Of the two arrestees, the person arrested at the IMF Soccer Riot will be arraigned no sooner than 10 AM; the person at the night march and hotel action will be arraigned no sooner than Noon (someone with better details can post). That will happen at DC Superior Court (I don't have room numbers - please post if you have them) at 500 Indiana Avenue near Judiciary Square metro.

how about the person with the stun gun?

he was released monday afternoon.

Badge numbers are clearly displayed on uniform shirts and jackets. Plus they are extremely visible on the white helmets of the motorcycle cops. The numbers are black and on the front. Isn't that per your collective's request from the lawsuit? What did your soccer riot and screaming at people do besides look comical and cause headaches to those who were innocent bystanders to the tirades? The meetings still convened, even with the lengthy 10 minute delays that were caused by activists. Even at a demo where police were not intending to make arrests, 2 people were arrested, the individual you reported on and another for a stun gun. After running into the Fairmont hotel out of the rain on Saturday night, yelling and screaming in the lobby, and then back into the street, noone was arrested. Not until the stun gun incident. You've been given the streets to walk in, dance in, lay in, stand in, and whatever else you do, permitted and non-permitted, yet your collective is still ineffective.

While I am tired of your weak turnouts for the last several demos, i do enjoy the overtime i get from them. So keep coming back, please. You're paying for my winter trips to the Antilles.

So are you on the clock when you are posting here?

I can't believe that a DC cop believes so much in the mission of the IMF/World bank that he/she would spend their own free time writing critiques of street demonstrations.

Let's put it this way: I hope you are getting paid to write this, otherwise you need to get a life.

Who said i believe in the mission of the IMF/WB? I just wanted to know what good came from a soccer riot, yelling at delegates, and walking in the torrential rains.

[[Let's put it this way: I hope you are getting paid to write this, otherwise you need to get a life.]]

That's typical. I ask a reasonable question and get this ignorant response. Do you not like to see your accounts refuted? Read the moto posted in the banner up top..."Spoonfed news causes blindness". This applies to the IMC as well as mainstream media. You seem to be just as bad as those you fight against.

In one particular case, J. Tubbs had a pen covering his badge, which he would not remove.

It was also quite dark. In at least one case I witnessed, police who were demanded badge numbers withdrew behind other police officers as well.

J. Tubbs said at one point that we would be able to see his badge when we saw our arrest report.

Our stated aim for these protests were not to shut the meetings down but to use direct action to disrupt delegates. We succeeded in that; more importantly, we succeeded in showing how actions using small numbers can nevertheless be empowering. We knew because of several factors, many of them internal to movement politics, that this would be small, and that we would need to use these meetings as a transitional phase in tactics used. The meetings themselves are not the aim so much but rather the sustained campaign against the people themselves responsible for these policies.

Wolfowitz knows we'll be back; Marti knows we'll be back. Others must know that we'll be around. Soon, their neighbors will be around, too. Even if neighbors offer support out of misplaced fallacies about justice, they will be confronted. In the Global South, these people will be confronted as well.

Having said that, I have to also say that of course these demonstrations were only successful on the very low bar that was set for them. I will readily admit that the American global justice movement and all its allied social movements (e.g. anti-war) are in a very sad shape, so much so that police will let people run around, dance and play soccer in the street and even tolerate the kind of disruption that delegates ultimately faced. But, the movement does need to know that it can at least do that much (how many don't do direct action not knowing what is possible on the streets of DC in large part because of previous actions by activists to ensure that space - police repression in Pershing Park has led to empowerment for many over time -, to know that there are opportunities of empowerment that are greater than they imagine. If the actions weren't successful to that degree, you wouldn't have witnessed the encouragement for further action and organizing by those who participated.

What these actions show is the need for much more serious organizing. One day, I believe that organizing, if we do in fact build off of these successes, we will have a great success that will happen as a great surprise to the establishment. That will lead to great repression. The question will be how to respond and adapt to that repression. I think that has a lot to do with how we build right now and the ways we build movements and mutual support networks.

Anyhow, many complaints are in the process of being filed. If you have a complaint and are no longer in DC, please get in touch with legal support.

And, the more criticsm you get for these actions, the more it gets under their skin. Let's just see how many more comments this post gets. Generally, the number of responses from the right, the moderates, and the liberals against these actions show their effectiveness (the right - the cops are great; the state is wonderful; but I don't want to pay taxes - the moderates - the IMF/World Bank does eradicate poverty and the debt is gone and the war has simply been bungled; the liberals - the World Bank may not eliminate poverty but its heart is in the right place, so use reason to reach the hearts of those in charge, using the system to fix the system so it can help us all).

So, flame away; it's fun and empowering. It's true on the streets; it's no less true here.

So Jim, when we come to the park and make noise on the bridge you live under, that's OK by you?

You'd like it?

you know, as much as you guys try to seem political, you just come off as unintentionally funny. heres some advice: get a life, get a job, stop trying to mess with everyones business. its obvious that your hatred for the "movers and shakers" of the world is motivated by jealousy, lack of anything better to do, and a desire for acceptance into pretentious left-wing social circles. you people are truly pathetic.

who is 'you people'?

It's always hilarious and a bit sad at the same time when the ultra-pathetic call others pathetic.

And um...stop with the tired cliches, most of us HAVE jobs. Maybe we don't make enough individually to impress your classist mindset, but it still is YOU who represents everything that's pathetic about the human race. You're not only pathetic, you're an abomination to God and humankind. And...ultimately you're going to lose the battle regardless of how well-stocked your arsenal of murder is.

Congrats on the street actions...onto the next mission to free humanity!

And people...it's time to wake up to the fact that 9/11 was a false-flag operation. It WAS an inside job. Now THAT should get the paid-operatives in here moving with their pathetic little rants!

[And people...it's time to wake up to the fact that 9/11 was a false-flag operation. It WAS an inside job. Now THAT should get the paid-operatives in here moving with their pathetic little rants!]

Who knew that Art Bell was the anarchists' leader...

Who knew that people posting on indymedia could be so stupid to think that because some person likely a FReeper posted something you don't like you claim he is a leader and of anarchists at that when anarchists don't have leaders, and most protests don't have leaders

How about some respect on this forum? It's fine to criticize the actions, and definitely fine to give input as to why you see the actions as unsuccessful or even a joke. But please, give us some respect. We're working our butts off, and sending us unproductive and at times immature comments isn't going to stop us....OR change our tactics. I like seeing that not everyone on the forum agrees. But let's disagree like grown-ups.

Hey, superficial moron, has it ever occurred to you that YOU appear unintentionally funny to US? How many status symbols do you require to feel as though you have worth? Guess what asshole, you'll never have enough, and by the time you figure it out, you'll be dead.

I noticed that when your people, rioters, are told not to interupt other people, you complain about your freedom of speech. What about the attendees' rights of speech and assembly? Why don't you let them speak their minds and assemble. Kinda nazi-like isn't it?

That is common to all zealots.

They're "speech" is destructive to people all over the world, because the speaking that goes on @ these summits is the planning that goes on about how to best rape the third world of its resources and environment. there's freedom of speech, and then there's conspiracy to commit colonialism.

freedom of speech does not apply to government agencies, nor does right to assembly.

yo, let's get some pictures up from this weekend.

Police obscure and block their badge numbers all the time; anyone who says otherwise is a liar or hiding in the fortress of their fantasy.
I have a job making 28 K, not enough by far. So Free Republic Troll, go back to the factory and stop worshipping Reagan. That's WHY you're underpaid.
Good Work Protesters !!!!!!!

You're confusing police confrontation with persuasive protest and having a political point. Next time, how about writing more substantively about your cause and how your event directly brought attention to it and (likely) persuaded people to change their views.

Most people in this country don't know enough about the IMF and World Bank to even have "views" on them in the first place, so changing people's views doesn't seem like a very good strategy in this case. A better strategy might be to disrupt the meetings and generally make it an unpleasant weekend for the meeting participants, and that's exactly what these folks did.

Actually, a better strategy would be to educate the general public. No matter how disruptive you are to these meetings, if there are only a handful of you, the meeting participants will write you off as a noisy fringe group. However, if your opinion became a widely held popular opinion, you wouldn't be so easy to ignore.

<i>Most people in this country don't know enough about the IMF and World Bank to even have "views" on them in the first place,</i>

An earlier person already said this, but as the person who made the original comment you were replying to, let me echo what they said in the hopes that it will help it sink in:

The solution then is education.

Frankly, based on some of the misguided and overly broad criticisms I've seen here, I think you might learn something in the process yourself. And while you're preparing material, can I suggest that you not go into learning more about the World Bank and the IMF with the intellectual agenda of "getting ammunition to attack".

It's not that the two organizations are without flaws. Both wield an incredible amount of power with no where near enough democratic accountability and transparency. But they are deserving of praise for some of their poverty reduction and health work as well, and to become a zealout in trying to villify them absolutely just strains your credibility and lowers the possibilities for change and transforming them.

OK, maybe I misread the intent of your post.

A hard-working cop, after a day of serving and protecting, comes home and rather than going to sleep, watching Leno, or any of the other stereotypical things one would imagine a cop to do in their free time, stays up late to log on to dc.indymedia and critique street protests.

OK.

You say that "your collective is still ineffective" and that "I am tired of your weak turnouts for the last several demos" but you do enjoy the overtime.

You ask, "What did your soccer riot and screaming at people do besides look comical and cause headaches to those who were innocent bystanders to the tirades?" OK, let's assume for the sake of argument that this actually is a reasonable question.

Well, apparently they got your attention. That's a start.

I think it was in '96, I was covering the WB for a 3rd world network. We took a taxi to the Shoreham, couldn't get anywhere near it because it was total gridlock of black stretch limousines. Reporter and I got out and walked. Inside, late in the morning, we were approached by a couple of activists who told us there would be something of interest at the noon break.

We showed up, at the top of the escalators 3 or 4 indigenous Americans from South America held up banners protesting IMF/WB policies. Private security immediately appeared, and none too gently force marched them down to the lobby, outside and all the way to the Calvert Street. And that was it.

Now instead, US citizens are willing to stand in the rain at night and confront the delegates, who are being chauffered in buses instead of stretch limos (at least some of the time), and DC cops making hefty overtime are asking what it's all about.

That is progress.

Thank you for posting this comment in an way that respects people of all sides of this argument.

You're right. That IS progress.

I was there working, as usual since your collective's destructive ways in Seattle. I saw the the completely ridiculous antics that you seem to believe were making progress. If you were making progress, then the IMF/WB would not convene in D.C. anymore.

It's a bit funny when you think about it objectively, there are people in the District that realy do believe and understand your cause and the goals you want to achieve. They don't like your tactics of disrupting their daily routines. They dislike your methods of jeopardizing their livelyhood by storming their places of employment placing them at physical risk while you cause mayhem.

What you fail to understand is that a great deal of MPD officers enjoy the details. We get a break from chasing the radio non-stop, plenty of overtime due to the destructive ways of your collective in the past, we get to fellowship with other officers that we only see in passing. We get to talk to the more level headed activists who don't think that we are the enemy. Then they undersatnd that we don't actually despise your cause, just your destructive actions. Do we have problems with anarchists? Yes, those that want to fight us because we are police and for no other reason. Do we fear your threats of lawsuits? No. Do we hide our nametags and badges from you? No, because we have inspections before we go out each detail to make sure that eveyone is in compliance with the lawsuit your collective won. We allow you to run in the street in traffic with no permitsbecause we(MPD) are sensitive to your needs to prove the streets belong to the people. But what about the people who are occupying the streets in their vehicles going about their daily routine? Do they have to put up with your antics just to allow your collective to make a statement? No they shouldn't. However, we allow it and make great attempts at not making arrests, yet someone decides to go beyond the scope of your demo and gets arrested. What is it with this martyrdom syndrome that is prevalent in your actions? Then you rush to the web, log in on your pc which was purchased from some major retail corporation, connect to the web via your dsl(which is thru another major conglomerate) and then brag about your deeds. Then someone else comes along and beats your group down spouting that theirs is better. Then your anarchist constituents curse the right/police/freepers/trolls et al. Then those of us who don't agree with your actions come to refute the claims and get flamed. Do some desevre it? Yeah, sometimes. But when you get the same flaming you call foul. The IMC editors are biased in who they delete and refer those who protest their actions to a posting policy link that is so vague and broad it's laughable.

All in all, pay attention to who your real enemies are and direct your fight at them in a civilized manner. Yelling at delegates is not very mature, neither is kicking a ball in the street at 3am while blowing airhorns or beating pots and pans in front of government officials' homes. Running into a hotel disrupting a wedding reception is not a mature action either. Your collective tends to piss more people off than help them to understand your objective. The people you want to reach aren't reading the IMC's of the world. Only those who are directly involved in those actions, i.e. activists, police, liberals and conservatives.

The person below answers many of the errors in reasoning quite well. A lot more should be said, but all I have to say is that it does seem that Jim was right when he said there seems to be a direct correlation between the effectiveness of an action and the amount of posts against it on dc indymedia.

Running dinky little motorcycles into the backs of people's legs, picking fights, and trying to act like a hero or a bully also isn't very mature. Police are mature professionals, no? Fuck being mature when it comes to this insane economic status you collect paychecks to uphold.

World Bank and IMF openly admitted they were looking into moving their meetings because of the protests. So I guess you'll have to admit to your own definition towards progress.

I have to point out several objective, factual mistakes in your analysis. First, I'm confused about "the collective" that you speak of. Indeed there were collectives involved in organizing for this weekend. And indeed there were collectives involved in organizing for the demonstrations against the World Trade Organization in Seattle in 1999. However, all collectives are not the same, and in this case, the collectives organizing for this weekend were indeed not the same as those organizing for Seattle.

Second, there was indeed a successful lawsuit won on behalf of those illegaly and unjustly arrested in 2002 (though I would argue that the vast majority of people are unjustly arrested). I applaud those that took part in the suit; attorneys, plaintiffs and supporters alike. However, you again mistake one "collective" as being every collective. Furthermore, your statement that:
"We allow you to run in the street in traffic with no permitsbecause we(MPD) are sensitive to your needs to prove the streets belong to the people."
is flawed for several reasons. Number one; if this were actually the case, your department and officers would have always respected the rights of citizens to exercise their rights. However, they have not, and do not (and only began to due to the success of a lawsuit), and do so intermittently now only because of the threat of being sued again. Number two; officers from your department repeatedly attempted to use physical force to move citizens from the roadway, and did not seem "very sensitive" when running over people's feet with their bikes and scooters. Number three; if you'll note, one of the outcomes of the lawsuit was that demonstrators cannot be arrested simply for lack of a permit, which is why your officers did not arrest those marching without a permit.

Error #3 in your statement is as follows. You claimed that anyone who is an anarchist is there to fight you because you are police and for no other reason. In fact, despite what you may believe, many people were there this weekend for the purpose of protesting the world bank and the IMF. There are plenty of reasons to protest the police, but that's not what was occuring this weekend. Many anarchists did indeed take part in the protest, but in fact, it was only the police who were initiating physical contact with the demonstrators. So, your statement could in fact actually be accurately modified in several different ways, and to apply to a large sector of the population. , " Do we have problems with police? Yes, because they want to fight us simply because we are protestors and for no other reason." It could also read this way in many instances. "Do we have problems with police? Yes, because they want to fight us simply because we are people of color and for not other reason." Alternatively, "Do we have problems with police? Yes, because they want to fight us simply because we are transgender and for no other reason." Or, "Do we have problems with police? Yes, because they want to fight us because we are poor and for no other reason." I could go on and on, but I won't, because again, that's not why we were demonstrating this weekend.
I also disagree with your assertion that waking up delegates is "not mature". People (delegates to, and employees of, the World Bank and IMF) have been, and are, engaged in a brutal war in the poor for decades. Just one of many books you might want to read is "Masters of Illusion" by Catherine Caufield. The oppression and subsequent suffering caused by these institutions in so many countries is truly overwhelming. (That said, many countries, including Venezuela, Argentina, China, Bolivia, Nigeria, are now successfully fighting back, and saying they want nothing to do with the IMF, and encouraging others to do the same. Even mainstream media outlets are calling for the IMF to close; see Sunday and Monday Washington Post editorial sections.) Therefore, to me, it would seem immature not to disturb these people and to discourage them from coming back to Washington DC or anywhere. They should be discouraged by any means from continuing their neocolonialist ways. I would go so far as to say it would be immature not to disturb them.

Everyone has the right to an opinion, and you're certainly entitled to yours. However, please attempt to verify the validity and truth of your statements before voicing them. Sometimes questioning one's own opinions can lead you to a different conclusion than you originally expected.

Collective is just what it appears to be, all of your sub groups coming together to form a larger one to protest.

My statement of sensitivity is a sarcastic one. You obviously didn't catch it. Your collective's lawyers agrued the case better than the government and won the case. Good for you. Were the arrests at Pershing Park made without the issuance of a warning? Sure were. Was it wrong? Sure was. So you won, and rightfully so. However, that does not give your collective the right to walk in the street whenever you want to try to introduce others to your cause. Your assertion that protestors cannot be arrested for simply demonstarting is correct. However, they must do it on the sidewalk, not in the street, and they must not impede the pedestrian traffic and vehicular traffic. So each action your collective has, we give you a pass on disrupting traffic.

As for the anarchist issue. You're pretty good at trying to editorialize. I asked do we have problems with anarchists, then i responded by saying only with those who want to fight us because we are police. Nice try, come with something else next time.

As for the police questions, I answer this way:

Your assertations about all police officers are just as correct as law enforcement assertations that all activists are violent. If you believe that, then i have some prime beachfront property laden with palm trees & pristine sand to sell you in Antarctica.

I'll just cede that my view on maturity is not the same as yours. Although i do believe that you would believe individuals who didn't like you or the company you work for, who decided to come outside your home and blow airhorns, disturbing your family and neighbors would be acting in a childish manner.

Since when does a WashPost editorial report speak for the entire rag? That seems pretty ignorant for you to claim the entire newspaper when it clearly doesn't side itself with you.

Like I stated in my previous post. Figure out who your real enemies are and take the fight to them in a civilized manner.

It appears that you didn't really address the fact that different people organize different events and that the word collective, as a noun (not an adjective) typically refers to a specific group of individuals, and in this case you have misrepresented who those individuals were. To give you an example, according to your reasoning, it would be reasonable to blame you, an officer in the MPD for the actions of officers of the NYPD. Are you, according to your reasoning, willing to take responsibility for the 8.5 million dollar settlement won by the family of a Haitian immigrant brutally sodomized and tortured by 9 officers of the NYPD? Are you willing to accept responsibility for the actions of four New Orleans PD officers who brutally assaulted a 61 year old school teacher? Are you willing to accept responsibility for the police role in all the false convictions that have since been overturned? Perhaps now you realize the danger of small semantical differences.

Your statement:
Do we have problems with anarchists? Yes, those that want to fight us because we are police and for no other reason.

Grammatically, this sentence is ambiguous. It could be interpreted as you stated, that you only have a problem with those who want to fight you. It could also be interpreted as saying that all anarchists want to fight you. Furthermore, can you name one incidence this weekend of a protest initiating, or taking part in, a fight with a police officer?

We do disagree on maturity and moral responsibility.

I'll reassert again, that some members of even the mainstream media are calling for the closure of the IMF. Are there reasons the same as mine? Probably not. Did I ever claim they were? No.

As for your last statement
"Like I stated in my previous post. Figure out who your real enemies are and take the fight to them in a civilized manner."
we don't totally disagree.
I think we've clearly figured out who some enemies of the world and the poor are. We are taking the fight to them, and will continue to do so. However, I question your use of the term "civilized". Is it civilized to prohibit countries from spending more than an externally (IMF) imposed amount on health care, even if that leaves thousands of people without health care? Is it civilized to build dams that displace communities without any community input? Is it civilized to tell someone that you now own the water in the ground and that if they want access to it, they'll have to pay you 4 times what they did yesterday? Is it civilized to continue forcing countries further into debt while its citizens die from preventable diseases at ever increasing rates? Is it civilized to pay money (partially public, from the United States Congress) to private corporations that reap profits and destroy the earth and lives?

We will continue to fight those responsible for murder. I would invite you again to educate yourselves on these institutions (Masters of Illusions is but one of many books; if you'd like a further list, please ask, and I'd be happy to post it here) You might not see bloody images (though sometimes you will) of their victims, but please, tell those people whose lifelong homes have been flooded by a dam that serves to profit the World Bank that they should really be more civilized. And please, tell those being denied access to medications (because of budget ceilings, meaning that countries often even have the money needed to pay for such health care) that would quite easily save their lives that they should really be civilized and keep it down, because they might disturb someone. Capitalism is a shitty way to decide who lives and who dies, but please, let's all be "civilized."

I have misrepresented noone. I merely state collective as a way of describing whatever groups came together to organize this demo. Is it the same as the groups from s27(is that correct?) or A16? Probably not, and I don't really care if it is. it is a generic term to describe those who worked this weekend. Nothing else. Your analogy between me and NYPD vs Abner Louima is flawed. While i can only account for my actions and not anothers, I still recieve damnation for what others do. I've become accustomed to the fact it's part of my job, though it shouldn't be. Nonetheless, I caught hell from Virginia Beach in 1990 and everything bad that any officer anywhere in the world did to any citizen of the world pertaining to human rights violations up until today. No matter where i go in uniform I acknowlege that there is someone in the room that will immediately hate me for what i choose as my profession. But let me go to that same place out of uniform, Ill make friends very easily. Then when the ugly 'What do you do for a living?' question pops up and I respond I'm a police officer, the chill over the room is so obvious it's funny. Then I begin to see how superficial people really are.

Anarchists who fight police, for no other reason except that we are police, are who I was speaking of.

We spoke of maturity levels not morality. But if your views of morality are paralel with your views on maturity, then we disagree.

You would be surprised by my library and the circles I run in. So don't think that because I don't discuss the IMF/WB's actions with you that I am not aware of the things they do and have done, good and bad. But that's not what I'm here to discuss with you. It is merely the tactics used are not effective in combatting the problems you see with an organization. I also believe that your energy would be put to better use fighting for better education and general welfare of American people. But you pick your battles, carry on.

My intention was actually in line with your statement. I believe, as you do, that education is a valuable tool. My intent was not to assume any knowledge or lack of knowledge about the international financial institutions, but rather to offer resources that could be educational to anyone. It's quite possible that you've read some, or all, of the books that I would list. It's also possible that others would have read some, all, or none of them.

We do disagree on tactics, but that is OK. If everyone agreed on tactics, protest, and other facets of life would be pretty mundane.

You raise interesting questions about the associations people have with police officers, and why they have them. Sometimes understanding where a person is coming from can shed much light on their beliefs.

As for not being here to discuss the institutions, that's your right as well. However, I am here to discuss those institutions and the oppression that they enforce. I think that many of those here this weekend also were here for that same reason, though I can't speak for them. It is my hope, that through education, disruption, and a variety of tactics, that people will continue to show their opposition to the negative consequences of these IFI's to bring down the neoliberal, neocolonial oppressors.

Even after all of this I still haven't been given an answer to my original question, what good has come from kicking a ball in the street, yelling at delegates, and marching in the rain for an hour and a half done to disrupt the IMF/WB?

We disrupted some of the delegates, not simply by yelling, but by physically putting our bodies in their way.

Ultimately, that doesn't do much, but it's not nothing, if the looks on their faces were any indication. What can you do with such small numbers more than what we managed to do? And, yet, very few people believe doing that much is possible. Many don't believe it's possible to march in the streets without being arrested, so afraid they are even of marches that have permits. I had my leg run into by a motorcycle police officer during a permitted march just last month. Many are so scared that they'll lose their jobs if the wrong person sees them. People are so afraid. To turn back such a dire situation, almost anything is empowering given the general fear that people live under. When they are not afraid, they are apathetic and lost in pursuits that have little to do with the world around them. Anything which turns back that malaise and creates any sense of spirit or alternative in the streets is a good thing and in the smallest ways disrupts the anti-collectivism of World Bank/IMF policies.

The protests then provide grounds for further actions which are similar in type, which are small, frequent, and direct. They aim to annoy and nag and irritate. They aim to reach people the only way they can be reached, outside of impenetrable fortresses. Socrates called himself a gadfly buzzing about Athens, annoying and prodding it. Of course, they put him to death for it. But, what he suggested has lived on, as anyone wishing to deal with people who are vain about their own wisdom, needs to be challenged. And, yet, in Athens, Socrates could find the Wolfowitz of his day in the Acropolis and expose him in argument. We have no access to the Acropolis anymore. We cannot touch the untouchable rulers who have receded to their Mount Olympus. So, more than annoy in word, we must annoy with the language of direct action, in order that we all might be touched again by rational conversation. We must speak the language available to us, and that language is soccer. Absurd? You bet it is! But, in that larger metaphysical context, it is entirely rational.

These protests showed how much can be done with so little such that with a little more and a little more done the same way, the disruption can be more complete, and people will be less and less afraid (whether it's of the police or even the protesters). People are afraid of the protesters, too, and that's simply a sign of everything that's wrong with today's society.

The protests encourage these sorts of discussions. Why the absurdity? Why the ironic response to power? Why do people resort to the streets, and why do they resort to them in this way? Even those very questions are an affront to a society that hopes we all behave nicely and pretend that oppression and suffering isn't going on every single day. Stop being so philosophical. Relax. The NFL draft is nearly here.

The police represent the status quo and the protection of the status quo, especially for those who own property, and those who have means. We are all equal under the law, supposedly, and yet we are unequal in what we have, and the law protects what each has. Those who have more are protected more. If you own a wall, that wall will be protected. If you own the world, and on and on and on. We are chastised as if we are all equal, playing on the same soccer field. But, we are not on the same soccer field. We don't have the same access to those who make all the decisions for us, especially when it comes to people like Wolfowitz.

What means is there to influence, change, reform what's wrong? How much time is wasted following channels offered by a system built on tyranny and corruption? Wolfowitz talks about corruption, but what does he have to say about a system that is inherently corrupt and inherently protects the rich over the poor?

I watched at times looking at protesters get into it with police and vice versa or with drivers of delegates, and then I'd look up at the hotel. They love these class disputes between all the people who might one day join together to topple the puppetmasters. They are happy that they have convinced a class of people to do their dirty work, to buy their crap, to enforce their laws, to drive them to and fro, and we are all guilty of it. We are all hypocrites, and that's all the more reason to blast air horns at these crazy maniacs. One would hope that the police would one day join us in solidarity against those who pull their strings.

No one deserves to enrich themselves at the expense of everyone else, and yet that's what we do over and over again.

So, to any degree that we shed light on that, to any degree that we provoke questions of effectiveness, provoke a response, provoke a defense of either position, we have done that. I suspect if we had simply had a pleasant little educational teach-in on the World Bank and IMF, we wouldn't have generated this much provocation or genuine discussion.

Now, multiply that disruption, and recognize furthermore that the powers that be manage to do so with so few people making any of the decisions, and you realize that the Wolfowitz's and Marti's of this world are not nearly as inaccessible as they say they would like us to believe. We can do more, and we've exposed the possibilities.

That's all we aimed to do, but we aim to do more, and we will do more if we can get that message out there.

-Jim

"Even after all of this I still haven't been given an answer to my original question, what good has come from kicking a ball in the street, yelling at delegates, and marching in the rain for an hour and a half done to disrupt the IMF/WB?"

I sat through the entire testimony of Ramsey et al to the DC Council about the Perching Park arrests (and was thoroughly horrified about what I learned about Ramsey as a leader and how he pressured the authors of the final report to edit out his role in the illegal arrests) and after packing up and leaving found myself next to an old colleague from a different lifetime, who had been sitting looking very grim at the executive Mayorial table during testimony.

We chatted a bit, and then dicussed a bit of the larger issue. He pointed out that, from his point of view (and legal mandate, I suppose) there was no city in the US that would put up with the lack of public security that occured in Seattle.

My response was that events like that are not unususal in cities in Europe, and that it might not be a coincidence that in those countries people have a higher standard of living and far more entitlements than we do here in the US.

There is a correlation between social (street) activism and social/human rights, going back through Indian anti-colonialism. Note to your legal counsel: I am not advocating illegal activity or violence.

And I'm not suggesting we endorse Rice, Rumsfeld and the neocons in saying that kidnappings, beheadings, bombings are all just an acceptable price for "freedom" as is the case now in Iraq.

Saddam Hussein had a very, very high level of "public safety", to use that parameter, but no human rights.

But as a member of Mubarrak's Egyptian armed forces told a member of the Kifaya (Enough!) democratic reform movement there, civil rights are taken, not given. This shouldn't be news to anyone who witnessed the civil rights struggle here in the US, which stands as a universal global model.

Social change is happening, and it is going to continue happening here, in DC, the nation's capital. Tne Nurenberg precedent stands, obeying orders is not morally or legally defensible.

It's not about either you are with us or you are against us, that is Bush/BinLaden ideology. No one wants a Tien Amen in Washington DC.

So, to answer your question maybe, these actions are a reminder of what could happen spontaeously at any moment and any time, and a test to how you will respond.

Plus making life uncomfortable for toady delegates.

What I love to read are the comments that are negative and only complain about the lack of support or how small a protest was. If these people think that these protests are small and thus pointless and wrong I would love to hear what they think about what Rosa Parks did...because she did it by herself.

And if you think you are getting the last laugh or the upper hand by posting about how much these protests suck and how they are ineffective...you are wrong. I and four others came out from Chicago to support those in DC and to stand in solidarity with those around the world fighting against and suffering because of the IMF/World Bank. And on the drive home I felt like the weekend was one of the most uplifting and empowering protests I have been to in a while.

All the people I met were great and the actions were lots of fun. So, post and complain about how we suck and our actions are weak...I was there and stood against what I believe is wrong in the world and...well, you did nothing but complain about it.

on march 2, 1955 a 15 yr old named claudette colvin was arrested for not relinquishing her seat to a white passenger. she was convicted & placed on probation. she was not used as the catalyst for the movement because of a pregnancy scandal.

on october 21, 1955, an 18 yr old named mary louise smith was arrested for the same crime. she was convicted & the naacp refused to use her plight as the springboard for a movement. there were rumors about her family circulated that made the naacp & the locals look down on her.

on december 1, 1955, a 42 yr old secretary for the naacp's local chapter was arrested for refusing to relinquish her seat to a white passenger. her name was rosa parks.

you need to know the truth of the events you speak of, otherwise you loose credibility.

I thank you for the information and but also keep in mind that I was poking fun at the fact that people believe small protests, like one person seat protests, as pointless and ineffective.

heres a link to one of the ladies i just wrote about.
72.14.203.104/search

heres another
www.montgomeryboycott.com/bio_mlsmith.htm

So Jim MasDonald's secret desire is to become a small older black woman?

The "Ineffective Collective"....that's Y. A .W. N.

The Washington Post reported today that detectives from the Metropolitan Police Department misreported and then failed to investigate two serious muggings likely perpetrated by the same assailants that mugged the New York Times reporter who later died from wounds that went untreated because MPD and the Fire Department mistook a serious concussion for intoxication. Had MPD investigated the earlier muggings, the death would likely never have happened.

The whole force seems to have failed the city – both Ramsey and the F.O.P. should be run out of town and like FEMA MPD should be disbanded.