Santa Cruz Indymedia : http://santacruz.indymedia.org
Home
Santa Cruz Indymedia

LOCAL News :: Civil & Human Rights : Education & Youth : Government & Elections

THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

UCSC, April 18, 2005: An inappropriate, overwhelming and brutal police attack was the University response to a disciplined nonviolent student appeal and action on behalf of a humanized education.
panel1_badegpain.jpg
WHY THIS PAIN AND ANGUISH?


UCSC, April 18, 2005: An inappropriate, overwhelming and brutal police attack was the University response to a disciplined nonviolent student appeal and action on behalf of a humanized education.

Called at home by cell phone at 9:30pm on Monday night, a student friend shout over the background ruckus, “I am at the tent university and the cops are choking the students! You won’t believe this. Bring your camera.?

He was right. What I witnesses and photographed was from another a bygone 1960s authority-at-war-with-youth era. However, in this case the youth were conscientiously and consistently nonviolent, even in the face of protracted violence, physical pain and degradation.

Approximately 100 young people, aware of the explicit threats of possible academic discipline, peacefully assembled in huddled circles of support beneath a tent-covered mental framework on the barren lot next to the university’s High St. entrance.

Students were surrounded by a mercenary group of approximately 50 riot gear encased police officers assembled by mutual aide agreements from regional police departments. The University police charged into the assembled students and directed the extremely aggressive, but not very successful process of arrest and removal.

The police effort was greatly retarded because each little circle of students clung to each other like balls of tangled seaweed. Despite police use of a very painful and disabling martial arts bodily pressure-point technique (administered, of course with surgical sanitary gloves) the tedious process of disengaging just one person was often followed with mighty wrestling match where four huge police officers grappled with one wiggling student…who often again became re-entangled with comrades.

Suddenly, after three hours of struggling to remove half of the students, the police left. Apparently an agreement was made allowing a small group to remain with the tents, if the others would leave. If an agreement was possible, I asked myself, why did any of the brutal removal process take place at all?

It was ugly. Most observers were appropriately enraged; many wept.

Driving home a word grabbed me -- WHY? Why the brutality. Why the organizing and expense a large mercenary police force? Why the loss of student, faculty, and community good vibes and good will? Why the destruction of a peaceful and gentle protest impassioned by noble and worthy ideals?

See for yourself:

Click on image for a larger version

panel2_light.jpg
BEGINNING WITH GOOD VIBES.

Click on image for a larger version

panel3_circle_song.jpg
CIRCLES OF FRIENDSHIP, JOY AND SONG.

Click on image for a larger version

panel4_attack.jpg
THE ATTACK BEGINS.

Click on image for a larger version

panel5_choker.jpg
MORE AND MORE.

Click on image for a larger version

panel6_shouters.jpg
FOR THOSE WHO WATCHED -- ANGER AND ANGUISH...

Click on image for a larger version

panel7_rage.jpg
...AND RAGE

Click on image for a larger version

panel8_end.jpg
CELEBRATING THE SUDDEN DEPARTURE OF VIOLENCE.
 
 


New Comments are disabled, please visit Indybay.org/SantaCruz

Comments

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

Your fellows from Rutgers are with you.
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

there is now a video tent set up at rutgers for students to view the incident - as well as phone numbers to call the administration at uc-santa cruz.
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

Scott from Lost Film Fest just sent me a link to the video, and then the link went dead. We are mirroring the clip on our sites:

submediatv.com/movies/To%20Protect%20and%20Serve%20Broad.mov
www.lostfilmfest.org/video/tent_state_ucsc_policeattack.mp4

cheers//frank
submediatv.com
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

was scott from Lost film fest there? what the??...
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

After witnessing the Pain Compliance brutality of the police arresting peaceful Tent University students on Monday, I sent this notice to UCSC Chancellor Denton. I am on a hunger strike and calling Chancellor Denton to give the names and contact information of the authorizing UC officials responsible.

From: ptrue (at) ipmts.ucsc.edu
Subject: Students Forced Unconscious in Arrest –
Letter of Notice to UCSC Chancellor Denton
Date: April 22, 2005 10:20:33 AM PDT
To: denton (at) ucsc.edu


Greetings,

I am at my wits end. Has all good reason gone out the window?

I am calling on you, Chancellor Denton, to disclose the complete names and contact information of the UC management persons who were responsible for authorizing the act of inhumanity on UCSC students, Monday, 18, 2005.

I was present at Tent U Monday night and I was so appalled at what I saw that I began an extended fast to clear my mind.

I have now decided to continue my fast as a public hunger strike. I will continue this hunger strike until the names of those who were responsible for authorizing this horrible act are made public.


What happened at UCSC Monday night, April 18, 2005??

Peaceful student protesters where cited as ‘trespassing’ for camping overnight at the main entrance of California University, Santa Cruz. At about 9 pm on Monday evening, a squad of 'riot police' announced that they would begin arresting people. But instead of issuing citations, the police began a bizarre, hideous act: the students were PUT UNCONSCIOUS using knockout pressure points in the neck, in the process of arresting them.

Below is a link to a video of this act on several UCSC students. You cannot watch this video without being enraged!!

There is NO justification for this kind of brutality at a peaceful civil disobedience action.

Who authorized bringing this ‘riot squad’??

Who authorized PUTTING STUDENTS UNCONSCIOUS??

The responsible persons must be held accountable. I await this information and will be making it public.

Video:
submediatv.com/movies/To%20Protect%20and%20Serve%20Broad.mov

Addition info in recent Santa Cruz Sentinel articles and at Santa Cruz Indymedia:
www.santacruzsentinel.com/
www.santacruz.indymedia.org/


Truth will prevail!!
Caring and Sharing to Heal the World!! Pat ; )

Patrick (time4respect) True
ptrue (at) ipmts.ucsc.edu
phone: 831-459-5799

DO NOT SETTLE FOR LESS THAN A TRULY BETTER WORLD!
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

OK - WE the people her and every were USA have to stop giving our power away. It is not ok to just let cops get away with is shit , to stand there and watch. WE have the power to stop this like with every thing alse- every thing. It is time to Do some thing ?. To perhaps ?. So on that note: Never let them see us not watching.
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

What a shocking display of behavior on the part of police, to attack non-violent people in such a brutal way in what I thought was a democracy, the United States. What was the University of California at Santa Cruz' role in this outrage? To the extent there was comoplicity, there should be a financial boycott on the part of alums and donors until the appropriate parties are held to account and brought to justice.
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

I'm perfectly happy to let the cops get away with it, because they didn't do anything wrong, and if the outrage is anything to go by, most people aren't outraged.
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

Patrick, I am glad you are taking such strong steps.

I am in Chicago. I just saw the video. I am past outraged, and I don't even live there.

I am glad our friend isn't outraged. Certainly if someone started passing this out to the student body, the students wouldn't be outraged. Certainly if people went door to door in the community, the community wouldn't be outraged. Certainly if every parent who brought their children to check out the school knew about this, they wouldn't be outraged. Nor would the alumni who support the school with their dollars, if they knew about it. Nor would the many-gasp!-liberal and progressive visitors who spend money in your city's stores, even if you went outside said stores with signs asking people not to support any local businesses until these police, the city, and the school are held responsible for their actions.

Few people are outraged, eh? I suppose they played the whole six-minute clip on the local TV, eh?

I will tell my grandchildren about this. But perhaps I'm alone.

People of Santa Cruz, what will you do? I am in Chicago, and we have our own outrages to fight.

I'll tell you one thing: we don't need only statements right now. We need the university and city's name to be mud. Martin Luther King did it in FARRRRRR less progressive cities than yours, my friends. Someone-hopefully many people-need to spend 2 hours a day to get the truth out until this is solved. You are in a small community. You can make the difference. And that difference can spread. Any city in the country will think again before doing that again.

And in 2 hours a day, you will be able to look your children in the eye, and tell them that in these dark times, you acted.

That is my feeling from Chicago. Certainly there are many in Santa Cruz who agree?
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

Arrest all of the police that you have pictures of
and charge them with "HATE CRIMES." Then go to the
administrators offices and arrest them for "Attempted
Murder." And for "Violation of Civil Rights." Use the
power of the Federal Government to punish them.
Make the police to convene a Grand Jury to record, make them tell why they tried to kill innocent NON-VIOLENT! students.
On an individual basis harass the administrators wherever they go. Block their parking spaces with a disabled car. Refuse to respect them in all ways. Ignore them in public places, cut in front of them in lines. refuse to serve them in stores,
restaurants (whenever you can get away with it.) Make them wait for reports, books(hide them)
In other words make them feel like a modern day
leper.
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

I'm an 57 year old martial artist, and I was taught what appear to be the same techniques back in the 1980s by a police instructor in Australia.

I have also been in protests in England and full scale riots in Hong Kong (when it was still a British colony).

The pressure points underneath the nose, ear and jawline cause great pain but are not lethal and should not even cause injury.

They are designed to cause enough temporary pain to force the person they are used on to stop resisting and 'come along' quietly.

I've had them applied to me, and I've used them on others (only in training class, folks).

Aikido and Ju Jitsu wrist locks are designed to be painful if you resist, but if you relax and do as you are told, the pain is reduced.

Now let me state here that what happened to your protesters was wrong. Okay? The police were doing exactly what they are trained and paid to do. Like soldiers, they face disciplinary action if they say "No", and they are taught / conditioned to just do as they're told anyhow.

This isn't putting the cops down; it's just how police anywhere in the world operate. In some places they would have used Mace or Pepper Spray... Maybe even Tazers or electric batons. All of these are 'non-lethal' tools available to most police forces.

In less enlightened countries (not that yours or mine are perfect) the police would have used boots and riot batons to break heads and bones; and in some places I could mention, the women would probably be carted off to the station and sexually assaulted.

So what I'm saying is, nobody got cracked skulls or broken bones... Nobody was taken out the back to have the sh*t kicked out of them. be glad of that.

Don't attack the cops for doing their job. Blame lies with the person in authority who decided the cops should remove you by force. Those coppers were just the 'removal men'.

You guys knew the police were going to do something; it's just that they weren't as nice as you had expected.

You can learn a bit more about pressure points here www.gedanate.com/vital-points.html
That's not the only article on the web site.

Don't shoot me, guys, I'm only the messenger!
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

Gedanate --

Even though you are a police apologist, I thank you for your valuable link.

I learned from your website that:

"The human body has many vulnerable areas, called Vital points or Pressure points. If you get involved in a fight, then hitting these vulnerable places will hurt and weaken your opponent faster than anywhere else.

Vital Points should only be used for real self defense situations, because they can inflict permanent damage."

Thanks for tip! Since the police involved were neither being attacked or in a life-threatening situation, this further confirms my belief that these students were outright maliciously abused by these thugs. Furthermore, I will be sure that the victims have had thorough medical examinations since the procedures used on them "can inflict permanent damage."

This is good evidence for a potential law suit.
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

Holy Crap....no one is going to care about this next week. How did finals go? Did any of you graduate? If not, then you may want to take a closer look at why. Too much singing? Too much camping? If you don't like your school then leave and go to another. The school should not feel like they are held hostage to you. If you go to a resteraunt and you don't like the food, you most likely would not close the doors and demand that the chef do better or you will stage a nonviolent protest until he/she does! You simply get up and walk out. College is the exact same way my friends. As for the trespassing, you all don't own that land, the state does if it is a state school. So they have the right to tell you where you can and can't protest. It is just the same as the state house grounds. Just cut your losses. That martial artist guy is exactly right. The state's interest in moving you people heavily outweighs the not lethal methods that they used. Law suit? This case would be a looser. There is so much case law out there on this kind of thing and the state's interest of good order and discipline always prevails. Good luck......
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

last time I checked, in non-violent protests, you're supposed to give yourself up to the police. (remember the Freedom Riders and Rosa Parks?)

And yes, the police were doing their job. They were told to arrest the protestors, and although they negotiated later than thay could have, they used a relatively civil way to make the arrests. How else could the do it, by injecting sedatives?

The excessive adjectives you use reminds me of the propaganda the communists, saddam hussein, and gwb uses. Maybe more people would listen to you if you didn't sound like a bunch of hippies. I suggest you use a less extreme way of speaking.
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

Are you really university students? Maybe you ought to put down your signs and pick up some books - on grammar, spelling, and diction.

Once you have mastered those basics, you can move on to logic, reason, and the rule of law.

I am not optimistic.
 

Responding to Police Apologists; Some Historical Parallels

To "Jim", "nbsp", and "me":

Since there was no criminal behavior happening, the "the police are just doing their jobs" stuff is b.s.--since no crime was involved. We are left with "we're just following orders"-- and judging that, of course, depends on the quality of the orders.

In Iraq, some U.S. occupation troops are refusing to "follow orders" to avoid eventual war crimes prosecution (and perhaps some of them just don't want to commit war crimes, whether they're prosecuted or not). Locally, following illegal orders can result in lawsuits for which individual officers can be held personally accountable.

Just what was "the state's interest" in moving out the students, jim? "Good order" and "discipline" ? - sounds like a military view of a civilian institution: we're talking about the University not the Army.

nbsp, non-violent resistance to abusive authority can take many forms. A thousand+ students surrounded the squadcar that came to remove the Jack Weinberg Oct 1, 1964 from the UCB campus in the beginnings of the FSM [see article below].

Students then weren't interested in accepting fines and jail for upholding the Constitution then and Tent U students should be interested in it now.

The community should be demanding restitution for the Santa Cruz 19, abolition of the abusive un-Free Speech zones, and removal of those officials responsible for the misconduct.

nbsp: Police had no business being there in the first place. Even if you assume they had any legitimate reason, they could have begun by issuing citations rather than making arrests.

The absurd claim that Tent U was an "illegal assembly" was so substanceless, it was abandoned rather quickly (but still served as the pretext to torture people peacefully asserting basic rights).
They were obviously targeting people selectively (those seated in the Nome) rather than clearing the area generally.

The strength of the Tent U. resisters in PEACEFULLY standing up to that kind of abuse was an inspiration to everyone. Too bad the legal assembly didn't continue but was ultimately dispersed by the UCSC PD and UCB PD terror. Too bad students didn't spent more time considering occupation alternatives that were discussed but abandoned in the four-hour direct democracy that preceeded the terrifying police assault.

Perhaps the organizations seeking to uncover responsibility should seek an anti-terrorist grant.

I apologise for the length of this post but the following summary of the Free Speech Movement at Berkeley is instructive, I think, and the parallels are worth noting:





[from www.diggers.org/cavallo_pt__2.htm]

The Free Speech Movement

In the early sixties, two unanticipated and very different forms of rebellion erupted among young people in the Bay Area. Their impact would ripple through the rest of the country during the remainder of the decade and to a great extent define for many Americans what the sixties youth culture represented: incessant political unrest among college students and a Dionysian hippie dance of abandon choreographed by hallucinogenic drugs and rock music.

Prior to 1964, most Americans viewed college students as a privileged class poised for a future of security, affluence and influence. One of the first public signs that some students viewed themselves in a different light—in fact thought of themselves as oppressed victims of an impersonal, repressive, boring society— appeared across the bay from San Francisco. In the fall of 1964 the Free Speech Movement (FSM) erupted on the campus of the University of California at Berkeley.

The FSM was a response by Berkeley students to new restrictions on student political activity imposed that fall by the university's administration. The restrictions were pushed by conservative members of the university's Regents. As early as 1960 conservative Regents were upset by the involvement of Berkeley students in left-wing causes. Students from Berkeley had played a prominent role in the massive demonstrations against the House Un-American Activities Committee that occurred in San Francisco in May 1960. In the early sixties, they were active as well in efforts to end both capital punishment in California and de facto racial segregation in the Bay Area.(30)

Since the beginning of the Cold War, political activity on campus had been generally prohibited. This was especially true of activism perceived by the university administration as "left wing," which in the repressive climate of the fifties meant almost any form of protest against the status quo. By the early sixties this included civil-rights activism. For instance, the new regulations prohibited students from engaging in off-campus acts of civil disobedience, a tactic regularly [p. 108] used in civil-rights protests.

Also, students were prohibited from proselytizing or passing out political literature on city-owned sidewalks at the main pedestrian entrance to the campus, the intersection of Telegraph Avenue and Bancroft Way, where student political activity had traditionally been tolerated by the university.(31)

On October 1 the civil-rights activist Jack Weinberg and others defied the ban. Weinberg was arrested for distributing literature for the Congress of Racial Equality. When police placed him in the back seat of a squad car, hundreds of students surrounded it. In the first, and perhaps most memorable, act of massive student defiance toward campus authorities in the sixties, the squad car was prevented from moving for 32 hours. While Weinberg remained in the car, and the crowd surrounding it grew to a few thousand, dozens of students took turns standing on its roof, making speeches about the pros and cons of the ban on political activity. Most of the speakers removed their shoes to avoid damaging the squad car. And a few weeks later, FSM leaders voluntarily collected over $400 from students to pay for repairs to the vehicle.

The outrage created by the university's prohibition on student political activity, along with the arrests of Weinberg and others, created a semester-long uproar on the campus. The lies and duplicity of a feckless university administration, which portrayed the dissidents as little more than puerile adolescents engaged in a fraternity-style lark, made matters worse. From the students point of view, they were fighting to secure their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and assembly. Acrimony and frustration mounted on both sides, and on December 2 Sproul Hall, the university's administration building, was occupied by nearly 1,000 student protesters who staged a sit-in.

Edward Meese, Berkeley's assistant county prosecutor (and later attorney general in President Ronald Reagan's administration) told Governor Pat Brown that the students were "busting up" Sproul Hall. Meese was being less than truthful. The occupation of the administration building obviously disrupted the campus. But the demonstrators, unlike many campus protesters later in the decade, carefully avoided abusing university officials or damaging property. They spent the day singing FSM-inspired folk songs ("Don't know if I'm subversive," went one, "just want to say what I please.") Some studied for final examinations, while others watched Charlie Chaplin movies. Jewish students organized a Chanukah service. The governor ordered the police to remove the students, which they did at 3 A.M. on December 3. Nearly 800 students were taken into custody in the largest mass arrest in California history. A campus-wide student strike ensued. Finally, on December 8 an overwhelming majority of the faculty voted to support the FSM's claim that the First Amendment guaranteed students' rights to freedom of speech and assembly [p. 109] on the campus. The administration caved in, lifting the prohibition on student political activity. The students had won a stunning, nationally publicized victory.(34)

On the surface, the Free Speech Movement was an ardent defense by students of their right to enjoy fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. For this reason, even politically conservative student groups, such as the Young Republicans, supported the FSM (most of whose spokespersons were liberal to left) and participated in its rallies. But as the crisis deepened during the fall, issues unrelated to free speech unexpectedly surfaced among some of the leftists involved in the movement. These students began to question the right of the university to restrict their behavior in any fashion, except when the well-being of others was clearly imperiled. In their view, the university's traditional power to act in loco parentis was illegitimate.

More significantly, these students started to see themselves as fodder for an educational system—and a society—determined to mold them into efficient and compliant components of what FSM leader Mario Savio amorphously but ominously referred to as "the machine" of American society.(35) White middle-class college students saw a contradiction between their expectations of becoming autonomous, independent adults and the ultimate purposes of their education as it was defined by the society. In a famous metaphor, the president of the University of California, the liberal Democrat Clark Kerr, called Berkeley a "knowledge factory." Berkeley and the country's other major research institutions were what he called "multiversities." They promoted diverse forms of knowledge that not only reflected "middle-class pluralism," but were also, according to Kerr, "instrument[s] of national purpose" as well.(36)

Some students took a dim view of Kerr's vision, and of the impersonal nature of the university's academic and administrative environments it tacitly sanctioned. They saw it as proof that they were perceived by society as "products" and "resources" whose destiny was to serve the needs of an undefined "national purpose" not of their choosing. Particularly those students involved in or sympathetic to causes for social justice saw a parallel, however inexact, between themselves and victims of racial discrimination and economic inequity. Their sense of being "oppressed" was rather vague and undefined, but it brought to the surface powerful undercurrents of resentment. "For the first time," FSM leader Michael Rossman said years later, "the question becomes, What about us? For the first time we took the conditions of our lives, the institutionally determined conditions of our own lives, not as a base from which to address others' problems but as the ground of our own oppression. When people began to make this sort of connection, the floodgates opened."(37)
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

Perhaps you didn't hear the whole story.
messages.ucsc.edu/04-05/04-19.tent-update.asp

The protesters were unwilling to negotiate and knew what was coming. They were breaking the law. My thoughts are that they were provoking the police so that the police would make a move and then the protesters would have footage of "violent torture blah blah blah" in order to produce an emotional response from others in the community. However they failed to accomplish this goal. I would like you to know that among the responses to this incident that I have seen, I am one of the most favorable to the protestors. That doesn't necessarily mean I support them, just that the other responses were much more passionately in support of the police and against the protestors.

And excuse me for this next comment but I thought the protesters were damn whiny. As I watched some videos I found myself telling them to shut up.

From that article you posted it seems that Jack Weinberg gave himself up. Then, in a way respectful to the police, the students held a protest around the car after stopping it. Then there were both pro and con speeches, proving that the students were not unreasonable or unthinking. During the sit-in at sproul hall, the students were respectful and civil.

The protesters at "Tent State" did none of these things. Excuse me again, but it looked like a whiny hippie party. This image is furthered by your dedication to sue or abuse the "terrorist" staff and police force. Again I must say that maybe if you sounded less unreasonable more people would listen to you.
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

i had no idea this was going on. Im fourteen years old and thought i had a pretty good handle on the news/media in general. but this has opened my eyes. i cant believe this went on in my own Santa Cruz and its like no one knows anything about it. how could this happen? thank you so much for the honesty. i will open my eyes and ears wider.
 

Administration and their police violated the First Amendment. Students broke no laws.

nbsp:

I'm impressed someone actually read my long post.

TUSC workers have a different story than that propounded by the UC administration letter you cite above.

It is my understanding (and I repeatedly interviewed TUSC worker Laurel on Free Radio as well as other TUSCers) that there was indeed an extensive negotiating process, but UC was insistent on denying one of the basic requirements of Tent U--being in a location (viz. the base of campus) which was open to the community.

I think you're naive in relying on university documents as holy writ.

This is not "against the law". It is against some arbitrary university regulations (just as the exclusion of most of UCSC from "free speech" activity is a university regulation).

Is it "provoking the police" when you stand your ground with a lawful assembly and they use fear, force, and pain to try to disperse you?

Your notion about their "goal" being to provoke the police, you acknowledge comes from your own "thoughts"--you are candid enough to admit. Do you have any other substantiation for this claim?

Truth is not always at the mid-point between two opposing views. It may be one, it may be the other, it may be neither. You may consider yourself moderate, but the real question is whether you have a handle on the facts.

As to the parallels with the FSM occupation--that WAS illegal--they interfered with a police officer for many many hours. I think the technical charge is "lynching" (when you take a prisoner away from a police officer--or, at least, obstructing an officer.

While it may appeal to your sensibilities for students to respond in a low-key manner, I think you will grant that many folks get angry with they see basic rights--like freedom of assembly---being swept away by men in uniforms with guns.

Non-violent means that they don't raise weapons of their own, but resist it without injuring the officers involved--though at risk to themselves. Which is exactly what the Tent U folks did.

If only "whiney hippies" are defending the Constitution locally and standing up to police force, let's have more of them.
Disclaimer: My remarks are made as an observer and a reporter. I was also a representative of one of the consensus groups on April 18 that voted to stay the night at the base of campus. But I was not part of the central planning for Tent U, nor am I student.

For those interested in some eyewitness interviews, scan through www.huffsantacruz.org and check bathrobespierre's broadsides for shows April 21 and after.
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

I must admit that I don't know much about this event or what they're protesting. The reason I was initially sympathetic to the protestors is because my brother recently participated in a protest at UC Davis at relatively the same time, which means he could be part of the same thing.I know the basic gist of it, but I don't really know the whole story.

I also admit that I was naive to rely only on that one source for information, but it was the first and only source I saw that mentioned the negotiations.

and this is the basis for my statements that the protesters sounded whiny and were provoking the police: The protesters went through such great lengths to emphasize and exaggerate the pain and the "torture" of the police that it seemed like a child whining.

Pain is not an uncommon way to make violent people cooperative. Tear gas and pepper spray are common against belligerant crimials or mobs. However it is a questionble method for non-violent protesters. But how else are they going to make arrests?

Also the stopping of the police car isn't lynching. Lynching is basically a mob killing without a trial or something. I don't know the exact definition, but you get the basic idea. Taking a prisoner away from an officer or obstructing him is "Obstruction of Justice" (I think.)

From what I've seen protests that involve everyone linking arms and resisting the police usually don't work. Protests involving tons of people willingly going to jail, filling the jails with protesters and then going back and commiting the same "crime" usually do work.

Disclaimer: I am a high school student sitting in at home reading things off a computer monitor. The only connection I have to the UC schools is that I have a brother that goes to a UC school, so I'm even less qualified to speak on this subject than you are :D
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

I first heard about your story on freetalklive.com, a Libertarian radio show/pod cast from across the country. If you access the old archives you can find the show where they discussed you, I believe it was in May.

Anyway, I am just writing to give my support to what you did. As far as I know, the area you set up your tents on was *public* land. As such, you have every right to do so. In addition, the police tactics in the video and the hostility from the administration of the university trouble me deeply. Best wishes to you all,

Matt, New York.
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

I just saw the film clip and I am horrified. My daughter wanted to go to UC Santa Cruz but after seeing that there is no way. Any university administration that would call in police to manhandle students in a peaceful demonstration in such a way is not fit to educate our children.
 

Re: THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)

Speaking on behalf of Police, (I am a University Police Officer), I did not see anything that would constitute brutality. The Officers showed up told you to leave, you did not obey. They are allowed to use force to do their job. I actually give them credit for holding back. They could have used pepper spray, tasers, or worse case batons to break it up. In the case of the people "put to sleep", that is a painless technique that is safe for the Officer and the subject.
 

Calendar

No events for this day.

view calendar week
add an event

Views

Media Centers

Syndication feeds

Account Login

This site made manifest by dadaIMC software