After filing a Freedom of Information Act request with the Richmond Police Department for police training documents, Mo Karn received much more than expected in return: homeland security and crowd control guides that show how the police target protests.

The police filed for an emergency court order yesterday to prohibit Karn from publicizing any of the documents, which should never have been released. The cops’ reasoning? “Defendant Mo Karn is a known and admitted anarchist.”

The documents, however, have already been published online. And buried in the training guides are insights into three trends in law enforcement that have been occurring not just in Virginia, but nationally: the demonization of protest, the militarization of police, and turning local cops into “terrorism” officials.

The Demonization of Protest

The Richmond Police Department’s Emergency Operations Plan
includes a section on “civil disturbances.” While this sounds innocuous, “civil disturbances” are defined so broadly as to include what the police call “dissident gatherings.”

“The City of Richmond is a target rich environment” for antiwar protesters, the document says. And it warns that police and homeland security have reason to be increasingly concerned:

“Current training and intelligence reveals that protestors are becoming more proficient in the methods of assembly.”

Militarization of Local Police

Such a depiction of “assembly” (a First Amendment right) as a “disturbance” and a threat is all the more troubling when put in the context of the other police department guides. Richmond’s Crowd Management Operating Manual is for the police unit assigned to large protests (no experience required). Among the tools that the crowd management team are issued include riot shields, chemical agents, cut tools, helmets, body armor, cameras, video cameras, batons, gas masks, and a “mass arrest kit.”

Deputizing Local Cops as Counter-terrorism Officials

This militarization of local police is accompanied by another trend in law enforcement since September 11th: deputizing local cops to becoming “homeland security” and counter-terrorism officials. According to the Homeland Security Criminal Intelligence Unit Operating Manual, “The Richmond Police Department is under contract with the FBI to provide assistance through staffing, intelligence and equipment.” And one member of the homeland security unit is assigned to the Joint Terrorism Task Force.

The result? Documents like the Virginia Terrorism Threat Assessment. The 2009 document was created by the Virginia Fusion Center, of which the Richmond Police Department is part. Fusion centers are ostensibly designed to gather terrorism intelligence from multiple police agencies, and make us safer. In practice, they routinely label activists as “terrorists.” Among the “terrorist threats” identified in Virginia were animal rights activists, environmental activists, and anarchists.

According to the threat assessment, “The Virginia Federation of Anarchists has held two conferences in Richmond in November 2007 and January 2008″ and “Anarchist protesters at the International Monetary Fund in Washington, D.C. spilled over into Prince William County.”

Karn, meanwhile, wears her scarlet circle ‘A’ with pride, and has no problem being labeled an anarchist. The FOIA was submitted by the Wingnut Collective, a Richmond anarchist group, as part of their police accountability project.

In his court motion warning that Karn is an “anarchist,” Richmond’s Deputy Assistant Attorney Brian Telfair doesn’t allege the possibility of any violence or property destruction. Instead, he cites a blog post by Karn about acquiring government information through legal requests. The title? “FOIA Rocks!”

Twenty years ago today, Judi Bari and Darryl Cherney, two prominent Earth First!ers, were in Oakland protesting clearcutting. They had been on the road organizing Redwood Summer, a campaign to save old-growth forests inspired by the Freedom Summer of the civil rights movement.

Bari had already received dozens of death threats for her campaigning. She had drawn quite a bit of attention from opposition in the logging industry because of her effective organizing. As kp wrote in the Earth First! Journal recently:

She brought us lessons from her background as a labor organizer and analysis that helped evolve our radical thinking both philosophically and strategically.

The two were in Bari’s Subaru station wagon when a pipe bomb exploded underneath her, injuring Cherney and nearly killing her. Hours later, while Bari was still in Oakland’s Highland Hospital, local police arrested them and said they had knowingly transported the bomb—that they were responsible for their own bombing. Police dropped those charges weeks later, but this was just the beginning.

Bari and Cherney sued the police and the FBI, alleging false arrest, slander, and conspiracy. They said the government refused to follow any leads in order to smear them. In the opening statement of a two-month trial the prosecutor compared Bari and Cherney to domestic terrorists.

In 2004, fourteen years after the bombing, the federal government agreed to pay $2 million to settle the civil suit, and the city of Oakland agreed to a separate $2 million payment.

It might seem odd that I wanted to mark the 20th anniversary of such a violent and tragic event. I know that I write about plenty of depressing, negative news on this site, so why add to that?

This bombing should be a reminder, I think, of two things. The first is of how far corporations and law enforcement are willing to go in order to silence dissent. This buzzword “eco-terrorism” is often used alongside the word “violence,” but the violence has not flowed both ways. Environmentalists have been assaulted and killed, and they have not responded in kind; that is not the behavior of “terrorists.”

The second reminder is much more important. Experiencing a bombing like this, and surviving, must be a traumatic experience. On top of that, the victims were labeled terrorists and demonized in the press. Bari and Cherney, and all of Earth First!, had to deal with public relations attacks alongside the violent attacks, and through this their campaigns continued.

In this context, I think this is an anniversary worth celebrating, one of resilience and courage in the face of seemingly unrelenting violence and repression.

Police in Pittsburgh have been rolling out their new toys and dressing up like stormtroopers at the G20 protests. (Much more at Pittsburgh Indymedia).There have been reports of direct action in the streets, with activists rolling dumpsters into the paths of oncoming riot police and police pepper-spraying, beating, arresting, and surveilling activists. The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reports police following activists in unmarked cars, but that’s clearly not the full scope of what is going on right now in Pittsburgh.

Check out this video of two men in military fatigues grabbing an activist out of the crowd, throwing him into an unmarked car, and driving on through the lines of riot police.

I’ve reported previously on local police buying tanks, and an influx of “anti-terrorism” money being used to militarize local police departments. And in the RNC 8 case, police and attorneys used “anti-terrorism” resources and rhetoric to target protest organizers. It should be strikingly, undeniably clear by now that the lines between police and military have been completely eroded. The police have been militarized, the military is policing.

There is a reason police and military operations are separated. It’s the same reason that the foreign intelligence operations of the CIA are kept separate from the domestic intelligence operations of the FBI: Even if you believe that the tactics, violence, and black ops used abroad are justifiable, they have no place at home. They are incompatible with any semblance of a democracy.

The Denver police union made this shirt to commemorate the beating of DNC protesters.

The general myth about protest violence goes something like this: A small group of people, wearing black, were bent on causing chaos and police violence was required to protect the public. Ever heard that one before?

Or, this Star Tribune editorial after the RNC sums it up pretty well:

The show of [police] force was a reasonable response to the behavior and the threat posed by a relatively small number of rogue protesters who traveled to the Twin Cities for no other reason than to damage property…

Supporters of the police crackdown on protestors have cited search warrant applications for some of the home raids in Minneapolis—including a bookstore. The warrant includes a string of absurd, unsubstantiated claims, including that an unnamed “reliable source” of the FBI says that 21 heavy packages that a postman says he delivered “contained weapons to be used during the RNC.”

Turns out, attorneys say the boxes were full of vegan literature.
Perhaps they were for those “terrorist” vegan potlucks.

If you only rely on these “official” sources, and don’t both to question them, it could paint a picture of these protesters as “violent.” But check out what John Wise, a national editor for Fox News, had to say:

On September 4, the convention’s last night, Wise and a colleague left the Fox tent to cover a developing protest. He ended up moving back and forth over a series of bridges in downtown St. Paul, usually in response to police orders, shooting stills and video as police-launched weaponry detonated in the background. In the process, he formed a surprisingly good picture of the protesters. (“I’m not just trying to be some liberal journalist,” Wise tells the Phoenix, “but I did not see one protester get violent, break anything, throw anything at anybody, anything like that. People were wanting to get away, but that’s natural — they were scared.”)

Riot cops relax after beating protestors at the RNC.

But there are two key points that need to be remembered. First, leading up to protests like this, activists are demonized and branded as “extremists” and “domestic terrorists.” Fear is instilled in the general public and law enforcement. Second, local police are being militarized. They’re being outfitted like storm troopers with tear gas cannons, concussion grenades, and other weaponry.

So what happens when you get a bunch of cops hyped up on information about evil protesters and armed to the teeth? Well, check out the image at the top of this post. It’s a t-shirt made by the police union in Denver, celebrating the beatings of protesters at the DNC.

[Check out this video of police conduct at the DNC. And, on a more inspiring note, how the crowd responds when police shut down a lawful Rage Against the Machine concert.]

In some ways, the myth of protest violence is true. It is a small group of people, often from out of state, dressed in all black, that are bent on causing violence and destruction at these mass protests. And they’re called riot cops.

And now, your moment of Zen: Anyone want to try their hand at writing a caption for this photo of Peta pigs and, er, friends?

I’ll be on Portland’s KBOO 90.7 FM this morning (8am Portland time, 11am DC time) to talk about the police state showing its true color in Minneapolis this week at the RNC. There’s live streaming on the previous link (click in the top right corner of the KBOO page).

Hmm, if ya’ll see this in time you could even post a comment as you’re listening, if there’s something you think should be discussed…

News continues to come out of the Twin Cities and the Republican National Convention of what I can only describe as a police state showing its true colors. If you read this site regularly, you know I stay far away from language and descriptions like that, because I think it’s best to let the stories speak for themselves. But I’m at a loss of how else to describe this. Here as some of the highlights that the mainstream press has overwhelmingly ignored:

• Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com writes: “Protesters here in Minneapolis have been targeted by a series of highly intimidating, sweeping police raids across the city, involving teams of 25-30 officers in riot gear, with semi-automatic weapons drawn, entering homes of those suspected of planning protests, handcuffing and forcing them to lay on the floor, while law enforcement officers searched the homes, seizing computers, journals, and political pamphlets.” Here’s another wrap-up with a video interview of an attorney on the scene. Police claim the raids targeted protest “leaders.”
• Police raided what’s called the convergence space, a place with computer access, free food, and child care for out-of-town protestors. The raid took place while folks were having a group dinner and watching a video, with children. Police took laptops, schedules and 7,000 “welcoming guides” organizers would have distributed at protests.
• Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman was arrested while reporting about her two producers, who were arrested for “conspiracy to riot” while covering the RNC protests. An AP photographer was arrested at the same time. David Ake, an AP assistant chief of bureau in Washington, said, “Covering news is a constitutionally protected activity…Photographers should not be detained for covering breaking news.”
• Filmmakers who traveled from NYC to document, among other things, police conduct had video equipment seized when they came into town.
• Police raided the home of I-Witness video, whose video coverage exposed police abuse, and lying under oath, during the 2004 RNC. Eileen Clancy was able to write this as police swarmed the home: “We have locked all the doors…The police say that they are waiting to get a search warrant. More than a dozen police are wielding firearms, including one St. Paul officer with a long gun, which someone told me is an M-16.”
• Police raided and seized an Earth Justice bus, used to educate people about environmental sustainability. Check out the number of squad cars in this video.
• Even the local alt-weekly joined the scare-mongering leading up to the RNC, with a tongue-in-cheek “field guide” to the “deranged” people coming to town, including “eco-terrorists” (“Weapon of Choice: Their ability to chain themselves to stuff.”) To be fair, they also listed “FBI moles”.

What’s particularly disturbing is that the federal government and Joint Terrorism Task Forces have been instrumental in all of this. Minnesota Public Radio reported that the FBI was involved in the raids, and the Star Tribune reported that the raids were specifically “aided by informants planted in protest groups.”

You’ll remember that this is the same town where Joint Terrorism Task Forces were recruiting folks to infiltrate vegan potlucks. And you’ll also remember how the government has used “infiltrators” to instigate and provoke illegal activity, such as with “Anna” in the Eric McDavid case, among others.

The mass media have overwhelmingly ignored all of this, while repeating absurd “official” soundbites. Headlines that proclaim “Police hope violent St. Paul protests will end” ignore the simple, crucial facts that police have stormed homes, confiscated leaflets, confiscated cameras, arrested journalists, arrested attorneys, and more. Stories of “protestors turning violent” are quite Orwellian, considering police kicked in the doors of peaceful protestors, armed to the teeth.

How can there be any discussion about protestors (both legal and illegal) without this context? Considering the overwhelming, unconstitutional assaults by the police, I think protestors should be praised for being so restrained.

The purpose of all this, as we’ve seen time and again, is two-fold. The first, through the press, is to further the myth that if you protest the right way you have nothing to worry about. The mayor said it well: “To pick up a protest sign, that’s fine. If you’re here to pick up a brick or some other instrument, there’s a problem.” If people continue to believe lies like this, while ignore attacks on First Amendment activity, this government repression will continue unabated.

The second purpose, regardless of the myths people believe, is to instill widespread fear in anyone who might even consider taking action.

On that note, it’s inspiring to see how folks have responded. I’ll leave you with an excerpt from today’s press statement by the RNC Welcoming Committee

The actions taken yesterday prove that the tactics of intimidation, harassment, violent oppression, the snatching of specific individuals, and the profiling of activists will not stop committed people from taking to the streets for what they believe in and putting their bodies behind those convictions. These tactics were seen yesterday in the targeting of medical workers, journalists, legal observers, and the public. They are the same tactics used daily by police and governments around the world to terrorize and oppress those that they claim to serve…

The infrastructure that has been created for these actions with the help and support of the twin cities community has been amazing. 100′s of people in Minneapolis and St. Paul have opened their homes to 1000′s of protesters, Locals and newcomers have taken time off work and from their lives to cook meals, provide medical care, legal support, and transportation. We understand that it must be intimidating to see people organizing for themselves around the idea of mutual aid and solidarity, but in doing this we are actively creating the world we want to live in. This is work that we will continue to do for the rest of our lives.

What do you think? I know police response at big protests like this (WTO, FTAA, DNC/RNC) has often been extreme, but is this above and beyond?

In yet another expansion of police powers since 9/11, the Supreme Court ruled this week that evidence obtained through illegal “no knock” police searches is still admissible in court. So cops don’t have to worry about following the letter of the law too closely in home raids, because even their illegal actions can still be used to land convictions.

The ruling is a big green light for cops to push the limits of their power even further, conducting ever more aggressive raids. And that’s something that, in this Green Scare crackdown on civil liberties in the name of fighting “eco-terrorism,” all activists should be worried about.

At first blush, this might all seem kind of trivial. I mean, why should we give criminals the courtesy of knocking on their doors, and giving them time to flush evidence down the toilet?

Because we don’t know they’re criminals, for one thing. A search warrant isn’t a guilty verdict. It just means that the cops have convinced the court they have reason to believe they would find evidence of a crime if they searched a location. It doesn’t mean that the evidence will be there, and it doesn’t mean that person is guilty of a crime. That’s for the courts to decide, not the cops.

Before this ruling, the “knock and announce” rule meant SWAT teams couldn’t just kick down a door, rifles in hand, and ransack a house. They had knock on the door, say “POLICE! WE HAVE A WARRANT!” (or other action-packed dialogue — you get the idea), and wait a reasonable amount of time for a response. Otherwise any evidence would get thrown out of court.

In 1995, the court made this part of what defines a “reasonable search” under the Fourth Amendment. Today’s 5 to 4 decision in Hudson v. Michigan flies in the face of that.

It’s a huge blow to checks and balances on police power. At the end of the day, cops want to look successful, they want their door-kicking to lead to a conviction. That’s why the “exclusionary rule,” as the courts call it, is pretty effective. It means that if cops don’t respect your rights, like the right to remain silent, any evidence they obtain will be excluded from court. This ruling, then, could be used to chip away at other Fourth Amendment protections.

Don’t get me wrong, I think there are plenty of bigger rights abuses by law enforcement out there than not knocking on a door. At the end of the day, though, ALL of our rights are crucial and should be defended, and we can’t let the government whittle away at them piece by piece.

Don’t think that will happen? Think again.

As Charles Lane wrote in The Washington Post:

Scalia argued that the law enforcement landscape has changed dramatically since 1961, when the Supreme Court first imposed an exclusionary rule on the states to protect against warrantless searches. Today’s police are more professional than those of 45 years ago, he observed, and there is “increasing evidence that police forces across the United States take the constitutional rights of citizens seriously.”

That’s so absolutely terrifying that I think it’s worth repeating: Supreme Court justices feel that basic Constitutional protections aren’t necessary because there is “increasing evidence that police forces across the United States take the constitutional rights of citizens seriously.”

In other words: trust us, you don’t need your rights, we’re the government, and only criminals have something to hide.

It’s times like this that I think we should be calling this “The Scare,” instead of the Green Scare, because every reasonable person in the United States should be very afraid of this reckless rollback of basic civil liberties and constitutional rights.