiting soldiers from low-income neighborhoods... and then we can talk about the population having a peaceful response to things. Personally I am only against breaking windows because I don't think it accomplishes much in regards to building a movement against police brutality and for civil rights, but I am not going to condemn or worry about people expressing anger when a case of such obvious injustice is allowed to go on by the police, media, courts, and city government.

Frankly the city (by sitting on their own video evidence, ignoring videos from people on the train, and letting this murdering cop hang out across state lines for a week without charging him) left people with little other choice but to express their anger like that. If there is more violence, blame rests on the city and the courts and police... just as we would look at violence in Iranian protests and blame the regime, not the voiceless struggling to be heard.

Jimmie Higgins.

It's a historic case of police violence because the mass protests and "riots" led to a cop actually being arrested and charged. It has also been an interesting "teachable" moment to expose the role of liberals in our society as they have so transparently been using the language of liberation and their connections to activism to try and contain mass anger and make the focus on the case "rioting" rather than police murder.

Paulappaul

8th July 2010, 22:54

Basically the same thing that is happening in Portland right now.

this is an invasion

8th July 2010, 23:13

Thought that was a good piece. I agree 100% with it. It's absolutely ridiculous that we live in a system that is built upon violence and fear, and police violence is a regular occurrence, yet people who resist this, or are just rising up out of anger, are demonized. Fuck that.

I mean I'm not surprised that the media and politicians do this. It's what they do. And let's not be under any illusions about the police. By showing up to this and smashing the fuck out of people, they will be doing their jobs.

Jimmie Higgins

8th July 2010, 23:14

I have also been sent letters from the OPD and been given flier by BART (the subway) warning me to stay away from downtown after the verdict. My partner's art-school (high on a hill, overlooking the trendy [i.e. young white] area of Oakland far away from downtown and public transportation sent this:

With the verdict coming soon in the Bart shooting incident many neighborhoods in Oakland are concerned about violence and vandalism erupting. While the campus is not in the center of the area where riots occurred at the time of the shooting we are still taking steps to safeguard our community. We have added Public Safety Officers to enhance the scope of our normal patrols and be of use to escort students, staff and faculty for short distances off campus. We will keep the extra officers on duty 24/7 until the situation clears up and we all feel that tensions have eased in the wake of a verdict.

We do not know how this will affect our neighborhood after the verdict decision is made public but I'm sending this message out so you will have information in anticipation of problems:

>Please park as close as possible to campus, be very aware of your surroundings and travel in groups of at least two whenever possible.
>Do not make any unnecessary trips off campus at this time, even a quick run over to Wendy’s across the street or Safeway next door is discouraged.
>Avoid going to downtown Oakland.
>Store the Public Safety cell number in your cell phone so you have it if you should need to contact them. This phone is always on and answered. If you have to leave a message because they are on another call, leave your number, name, location and the reason for your call so your needs can be addressed as soon as possible.

While we can’t foresee every possible scenario we can assist in any way to safeguard the people who come and go from our campus. Please use our services, be cautious and aware of your surroundings and keep an eye out. Use good judgment and take this situation seriously, it’s in everyone’s best interest to watch out for each other.

A local Oakland "booster" group that makes t-shirts with a vague "street" image sent my friend this in one of their e-mail blasts:

> > We've been printing new shirts around the clock with only small breaks
> > for eating, sleeping, bike riding, drinking, summer barbequing, and
> > shopping for fireworks online. So, we have a lot of new shirts, and
> > we're posting them first on Facebook since that's where everyone seems
> > to hang out these days. If you're the type of person who likes to be
> > the first with fresh shirts, then we highly recommend that you
> > announce publicly that you "Like" us here:
> > http://www.facebook.com/pages/Oaklandish/307785720017
> > --------------------------------------
> > --------------------------------------
> > Enjoy your celebrations of independence and self-determination over
> > this long weekend Oakland! Remember also that fulfilling the
> > expectations of those in power means we have allowed ourselves to
> > become like the system we oppose.
> >
> > Represent the town. Represent the people. Represent what you believe
> > in. Oaklandish represents you.
> > --------------------------------------

So I wrote back to my friend:

Wouldn't fulfilling the expectations of those in power be accepting inequality and police violence without protest? Doing these things only means you don't oppose the system you claim to oppose.

(Yeah, I know they are specifically talking about "riots" but, still, I don't think Oaklandish was part of all the peaceful weekly organizing that went on for months after the killing... it might have cut into their busy schedule of... "bike riding, drinking, summer barbequing, and shopping for fireworks online.")

It's also ironic that they are telling us to enjoy "Independence Day" - a revolution sparked, in part by mobilizing against red-coat massacres and abuses of people.

Pretty much the entire NGO world of Oakland (religious, social groups, and cultural - like Oaklandish) has been mobilized by the city to try and "ensure peace". Since they have funding and access on the line, they are pretty motivated and it's interesting to see how liberal organizations that can be good in some of the work they do, really are attached to the status quo and against building any kind of mass movement.

Anyway, it's been an amazing process to watch and the propaganda and scare-tactics coming from the local establishment is reminiscent of the kind of things they do when there is a WTO protest coming to town and they want to justify their use of police-state tactics in advance by making hysteria about the "dangerous" protesters.

Jimmie Higgins

8th July 2010, 23:19

Basically the same thing that is happening in Portland right now.
I saw those videos - or wait, was that Seattle where the cop said: "I'm going to kick the Mexican off you"? Sorry, comrade, I'm such a Californian - everything becomes a rainy misty haze in my mind above Sacramento.

What's been going on in Portland?

this is an invasion

8th July 2010, 23:19

What is the difference between the pigs and the NGOs that are trying to manage the revolt? To "ensure peace" means to side with the state and the police.

Not to say that everyone needs to go out and fuck shit up.

Ele'ill

8th July 2010, 23:29

Basically the same thing that is happening in Portland right now.

Portland wouldn't erupt into riots but it has been lively at times.

I'm indifferent towards a riot based on these particular circumstances (in both cities). It happens because so many people are in pain emotionally they combust. It isn't about agreeing or disagreeing with a 'passion-riot' or whatever you'd like to call it- it's a topic of how can we better utilize the rage shown towards a system that is killing us. I think the left is clever- it's a 'clever-bomb' waiting to happen and when it does detonate the ideas it springs into the world will catch and spread faster than any bank fire or rain of bricks.

New tactics.

Ele'ill

8th July 2010, 23:37

I saw those videos - or wait, was that Seattle where the cop said: "I'm going to kick the Mexican off you"? Sorry, comrade, I'm such a Californian - everything becomes a rainy misty haze in my mind above Sacramento.

What's been going on in Portland?

There's been five(?) killings since March? and several questionable assaults by police before that. One involving a beanbag shotgun to the head of a girl from less than a foot away (someone correct me if I'm wrong). There has been a lot of other questionable behavior from the police as well.

There's been a lot of community talking since and during but I have not seen a lot of action.

Ele'ill

9th July 2010, 00:42

Involuntary Manslaughter

scarletghoul

9th July 2010, 01:08

What a load of fucking bullshit.

They need to tear those pigs apart

A Revolutionary Tool

9th July 2010, 01:17

I'm watching the news right now. Everybody is saying "be calm" except for the protesters there who are angry. I saw somebody from the RCP was there. I wonder if anybody from other parties are there.

MilkmanofHumanKindness

9th July 2010, 01:25

http://twitter.com/oaklandriots

MilkmanofHumanKindness

9th July 2010, 03:22

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/kron-4-news

This is probably the best coverage.

R_P_A_S

9th July 2010, 03:47

I remember hearing of this on public radio. Does anyone know why Mr. Grant was stopped by police? I remember hearing that he was coming back from a job at some butcher shop and how he had just became a father...

Ricardo

9th July 2010, 04:40

well to whoever isn't listeningto live stream, apparantely Foot Locker has just been broken into and looted, and people are starting fires in the streets, possiblyfireworks... with no police action against these people yet. Instead they're corralling the group of protesters down the street...

bcbm

9th July 2010, 04:53

news "does there appear to be any drinking or illicit drugs there that may incite the crowd further?"

"i saw people with beer cans in paper bags and i smelled marijuana smoke earlier so there are definitely people using drugs here"

love the media

bcbm

9th July 2010, 04:56

"it is literally chaos down here"

top pig: "we started taking bottles and rocks on a consistent basis from the crowd"

MilkmanofHumanKindness

9th July 2010, 05:10

Listening to them talking about Anarchists is hilarious :laugh::laugh::laugh:

Update for those not using Live Stream:

The windows of the Far East National Bank at 1423 Broadway have been SMASHED. Unlawful Assembly was declared, mass arrests are currently taking place. Car windshields are being smashed.

A Revolutionary Tool

9th July 2010, 05:31

They're throwing fireworks at police and the news is saying "They're using explosive devices".

MilkmanofHumanKindness

9th July 2010, 05:34

Live Update:

Crowd moving up 15th and Webster. Cops outnumber protesters, but look as if they are preparing to use tear gas. Cops have begun using gas masks. Protesters have been throwing fireworks at the police. Current estimates state there are about 400 protesters, which is about half of what used to be there. Police are arming themselves with beanbags shotguns, but do not have the weapons raised. Large chanting of "Whose street? Our street!" and "Justice for Oscar Grant".

M1000 fireworks are what is currently being claimed as what is being thrown:

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b336/dmcme/M-1000firecracker.jpg

A Revolutionary Tool

9th July 2010, 05:40

^explosive device noooooooooo!

bcbm

9th July 2010, 05:45

bcbm

9th July 2010, 05:46

also cop car ran over a woman earlier
http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2010/07/08/ba-mehserle_071__0501945841.jpg

MilkmanofHumanKindness

9th July 2010, 05:46

Live Update:

Police have used a flash bang grenade, sending dozens of people running at 17th and Telegraph. It lightly charred the hood of a media van. An officer had a bottle thrown at him. Police are still moving the crowd down 17th Street from Broadway. The police aree in an organized walk away from the protestors, with people surging forward.

Police are orderly, facing forward, stepping away from people. Protestors are being emboldened by this. Protestors have retaken 17th and Broadway. "I just hope it doesn't get any worse that what it's been so far. This certainly is not peace or justice for Oscar," said Councilmember Larry Reid shortly after police cleared 14th Street and Broadway.

"And I was hoping people would pay attention to what Oscar Grant's family asked folks to do -- to exercise their constitutional rights but do it in a way that didn't cause property damage or any physical harm to anyone.

bcbm

9th July 2010, 05:48

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2010/07/08/ba-mehserle_092__0501945842.jpg

Police have used a flash bang grenade, sending dozens of people running at 17th and Telegraph. It lightly charred the hood of a media van.

that was abc. right before that one of the reporters was threatened by multiple people and hit with a bottle. not their night

bcbm

9th July 2010, 05:55

video (http://cbs5.com/video/[email protected]) of foot locker getting raided

Animal Farm Pig

9th July 2010, 05:56

Ricardo

9th July 2010, 06:10

^^^ Exactly. Hopefully some of these expropriations will be distributed to people in need of the stuff, or money.

Jimmie Higgins

9th July 2010, 06:33

Just got back. The media is shit and they keep saying on TV: "The cops greatly outnumber the protesters, but why won't they stop the looting." And then they cut to a reporter who shows scenes of hundreds of pigs pushing crowds of dozens of protesters and the reporter says: "Well it's quiet here now, we had reports of 'anarchist' violence".

Well, media, the reason the cops aren't doing anything is because they NEED to provoke some damage just to make their heavy-handed tactics and months of fear-mongering seem reasonable. Everyone was peaceful throughout the rally and speakers, and then when it was over, the cops surrounded the crowd and began moving in and "kettle-ing". If the cops let everyone go home, the top story tonight would be that the killer-cop went to jail (though the verdict is bullshit) and people in Oakland thought he got away easy and all the millions the city spent on cops was a total waste.

Now, the top story is: "Run! Outside agitators are here to do violence!"

MilkmanofHumanKindness

9th July 2010, 06:33

Live Update:

The crowd just broke into the Oakland Coin and Jewelry Exchange and raided the place, and police are actively moving in. Oaksterdam at 19th and Broadway had its windows broken. Police threw flash bang grenades and are moving in with bean bag guns. JC Jewelry at 19th and Broadway had its metal gate ripped off and there is shattered glass everywhere and all the case inside are broken. People are breaking into the Sears store at 20th and Broadway using the metal bats to break the display window, stripping the mannequins of their clothes. Mannequins were set on fire. More flash grenades went off. The crowd is about 100 people now.

At 19th and Broadway, police have established a police line and there are at least four fires in Dumpsters in the middle of the street. At times you can see cops with guns facing off with a line of people armed with cameras. The streetlights have been turned on and off sporadically over the last 20 minutes.

COPS BRING MORE REINFORCEMENTS:

Hundreds of police officers from Berkeley, Fremont, Hayward, San Francisco and other departments have been on hand today and tonight helping Oakland police with the protests, violence and looting in downtown. Now, at least 60 police officers from Contra Costa County are being brought in to assist.

Jimmie Higgins

9th July 2010, 06:39

Thanks for the updates, comrades.

Sounds like most of the actions are taking place in the downtown. I wouldn't expect so much going on in Fruitvale, as it's more hispanic than black, but what about further up International, like around High Street or Seminary? Anyone know?

Fruitvale has a large black population too and the original protests in 09 began there and marched to downtown (or tried to because the police confronted the March which caused the first split-offs and the first 'riots'). When I came home to get ready - this was about 10 minutes after the verdict was announced (the court told the city of Oakland what the jury had decided 2 hours before it was announced to the court and public) and I went the back way which goes behind the BART station. On a small side-street near the train tracks there was a cop car blocking the street - I took a look and there were a dozen cop cars and paddy-wagons all set up.

When I came back home, the BART station was completely shut-off and surrounded by cops who were not letting people anywhere near the area.

Jimmie Higgins

9th July 2010, 06:51

One note on the city's efforts to get NGOs and churches and liberal groups to "enforce peace" - it appears to have worked. Obviously not in their stated reason of "promoting a peaceful response" to the verdict - but it worked in turning people in Oakland against eachother and isolating radicals.

One of the NGO people said at the rally that "the Oakland youth" should stop the "anarchists/outside agitators". Now the media is reporting that groups of "local black youth" are confronting "the anarchists" and telling them to "get out of our city".

While this is bullshit and locals as well as people from nearby cities are equally angry, and the "anarchists" are being used as scapegoats for police repression of ALL protesters it shows a weakness in the anonymous protesting of this type. It has allowed the city to have some space to drive a wedge in and try and divide black ("locals") and white ("outside agitators"). This isn't true because at the rally, the people who condemned violence in the past and pleaded for us to all be peaceful got a timid applause whereas people who were unapologetic and militant got strong applause.

But anyway, more thoughts on this later. We need to organize openly and collaboratively so that the media can't just dismiss our politics and concerns as "outside agitation" and so they can't just claim that radicals have a different agenda than the people in Oakland.

The Red Next Door

9th July 2010, 07:14

Don't these people realize they are doing the dirty work of the People in control, they need to side with the radicals and stop listening to media BS.

bleh

9th July 2010, 08:12

Now the media is reporting that groups of "local black youth" are confronting "the anarchists" and telling them to "get out of our city".

LATimes has it as "[Updated, 9:53 p.m.: At 9:40 pm, residents could be heard yelling at younger protesters in the street to “go home. This is our city. Don’t destroy it.”]"

praxis1966

9th July 2010, 15:32

To use phraseology like "outside agitators" is just bullshit. First of all, Oscar Grant wasn't from Oakland, he was from Hayward. Johannes Mehserle was from the Czech Republic or some such shit. The fact that the shooting took place in Oakland was a matter of sheer coincidence considering the incident that caused transit pigs to show up in the first place was on a southbound subway line headed out of the city. Furthermore, I don't know where people get off saying that just because I live on one side of some city limit that borders Oakland and the incident happened on the other that somehow I don't have a right to be angry about it.

To whomever praised KRON's coverage: Were you actually listening to what the newscasters were saying? Alot of the things they were saying were basically racist. I remember at one point their legal analyst saying, "If black people want to get justice maybe they should show up for jury duty more often." As if some how it was African Americans' fault that the justice system's fucked up. On top of that, they actually called some OPD spokeswoman to talk to her about how the extra expenses of dealing with these "troublemakers" would affect budget cuts in the department. Like I give a fuck.

Anyway, while I'm sure there were some anarchists in the crowd, it could hardly be said that the anarchists were solely responsible for the violence last night. Even if you are the kind of person who blames the protesters and not the cops for the riot (which I'm not), you have to acknowledge that some people are just going to look for trouble. Take for instance the riots when the Raiders lost the Super Bowl last time. How many of the people who participated in that idiocy do you figure were outside agitators? How many of them are the same personality types who would have set fire to shit last night? The media analysis of this is total horseshit.

EDIT: I just heard some pig on channel 2 saying that most of the people arrested for violence were white. I got news for you, you fucking reverse racist, white people live in Oakland, too!

Ele'ill

9th July 2010, 17:57

'Solidarity' actions in Portland happened last night.

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2010/07/400889.shtml

Wolf Larson

9th July 2010, 18:47

the whole foods right next to my house was 'looted'. This was all the way up by Harrison St....by the lake.

Wolf Larson

9th July 2010, 19:07

i've been watching http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/livenow?id=7544444

they have been talking quite a lot about "anarchists" and how they are all from out of town, locals don't want them there, etc. also talking about how ngo's talking to youth to keep the peace has worked because a few kids were arguing with "anarchists"

The people who 'looted' foot locker set the shoes on fire. They weren't anarchists or just opportunists looking for free shoes.

Whole foods? Different story. ;)

praxis1966

9th July 2010, 19:08

MilkmanofHumanKindness

9th July 2010, 19:15

Wolf Larson

9th July 2010, 19:18

By the way, I think there's something that a lot of us are not acknowledging here. Johannes Mehserle was a BART transit cop. As per the Homeland Security Act of 2002, all transit authorities were federalized. What this means is that, technically speaking, Mehserle was a federal law enforcement official with jurisdiction anywhere in the entire country. To attempt to localize this as an Oakland problem is a load of garbage.

BART cops are or have been out of control for years in my experience. Especially on new years eve which means it comes from command (orders from high up). I was thrown in Alameda County Jail in 2003 (for 4 months) for defending my 120 lb girlfriend from a BART cop. We were coming back from SF and she was indeed drunk but she was sleeping...not bothering anyone. The BART police were waiting when we got off arresting 'drunk' people and they grabbed her and threw her on her face because she was stumbling ...twisting her arm back and up (she wasn't resisting).

I was in shock for a second or so but then picked the guy up and threw him about 5 ft. (if i was black i would've been shot) Luckily there was about 20 of us and 2 of them....I still took a baton to the head and was arrested but it was all stemming from the use of excessive force on an unarmed woman (for being drunk on new years eve).

After i got out of jail...the day i was released I was back on BART going home and fount a fanny pack with 600 dollars in it. Karma.

Os Cangaceiros

9th July 2010, 19:28

Whole foods? Different story. ;)

LOL, Whole Foods being looted by anarchists is to be expected.

Wolf Larson

9th July 2010, 19:36

LOL, Whole Foods being looted by anarchists is to be expected.

I wasn't there and didn't do anything and don't know what you're talking about. Stealing private property from corporations is wrong and illegal. :)

You know whats funny, they've had private security guards at that store for years and they carry what looks like 9mm handguns. I've actually complained numerous times...told them i feel like I'm shopping with guns pointed at me. I've posted a few threads on various forums concerning the Whole Foods employees with guns thing and most people say it's only in the Oakland store off Harrison st. Up in Berkeley I don't see any people patrolling Whole Foods in all black military clothes carrying pistols walking around like wrestlers in the WWF.

It's a bit racist if you ask me. There's about 2 or 3 miles separating the two stores but 1000 miles as far as demographics.

Anyhow, this thread is about Oscar Grant. I was contemplating what would have happened after the Rodney King case if people didn't go berserk. Did the LA riots stop future LAPD acts of violence? Would cops be even more abusive if they thought their actions would only warrant some 'peaceful protest'?

Anyhow, what happened in Oakland was no LA riot. There wasn't violence only property damage. There was much more racial anger in LA.

Os Cangaceiros

9th July 2010, 19:51

I don't think that Whole Foods being looted by anarchists is a consequence of anarchist predisposition towards violence, necessarily, more to do with the fact that my local Whole Foods has a demographic that's similar to, say, a PBR-sponsored MIA show in Portland.

Ele'ill

9th July 2010, 20:00

I tend to disagree with property destruction as a tactic for these types of situations, people want to take to the streets and shout and yell but they don't want to be associated with peripheral bullshit like breaking windows. I know nine people off the top of my head that would take to the street but they won't because they don't want to get arrested for being associated with property destruction- they would be willing to get arrested for expressing their ideas and standing against empire.

What else can be done, non-violently, to rally around this and get shit moving?

I suggest talking with your affinity groups, attending any local meetings on the issue of police violence.

We need to start utilizing national coverage of events that pertain to social justice.

I saw a lot of people- non-activists- yesterday at various events that were very interested in what we had to say either through leafleting, banners and signs. I am usually very critical of how successful actions and events are.

What can you do?

Think about what your talents are- are you good at writing, art, talking to people one on one, speeches?

Do you have access to print making equipment for banners?
Can you write text for a leaflet that isn't extreme and overbearing yet to the point?

All it takes are five people in each city handing out pamphlets for two hours during nationally covered events for people to start thinking- If people power doesn't explode this time there's a better chance it will next time.

Let's keep this rolling- no grey area or media blackouts in a week- we're emotionally distraught- let's stop being powerless and start doing anything we can.

Wolf Larson

9th July 2010, 20:07

I tend to disagree with property destruction as a tactic for these types of situations, people want to take to the streets and shout and yell but they don't want to be associated with peripheral bullshit like breaking windows. I know nine people off the top of my head that would take to the street but they won't because they don't want to get arrested for being associated with property destruction- they would be willing to get arrested for expressing their ideas and standing against empire.

What else can be done, non-violently, to rally around this and get shit moving?

I suggest talking with your affinity groups, attending any local meetings on the issue of police violence.

We need to start utilizing national coverage of events that pertain to social justice.

I saw a lot of people- non-activists- yesterday at various events that were very interested in what we had to say either through leafleting, banners and signs. I am usually very critical of how successful actions and events are.

What can you do?

Think about what your talents are- are you good at writing, art, talking to people one on one, speeches?

Do you have access to print making equipment for banners?
Can you write text for a leaflet that isn't extreme and overbearing yet to the point?

Let's keep this rolling- no grey area or media blackouts in a week- we're emotionally distraught- let's stop being powerless and start doing anything we can.

Well that's just it, is property damage violence? The capitalist media loves to say so....what say you?

Oscar Grant did not deserve to be murdered. Thats violence. I also think the media did a hell of a job framing the property damage/anger as coming from outside agitators (white anarchists) from out of town. I wouldnt fall into that trap. Especially if you were there.

Ele'ill

9th July 2010, 20:31

Well that's just it, is property damage violence? The capitalist media loves to say so....what say you?

I don't want to turn this thread into a debate on property destruction so I stress that any responses be entirely based on property destruction tactics and how they directly relate to this specific situation.

Violence doesn't just involve hurting someone or something- I don't want to copy the definition in here but I believe that's what it is. I ultimately think this is irrelevant for this discussion.

Property destruction turns a lot of people away from street marches- this doesn't just result in low numbers of people who, while in the streets would meet people and exchange ideas, but ends up making large numbers of people feel like the social issue being violently demonstrated against isn't their fight. They simply feel like they don't fit in.

I have noticed at various events that many of the people involved in property destruction have an elitist attitude that proclaims they only need themselves and others that are willing to jump on their bandwagon.

We really need to pull together and find a 'middle ground'- at least for the time being- where everyone is comfortable during these nationally covered events. I think there are plenty of non-violent tactics that can be used right now that would lower arrestability and make a greater impact.

If the only 'groups' organizing solidarity demonstrations and actions in a nearby city are anarchists we need to make sure that the majority of the events are ones that everybody can attend- and I'm not talking about a picnic in the park.

Oscar Grant did not deserve to be murdered. Thats violence. I also think the media did a hell of a job framing the property damage/anger as coming from outside agitators (white anarchists) from out of town. I wouldnt fall into that trap. Especially if you were there.

Where's the counter media teams?

Where's legal?

Who is documenting all of this and pushing for a voice? Yes this last part is difficult and sometimes impossible but it can win victories.

We know property destruction is going to be used by the media as an excuse or justification for why police are so violent. If the property destruction doesn't serve a purpose (which I'm still trying to figure out what it's purpose is in this situation) then don't fucking do it. Leave the rocks on the ground.

If there was a demonstration- let's say anti war- and people were getting ready to lock down and occupy a space- why would two or three get up and start picketing a powerplant next door and handing out leaflets?

It breaks down the architecture of demonstration.

this is an invasion

9th July 2010, 20:32

I don't understand the call to be peaceful after police kill another person.

Kids came together and broke shit, looted shit, and set shit on fire. They realized their potential collective strength, and they know what they are capable of now. Do you think the City of Oakland might be just a little afraid of the next time a cop fucks up?

praxis1966

9th July 2010, 20:37

It's not over yet...

http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area-news/ci_15469932?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&nclick_check=1

CHP plans to continue backup support in Oakland this weekend and beyond
Along with several other law enforcement agencies, California Highway Patrol officers from as far away as Sacramento and the Central Valley were out in force on the streets of Oakland Thursday night, backing up Oakland police as violent protests emerged downtown, CHP Sgt. Trent Cross said this morning.

While he wouldn't give numbers, Cross said the CHP maintained a "significant presence," working to protect public safety and keeping people off the freeways.
The backup coverage will continue throughout this weekend and the coming weeks, he said.

So basically, it's OK for the cops to bring in "outside agitators" but not the activists?:lol:

I wasn't there and didn't do anything and don't know what you're talking about. Stealing private property from corporations is wrong and illegal. :)

:laugh: @ ^. Personally, I'd like to characterize the looting of a Whole Foods by people acting out against police brutality an act of class warfare. Think about it, Whole Foods is a fuckin' bourgeois store (not just in terms of price but the people who shop there). The people most likely to be affected by police violence are most likely poor and/or members of an ethnic minority. Therefore, it's an act of the proletariat attacking the bourgeoisie. Not that it'll accomplish much in the long run, but I'm just sayin' and shit.

this is an invasion

9th July 2010, 20:44

The people who 'looted' foot locker set the shoes on fire. They weren't anarchists or just opportunists looking for free shoes.

Whole foods? Different story. ;)

Nah, people were wearing new shoes, too. I don't see a problem with this. There weren't any fights during the looting. People took what they needed and wanted. Whether they intended it or not, this directly challenges the idea of ownership. It also shows just how much people realized the divide between the rich and business owners that make up the downtown area and themselves.

Ele'ill

9th July 2010, 20:49

I don't understand the call to be peaceful after police kill another person.

Don't put words in my mouth, Nothing was said about being 'peaceful'- I'm not a peace activist.

If you can't find another way to be an explosive agitator without throwing rocks through the same fucking windows over and over again then you're essentially pond scum stagnating a movement. Fuck that.

Kids came together and broke shit, looted shit, and set shit on fire.

What did it accomplish and what was their goal. How did it have anything to do with police accountability/abolition?

They realized their potential collective strength, and they know what they are capable of now. Do you think the City of Oakland might be just a little afraid of the next time a cop fucks up?

I really wish I could list tactics on the internet without being potentially questioned by local law enforcement dick heads but there are hundreds of nonviolent yet flashy and powerful ways to 'fuck shit up' without breaking anything.

Actions need to lead to change and not just stand independent of everything else.

Fuck iconic imagery of the past.

praxis1966

9th July 2010, 20:56

I think Mari3L's got a point, though. There are a shit ton of people that I'm sure would have liked to have been at the protest yesterday, but they didn't show up because they were afraid that A) the same thing that happened last time would happen this time (which it did) and that B) the cops weren't going to distinguish between "non-violent" and "violent" protesters once things started getting broken and set on fire. Now I'm not saying that I think property destruction is the same as violence against another human, but asking a cop to make that distinction is a pretty tall order in my estimation.

Besides, did breaking windows or overturning cars actually change the verdict? Did it help centrists sympathize with the position of the protesters? I think the answer to both those questions is no.

this is an invasion

9th July 2010, 21:09

Besides, did breaking windows or overturning cars actually change the verdict? Did it help centrists sympathize with the position of the protesters? I think the answer to both those questions is no.
You don't think people are so stupid that they don't get this, do you?

Don't make assumptions about why people were there.

What did happen is that Oakland suffered hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage and looting. Kids realized the sort of power they have when they come together, and the shit they can get away with. The City of Oakland does not want this to happen again.

praxis1966

9th July 2010, 21:26

You don't think people are so stupid that they don't get this, do you?

No, I was just saying in a roundabout way that I wish things had gone down a little differently.

What did happen is that Oakland suffered hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage and looting. Kids realized the sort of power they have when they come together, and the shit they can get away with. The City of Oakland does not want this to happen again.

I hope you're right. I also hope that some organizing can be done around this issue so that civil disobedience of this kind isn't an isolated incident, that these acts aren't some kind of satiating catharsis for what's obviously a repressed ebullition.

Animal Farm Pig

9th July 2010, 21:27

For the folks advocating "peaceful" movement, etc.

Let me show you something:

Police violence -> Riots
OR
Police violence -> peaceful demonstrations, raising consciousness, handwringing

Which do you think is a more effective method for stopping police violence? Which one is the ruling class more afraid of?

Do you think there would have been charges filed against Meserle if there hadn't be "disturbances" after the shooting? You think he would have been convicted if the '92 LA riots hadn't happened?

Non-violence is a liberal fetish. I'll tell you what the result of peaceful non-violent protest within the confines of the law is-- you get to feel morally superior, nothing changes, and the people keep suffering.

praxis1966

9th July 2010, 21:35

Do you think there would have been charges filed against Meserle if there hadn't be "disturbances" after the shooting? You think he would have been convicted if the '92 LA riots hadn't happened?

I think the verdict had more to do with the fact that there was so much video of what happened than anything else. Frankly, I think if the videos didn't exist that there never would have been charges filed in the first place.

Non-violence is a liberal fetish. I'll tell you what the result of peaceful non-violent protest within the confines of the law is-- you get to feel morally superior, nothing changes, and the people keep suffering.

Ok, maybe you're right. How many rocks did you toss last night?

Ele'ill

9th July 2010, 21:40

Police violence -> Riots
OR
Police violence -> peaceful demonstrations, raising consciousness, handwringingIt takes and outerwardly displays more courage and passion to lock down an intersection- shut down the city and let the police demonstrate how violent they are than it is to run around in black with masks on and break windows of chain stores that had absolutely nothing to do with the verdict, the situation or why people should be in the street demonstrating against the verdict and situation.

Seattle was good times. Seattle also didn't get shut down because anarchists broke windows it got shut down and the meeting got shut down because several hundred to a thousand brave soles took the brunt of the police violence in the face while locking down.

Which do you think is a more effective method for stopping police violence? Which one is the ruling class more afraid of?Again, I'm not debating various tactics in all situations because all situations are not the same. The ruling class doesn't give a fuck if people smash a starbucks window and neither does starbucks because they have insurance that takes care of it. It's a purely symbolic gesture.

At this event the rioting should have been directed towards state infrastructure and not on looting fucking stores for goodies- that's where the whole thing failed to regain any type of credibility in my mind. Things should have been done differently.

Do you think there would have been charges filed against Meserle if there hadn't be "disturbances" after the shooting? You think he would have been convicted if the '92 LA riots hadn't happened?I don't think the broken shop windows had anything to do with the verdict or charges brought. I think the amount of people in the street had to do with it- as well as the various state 'items' that were targeted.

Non-violence is a liberal fetish. I'll tell you what the result of peaceful non-violent protest within the confines of the law is-- you get to feel morally superior, nothing changes, and the people keep suffering.

I support a variety of well timed and executed tactics. This isn't an hour in a mcdonalds playground ball pit this is real life. We need to be more organized- more open minded and always changing.

As for the 'liberal fetish' nonsense I've already shot this down with my above comments. Game over. :thumbup1:

Animal Farm Pig

9th July 2010, 21:56

Ok, maybe you're right. How many rocks did you toss last night?

None. I wish I could, but my desire to not be arrested or convicted of any crimes is greater than my desire to participate in the rock throwing. Sorry, I guess I'm not hardcore enough to participate. I have too many other responsibilities that would be adversely affected.

That being said, I will not condemn those who are taking part in the action. Rioting in downtown is an effective means of "area denial"-- like a picket line or land-mines. It hurts bourgeois business owners by preventing them from operating and imposing clean-up/repair costs. It scares the people in charge-- if it didn't, there wouldn't be so many police.

If all you can do is peacefully demonstrate, then go for it. Just don't expect to get much of a result. And, don't pretend that your method is morally superior or that other methods are not effective.

Jimmie Higgins

9th July 2010, 22:19

http://i521.photobucket.com/albums/w331/iso_oakland/Oscar%20Grant/P1010133.jpg?t=1278706045
As you can see, despite the media's racist description of any white protesters with masks as "anarchist outside agitators" and black protesters with the same masks as "looters"... this was an incredibly diverse crowd that really did represent a cross-section of the Bay Area.

http://i521.photobucket.com/albums/w331/iso_oakland/Oscar%20Grant/P1010126.jpg?t=1278706284
A couple of awesome speakers ;)

Much of the organized left was well represented - Answer, ISO, and people sporting PM press shirts and so on.

http://i521.photobucket.com/albums/w331/iso_oakland/Oscar%20Grant/P1010113.jpg?t=1278707045

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs020.ash2/34352_721111729218_6703999_40615240_4287195_n.jpg

http://i521.photobucket.com/albums/w331/iso_oakland/Oscar%20Grant/P1010087.jpg?t=1278707287

1/3rd of an rad piece someone did using a poster designed by a local anarchist I know. Oscar Grant murals are all over downtown right now.

http://i521.photobucket.com/albums/w331/iso_oakland/Oscar%20Grant/P1010138.jpg?t=1278707576

Here we go - a small sampling of the real "outside agitators" here to cause trouble. I wish I had time to go around documenting the police presence because it was huge.

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs001.snc4/33422_721112253168_6703999_40615253_3189291_n.jpg

While the police and media spoke of "professional troublemakers" and protester violence... this was the scene after the rally in the middle of 14th and Broadway (the center of the protest area) at 8-9pm when the media was talking about "riots".

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs097.snc4/36234_721112562548_6703999_40615274_1602705_n.jpg

A relative of Bobby Hutton (black panther youth who was murdered by the police) spoke about the enduring relevance of the BPP demands. She also made the point that peace without making demands and putting pressure on the system (as the liberals were essentially urging people to do)... is mearly accepting an unacceptable status-quo.

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs048.snc4/34770_721113126418_6703999_40615321_1438143_n.jpg

Again, who are the professional troublemakers?

praxis1966

9th July 2010, 22:19

None. I wish I could, but my desire to not be arrested or convicted of any crimes is greater than my desire to participate in the rock throwing. Sorry, I guess I'm not hardcore enough to participate. I have too many other responsibilities that would be adversely affected.

Well, call me a defeatist if you like, but the reason I wasn't down in Oakland throwing rocks had a lot to do with the things you're talking about as well. Apart from the reasons I mentioned earlier, that is.

That being said, I will not condemn those who are taking part in the action. Rioting in downtown is an effective means of "area denial"-- like a picket line or land-mines. It hurts bourgeois business owners by preventing them from operating and imposing clean-up/repair costs. It scares the people in charge-- if it didn't, there wouldn't be so many police.

I totally agree. I don't condemn them either because I understand the frustration. All I was saying was that alot of what you're talking about (denying bourgeois business owners an income) was done at 3 pm yesterday before any rioting started. Downtown Oakland businesses closed up shop and started their evacuation at that time. However, what about the people who work in those businesses? What about the proletariat worker in the sandwich shop or sneaker store who can't earn a wage today because his/her place of employment is destroyed?

If all you can do is peacefully demonstrate, then go for it. Just don't expect to get much of a result. And, don't pretend that your method is morally superior or that other methods are not effective.

I'm not saying all we should do is protest peacefully. I would say that there is, however, a difference between constructive and destructive violence. Either way, I hope, as I said before, this isn't just a one off and can be channeled into something larger.

EDIT: As an aside, I will concede what Jimmy Higgins will probably argue, that most of the violence was instigated by the police tactic of trying to compress the demonstration into one block. When the cops did that, they provoked hostility from a crowd that was by and large peaceful up to that point.

Os Cangaceiros

9th July 2010, 22:40

Personally I think that the message should be sent that you can't murder a member of the community and expect people to just take it. And yes, sometimes violence is a very good way to send that message, especially when you're being completely ignored by the establishment; for example, the massive banlieue riots in France in 2005.

However, every situation is different.

Animal Farm Pig

9th July 2010, 23:22

Great photos, Jimmie. Really inspiring!

I want to apologize for the previous post calling peaceful non-violence protest a liberal fetish and implying that peaceful protester are self-righteous. They were rude comments, and I shouldn't have said them. We're all on the same side about the results that we want. Questions of strategy and tactics are always worth debating; debating helps develop the work. Insulting people posting here was uncalled for and not productive. I'm sorry.

Mari3l:

I won't deny that civil disobedience takes courage. I can't engage in it for the same reason I can't throw rocks. Not having health insurance also makes me hesitant to allow the police to demonstrate their brutality. If you and your comrades can afford to get beat up and arrested, and you're willing to do it, good on you.

We disagree on whether the property destruction was a good idea. You think it discouraged other activists from showing up while not being effective. I think you're right about the first part. Where we disagree is on whether or not it had an effect.

You're closer to the situation than I am, but what I can hear from here makes me think it was effective. I've heard about closed shops and people avoiding the area. I think this a good effect. From what I've seen of local politics in many places where I've lived (including Oakland), the local business community is a very powerful force in local politics. They are the ones with a lot of influence.

So, I think it's a good idea to convince local business that they don't want this to happen again. I think, breaking windows and hurting the bottom line is a good way to do it.

Maybe we could also appeal to the conscience of the people with power and influence, but I just don't think it will work. I used to live near International & Seminary. Walk around there some time and talk with the people in the neighborhood. If the people running Oakland had any conscience, they would have been working a lot harder to get rid of the misery in that neighborhood. Maybe I'm too pessimistic, but that's how I see it.

praxis:

I think we fundamentally agree.

I went too far when talking about peaceful protest before. I think you're right to identify frustration as the important thing. When you want something so badly and you've been so frequently ignored, denied, intimidated, and, well, frustrated... well, what is anyone supposed to do?

As far as closed businesses go-- I'm guessing that they were closed because people expected there to be disturbances. I doubt they would have closed if everyone expected a totally peaceful outcome. Think how many frappucinos Starbucks could have sold to peaceful protestors. :)

The income that workers lost is regrettable. When I think about this, I think about picket lines. A strike is a conflict between the workers and the boss, but a picket line is not. A picket line is one group of workers preventing another group of workers (scabs) from working. It's not a great situation, but well, I think it's necessary sometimes.

Ele'ill

9th July 2010, 23:51

I think the entire situation, once it's finished its full rotation, may lead to the new ideas I'm talking about.

praxis1966

9th July 2010, 23:54

praxis:

I think we fundamentally agree.

I went too far when talking about peaceful protest before. I think you're right to identify frustration as the important thing. When you want something so badly and you've been so frequently ignored, denied, intimidated, and, well, frustrated... well, what is anyone supposed to do?

As far as closed businesses go-- I'm guessing that they were closed because people expected there to be disturbances. I doubt they would have closed if everyone expected a totally peaceful outcome. Think how many frappucinos Starbucks could have sold to peaceful protestors. :)

The income that workers lost is regrettable. When I think about this, I think about picket lines. A strike is a conflict between the workers and the boss, but a picket line is not. A picket line is one group of workers preventing another group of workers (scabs) from working. It's not a great situation, but well, I think it's necessary sometimes.

I think you're right, by and large, that we do agree on some fundamental levels. I think this is just really emotional for a lot of us, especially those of us who are close to what's going on.

And it's a difficult thing, treading the fine line mentally between, "Well, the businesses are already shut down so we've proved our point," early in an evening like last night and then getting caught up in what's going on around you later on. It's something I definitely can't be moralistic about in light of the circumstances.

As for the last paragraph I tend to agree with you. All the more reason to agitate and organize for a united proletariat so the issue of scabs is moot!

Ele'ill

10th July 2010, 00:26

So, I think it's a good idea to convince local business that they don't want this to happen again. I think, breaking windows and hurting the bottom line is a good way to do it.

I mentioned the issue of those businesses having insurance earlier. Does anyone know how their insurance works? In the event that it covers intentional damages the percentage is likely fiscal year to fiscal year. I don't think it hurts the bottom line at all.

The goal of an organizer is to get people involved. We don't have the kind of numbers to bring about genuine social change and the tactics being used to fight for social justice are on one side ineffective and on the other side extreme and unapproachable from the outside.

If there were an actual revolution- assuming it would be an armed one to an extent and assuming it perhaps was not completely autonomous and that there was a militant hierarchy of some sort- we would not expect the new gals and guys to be able to competently launch a guerrilla raid on target X. This is what's happening in the streets at various actions- we want more people to stand with us but at the same time we're using tactics that they are uncomfortable with and perhaps don't fully understand. I'm talking about anarchists that don't want to march in a bloc because the tactics used increase arrestability by a huge percentage. They're not peace activists either and they don't disagree with property destruction they disagree with the timing and the targets.

Honestly, here where I live I'd like to see a large demo with a whole lot of noise (which is insanely possible) without the tactics that make 3/4 of the bloc take off down a side street because they know that the police-which often out number the demonstrators will likely arrest them- the innocent simply because they can and don't really give a shit who they nab. This usually leaves like 10-15 people totally exposed in the middle of the street or where ever.

Autonomy isn't good enough we need intelligent autonomy.

Wolf Larson

10th July 2010, 01:38

I don't want to turn this thread into a debate on property destruction so I stress that any responses be entirely based on property destruction tactics and how they directly relate to this specific situation.

Violence doesn't just involve hurting someone (yes it does)- I don't want to copy the definition in here but I believe that's what it is. I ultimately think this is irrelevant for this discussion.

Property destruction turns a lot of people away from street marches- this doesn't just result in low numbers of people who, while in the streets would meet people and exchange ideas, but ends up making large numbers of people feel like the social issue being violently demonstrated against isn't their fight. They simply feel like they don't fit in.

I have noticed at various events that many of the people involved in property destruction have an elitist attitude that proclaims they only need themselves and others that are willing to jump on their bandwagon.

It breaks down the architecture of demonstration.

I don't by any means think violence is called for as far as sparking a revolution at this point. No way no how....but....when the system becomes so obviously racist and one sided I think property damage, at the least, is not something I would condemn. I don't condemn the people who took part in the LA riots (the racist violent ones yes) and I don't condemn the people who broke some windows in Oakland.

It's not only African Americans who get beat up, falsely imprisoned and murdered by police. Police in this country are and have been out of control since day one.

Have you ever read or seen video on the Stanford Prison Experiment? A badge and a gun = hierarchy gone wild. We need, if cops within the capitalist system are going t be around for a while, a better way to police the police. Until that happens I'm sure a whole bunch of poor capitalists will have their windows broken :) It will happen again. Just a matter of time. It happens all the time only difference is if it's on tape or not.

EDIT:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJKbDz4EZio

Jimmie Higgins

10th July 2010, 01:38

Oh, here's one my friend took the next morning (that's today - damn, last night seems like a week ago now) - note the media covering the charred and burnt remains of Oakland.:laugh:

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs087.snc4/35727_1515698218616_1419276766_31351207_7270658_n. jpg
I love that tag by the way: "Involuntary Property Destruction".

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs152.snc4/36952_1515700218666_1419276766_31351213_1736556_n. jpg

Awww... don't they look disappointed that they were sent all the way to downtown to cover the "devastation"... er, I mean some people cleaning up several broken windows and about as much graf as appears over a weekend in Oakland anyway.

A power-washer won't brink Oscar Grant back.

Anyway this isn't to make a comment about the debate here on the virtue or non-virtue of property destruction, just to highlight the crazy media attention to a broken window vs. systemic police violence and racial profiling.

Delenda Carthago

11th July 2010, 08:35

The idea of some(few) people in here opposing the idea of a riot because it doesnt make "justice" easier,I dont get it.

Are you expecting the system to judge itself?A cop killing a young black poor male was not an accident,it was the essence of the system.And even if the head of the system was to hit the hand of it,just to keep the social peace,would you be happy with that?

Fuck a jury and fuck their law system.Justice for people to revolt.

this is an invasion

11th July 2010, 08:38

Delenda Carthago

11th July 2010, 11:52

Do anarchists in Greece know about the Oscar Grant shit in California?
no,not really.The media dont even mention it and we kinda are in our own thing with the crisis,so not much time and energy is left to spent on international issues.I m gonna make a post on athens.indymedia if i can find a full article about the situation and some pictures maybe.

Fietsketting

11th July 2010, 12:10

Nonviolence is an inherently privileged position in the modern context. Besides the fact that the typical pacifist is quite clearly white and middle class, pacifism as an ideology comes from a privileged context. It ignores that violence is already here; that violence is an unavoidable,
structurally integral part of the current NONVIOLENCE IS social hierarchy; and that it is people of color who are most affected by that
R ACIS T
violence.

Pacifism assumes that white people who grew up in the suburbs with all their basic needs met can counsel oppressed people, many ofwhom are people of color, to suffer patiently under an inconceivably greater violence, until such time as the Great White Father is swayed by the movement's demands or the pacifists achieve that legendary "critical mass."

Nonviolence declares that the American Indians could
have fought off Columbus, George Washington, and all the
other genocidal butchers with sit-ins; that Crazy Horse, by using
violent resistance, became part of the cycle of violence, and
was "as bad as" Custer. Nonviolence declares that Africans could
have stopped the slave trade with hunger strikes and petitions, and that those who mutinied were as bad as their captors; that mutiny, a form of violence, led to more violence, and, thus, resistanceled to more enslavement. Nonviolence refuses to recognize that it can only work for privileged people, who have a status protected by violence, as the perpetrators and beneficiaries of a violent hierarchy.

Fietsketting

11th July 2010, 12:11

Nonviolence is an inherently privileged position in the modern context. Besides the fact that the typical pacifist is quite clearly white and middle class, pacifism as an ideology comes from a privileged context. It ignores that violence is already here; that violence is an unavoidable, structurally integral part of the current NONVIOLENCE IS social hierarchy; and that it is people of color who are most affected by that violence.

Pacifism assumes that white people who grew up in the suburbs with all their basic needs met can counsel oppressed people, many ofwhom are people of color, to suffer patiently under an inconceivably greater violence, until such time as the Great White Father is swayed by the movement's demands or the pacifists achieve that legendary "critical mass."

Nonviolence declares that the American Indians could have fought off Columbus, George Washington, and all the
other genocidal butchers with sit-ins; that Crazy Horse, by using violent resistance, became part of the cycle of violence, and
was "as bad as" Custer. Nonviolence declares that Africans could have stopped the slave trade with hunger strikes and petitions, and that those who mutinied were as bad as their captors; that mutiny, a form of violence, led to more violence, and, thus, resistanceled to more enslavement. Nonviolence refuses to recognize that it can only work for privileged people, who have a status protected by violence, as the perpetrators and beneficiaries of a violent hierarchy.

Put quite plainly, nonviolance ensures a state monopoly on violance.

this is an invasion

11th July 2010, 12:15

no,not really.The media dont even mention it and we kinda are in our own thing with the crisis,so not much time and energy is left to spent on international issues.I m gonna make a post on athens.indymedia if i can find a full article about the situation and some pictures maybe.

That would be awesome. I would be interested in seeing what Greek comrades have to say on this shit.

Jimmie Higgins

12th July 2010, 03:14

Nonviolence is an inherently privileged position in the modern context. Besides the fact that the typical pacifist is quite clearly white and middle class, pacifism as an ideology comes from a privileged context. It ignores that violence is already here; that violence is an unavoidable,
structurally integral part of the current NONVIOLENCE IS social hierarchy; and that it is people of color who are most affected by that
R ACIS T
violence.

While I agree that non-violence as a principle rather than one of many possible tactical stances to take in a situation is totally wrong, I don't know if it is that clear-cut to say that non-violence is always a privileged position.

The pacifists at the rally were arguing the opposite - they either bought into or were trying to push the idea that all violence was only "outside anarchist agitators" and that "this element" were rich and white and would have their rights respected more than the black people who would get caught up in the police response and their "parents would bail them out".

I don't agree with that argument at all and it was, I'm pretty sure, often coming from NGOs who were pressured by the city to "promote peace". It was a racially divisive "divide and conquer" tactic on the part of the city, in fact, but it was a convincing argument for many people in Oakland and so it needs to be considered.

Ele'ill

12th July 2010, 04:31

this is an invasion

12th July 2010, 06:27

I guess it comes down to how valuable a riot or the property destruction really is. I'm sure we can all imagine and think of some examples where property destruction had exceeded any viable insurance policy that a company might have (i.e. wiping a building from existence with fire) but this doesn't seem to be the trend.

The point of destroying a city isn't always to cause "monetary damage." The point of the Oscar Grant riots was to send a message to the city and to the OPD that if they keep murdering people, then there are going to be consequences.

Animal Farm Pig

12th July 2010, 07:15

So, putting oneself in the shoes of someone who is taking non-violent action, what would be the best tactical public position to take?

- "We deplore violence, etc. etc."
- "The violence is understandable, but we think the correct action is to... blah blah blah"
- "We support them totally and stand in solidarity, but we choose to act in a different way."

Maybe to say, "we deplore violence" is actually the best public position to take (even if it's not how you actually feel). It makes an easy media sound bite-- the others take more explaining. It's a safe position to take-- nobody in positions of power will object to that position. It may be an easier position to take in order to gain "moral authority."

What do you guys think?

Regardless of whether anyone is adopting a "non-violent" position for tactical reasons or out of genuine conviction, we should look at ways to prevent this difference in tactical ideas from dividing us.

We need to encourage solidarity. Yes, justice for Oscar Grant and ending the systematic police brutality in Oakland is important. It's really damn important. But, there are going to be other struggles coming in the future. It's better for future struggles if we're building strong links not creating divisions.

I sounds so easy to say "encourage solidarity", but we all know it's going to be fucking hard. There's no simple recipe for this. It will also be in the face of continuous action by the bourgeois state to divide us.

So, maybe this is something we should each think about and find ways to do. I'm meeting up with my comrades from Oakland next weekend, and we'll have a good discussion about this issue. I think it's probably good if those of you who are also in the area to speak with your comrades about this same issue. Just doing that is certainly not a solution, but it's a start.

this is an invasion

12th July 2010, 08:04

Animal Farm Pig

12th July 2010, 08:10

I would say some pretty strong bonds are being created by the anarchists and communists that rioted alongside hyphy kids and other Oakland youth. And I would say those bonds are being strengthened by all of the anarchists and communists that are working non-stop on prisoner support.

Awesome. How about links with the people who were arguing against violence?

this is an invasion

12th July 2010, 08:35

Awesome. How about links with the people who were arguing against violence?

If they "leave" the "movement" because violence was used by some people (not everyone, there were a lot of peaceful people), then they are essentially movement cops. These hypothetical people have chosen their sides. Do we really want people who aren't going to participate in a movement unless everyone follows their rules?

It's also important to look at the fact that a lot of the more "militant" non-violent people alienated themselves from everyone else by physically confronting people who were starting fires or breaking windows. These are not the sort of people that are on our team.

Of course, not everyone who preaches non-violence is alienated from the movement, and those that understand that the way people get down at these sorts of events is entirely personal choice are still probably strongly connected to the movement.

So, I'm not sure what you're trying to say. The people who argue against violence are not a homogeneous group. There are those that are still connected to the movement, and those that alienated themselves or were only looking to be managers and leaders of struggle. The latter are not the people we should be reaching out to and forming bonds with.

Paulappaul

12th July 2010, 08:41

I saw those videos - or wait, was that Seattle where the cop said: "I'm going to kick the Mexican off you"? Sorry, comrade, I'm such a Californian - everything becomes a rainy misty haze in my mind above Sacramento.

What's been going on in Portland?

Multiple murders and Cover ups by the same clique of police. Disappointment with the newly elected government at the same time of declining economy has made some a little moody towards their local government.

There's been a lot of community talking since and during but I have not seen a lot of action.

There hasn't been alot of change, but there is still action. It's an issue which thankfully hasn't faded away and was put at it's peak made was made a demand by the May Day marchers. Although some may not consider this action, the black bloc has lead a couple marches at which Riot Cops were called. If I remember correctly they "took" the street Aaron Campbell was shot on and were meet with Police. I've been to a couple of these and although it seems like the same crowd, it's growing significantly.

Jimmie Higgins

12th July 2010, 13:22

Of course, not everyone who preaches non-violence is alienated from the movement, and those that understand that the way people get down at these sorts of events is entirely personal choice are still probably strongly connected to the movement.

So, I'm not sure what you're trying to say. The people who argue against violence are not a homogeneous group. There are those that are still connected to the movement, and those that alienated themselves or were only looking to be managers and leaders of struggle. The latter are not the people we should be reaching out to and forming bonds with.Right - I think a lot of sincere people were swayed by all the pressure from the city, NGOs, churches and so on - all of whom are more interested in keeping their "access" to city government or funding and so on.

I think the ability of the city to do what they have been calling "community outreach" to NGOs and churches that created divisions in "the movement" shows that we were basically out-organized and politically out-flanked by the city. Unfortunately the coalition that came around after the killing fell into in-fighting and I think that helped the city to come in and influence some and intimidate others. So while the radicals as well as the NOI's Minister Keith have actually been really sharp on a lot of the issues that came up as well as re-focusing the attention back onto the killing rather than the so-called riot (what I now prefer to call the involuntary property destruction), the lack of organizing made the response to the liberals was scatter-shot and not focused enough to act as a counter-weight to some of the really overwhelming propaganda by the city.

IMO we should not be apologetic about the broken windows because WE should not be the ones being defensive in this matter, we're not the ones who killed someone! So we need to tell the city some basic Sociology 101: hey, we want peace too so you'd better stop letting cops get away with beatings and murder otherwise people tend to get angry. (This is part of the reason all the media and the city government scapegoated "outside agitators" - it was to divide the movement and also present the appearance that people in Oakland are not as mad as they are about this).

So I hope that while we still organize around the sentancing (and hopefully the arrests of the other cops from the BART platform) that we can take the connections we made already and start to do some grass-roots organizing so that people in Oakland can see that this can become more of a real movement based out of the community to keep pressure up. Grassroots organizing of this sort will show that radicals are not just riot tourists as the media made us out to be, but are sincerely committed to fighting systemic police racism whereas it is the liberal groups who are the real ones that have "their own separate agendas" that have nothing to do with ending racial profiling and police brutality.

Ele'ill

12th July 2010, 20:01

The point of destroying a city isn't always to cause "monetary damage." The point of the Oscar Grant riots was to send a message to the city and to the OPD that if they keep murdering people, then there are going to be consequences.

Consequences?

Like what?

If there's no monetary damages what was the consequence?

Cleaning up?

They'll pay some people minimum wage to sweep glass and remove paint all day long.

I'm not advocating peace. I'm advocating competent tactics.

Ele'ill

12th July 2010, 20:08

There hasn't been alot of change, but there is still action. It's an issue which thankfully hasn't faded away and was put at it's peak made was made a demand by the May Day marchers. Although some may not consider this action, the black bloc has lead a couple marches at which Riot Cops were called. If I remember correctly they "took" the street Aaron Campbell was shot on and were meet with Police. I've been to a couple of these and although it seems like the same crowd, it's growing significantly.

I've been to several of the marches, info demos etc. The riot cops that were called out most recently (like six of them) stood around looking bored.

Most of the marches have low numbers. (as in bloc'd up) and the street marches always end in unneeded arrest because of these low numbers.

I'd like to see less property destruction- in fact- no property destruction as to encourage new tactics and more importantly new bodies that want to march- shout- make noise and take it into the streets. They'd be willing to get arrested for walking in the street but not for 'fucking shit up'.

this is an invasion

12th July 2010, 21:13

Consequences?

Like what?

If there's no monetary damages what was the consequence?

Cleaning up?

They'll pay some people minimum wage to sweep glass and remove paint all day long.

I'm not advocating peace. I'm advocating competent tactics.

The consequence is is that people came together and fucked up downtown Oakland and looted shit. Just because stores have insurance policies doesn't mean they aren't fucking pissed that this happened. Riots look very bad for a city's government. Plus, those in power are always going to be afraid of people organizing and mobilizing themselves against the police, the city, or fuck ups made by either one.

Ele'ill

12th July 2010, 22:01

The consequence is is that people came together and fucked up downtown Oakland and looted shit. Just because stores have insurance policies doesn't mean they aren't fucking pissed that this happened.

'fucked up downtown' but not really because it will be replaced quickly and there were no monetary damages because of the company's insurance. Perhaps some of the employees were pissed or scared or happy- who gives a fuck- the CEO's don't care- they're infinitely more afraid of competent organizing.

People coming together to work towards something is great but what they're doing isn't making any difference at all in regards to movement. It can and has gotten a lot of people arrested and charged with fairly steep charges.

A lot of people that have faced police repression their entire lives don't want to be in a situation where there's going to be violence and police. They're going to be a million miles away. We saw this in Pittsburgh at the g20 summit.

Riots look very bad for a city's government.

Look bad to who? The population? The people that don't immediately feel sympathy for the police and other people in power will take the liberal stance and 'vote better next time'.

Plus, those in power are always going to be afraid of people organizing and mobilizing themselves against the police, the city, or fuck ups made by either one.

That wasn't a mobilization against the police, or the city it was smashing shop windows of corporations that were allowed into that community by an economic development commission.

Nobody is afraid of that- what they're afraid of are the things you said happened but didn't- actions against police and the city. Direct action against the State.

.

this is an invasion

12th July 2010, 22:36

'fucked up downtown' but not really because it will be replaced quickly and there were no monetary damages because of the company's insurance. Perhaps some of the employees were pissed or scared or happy- who gives a fuck- the CEO's don't care- they're infinitely more afraid of competent organizing. Monetary damages aren't everything, bro.

People coming together to work towards something is great but what they're doing isn't making any difference at all in regards to movement. It can and has gotten a lot of people arrested and charged with fairly steep charges. And bonds are being created between the anarchists that are working non stop on prisoner support and those people that got arrested. This sort of stuff builds credibility of revolutionaries in working class communities. Movements take time and energy to build. They don't just spring up as soon as there is something to organize around. I think some very solid first steps have been taken.

A lot of people that have faced police repression their entire lives don't want to be in a situation where there's going to be violence and police. They're going to be a million miles away. We saw this in Pittsburgh at the g20 summit.

Look bad to who? The population? The people that don't immediately feel sympathy for the police and other people in power will take the liberal stance and 'vote better next time'.

That wasn't a mobilization against the police, or the city it was smashing shop windows of corporations that were allowed into that community by an economic development commission.
The OPD is an extremely heavy handed police force and police brutality happens all the time. People who live in Oakland know this. Do you think people are going to want to open businesses in downtown Oakland if there is the possibility of a riot or some other sort of community response every time a cop fucks up?

Nobody is afraid of that- what they're afraid of are the things you said happened but didn't- actions against police and the city. Direct action against the State.

If the city isn't afraid to some degree of rioting, then tell me why there was so much effort and energy spent by the City of Oakland to call for peace and to divide the movement.

Ele'ill

12th July 2010, 23:19

Monetary damages aren't everything, bro.

It amounts to nothing- sis.

And bonds are being created between the anarchists that are working non stop on prisoner support and those people that got arrested.

Prisoner support as in the people that got arrested? Or other not directly related prisoner support like books to prisons etc..?

Because they're not building credibility by supporting prisoners that were arrested breaking shop windows which we've sort of established is a useless tactic due to lack of other evidence.

This sort of stuff builds credibility of revolutionaries in working class communities. Movements take time and energy to build. They don't just spring up as soon as there is something to organize around. I think some very solid first steps have been taken.

Yes, they do. They also take diversity of tactics and solidarity.

I'm unaware of other organizing going on in Oakland- I'm sure there's good stuff being done. I disagree with the property destruction tactics and think they're useless.

The OPD is an extremely heavy handed police force and police brutality happens all the time. People who live in Oakland know this. Do you think people are going to want to open businesses in downtown Oakland if there is the possibility of a riot or some other sort of community response every time a cop fucks up?

So it's about forcing businesses to close? I promise you that the riots are not going to happen frequently enough to make this tactic sustainable. It's going to fail and you can bet at the first opportunity most of California's police will be on call for riot duty. Rioting isn't solving the problems of police violence which is what this particular struggle is about.

If the city isn't afraid to some degree of rioting, then tell me why there was so much effort and energy spent by the City of Oakland to call for peace and to divide the movement.

Because they're afraid of the unknown. There is, at every demonstration and especially the ones based around very emotional and recent issues a fear of that unknown element.

It was also a likely PR campaign to keep the issues blurry.

And again- they were likely afraid of direct action against the state.

I like seeing those mother fuckers get smashed as much as anyone but it isn't an affective tactic. There needs to be more done in conjunction with it- or cut it out all together.

this is an invasion

13th July 2010, 06:44

Prisoner support as in the people that got arrested? Or other not directly related prisoner support like books to prisons etc..?

Because they're not building credibility by supporting prisoners that were arrested breaking shop windows which we've sort of established is a useless tactic due to lack of other evidence. No, all that's happened is you've said that you don't think they are a useful tactic. You continue to ignore the fact that people don't like to have their shit smashed regardless of whether they have insurance or not. The city does not want to have downtown smashed either. It's called living in a world that places property above humanity.

Yes, they do. They also take diversity of tactics and solidarity.

I'm unaware of other organizing going on in Oakland- I'm sure there's good stuff being done. I disagree with the property destruction tactics and think they're useless. Yes they do. No one is denying this. No one is saying that people can't use non-violent civil disobedience to shut down the city either. The only inter-movement violence that happened in Oakland was either people that were against smashing windows and loot physically confronting those smashing windows and looting (i.e. movement cops) and the few kids that believed the hype about "outside agitators." Not once was there any attempt by those looting and smashing windows to force people who weren't doing that to participate.

So it's about forcing businesses to close? I promise you that the riots are not going to happen frequently enough to make this tactic sustainable. It's going to fail and you can bet at the first opportunity most of California's police will be on call for riot duty. Rioting isn't solving the problems of police violence which is what this particular struggle is about. No it's about creating a movement that is capable of responding to attacks on working people, be they physical, political, or economic.

Because they're afraid of the unknown. There is, at every demonstration and especially the ones based around very emotional and recent issues a fear of that unknown element.

It was also a likely PR campaign to keep the issues blurry.

And again- they were likely afraid of direct action against the state. They're afraid of this becoming a continual and sustainable thing. "Direct action against the state" is a goal, obviously. But do you honestly suggest that this sort of thing is even remotely possible on a large scale with the level of organization that is currently in Oakland and the greater Bay Area?

I like seeing those mother fuckers get smashed as much as anyone but it isn't an affective tactic. There needs to be more done in conjunction with it- or cut it out all together.Then do it.

Look, property destruction is going to continue to happen whether you like it or not. Hopefully looting will become common place now, too, once people see how easy and possible it is. So what people like you are left with is either working within this situation to either join in or organize your own tactics along side property destruction, or denounce popular tactics and essentially be a movement cop.

Ele'ill

13th July 2010, 16:47

No, all that's happened is you've said that you don't think they are a useful tactic. You continue to ignore the fact that people don't like to have their shit smashed regardless of whether they have insurance or not. The city does not want to have downtown smashed either. It's called living in a world that places property above humanity.

So then it's about pissing people off.

The people that might possibly be pissed off aren't the ones calling the shots it's the store owners that see it happen. You can rant and rave all day about owners and managers but that isn't what the 'riot' was about and it isn't an affective tactic to break something that will be replaced.

The threat they see in anarchism isn't the broken windows it's what comes after people realize that breaking windows isn't a tactic worth using. They're afraid of movement within the left and the new tactics it will bring.

Yes they do. No one is denying this. No one is saying that people can't use non-violent civil disobedience to shut down the city either. The only inter-movement violence that happened in Oakland was either people that were against smashing windows and loot physically confronting those smashing windows and looting (i.e. movement cops) and the few kids that believed the hype about "outside agitators." Not once was there any attempt by those looting and smashing windows to force people who weren't doing that to participate.

It puts people at a greater risk of arrest. People don't want to get arrested for being around property destruction because they realize it's a useless tactic that serves no purpose other than a feel good elevation of self importance. They don't feel connected to the movement if they can't relate to the tactics being used.

No it's about creating a movement that is capable of responding to attacks on working people, be they physical, political, or economic.

It isn't movement. It's not going anywhere- it's not escalating in impact and it isn't going to be a sustainable tactic.

They're afraid of this becoming a continual and sustainable thing. "Direct action against the state" is a goal, obviously. But do you honestly suggest that this sort of thing is even remotely possible on a large scale with the level of organization that is currently in Oakland and the greater Bay Area?

It is as possible as petty property destruction and would make way more of an impact.

To be honest the current property destruction in the united states reminds me of a 15 year old going to his/her room and breaking their ipod.

Then do it.

No.

Look, property destruction is going to continue to happen whether you like it or not. Hopefully looting will become common place now, too, once people see how easy and possible it is.

Not enough people are going to get turned onto this idea for any of these tactics to become a vehicle for movement. There is a difference between doing something and movement.

They're going to set anarchist movement back once the media runs their smear campaigns and does a better job of community organizing (albeit organizing that's false and based on trickery and lies) and you'll still be left with the majority of the population fed up with the same exact things that you are but they won't understand the in depth theory regarding why you loot and burn.

So what people like you are left with is either working within this situation to either join in or organize your own tactics along side property destruction, or denounce popular tactics and essentially be a movement cop.

As far as I'm concerned the only people playing cop are the anarchists that advocate 'diversity of tactics' but then create an atmosphere at every single demonstration of panic and fear.

People shouldn't have to have a super high arrestability in order to demonstrate and that's exactly what happens when people start breaking windows. Know what happens when a city gets locked down by successful organizing and then people use property destruction as a tactic?

The people that are locked down- most likely the actual organizers of the lock down get charged with the whole deal.

Inciting a riot- conspiracy to criminal mischief or whatever the charges will be.

Who gets off? The assholes that broke a bunch of already paid for and replaced windows and ran.

Diversity of tactics doesn't mean use lots of tactics it means think about how your own tactics are going to affect everyone else around you.

this is an invasion

14th July 2010, 10:14

di·verse [dih-vurs, dahy-, dahy-vurs] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
of a different kind, form, character, etc.; unlike: a wide range of diverse opinions.
2.
of various kinds or forms; multiform.

Seems like "diversity of tactics" does, in fact, mean "lots of tactics."

I'm not sure what demonstrations you've been to, but at every one I've been to anarchists haven't created an atmosphere of panic and fear. Cops usually do though, regardless of the demonstration being violent or not. And to be fair, I don't see what this has to do with Oakland, since it was just regular ass Oakland kids that started smashing windows and throwing shit at cops.

You're being a total wiener right now. If people shut down a city, they are going to be arrested whether other people smash windows or not. It seems like the only person here that is against diversity of tactics is you, because every time a window gets smashed your throw a little fit. "No, guys! You need to do it this way." You can either figure out ways for lock downs and such to exist along side riots (not necessarily at the same time or place) and contribute to actual diversity of tactics, or be a whiny cop. It's up to you, bud.

P.S. Looting has been a pretty popular "tactic" in past struggles. Jus' sayin'.

P.P.S. If the assholes who broke a bunch of windows and looted some sick ass shoes are the ones not getting arrested, and the people doing boring ass, activist ass, privileged ass lock downs are getting arrested, what does that say about who's doing something right?

Ele'ill

14th July 2010, 22:35

You're being a total wiener right now. If people shut down a city, they are going to be arrested whether other people smash windows or not.

The difference is what the tactic actually accomplishes and if it actually accomplishes anything.

It seems like the only person here that is against diversity of tactics is you, because every time a window gets smashed your throw a little fit. "No, guys! You need to do it this way." You can either figure out ways for lock downs and such to exist along side riots (not necessarily at the same time or place) and contribute to actual diversity of tactics, or be a whiny cop. It's up to you, bud.

To comment on my point of 'diversity of tactics'- You can't have a diversity of tactics that don't complement each other or generally accomplish a similar goal as 'diversity of tactics' is a tactic in itself to accomplish a goal. I don't think petty property destruction is the same as direct action against the state just the same as how sitting and 'occupying' a public park during a demonstration isn't the same as locking down an intersection.

I really hope you get what I mean.

P.P.S. If the assholes who broke a bunch of windows and looted some sick ass shoes are the ones not getting arrested, and the people doing boring ass, activist ass, privileged ass lock downs are getting arrested, what does that say about who's doing something right?

Not right, wrong.

Lock downs and occupations of key locations are valuable tactics- when I'm criticizing property destruction I'm talking about oakland in particular.

I'm going to go ahead and try to find a point to agree on with you because I don't like disagreeing on the same things over and over again.

As an anarchist I don't like people only associating me with broken windows and general vandalism. That's what members of the community currently think. What else can be done to erase this idea?

I enjoy seeing symbols smashed- I won't do it for several reasons- a couple reasons I already listed in this thread. The issue I've had is it becomes impossible to organize anarchists to have marches, demos and actions that don't involve the same tactics.

I'm not a peace activist by any means but it would be nice to have other seasoned anarchist organizers organize 'events' for people that want to avoid property destruction for the time being- lots of drums and banners and horns and fireworks (that are legal and harmless) and maybe some torches- take to the street on a busy night and dont' touch the windows.

Perhaps this is mainly where my position is coming from or coming from - from where this conversation has led us.

Rusty Shackleford

20th July 2010, 23:24

Well, the most recent event involving the Oscar Grant case is that of a pro mehserle rally.

WALNUT CREEK, CALIF. — Dozens of people rallied Monday in support of a white former transit officer convicted of killing an unarmed black man on an Oakland train platform.
The emotional display brought an outcry from hundreds of counter-protesters upset that Johannes Mehserle was convicted of involuntary manslaughter instead of murder in the death of 22-year-old Oscar Grant on New Year's Day 2009.
Authorities in Walnut Creek, an affluent suburb about 15 miles east of Oakland, wore tactical gear as they stood watch over the dual demonstrations.
Both factions initially waved signs and hurled insults across metal barriers. Counter-protesters soon crossed the barriers, sparking face-to-face staredowns and shouting in the street.
Police Chief Joel Bryden said no injuries or violence were reported as the confrontation ended peacefully.
"I have no shame being out here," said Tiffany Maldonado, 21, of Hayward, who joined others in showing support for Mehserle.
She carried a sign that read, "Can we all just get along? Justice was served," an apparent reference to Rodney King's comment after the acquittal of four police officers in his beating sparked riots.
"I'm not saying what he (Mehserle) did was right, but he said it was an accident and he said he was sorry," Maldonado said.
A Los Angeles jury earlier this month found the 28-year-old Mehserle guilty of involuntary manslaughter for fatally shooting Grant on the Bay Area Rapid Transit platform. Mehserle could face a sentence of 14 years in prison in November.
Prosecutors had pushed for a murder conviction. The verdict on the lesser charge sparked a wave of protests in downtown Oakland, resulting in damage to businesses and dozens of arrests.
On Monday, Mehserle supporters carried signs that read, "Mercy for Mehserle" and "Mehserle is Not a Monster."
"He made a tragic mistake under tremendous pressure," said Mike Di Lorenzo, 47, of Concord. "He will pay the penalty and his family and the Grant family will suffer for the rest of their lives."
Counter-protesters carried placards that read, "Justice for Oscar Grant" and chanted, "Murder is murder is murder!"
Cat Brooks, a member of the Coalition of Justice for Oscar Grant, shook her head, bewildered by the support for Mehserle.
"Our intention was to come out here and hold up signs and make the people that organized this rally understand that this is a slap in the face," she said.
Joe Avila, 39, a veteran police officer in Richmond, was surprised there was some civil dialogue between the factions.
"I hope that we can find that common ground, someday," Avila said.
The former officer's father, Todd Mehserle, attended the demonstration but declined to comment.
Monday's rally was a sharp contrast to the violent protests that rocked Oakland after Grant was fatally shot 19 months ago.
Mehserle's trial was moved from Alameda County to Los Angeles because of racial tensions and concerns about whether an unbiased jury could be assembled in Oakland.

Read more at the San Francisco Examiner: http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/rally-supports-former-cop-in-train-station-killing-98748774.html#ixzz0uGQkoUtx

International ANSWER Coalition, RCP, ILWU, Souljah, BAMN and some other organizations were there. but those were the ones i at least talked to. i didnt see the ISO or IBT though.