An Ugly End to Long Day of Protest
Police fire tear gas after small group of protesters sets fires, vandalizes buildings
It was the moment Oakland leaders had tried to avoid throughout Occupy Oakland's day-long mostly peaceful protest: a confrontation between demonstrators and police.
But around midnight, officers fired tear gas at protesters who had taken over a vacant building and set makeshift barricades ablaze near 16th Street and Broadway.
As police were approaching the barricades, Oakland's mayor, Jean Quan, was sending out tweets urging protesters to contact her office.
But within three minutes, officers began firing tear gas at the demonstrators, who had been throwing firecrackers and bottles at police, according to witnesses and news reports.
Protesters ran away from the tear gas; some began breaking windows along 16th street. A group of demonstrators dressed in black broke windows and spray-painted the offices of the Oakland Police Department's Internal Affairs Division.
A few protesters stopped spray-painting briefly to pose for pictures, while other demonstrators tried to convince them to stop vandalizing property.
Around 1 a.m., on a street adjacent to Frank Ogawa Plaza, a group of 200 to 300 officers faced off against 150 protesters, many of whom were carrying makeshift shields and taunting officers. At one point, the officers split into two groups. Protesters followed the officers, who ordered them to disperse.
Police then went around a building, surrounded the demonstrators and began firing tear gas.
One of the tear gas canisters hit The Bay Citizen's editor-in-chief, Steve Fainaru, in the stomach, then exploded on his left hand. Fainaru said he did not sustain serious injuries.
Officers arrested more than 50 protesters.
The confrontation early Thursday morning followed a day of demonstrations and rallies by Occupy Oakland that culminated in thousands of protesters marching to the Port of Oakland, shutting it down.
Most of Wednesday's demonstrations were peaceful, although a group of about 60 protesters dressed in black vandalized four banks and a Whole Foods Market.
Interim Oakland police Chief Howard Jordan estimated that 7,000 people took to the streets at the height of the protest.
By 10 p.m. Wednesday, dozens of protesters who had been at the port made their way inside a vacant building on 16th Street, the former home of the nonprofit Traveler’s Aid Society. They hung a banner in the window that read, “Occupy Everything.”
Protesters had circulated a flier calling for the organization, which provided aid to the city’s homeless population before funding cuts and foreclosure, to reoccupy the space.
“Otherwise, we will make it into a library and open workshop space for the people of Oakland,” the flier reads. “To us this space is invaluable. We are reclaiming it for the people. It is now open for our use.”
More demonstrators began to dance and gather outside, while others built barricades on the street.
Shortly after 11:30 p.m., some of the protesters began lighting the barricades on fire, setting off a confrontation with police.
The Oakland Police Department is currently investigating another confrontation between officers and Occupy Oakland protesters that resulted in officers' firing tear gas. During the Oct. 25 demonstration, Scott Olsen, a 24-year-old Iraq war veteran, suffered a fractured skull. Videotapes from news organizations and protesters suggest Olsen may have been hit by a tear gas canister fired by police.
It's not clear which law enforcement agencies were involved in that incident or in the confrontation early Thursday morning.
AnMarie Rodgers
Thank you BC for quality journalism!
It's a shame that your sister publication, the NYTimes, did not include a significant part of this story that was included here: the reason for the occupation of the downtown building which was the site of the police stand-off. It wasn't a random vacant building but instead highlights the essence of this issue.
A foreclosed building that had provided aide to the homeless? This sounds less like a random mob and more like Robin Hood. Shame on NYTimes for not including this information.
nandro n
No, it was a mob. I've seen the video footage all over the web. Its not just on the NYTimes. Check out Reuters, AP, Al Jazeera even hid videos after rioters lighting trashcans on fire and taunting the police and throwing bottles at them.
And its not like this is the first time either. I dare anyone to cite the last time there was a protest in Oakland that did not descend into chaos, looting, riots, mobs, etc. at the hands of the same group of anarchists.
And AnnMarie, get informed. It wasn't "foreclosed on", the society lost funding from city and state budget cuts and shut-down. Just like a dozen providers of aid to the poor throughout the Bay Area that have suffered through budget cuts. "Occupying" their space isn't going to bring the employees who weren't getting paid back to work.
Elly Faden
Did the group of protesters take the question to the General Assembly before "occupying" the building? If not, then they did not speak for many of the thousand who came out to support a fledgling new government in its infancy.
Alyssa Kies
When the protesters split up into groups of 2,000 at the gates of the port, they formed separate general assemblies at each gate. From what I understand (I was at a different gate), it was one of these general assemblies that chose to occupy the Traveler's Aid Society building. Other general assemblies discussed the future occupations of spaces like the Bay Bridge. I think the decision to occupy the building was totally valid, but the protesters that taunted the police and set things on fire delegitimized it.
R T
Just curious if you could try to make the sub-headline a little more biased?
"After mostly peaceful demonstration, police fire tear gas, arrest dozens"
Makes it sound like the cops got bored or wanted to end things so they could go home. Instead, buried in your story are the real facts- the protestors broke into a building, started fires, shot fireworks at the cops and threw bottles.
I am really disappointed in the Bay Citizen. It started with the idea of being an online news-source that was going to be un-biased etc. However, over the past year or so, I have seen it become more and more biased, especially with police stories. At this point, I consider it to be 2 steps to the right of the Bay Guardian and closing fast.
nandro n
I have noticed this as well. This is not independent journalism. It clearly has a bias towards an anti-police point of view. Several articles have been written with misleading and inflammatory ttitles like "Police shoot man in back" etc.
Its a disappointment as we were all hoping that an independent news source not surviving totally on ad-revenue would be better than this.
M. Mouse
RT: Speaking of bias, why did you focus on only one sub-headline? The ones I saw were "An Ugly End to Long Day of Protest" and "Police fire tear gas after small group of protesters sets fires, vandalizes buildings"
Both of those headers are accurate. So unless you're the type who cherry-picks whatever text suits your agenda, or who doesn't read an entire article, you really don't have a valid point.
Zoe Corneli
Thanks, everyone, for your comments. We did not intend to imply that police were solely responsible for the confrontation. After discussing the concerns raised here, we decided to revise the subhead. We appreciate the thoughtful feedback.
saltykittysnacks .
I'd like to see some in-depth coverage of the incident in which protesters were intentionally injured by the Mercedes driver. Why did the police allow him to leave the scene? What charges, if any, do they plan to bring against him.
saltykittysnacks .
Video of the Mercedes incident: http://www.kirotv.com/videos/news/raw-video-occupy-oakland-protester-hit-by-car/vD4wS/
soxfan
Who called Mayor Jean Quan's number? And what did she say? Why didn't she just tweet what she wanted the crowd to know?
Elly Faden
She probably didn't tweet because she is not as savvy as the violent protesters who instigated a police incident and then tweeted for everyone to watch as the police used "brutality" against them.
Patrick Mitchell
Turn the building into another library? How is that going to work?
Oakland's libraries are already in peril - drastically cut hours already - because of financial cuts. We certainly can't afford another one.
Oakland's librarians are unionized - they're certainly not going to allow a competing, non-union library to open, if that's your plan.
The Oakland's main library branch - as well as Oakland's Asian Library branch are in walking distance of this building - each less than 6 blocks away.
By burning things in the street, trashing windows and scaring away businesses, no one wants to be in that area anyway - certainly not to visit a library.
nandro n
Of course it doesn't make any sense. These aren't thought-out plans for bettering society. These are the rambling decisions of 20something anarchists whose main agenda is confrontation, destruction, revolt against the "oppressors" etc. They couldn't run a library if they tried.
nandro n
Just reading the title again, I can't think of a more misleading and provocative tittle than:
"After mostly peaceful demonstration, police fire tear gas, arrest dozens." IT clearly implies that the protests were peaceful and then for no apparent reason police fire tear gas and arrest dozens.
This is the law straw for me with the Bay Citizen. I had high hopes. But this is like 3rd rate journalism. I thought it couldn't' get much worse than the SF Chronicle, but I was wrong. I think I will stick to local blogs for Bay Area coverage as this is just so absurdly biased its comical.
How can you even call yourself a news website???
Steve and Shoshana, you should be ashamed of yourselves as journalists.
Billy Vierra
Thank you for at least covering what happened last night. However as someone that watched everything via live stream / twitter last night there are some major things that need to be covered that I feel you overlooked.
#1 The phone number that @jeanquan posted went directly to voice mail. http://twitter.com/#!/Vsmoothe/status/131993056693075968
#2 Protesters tried to call and were told that @jeanquan would call back... never happened.
#3 Oakland PD shot a homeless man sitting in a doorway with a 'non-lethal projectile' (http://twitter.com/#!/nihonmama/status/132011826379620352) after @jeanquan stated that 'OPD has not taken action' (http://twitter.com/#!/jeanquan/status/131991477747331073).
#4 The fires that were set, were set to combat the tear gas that was being shot at protesters. (watch the video below)
Please take a some time and watch what @OakFoSho video taped last night since the main stream media would not. http://www.ustream.tv/channel/occupy-oakland-live/videos
nandro n
I watched your videos, by the way there is nothing there that supports what you said. But I did see videos of people throwing rocks and bottles at the police.... Was that to block the tear-gas as well? Come-on man, get real. Own up to the fact that there is a violent anarchist element here. Even OWS does. Again, from SJ MEercury News today:
The campers will be discussing at their morning meeting how to keep out the destructive anarchist element. "It's not us, it's a bunch of guys who wear black masks," said Michael Porter, 24, who works full-time selling DirectTV and has been camping at the Occupy Oakland site. "It's messing with our movement. They leech off our numbers -- they only show up when there's a rally." Porter will be leading a discussion at the meeting starting soon.
So sorry, not even Occupy Oakland is buying your fairy tail.
By the way, Twitter, Ustream, every .com platform that you are using to spread your message is owned by a variety of venture capital, hedge funds, and private equity funds, so think about that for a while. You are literally putting money into the pockets of the 1%....
Michael Boyd
nandro n
Get a grip! Your advocating for the censorship of the press for disagreeing with their views? You clearly don't understand the First Amendment do you?
My view is We the people should occupy all the foreclosed homes and other properties [siting vacant]taken by the hedge funds and investment banks that currently rule this planet. These Banksters did this through the use of mortgage backed securities that have created $683.7 trillion in unsecured debt worldwide in the insurance policies on that debt called credit default swaps (CDS). It's what I call the "Bottomless Pit".
Rev 9:1 And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit. [Note: this is protected religious speech under the First Amendment]
See http://www.bis.org/publ/otc_hy0811.pdf?noframes=1 at page 5.
I. Market developments in the first half of 2008
The notional amounts outstanding of over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives continued to expand in the first half of 2008. Notional amounts of all types of OTC contracts stood at $683.7 trillion at the end of June, 15% higher than six months before (Table 1).
So which side are you on? The side of the 99% or the 1% hedge funds and investment banks that currently rule this planet?
nandro n
I'm not advocating for censorship whatsoever. I am saying they have lost my readership. Big difference. That is the difference between you and I. I don't' DEMAND that others change for me, I make changes myself.
Which side am I on? I'm on the side that isn't actively calling for the destruction of the United States. Which side are you on? Just to quote some of the graffiti as reported by an actual news organization, San Jose Mercury News this morning:
"9:10 a.m. Graffiti scrawled all over downtown, with conflicting messages
Graffiti is everywhere around 14th and Broadway. It appears there was a struggle between people who were bent on destruction and those trying to keep the peace.
There were messages like "kill cops" and "not until the last capitalist is hung with the entrails of the last bureaucrat." Next to that, somebody had graffitied a heart with the words "Nonviolence works better.""
You sound like the "kill the cops" and "hang the capitalists" type. I am not. And let me tell you, we are the 99%. You are in the extreme minority when you advocate violence. A takeover is violent by definition. You are literally taking someone else's property by force. That is the definition of violence. I guarantee you less than 5% of this country support you're actions. We are the 99% and we're no going to put up with this kind of lawlessness and mayhem.
Protste. Fine. Rally. Fine. Follow the laws though otherwise the police will move on. As they should. They represent the rest of us that don't like our cities torched, our buildings "occupied," our front door steps graffitit'd.
Michael Boyd
"You sound like the "kill the cops" and "hang the capitalists" type. I am not. And let me tell you, we are the 99%. You are in the extreme minority when you advocate violence. A takeover is violent by definition. You are literally taking someone else's property by force. That is the definition of violence. I guarantee you less than 5% of this country support you're actions. "
Your paranoid aren't you? I am totally non-violent, I believe in love not hate.
You seem to understand what it means "taking someone else's property by force". That's exactly what the hedge funds and investment bankers do; first they send the Sheriff to knock on your door to tell you you have 24 hours to get out, the next day the Sheriff shows up to forcefully remove you and your belongings. That's how foreclosure works.
If your one of 99% why aren't you out there in the streets of Oakland confronting the vandals whose actions undermine the non-violent struggle, instead of bashing a couple of reporters for exercising their rights to report the news as they see it?
nandro n
Foreclosure is what happens when you borrow money and don't pay it back. Its taken "by force" if you will based on the laws of this country which say that when you borrow $500,000 from the bank and then DON"T PAY IT BACK, the bank has the right to seize the asset (the house) that was the basis for the loan. That's why they gave the loan out in the first place. They don't go around giving $100,000 unsecuritized loans to individual citizens. There is always collateral. The house is collateral. And when you stop paying, yes the house seized. It is strictly speaking NOT YOUR PROPERTY. The bank actually holds the title and the title is in the bank's name, not yours. Its all in the loan contract.
So if your car is repossessed I guess that is by force too. Or if your wages garnished because you are a dead-beat dad and not paying alimony, I guess that is by force too per your logic.
It may be by force but is also under the rule of law of this country. If you don't like the laws, change them, but realize that without these laws no one would be making the loans in the first place. Why on earth would a bank lend money if they had no recourse if it weren't repaid? They wouldn't. There wouldn't be any loans or any home-ownership.
Alex Fraser
If, during a protest, a person in a Mercedes at a major intersection, no matter how frustrated, floors it, knocking over two people, the police should arrest that person. Why was this not done? It is the job of the police to protect citizens, no matter who they are.
When masked men break off from the main group of peaceful protesters, or suddenly turn up on side streets, and begin to willfully destroy private or public property, of course, the police should arrest them! Why is this so seldom done? If it is done, who are the people arrested? Where did they come from? Why do we not see read news of their indictments? Where are the trials? If convicted of serious crimes, why are they not put away in prison? The Occupy Movements are said to be conducting acts of Civil Disobedience. There is no need for protesters to wear masks. They should proudly announce their names, confess their crimes, and ask to be punished. And yesterday, November 3, most of the 4,000 Occupy Oakland participants did not.
Are these people Anarchists? If so, they should announce their cause, so that "The Assemblies" may deal with them in a "participatory democratic" fashion, deciding whether or not they wish to be identified with such people, who are usually (and historically) connected to violent terrorism.
In my experience over sixty years, in several parts of America, I have come across such isolated individuals or groups, latterly identified as "Black Blocks." When attending the huge peace demonstrations here in San Francisco during 2003, on several occasions, I marched, or stood in large main groups, peacefully listening to public figures advise us what we could do within the democratic process to stop the insane coming invasion of Iraq (which has brought us to where we are now). Then, an hour or two later, having coffee or a drink at some cafe or bar on a side street, I would suddenly see black masked figures running along with sticks, smashing windows. Only on one or two occasions did I ever hear of these thugs being arrested. The people arrested were usually identified (if at all) as individuals from other states! To my knowledge, they were never prosecuted; if prosecuted, never convicted; if convicted, never put in jail. If any of these desired police and legal procedures were conducted, where were the newspaper and TV reports? They would certainly have been more important than the trial of Michael Jackson, or the latest marriage and divorce of some celebrity!
It is my belief that many of these small groups resemble combat squads. In fact, I believe that some of them are "Cointelpro" outfits, covert police or intelligence teams (formed so far back as the Cold War) and carried over secretly from one Administration to another, not unlike "the fast and furious" operations in another matter, but deployed to provoke police or military retaliation, to inflame the public, discredit peaceful protest, and feed the media (which are usually bored and impatient with American Citizens simply exerting peacefully their First Amendment Rights).
Looking back at the monstrous massacre by National Guardsmen of innocent students protesting the Vietnam War at my alma mater, Kent State University, Ohio, in May 1970, I see the same pattern in embryo. Recent, little reported new video evidence shows a local police undercover police agent and FBI Informant, handing over his weapon to Kent Police and Guard Officers, after four shots now appear to have encouraged a platoon of Ohio National Guardsmen to loose a fusillade which killed or wounded nearly a dozen Kent State students, a number of whom were only coming to or fro from their classes on a warm Spring day. The individual thought to have fired his pistol, was given police protection, and later surfaced as a drug informant in Washington. After a long covert career, he lives serenely in the Carolinas.
Are we going to have to witness such a fascist act again if the Occupy Movements pick up steam?
As definitely, in my 81st year, one of the 99%, I hope not!
Michael Boyd
So you believe the $683.7 trillion unsecured debt world wide must be paid back by our great great grand kids? If that's what your saying your not paranoid your crazy. Either that or your part of 1%, the investment bankers and hedge funds that currently rule this planet.
Why should anyone have to pay back a loan to a bank that you never signed a loan with? That's how mortgage backed securities work. The investment bankers and hedge funds where the beneficiaries of millions of fraudulent loans based on contracts of adhesion; where the borrower doesn't know who the investor is.
Which side are you on again?
Alex Fraser
What Nandro doesn't seem to recognize is that this huge World Debt was accrued over decades by fraud and corruption, involving Wall Street, the IMF and the World Bank. Okay, Nandro, unless you are really part of the 1%, you will get it through your head soon!
Mister T
I believe that the whole non-violence thing is a tactic, not a principle. It's just good opposition practice. If you think your movement will be buried if it's violent (as is the case at its current scale), you advocate non-violence to keep the wolf from the door and live to protest another day. But once you sense that the scales have tipped to where violence may prevail instead, well, I think a lot of these principles would flutter away like a hot dog wrapper in the wind.