"Free speech" in Boston: Eyewitness report from the FSZ

[donsu]

http://www.buzzflash.com/mailbag/04/07/mai04209.html

-snip-

Forwarded from a friend whose pal paid a visit to the designated "Free Speech Zone" near the convention last night. If this is what our civil liberties look like in a "secure" post-9/11 America, may I suggest the terrorists have already won ?

Last night, I had my first direct experience with the so-called free speech zone. It left me with one conclusion: whatever you do, do NOT go inside. It's not only a blatant offense to free speech, but also highly dangerous and unsafe. I would suggest protesting anywhere in Boston but inside of it.

No amount of hyperbole can accurately describe how disastrous the interior actually is. It's like a scene from some post-apocalyptic movie -- a futuristic, industrial detention area from a Mad Max film. You are surrounded on all sides by concrete blocks and steel fencing, with razor wire lining the perimeter. Then, there is a giant black net over the entire space.



That's not even the worst part. 80% of the space is actually beneath a construction site. You heard me, most of the zone is actually under a partially constructed building, broken up by gates, iron girders and wooden rafters, in the darkness.

No helicopter will ever be able to see an aerial shot of the people assembled, negating the major points of mass protest: to let the rest of the public see your numbers. This forced 'invisibility' is so painfully obvious, that it is hard to believe it resulted from pure negligence. What's more, the space fits only 1000 maximum by law, so the 1001st person who wants to express their rights, is shit out of luck.

That's not all. If you go inside, you won't be left safely alone with your fellow protesters. Right above you will be a suspended catwalk of wooden rafters traveling down the middle of the protest area. This strip is not only covered with reams of barbed wire, but officers (or national guardsmen) will be strolling above you just feet from your head. After walking in, it took us about 2 seconds to agree; "there is no fucking way we are stepping into this trap."

And if you think that the civility of individual officers will make up for it, think again. As we were casually walking through the pen, our jaws open in disbelief, a group of officers quickly surrounded us. Twenty-four of them. The first officer (Officer 'Gately') approached us swiftly, and declared, "Do you know that the willful destruction of public property in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is a felony that carries 5 year in jail!' We were taken aback by this introduction. Other people in suits and ties were walking by, using the zone as a pedestrian shortcut. A bunch of peaceniks were walking through in our shorts and backpacks and we were immediately suspect of committing a criminal act. I guess this explains the meaning of the rule about those wearing 'inappropriate clothing' being searched. The overtly intimidating tone of the interaction didn't cease, so we soon left.

I called the BPD headquarters and asked to talk to the district 2 duty officer, in order to file a complaint about the rude treatment. When I asked him (Sgt. Ross) for Officer Gately's ID#, he stated that he could not give me that information because after all, I could be "a member of the press, or an anarchist." I guess myself (along with the press and anarchists) are no longer allowed to hold the police accountable for their actions.

A word of advice: Do not make the mistake of making your first visit to the free speech zone on your day of protest. It will be too late to realize what you are getting into.

It's crazy to think that this is happening in Boston, a city that fronts a reputation of being a cradle of constitutional values. The city has tried to force free speech into a cage where it cannot survive. The only reasonable response is to exercise our rights everywhere but the protest zone.

By giving free speech an unacceptable location, the City of Boston has unwittingly declared that the entire city is now a free speech zone.

J.M.


-snip-
------------------------------

Free Speech Zones in america are a perversion. a sickness.


being old, all I can think of is Hitler. pics of WWII during my childhood flash in my mind's eye.

[sandnsea]

1. "protesting anywhere in Boston"

Which people are doing and have been doing since day one. That awful cage was put up because protest groups ASKED for a place closer to the convention. Nobody put it up as a place people HAD to protest in, like Bush's FSZ's. This thing has been totally misrepresented, although they could have put up something a little less nazi-like, that's for sure.

3. Weird logic even if true

That awful cage was put up because protest groups ASKED for a place closer to the convention.





They ASKED for it did they?
I've heard that logic used in relation to other things before.

[kiahzero]

7. Equivocation is a logical fallacy

The poster said that the protest groups requested a place closer to the convention. You then took his quote, and changed the meaning to imply "they deserved it," then attacked him for your distorted version. Does that sound like intellectual honesty to you? It sure doesn't to me.

9. attacked, no? commented, yes

I'm pointing out the subtext that the poster might have unconsciously bought into and where that logic can lead.

If I was going to attack you'd know it. It would be a lot more blatant than what I did.

[sangh0]

11. "might have" unconsciously bought into

Your original comments didn't seem to make any note of the conditional nature of your concern. You said "They ASKED for it did they? I've heard that logic used in relation to other things before."

It sure didn't sound like you were concerned with a possibility. You sound quite certain that the poster was saying they deserved it. I don't know what your intent was, but I know how I interpreted your original post.

12. I'm not surprised you interpreted it that way

.

[sandnsea]

8. My point is that it isn't a designated FSZ

People don't HAVE to go in there, the DNC didn't come up with it to keep protests out of sight like Bush does. It's an awful thing, but maybe we ought to be figuring out who in the world decided to stick that razorwire on it instead of kneejerking against Dems. I know kneejerking against Dems is more fun, but I'm not sure it solves anything.

10. I'm not kneejerking against Dems

others may be.

I hold the Boston police and the State of Massachusetts responsible, not the Dems.

It would be nice if some Dems spoke up about it though.

[doctorbombeigh]

5. I think the barbed wire came from the Feds - no surprise.

But I have to say, with what awaits this country in the NEXT Bush&Co. administration, we all have to suck it up.

We can see how far they are willing to go when they have the restraint of another run for the White House weighing them down. I think we're looking at Iran, Syria and lord knows how many other countries being terrorized and/or invaded to satisfy these freaks.

To me, re the "free speech zone" and whatever umbrage might be reasonably taken by a freedom-loving person - my attitude is to just suck it up this season. And no whining.

[Pallas180]

2. EXCELLENT, excellent report. Very similar to what I saw in

Savannah and posted .

Bravo.

You need to send this to Letters to the Editor of all magazines
and newspapers so that the People of America will know what has
happened to their civil liberties.

What you have written is very important!

[tridim]

4. I've never thought it was meant for free speechifying

I think Ridge's plan was to use it as a temporary lockup if things got out of control. There's no other excuse for the razor wire.

[Warpy]

6. It looked like a gulag, but

protest permits were issued for other parts of the city, away from the cage. Only the protests close to the convention had to be caged.

In NYC, there are no facilities for protestors within a mile of Madison Square Garden, and no provisions are being made. As I understand it, a few permits have been issued for protests elsewhere, but counter demosnstration permits were expedited and issued before the demonstration permits were.

(all I could think when I saw the photos of the old section of El above the site was how it always rained pigeon poop under that things. I've also noticed via the news that the only demonstrators who insist on being right at the Fleet Center are the antichoice crowd, who really thought they'd be allowed to roll on the ground and block entrances)

Yes, these things are largely an obscenity. However, remember that they're an outgrowth of having antichoicers restrained from blocking access to womens' clinics.

I can see why no permits for uncaged demos were allowed near the conventions. I went through the 60s and more than one riot. However, if they're going to build cages like that, they should use them only for restraining rioters and trashers, not peaceful people.