arch/ive/ief (2000 - 2005)

INTRODUCTION

A Disaster Waiting to Happen
Most of the reports, written about the WTO Ministerial in Seattle
have a few things in common.  They are written by administrators in
law enforcement.  They paint a picture of uncontrolled rioters,
hooligans and anarchists taking over the streets of a serene, well
managed town.  Their regrets are that the use of force could not have
been greater.

There's little or no mention of the fact that only a few dozen of the
50,000 or more of the demonstrators took part in any property
destruction whatsoever.  There's no mention of the fact that two
thirds of the delegates found the process at the Ministerial to be
undemocratic and refused to go along.  And there's no mention that
potentially lethal force was used on literally thousands of people
throughout the Ministerial - some of it hours before any of the famous
window breaking had taken place.

This report agrees that aspects of the Seattle Rounds of the WTO were
an unqualified disaster.  We choose to disagree with authors of these
other reports about what these aspects were and the reasons why.
 
At the core of what went wrong is the simple fact that the World Trade
Organization is one of the least democratic institutions that exist on
the planet.  It is attempting to create a world where the corporations
have unlimited powers - a world where the most basic protections on
health, safety, environment, workers rights, quality of life, can be
removed as "barriers to free trade."  

The WTO has sparked universal outrage from nearly all persons who
have attempted to look at its policies objectively, whatever their
political spectrum or station in life.   There is no reason it should
have been any different in Seattle.

Even before Seattle had been considered as the site for the Ministerial,
scores of Seattle citizens had met with the bulk of Seattle's elected
officials asking for condemnation of several WTO type policies - the
MAI and NAFTA.  

The response that took place in Seattle during the WTO Ministerial is
a direct result of the organization's undemocratic practices.  This is
the primary factor that defines the disaster that took place at the
Seattle Rounds.

A Showcase, But for What?
It was intended that the WTO Ministerial be a showcase.  It was.

It was a showcase for the heavy-handed tactics necessary to maintain
a few multinational corporations' vision of globalization.  

As a showcase, the Ministerial demonstrated the heavy-handed paramilitary
tactics necessary to keep a fundamentally undemocratic institution in
place. As a result of this undemocratic institution coming to Seattle:

Capitol Hill, the densest urban neighborhood North of San Francisco
was subjected to a paramilitary occupation.  There are reports of
residents being attacked by masked police in their restaurants,
businesses, front yards, and their homes, even when no demonstrators
were in sight.
 
Tens of thousands of people, some demonstrators and some bystanders,
were subjected to potentially lethal chemical exposure in what one
physician has deemed the largest ever experiment in chemical effects
on a modern civilian population.  

Many people suffered serious injuries from the use of "less-lethal"
weaponry.  Teeth were knocked out.  Eyes damaged.  Key Martin, a longtime
activist, who suffered from AIDs and Asthma, seems to have died as a
result of complications from the chemical agents used.  His death in
turn raises questions about the ability of certain physically vulnerable
people, such as those with AIDs or the elderly, to even attend political
demonstrations. 

The Seattle Ministerial was also a showcase for the greed that
organizations like the WTO and its allies create.   

The agencies responsible for bringing the Ministerial
to Seattle, and for supporting the WTO once here, quibbled
among themselves constantly, before during and after the Ministerial.
Law enforcement fought for turf - other agencies accusing the
Seattle Police of keeping the funds for themselves. When the
Ministerial became an unqualified disaster, the many corporate
"partners" and "citizens" distanced themselves from the disaster
they'd created.  The millions of dollars of support they'd
promised, vanishing into the ether, along with the careers of a
few politicians.

Perhaps the only ones to benefit were the manufacturers
of the "less-lethal" weapons, whose use was widely showcased,
and whose presence has become so much more pervasive in police
departments following the Seattle Ministerial. But because of
the continued misapplication of these weapons by ill-trained
officers, and the numerous civil suits arising form this event,
it is probable that even the weapon's manufacturers may
ultimately have lost the Seattle Round. 






CHAPTER ONE:
Historical Background of Corporate Hegemony

As seen by the recent Microsoft decision, the United States and the laws
created to serve its citizens have a fundamental conflict with the power
of unchecked corporate monopolies.  A lot of this goes back to the
beginning of the industrial revolution, when  many of the country's
largest fortunes were being formed. 

A little more than a hundred years ago, the owners of the same fortunes
that still dominate our economy fortunes were called "robber barons" by
the critics of their time.  Their greatest power grabs centered on the
building of the railroads.  During these times there were huge financial
scandals that involved funneling enormous sums of money into non-existent
projects.  There were also huge give-aways of land and the resources on
that land as part of the railroad construction.  This enabled the few
families who profited from the railroads' construction to build many
These new franchises included mining operations, timber companies, 
residential land developments and banks to finance these 
operations.  Look at the names of a few of the timber companies 
created during this time such as Georgia-Pacific and Louisiana-Pacific 
and the connection becomes obvious.  Families to profit 
from this included Morgans, Rockefellers, Vanderbilts and 
Mellons. The power of these corporations was enormous, and 
because of the increasing power of technology, unprecedented.  
Before the turn of the century, these corporations were
even granted legal status as human beings.   (See Robber Barons, 
Josephson; America’s Fifty Families, The Rich and the Super Rich, 
Lundberg; Railroads and Clearcuts Draffan)
 

Whether the proceedings are secret or open, however, the rules by which
panels make their decisions make it effectively impossible to uphold any
law that prefers environmental, human, or national concerns to trade.
First, in health and safety, under the WTO a country must prove that a
product is harmful before it can be restricted or regulated above minimum
international levels.   This is a complete reversal of the "precautionary
principle," which states that a product must be proved safe before it
may be introduced into society.  The precautionary principle underlies
the regulations of most technologically advanced countries, for the
simple reason that both the public and the scientific community are
well aware that the effects of newly developed pharmaceuticals, food
products, pesticides, and other chemicals can only be determined through
extensive study.  Yet, under WTO rules, a product may be developed and
immediately introduced, and may only later be banned or restricted if a
country can conclusively prove the existence of health or environmental
risks.  By then, of course, the worst damage may already have been done.

Second, products must be treated "equally" by a country's trade laws,
without regard for how or where the product was made or harvested.
This "equal protection for objects" means that the WTO does not allow
differentiation of products except on the basis of the product's gross
physical characteristics.  A tee-shirt made in a sweatshop or by child
labor is the same as one made by union workers.  Tuna caught in purse
seine nets that kill thousands of dolphins are the same as those caught
by methods that do not endanger dolphins.  The European Union and Japan
challenged, under the same theory, a Massachusetts law banning government
procurement of products made in Burma in protest of the Burmese government's
severe human rights abuses.  Economic sanctions against an inhumane
government, such as the sanctions against apartheid-era South Africa,
are not acceptable under the WTO regime.

Finally, even if a country is able to prove that a product is unsafe,
even if a product is shown to be somehow physically different due to
its method of production, the WTO Agreement requires that a country
use the "least trade-restrictive" means to accomplish its non-trade-related
(environmental, human rights, health and safety) purpose.   The danger
of this rule lies in its dependence upon the biases of the decision-maker.
For example, a requirement that all wooden crating be treated to eliminate
insect infestations will be trade-restrictive in a sense, in that
compliance will increase a supplier's costs.  If another method of
exterminating insect infestations is less effective, but cheaper,
the panel alone decides which is more important: providing a cheaper
method of compliance to the supplier, or allowing a more effective
method to minimize insect infestations.  As described above, the panel
members' inherent biases will tend to view trade concerns as more
important than human and environmental concerns.

The only outcome of such a process, implemented by such individuals,
can be the denigration of human and environmental rights and the assertion
of the primacy of money and objects.  The record of the WTO has borne
this out: since its creation, every environmental or safety-related law
reviewed by the WTO has been ruled WTO-illegal. 

Once a panel makes its decision, there are only two ways it may be
changed.  The losing country can appeal--which means a three-member
panel is formed to review the legal issues addressed by the original
panel.   Or, the decision can be overturned by the unanimous vote of
every member country of the WTO--including the country that won the
dispute.   It is not difficult to understand why no decision has ever
been overturned by that unanimous vote.

Once the decision has been made to subjugate human rights to trade,
all that remains is enforcement.  The losing country in a WTO dispute
has only three choices: change its laws in accordance with the
dictates of the panel pay monetary sanctions to the winning country,
or allow the winning country to impose retaliatory trade sanctions.
The danger to national sovereignty--and to democratic peoples in
particular--should become immediately clear.  Unlike an ordinary,
consensual international agreement, the WTO is empowered to dictate,
under threat of severe economic sanctions, how a member country should
change its laws that protect individuals, the environment, and social
cohesion.

What this means in practice is that any international corporation that
was prohibited from doing what might be reasonably considered a hazardous
practice anywhere on the planet, need only find the government of one
country to come forward and present a complaint on their behalf. 

Here's a hypothetical example of the way the WTO works to illustrate
this point.  Say the Standard Oil Company wants to ship oil into say
Puget Sound, in inexpensive, leaky boats.  At worst under our modern
judicial system, there'd be some semblance of accountability, a chance
they'd be barred.  If they weren't barred, there'd be a chance they'd
pay for some part of the damages.

Let's pretend the Standard Oil Company wanted to run leaky boats wherever
they wanted and not have to pay any clean-up costs.

Under WTO rules, all the Standard Oil Company would need to do is contact
a single corrupt, bankrupt dictator, and offer them a little bit of
business.  The corrupt, bankrupt dictator would then bring Standard
Oil's complaint before the WTO's secret tribunal.   The tribunal could
even be composed of people who worked as consultants for Standard Oil,
stockholders of Standard Oil, or others with a vested interest.  They
and they alone would then make a decision.  That decision would allow
enormous fines to be levied against any country that sought to either
prevent the Standard Oil Company from bringing it's leaky boats into
their waters, or tried to make Standard Oil pay for their clean-up costs.
The only way these fines could be removed is if every member country of
the WTO, including the country run by the corrupt and bankrupt dictator,
voted to do so.  

Obviously this one example is just scratching the surface of possibilities
under the WTO.  A business that produces a food prepared with dangerous,
carcinogenic, or poisonous chemicals can bring a similar challenge.  So
can a corporation that employs eight-year old children who work 20-hour
days who lived in cardboard boxes.  So can the manufacturer of flimsy
houses that tended to collapse or cars that tended to explode.  Under
the regulations of the WTO any protections against these or other
practices could be viewed as barriers to "Free Trade."  

In practice this has meant successful challenges to:
The U.S. Clean Air Act
Protections on Dolphins and Sea Turtles,  
Guaranteeing 30 day shelf life for meat
Banning hormone tested beef
Labeling of genetically modified food
Bans on asbestos. 

The WTO does include one nominal safety net called Article XX.
Nominally this contains "exceptions" that countries can use to try to
challenge a law that is considered a "barrier to free trade."  Article
XX is so ambiguously written that it is nothing more than window-dressing.
Despite the fact that it has been brought up by numerous countries,
including the United States, Article XX has never been used successfully
by any country. Not once. 

There is nothing necessarily wrong with the concept of economic sanctions.
As mentioned above, economic sanctions were an effective tool in pressuring
the South African government to give up its policy of apartheid.  As an
alternative to open military warfare, it is almost unequivocally preferable.
But sanctions for what objective?  The WTO is a system structured to: 
(1) view natural resources, human labor--all goods and services--as
interchangeable objects to be traded without regard for their origins; 
(2) value these goods and services solely in terms of money, without
regard for their human, social, or environmental values that are not
accurately represented by a monetary standard;
(3)  mandate the flow of these commodified goods and services according
to the sole dictates of the needs of international markets, even to the
extent of commodifying and stripping away the minimum natural resources,
human labor, and social goods necessary to maintain a local human community; 
(4) enforce its own point of view, system of values, and desire for
movement of commodified goods by altering local laws to its own taste,
and imposing economic penalties against communities with the temerity to
resist.

Under such conditions maintenance of even minimum levels of environmental
protection, human rights and safety, and social integrity is nearly
impossible.  A government may not act preventatively and take precautions
against unknown dangers; it may not differentiate between products made
under morally repugnant conditions from those made more humanely; and to
the extent it is permitted to act, or has managed to prove it has cause
to act, it may do so only if, in the sole judgment of a trade-focused,
trade-biased, unaccountable, unrepresentative WTO panel, it has used the
least trade-restrictive means.  Under the WTO, movement of commodified
goods is paramount; everything else is subordinate.  Any law that proposes
to make a value judgment on some standard other than strict monetary cost,
any standard relating to human rights rather than the monetary value of
objects and property rights, will be struck down as a non-tariff barrier
to trade.

Perhaps most ominous is that this has a preventative effect,
keeping much legislation from being written, because of the
justifiable fear that it will be found to be a "barrier to free
trade."

These are the issues that brought tens of thousands of people
to Seattle to protest the WTO Ministerial Meeting.  This is
why environmentalists, indigenous peoples, anarchists, labor
unions, social justice activists, and church groups all find
common cause against the WTO: because it threatens by the very
structure of its existence every aspect of the values that make
human beings and their relationship with the earth something
more than the dull collision of objects in a dead universe:
the inherent value of the ecosystems of the Earth, and the worth
of human beings for their qualities that cannot be bought
and sold.


CHAPTER TWO
Early Local Opposition to WTO Policies

Long before Seattle was officially being considered as
a destination for the WTO, members of the community were
meeting with elected officials and expressing their outrage with
it and the other institutions it was allied with.

In 1997, President Clinton had begun pushing the expansion of the North
American Agreement on Free Trade (NAFTA) and something called "Fast Track."
NAFTA was a "free trade" agreement among the North American nations that
allowed such things as large trucks with lower safety standards to drive
on our highways.  "Fast track" enabled the President to pass these
"trade agreements" unilaterally, limiting Congress's input to a simple
yes or no vote.   Concerned citizens who understood the implications of
this met regularly with their elected officials, including Congressman
Jim McDermett, who was to become a champion of the WTO. 

In the spring of 1998, the Organization of Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) met in Paris.  One of the most dangerous things
to have emerged from these meetings was the Multilateral Agreement
on Investment (MAI).  Similar to the WTO, the MAI was a 39-nation
agreement that eliminated local decision making and gave increased
rights to the world's largest corporations.  The only reason the
public became aware of the MAI was that concerned citizens in
Paris released the complete document of the MAI over the Internet.
If they hadn't, it might still be secret. 

Around the world, concerned citizens began to meet with their
elected officials, warning them of the danger of the MAI.
In Seattle, representatives of labor, environmental and other
public interest groups met with most if not all members of the
King County Council and the Seattle City Council.  The citizens
informed these elected officials of the loss of local control
the MAI would bring.  They also told the officials some of the
ways this loss of control would adversely affect the basic issues
of livability and quality of life.

Their efforts began to pay off.  In late October of 1998, five
members of the King County Council introduced and passed a measure
against the MAI.  King County Councilman Larry Gossett stated,
"local governments should have the right to set hiring goals for
women and minorities without the threat of foreign litigation
hanging over our heads.  Council member Brian Derdowski called
the MAI "NAFTA on steroids."  

Seattle City Council passed a similar ordinance opposing the MAI
in April of 1999 - mere weeks after Seattle was officially selected
as the site of the WTO Ministerial, and most members of the Seattle 
City Council were first officially notified of the WTO's impending visit.

The WTO was Brought to Seattle in an Undemocratic Manner

To all available evidence, the Mayor and others including the Seattle
Host Committee, who worked to bring the WTO Ministerial to Seattle,
sought to control negative publicity, by keeping the matter secret
until Seattle had been selected and locked in as the site.
According to a tentative time-line prepared by the Seattle City
Council's WTO review committee, most members of the Seattle City
Council were not aware of the impending visit until after it had
been locked in place.

Citizen groups that monitored "free trade" became aware of the
possibility of a Seattle Ministerial as early as November of 1998.
Concerned citizens recall meeting with Pat Davis and other staff
members of the Seattle Host Organization as early as February of 1999.
During those meetings, the citizens expressed concern over the same
types of issues they had concerning the MAI.

On August 30, 1999, the WTO came under official scrutiny.  Two
members of the King County Council, Rod McCenna and Chris Vance,
attempted to pass an ordinance welcoming the WTO.  They were met
by a broad coalition of labor, environmental groups, human rights
groups, animal rights public health and local small business advocates
who filled every seat in the chamber and overflowed into the halls.
Members of the Seattle community gave impassioned testimony
challenging the legitimacy of the WTO as an institution and the
wisdom of bringing this organization to Seattle. The first version
to pass the council by a vote of 7-4 deleted all references to fair
trade and merely welcomed the WTO as they would any other visitor.
On September 7, members of the council added amendments attempting
to correct the organization's unjust practices.  Five council members
felt these improvements didn't go far enough and still voted against it.  


CHAPTER THREE
THE STREETS OF SEATTLE

Seattle as a Model of a New Type of Warr
Some recent studies have come out pointing to the Seattle WTO Ministerial
as a prototypical example of what is being called "asymmetrical warfare."
According to these reports, "asymmetrical warfare" is the war of the future.
It's found in a world where nationalities are obsolete.  The many printed
analysis say the scope has shifted from wars between nations to warfare
between gangs and political factions.  Under asymmetrical warfare, wars
on crime, drugs, and political dissent are all lumped together under the
larger rubric of war.  Political dissent and revolution are looked at as
criminal acts based on opportunism.  The primary field of conflict is
urban terrain, or in plain English, cities. 

As Seattle is being held up as the prototype of this type of  "war"
incredible tactical, and even militaristic characteristics are being
attributed to the protesters.  This has led to justifications of
sophisticated weaponry against these protesters as the new norm.
As the protests that took place in Seattle are being held out as a
"new" type on a national level, it has led to law enforcement being
ever more ready to resort to heavy handed tactics and to use potentially
lethal force, when it is not called for.

What Happened and What Didn't
The first thing to come to mind for most people when they hear about the
WTO in Seattle are the demonstrations that took place in the street, and
the response they received from the police.

It is first worth noting that the majority of activities held by the
protesters consisted of peaceful demonstrations and well attended teach-ins.
The peaceful protests brought in tens of thousands of people, as did the
march on November 30.  The teach-ins were held by some of the world's
leading thinkers including Ralph Nader and Vandana Shiva. 
  
The most striking images to come out of the Seattle WTO Ministerial are
of heavily armored police.  Their faces are hidden behind gas masks and
protective shielding.  They carry bizarre, but very lethal looking weapons.
Ominous, hallucinatory clouds of smoke surround them.  

All around the armored figures, people are falling, their faces contorted
in expressions of pain and anguish.

There is a deeply ingrained human tendency to magnify the strength,
and power of one's enemy after a conflict.  It is the stuff of the most
primal myths, legends and stories of all cultures.  In the aftermath of
the Seattle WTO Ministerial, there have been innumerable accounts from
protesters and police of the invincible enemy that was fought and met on
the streets of Seattle.  Reports by Robert Oedenthal, the Emergency
Response Institute, McCarthy and Associates and the Seattle Police
Department describe the demonstrators of Seattle as a well disciplined
force, with lifetimes of tactical experience and flawless lines of
communication.  They regularly probed the police lines.  They reported
back their information to a central command.  Even the inane questions
posed by disoriented looking individuals were part of a larger plan to
outflank the police.

There are also economic and political reasons for the police consultants
to magnify the strength and organization of the demonstrators.  Law
enforcement is big business, and a tremendous growth industry at that.
Magnifying the capabilities of one's opponents is one way to insure a
continuing and healthy budget.

The accounts of the demonstrators as a hierarchical paramilitary
organization that run through these reports, is of course, absurd.

While the demonstrators were fairly well organized, many of the
organizers of the civil disobedience were young, in their teens
and early twenties.  Also, many of those who were spokespeople
and lead organizers, had never been to a large demonstration in
their lives.  Many of the different organizations that took part
in the demonstrations were only distantly aware of each other, and
even got in each other's way.  For example, members of the Independent
Media Center found it difficult to get to areas where police were using
force on demonstrators, because they couldn't cross the other demonstrators'
"human chains."

SPD at WTO: Too Many Weapons, Too Little Training
For the demonstrators, the dominant picture of the police is of an
efficient, paramilitary force.  In fact, the police at the WTO
Ministerial were under-trained, often green officers. SPD Assistant
Chief Joiner admitted at one meeting prior to the Ministerial that
about a third of the officers in the SPD had only been on the force
two years or less.  Most of these police had never been to a large
demonstration either.  

In Seattle witness accounts abound of police fumbling with their
weapons and receiving most of the impact themselves.  There are
stories of police fumbling with tear gas grenades in their heavily
gloved hands, dropping the grenades and gassing their own line.
There are accounts of volleys of tear gas being fired, only to have
the wind carry it back at the police.  There are accounts in the
police reports of numerous injuries to police officers, from misuse
of these weapons and ill fitting protective devices.  The police
afteraction (sic) reports lists police experiencing everything from
chemical burns to heart problems.

In some respects, the police were like the grunts in Viet Nam.  They
were put there to fight an unpopular war.  They were ill-equipped and
ill-trained.  The psychological toll on these officers was enormous.
After the WTO there are even anecdotal reports of officers on Prozac and
undergoing therapy.   Ultimately the police themselves became victims
of the dynamic created by the WTO. 

The Demonstrators' Actions Were Not a Surprise -
Inability to Gather Intelligence Was Not an Issue
One of the most constant refrains of the Politicians and law enforcement
personnel who led the preparations for the WTO Ministerial is that they
had no idea what was going to happen.   Often this has been blamed on
the inability of the police to gather intelligence.  This has been
blamed on an ordinance that prohibits the police from gathering
information without suspicion of criminal activity.  One constant
refrain is that this ordinance must be eliminated 

In fact, a large protest began to be planned as soon as Seattle was first
publicly designated as the site for the WTO Ministerial.  

As early as April, organized labor promised to deliver 50-100,000 people.
The stories of the upcoming demonstration appeared in the most official
news organs that exist in the United States including The Wall Street
Journal and The New York Times. Many began to predict that this would be
the protest of the century.

As the event moved forward many of the leading organizers began to call
for "shutting the WTO down."  Activists held training workshops in "direct
action."  These workshops were well publicized with articles appearing in
major news organs.   The activists communicated with each other over the
Internet, and set up web sites.  These web sites were open to all and read
by many.  Captain Jim Pugel of the Seattle Police Department makes reference
to monitoring these sites often and early in his reports.  Since Pugel was
one of the officers in charge, clearly the SPD was aware of this buildup.

Even with this much being acknowledged, the continued refrain is that these
police leaders, and politicians believed the calls for an actual shut down
of the WTO were just so much rhetoric.  This line loses all credibility when
you look at this section of an interview with Captain Jim Pugel in an online
newspaper for law enforcement officers:

"Before the conference, Seattle PD heard that they were going to "harden"
themselves with pipes and Kryptonite locks to form virtually immovable lines.
Here protesters place their arms in construction-grade metal devices called
"sleeping dragons."  Inside they affix their wrists with locks to pieces of
rebar, welded vertically within the pipes.  Thus a string of protesters can
chain themselves into a virtually a steel wall that is almost impossible to
easily break through.  (the commanding officer) says the protesters also were
expected to drive cars into intersections and puncture tires to obstruct
traffic and thus add to the stalemate." 

Clearly there were people who were not here merely to hold up signs
and chant slogans while the meeting they protested went on unimpeded.
Clearly the SPD knew this before the event.  Moreover the records show
that the SPD was never prevented from obtaining warrants by court order
and did in fact do so for the WTO. 

Those weighing in on the legitimacy of the ordinance may also want to
consider the way that agencies with less controls in these areas have
behaved.  Los Angeles Police for example, have frequently complained
about limits on their ability to gather Intelligence, (Vernon, 93-107.)
Yet the record shows a consistent pattern of abuse.  Mike Rothmiller,
a former detective with the Los Angeles Police Departments Organized
Crime Intelligence Division (OCID) claimed that LAPD used OCID to do
little more than track politicians and celebrities who were perceived
to be potential political problems.  (Rothmiller, L.A. Secret Police,
Simon and Schuster, 1992.)

There were other indicators of what might be expected at the Seattle
Ministerial.  For example the McCarthy report mentions that a member of
the International Association of Chiefs of Police placed the probability
of violence occurring at the Seattle Ministerial as 8.5 on a scale of 10.
(McCarthy 19.)    Though the details of the reasoning behind this have not
been made available to the writers of this report to review, other tools
may help us analyze what this response was based on.  

Dr. Karl Seger is the contract writer for the textbook used in the
terrorism counteraction course for the U.S. Army Military Police School.
Dr. Seger lists the following as the Number One factor for indicating that
a General Threat exists:

"Political - Unpopular, repressive or corrupt government."

In other words, bringing in an unpopular, undemocratic institution is
the best way to create a security risk.
(Seger, Antiterrorism Handbook, p. 90, Presidio Press. 1990.)


Highly Publicized Threats that Never Panned Out 
Things began to heat up as the event neared.  In the weeks and days
immediately before the Ministerial, there were scattered reports from
the Seattle Police of property damage.  

One pattern that seems to have emerged is the police identifying potential
high level threats that never panned out.  For example, the police reports
make several mentions of possible Molotov Cocktails.  Molotov Cocktails are a
crude homemade explosive, usually associated with the stereotypical Anarchists
of the 1920s.  For some reason, no actual Molotov Cocktails ever seemed to
have materialized from the Seattle Police.  Later during the protests, police
grew anxious when they found all the materials that could potentially have
been used for the construction of home made explosives missing from the shelves
of a Capitol Hill grocer - it turned out the grocer had merely pulled them
from the shelf.  This has not prevented police in Seattle and other cities
now anticipating WTO type demonstrations from imposing security measures in
anticipation of their appearance, as when the police in Washington D.C.
"proactively" closed down a location used by the demonstrators for organizing.

On the night before opening ceremonies, the Seattle Police closed down the
Convention Center, the site of the Ministerial.  All of the Trade Ministers
and the world's finest reporters were evacuated from the building.   The
afteraction (sic) report of the SPD team assigned to this detail states their
concern was a door that had appeared to be forced open and damaged.  The
report states they then spent about three and a half hours "sweeping" the
building.  At this time they were approached by a U.S. Secret Service Agent
who dutifully informed them that the door had probably been damaged during an
earlier "sweep."  The SPD officers then did a perfunctory completion of the
sweep and re-opened the building.

On November 29, Captain Pugel had dinner with a "leader" of the RUCKUS
Society; a meeting preserved in the commander's afteraction (sic) report.
The RUCKUS Society member had reportedly asked if they could arrange a
plan for the thousand or so people who had wanted to perform civil
disobedience.  The police commander had felt it would tax their resources
too much.  At which the leader of the RUCKUS Society had reportedly smiled
and said that they could make other plans.

The Battle of Seattle:
The Stuff of Modern Legend 
November 30 began as a sort of pageant.  It was early in the morning.
Thousands of people assembled.  Most of them wore exotic costumes.
Some dressed as jugglers and clowns.  Others were dressed
as sea turtles, butterflies and trees.   One man was dressed as
a superhero with a dollar sign across his chest and long johns
under boxer shorts.  The demonstrators carried colorful banners.
They pulled parade floats with giant cartoon puppets representing
caricatured aspects of corporate greed.

The demonstrators stopped at pre-selected intersections.  Some of them
took out pipes and used them to link arms.  Most linked arms and became
enormous human chains blocking anyone from entering or leaving.  

Most of these people hadn't met before and most of the groups were only
vaguely aware of each other's existence.  This caused complications in
what "riot consultant" Robert Oedenthal describes as a well-orchestrated
force.  For example, members of the Independent Media Center found
themselves having to explain what the IMC was when they tried to get
through the demonstrators' lines.  

Still, the thousands of demonstrators were succeeding in stopping the
delegates from attending the Ministerial. 

The Police Had Planned to Use Less Lethal Weaponry
It is the theory of this report, that because of the unchecked growth
of the military industrial complex, especially in the area of law
enforcement, and because of the undemocratic nature of the WTO and
its policies, the response of the police to the thousands of successful
demonstrators, became almost inevitable.  This was something that
unnecessarily endangered the demonstrators, the police and most of
the area's residents.

The afteraction (sic) report of the King County Sheriff's Office
says this about the Seattle Police Departments response:  "(They)
expected 50,000 demonstrators - their plan was to use tear gas and
lot of gas."

While the numbers of the police officers facing the seemingly endless
number of protesters seemed meager, their weaponry appeared frightening.
All wore full body armor.  There were plastic looking pieces that covered
their torsos.  They wore pieces of body armor wrapped around their legs
and arms.  They looked like villains in a sci-fi movie.  Their boots
looked like those worn by the oversize shoes of the English comic-book
character Judge Dred.  The armor concealed their faces and made them
look like a cross between Star Wars Imperial Storm Troopers and Robby
the Robot from the movie Forbidden Planet.   Some carried rubber
bullet guns that looked like a black super-soaker.  Others carried
twelve gage pump shotguns.  Others carried hand held rocket launchers
configured like revolvers, but carrying projectiles the size of a
beer bottle.  Many carried cans of pepper-spray the size of fire
extinguishers.  

Articles in the Wall Street Journal and The Stranger had stated some
of the weapons that would be used.  It was still a shock to most of
the demonstrators to see them deployed so quickly.

"I was working in Ryker's Island when they broke up a prison riot.
The police there wore nothing like what I saw in Seattle.  This is nuts."
Former Counselor at Ryker's Island

The actual training the police had had with these intimidating
weapons was minimal.  In fact, it appears that any training the
police had prior to WTO was minimal.

An online newspaper published for police attributes the following
remark to a Seattle Police Officer:

"We had only very basic riot training, such as forming a line,
locking with sticks, strikes to use with the sticks, lethal and
non-lethal strikes."  The officer states they could have used more
training in the use of gas masks, to cite one example.

Another officer had this to say:

"We received an 8-hour block training a month prior to WTO.  It
was a refresher course at best and allowed us to work on our
formations…The real lack of training came at the supervisory level.
There was no refresher class for supervisors.  Most went to the same
class as the line officers and were ill prepared.  The lack of
confidence in our leadership only grew from these classes.  They
showed us how untrained we were and how vulnerable we were."

Recently released videotapes of police training sessions held on
November 19, confirm these assertions.  In these videotapes, the
police have trouble maintaining their most basic formations or
mastering the baton strokes that they are apparently being shown
for the first time.

From the first, it was clear that despite the apparent lethality
and formidability of the weapons they carried, the police had no
idea as to how to handle the numbers of demonstrators they faced.
Despite the chaotic nature of the demonstrators, their lines were
succeeding in blocking the entrance or exit of delegates and reporters.
As the demonstrators had openly promised for months, the WTO was
being shut down.

The first reactions of the police seemed to be borne more of
frustration than an attempt to achieve an actual tactical objective.  

At the front door of the Sheraton, police carrying submachine guns
on loose straps around their backs, entered in the crowd and began
attempting to wrestle the demonstrators back.

At seemingly random points the police rode in on armored vehicles
the size of Chevy Suburbans called Peacekeepers, firing rubber
bullets and pepper spray.   It was like a moment from ancient
history.  There had been a Roman Emperor named Hadrian.  During the
days of this empire's fall and decline, he'd ordered his legionnaires
to attack the sea.  The centurions and legionnaires had beat at the
sea with their swords and spears, the water had flowed and retreated
and at the end of the day Hadrian had given his proud soldiers medals.

It seemed a repeat in ancient history.  As the dozen or so police
flailed out madly with their less lethal chemical instruments, there
would be no more movement of the thousands in the crowd than if a
foot kicked into the sea.  Because of their sheer numbers, none of
the protesters could practically retreat, so instead they flowed
back in around the police.  The police would flail around a little
more and then disappear, only to reemerge at another edge of the crowd. 

An afteraction (sic) report by Lt. Neil Low, a commanding officer
states that at least three police were themselves injured by
pepper-spray during these first forays:

"Two of my officers were overcome by spray, unknown whose it was,
became sick and vomited."

Another officer became "contaminated" and "suffered great pain."

Purple Haze
The first major use of tear gas seems to have happened at around
11:20 AM at 6th and Union.  An afteraction report by the Seattle
Police estimates that there were between 5,00 and 10,000 demonstrators,
reporters, medics and legal observers standing on the single block
of Sixth Avenue between Union and Pike.  The police might have
issued a warning through their Jack-in-the-Box bullhorns.  It's
inconceivable that most in the crowd in front of the Sheraton Hotel
heard it.  For those who did, movement was an impossibility, so tightly
were the people packed.

When the gas came, those in the front of the crowd bore the worst of it.
Most of the crowd seemed to stand still as the first clouds of gas moved
through the crowd, they had no idea what tear gas was.  Despite the
afteraction (sic) report's mention of the thousands of demonstrators
with gas masks there were precious few who'd had any protection.  This
is borne out by the photographic and video record of the event.  Much
of the protest leadership had discouraged talk about the police use of
these weapons because of the fear that it would scare people away.  As
the week wore on the demonstrators developed a suitably improvised
rag-tag set of protections that fit the ambience of their costumes.
They wore swim goggles, ski goggles and paint masks.  It was trial and
error with whatever was available, especially after the actual gas masks
were made illegal.  Somehow the rumor started that toothpaste protects
ones membranes and people began applying this under their eyes - later
some people found out the hard way that this actually held the irritants
there longer.

The police moved forward, just behind the clouds of tear gas, clearing
the entire street in front of the Sheraton Hotel.  It was reminiscent
of the sort of warfare that took place during World War I.  Soldiers
advancing slowly through gas filled trenches.  Victories measured in
lengths of a few hundred feet.
  
For the next several hours, there were occasional skirmishes.  Mostly
the two strangely clad groups stared at each other.

The Broken Window Theory
At about 12:30 the first windows seems to have been broken and the
myth of the masked Eugene Anarchists was borne.  The images and stories
of broken windows have come to dominate much of the discussion of what
took place during the Seattle WTO Ministerial.  

For many, there is the impression that the police use of the CS,
CN, OC gases, Concussion Grenades, Wooden Dowels and Rubber Bullets
was a reaction to this destruction of property.  Records of police,
the media and witness accounts all show clearly that the police had
deployed all of this less lethal weaponry long before any property
destruction had taken place.  Moreover, to all accounts, none of this
weaponry was ever employed in the areas where this property destruction
took place.  
   
The window breaking took place more than two hours after the police
had fired their rubber bullets and an hour after the first major volley
of tear gas.

Most witnesses agree that there were a relatively few number of people
involved in the window breaking, perhaps two to three dozen.  This
number can be contrasted with the estimated 50,000 demonstrators who
took part in the Labor March that same day.  One witness later commented
that most of the people with ski masks seemed to be young women.  Other
witnesses describe some of the worst offenders as the same kids they
see hanging around that area, during most days of the week.  Police
reports, news reports and witnesses all state that the only thing
that limited the damage done by these masked super-villains from
Eugene were the demonstrators who stood between them and their
targets.  The afteraction (sic) report of one commanding officer
states that some of the Sergeants wanted to move forward and make
arrests, but were stopped by their commanders.  Another afteraction
(sic) report states that the police stood there with the understanding
that they would intervene if the demonstrators were actually attacked.
 
Some Representative Incidents
The general dynamic that occurred for the next few hours was of
encounters where the police, unsure of what their weaponry did,
and overwhelmed by the numbers of demonstrators, reacted in ways
that seem to make no consistent sense.  This adds credence to the
theory that many of the actions or lack of actions that occurred
were due to a lack of direction from command support.  

At Sixth and Union around 2 PM, police, surrounded about a dozen
demonstrators sitting on the ground.  The demonstrators and the
police line are on the south corner of the intersection, so it is
not clear what is gained by singling them out.  Nonetheless, the
police form a skirmish line between the hundreds of demonstrators
on Sixth Avenues, just South of Union.  The police proceeded to
separate the demonstrators by plying them apart with their batons,
and applying the batons to pressure points.   There is a lot of use
of pepper spray, often applied continuously into the demonstrators'
faces, from mere inches away.  As the court observed in the recent
Headwaters decision, this use of pepper spray, and waiting for it
to take effect, seems to have complicated and prolonged what should
have been a simple arrest procedure.  One by one the demonstrators
are separated and formally arrested.  The entire procedure takes
almost half an hour. 

At the Hilton Hotel, police are temporarily stifled by a group of
demonstrators blocking the door.  Without putting away their weapons,
police charge into the group and begin wrestling the demonstrators away.
Video shows at least one of the officers firing a 12 gauge shot gun,
presumably with less lethal ammunition, while standing among
the people being fired at.  Another officer wrestling with the
protesters wears what appears to be a Heckler and Koch 9mm
machine gun around his waist.  Fortunately, no one grabs for it.
  
At Fourth and Pike witnesses report a police officer fumbling
with a tear gas grenade and dropping it at his feet, gassing
the entire line of officers.  When the demonstrators laugh,
the police get angry.  Demonstrators report that the police
then throw a dozen or so gas grenades at them.

Several demonstrators report talking the police at Sixth and
Pike into taking off their gas masks, on three occasions.
Each time, the line officers take the initiative in removing
the masks, first one, then another, then all.  "We are your
community," say the demonstrators.  "There are women and
children here."

Was the Chemical Gassing Necessary?
Sometime after 4:00, there was a feeling amongst many of the
demonstrators that they should probably call it a day.  At the
intersection of Sixth and Pike a demostrator spoke over a
loudspeaker system they'd used for most of that day.  His words
were to the effect that he couldn't tell the other people there
what to do, but they'd stopped the meeting and he was for going
home.  The crowd thinned gradually.  At about 4:45 PM perhaps a
third to half the crowd of demonstrators had left.  

At the East corner of the intersection, a demonstrator uses the
amplification system in a police car to tell the demonstrators to
allow the piece to pass if they need to.

Then the police who were standing on Sixth Avenue in front of the
Sheraton Hotel facing Pike Street took a few steps forward.

The demonstrators' mood changed suddenly.  They did nothing to
attack the police, but there was a definite feeling of anger in
the air.  They two groups stood facing each other.

"In conclusion, wish to state that all efforts should be made
when the use of gas is contemplated to supply plenty of it."
-Military Aid in Civil Disturbances, General Douglas MacArthur

If Seattle Police had run out of tear gas earlier in the day, it
wasn't because they hadn't planned on using any.  Planning reports
indicate that the SPD Commanders thought they'd had enough tear gas
on hand for several days of moderate use, or a full day of heavy use.
Their early estimates also note that they had difficulty estimating
how much tear gas would be needed because it had been so long since
anyone had used the stuff.  Reports from the police and the media
indicate that sometime on November 30, they ran out of tear gas
and that they flew to Montana with members of the National Guard,
to purchase some more.  They returned with 3,300 pounds of "less
lethal" munitions including more tear gas.  The period where these
officers were gone probably corresponded with the period when tear
gas use subsided and the interaction between the police and
demonstrators became confined to long stand-offs and occasional
minor skirmishes.

Routing the Clowns and Butterflies
Now, from the Easterly direction of Seventh Avenue, moving down Pike
Street, came the flash of concussion grenades and the startled cries
of demonstrators.  Tear Gas filled the air as a group of demonstrators
east of Sixth Avenue began to move in a westerly direction.  Then the
main group of demonstrators began to walk east to Pike Place Market.
Lines of armored police followed behind them throwing tear gas and
flash bang grenades at the demonstrators.  Some walked, some rode in
the armored "peacekeepers."

One SWAT training officer observing video of this afterwards
remarked that the police seemed to be having "too much of a
good thing."  

A police video shows demonstrators driven by an intersection by
blasts of concussion devices and tear gas.  "That was sweet!" the
videotape records an officer stating.

None of the afteraction (sic) reports made available to this
group through public disclosure seem to list who ordered this
tear gas fired.

They arrive at Pike Place Market.  The merchants' wares - fresh
fruit and vegetables, seafood and smoked meats all acquired instant
cayenne flavoring and loads of inorganic chemical preservatives.

Throughout downtown there are scattered standoffs.  Angry crowds,
including people who hadn't been at the event, stare at the
armor-clad, faceless police.  One side has advanced weaponry,
the other doesn't.

In an email chat-room reserved for members of law enforcement,
one officer states that by the end of the day they'd discovered
that five officers equipped with tear gas and rubber bullets could
turn back hundreds of demonstrators.   So it goes.

 Paramilitary forces drive the demonstrators out of downtown Seattle.
Gasping sea turtles drop their shells.  Paper mache butterflies fall
to the pavement.  The demonstrators flee from the down town core.

Capitol Hill

"Troops will be disposed with the object of…(2) Driving the mob
into or through the district of the city where looting is the
least profitable and where destruction of property incident to
military operation will be reduced to a minimum and preferably
fall on the rioters or the class of people composing the rioters…."
- Basic Field Manual, Vol., VII, Part 3, "Domestic Disturbances,"
- General Douglas MacArthur
- (See Seldes, You Can't Do That (1938) pp. 194-203,
Witness to a Century (1987) pp. 79-83.)


The armored forces with their bizarre exploding smoke weapons chase
the routed circus.  Imperial storm troopers follow the coughing red
eyed people in clown-suits, red eyed people in costumes walking on
stilts and dragging giant puppets.  

As they retreat, the diminished numbers of protesters find their
numbers swelled by the residents of the neighborhoods they pass
through.  Some of the people arriving are curious.  They've never
seen anything like this before.  Some are indignant at the arrival
of a paramilitary Darth Vaderesque force entering their neighborhood.
Some are passing through and merely want to reach their homes.
Some sit in restaurants or shop, either oblivious to what is going
on, or perhaps trying to be.

The police fire off tear-gas, throw concussion grenades and
shoot rubber bullets.

Statements of witnesses declare the following:

One person marked as a National Lawyers Guild "legal observer"
is struck in the head by a round the manufacturer describes as
capable of causing "trauma" and "death" if aimed at that region
of the body.  The observer slumps to the ground, bleeding.

A medic is shot below the eyes with a trauma inducing projectile.
The projectile is designed by its manufacturer to be fired into an
area of the body with large muscle mass such as the thigh or buttocks.
The manufacturer states that shots to the head may cause trauma and
death.

A man is tear gassed while standing with wife and child.  Later
he describes indiscriminate violence by the police, and police
physically attacking people who were already running away.

A Capitol Hill resident witnesses the tear gassing of a professional
video news photographer and the drive by pepper spraying of bystanders.

Another witness states he heard noise and went to investigate.
He experienced and witnessed tear gas, rubber bullets and pepper
spray.  He helped several people including a reporter and a couple
out for dinner into his building, away from the tear gas.

Two women state that they were standing in front of their apartment
with four other residents.  Their account is as follows: They were
the only people on the street at the time.  Without warning .a
line of police charged at them from Pine Street. They ran inside
but were pepper sprayed as they went into the building.  They went
to their first floor apartment where they went to the window and
began to call for the police to leave.  Then the police pepper
sprayed their window

The Forbidden Zone
The governing law regarding free speech during large demonstrations
is Collins v. Jordan.  It had been cited to the police both verbally
and in written communication by members of the National Lawyers Guild
Seattle Chapter months before the Ministerial.  This law holds that
entities such as the City of Seattle have an obligation to maintain
channels for protest to be heard by their intended audience.  The City
of Seattle and those working with her choose to disregard this and
openly violate the U.S. Constitution.

On the second day of the Seattle Ministerial, the paraders returned to
downtown.  The protesters are shadowed, then encircled by the police.
There is something called a curfew zone.  Or maybe it's a no protest
zone.  What are its boundaries?  No one can say for sure.  When has it
been declared? More annoying questions.  

The line touted by government was that this was an unanticipated
emergency, and the plans immediately improvised.  

The report of the Public Safety Committee states that this was an
option discussed by the SPD and Mayor Schell on November 10.  There
is nothing that precludes the possibility that it was discussed even
earlier.

On the morning of December 1, the police intercept several hundred
paraders in front of Westlake Plaza.  Those wanting to be arrested
are told to go to one area of the Plaza.  Those concerned about the
arrestees' safety are led to a spot on the sidewalk alongside the
holiday shoppers where they can watch.  The sitting protesters sing
songs.  Most of them go limp, and are carried off by the police one
by one.     There are perhaps 150 people willing to be arrested.  The
entire arrest process takes perhaps forty-five minutes, and the people
there willing to be arrested are all handcuffed, sitting in buses.  

Then the police turn to the observers, the photographers, the people
with video cameras, and another round of arrests begins.

Also arrested that day are many of those there to clean up the city
from the day before.  They carry brooms and paint brushes.  Later
reports by some members of law enforcement describe these as "weapons."

At 0756 hours a command is heard over the police radio concerning the
National Lawyers Guild legal observers: "take the notes from them and
get em outta here."

Later that day there is another march.  Again the tear gas, rubber
bullets, pepper spray, and concussion grenades fly.  One after action
report by the SPD attributes the use of fifteen concussion grenades to
a single incident.  The manufacturer instructions on the tear gas,
written in manuals no one's apparently read instructs that targets are
to be left a clear exit path.  The demonstrators are herded form one
barrage of tear gas to the next with no clear path of escape.  

It is not immediately apparent what law enforcement agencies are
involved.  It seems to be a mix, with different agencies trying
simultaneously to achieve different goals.  Some try to arrest.
Some try to use the weapons.  The result is chaos.

The demonstrators improvise.  Some find gaps in the police lines.
Some are able to find refuge in the residences and buildings in the
area.  Hundreds more are arrested.

One witness states he observed and experienced indiscriminate tear
gassing and firing of rubber bullets, at peaceful protesters, bystanders,
shopkeepers, and commuters.  He states he was stopped by police and
hit with a baton when trying to reach a friend in asthmatic distress.

Plucking Dissidents Off the Street
One credentialed member of a Non Governmental Organization (NGO) left
a meeting with White House Officials and Trade Ministers.  When the
meeting ended this individual saw a few friends and began to tell
them what was being discussed inside.  As this person was talking,
a group of masked police officers with no badges showing, rushed at
the group.   The masked police singled this person out and pulled
them away.  Their official WTO credential and briefing papers were
confiscated.  Like a familiar scene in Chile, or El Salvador, they
were hauled off to an undisclosed location. 

Videotape of a police training session on November 19, 1999 seems
to show them practicing this very maneuver.

Ritual Dominance Behaviors of the Police
With the protesters now in disarray, the police began to utilize
tactics animal behaviorists say are intended to establish dominance
without killing members of their own species.  They postured.  They
made loud noises.  They charged forward making what sounded like
primal screams.  Lines of police stood tapping their riot batons
on the ground in what t.v. news stations described as a "ritual"
behavior.  In other parts of the city police marched forward, lifting
up their legs, and banging them down with a loud crashing sound.  This
was all accentuated by the strange costumes they wore.  Their use of
devices that created loud explosive charges and blinding bright
flashes accentuated this even further.  

Are You Guys Out to Get Me?
One witness states that he left his downtown work at 3:30 that day.
Aware of what had been going on, he states he asked an officer if
it was safe to leave.  The officer reportedly stated that it was a
peaceful protest and no tear gas would be fired.  The witness states
he had walked a few blocks and was hit with CS gas.  As he turned
to leave, he was disoriented by some concussion grenades, and hit
again with gas.    He then returned to his place of work and disposed
of his ruined contact lenses.  He tried to leave again at 5PM, but
was again gassed.  Later that evening, he returned to his home at
Capitol Hill.  Here he witnessed police shooting rubber bullets and
tear gas at residents and into a business.  Standing near his home he
was shot with rubber bullets.

Capitol Hill - Part II
As night falls, the armored troops again enter Capitol Hill, the
densest population center on the West Coast north of San Francisco.
More tear gas.  More concussion grenades.  More pepper spray.  More
rubber bullets.

One witness states that she was returning from a meeting.  She saw no
protesters, only police spraying tear gas.  She sees police attack
people who were clearly residents when no protesters were present,
and then she was tear-gassed herself.  Afterwards, she complained
of anxiety and difficulty concentrating.

"MacArthur recommends that… "Armored cars will be especially
valuable in riot duty… the hand grenades he recommends are
especially those filled with chemicals."

- George Seldes on General Douglas MacArthur's training manual
Military Aid in Civil Disturbances.

One witness states he was standing in front of his own house with
four other people.  Then police told him to go home.  He stated that
this was where he lived.  He was pepper sprayed in the face.  He asked
for badge numbers and was sprayed in his face again.

Another witness states she was dining in a restaurant when police and
National Guard began gassing the street.  She witnesses the police
strike and kick man who fell to ground.   

According to one witness it is two in the morning and people are
singing Christmas Carols to the police.  They are in the middle of
Silent Night when the last barrage of less lethal weaponry begins. 

The Clampdown
Now the streets are filled with armored troops.

Downtown Seattle looked like a picture from San Salvador.  People
passing through are stopped, frisked, shoved and according to some
witnesses, cursed at by the armored police.  The only people allowed
into the downtown core are those with the official badges of the
World Trade Organization.

One woman states she was turning the corner on Fifth and Pike when
a police officer grabbed her.  The officer shoved her and began to
shout obscenities.  She told the police officer that she was pregnant
and just passing through.  She states that the Officer shouted an
obscenity, then pepper sprayed her.  Some days later she was still
suffering ill effects.

In The Jails
By the accounts of numerous witnesses, there were patterns of
mistreatment and abuse that continued in the jails.  Much of this
seems to have been compounded by the fact that many of those
processing the arrestees were only officers in training.

There are numerous complaints of pepper spray used to extract
protesters from buses.

There is at least one arrestee who suffered a broken arm from what
appears to be improper handling.

Numerous arrestees complain of being subjected to sudden and extreme
changes in temperature in their jail cells.

There are several witnesses attesting to cloth saturated with pepper
spray being left over the face of one demonstrator.

There are several that state that they witnessed or experienced
systematic infliction of pain by the police. 

Most of those arrested are not processed within the seventy-two
hours required by law.


CHAPTER FOUR
Analyzing the Response that Occurred in the Context of a General
Climate of Diminished Resources and Rising Militarism

The use of force that occurred in Seattle is hardly unprecedented.

The sort of paramilitary reaction that occurred in Seattle is typical
of the sort of reaction that has been used by the institutions like the
World Bank, IMF and WTO from their inception.  It is a reaction that has
been experienced in the world's poorer countries.  It has been experienced
in this country's poorer neighborhoods.  It is typical of the way
institutions such as multinational corporations treat the Third World.
It is typical of what happens when things get so out of whack that
corporations can look at people as a "resource."

What happened during the Seattle WTO Ministerial, when the police
exposed tens of thousands of people to potentially lethal agents
and invaded the densest population center on the West Coast north
of San Francisco, is that the Third World got a lot bigger.

Institutions that create undemocratic financial policies, must by
their nature, rely on undemocratic means to maintain their policies
and practices.  Petty thugs have bodyguards to protect them.
Corporations and Countries that profit and rely on inherently unjust
 practices, require strong, constant and heavy-handed military presence.

The marriage of greedy corporations and military conquest is one of
the oldest in recorded history.  One can pick the opening of the
American Continents as an arbitrary starting point for the purpose
of illustration.  One need only look at the literally millions of
slaves and corpses created in the name of Trade by the likes of the
Hudson Bay Company, East India Tea company and others that committed
genocide on multiple continents, wiping out Native Americans Nations,
enslaving other Nations in Africa. in their efforts to acquire a larger
share of profit.  These were the early American examples of what is now
euphemistically called "free trade."

Fortified Limousines Riding Through the Rest of the Global Village

One of the best explanations of the dynamic which is creating institutions
such as the World Trade Organization, and the paramilitary presence they
inevitably bring with them is  The Coming Anarchy published in the February
1994 edition of The Atlantic and recently expanded into a book.  Author
Robert Kaplan describes the plundering of the world's resources that are
taking place, from the loss of half the world's top soil to its ever
diminishing supply of drinkable water.  With the collapse of the world's
ecology, will eventually come the collapse of most of the world's economy.
As this occurs, the poor will continue to grow in raw numbers and percentage
of the human population.  The "global village" will become divided.  Most
of it will be ghettos.  The privileged few who own most of everything that
can be owned will try to find ways to hold onto what they've got.  They
will ride around in armored limousines as they drive from one fortified
suburban enclave to the next.    

Author Kaplan writes this report from the vantagepoint of  "those of us
inside the stretch limo," (p. 44).  He analyzes the changing state of warfare,
relying on prominent military historian Martin Van Creveld, and his book The
Transformation of War.   The following are the highlights:

95% of the Earth's population growth will take place in the poorest
  places in the globe.
Future wars will be based on community survival and environmental scarcity.
State armies will shrink, gradually being replaced by private security.
Existing distinctions between war and crime will break down as they have
  in Lebanon, El Salvador, Peru or Columbia.
War will be more likely to take place among groups of people formally
  considered civilians.   Hence the military must prepare to wage war upon
  what are presently considered civilian populations.

The model put forward by Van Creveld and supported by Kaplan is also that
being put forward by the Chicago based Emergency Response Institute (ERI).
The ERI has recently put out several reports describing what took place in
the streets of Seattle during the WTO Ministerial and more recently during
the World Bank/IMF protests as examples of "asymmetric warfare."
"Asymmetric warfare" is the wave of the future, the ERI would have us
believe, and what took place in recent U.S. protests is little different
from the Somalia, Lebanon, Kosvo or Panama.

Kaplan's prescription is to unify intelligence agencies such as the CIA with
the military.   This is a dynamic mirrored in law enforcement circles where
an intimate knowledge of the community by law enforcement, is being paired
with increased tactical capabilities.  It is evokes images of the  "softer"
community policing styles that emphasize more feelers in the community.  It
adds understanding to the sentiments expressed in law enforcement circles
including the repeated cries in Seattle law enforcement to increase the
bilities of police to collect intelligence on political organizations, and
similar concerns that have been raised by police in Los Angeles. (Vernon, pp. 99-107)

The other factor in Kaplan's prescription is realizing that as we move to a
globalized society, it is the corporations that have the true power.

Applying this social dynamic to the Seattle WTO Ministerial goes a long way
to explaining the mentality that had law enforcement protecting delegates and
exposing thousands of Seattle residents to CS, CN, OC and other potentially
lethal agents. 

Another factor that puts the dynamic creating the spectacle of repression
and paramilitary response that accompanied the WTO Ministerial in Seattle
is that the military itself is an industry and a source of pecuniary
income for the wealthy few.  Despite the fact that it's been more than
fifty years since the U.S. military engaged in all out battle with
anything resembling an evenly matched opponent, we are still living
in a war time economy.  What saved the U.S. economy from the Great
Depression was World War II.  What kept it going afterwards was the
Cold War.  With the end of the Cold War, the military industrial complex
has had to focus on new targets.  Part of this focus has been "terrorists."
Part of this has been "the war on crime."  Part of this has been
"the war on drugs."  Part of this has been the war on
"political extremists."  And as the police and military become more
interchangeable this industry spreads into things like the building
of prisons where major military contractors including Bechtel, the
largest privately held company in the U.S. become builders of prisons.

All of these can be code words for waging war on civilian populations,
as described by ERI, Van Cleveld and others.  Acknowledging this drive
to militarization provides insight into the militarized police response
that took place during the WTO.

Militarizing Main Street - The Third World's Getting a Lot Bigger 

Another dynamic that must be examined to understand what took place
during the Seattle WTO Ministerial is the creation of an ever-larger
paramilitary force to control the domestic population.  This has been
borne of the factors described by Kaplan and Van Creveld above including
diminishing resources, the dissolution of boundaries between war on
foreign states and war on political dissidents and crime, as well as
the self perpetuating nature of the military industrial complex. 

The use of a paramilitary force to keep political dissidents and even
the general population in line is something puppet dictators in Third
World nations have used for years.  It's allowed them to loot their
own countries, put a little bit of money in their pocket, and help
the world's wealthiest corporations, the true beneficiaries of WTO
policies, accomplish whatever they feel is needed.  

In practice this has meant such things as the murder of outspoken
religious leaders in places like El Salvador, the murder of labor
leaders in Chile and the wholesale massacre of populations as in
Indonesia and East Timor. 

Some Earlier Domestic Paramilitary Police Actions
The use of the U.S. military against U.S. citizens is hardly unprecedented.
The following just serve as a few of the better-documented examples:  

· In 1914, National Guardsmen broke a strike at a Standard Oil owned
Mining facility in the town of Ludlow.  They did so by firing machine
guns into the tents occupied by the striking miners and their families.
Thirteen people, mostly women and children died, scores more were injured.
(For point of reference, Standard Oil and its satellites were key players
in the discussions that created GATT in the 1940's.)

· In 1932, at the height of the depression, a group of starving World
War I veterans came to Washington D.C. with their wives and children in
tow.  They numbered more than twenty thousand.  They had no work, no
food, and no place to live.  They hoped that they could collect a bonus
promised them by the government when they'd served their country as
soldiers in what had been history's bloodiest war.  The U.S. government
responded by sending out four troops of calvary, four troops of infantry,
a machine gun squadron and six tanks.  Soon the streets of Washington D.C.
were filled with tear gas.   Casualties followed.  This domestic force was
led by several who would go on to become top military commanders including
Patton, Eisenhauer and MacArthur.

· In the 1940's the entire Japanese population was forced to abandon all
their worldly possessions and relocate to camps.  Barbed wire and armed
guards surrounded the camps.  It was similar to Rex 84 Bravo, the scenario
envisioned by Oliver North for political dissidents in the event the U.S.
again found itself experiencing dissent during a military conflict. 

· In the 1960's and early 1970's many of the most repressed minority
groups began to acquire a sense of pride in their cultures and history.
Many of them had been sent to fight in a pointless war in Vietnam. They
came back realizing that they were a group of victims being used to fight
more victims.  Groups like the Black Panthers developed programs that fed
and educated their impoverished communities.  The response of the
government was predictably brutal.   Simultaneous military attacks were
staged on the different headquarters of the organization.  In the case o
f at least one chapter in Chicago, the chapter's members were
surreptitiously drugged before the forces of the law broke in and
machine-gunned them as they slept.   In South Dakota, members of the
American Indian Movement armed with antiquated rifles designed to hunt
small game, faced a well-armed military force that included helicopters
and armored personnel carriers.

· On May 13, 1985 the Philadelphia Police ended a long, politically
uncomfortable standoff with the African American back to the land group
MOVE.  Move occupied a small row house.  Police used tear gas, water
canons, shot guns, Uzis, M-16's, M-60 machine guns, a 20mm anti tank
gun and a 50-caliber machine gun.  Police filled the home with tear gas
and fired over 10,000 rounds.  When this was insufficient to force out
the people inside, a helicopter dropped an incendiary device.  The blaze
was allowed to spread consuming not only the MOVE house, but all 60 homes
on the block.  Eleven people, including five children died in the inferno.
There were two survivors, one of them an infant who was carried out.

· Under the guise of the "war on drugs" the National Guard was given
increased powers.  These powers enable the Guard to be used routinely
against the domestic population.  Among the areas hardest hit were the
parts of Northern California and Southern Oregon called the
"Emerald Triangle."   Routinely now, people in these areas find their
homes invaded.  Troops in camouflage uniforms, carrying M-16s
and supported by helicopters hold families at gunpoint.  Furniture
and other property aredestroyed.  Dogs and livestock are shot.
Some of these people do grow marijuana.  The majority of them
are loggers with nothing left to cut or farmers with nothing
profitable left to grow.  This has been going on
since the mid 1980's.  

· An avowed "White Separatist," Randy Weaver, found himself and his
family laid siege by hundreds of paramilitary agents in his remote,
plywood shack.  Facing questionable charges from the Bureau of Alcohol
Tobacco and Firearms, Weaver had refused to plea bargain his charges by
infiltrating a "White Separatist" organization.  Camouflaged snipers who
hid in the woods killed his dog and fourteen-year old son.  His wife was
killed when a sniper's50 caliber bullet exploded her head as they prepared
the son's body for burial.  For those unfamiliar with weapons, this is the
same caliber bullet as that used by the McCaw Indians to kill a whale.
Vicky Weaver's head exploded with such force that Randy Weaver was
injured by the flying fragments of her skull.

· In Waco Texas, hundreds of armor-clad federal agents laid siege to
half-constructed combination church and community center.  During the
initial siege federal agents broke through doors and windows, and
helicopters passed overhead firing machine guns.  Records available
later show that the agents only withdrew when they ran out of ammunition
and negotiated a cease-fire and retreat.  For long weeks, the members of
the religious community were subjected to loudspeakers that blasted
sounds of rabbits dying in slaughterhouses as they watched the corpses
of neighbors killed in the earlier shoot-out decompose.  Tanks circled
their property, driving over their vehicles.  After some six weeks the
facility, seventeen children inside, was filled with tear gas - a
highly incendiary substance outlawed by the Geneva Convention, and
a favorite tool of law enforcement.  The plywood structure burned
quickly.  Survivors recall that many who tried to exit the burning
structure were fired upon.  Thermal imaging of film taken during this
time, seems to confirm this.

What distinguishes these from what took place in Seattle is that all
these actions took place against populations that were marginalized
socially, geographically or economically.  During the Seattle WTO
Ministerial this same dynamic was openly applied to a major middle-class
population center of the United States.  It was not only an effective
way of telling the people that the rules had changed.  It was setting
a precedent about the use of potentially lethal military force against
any population.

Say Goodbye to Posse Comitatus
The United States has a protection against the use of federal troops
for civilian law enforcement.  The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 makes
it a crime to do so.  The intent behind this is that the military is
there to deal with foreign enemies, usually with a lethal response.
Police, by contrast are members of the community and there above all
to protect life.  The two are hence incompatible.  

What has happened is that as a result of political expediency, the
judicial, legislative and executive branches have increasingly blurred
the lines between police and the military.

For example 10 USC 375 only limits the use of military to actual
engagement of troops in the field.  This means that that the most
elite "Special Forces" military units including the Navy Seals Team 6,
Delta Force and the Special Service (SAS) routinely train both federal
and police SWAT Teams. These "Special Forces" not only are allowed
to conduct training they can also appear on site and act as
"consultants" at every stage of the action, even writing action
plans that supercede those of their law enforcement counterparts.   

Under 10 USC 372, the military forces can also provide any piece of
military equipment deemed necessary.  The only caveat is that military
personnel cannot operate this military equipment.  

Under 10 USC 373, the military are authorized to train the law
enforcement on any piece of their equipment, such as the tanks
that were used at Waco.  

Also under recent exceptions created under the "War on Drugs"
members of the National Guard may be brought in directly.

FBI Hostage Rescue Team (HRT) founder Danny Coulson seems to have
grasped some of the implications of this blurring of the lines
between military and law enforcement.  Then FBI Director William
Webster and Coulson had observed an early training session of Delta
Force.  Coulson who describes the FBI's involvement in the 1973
Wounded Knee siege as "disastrous" (Coulson, pp. 136-37) describes
the following exchange:

  "Webster nodded sagely and took a closer look at the array
of guns and gizmos.  There seemed to be something missing.  He turned
a puzzled face to Major General Richard Scholtes, commander of the
Joint Special Operations Command, who oversaw Delta, SEAL Team Six
and other DOD counterterror activities.
    'I don't see any handcuffs,' Webster said.
    'We don't have handcuffs,' Scholtes responded crisply.
'It's not my job to arrest people.'
    Oh?  Oh! Webster's eyebrows curved like the St. Louis arch
as the realization dawned that once the military was called in,
the situation would most assuredly be resolved with bullets, and
there might be no one left to be taken to jail.  It conjured up a
nightmare scenario that could make Kent State look like a picnic."
(Coulson p. 139)

In point of fact, these military units may be overruling their
civilian counterparts once called in.  Evidence of this is shown by
examination of the testimony by Attorney General Janet concerning the
disaster that occurred at Waco.  Reno first described the role of the
President as being limited like a World War II general who was not
expected to exercise constant oversight.   Reno also acknowledged that
though the FBI had conceived the April 19th assault of the Branch
Davidian's plywood structure with military tanks, the actual
implementation which began a few minutes after the tanks were first
deployed, was the work of Delta Force.  "In effect Delta Force's
recommendation was carried out."
(Kopel and Blackmun, pp. 84-87)


There is certainly evidence that a similar dynamic was taking place
in Seattle.  Evidence of Federal involvement in the Seattle Ministerial
is there as early as July 16th article in The Wall Street Journal.
This article quotes SPD spokesperson Carmen Best as saying,
"The police department has set up a WTO planning commission,
which is coordinating with the U.S. Secret Service, the Federal Bureau
of Investigation, the State Department, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and numerous other
law enforcement types."   (emphasis added.)

An article in The Seattle Weekly published two weeks after the
ministerial, states that Delta Force members were on the street
in civilian garb mingling with demonstrators.  The Delta Force
members may not have only been in charge of much of what was
going on in the streets, but according to two sources, were
those who pushed the hardest for the crackdown that occurred
on the streets.
(SW, "Delta's Down with it." Rick Anderson, 12/23/1999, p. 16.)
Certainly the response that occurred on November 30 where
thousands were tear gassed and almost no one arrested mirrors
Coulson's and Webster's impressions of Delta's operating style.  

Community leader Harriet Walden, one of the founders of the
group Mothers for Police Accountability made remarks to this
effect at a community dialogue with Seattle Police Chief Norm
Stamper: 

After the crackdown began, every press briefing was held in the
federal building.  The local authorities were not in control. 

This conclusion is mirrored by experience of members of the local
chapter of the National Lawyer's Guild.  NLG members received a
short letter from Captain Linda Pierce a few days before the WTO
Ministerial.  Captain Pierce's letter included the following
acknowledgment:

"While we appreciate your interest in ensuring individual First
Amendment expression, it is important to note that security issues
are paramount and are often dictated by federal agencies responsible
for event security."

In essence, the letter is saying, what we locals think or want
doesn't matter.  The Feds are in charge.

What this Portends
Every honest examiner of what took place during the Seattle WTO
Ministerial has an obligation to look at the implications of this
large a use of a military force against a domestic population.  If
allowed to go unexamined it will become the new benchmark.  The
willingness of police forces to utilize paramilitary "less lethal"
weaponry against citizens in subsequent events, such as the apolitical
Mardi Gras, and the attempts by police to limit the debate to how the
demonstrators could have been more effectively contained, only
illustrate this fact.

What has in fact been happening in the last decade is that the
capability to wage war on the domestic population has increased
several fold  Much of the money that went to the military now goes
to National Guard Units.  These units are functionally the same
as the military.  They have been called to serve in Panama and
the Persian Gulf.  Arguably the training, level of equipment and
level of recruits they receive is superior to that of their
counterparts in the regular military.  Indeed many of these
National Guard Units routinely best their military counterparts in
staged competitions.  The difference is that the National Guard
may be used against the domestic population.

The police too have become militarized.  There are euphemisms like
the "war on crime" and the "war on drugs."  Their result has been
an increased police force with many more and newer officers using
weapons with higher capacities, and having less training and street
experience behind them.  There has been an increase in the number
of paramilitary SWAT and SERT units.  In large part because this
is where the federal funds are, small town police forces apply
for and receive grants for SWAT teams, not basic items such as
police cars.  One recent academic study found that nearly 70% of
the cities with populations under 50,000 had paramilitary units.
For cities with populations over 50,000 the number jumped to 90%.

Much of this rise in the militarization of the police has occurred
alongside the growth of something called "Community Policing."
Discussions of community policing are usually dominated by
touchy-feely terms of  "community involvement."  Neighbors are
encouraged to be the eyes and ears of the police in the community.
They are encouraged to report any "suspicious" persons and events
and to work with the police in eliminating these elements.  What
in fact "Community Policing" accomplishes is that the police,
particularly the paramilitary police described above, are given
eyes, informants and unchecked entry into the community.  

Portland, Oregon is one of the national models of "Community
Policing."   It has hosted several national conferences on the
subject and two of its chiefs were among the three finalists
for position of administering the allocation of the 100,000
new police created by the federal crime bill.  A closer look
at this program reveals how closely it is intertwined in the
community.  Figures in a study conducted by the Portland City
Auditor's office revealed that under community policing, the
number of patrol cops actually went slightly down, while the
number of those involved in Tactical Operations went from two
to fifty-six officers in the space of a little over three years.
Also the person who was "Lieutenant in charge of Community
Policing" inevitably became the "Captain in Charge of Tactical
Operations."  

Just to clarify, "Tactical Operations" is the division that runs
the paramilitary team that knocks down doors, dresses in
camouflage, drives armored cars, and carries AR-15's and
H&K submachine guns.  This is also the division of the police
that can confiscate property.  This is part of the "asset
forfeiture" fund mentioned in the 1993 Federal Crime Bill
that created 100,000 new police on the streets.  "Asset
forfeiture" refers to property taken through drug and other
crime related seizures by law enforcement.  In effect, the
police are expected to become self-funding through the
confiscation of private property.  One obscure ordinance
passed by Portland City Council enabled this branch of the
police to work with the National Guard to compile a database
of property owned in Portland under the guise of a "War on Drugs."

Why "Community Policing" is most relevant to the Seattle WTO
Ministerial can found in remarks by one the program's founders.
Lee Brown a former Multnomah County Sheriff, New York police
Commissioner and Clinton Drug Czar wrote this in a history of
"Community Policing" intended for members of the law enforcement
community.  Brown begins by looking at "shortcomings" to the
police response that occurred during the protests of the late
1960's and early 1970's:

" (these shortcomings) came into sharp focus by the middle
1960's and early 1970's when riots and protests exploded with
rampant regularity across America…questions were raised about
the apparent inability of police to prevent or at least control
such outbreaks."
(Perspectives on Policing, U.S. Department of Justice, September 1989.)

In other words, "community policing" was put into place to
answer the question: how can the police more effectively
eliminate dissent, or if that is not possible, control it.

More Cops, Less Training
Community Policing also brought with it a mass of new hires.
There is no objective evidence anywhere that supports that
bringing more cops on the street limits crime.  FBI Statistics
prove that there is no correlation with having more police and
a lowered crime rate.  That information is being ignored and
more and more police are being hired.  

In most police departments, new recruits have swelled the
ranks, and sometimes even form a majority of the police on
the street.  In Seattle, one third of the police have been on
the force for less than two years.  This has brought a concern
noted by many police commanders and police union leaders, that
with the increasing numbers of new recruits, police cannot be and
are not being adequately trained.  

Robert Vernon, Retired Assistant Chief of the LAPD writes the
following in his book LA Justice:

"I also called the (Christopher) Commission's attention to our
training problem in the LAPD.  Our hiring schedule was (and is)
controlled completely by the politicians and the city administrative
officer…. (T)hese leaders mandated our hiring to go from zero growth
to adding several hundred in one year.  To make political points
with the people, they actually began seeing who could add the most
officers to our authorized strength.  The result was that in recent
years of heavy hiring, we hired too many too quickly.

When I joined the department and graduated from the academy, I
was assigned to work with an 8-year veteran.  I soon learned
that it took several years of experience to become an effective
officer.  When we shifted into heavy hiring mode that wise
practice all but disappeared.  Today it's not unusual to have
a rookie working with a training officer who has all of 18
months' experience.  The sharper recruits often find themselves
working a 1-person car-on their own-near the end of their
probationary period.  This is another reason we're not adequately
passing on the principles of police professionalism."
(Vernon, LA Justice p. 120) 
 
A similar dynamic pervades the dynamics of training special
units such as SWAT teams. FBI Hostage Rescue Team (HRT) founder,
Danny Coulson describes a situation in which he was assigned to
handle a prison disturbance with members of several local police
SWAT Teams.  Coulson writes: 

"We were asking a lot of the SWAT agents.  We'd had years to
practice these skills.  These men had days - maybe hours."
(No Heroes, Coulson, p. 357)

An even worse dynamic seems to have occurred in Seattle during the
WTO Ministerial.  Many of the police from outside the Seattle area
seem to all available evidence, to have been called in at the last
minute and received no training whatsoever on the less lethal weaponry. 

What often becomes a substitute for that training is the preconception
that the officers have when they begin the job.  Usually these
preconceptions come from television and movies.  These works of
popular fiction feature continuous images of the police actively
engaging in direct physical acts such as gun fights and car chases
on an abnormally regular basis.

These factors go a long way to describing the enthusiasm and
irregularities displayed by numerous officers deployed during
WTO Ministerial.  Scenes such as occurred after the labor march
where demonstrators were inexplicably driven from one barrage of
tear gas to another, or Capitol Hill where less lethal weaponry
was fired into empty streets, make a lot more sense in light of
these factors.

Consider also that as the training levels are going down, the
capacity and lethality of their weaponry are increasing.  Where
they once had very accurate six shot revolvers whose barrels
formed a natural extension of their hands, the standard issue
weapon is now a semi-automatic 9mm Glock that carries anything
from 17 to 30 rounds in a clip.  To accommodate the extra bullets,
the Glock is built with a diagonal handle, so that the barrel does
not form a natural extension of the forefinger when it is clasped
in a person's hand, as it would with the standard issue service
revolvers.

Police Being Trained to View the Public as a Threat 
Also consider that a dominant factor in police training is to
have officers assume the worst about a person.  Police are trained
to view nearly every movement that a suspect makes as a threat.
They are also taught to respond to that threat with a necessary
amount of force.

One of the greatest illustrations of this is found in Sgt.
Stacey Koon's book Presumed Guilty; The Tragedy of the Rodney
King Affair.  Sgt. Koon was the LAPD officer in charge of the
pursuit and arrest of Rodney King on March 3 of 1991.  In the
opening chapter Sergeant Koon gives a step by step analysis
of the pursuit and stop of Rodney King.  Every moment on the
famous videotape is explained as the police doing exactly what
they were trained to do.  The following are some of the more
illustrative examples from Sgt. Koon's detailed narration:
 
"After the second TASER King continued to right himself.  In
an instant he was on his feet.  His arms outstretched, King rushed
Officer Powell.  If he had wanted to escape, there were plenty of
avenues available.  He could have fled across the street into the
crowd of bystanders, or to his right into the park.  But King didn't
do that.  He chose to collide into Officer Powell, and the two
grappled for a split second.  That's why all of the officers present
interpreted it as an assault on a policeman instead of a chance to
escape.  Powell was terrified; police officers get scared, too.
He defended himself with his metal PR 24 baton…" (p.40)

"Then the officers stepped back to evaluate the effect the blows
were having on the suspect.  That's strictly procedure, because it
gives the officers an opportunity to determine whether the suspect
intends to comply.  More importantly, the pause gives the suspect an
outlet to avoid any further blows by obeying the command to prone
out, hands behind the back.  These pauses are known as "pulsations"
in police language.  Yet they are interpreted by many viewers of the
videotape as policemen simply taking turns beating an innocent suspect.
That wasn't the case.  They were following my orders and strict
procedure; deliver the baton blows, then back off to see what
effect they're having on the suspect…" (p.42)

"…in one of the more tense moments that is captured in stark
clarity on the Holliday videotape, King began rolling toward
Officer Wind.  Wind backed quickly away.  He knew what was
happening.  Rodney King was doing the "Folsom Roll."  To the
casual viewer of the videotape, it appeared as though King were
rolling away from the officers in an effort to avoid getting hit.
 But he wasn't being hit at the time.  King wasn't avoiding blows.
He was rolling toward Officer Wind- he was doing the "Folsom Roll."
Any LAPD cop who's dealt with ex-cons is familiar with the
"Folsom Roll."

Prisoners at California's Folsom Prison and correction units in
other states have been photographed teaching it to one another in
the prison yard.  It's a technique for disarming an officer while
proned out on the ground.  The idea is to roll into an officer and
tangle up his legs, then reach up and grab a gun belt and holster
while the officer is off-balance.  Then the officer is downed and
the suspect has the weapon." (pp. 42-43)

This provides insight into why the officers were acquitted the
first time - they were conducting the entire operation by the book.

A similar dynamic took place in one of the models of "community
Policing."  A Portland Police officer pursuing a suspect fired
twenty-seven shots. Gratton had been observed carrying a gun,
which he immediately dropped.  The officer pursued Gratton
through a residential neighborhood, shooting wildly.  Since
his Glock only carried 17 rounds, he even reloaded his clip.
Though initially dismissed the officer was reinstated.  The
decision described in detail every the pursuit and how every move
by Mr. Gratton was a potential threat to the life of the officer.
When Gratton crouched, when he held up his hands, every move
mirrored something that the officer had been trained to respond
to as a potentially lethal attack.  A more recent example of
this sort of shooting is the Diallo shooting in New York.

A similar dynamic seems to have applied during the WTO.  One
of the few of the approximately 600 arrestees to make it to
trial was Eric Larsen, manager of a local cafe, a photographer
and a poet.  The videotape of the King County Sheriff's Office
used in the trial, shows that Larsen was subjected to several
distinct blasts of pepper spray.  King County Sheriffs dutifully
explained the whys of this.  When Larsen wiped at his eyes, or held
out his hands to block a stream of the spray, or bent over slightly
with his arms at his side, every one of these was a potential chance
for Larsen to attack the few dozen armored officers he faced.  

Larsen was acquitted of all charges including resisting arrest.

Other police videos support this view of a police force being
trained to expect the worst from the demonstrators.  For example
video of the police training on 11/19 shows the police divided
into two groups one being the protesters.  The "protesters" do
things such as hurling large chunks of debris at the other officers. 

There is also a tape provided by one of the police agencies where
they receive a morning briefing.  "They will try to provoke you,"
warns their commander.

Most ominous is an assessment hinted at in some of the police
reports, that a certain number of police casualties would have
been acceptable.

 Police Viewing Themselves as Outsiders in a Hostile Community
What has changed is that police who were once taught to protect life,
are now focused on making it home from the hostile environments they
patrol.  It is part of a larger rubric similar to the changed training
methods in the military that brought increased killing rates from American
Troops in Vietnam.  Once the enemy is dehumanized it becomes a lot easier
to kill if deemed necessary.   Police come to view themselves as
being in a position analogous to "the lost patrol."  Trapped
behind enemy lines with no one but each other for support.

The dynamic of police as outsiders, is revealed in a recent interview
with Philadelphia Police Chief Ed Timoney.  Timoney describes his
investigation of a 1994 gunfight he had investigated while a chief
in the New York Police Department.  The gunfight had lasted ten
minutes, the police had shot 258 rounds of ammunition.  Four people
were killed including an innocent bystander who was shot by a police
bullet.  The casualties also included a pregnant woman who was left
alone to bleed to death in a nearby restaurant.  Timoney states
that he conducted his investigation to determine how these officers
defined their jobs as members of the police department.  What he
found disturbed him deeply:

"She was dying, she was pregnant, and the cops went out - they
ran away.  And the more we spoke to cops the more we heard, 'Hey,
listen, my main function is to protect my partner.  That's my main
job.'  This kept coming across-every cop.  'My main job is to
protect my partner and make sure I go home every night.'  And we
had to say: 'That's not why we hired you! Implicit in all this is
that it is a dangerous business.  You may get shot.  You may be
called upon to make the ultimate sacrifice.  But I didn't hire
you to protect your partner.  I hired you to protect the public.'
And the more I thought about it, the more I realized: Something's
switched.  Something's changed.  I didn't think I would have
given that answer as a young cop."
The Last Cop in Camelot, Tom Junod, Esquire June 2,000, p116.

This sort of insularity is something that can and does pervade
to the highest levels of police organizations.  New York's
Mollen Commission, one of the most in depth analysis of police
misbehavior conducted in recent years observed the following:

"…the Department allowed its own systems for fighting corruption
virtually to collapse.  It had become more concerned about the
bad publicity that corruption disclosures generate than the
devastating consequences of corruption itself.  As a result,
its corruption controls minimized, ignored and at times concealed
corruption rather than the devastating consequences of corruption
itself….This reluctance manifested  itself in every component of
the Department's corruption controls from command accountability
and supervision, to investigations, police culture, training and
recruitment." 
(Mollen Commission Report 7/7/1994, pp2-3)

Smart Cops Realize This Puts Them in Danger

The more experienced cops realize that these dynamics ultimately
make their own job more dangerous and create unnecessary friction
in the community.  Moreover, these policies may themselves create
the very criminals that they are nominally there to protect the
community from.

Portland Police Officer Thomas Mack, a representative of the
Police Officers Union, has been one of the more candid critics
of the effect community policing has had on officers ability to
perform their jobs.   When Portland experienced its first fatal
shooting of an officer in nearly two decades Mack made remarks
to a reporter attributing the officer's death to the lack of
training officers were receiving.  He said "it should be a wake
up call."   (Oregonian 7/21/97, PDX Vol. 7, No. 11)  More
recently, Mack has come under fire for his criticism of the
Portland Police Bureau's use of less than lethal beanbag rounds,
on May 1st.   Mack stated the policies were unsound and being
forced on the street officers from their commanders.  He'd also
made these statements about a  "Gang Enforcement Program" to a
panel of leaders assembled by the police chief:

"When you talk about a popular thing, gangs are becoming bigger
because they are popular.  I want you to understand part of the
approach we're taking may be a reason for that.   When you put
a special unit together and special uniforms and special cars
and call it "gang enforcement unit," the little kids who are
wannabes and are not quite sure look at it and go these "G's"
these "little G'd" and "OG's," these big guys they must be
important because the police are putting together a special
unit to fight them.  I want you to think twice about making
the gang unit bigger and bigger and bigger, because what you
seem to be doing, looking at the stats here is making the
problem bigger and bigger."
(Statement of Officer Tom Mack to PPB Chief's Forum, 10/24/94,
Portlandian Vol.I, No.3)

It takes little imagination to apply this same dynamic to the
relationship between the authorities and the Anarchists.  By
drawing so much attention to these groups, members of law
enforcement have become their best recruiters.  By describing
disruptive tactics that the demonstrators might use, certain
members of law enforcement make their appearance on the street
inevitable. 

Part of Mack's reticence may stem from the increased fatalities
that Community Policing brings with it.  For example in 1993,
annual statistics released by the Federal Bureau of Investigation
show that Portland had the third highest per capita shooting rate
of citizens by its own police.   In 1997, for the first time in
almost two decades, police officers were fatally shot.  The case
of the first officer, Thomas Jeffries is especially instructive.
Jeffries pursued an armed suspect, who had shot at a child.  It
was late at night, the area was a residential neighborhood.  This
was a situation where containment would have been ideal.  Instead,
Jeffries, separated from his partner, losing whatever advantage he
had.  During his last moments, he crashed through ten-foot hedges
pinning his arms, and alerting the suspect through the rustling
of leaves.  This might work nicely on television but it was horrible
in life.  Jeffries was not the only PPB Officer to die that year.
A few months later several officers conducting a "no-knock" drug
bust failed to pay attention to a video camera mounted conspicuously
outside the door.  All three were shot.  For one, a recently married
female officer on her first drug assignment, the shooting was fatal.
Another officer who was her trainer remained in critical condition
for months.

CHAPTER FIVE
The Human Aversion to Killing and Lie of "Non-Lethal" Weapons

"Blank cartridges should never be fired against a mob, nor should
a volley be fired over the heads of the mob even if there is little
danger of hurting persons in the rear.  Such things will be regarded
as an admission of weakness, or an attempt to bluff, and may do much
more harm than good."
General Douglas MacArthur, Military Aid in Civil Disturbances

One of the major things to come out of Seattle was a grudging
acceptance of what are being referred to by some members of
law enforcement as "non-lethal" weaponry.  

In demonstrations that have followed the WTO Ministerial in
Seattle, police seem more prone to using these weapons, then
they were even a few months ago.  

In Mardi Gras in Seattle, hundreds of revelers in Pioneer
Square received doses of pepper spray for reasons that remain
unclear at best./ 

In Washington D.C, during the meetings of the World Bank
and International Monetary Fund, these weapons were employed
on multiple occasions.  The acceptance these weapons have
gained is illustrated by the fact that many in the progressive
community refer to these uses with terms such as  "sparing" and
"minimal."  

Two hundred miles to the south of Seattle, the Portland Police
fire "non-lethal" bean bag rounds from shotguns, during a small
May 1st street demonstration.  This is a first for the city
George Bush Senior once dubbed "Little Beirut." 

No Normal Person Likes to Kill
To understand the attraction of what are now being popularly
referred to as "non-lethal weapons," it is helpful to understand
the basic aversion to killing that is biologically hard-wired
into most of the biologically advanced life forms on this planet.
Most of us who have been around a television set sometime in our
lives have seen the nature documentaries where two members of
the same species engage in very ritualized combat over territory,
food sex, etc.  Even the most vilified species on the planet have
adopted these sorts of rituals.  Piranhas establish dominance by
swatting each other with their tails.  Rattlesnakes wrestle with
each other.   

In the human realm these same habits are reflected in the
anthropological documentaries most of us have also seen, where
the warriors of two primitive hunter gatherer societies stand
in opposing lines, posture at each other, make loud noises and
the like. When actual weapons such as spears and bows and arrows
are employed, weapons these people use to hunt with and are
indisputably competent with, the weapons inevitably miss their
targets.  The point is not to kill a member of one's own species
but to vanquish the opposition through a show of force.  

These same habits and aversion have directed the way most war has
been fought in most of Western Civilization including the United
States.  While the popular image of warfare is of soldiers on both
sides valiantly fighting slaying and triumphing over phenomenal
odds, these are usually just tall tales of another primitive society.
In nearly every case, the vast majority of soldiers who behaved
competently in training were unable to kill their opponents.
Fire arms and lines of soldiers seem to have been more often used
as means of intimidation.  Most soldiers would do things such as
load and reload their weapons or fire over their enemies' heads.
A relatively small portion of the soldiers did the actual killing.
These results are confirmed by numerous examples in history:

· In studies of the Napoleonic and U.S. Civil Wars it has been
shown that lines of two hundred to a thousand men standing thirty
yards apart and firing their muskets at an exposed enemy regiment
produced kill rates of  one to two per minute.  For point of
reference, these were weapons that could fire between one and
five rounds per minute and would have an accuracy rate of 50%.
This should have resulted in a killing rate of hundreds per minute.  

· In World War Two, Army Brigadier General S.L.A. Marshall worked
with a team of Historians both during and after the war.  They
conducted interviews with literally thousands of soldiers in more
than four hundred infantry companies.  The results they found were
consistently the same: only 15 to 20 percent of American riflemen
in combat in World War would fire at the enemy.  

Interestingly it was found that those forces that were further
removed from their enemy had far less difficulty killing.  Bombers,
and even snipers had a much higher kill rate then their counterparts
in the infantry who faced their opponents at close range.

Making Soldiers into More Efficient Killers
As members of the U.S. military have become more aware of these
natural tendencies to avoid killing, the training of soldiers
has been modified to result in higher killing rates.
During Korea, figures gathered by Marshall indicate that about
55% of U.S. troops were firing accurately upon the opposition.
In Vietnam it is estimated that 95% of the soldiers fired at their
enemies. The methods used to accomplish this were based on
desensitization, conditioning and denial.

The training camps of World War II and these later wars differed
dramatically.  Studies of the methods used in these camps show that
use of the term "killing" was far more a part of the trainer's
vernacular in the later wars.  Also the targets more accurately
resembled human beings.  Where once soldiers practiced shooting
bulls-eyes, they now practice on human shaped targets that pop
out at them. Some of these targets are even filled with jugs of
red liquid to more effectively simulate a person being killed by
a bullet.  The point was to make the killing of what looked like
a human being instinctual and reflexive.

There are also distancing techniques through mechanization.
It's easier to kill another human being if you're looking
through a simulator, scope, or any sort of device that makes
them look less like a human being and more like a figure on
the screen.   

Another factor utilized is the use of pressure from leaders
and members of a group.  Two of the most famous experiments in
the field of psychology help illustrate the methods used in the
training of soldiers and more recently, police.  In one
experiment a person was told that they would be helping to
administer an experiment.  Their job, at the direction of a
person in a lab coat, was to deliver shocks to a third party.
In reality the person administering the shocks was the unwitting
subject.  The person in the lab coat and the person receiving the
shocks were working together.  As the experiment proceeded the
person in the lab coat would direct the true subject to keep
increasing the level of shocks administered.  The simple mechanism
of having an authority figure there, ordering the person on was
enough to make the vast majority of the subjects continue to
administer shocks long after they were aware that what they
were doing would kill the person.

In practical matters, this resulted in the "improvement" of having
more commanders in the field to urge on the troops.  

Another experiment involved group psychology.  Two groups of people
were selected at random. One was told that they were guards, the
others, prisoners.  With no other stimulus, the two groups evolved
distinct behavior patterns.  The guards becoming ever brutal and
enforcing each other's behavior.

This of course mirrors the sort of psychology that allowed U.S.
troops to participate in events such as the massacre at Mai Lai.
Stories also abound of troops shooting children, raping women,
and executing entire villages.  The point is that the group of
soldiers engaged in acts that would have been individually repugnant
and unthinkable to the vast majority as individuals.  The effect
these acts have is one of disheartening the affected population. 

Transferring these Skills to the Police
The reason this report examines the training methods of the
military in such detail is that the training methods of the
police have begun to resemble those of the military, especially
as many of these police units train with and go into action with
those of the military.  Police shooting simulators, enormous video
games, train police to reflexively shoot at human targets.
Police sniper ranges also feature human figures with exploding
heads filled with red liquid.  Police gear including night vision
goggles, gas masks, all serve to add another layer of distancing
to what the police are doing.

The police have also utilized what has been learned from the field
of psychology's most famous experiments.  Where government has been
cutting middle level management in nearly every field, the opposite
is true of the police.  Instead the trend has been to increase the
number of field commanders.  This of course makes it more likely
that police will be more likely to perform tasks that they consider
repugnant such as tear-gassing members of their community.  Consider
the incidents at 6th and Pike where police were talked into removing
their masks.

Consider also the analogy of gangs.  Philadelphia Timoney's remarks
not withstanding, there are numerous instances of police forming into
gangs and performing acts as despicable as those of the worst of the
troops in Vietnam.  In New York the Mollen Commission reported
them forming gangs, taking property from murder victims, selling
drugs and even going into a brothel, chasing out the johns and
raping the prostitutes.  In New Orleans one officer was convicted of
murdering someone informing on a drug dealer she worked for.  In
Portland, a survey by the city's metropolitan human rights commission
found the thing that members of the city's minority population most
feared was the police.  There are of course no end to the number of
citizens who have attended forums in the past year to speak about
police abuse, not only in relation to the WTO but also among the
poor and minorities as well.  One cannot help wondering if this
is in some way deliberate as it is in many third world regions?


The Correct Term is "Less Lethal"
One of the most efficient ways to get people to be able to inflict
pain or harm is to build up denial mechanisms.  

Most of the police in Seattle seemed to have believed that the
weapons they had weren't capable of killing anybody.  This is
seen by the repeated referral to them as "non-lethal" rather
than "less-lethal" weapons.  The term "non-lethal" was used
in some of the SPD training materials and in many of the
officers' afteraction reports.  It was even used by Chief
Norm Stamper during WTO related Press Conferences when he
acknowledged these weapons existence.  Moreover the police
officers are even forced to expose themselves to the effects
of some these weapons.  The authors of this report have been
giving training videos that show the police pepper spraying
each other.  For most the atmosphere is jubilant, almost
like a watching a frat party.  The officers make jokes, and
go through macho posturing routines.

Using these weapons themselves is probably a huge adrenaline
rush.  Like taking part in a furious snowball fight as a kid,
the adrenaline is pumping, the other side says "ow," but it's
all in good fun.   The author of this report had the opportunity
of joking with a police officer who was inside the Ministerial
doing security.  The officer was asked questions about how
quickly he'd be able to disperse the delegates with the same
weapons he'd used on the demonstrators. The officer's face
lit up as he joked about a smoke bomb here and a concussion
grenade there.   The point in relating this is not to condemn
this officer but to realize that these weapons have a powerful
intoxicating effect, especially if one's been raised on t.v.
and video games, as so many have.

The problem is that the term "non-lethal" is a misnomer.
These products' manufacturers refer to them as "less lethal."

In essence, these are weapons that can and have produced many
fatal injuries.  These have been documented in their use during
war time, their use as weapons of "civil control" in other parts
of the world including South Africa, Israel and Ireland and studies
of their use domestically as part of law enforcement.

Indications are that a large part of the reason Seattle Police
did not consider these lethal had to do with their training.
This is indicated by its placement in the "use of force continuum."
A use of force continuum is a guideline that tells an officer how
much force is appropriate for a given situation, or put another
way, how much force should be used to counter a specific type of
threat.  The rankings for these weapons provided by the manufacturer
and the SPD are quite different.  The manufacturer rates these
weapons in the same range as use of a gun or other potentially
lethal force.  The SPD rates them slightly above a verbal command.

Projectile Weapons

"… Plastic and rubber bullets were products of British colonial
experience in Hong Kong where the flying teak baton round became
the template for future kinetic weapons.  The concept was one of
a flying truncheon which could disperse a crowd without using
small arms.  They were however regarded as too dangerous for
use on white people, so in 1969, Porton Down came up with a
'safer' version for use in Northern Ireland in 1970.  Just as
plastic bullets were considered too dangerous for use in
mainland Britain until 1985 when they proliferated throughout
the UK's police forces, so were baton rounds regarded as too
dangerous for the residents of Northern Ireland but not Hong
Kong.  Now plastic bullets have been deployed in virtually every
continent from the USA to Argentina, to South Africa…"
- An Appraisal of Technologies of Political Control, page 22. 
- European Parliament, January 6, 1998.

There were several type of projectile weapons, used by the
police during the Seattle Ministerial.  These projectile
weapons included: 
· 12 gage pump action shot guns
· 37mm and 40 mm weapons that fired large versions of what
were in the shot gun shells

Both of these fired a variety of projectiles including:
· 32 caliber rubber bullets
· 60 caliber rubber bullets
· wooden dowels
· leaded weights called "bean bags"
· a variety of chemical agents

There was also CO2 powered launchers that fired individual
.69 rubber spherical projectiles, or rubber bullets, at
350+ feet per second.  

Additionally, exploding, "less lethal" grenades released
some of these projectiles.

What makes these weapons less likely to produce lethal
injuries is both the fact that ammunition that is propelled
is physically lighter than that of the traditional firearms
and that the explosive charge that propels these projectile
is not as powerful as that is used for traditional firearms.  

In theory, the smaller explosive charge delivers the projectiles
at a slower speed.  This less powerful charge is crucial to
these weapons not producing fatalities.  If a lightweight
plastic munition is given a large enough charge it can easily
be lethal.  In fact some of the more popular "cop killer"
bullets are made out of similar materials to some of the
"less lethal" rounds.  They are simply propelled with enough
velocity to penetrate a "bullet-proof" Kevlar vest - it is
similar to the way that a straw can penetrate a tree or a
concrete block in a hurricane.

The smaller explosive charge is why none of these projectiles
are dispensed from semi-automatic type weapons that rely on
the charge's backfire to cycle the next round into the chamber.
The 37mm and 40mm mechanically load the next round in the manner
of a revolver.  The pump action shot guns require the user to
manually cycle the next round in to the chamber.   The rub is
that the weapons still must have a sufficient charge to propel
the projectiles as far as they are intended to travel.  In
practice what this means is that they are traveling at much
faster speeds when they leave the muzzle, then when they
arrive at the distance they are designed to hit their targets at.  

Though there is some variation with the many types of cartridges
and projectiles used, as a general rule they shouldn't be striking
anything closer than fifteen feet, or you're risking serious
injury, trauma and possible death.

Even at these distances, the manufacturer's guidelines stress
that there are limited areas of the human body that these
projectiles are designed to hit with a minimum expectation
of loss of life.  These areas where these weapons can be
shot are limited to the areas of large muscle mass which
include the buttocks and thighs.  

Some of the munitions, such as the cartridges with multiple
rubber bullets, are not even intended to be fired directly
at the target.  Instead they should be fired at the pavement
in front of a large crowd so that they will lose velocity as
they ricochet up and hit their intended targets.   This
method is called "skip firing."

The literature provided by the Armor Holdings Company, a
manufacturer and distributor of these weapons warns: 
 "Avoid striking the head, neck groin and spinal area."   
Armor Holdings gives a very lengthy list of the possible
injuries that can result from these weapons misuse, or
even by chance if used correctly.

Shots to the head can result in 
· " Concussion - Mild injury to the brain resulting in short
term loss of consciousness and memory, headache and possibly
vomiting.
· "Contusion - Bruising of the brain tissue or spinal cord,
resulting in a loss of normal brain function to the
affected area; may cause swelling hemorrhage, unconsciousness,
and possibly death.
· "Fractures - may result in abrasions, contusions,
lacerations or, (sic) avulsions to brain and spinal
tissue requiring neurological and orthopedic remedies.
a) "Fractures to trachea and/or pharynx that could
obstruct the airway.
b) "Fractures may effect the teeth, jaw, facial bones,
nose, sinus cavities and auditory organs.

Shots to the chest can result in:
· "Mydrocordial Contusion - Bruising of the heart and
surrounding tissue (thepericarium) resulting in tachycardia,
arrhythmia, or weakening of the aorta or pulmonary artery
that could result in tearing.
· Fractures to the sternum or rib cage that may cause hemothorax,
pneumothorax, hemmoraghic shock, or diagrammatic rupture; all
of which are potentially fatal.

Shots to the abdomen:
· Depending on the force of the blow, the trauma can lacerate
the liver spleen, rupture the stomach and bruise or damage
the kidneys and intestines.

These are the instructions provided with the munitions by
Armor Holdings Inc.  It is hard to imagine how they could
be more explicit.  Yet it seems from an overwhelming body
of evidence, that these warnings were routinely ignored.

Witness statements given to organizations including NLG,
DAN Legal and others report police firing both from
distances that are potentially lethal or trauma inducing,
and shooting into parts of the body that are potentially
lethal or trauma inducing.  This is confirmed in photos and
video taken by the press, members of the independent media
center and hundreds of independent citizens. 

One witness states that an officer pointed a large barreled
weapon in their direction and shot them.   At lease one of
the projectiles seems to have struck them in the eye.  Either
from the force of the projectile, or as a reaction to the
pain, they fell back into a large metal box. This person
suffered partial blindness, continued bleeding in the eye,
and the possibility of a detached retina.

Another person states that they were struck in the face by
the rubber projectiles and that they made holes as they
passed through the area around their mouth.

Neither of these individuals or any of the others shot
with these rounds was, according to available evidence,
ever offered medical treatment by the police.  In fact
this is something that is mandated by the manufacturers,
the trainers and the SPD's own guidelines.  All of these
require filling out a medical report each time a suspect
is struck with one of these potentially lethal rounds.
No completed forms of this type have ever been presented
to this group.

One Los Angeles Sheriff's Department Deputy wrote in a
chat line for members of law enforcement, during a
discussion on Seattle:

"As a less lethal weapons tactics instructor, I was
somewhat concerned with what I saw.

"Why were officers with less-lethal weapons engaging
suspects while their partners watched?  These personnel
should have been behind skirmish lines.

"I also hope that 37mm Stinger rounds were not being fired
 into the faces of demonstrators as some still photographs
suggest.  Shooting these rounds above a suspect's waist is
only an option at our agency in deadly force situations.
Firing Stinger ordinance point-blank into someone's face
escalates the chance of inflicting a lethal injury.

"I noticed officers were firing full-auto pepperball guns in
addition to tossing CS grenades. It was not clear what they
were hoping to gain-crowd dispersal or shepherding suspects
toward an arrest area?  In either case, it seemed like too
much of a good thing.

Col. Ijames of the Springfield Missouri PD, a leading trainer
and expert on the subject notes that at least six fatalities
have occurred as a result of the use of these weapons in the
United States, and an unknown number in Europe.  Speaking in
a recent training session, Ijames told the story of someone
in Canada who was struck in the chest with a leaded weight
known a s a "bean bag" round.  The lead projectile traveled
through the suspect's chest cavity into their heart.  "The
subject was DRT - dead right there." 

Ijames also stressed the need for prompt medical attention
with anyone who is shot with any of these rounds: 

"You can't see what's going on inside the subject.  He may
have internal bleeding.  If he goes into the drunk tank and
dies, you are going to be in trouble."

Additional complications in the deployment of these weapons
has to do with the very nature of the situations in which they
are deployed.  In essence, the very nature of crowd control
situations makes their deployment as practiced in a training
situation, impractical.  Simply put, with hundreds, or even
dozens of people moving around in a close area, it is impossible
to factor in the distance, trajectory for each of the people so
that the weapon may be fired in a "safe" manner.  This is of
course exacerbated with the grenades.

This inability to actually use the weapons in their
intended manner is born out by studies after the extensive
use of rubber bullets in Ireland.  One report compiled by
physicians in the early 1970's includes documentation of
the following as some of the injuries sustained from 90
patients who sought hospital treatment after being hit
with rubber bullets:

 32 fractures of facial bones
8 ruptured eye globes, all resulting in blindness 
3 cases of severe brain damage
7 cases of lung injury
4 cases of facial disfigurement

This and similar studies have found that the majority
of these injuries were caused not only by their being
pointed at the wrong parts of the body, but being fired
at far too close a distance.  In another study done of
12 fatalities caused by these bullets, inquests found
that six out of the twelve killed were not in any way
involved in any civil disturbance, and seven of the
twelve were children fifteen years or younger.  

It was also found, that each time these weapons were
used, they required a stronger response.  As was found
in a 1987 study conducted by the Richardson Institute
at the University of Lancaster:

"The initial use of water canon thus gave way to the use
of CS gas.  This was augmented by rubber bullets which
were then replaced by the harder hitting PVC variety,
and in greater quantities.  Further empirical work
suggested…the resistance they bred led to a successive
deployment of each subsequent and more violent phase
of the low intensity conflict programme.  In effect
they bred the dissent they were designed to 'fix.'"
(Emphasis added.)

It was based on facts such as these that their use was
banned by the European Parliament in 1982, and upheld a
s a recommendation in 1998. (An Appraisal of Technologies
of Political Control, European Parliament, Luxembourg,
January 6, 1998.)



Chemical Irritant Weapons 

"On November 30 I observed police throw tear gas
canisters at non-violent protesters…downtown.
They were not…(warning) the crowds and people were
taken by surprise.  I had to assist an elderly man
momentarily blinded by gas."

"Around 8'O Clock PM, at my friend's apartment on
(Capitol Hill) I was inside the apartment - not even
participating in the events.  Watching t.v. coverage
on Channel 5.  Eyes started burning inside the apartment
building.  Realized it was tear gas.  I went outside.
Police outside.  I complained to police about gas.
Police said, 'I don't give a fuck.  If you don't want
something more severe, go back inside your apartment.'
…Gas continued inside for 2-3 hours. "

"Skin irritation, chest pain…am asthmatic have heart problem.
Was involved in good dose of pepper spray…could not rest
could not breathe. Used (respirator) machine (to breathe)."

- From Declarations collected by the Seattle National Lawyer's
Guild Data Collection Group.

Speaking before a recent panel at the Environmental Law
Conference in Eugene, Dr. Kirk Murphy, a UCLA physician
told those assembled that they were part of the largest
experiment in chemical warfare in recent history.  The reason
Dr. Murphy was able to make this statement was that CN and
CS gas fall into a sort of limbo where they are not subject
to testing for their effects.  They are not classified as
weapons of war, though they have been used in warfare extensively.  

Chemical Irritant Weapons were first introduced by Allied
forces during World War I.  They were intended to clear
out German trenches so that the Allies could then machine-gun
them.  It was a weapon that remained popular with the Allies
in the subsequent struggles they had with their colonies.
The RAF dropped it on the Afghan trenches in the 1920's.  The
French and Spanish used it in Morocco.  The book A Higher Form o
f Killing provides this summary of the use and development of
tear gas:

"The Geneva Protocol had laid down firm controls over the
use of gas in war.  But the use of chemical weapons, like
tear gas, by domestic police forces was a matter purely for
national governments.  Both the United States and Britain
had established factories to manufacture CN gas after the
First World War, and the British were soon using the gas
against rioters in the colonies.  The weapon which replaced
it, and was used in Vietnam, CS gas,  (named after the two
American scientists, Carson and Staughton who discovered it
in 1928,) provides a near-perfect example of the way in which
British chemical warfare research, despite its commitment to
purely defensive purposes came to be applied to war."

Britain realized the shortcomings of CN gas in the 1950's
in Korea and Cyprus.  In particular, it was ineffective in
controlling "rioters" who had only to close or cover their
eyes to protect themselves from its effects.  CS gas had the
"advantage" of producing a far wider range of effects.  These
effects included making the victims' eyes burn and water,
their skin itch, their noses run, and inducing coughing and
vomiting.  

All of the above are complaints, not coincidentally, made
by members of the Seattle Police Department in their
afteraction reports.  

The British first tested CS in Cyprus in 1958.  Buoyed by
the success of this, the British continued to use CS 'in
support of civil power' as in when it was deployed in
Ireland a few years later.  

The U.S., under General Westmoreland, Commander in Chief
of Operations in Vietnam, began to use CS Gas as early as
1965.  Because of the deservedly horrendous reputation
chemical and gas warfare had acquired, the term "tear
gas" was first coined and U.S. Troops were specifically
trained to refer to it by that term and that term alone.
Literally thousands of tons of CS gas were dumped by the
U.S. forces on the Vietnamese.  Its purpose was to drive
out those in hiding so they could be killed by machine guns
and carpet bombs.   The CS gas doubtless mixed with defoliants
such as Agent Orange and added to the literally millions of
persons who's long term injuries may never be understood.
(A Higher Form of Killing, Robert Harris and Jeremy Paxman,
esp. pp. 9, 44, 194-5, 233.)

The effects these substances have on humans and other living
creatures is still not understood.  A major portion of the
notion of their safety comes from the belief that they will
naturally disperse, so that persons will not be exposed to
concentrated doses.  This of course does not happen if the
agents are used in a confined space, or are altered by such
factors as weather.  

All information provided on the safety of these agents to law
enforcement comes form the manufacturers themselves.  In many
ways it is the ultimate WTO dynamic, as if the manufacturer of
DDT or Thalidomide or Malathion were in charge of determining
its products safety.  The police rely on the manufacturers of
these products for assurances of their safety, and the public
in turn relies on police.

Compositions of these products all contain carriers and agents.
As with the other weaponry examined, the lethality of each
can vary depending upon the strength with it is mixed.
Often it is the carrier that is the most lethal part of
these weapons.

CN
CN is more commonly known by the brand name of its most
popular brand, "mace."  During instructions in its use,
trainees are told that it is not a gas, but really small
metal barbs contained in a carrier agent.  According to one
manufacturer the propellant in the Def-Tec formula used in
Seattle added a methylene choride a toxic substance used
in paint removers as a propellant. OSHA classifies methelyne
chloride as a "potential occupational carcinogen."  Both
methylene chloride and CN are classified as hazardous
materials that require notification of release.  U.S.
Army research shows that methylene chloride is, "reasonably
expected to be a carcinogen."  Both the U.S. Army and NATO
have removed it from their arsenals.

CS
CS is also a solid that is mixed with pyrotechnic carrier agent
and propelled through a pressurized aerosol.  The basic
instructions manuals supplied by the manufacturers and the
Seattle Police Department require that any person or group
of persons being sprayed with CS gas be given an exit path.   

There is no doubt that these are potentially lethal
substances.  In an investigation of the Israeli Army,
the United Nations determined that there were dozens of
deaths resulting from application of CS on Palestinians
in closed spaces.    The substance also killed a large number
of children in South Africa under apartheid.  CS has been
determined among other things to raise blood pressure,
sometimes heart failure, so could be potentially be the
cause of the heart problems experienced by the SPD officer
mentioned in one of their afteraction reports.  "Of
particular concern," writes Harvard epidemiologist Howard
Hu, "are allegations that exposure to tear gas has been
associated with increases in miscarriages and stillbirths."
Hu has also linked CS to chromosomal mutation - changes to
the very structure of a person's DNA.  CS also particularly
puts people with asthma, diabetes and heart conditions at
greater risks.  The Journal of the American Medical
Association (JAMA) found that one exposure to respiratory
irritants similar to CS have led to the development of
'reactive airways disease syndrome' - in layperson's terms
this has meant a prolonged cough and shortness of breath.
The British medical Journal The Lancet called for CS Gas
to be withdrawn from police until more research has been
carried into health implications.    

OC
OC (oleoresin capsicum, cap-stun or pepper spray) is made
from extract of cayenne pepper.  The substance gained
popularity, because unlike CN gas, it did not merely
incapacitate the person by causing great discomfort, it
caused involuntary physical reactions. The fact that it
caused involuntary physical reactions made more effective
on persons on drugs, persons suffering from psychotic
episodes, and animals whose nasal systems are different
from humans.  Pepper spray was first endorsed by the FBI
in 1987 and trickled down to most of the other law enforcement
agencies in the country.  Thomas Ward the director of the
FBI's Quantico Firearms Training Unit, brought the weapon
into the FBI's arsenal and wrote the main study cited by
law enforcement to defend it's use.
  
In February of 1996 Ward pled guilty to accepting a $57,500
kickback from the pepper-spray manufacturer who was the
leading supplier to the FBI making the entire certification
of the substance suspect.  

Some of the harshest criticisms of OC has come form Prison
Guards and Police Officers, most of whom are required to
have it sprayed in their eyes as part of their training.  

OC may have some genuine utility for law enforcement, for
example it does provide an intermediary use of force that
might not otherwise be available.  LA Chief Willie Williams,
 for example, states that had it been available at the time,
it would have been used to contain Rodney King.  But all
objective criteria seem to prove that its use is becoming
all too prevalent.  

It is used routinely in prisons not only to extract troublesome
prisoners, but also simply to quiet them.  

In Northern California, it was applied by swabs to protesters'
eyes. The Court found that a reasonable person could conclude
this was excessive use of force.

In Seattle, it was used repeatedly at close range on
demonstrators on the street.  It was also used in jail
situations that from some witnesses' statements, seem to
resemble third world torture scenes, more than images
of U.S. Justice

Like the other agents, OC has been linked to numerous
fatalities.  A 1995 article by the Los Angeles Times noted
a minimum of 61 deaths linked with the use of OC by police
in the U.S.A.   A study by the ACLU in the same year
documented 27 deaths in custody over a two-year period
because of the use of OC in California alone.

Methods of Dispersal - Varied and Inaccurate

There are several methods of dispersal for all of
these agents.

There were cartridges fired from the 37mm launchers,
and shotguns. These seem to have been filled mostly
with CS gas, some CN Gas.  The police seem to have used
these to fire into the middle of crowds from a distance.
Some of these cartridges contained combinations of these
and other "less lethal technologies."  For example, the
"barricade rounds" were designed to penetrate a heavy
barrier, then release then chemical agent on the other
side.  Other cartridges combined the release of the chemical
agents with that of rubber projectiles.  Yet others
released multiple containers that dispersed the agents
to minimize the chance that they could be thrown back
at the police.

There were grenades that could be thrown.  These contained
similar components to the cartridges.

There were paint-ball guns.  These shot rubber containers
filled with OC powder.  

There were canisters the size of small fire extinguishers
that were carried by officers. These seem to have been
carrying OC, and sometimes a combination of OC and CN.
The OC was dispersed in both the form of a mist and in
the form of foam that according to training officers
was far more potent.

There were portable fogger units.

All of these methods of disposal encountered problems. 

As reported above, police officers fired at themselves,
dropped canisters at their feet, had gas blow back at
them on the street and in buses of prisoners, and had
at least one grenade explode in an officer's hands.  

The problems in dispersing these agents among large crowds
were even worse.  There was no way the police could separate
who was being hit with these agents with any accuracy.  They
could not separate the old, the invalids, and the infants.
][They could not separate out those with heart conditions,
diabetes, asthma or AIDs.  They could not separate the
bystanders from the demonstrators.

And they could not offer the medical aid they were required
to once the gas was launched in large quantities.    

Lethal Agents + Inaccurate Dispersal Techniques = Bad News
In the months leading up to the WTO Ministerial, Seattle
officials explicitly played down the use of their weaponry.
 Mayor Paul Schell had even encouraged people to come do their
 holiday shopping downtown on November 30th.  He had stated that
downtown would be the safest place in Washington to be that day.  

In considering the effects these weapons had, look also at who
some of the most vulnerable people subjected to these weapons
were:
 
There were children and pregnant women.

Capitol Hill arguably the community most effected by
these weapons of war, houses several retirement homes.  

Perhaps most vulnerable, were the people with AIDs, there
to protest the policies of the WTO - an organization that
prevented the manufacture of less expensive treatments and
vaccines.  These may have been the people who suffered the
worst effects from these agents.  Many with this stigmatizing
disease were forced not only to take time off of work because
of the effects the gas had on them, but also to offer explanations
to their employers and acquaintances.

There seems to be at least one fatality as a result of deployment
of these "less-lethal" technologies during the WTO Ministerial.  

Skip Meyer was a long time activist and video producer.  He
suffered from asthma and AIDS.  This put him in a more vulnerable
position during the Seattle WTO Ministerial.  Those who were close
to him attributed his recent death to complications resulting from
these conditions and exposure to these toxic chemicals. That Meyer
had these pre-existing conditions does not make his death reasonable
or even legally justified.  Under the most basic precepts of tort
liability, a defendant takes a victim as they are.  

The implications of Meyer's death are far reaching.  It is well
known that the substance adversely effects those with AIDs.  Consider
that among the leaders of those activist groups the police had met
with were leaders of AIDs groups including ACT-UP.  Perhaps Meyer's
death can be excused as a case of cognitive dissonance.  Future
deaths cannot be excused this way.  Knowingly spraying these
chemical agents into an infected population has to be recognized
for what it is, a lethal use of force.  It must also be acknowledged
that if these chemical agents can be expected to be deployed with
minimal warning those suffering from AIDs have effectively lost their
right to free speech.

Given the numbers of children, old people and disabled present
at this event the numbers could also have been far higher and
indeed they may be.  What has kept many of these people from
coming out with their stories is that they themselves are undergoing
feelings of post-traumatic-stress-disorder usually assigned to
survivors of wars.  The legal system itself also presents massive
hurdles, hurdles few people have the resources to overcome.  Some
state frankly, that they fear retribution.

In the aftermath of the exposure to these weapons, questions
are being raised about the origin and toxicity of agents
that were employed.   Some of these are questions that may
yield quicker answers such as where did the tear gas used
after the SPD exhausted their initial supply come from and
what was in it?  

The other thing to consider is that many of the effects of
these weapons are simply not known, especially since they
have not been widely studied.  Matters concerning the lethality
of these materials may emerge over time as happened with
symptoms associated Agent Orange and is happening now with
the Gulf War syndrome.   Ironically, should this occur,
police officers that were effected may find themselves in
a position similar to that of the veterans of these wars,
relying on the protesters for information and support.

Ultimately, those in both the military and in law enforcement
must look hard and honestly at the dynamic that took place
in the streets of Seattle during the WTO Ministerial.  They
must look at the ever more militarized force they are
creating, the effect it has on the citizens right to free
 speech, the effect it has on the safety of those who
enforce the policies and the effect it is having on the
very fabric of democracy.

In Seattle, there is a moral and legal obligation to set
up long term monitoring facilities for those who were
exposed to these lethal substances.


CHAPTER SIX
The Breakdown Inside The Ministerial

"It is a matter of record that, despite a year of hard
preparatory work by the Chairman of the General Council,
delegations and the Secretariat, the Ministerial failed to
reach agreement either on the launch of a new Round of trade
negotiations or on the other important points which had
emerged in the course of the preparatory process.
Furthermore, the WTO found itself at the centre of a wave
of resentment against many aspects of the global economy,
for which Seattle became a focus." 
Introduction to the Annual Report of the World Trade Organization

Thus far this report has focused on the factors that created
the dynamic that took place in the streets of Seattle during
the WTO Ministerial.  We now look at the dynamics happening
inside the WTO itself.

For much of 1999 the WTO operated as a leaderless organization.
Perhaps it was the earlier protests the organization had brought
that made it difficult to find someone to act as the organization's
main representative.  From about the time Seattle was announced
as the site of the Ministerial, till September of 1999 when the
visit, and collisions it brought with it were inevitable, a
period of nearly four months, the WTO was a leaderless
organization.  

In September of 1999, Michael Moore, a politician from New
Zealand, who'd been out of elective office for almost a decade
was given the job.  Moore had been a long time friend of WTO
policies having represented New Zealand at the first APEC
Ministerial Meeting and having been active in launching the
Uruguay Rounds that created the WTO while New Zealand's Trade
Minister.
(Annual Report of the WTO, p.2.; Short Biography of Mike
Moore WTO Home-Page, www.wto.org) 

Moore met with some of the citizens of Seattle in early
October, speaking before the Washington Council on International
trade and at the University of Washington.  During the question
and answer periods Moore revealed himself as a belligerent,
with a superficial understanding of the issues, and a
willingness to lie, obfuscate, talk over people he disagreed
with and ignore questions.

Perhaps Moore's most ridiculous argument was when he claimed
that it was a form of cultural imperialism to say that the
citizens of countries with oppressive dictators might not
want their despots.

The Dynamic Created Within the Ministerial Mirrored
that it had Created on the Streets

"Do you think this process broke down at any point?"
"This process didn't work at any point"
- exchange between reporter and Zimbabwe Delegate.

Faced with a tighter deadline and many already perturbed
delegates it is easy to see how Director General Moore
himself could have sown the seeds for the meeting's
destruction as he faced ever tighter time pressures.

"We're a democracy and understand what democracy is all
about.   This is not democracy this is just ridiculous."
-Namibian Delegate

From conversations with and statements collected from
delegates, Moore and the others in the WTO responded to
these pressures by making the rules of the meetings ever
more rigid.  Meeting rooms were changed hurriedly and many
delegations not notified.  Some delegates found themselves
barred from participation when they did find out about meetings.

"What has been going on in Seattle is a scandal.  Developing
countries that form more than two-thirds of the membership of
the WTO are being coerced and stampeded by the major powers,
especially the host country the US, to agree to a Declaration
to which they were given very little opportunity to draft of consider.

"Most of the important negotiation have taken place in
"green room" meetings where only a few countries are invited.
Most of the developing country members of the WTO have not
been able to participate.  Even if a country is invited to
a meeting on a particular issue, it may not be a participant
in other issues.  Many developing countries were not invited
to any meeting on any issue at all.

"As a result most Ministers have been insulted by their not
being able to take part in decisions that seriously affect
their countries and people. Worse, they have had little chance
to even know what is being discussed, by whom or where.  Nor
what the results of these discussions were.

"Also, the programme has been so crammed and tight that
when the final draft Declaration is produced, Ministers
and officials would hardly have any time at all to consider
its contents.

"To expect them to 'join in the consensus' through the
blackmail that otherwise the Ministerial Conference would
be deemed a failure, is to impose a kind of blackmail."
- Martin Khor, Director, Third World Network, 12/3/1999

Khor's statement was echoed by two thirds of the delegates
in attendance.  The Caribbean Delegations, The Latin American
Delegations, The African Delegations, all issued statements
and or held press conferences where they condemned the process.

As the conference drew to a close the press had come back inside.
As most of them were barred from most sessions, the 2,500 WTO
accredited journalists had begun covering the streets of Seattle.
The tear gassings, the arrests, the no-protest zones had become
the main focus of some of the world's top reporters.

General Director Moore had said there would be a final briefing
on the WTO at 7:00 PM on Friday December 3.  Hundreds of journalists
arrived at the sixth floor Green Room.  Lugging their heavy
professional gear.  Computers.  Video Cameras.  Bulky tri-pods.
They staked out places and waited.  And waited.

After a few hours a representative of the Ministerial rushed in.
The meeting was happening right away on the fourth floor Green
Room.  Right away.  Hurry Hurry!  Run!

The hundreds of reporters packed up their bulky gear as quickly
as they could.  Then they made their way to the single escalator
that was the only way to move between the floors of the convention
center.  Some months later during the April protests against the
IMF and World bank in Washington DC, the Activists' "Convergence
Center" had been shut down when the Fire Marshall, citing overuse
and lack of exit space, had declared it a fire hazard.  One
wonders how the Convention Center would have held up to such
scrutiny?

On the escalators, the reporters crowded together, so many grains
trying to get through a large funnel.  These people were exhausted
from a week of breathing gas on the street and receiving what
seemed like little more than hot air and obfuscation inside the
WTO itself.   There was palpable exhaustion painted on their faces.
Many of their neat professional clothes were inundated with a
mixed scent of cayenne and sweat.  

When they arrived at the door to the fourth floor Green Room they
were stopped.  They waited.  After a time it was decided that
this meeting was only for delegates.  And so the first of the
reporters made their way from the door of the fourth floor Green
Room.  As others continued off the single elevator they too
arrived and were disappointed.  This scene continued for at
least another twenty minutes.  To their credit, none of these
reporters broke any windows.



"The agenda thus far has seen us marginalized.  This morning
the African Delegation has put out a statement saying if our
issues are not addressed before the declaration is actually out
on the table we are going to withdraw our consensus because what's
the point of coming to the table in a negotiation process which
is purportedly to support the development interest of all
countries yet when they come to the table their interests
are completely out weighed.  If you really look at the
agenda that some of the north countries are putting out,
that's the US, the European Union, Japan and Canada in
particular, they totally ignore the issues of implementation ,
yet they want Africa to open up its markets...

"Also the preamble states that the WTO is about development.
For us development is about alleviating poverty, it's about
insuring that human rights are upheld, its insuring that people
are able to eat, its insuring that people are employed and well
employed, and not exploited and its insuring that people have
rights to services.
And basically what this round is suggesting and proposing is
that we sign these rights away in the interests of multinational
corporations.  And this is really the agenda.  And we can confirm
that this is the agenda, because any one of these US corporations
who have paid $250,000 US Dollars can have four representatives
in the US delegation to actually influence the process.  This
system is no longer about rules, it's about who has the money
to influence trade policy in northern countries and it's
absolutely outrageous." 
Mohau Pheko, African Woman's Congress
Remarks made on 12/3/1999

The Reporters had made the elevator circuit a few times and it
was getting close to midnight.  Now they were told that the
conference was in fact over and Mike Moore would speak with them.
The location was not the sixth floor where all their equipment
was set up, it was the press briefing area in the middle of the
fourth floor press area.  Once again, the rag tag army of the
world's finest reporters funneled their many hundreds down
the single narrow escalator. 

The press area was an enormous cavern filled with rows of
make shift cubicles freestanding computers and the like.
The pathways between the obstacles were narrow and so the
frenzied hurried press was again slowed.   

The small area that was designated for the final WTO press
conference could have fit perhaps fifty people.  The
reporters pressed in filling the small side room to many
times beyond its capacity.  Still the majority of their
number were outside the small cubicle where Moore's final
remarks to the world were to take place.  

To understand what happened next, it is important to
understand the mindset the reporters had been put in.
For most of the conference, they'd been denied access to
any meeting of importance.  Now, at the end of the event,
they were stuck in a hallway, anxious, on assignment, and
afraid they'd be scooped.  And inside the small room, Moore
himself was nowhere around.  There were merely a lot of tired
reporters, crowded together, breathing on each other.

Someone began to chant: "Mikey, come out and play."

The chant spread like wildfire.  Where a few days ago had
been an army of neatly clad professionals, now was a group
of people outraged with what they had experienced from the
World Trade Organization, and Director Mike Moore himself

Hurriedly the conference was moved back to the larger area
on the sixth floor. 

Once it started, the press conference quickly began to
resemble the reception Moore had received at UW in October.
The questions that reigned down on General Director Moore
from the crowd during this final conference were the same
asked by the demonstrators outside days ago and the majority
of the delegates only hours and minutes ago.  Moore was
discomforted.  Moore was confused.  Every question seemed to
make things worse.  

Moore left the conference with many wondering if the WTO
were now functionally dead.


CHAPTER Seven
Aftermath in Seattle

In its aftermath the Seattle WTO Ministerial has left a
legacy that must be addressed.

The Citizens of Seattle have, by and large lost faith
both with their police and with many of their elected
leaders.    In the weeks following the WTO hundreds of
citizens gave complaints or public testimony to either
the Mayor or the City Council in testimony that ran an
unprecedented twenty hours.

The police seem to be pursuing a policy of damage control.
They do not acknowledge that many, many of the citizens
that they are sworn to serve and protect were harmed.
The principle concerns expressed by the police are can
they more effectively control dissent next time.  Note
for example their continued requests for increased
intelligence gathering capabilities.   

Obviously this is not a way to gain a community's trust.
It is a way to occupy a hostile population.  As has been
shown by history's recent examples this usually makes
things worse.

Presently much of the investigations that are preceding
and the questions that are being asked have to do with
moneys that were promised, and the lack of support by the
largest Corporations such as Boeing, Weyerhaeuser and
Microsoft in picking up the tab, as many thought they would.
These are important questions both because there is a
considerable amount of money at stake and because as a
general matter of principal, these corporations must always
be held accountable.

But there are deeper issues too.  We need to look openly
and honestly at the violations of human rights that occurred
and have to look at them in the context of the increased
militarization of our country, and the economic system
that is making it necessary.

If the sort of human rights violations that had occurred
in Seattle were attributed to Iraq or Serbia or Grenada -
The tear gassing of thousands; The plucking of dissidents
off the street; The torture of people in jail - It could
easily serve as grounds for U.S. military intervention.

This report has discussed some of the ways individuals and
institutions can go into denial.  As an individual it can
be uncomfortable to look honestly at what one has done.
For an institution there can be the perception that
examination can create more damage than the problem itself.

Retired San Francisco Police Captain Charles Beene, who
has managed over a thousand demonstrations and parades
notes in his book Police Crowd Control, that honest
productive critiques by law enforcement have diminished
because of fear of providing information to defendants.
Beene writes: 

"This is unfortunate as far as tactical planning is
concerned.  Anxious not to give the defense ammunition
to use against them, many police departments, including
the SFPD, have stopped preparing written critiques after
demonstrations…

"Some form of critiquing past events is essential to
improving future performance, however.  For example, three
actions caused a lot of turmoil with demonstrators in San
Francisco in 1984, but using critiques we devised alternatives
to minimize trouble at later crowd events."  (Beene pp. 75-76.)

Seattle cannot deny what took place during the WTO Ministerial.
We have seen first hand the impacts of increasing corporate
control, and the mechanisms of control it brings with it.
We have seen the way it runs roughshod and destroys our
democratic institutions.  We have seen the way it treats
our citizens.

If Seattle does nothing it will be seen as the response.
People will come to accept loss of democratic institutions,
loss of representation, loss of Constitutionally guaranteed
rights.  People will accept ever-stronger uses of force
against our own population and ever-greater limits upon our
basic freedoms to speak and assemble freely.

Because of this we need a response that stops these inroads
on our most basic rights. We need to stop the militarization
of our law enforcement and the blurring of the lines between
crime and war.  We need to stop subsuming our democratic rights
and most basic safety measures to the immediate desires of the
world's largest corporations.  


SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS:


The City of Seattle should explore as far as possible the role
all federal law enforcement and military agencies had in the
decision making process, both in terms of the planning and during
the actual event.   Any agency's refusal to cooperate in this
investigation should be documented as part of the City's report,
and legal methods of obtaining this information should be
thoroughly investigated.

The City of Seattle needs to set up a long term study of the
effects that people exposed to these substances, including law
enforcement, are experiencing.  The results of this study should
be made accessible to all interested members of the public, and
should be actively distributed to other agencies considering the
use of these substances and the manufacturers of these substances.
In addition active treatment options should be made available to
those suffering from effects of these substances. 

At a minimum, police should be properly instructed that every
time they are deploying any of the "less lethal" weapons, it is
an act with the same potential consequences as the decision to
deploy a firearm. Consequently, use of any of these weapons
should be limited exclusively to those circumstances when it
is legitimate to use a firearm.   Using these weapons to
incapacitate an individual who poses an immediate threat of
loss of life, may in some circumstances, be legitimate if the
only other choice is a firearm.  Using these weapons to break
up any assembly, even if unlawful, should be recognized as an
improper use of force and should be banned for all such purposes,
unless there is an impending threat of loss of life, that cannot
otherwise be avoided. 

The present blurring of the lines between military and police
is a question of going too far and a violation of Posse Comitatus,
the citizens' protection against the military.  A hard look should
 be taken at the actual function of the special teams we have created
for our police.  The growth of these units should be frozen.
Assessments should be done of these units actual performance and
effectiveness.  Consideration should be given as to whether these
units can be reduced or even disbanded.

Analysis should also be done of the influence the training these
special police units receive on the training of their officers.
Are they for example, being given less emphasis on the preservation
of life and more on the taking of it?  Such factors should be
analyzed and corrected.

In the future, event s that raise any considerations of
public safety, and/or the abrogation of Constitutional Rights
must be dealt with openly and democratically, with adequate
participation from the public.  It is unclear whether those
officials responsible for bringing the WTO to Seattle knew of
its volatility when they first issued the invitation - as is
suggested in the recent report of WTO Accountability Review
Committee Panel I - or if this was something that became
clearer as they got closer to the event.  In either event,
once factors that threatened the safety, the lives and the
Constitutional rights of many of Seattle's citizens became
an integral part of the planning process just so the event
could continue, the elected officials of Seattle had an
obligation.  That obligation was not to the event, but to
their constituents, the citizens of Seattle, and to the
Constitution itself.  If there were still circumstances that
prevented the City of Seattle from upholding its basic duties,
it should have been readily apparent that having the WTO
Ministerial in Seattle was simply not worth the risk.  The
City should have done as Mayor Schell later did with the
Millennial New Years Eve party and simply ended the event
before it began. To violate the U.S. Constitution and to
use potentially lethal force against citizens who are not
themselves threatening such force, is a violation of the
most basic laws enabling us to maintain a free society.


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books:

Applegate, Rex, Riot Control Materials and Techniques,
Stackpole Books, 1969.

Beene, Captain Charles, Ret., Police Crowd Control,
Paladin Press, 1992,

Bosworth, Allan R., America's Concentration Camps,
W.W. Norton and Company, 1967.

Churchill, Ward, and Vander Wall, Jim, Agents of Repression,
South End Press, 1990.

Coulson, Danny, with Shannon, Elaine, No Heroes,
Simon and Schuster, 1999.

Das, Bhagirath Lal, An Introduction to the WTO Agreements,
Zed Books, 1998.

Domhoff, William G., Who Rules America,
Prentice-Hall, 1967.

Domhoff, William G., Who Rules America Now,
Prentice Hall, 1983.

Draffan, George and Jensen, Derrick, Railroads and Clearcuts,
Keokee Publishing Inc., 1995.

Greidner, William L., One World, Ready or Not,
Touchstone, 1997.

Grossman, Lt. Col. Dave, On Killing,
Little Brown, 1995.

Harris, Robert and Paxman, Jeremy, A Higher Form of Killing,
Hill and Wang, 1982.

Holbrook, Stewart H., The Age of the Moguls,
Doubleday and Company, 1953

Josephson, Matthew, The Robber Barons,
Harcourt Brace, 1934, Renewed 1962.

Kaplan, Robert D., The Coming Anarchy,
Random House, 2000.

Kopel, David B, and Blackman, Paul H., No More Wacos,
Prometheus Books, 1997

Koon, Sgt. Stacey, Presumed Guilty,
Regnery Gateway, 1992.

Korten, David, When Corporations Rule the World,
Berrett-Koehler, 1995.

Lundberg, Ferdinand, America's 60 Families,
Vanguard Press, 1937

Lundberg, Ferdinand, The Rich and the Super Rich,
Lyle Stuart, 1968.

Mander, Jerry and Goldsmith, Edward,
The Case Against the Global Economy,
Sierra Club Books, 1996.

Mathiessen, Peter, In the Spirit of Crazy Horse,
Viking, 1980, 1983,1991.

Rivers, Gayle, The War Against the Terrorists,
Stein and Day, 1986.

Seger, Dr. Karl, Antiterrorism Handbook, p. 90,
Presidio Press. 1990.

Seldes, George, Witness to a Century,
Ballantine Books, 1987.

Seldes, George, You Can't Do That, 1938.

Shrybman, Steven, A Citizen's Guide to
the World Trade Organization,
James Lorimer and Company, Ltd., 1999.

Shoup, Laurence H., and Minter, William,
Imperial Brain Trust,
Monthly Review Press, 1977. 

Van Creveld, Martin, The Transformation of War,
Macmillan, 1991.

Vernon, Asst. Chief Robert, L.A. Justice,
Focus on the Family Publishing, 1993.

Wallach, Lori and Sforza, Michelle,
Whose Trade Organization,
Public Citizen, 1999.

Williams, Chief Willie L., Taking Back Our Streets,
Scribner, 1996

Zepezauer, Mark, The CIA's Greatest Hits, Odonian Press, 1994

Zinn, Howard, A People's History of the United States,
Harper and Row, 1980.

Anthologies

Voices From Wounded Knee,
Akwesasne Notes, 1974.

25 Years on the MOVE,
Black United Fund, May 1996

Reports:

Report on Commission of Wartime Relocation
and Internment of Civilians,
University of Washington Press, 1997.

Report of the National Advisory Commission
on Civil Disorders,
New York Times Company, 1968.

1999 Annual Report of the World Trade Organization

1999 Annual Report of the Seattle Police Department

Seattle Police Department WTO Afteraction Report,
April 4, 2000

An Appraisal of Technologies of Political Control,
European Parliament,
Director General for Research, January 6, 1998.
 
Asymmetric Warfare, the Evolution and Devolution of
Terrorism; The Coming Challenge For Emergency and
National Security Forces,
Clark L. Staten,
Emergency Response and Research Institute, 4/27/98.

King County Sheriff's Office,
Draft Final Report on the WTO,
2-18-2000.

The Battle in Seattle,
Report by Robert Oedenthal.

An Independent Review of the World Trade Organization
Conference Disruptions in Seattle, Washington,
R.M. McCarthy and Associates, April 2000.

Warrior Cops - The Ominous Growth of Paramilitarism,
Dane Cecilia Weber,
CATO Institute, August 26, 1999.

www.infosubway.org/infosubway/wto_report/report.html