In the Belly of the Beast.
In These Times blogs live from the Republican National Convention September 1 - 4.
ZoomZoom InZoom OutPrintDiscuss
News > December 5, 2003

Goons Over Miami

It’s the police, not the protesters, getting violent

By Cynthia Moothart

At the November protests against the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA) negotiations, Police Chief John Timoney and the Bush administration’s Department of Homeland Security launched a violent assault on American democracy.

With $8.5 million supplied from the famous $87 billion allocated for the War on Terror, thousands of officers from the Miami-Dade Police Department and several federal agencies, including the DEA, the ATF, INS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services, were armed with weapons ranging from tear gas to tazer guns, rubber bullets and water cannons.

The police unleashed these weapons against a parade of AFL-CIO marchers and a few thousand other activists, whose most militant ambition was to repeat the symbolic victory of Quebec City by pulling down a large “anarchist-proof” wall surrounding the hotel in which negotiators were meeting. These same forces also were used to prevent busloads of protesters from disembarking and to detain marchers attempting to leave downtown.

Observers have characterized this response as an act of desperation: Since thousands of activists shut down WTO meetings four years ago in Seattle, the FTAA has been in a tailspin, threatened by nonviolent global uprising. And it is clear that the “Miami Model,” as law enforcement officials are calling this overwhelming response, had goals beyond keeping the peace.

Seeking to control spin, Timoney “embedded” reporters from mainstream media outlets in police operations. The demonstrations, already defined as protesters against police, took on the look of warfare as TV correspondents appeared on camera in flak jackets and riot helmets. Police propaganda efforts also sought to draw distinctions between assembled labor union members and unaffiliated activists and warned of supposed protester tactics, such as squirting acid and urine on officers and bystanders.

The mainstream media, embedded in this newest war, provided jingoistic coverage equaled only by their efforts in Iraq: Local anchors made such claims as “everything is going according to script,” and labeled the protesters “rabble rousers,” “anarchists” and “bad seeds,” among other things.

Such efforts were nothing new. Timoney was among the first to employ these strategies during protests at the Republican National Convention in 2000 when he was chief of police in Philadelphia. In an effort to discredit and dehumanize protesters, he waged a pre-emptive public relations strike. With helicopters flying above, police teams swarmed a warehouse where activists were assembled to make puppets, resulting in numerous arrests. In press briefings police representatives also suggested that protesters had sought to release poisonous reptiles in the city. The story, and others like it, was false, but that made no difference: The authority of the chief of police ensured that each made banner headlines.

Despite the overwhelming negative TV and newspaper reports, polls after Philadelphia revealed that most Americans still had a positive impression of the protesters. And after Miami the Steelworkers demanded that Timoney be fired and Amnesty International called for an investigation into police tactics.

These events suggest that efforts to control the public’s perception are never guaranteed, even when the equivalent of a state-run news agency stands behind them. But the Bush administration has another chance to get things right—and has already hired a big gun for next year’s Republican National Convention in New York, timed to coincide with the 9/11 anniversary. Jim Wilkinson, former director of strategic communications at U.S. Central Command, has been brought on to oversee media operations—and has promised another round of embeds to get the job done.

Wire services contributed to this report.
Cynthia Moothart is managing editor for content at In These Times.

More information about Cynthia Moothart

  • subscribe to print magazine

  • Reader Comments

    The act of “X-clusion of pro American supporters, and the Inclusion of pro Bush supporters as shown on CBS’s evening news this last week, is another great example of the real intent of the Republican Party and it’s supporters. The dismantling of the US Constituition and the installation of the tenants of “MEIN KAMPF”!!! The major differance between Bush and Hitler is the fact that Hitler wasn’t an IDIOT! 

    Posted by Bill Schultz on Dec 5, 2003 at 4:43 PM

    Unfortunately Bill, Bush is not an idiot. Or at least he has been smart enough to surround himself with smart and dangerous people. Kudos to In These Times for allowing myself and others to see the truth of events.  It scares me to realize that mainstream network media are now puppets of the government party-line.  The great majority of Americans recieve their “information” from these outlets and do not realize they are being fed half-truths and lies.  “Embedding” reporters should be used ONLY for physical protection of journalists in a real combat situation, NOT as a political favor between government and media as it has been. Miami and the other protests were NOT real combat situations (although the cops really tried to make it that). “Embedding” journalists with police at protests should raise a warning signal to us all and be a cause of alarm and concern to anyone who values American freedom and democracy and wants these values to become real instead of myths to placate the masses. Feedback anyone?

    Posted by Brian Siefke on Dec 5, 2003 at 11:24 PM

    Ms. Moothart’s, “Goon’s Over Miami”, is well written and she appears to have her facts straight - except for the reference to the “...$87 billion allocated for the War on Terror,”.  Shouldn’t that be, $87 billion allocated for the reconstruction of Iraq?

    Posted by Gary Kimball on Dec 6, 2003 at 12:28 AM

    Why should I, a Canadian citizen be interested in the above? Well, I am because what happens in the United States inevitably become something that happens in Canada.

    Now that Canada has been pressured into the “security fold” we are likely to see repeats of what happens when Freedom to congregate, or to protest goes out the window in favor of those who rule and are in turn ruled by Big Business Interests.

    As for the author using the fact that X number of millions have been syphoned off to doing exactly what the author has stated...is certainly well known in the media and in Canada. She told no lies.

    Posted by Frances Greenfield on Dec 6, 2003 at 11:33 AM

    So Bill, are you saying that those who support Bush don’t support America? And those who are against Bush support America? Yeah, right, Osama and Saddam are bigs fans or America.

    Thats funny, how you said “The major differance between Bush and Hitler is the fact that Hitler wasn’t an IDIOT! “ Because Bush is not dumb, thinking like that led to his presidency. I always thought that the major difference between Bush and Hitler is that Bush didn’t attempt genocide. Or that Bush would serve for the 12-13 yrs that Hitler served for. Or that Bush isn’t attempting to take over the world.

    That whole “Buush=Hitler” argument is so dumb as it makes no sense.

    Posted by brad on Dec 6, 2003 at 1:13 PM

  • extended discussion >>>Continued...

    Discussions with more than 5 comments are continued on our special discussion page to encourage continuity and ease of use. There are currently 14 posts.

Join Here
Member Login

Forgot password?

Article Appeared in this Issue

Full contents
Past issues

Also by Cynthia Moothart
"To people who say they are sick of the corporate dominated and celebrity fixated news media, I say, "Stop whining and subscribe to In These Times." --Barbara Ehrenreich
Popular Discussions