community-based, non-corporate, participatory media
Anti-Bush protest
by gwen
Tuesday, Dec. 02, 2003 at 9:40 AM
summary of the protest against GWB
It was cold and alternately flurrying, but roughly 200 people showed up to protest GWB's presence in Pittsburgh for a fund-raiser event. The Steelworker's Union were there in strong force, along with the PoG, ACLU, and Thomas Merton Center representatives.
After the rally officially broke up, a few protesters managed to get far back behind the lines, cheering on the rest of the protesters from beside the hotel itself. Just as the cops noticed this, and started towards them, one protester charged the gate. He got not very far in before the cops noticed him coming through, and so he turned around and ran off through the crowd. The cops chased him in full force, eventually arresting him and taking him away. Protesters tried to call for him to be let go, also tried to block the vehicle, but the cops forcefully removed all participants from the area of the vehicle, and it was able to leave.
Following that, the people who had attended the $2000 a plate fundraiser were leaving the hotel, so protesters ran along their path to cry out "Shame on you!" and other such scoldings.
After that point, I personally left. Peace to all who remained behind, I hope no further arrests were made. I will be posting my pictures of the event as soon as possible.
clarifications.
by ...
Tuesday, Dec. 02, 2003 at 10:32 AM
Just to clarify, the person arrested never tried to rush the gate. I was with them and we intended all along to simply walk where we did, stop, chant to the crowd, and then leave when forced to. If we'd wanted to enter the hotel we could have easily done so as there was no security at the door and the police did not notice us until we started to chant. The person arrested ran not for the entrance but merely to rejoin the crowd behind the barricades.
clarification 2
by -
Tuesday, Dec. 02, 2003 at 10:57 AM
yes, he was trying to rejoin the crowd by going out of his way to rejoin the barricades with the ground.
More than anything else, this is what provoked the police to chase him...and he wasn't 'merely' doing it; he went out of his way to reunite the wood with the cement.
Clarification 3.
by ...
Tuesday, Dec. 02, 2003 at 11:35 AM
Ya, how about you not guess about things. The police officer in charge SAID that he wasn't arrested for the barricade that got knocked over, he was arrested on a charge of criminal mischief. Who knows what that was but it sure as hell wasn't knocking over a barricade when he tried to rejoin the crowd. As a matter of point, what he did was prettty similar to what the Steelworkers did when they arrived- walk into the street police had blocked off, walk past officers forming a line despite police statements earlier that those in the street would be arrested, walk to near the entrance of the hotel, and block the driveway of the westin. Didn't see anyone get arrested for that... Wonder why...
it was great!
by anti-bush
Tuesday, Dec. 02, 2003 at 11:50 AM
I thought this was a great protest. There was a diverse crowd that was fired up most of the time. The direct action by the Steelworkers set the tone of the event and people were very respectful of each other. Even the college republicans had a say proportionate to the number of folks they turned out. Also, kudos to the republicans for illegally taking the street with everyone else following the steelworkers lead. Just goes to show direct action gets the goods.
My only regret is that people didn't walk forward when the barricades got knocked down or try to help the guy who did the knocking. Solidarity!
only one arrest?
by Sam
Tuesday, Dec. 02, 2003 at 12:18 PM
A damn shame....
you would have prefered more?
by ..
Tuesday, Dec. 02, 2003 at 12:22 PM
why would you have prefered more arrests? and of who- steelworkers, college republicans?
bikes!
by ^_^
Tuesday, Dec. 02, 2003 at 2:10 PM
the officer interviewed on KDKA said he was also arrested for running into a pig bike and "damaging it" i bet that means chipping paint
Shame On You
by trip
Tuesday, Dec. 02, 2003 at 3:41 PM
>Following that, the people who had attended the $2000 a plate fundraiser were leaving the hotel, so protesters ran along their path to cry out "Shame on you!" and other such scoldings.
That's funny! Bunch of damn know-nothing morons trying to lecture people of whose shoes they are unworthy to even unlace. I'd have loved to been there to laugh at them and spit on them. I'll just have to wait until the local idiots in my area decide to stage some stupid protest.
re: clarification 3
by --
Tuesday, Dec. 02, 2003 at 4:11 PM
I'm sorry about my previous report (clarification 2), I supposed I just 'guessed' seeing him going out of his way to rejoin the barricades to the ground.
Party of Booth
by College Republican
Tuesday, Dec. 02, 2003 at 5:26 PM
duqgop@hotmail.com
Maybe you young ladies of the college Republicans, instead of spending so much time slathering on pounds of makeup in a pathetic attempt to impersonate Britney Spears and making up stories as to why your cowardly ass would rather cheer from the sidelines than enlist, maybe you could some content to the webpage of your silly little cult.
It's worth a look, just for laughs. The little bootlickers even have a Sergeant at Arms. Oh my! How scary.
It's good to know that there are campus organizations for closet homosexuals and the repressed bimbos who think they can change them.
Or ask one of your freeper buddies who spends 20 hours a day on the internet typing about Gore to fix it for you.
arrest
by protest guy
Wednesday, Dec. 03, 2003 at 2:50 AM
I think a reasonable person could conclude that if someone were to topple a police bicycle and not one, but at least three barricades during a presidential visit, they might be facing arrest. The bicycle didn't exactly make a soft landing, so it seems plausible that it sustained minor damage. I think it is important to protest to express your opinion, but I also think it's lame to always assume the police are wrong. Avoiding arrest at a protest in Pittsburgh is not exactly rocket science, similarly, finding a way to get arrested isn't too hard to figure out, either. I am sure I am not the only person who dislikes Bush's policies in Pittsburgh that feels this way.
Quick rant
by #
Wednesday, Dec. 03, 2003 at 5:36 AM
First off I would like to say on a cold Tuesday morning I was pleased to see a diverse # of PGHer's stand up to show their dissent towards this current administration.
The story that was not given enough attention was the fact that in a city in a state that Bush lost in the previous election HE INSULTED THE CITY BY SAYING WE NEED TO FIX THE POTHOLES AND PICK UP THE GARBAGE. What a brazen comment. So if you were one of the young republican types or other blind supporters of "America" as they put it one the news, who just dropped two large to support a president who is insulting the city where he is trying to drum up support - this should have made you see the light of an imperialistic leader hellbent on world domination and doesn't give a fuck about the little people who get squashed in the way. I guess the Bush supporters comments would say, giggle, giggle, yeah we should pick up the garbage and fix potholes, completely missing the point of his ridiculous comments. Get it thru your heads, the Cocaine Cowboy just wants your money. Period.
Weather you agree or disagree with the people who went beyond the police barracade or the fellow who was arrested - we were all there for the same reason. Tactics vary, but the end result is the same.
not the point protest guy
by ...
Wednesday, Dec. 03, 2003 at 6:11 AM
"reasonable person could conclude that if someone were to topple a police bicycle and not one, but at least three barricades during a presidential visit, they might be facing arrest"
In a legal sense we all risked arrest as part of the Steelworkers direct action. We all walked into a road the police had blocked off, a road which the police SAID anyone going on would be arrested, a road that was blocked to let traffic in and out of a presidential event. We walked not just onto this road, but actually crossed the lines of police and walked through them towards the building the president was in to the point we were only 10ft or so away from the door. We then proceeded to block the driveway and foot path of this place for a sustained period of time. Could a reasonible person not conclude that we all risked arrest to do this action? In any type of legal sense we ALL BROKE THE LAW for a sustained period of time. We didn't get arrested because the police CHOOSE not to arrest us. They didn't try to arrest us because of who was participating in this action and the number of us there were. Every time a "law" is broken the police decide whether or not they are going to take action just as we as a movement need to decide how we will respond to that police action. The action later was done by one person AFTER the Steelworkers had left. An arrest was attempted in a crowd of people who the police knew would not come to the aid of the person. Had this been a different type of crowd with a similar number of police it is extremely unlikely they would have attempted an arrest. That to me is the point. No one organized a strong bloc capable of convincing the police to not arrest the person, lesson learned.
It doesn't matter whether the police were right or wrong legally. Acts like toppling police barricades, getting as close as possible to the event, having people dressed up in fish costumes, are necessary to build resistance to the current order of things. It is the responsibility of all of us to support those folks on the street.
And for anyone who wants to find additional fault with the actions of the police:
The person arrested was held on 2,200 dollar bail for this misdomeaner charge after the commanding officer at the scene said he would get out without any type of bail. The police also lied to the people who went to attend his arraignment causing them to miss it. The police also delayed and delayed his release while refusing to provide information as to his status to friends and family.
I think a reasonble person could conclude that we shouldn't work with the police again as we did on this event. What did we gain from working with them? Someone still got arrested and faces the possability of fines, probation, or jail. That's what I've taken from this event.
reasonable people
by Sam
Wednesday, Dec. 03, 2003 at 6:17 AM
It's reasonable to conclude there's always a jerk in every crowd, yet you'll defend the jerk. People won't take us seriously when we defend someone in the wrong.
so, fake sam.
by ...
Wednesday, Dec. 03, 2003 at 6:37 AM
Wow fake sam. Did you read the above post?
How exactly was he in the wrong?
If he was in the wrong, wasn't everyone else who disobeyed police and broke the law by blocking the street and driveway- college republicans, steelworkers, students, news media, etc?
The police arrested him because they could, not because he was a danger to anyone or had hurt anyone by his actions. I think those barricades will be okay :) They arrested him because they could. End of story. We need to be better prepared next time and we will be.
officer in question
by ...
Wednesday, Dec. 03, 2003 at 7:05 AM
supposedly damaged Bike-
Bike number 14
Officer on Bike- Badge number 3512
Officers last name- Scalise
re: arrest
by protest guy
Wednesday, Dec. 03, 2003 at 12:49 PM
All I am saying is that the person that was arrested could have avoided that outcome. I accept that people use a variety of tactics to get their message across.
Please stop talking about the arrest
by John Lacny
Friday, Dec. 05, 2003 at 6:23 AM
I was at the demonstration for about an hour, left to get a bite to eat, and when I left the restaurant, remnants of the demonstration were still going on, it was almost 1:00, and it was still very cold. Impressive! I learned later that someone had gotten arrested. But despite my curiosity about how it actually happened, I really don't want to know, and I especially don't want people broadcasting what they saw on Indymedia. If the person who got arrested is going to end up in court, it's not a good idea to discuss it on the Internet like this. Even if you think you're helping the person, you could be giving evidence that could prove harmful or prejudicial in some way that you did not anticipate.
So I think it would be a good idea if people had some discipline and didn't discuss things like this on Indymedia.
normally agree.
by ...
Friday, Dec. 05, 2003 at 6:30 AM
I would normally agree, but there is video on three different tv stations of what people are discussing. It happened and if people want to discuss it I don't see the problem
closure to this case
by ...
Wednesday, Dec. 24, 2003 at 8:44 AM
The person in question had to pay a small fine, no jail time (besides following the arrest) and no probation.
![[masthead]](/images/masthead_140.png)