Some of us are old enough to remember that bright day in January 1977 when Jimmy and Rosalyn Carter got out of their limo and strolled down Pennsylvania Avenue to the White House. We remember it now with nostalgia because that more hopeful American moment is long gone. Now we have elections deemed "brief accountability moments" and a garrison state to insure the trains of social order run on time.

Homeland security? Homeland insecurity is more like it, as new state of the art police state tactics are introduced to protect the president from protesters who plan to try to give his Administration as hard a time as they can.

This year's re-inauguration promises to be more fun and games and who knows what repressive tactics will be introduced if somehow the event turns into a street fight or worse. Will there be another Chicago or Tiananmen Square or just mass arrests like at the RNC in New York?

The FBI uses a sports metaphor to describe its overkill approach even as it waves a stick bigger than any Teddy Roosevelt carried. They can't wait to test out their souped up contain and control strategies. The testosterone is pumping among the G-Men. They want to engage.

Reports the Washington Post:

"This is the Super Bowl for us,” said FBI Supervisory Special Agent James W. Rice II. “Everyone on every team is dressed up and playing in the game. And the bench is very, very deep.”

"The agents and officers at the swearing-in and along the parade route will have access to the latest tools. Every piece of technology that exists will be a part of this,” said Rice, who oversees the National Capital Response Squad.

Underscore that line "Every technology that exists."

But this more than a boys with toys chasing the militant black bloc around Dupont Circle moment. It could be a turning point in the history of the republic since the "Sun King," as Marc Crispin Miller calls GWB, has already made clear that in his mind at least the election gave him a mandate to do whatever he wants to do.

Full Stop

Not surprisingly, the protesters will be out in force as they were in 2000. Back then, the press barely took notice of the biggest inaugural protest in American history. Writer Dennis Loy Johnson wrote a must-read little book called "The Big Chill" on "The great unreported story of the Bush Inauguration Protests..." (Melville House.)

The protests were ignored, he charges, "There seemed to be a determined and almost paternalistic effort by the media to soothe and assure the populace that everything was fine, that the democracy was running smoothly (as if that was the obligation of either print or broadcast journalists) that there was, in any case no dissent except from the usual suspects …"

That was then. That event signaled a new media paradigm for marginalizing dissenters.

Last year, the Post's ombudsman Michael Getler investigated complaints that the Post had been downplaying protests and minimizing their numbers. He concluded that the complaints were valid. And it was done as a matter of policy. The paper carried a mini-mea culpa about its prewar coverage. And then it was back to news business as usual.

So here we go again as David Admin wrote on RedefeatBush.com on January 15:

"The Post's coverage of the counter-inaugural in today's paper uses only 5 of its 1822 words to describe why anyone might wish to protest the inauguration of George W. Bush -- "Ohio is a battle cry." The rest trivializes the motivation of the protesters. An intelligent reader who wishes to discern the answer cannot grasp why they are protesting. The only possibility the post offers is that they do so to be cool.

"We look forward with great anticipation to the Post's ridicule of the Bush inaugural itself, since surely the pomposity of that event will engender a similar level of jocularity and arrogance on its part."

The blog at Democrats.com anticipates the worse: "the protests will be large but will be subject to a media blackout."

Some protesters fear the lack of coverage may be their own fault, that it is they who are turning off the press. Here is a comment by someone called "citizen" on the DC Indymedia site:

"How can we expect to be taken seriously without good typography…please I implore you, consult a trained professional graphic designer when creating any printed materials, particularly those that are to be seen by the press."

I wish that our media decided what to cover on the basis of typography. There is more going in here. The Washington Post works in the bubble of the beltway. It shares the values and logic of those in power. To them, protesters come from a different country, perhaps even a different planet, and as such have no claim on legitimacy or their attention.

So as media critics pounce on the Bush Administration for subsidizing the likes of conservative pseudo journalist Armstrong Williams to get its spin into the media, they ignore the way that our media has allowed itself to be co-opted. Many don't need to be bought. They are already on board, fully deferential to the Administration as has been seen over and over again,

Their stance reminds me of a ditty about journalists often cited in the media in the UK. I am not sure who wrote it.

"You cannot hope to bribe or twist, thank God. There's no occasion to."

No wonder many protesters don't feel they can't trust the press corps (or is it corpse?) . Activists feel they have taken sides even as they mask their agendas with the claims of objectivity. (Liberal Media, my a--) , In an age of information dominance, they are the ones being dominated when they are not just getting along by going along. Far too many in the corporate media world in the words of Senator Robert Byrd, "have bought it hook line and sinker."

Here is an example of how the reporters from the Post seek guidance from the Administration. As we know, the GOP and the Administration spends a great deal of time, with help from pollsters like Frank Luntz, in shaping the language used to popularize its agenda. We saw it clearly in the war when terms like "Iraqi Freedom" were on their lips every other second.

Now as the Administration promotes the privatization of social security, they depoliticize the issue by repeatedly referencing, "personal savings accounts" and avoiding unpopular words like "private." Recently Post reporters spoke to President Bush about this directly. This revealing exchange item in which a Post reporter explains that they have been arguing with the RNC over the proper language to use appease on the Democratic Underground site:

The Post: Will you talk to Senate Democrats about your privatization plan?

THE PRESIDENT: You mean, the personal savings accounts?

The Post: Yes, exactly. Scott has been --

THE PRESIDENT: We don't want to be editorializing, at least in the questions.

The Post: You used partial privatization yourself last year, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes?

The Post: Yes, three times in one sentence. We had to figure this out, because we're in an argument with the RNC about how we should actually word this. Mike Allen, the industrious Mike Allen, found it.

THE PRESIDENT: Allen did what now?

The Post: You used partial privatization.

THE PRESIDENT: I did, personally?

The Post: Right.

THE PRESIDENT: When?

The Post: To describe it.

THE PRESIDENT: When, when was it?

The Post: Mike said it was right around the election.

THE PRESIDENT: Seriously?

The Post: It was right around the election. We'll send it over.

THE PRESIDENT: I'm surprised. Maybe I did. It's amazing what happens when you're tired. Anyway, your question was? I'm sorry for interrupting.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12570-20...

Someone on the site then comments: "What was that? We had to figure this out, because we're in an argument with the RNC about how we should actually word this. Why the hell would the WP bother arguing with the Administration about the language they choose to use? …They start winning the issue when they get to frame the issue. Here we go again."

This type of negotiating may be one reason why one of Washington's great reporters no longer can stomach working for newspapers like the Times or the Post. He doesn't ask the Administration how to word things. Seymour Hersh is breaking stories all by himself for the New Yorker magazine.

His latest--out this week discloses that a new war may be brewing. Reuters reports: "The United States has been conducting secret reconnaissance missions inside Iran to help identify potential nuclear, chemical and missile targets,

The article, by award-winning reporter Seymour Hersh, said the secret missions have been going on at least since last summer with the goal of identifying target information for three dozen or more suspected sites. Hersh quotes one government consultant with close ties to the Pentagon as saying, "The civilians in the Pentagon want to go into Iran and destroy as much of the military infrastructure as possible."

Here we go again again.

So if media outlets can't or won't cover a major war in the making, is it any surprise that they won't cover the political war at home, right in their own backyard?

News Dissector Danny Schechter is the "blogger in chief" at Mediachannel and directed WMD (Weapons of Mass Deception) a film about the media coverage of the Iraq war. (www.wmdthefilm.com) WMD opens at the Village East in New York City February 4th.

TNS correspondents capture the spirit of a day full of “counter-inaugural” events, including large marches, clashes with police and colorful interactions between the president’s supporters and protesters.

Washington , DC , Jan. 21 - They came to express outrage at President George W. Bush and his administration and, with few exceptions, protesters attending the counter-inaugural events in Washington , DC yesterday said they were happy with the turnout, including the number and variety of demonstrations. 

From morning onward, demonstrators encountered the same dilemma as journalists trying to cover them: the schedule was jam-packed with competing events. Some expressed wishes that organizers from the numerous groups hosting or leading actions and other affairs had better coordinating their efforts.

Still, participants were happy to blow off steam and have what little say in the event that they were allowed by a massive security force and the media focused almost exclusively on the main spectacles: a colorful parade, the official swearing in and numerous gala happenings attended by the rich and famous.

Meanwhile, attendance at protests and other "counter-inaugural" events topped most participants' expectations, with impromptu marches occurring throughout the day and continuing well into the evening.

One of the largest events was a permitted rally and march hosted by the DC Anti-War Network (DAWN) and supported by Code Pink, Mobilization for Global Justice, and several other anti-war groups. At around 9 a.m. people began assembling at Meridian Hill Park in Northwest DC -- renamed Malcolm X Park by locals -- to hear speeches, put together hundreds of cardboard coffins, wander about chatting with like-minded people or hawking buttons and other anti-Bush and anti-war merchandise. By ten, the number of rally attendees had at least tripled, with one DAWN organizer estimating the crowd at over 3,000.

While the "1,000 Coffins" contingent went about covering each with black cloth or an American flag, a crew of about 50 people dressed in black with their faces mostly obscured gathered nearby around an orange banner reading "No More Presidents" as they eyed District police cars parked on the grass. Requests for comment on what they planned were met with "no thanks" from one member of the group, who seemed generally disinterested in talking to the media.

People working on the coffins were more open to press queries. Michael Berg of Columbia , South Carolina and Silver Spring , Maryland resident Jim Preston both spoke about the importance of protesting the president's second inauguration.

"I'm here to voice my opposition to this administration's policy of war, occupation and destruction," said Berg, the director of the Carolina Peace Resource Center . "Pretty much everything this president does and stands for, I'm against."

Berg rode a train into DC specifically to attend protests and said he would have been disappointed in himself had he not attended. Preston 's take, if not the commute from his home in a DC suburb, was similar.

"I want to voice my opposition to the Bush agenda," he said as he folded the sides of a cardboard coffin effigy. "I think these coffins are a meaningful component to the protest march. We're actually talking about people dying. I'm sure 

CNN and Fox and the other networks are kind of laughing at us, but just because Bush won the election doesn't mean he's right. You don't get to vote on the truth."

The park was filled with a variety of people. There were signs protesting war, the president and the election. There were others showing support for gay rights, abortion rights and the populations of other nations, especially Iraqis. A handful of people wandered about with orange flags as a reminder of what a determined populace recently accomplished in the Ukraine .

One of the larger demographic groups represented was that of college students. Some drove with friends, others came with student associations or other campus groups, and one -- a group 200 strong -- came on four busses rented by the university they attend.

"We just hate Bush more than anything in the world," explained Lisa, a University of Michigan student. "I think this rally is pretty good and I can't wait to see the coffins carried down the street. Most of all, it's great to see people in my age group doing something."

Lisa said the university sponsored the trip. And though it was to be a bi-partisan journey, she said only a few Bush supporters chose to take the twelve-hour ride. They arrived at five in the morning and would be leaving at five that evening.

While many of the protesters were not tied to one specific issue, a group of four local African American teens, who said they had never attended a protest before, showed up to express concern about the president's plan to partially privatize Social Security.

"I think his [Social Security] plan is the same as robbery," said Scott. "By the time I'm old enough to retire, there won't be anything for me." His friend Josh agreed, adding "it's really hard to find out the facts."

Josh said he liked the feeling of unity at the park and thinks it is a good thing he and his friends came to check out the protest.

Meanwhile, organizers of "The Cost of War: the Price We're All Paying" forum at the Foundry United Methodist Church said they were overwhelmed by the turnout. According to Debbie Churchman of Northern Virginians for Peace, only a handful of people were expected. Instead, several extra chairs had to be brought into the second floor room as well over 200 people came to hear speakers talk about the effects of war in economic and personal terms. Among the speakers were Celeste Zappala and Sue Neiderer, both mothers who have lost sons in the Iraq war and members of Military Families Speak Out.

As the panel discussion wound down, the march toward the inaugural parade route began, heading down 16th street from the park. Several smaller "feeder marches" joined in along the route.

"I'm surprised at how large this is," said Boston , MA resident Sean Healy. "I've never personally been involved in anything this big."

His comment was echoed by Caroline Guier, a fellow Bostonian who drove down with Healy the night before. "It's so cool that so many people took the time to come out and have a say," added Guier.

Others involved appeared a bit concerned that the march was too disorganized, with gaps of fifty or more feet appearing at times throughout the trek to McPherson Square . Edward H., an Indiana resident who declined to offer his last name or the city he lived in for fear of being disciplined for calling in sick to work, said it looked like there was not much communication between the various groups.

"When I was in New York for the Republican [National] Convention [in August/September 2004], the march was better ordered," he said. "But, I guess it doesn't really matter. I mean, look behind us; there are a lot of different people and a lot of different ideas here. That's got to be a good thing."

As the main march turned toward McPherson Square , a much smaller group broke off and headed toward H and 15th Streets. There, seventeen members of DAWN held a pre-planned "die-in," covering parts of their clothes, faces and hands with fake blood and lying in the intersection. A circle of protesters and picture-takers formed while curious onlookers walking by stopped to see and walked on. Fifteen minutes after the action, District police had yet to move in and make arrests.

At McPherson Square , speakers orated from a stage and various groups gathered together with banners, signs and other paraphernalia.

With speakers recounting what they term the crimes of the Bush administration from the stage, several smaller groups wandered away from the park, some followed by police cruisers or bicycle cops, others apparently left unhindered.

"We're anarchists, socialist, all kinds of people," a woman going by the name "Blood Red" said of the two to three hundred people gathered on the corner of 7th and H streets, right at the entrance to Washington 's Chinatown neighborhood. "Everybody over here wants liberation. It's not just about Bush, it's about the whole system."

According to Blood Red, whose scarf covered most of her face, police had routed the group of demonstrators from Logan 's Circle and the scattered protesters were regrouping closer to the parade route.

She declined to say they planned or what she wanted to see happen from further demonstrations that day, but at 2:30, as police in riot gear appeared on the opposite corner, the group took off on an unruly, unpermitted march toward a line of police standing behind portable metal fences. The first several rows had their arms linked, and a male in black with a red bandanna over his face remarked, "We're going as far as we can," when queried about the group's plan.

That turned out to be not too far. Police began closing in from the group's side and back, forcing the 250 or so protesters to turn right onto F street , parallel to the parade but several blocks and some rather large fences away. With police in slow pursuit, several in the group employed wooden pallets and overturned orange construction barrels as barricades while one young protester ran along the side of the street spray-painting red swaths on several cars and sports utility vehicles. At one point they received an approving honk from Nashville , Tennessee native Neil Love, a tractor-trailer driver.

"Hell no," Love said when asked if he approved of the president. "I'd wished he wouldn't have drove up the fuel prices. 
Good for these guys. I'm glad they're raising hell."

Tony Cocco, an Ohio bicycle messenger who was in town for a bike race and decided to stick around for the protests said he was unsure how he felt about the near-violent outbursts from marchers and police alike.

"I hate Bush as much as anyone," he said. "But I wasn't really part of this. I'm more of an opportunist -- I saw the march and joined. Now I'm not so sure it was a good idea."

Rochester , NY residents Kathy Castania and Peter Debes both said they were generally happy with the day's events. Additionally, Castania said it was important for people to be in the streets protesting consistently. Both said they have attended demonstrations regularly since Bush took office, and they hope the anti-war movement grows as strong as it became during the US invasion and bombing of Vietnam .

"It feels like we need to be doing things like this," Castania said. "It keeps the momentum up. We need to create chaos in the streets, just like we did during the Vietnam War."

Ron Immanuel of Chicago had a chance to see Bush's speech for himself and was unimpressed. "It was scary, he used the word 'freedom' about 100 times," Immanuel exaggerated. "It was that and the same old crap and sound bites. The guy still can't put together a sentence that actually says something."

Along the Inaugural parade route, thousands of demonstrators mixed with Bush supporters, wielding protest signs and chanting at the passing festivities. Lines to enter the parade snaked entire city blocks in the city's northwest quadrant, demonstrators standing cheek in jowl with Bush supporters as all vied for a fleeting opportunity to get their message out to Bush.

"I spent between a half an hour and 45 minutes at each checkpoint, said We went through 3 and then got caught behind a fence," said Andrea Smith, an intake coordinator and investigator at Legal Aide Society of DC. "At times I thought about turning around but once we were there and Bush went by it felt good to be there, with him, booing directly at him."

A Washington resident, Smith left the Inauguration glad that city residents had come out together, even if most of that together time happened in line.

"It's been weird the past few days to see Bush supporters come in. You see them wearing fur coats and tuxedos on the metro, clearly outsiders here to support a President who the city largely disapproves of… even the cops were imported for the day," she said.

A full 91 percent of Washington , DC residents voted against George W. Bush in 2004.

Cops were not the only imports who made it to Pennsylvania Avenue for the day. Mike Potter came to the Inauguration from Traverse City Michigan with a sign reading, "Bush is to Christianity what Bin Laden is to Islam." Potter, a Christian and father of two, said he attended church regularly before the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, but now he feels uncomfortable there.

"I was brought up a Christian and I believed it right up until the point when I saw it become a vehicle of war," he said. 

"The Right has created a religious war since 9/11 and I am flabbergasted that we are a nation of sheep following it."

While the Inauguration and its attendant street barricades shut down the vast majority of governmental offices, many federal employees weathered the traffic and made it downtown for the day's actions.

Thursday morning, Betsey Menshew left her Silver Spring home at around the same time that she usually leaves for her job as a nurse with Department of Defense -- today in order to spend her day off protesting the chief executive.

"It's important for those of us who didn't vote for Bush to show here and let people know that he did not have our mandate," Menshaw said. "To see people protesting here reaffirms my belief in democracy."

Following the appearance of Bush's motorcade, demonstrators lit two American flags on fire and incited a noxious hose-down of chemicals as city police emptied canister upon canister of pepper spray and Bush supporters rained ice down on them from a neighboring balcony.

"I didn't vote for Bush but I came here to see the parade and the protest is making it a hassle," said Brianna Berlin, a high school senior on a school field trip from California . "We saw a monument here. I wish I could see the inauguration better."

Legal observers clad in bright green hats labeled with the emblem of the National Lawyers Guild threaded the day's wool-coated crowds. They stood on hand all day at the checkpoints where police were searching people and barring the entrance of all bags over a certain size.

"My understanding of the checkpoints is that they are for security, but it's up to public debate to decide how reasonably or unreasonably they are being managed," said Bill Repsher, a retired lawyer from Reston , VA who was trained by the Guild earlier this week.

On a number of occasions, police brutally attacked demonstrators with pepper spray and batons, as described by several witnesses at various scenes around the parade route and depicted in wire service photos.

Later in the day, protesters gathered near Union Station, DC's major junction between Metro and Amtrack rails, to crash an inaugural party. The counter-party, dubbed the "Got Freedom? Inaugural Ball," organized by CodePink: Women for Peace, The Ohio League of Pissed Off Voters and a group known as The Ronald Reagan Home for the Criminally Insane, eventually overwhelmed police, who gave up trying to corral the demonstrators onto a sidewalk area across from the event.

A dancing troupe of five people dressed in sweatshirts reading "Torture U" and wearing masks depicting Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, President Bush, Secretary of State nominee Condolezza Rice, arch-conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh and Attorney General pick Alberto Gonzales all partook in the festivities as Jeff Grubler of The Ronald Reagan Home for the Criminally Insane led chants and spoke out against torture at the US-run Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq.

Those attending the sanctioned event were forced to enter through throngs of protesters jeering and taunting them along the way. But not all the protesters thought the verbal abuse was a good idea.

"I wish they'd say something constructive," said Jeannie Milner, a Dallas , Texas resident. "We look as bad as them if all we do is swear and yell. Maybe someone should try and actually talk to them."

Grubler apparently agreed. After the behavior had gone on for a while he took the microphone and pleaded with the crowd to ask intelligent questions of the gala-goers, not just castigate them. The appeals largely fell on apparently deaf ears.

"Go to hell," a shaven-headed man told a NewStandard reporter for inquiring how effective he thought accosting the attendees was. The man declined to give his name.

Police told Reuters that they arrested at least thirteen demonstrators.

According to Rae Abileah of CodePink, the group's co-founders, Medea Benjamin and Diane Wilson were among those arrested. Police apprehended them at the inauguration after seven members of the organization managed to obtain tickets for the event, unfurl banners and interrupt proceedings.

http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/1400

 © 2004 The NewStandard.