RadicalGraphics.org

And I think we'll be able to prove scientifically that other talents such as intuitive, psychic, clairvoyant and audiovoyant are very real.
-Shirley Maclaine

One of the side effects of participating in the kinds of mass protests that spring up whenever and wherever highly publicized, closed-door meetings of the global elites take place, is that the participants are able to experience a temporary simulation of the grim reality of discretionary law enforcement, better known as profiling. More often than not, all but the most active of the victims of political profiling will not have to fear being arrested for wearing black or "looking like a protester" when the demonstrations are over, unlike people of color in the US who are continuously targeted by law enforcement on the basis of their race.

Most of the proposed legislation is redundant, due to the catch-all, junk drawer kinds of charges such as "disorderly conduct" which can mean whatever the arresting officer wishes. There is no need for distinct legislation banning an strange assortment of objects, with "intent to defy," including firearms and the imaginary human waste that the police and their hand puppets in the media are so obsessed with. There is more evidence for the existence of UFOs or Bigfoot than the reputed bags feces and urine, which have yet to materialize. Just a kinky fantasy? What would Freud have to say?

No soiled riot armor, no (literally) dirty cops, no such disgusting projectiles seized, just a centralized corporate media that reports on official press releases without investigating the claims for themselves. It is pretty convenient to claim to be assaulted with something that would leave behind very little physical evidence. They may as well claim that there are icicles being thrown at them, which would quickly melt. I guess it's better than the imaginary batteries that police claim are thrown at them from time to time, as justification for arrests.

Since the police routinely shoot people who brandish knives, meat cleavers, and of course guns, not to mention, the occasional cell phone, it is hard to believe that an act that would get one killed will suddenly be subject a $300 fine, as the Post-Gazette reports:

The proposed ordinance would allow police to cite people for carrying a variety of items, from rotten eggs to 37 types of guns, if police perceive an intent to defy their orders.

Will the deceased's survivors be expected to pay the fine? Is there really anyone who believes that they can defy the orders of the police while holding a firearm? Really? Drop me a line, I would be interested in hearing from you.

The "divide and conquer" applications of what little can be gleaned on the proposed legislation, attempts to create "good protester/bad protester" schism between the organizations seeking permits and the ones who are not. The problem is, to borrow a popular diatribe from the right wing, is that it creates "activist judges law enforcement, who legislate from the bench squad car". Aside from sort of being what the Taliban does,  one can can only imagine the kinds of legal opinions that will be handed down by the jurists who, according to the Post Gazette:

Over a 20-month period, Pittsburgh police officers wrote 188 disorderly conduct citations to people for swearing, making profane gestures or just generally acting like jerks.

While law enforcement in the US, and the rest of the world for that matter seem to have the profiling thing down, Pittsburgh seems to be a leader in the use of psychic powers for policing. Despite the CIA lack of success with "Stargate" or the Pentagon's "Project Grill-Flame," the Pittsburgh Police must have fulfilled the dreams of the US Army's abandoned First Earth Battalion project with their advertised ability to "read" the "intent" of civilians, a remarkable, "faith-based" achievement on such a relatively tiny budget. The P-G reports on this amazing feat of human potential:

Police Chief Nate Harper said police are trained to evaluate the totality of a situation, and gauge someone's intent.

Who needs probable cause when police can "gauge intent?" Who needs expensive high-tech surveillance equipment, or warrants for that matter, when the local enforcers have such well developed powers of ESP? The word "intent" appears no less than seven times the proposed ordinance.

This City's surveillance camera network, its vehicles with built in cameras, and its frequent use of hand-held video cameras to record protest activity, (to say nothing of the federal government) make the campus cop's tantrum that ended in the arrest of a Hill District resident for violating the Pennsylvania Wiretap Act and possession of an instrument of crime, particularly ironic. This resident was arrested for videotaping the detention of his friend, for (Achtung!) not possessing identification. "The instrument of crime" in question was a cellular telephone with obligatory video camera, like the one you probably have. Several years ago, another Pittsburgh resident was roughed up, including his head being slammed into a brick wall for attempting to photograph officer William Vollberg, who had shoved someone else who attempted to photograph him. The documentation of police activity with cameras, sound or video recorders is not prohibited by law, and is a slam-dunk lawsuit. Should the City enact a policy of summary arrest of video activists and journalists, as is quickly becoming the norm at these kinds of events, it can probably expect to pay up in civil court. This should not be a problem, since the money in question is tax money and will not come out of the pockets of the local politicians who are hoping that hosting the G-20 will look good on a resume. It is amusing to read about the two-headed snake that is Pittsburgh Mayor Luke Ravenstahl and County Executive Dan Onorato fight over the rat that is your money.

The multi-agency composition of the massive security apparatus is engineered for maximum unaccountability, and subsequent investigations will place the blame on police departments that they have no mandate to investigate. This is precisely what occurred in the aftermath of the November 2003 demonstrations against the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), when dispersing participants in a labor march quickly found themselves in the midst of an unprovoked orgy of high-tech police violence, carried out by more than three dozen law enforcement agencies. The various review panels in Miami authorized to investigate the actions of a specific agency during the 2003 FTAA demonstrations, blamed other agencies for the violence and repression and ruled that the agency they were assigned to investigate behaved "professionally."

...Miami-Dade police showed great restraint for much of the weeklong conference. County officers only fired off three pepper spray balls and one pepper spray canister during an incident outside a county jail on Friday, Nov. 21, the final day of protests. ''The vast majority of MDPD personnel performed their duty without incident and conducted themselves in a professional manner under trying circumstances,'' reads one of the report's findings.

But it's also critical of some of the controversial arrests around Miami-Dade County Jail. ``Insufficient time to disperse was given to some demonstrators arrested . . . on Friday afternoon.'' Reynardus said most of the Friday arrests were unnecessary and inappropriate.

Nelda Fonticiella, a spokeswoman for the Miami-Dade police, said it was premature for the agency to comment: ``At this time our command staff is reviewing the report, so we won't have any comment until they are done.''

Carlos Alvarez -- who was the Miami-Dade police director during the conference and has since resigned to run for county mayor -- said the report sounded ``melodramatic.''

''There were a number of departments there; I can only speak for MDPD. I did not see any images of MDPD abusing anyone,'' he said. ``I know that we acted in a very professional manner, under very difficult circumstances.''

The G-20 Media Support Team is calling on freedom-loving residents of the Pittsburgh area to attend today's hearing where they will be submitting a pro-democracy resolution:

Call to Action: Attend City Council on Wednesday, 1:30pm

Starting August 30, 2009 - Ending September 3, 2009

Join the community of G20 dissenters to voice your concerns about the criminalization of dissent at a special Pittsburgh City Council hearing. Wednesday, Sept. 2, 1:30 P.M @ the City Council Chambers.

The Pittsburgh City Council is holding a public hearing on Wednesday, September 2, starting at 1:30 PM in Council Chambers (City-County Building, 414 Grant St., downtown) regarding the G-20 Summit. We need your support!

SIGN UP TO TESTIFY: 412-255-2138 (deadline to do so is 12 noon on Wednesday).  NOW is the time to speak out and urge the City to respect our constitutional rights. This will be the ONLY hearing held before the City Council votes on the Mayor’s proposed anti-free speech bills on the following Tuesday. We need Council to recognize that protesters are members of the public, too!

Even if you don’t want to speak, COME TO THE HEARING.  We need to pack the room. We will have stickers for everyone to wear to show support.

There has been much ado about “good” vs. “bad” apples in the organizing sectors, and talk of “a few rotten apples spoiling the bunch.”  To this end, we ask that everyone bring an apple with them. When speaking, consider putting an apple on the podium, for all to see.

One of the ordinances being discussed is a ban on mask-wearing or carrying certain materials with the “intent” of committing a crime. If you wish to address that ordinance, consider bringing a mask.

View proposed pro-democracy resolution that will be submitted to City Council. Download the proposed ordinances below.

We hope to see you there!

The G-20 Media Support Team