Jack Heyman
Sunday, March 5, 2006
At the start of the war in Iraq three years ago, several hundred demonstrators protested at the Port of Oakland. Oakland police officers opened fire on the protesters and longshoremen going to work with so-called "less-than-lethal" weapons, injuring dozens and arresting 25. Then-Police Chief Richard Word said the riot-gear clad police force was deployed at the behest of the maritime companies. The California Anti-Terrorism Information Center had warned police that "terrorists" could be in the demonstration.
A port safety and security plan for the San Francisco Bay, crafted primarily by the U.S. Coast Guard, didn't distinguish between terrorists, workers or anti-war protesters. The ACLU, the National Lawyers' Guild and even the U.N. Human Rights Commission condemned the action directed at people peacefully exercising their First Amendment rights. Now the Oakland City Council, without acknowledging any wrongdoing, is reaching out-of-court settlements with the longshore union and the 59 injured plaintiffs who sued. The settlements in the case, known as ILWU Local 10 vs. City of Oakland, have already reached nearly $2 million. The Oakland Police Department is revising its crowd-control policies, but few believe that will change anything.
Today, "port security" is on the lips of every politician in the rush to bolster the war on terrorism. Both Democratic and Republican parties voted for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Both voted for the "national security" measures, such as the Patriot Act, which President Bush deems necessary to carry out the wars abroad and at home. For dock workers, "port security" means intrusive background checks and cameras in rest areas. Will the next step be to ban port strikes, protests and public access to port parks?
Dock workers, who labor in one of the most dangerous industries, are angered when government officials target them as if they were terrorists. In 2002, then-Homeland Security Chief Tom Ridge threatened to mobilize troops against longshore workers if there were a strike. Yet, when maritime employers shut down all U.S. West Coast ports by locking out longshoremen, no action was taken against the companies. The police shooting of longshore workers demonstrating against the war in the Port of Oakland only reinforced the dock workers' anger at being targeted as terrorists. <snip>
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/03/05/EDGF0HI7QO1.DTL