community-based, non-corporate, participatory media
Racist Slurs Used by the Police
by Mark
Sunday, Mar. 23, 2003 at 11:05 AM
Did you hear any racial slurs being used while you were in jail?
Hey gang,
I'm compiling my account of spending 30 hours in jail and I'm at the point where the police were taking names after the pat search. I know that I heard the word nigger used by the police a number of times and the person next to me was told he had a "spic name." And of course, just about everyone was called a faggot at some point in time. I'm asking to see if anyone has more racial slurs they heard or were called while in prison (I'm not asking about slurs used when we were getting arrested, I know that people were called niggers then as well).
Forgot the most important
by Mark
Sunday, Mar. 23, 2003 at 11:11 AM
Man, I forgot the most important one. While I was being fingerprinted, 24+ hours in, the police kept referring to the protesters as 'the terrorists.' They would say stuff like "we've got 12 more terrorists in H14" and "we'll process three more terrorists until we go back to others." Man I love the police, sure do love them a lot.
Slurs
by Bosco
Sunday, Mar. 23, 2003 at 6:58 PM
Get a life you liberal!!
THE PO-PO RULE THE WORLD!!!!!!
response....
by Sam B
Sunday, Mar. 23, 2003 at 11:26 PM
I got arrested in the M20 protest and Im a juvy, so they were careful not to say anything too bad to us... They did however call us stupid, try to alter our political views towards the pro-war perspective, and call us punks and the works, despite the fact that none of us had a previous record
KDKA person arrested???
by jc
Monday, Mar. 24, 2003 at 1:10 AM
apparently a KDKA news 2 person was arrested? is there any confirmation of this? i heard that their coverage of the news made it look like a rage against the machine video. lots of brutal looking cops and then people in the streets...adn then cops ready to bust some heads.
everybody deep down inside hates cops. my uncle is a racist pig. i don't hate him, but i hate what he does, stands for and believes in.
also, apparently the cops on the scene at the protest are mainly rookies and have somethign to prove to somebody. if the law suits go through and the activists win, then maybe these bone heads will be directing traffic around construction or writing parking tickets for a while.
just as i start to think that some cops are ok, shit like this happens and i'm reminded of why the pittsburgh police is under investigation by the FBI.
Jouvie also
by Misfit
Monday, Mar. 24, 2003 at 10:37 AM
ETchewy@hotmail.com
The only thing i was called when i was there was "punk", "moron", "dumbass", "terrorist", "stupid" and my favorate one was from my mom (pro-war) was "tree-hugging-punk-who-supports-terrorism"
Cop Insults
by Rob
Monday, Mar. 24, 2003 at 5:21 PM
I was only called "lanky douschebag" which isn't to far from the trouth. I heard of one possessing a "spic" last name and one said he looked like that dude with the hair in kid and play. Other than these singular insults, many insults were given to us all during the "gauntlet" of cops.
Idiots
by Jake
Monday, Mar. 24, 2003 at 9:08 PM
I do agree that you should have the right to protest, and you do. But, we should all be smart about this. Dealing with anti-war protests is taking up all the law enforcement resources throughout the country. Our law enforcement agencies have more important things to focus on, like possible terrorist attacks. We should also be thinking about our troops. They are putting their lives on the line for us.
Excuses
by Sam
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 9:19 AM
<<Dealing with anti-war protests is taking up all the law enforcement resources throughout the country. Our law enforcement agencies have more important things to focus on, like possible terrorist attacks.>>
I agree. They should be focusing on those potential attacks, instead of people committing nonviolent acts of civil disobedience.
Of course, the U.S. gov't has consciously increased the chance of a terrorist attack by attacking Iraq. By demanding an end to it, we are, in fact, attempting combat potential acts of terrorism.
<<We should also be thinking about our troops. They are putting their lives on the line for us.>>
I feel bad for the troops. I hope no harm befalls them. But they're not putting their lives on the line for us. They're putting their lives on the line for big business and for Bush's political career. Iraq does not pose an imminent threat.
The best way to support our troops is to demand they be sent home, where they will be safe.
Sure, you can argue that the protests will damage American morale. My response is that any officer wh would show his troops footage of American protestors probably shouldn't be in that position.
Cops
by Dave Z
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 10:09 AM
"everybody deep down inside hates cops. "
Speak for yourself.
Cops are there to do a dangerous, thankless job.....there are surely some bad cops just like there are bad anti-war protestors.
Cops go out everyday LOOKING for the bad guys, while you and other anti-war folks go out looking to cause unrest.
They are human like you are. Piss you off, and you yell obscenities at the cop....piss the cop off and he yells stuff back. Smack him and he smacks you back. Seems fair enough. But AHH...we hold the cops to a higher standard and they have to ket you spit at them and beat on them and they have to do NOTHING AT ALL? Get real.
Careful who you hate. That person may very well save your life one day, even possibly without you ever knowing it.
DZ
facts
by jwg
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 10:31 AM
yell at a cop and you get arrested, he'll yell back all right, but he will also beat and arrest you.
Cops should be there to protect the community, but sadly they are not. If they were, some of these crimes that go unchecked in pittsburgh, might be prevented.
And no, I'm not talking about jaywalking.
If the police did their job, you wouldn't have to see those "MURDERED" billboards up in certain neightborhoods in town.
Facts
by Dave Z
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 11:47 AM
"Cops should be there to protect the community, but sadly they are not. "
Only one car was vandalized by protestors and nothing more than some paperrboxes were thrown around.
My opinion? The cops DID protect the community. The fact that nothing worse happened is tribute to that IMHO.
DZ
..
by jwg
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 12:01 PM
A car was not vandalised a car had it's license plate bent.
The paper boxes were to become a blockade.
there was a tonne of criminal activity on that day, all perpetrated by a gang wearing all black and carrying weapons.
You cannot prevent crime when there is no crime being comitted.
And about the mad motorist... Ok he had his license plate bent. He did attempt to severly injure someone, that was just a gut reaction. Don't give me the "you were in the street' argument either. If you come to an intersection with someone crossing and just missing the light, you donot have the right to plow them down just because they were in the street.
Angry mobs
by Dave Z
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 1:34 PM
"And about the mad motorist... Ok he had his license plate bent. He did attempt to severly injure someone, that was just a gut reaction. Don't give me the "you were in the street' argument either. If you come to an intersection with someone crossing and just missing the light, you donot have the right to plow them down just because they were in the street."
Theres a little difference between someone purposely trying to ram an innocent pedestrian attempting only to cross the street and a person trying to get by a group of protesters attempting to BLOCK the street, possibly putting this motorist in danger (remember the riots in CA? The trucker ripped from his truck and beaten by a group of "demonstrators" ?? THEIR protests began peacefully too)
I would have done the same thing. The protestors shoudl have done the intelligent thing and yeielded to the motorist.
DZ
No they didn't
by jwg
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 1:36 PM
The LA riots didn't begin peacefully. They began as looting and rioting. And no one had done anything to the mad motorist other than flash him the peace sign. He deliberatly tried to run somebody down. It was road rage pure and simple. As was the retaliation. But no damage was done to his vehicle.
Not vandalism?
by Dave Z
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 1:58 PM
"A car was not vandalised a car had it's license plate bent. "
Thats vandalism of state property, actually. No one had the right to TOUCH the car or anything on it. By definition, vandalism.
"The paper boxes were to become a blockade. "
A blockade for what? I thought it was supposed to be a peaceful march?? Now you need blockades??
"there was a tonne of criminal activity on that day, all perpetrated by a gang wearing all black and carrying weapons. "
Right......
Funny....I walked right past a LARGE group of these "gang" members ealrier before the rally got underway and I didnt get attacked or beaten.
Hmmmmmmm. Wonder why??
re:
by jake
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 2:05 PM
I agree. Don't act like a criminal and you will not be treated like a criminal. The police are putting their lives on the line every day for us. I think we should treat them with a little more respect.
Jake...
by Dave Z
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 2:11 PM
" agree. Don't act like a criminal and you will not be treated like a criminal. The police are putting their lives on the line every day for us. I think we should treat them with a little more respect."
I am just so amazed by the DUPLICITY that these folks are posting....
It's ok for THEM to interfere with the lives of commuters trying to get home, but NOT ok for people to try to interfere with their "right" to rally....
It's OK for them to lambast the government because it doesnt cater to the rose-colored whims of 60's wannabes, yet its NOT OK for you and I to critique THEIR tactics or theories.
They call for "justice" from the police to press charges against the motorist trying to get thru the mob, but charge "brutality" when protestors break the accepted laws and get handcuffed by the same police....
I could go on, but you get the gist...
DZ
police
by jwg
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 2:14 PM
the police also take people's lives from them every day. so don't give me that.
and Dave Z, you only ever respond to a portion of peoples statements, don't pick it apart, just answer it.
And I agree that bending his license plate was wrong. Never said it should have happened, I just said it was a gut reaction to watching someone attempt to inflict major injury on your friend.
and again, someone being in the street does not give you legal right to hit them with your car. So even though there was mass jaywalking, what the driver did is still a crime. I did not see the police batter him and pull him to the ground.
The police protect who they want to protect, the certainly don't protect all of society, ask residents of the hill.
Picking apart? I think not....
by Dave Z
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 2:32 PM
"and Dave Z, you only ever respond to a portion of peoples statements, don't pick it apart, just answer it. "
Kinda thought that is what I was doing......sorry if you dont care for my responses.....
"and again, someone being in the street does not give you legal right to hit them with your car. So even though there was mass jaywalking, what the driver did is still a crime. I did not see the police batter him and pull him to the ground. "
And in the same respect, simply being in the street does not give YOU the legal right to BLOCK it or interfere with the usual flow of traffic...it works BOTH ways.
What you fail to note here is that there is no proof that the motorist was *trying* to do anything other than proceed in his lawful direction.....just because a few people close to the scene (who are all activists--not ONE "objective party") CLAIM that there was a supposed purposeful act on the part of the driver doesnt make it so either. Should the driver simply have waited there untill all the rallyers decided to file past, regardless of the fact that they were most likely looking for trouble with him anyways?
Why didn't the innocent folks "just jaywalking" (as YOU describe) simply let him pass unfettered??? When I on occasion jaywalk I look both ways and let traffic move before I proceed simply out of self preservation...why wassnt this common sensical approach used?
I'll tell ya why, because they were intent on NOT letting him by. Period. The INTENTION of the rally was to cause unrest and generally try to bring commuter traffic to its knees in some lame childish attempt at a social revolt.
What did interfering with traffic have to do with lending to the cause of getting the "peace" message out?
"The police protect who they want to protect, the certainly don't protect all of society, ask residents of the hill."
Do you live on the Hill? Can you personally atest to the police not responding when you called them?Otherwise, this is as much heresay as anything else....
hearsay
by jwg
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 2:58 PM
"Do you live on the Hill? Can you personally atest to the police not responding when you called them?Otherwise, this is as much heresay as anything else.... "
I've learned this by listening to people when they talk.
and speaking of hearsay, YOu were not at the march, you cannot personally attest to anything, so quiet down lad.
And the motorist had stopped, then accelerated into someone. He was trying to do a lot more than proceed in his direction. and no one accosted him before he went a' rammin'.
Do note.
by Colin
Tuesday, Mar. 25, 2003 at 4:39 PM
Dave Z is a troll trying to distract us from making constructive discussion. Really. He's a Troll. All Dave Z is doing is stating general rhetoric without any full logical reasoning of the situation, much less any real grasp of the world.
Dave Z will continue stating sound bites, so don't bother about writing anything to validate his Trolling. You're not going to change his mind, because he's came here to cause a stir.
If you want to respond to Dave Z, perhaps the following will be more productive.
"Dave Z, I do not respond to rhetoric."
____________________________________
Aside from that, I did hear the following. Women were constantly refereed as bitches, even "cunt." I heard nigger a few times. I was constantly referred to as "Miss" and a girl during my time in jail. Even the Neo-Nazi Judge that convicted me did the same thing as I spoke out in a totally normal male voice. I have slightly long hair that almost comes down to the shoulders, but that's just blatant harassment. The Judge and the police officers were laughing as they read me the charges as quick as possible, officers pointing to each other and slapping the desk where my papers awaited.
On a funny note, one of them said my name. "CoLLen Powell?! Are you Collen Powell, CHIEF OF STAFF?"
I rest my case.
Violence
by Theo
Thursday, Mar. 27, 2003 at 8:06 AM
TheoK444@aol.com
Apparently, Dave Z, you cannot comprehend the obvious difference between civil disobedience and violence. Blocking motorists trying to get home is inconvenient, even illegal, but not violence. Knocking over news boxes is not violence. Attacking somebody's car is, although it does not rise to the level of trying to run somebody down. Nothing that was done Thursday night justifies a motorist deliberately driving into a crowd of people. Nothing. I still don't condone kicking his car or bending his license plate (and that's all that was done - no dents, no broken lights or windows, no assault on the driver, nothing), but the fact that you are outraged at several hundred people blocking traffic and do not have the same outrage at a man who willfully tried to run demonstrators over simply indicates the depth of your bias and anger towards the demonstrators. Disagree with our tactics, fine. Condoning vehicular assault is just sick.
![[masthead]](/images/masthead_140.png)