Submission
They had their tires slashed.
These vile blue beasts are a fine ride around town for the wealthy (unsurprisingly the most inept bike riders on the road), are consuming space and welcoming the rich into gentrifying neighborhoods; reminding us that leisure, technology and convenience are crafted for the elite, and always at our expense.
For a Black December and a rowdy new year!
Submission
On the last day of the year we slashed the tires of two cop cars parked outside their precinct.
This attack was carried out in revenge, specifically for the police brutality against anarchists in Philly this summer, and in general for all the indignities, small and large, that police cause every time they do their jobs.
This attack taught us the importance of patience and determination.
It warms our hearts to see the police also being attacked in Portland, even though we disagree with some of the goals we read in the most recent claims because we don’t think there’s any justice to be found in the system. We hope the comrades mean themselves when they speak of continuing “until something serious is done”, it’s obvious to us that the city and liberal campus they paint are not with us. We think it’s up to us to seek our own revenge.
The dead are with us in memory and through our actions.
Fuck the police!
from It’s Going Down
by Étienne Dolet
As has happened so often in the history of social movements and revolutions, actually existing history has once again outstripped the ready-made concepts and theories that we have for understanding it. The “yellow vests movement,” which was sparked earlier this fall but clearly has much deeper roots, has left many bewildered by the lack of party or union alignments on the part of the participants, the combination of extreme left and extreme right elements, its remarkable resilience and growth since November, and its ongoing creativity and dynamism in the face of massive state repression. The anonymous collective of political activists who are involved in the movement have struck out to conquer new territory, beyond the well-trodden paths of recent social movements, while also taking inspiration from or reawakening the deep history of revolutionary struggles. This has included the use of blockades and days of action instead of major public occupations, the development of the practices of “savage” protests and active strikes, the mobilization of bait-and-switch techniques to confuse the repressive state apparatus, the targeted use of anti-state and anti-property violence, and the call for lasting structural changes in modes of governance rather than a set of circumscribed demands.
The lessons that follow are the result of the collective work undertaken by RED – Radical Education Department to learn from the movement, try and contribute to its growth as an anti-capitalist insurgency, and ideally help it develop as a global movement against the pseudo-democracies that serve as increasingly thin cover for top-down class warfare.
All too often, when a “new” social movement emerges, activists and intellectuals on the sidelines watch it with a suspicious eye as they compare it to their operative theory of social transformation or their personal checklist for what a movement is supposed to be. Once they have categorized and judged it according to their pre-established principles, they then begin to preach to those around them about how the movement “isn’t X enough,” “should do Y,” and, in general, would be better served to follow the blueprint established by the person judging from the sidelines.
There is an entire media industry developed around this blueprint model of peremptory assessment, which stretches from prominent pundits and intellectuals weighing in on current events based on their rote theories to activist groups deciding once and for all that they are simply for or against a particular movement based on how it does or does not conform to their theories or checklists. In most cases, neither of these groups takes the all-important leap from a politics in the third person to a politics in the first person by getting directly involved in order to make the movement into what they think it ought to be.
What if we began the other way around? What if our reaction to social movements was to study and learn from them, to the point of having our mechanical reflexes and tried-and-true ideas called into question? What if our first question was: How can I contribute to the parts of these movements that connect to my own politics, while also learning from them and engaging with them? What are the multiple tendencies at play, and where might they develop beyond the present moment? What if we began, in short, from a radically materialist point of view instead of the rampant idealism of the mightier-than-thou bourgeois intelligentsia and the self-importance of activists who “know how it’s done”?
Social movements are, by their very nature, plural phenomena. There are numerous agents and forces at work, which far surpass any simple calculations, or reductions to blanket statements such as “this movement is X.” In short, there is never simply “a movement.” Instead, there are competing contingents, a struggle of forces and multiple fronts. While it can be useful, as a form of pragmatic shorthand, to refer for instance to “the yellow vests movement,” we need to begin by recognizing that this expression is a placeholder for an extremely complex series of movements.
In the case of the yellow vests, this is particularly important because they do not share a single political agenda or come from a common political party or union. This has been used to vilify the movement because there are right-wing, including extreme right-wing, elements involved. Purists denigrate anyone who would dare to participate when there is such a mishmash of political positions. However, this is one of the complicated aspects of popular working-class movements like this one. While there is clearly a common enemy—the neoliberal state and its persistent decimation of the lives of working-class people—there is not a shared agenda regarding the precise model for a new political order.
Instead of being used as a facile moral justification for withdrawing in horror before the remarkable stupidity of the masses or the vile presence of fascists who are presented as moral monsters rather than subjects of the system in place, this should instead be seen as a real challenge and opportunity to mobilize the radical educational tools of the extreme Left to help teach people about the real material sources of their oppression. The anti-populism of the intellectual and political purists will lead nowhere but to the moral grandstanding of those intent on ostentatiously parading their theoretical and ethical superiority to the ignorant masses, while actually demonstrating, above all, their own profound ignorance regarding how collective education works under capitalism’s ideological state apparatuses. Given the nature of the propagandist system within which we live, it should come as absolutely no surprise that there are so many people who correctly identify the source of their problems in the elite ruling class but have been duped into embracing faulty solutions.
Parting ways with the now well-established model of occupying public spaces, the yellow vests have conserved their energy and momentum over time by instead focusing on regularly programmed days of actions. Every Saturday since November 17th, they have organized national protests that have flooded the streets, often giving birth to “savage” marches (manifestations sauvages) that do not follow programmed itineraries but overwhelm the state through multiple and disparate direct actions. Simultaneously, there have been ongoing flash blockades at undisclosed times that choke or liberate particular sites of passage within the transportation industry. These have included blocking major highways and round-points, but the movement has also taken over or burned down tollbooths to allow drivers through without paying, thereby cutting off funds to the state.
While occupations can be important for building sites of solidarity, creating coalitional networks, developing collective education, and fostering public visibility for a particular cause, they can also drain resources, allow for easy targeting and manipulation, and stagnate over time. Programmed days of action mixed with intermittent blockades and flash mobs can both confuse the state and conserve resources for a long-term battle. Unlike the Nuit debout movement in spring 2016, which established and maintained public occupations like so many recent social movements, the yellow vests have undertaken an important shift in tactics, and it is arguable that this has already paid off in certain ways.
Some of the workers on strike have not simply refused to go to their job, but they have used their time off to actively coordinate direct actions against the state. Instead of a traditional strike, which is often coordinated in France with a large public march, an active strike is one in which workers participate in blockades, flash mobs, and other direct actions in order to multiply their political agency and maximize their impact.
In a certain sense, active strikes bring together two forms of radical struggle into a powerful concoction that surpasses the power of each of them independently. The traditional workplace action of a strike is fused with the standard tactics of social movements, such as protests and direct actions, thereby connecting two types of struggle and maximizing the power of both.
Since the media is largely controlled by the corporatocracy and—at least in France—the state, the “history” of the yellow vests movement is largely being written by its enemies. In one of the more flagrant cases, the TV channel France 3 doctored a photograph of one of the protests to erase “dégage” from a sign reading “Macron dégage! (Macron Get Out!).” This is, of course, only the tip of the iceberg, but it clearly demonstrates the media apparatus’ profound complicity with the state and their corporate backers.
This points, moreover, to the dire need to continue to develop networks of alternative media that provide a bottom-up account of radical social movements. Sites like Révolution Permanente, Wikipedia, and Mediapart are providing some of the more reliable coverage in French, along with Enough Is Enough, CrimethInc., and IGD in English. But these platforms could have greater visibility and support, and be part of a larger network of resources to help educate and agitate for revolutionary social transformation. They are an essential part of the anti-capitalist toolkit, and we need to continue to build autonomous but federated activist media platforms that can inform the public by developing the counter-narratives necessary for the coordination of mass revolutionary movements.
There has recently been an increasing consensus around a central issue on the part of the yellow vests, which has been described as the demand including all other demands: the RIC (référendum d’initiative citoyenne) or the Citizen Initiated Referendum. Aimed at giving real political power to the people, it would inscribe within the constitution the possibility of public referenda that could establish or abolish laws, and remove elected officials from office. Instead of simply relying on piecemeal concessions from the government, such as the dismal increase in the minimum wage promised by Macron, the RIC would allow the movement to restructure the governmental power dynamic and—at least in principle—accomplish all of its popular demands over time.
There is the concern, of course, that such a demand, if the government were to concede—which seems extremely unlikely unless it secures ample protections against the voice of the people—would help shore up a reformist agenda within the confines of capitalist pseudo-democracy. While this threat is an important one, the RIC could also potentially help build confidence in people power, begin to shift the structural power dynamic, and eventually be a step toward a more revolutionary transformation.
The mass media narrative regarding social movements is rooted in the logic of “divide and conquer.” It separates them from their deep historical roots and cuts them off from their expansive geographic connections. The yellow vests movement is, however, only the latest act in an ongoing civil war between the elite ruling classes and the oppressed masses. It is a continuation of the movement referred to as Nuit debout and the massive uprisings and occupations on the 50th anniversary of May 68. While there are, of course, certain differences between each of these moments and their precise conjunctures, they are all largely responding to capitalism’s unrelenting war on workers.
This points to the crucial importance of building power between “movements” and developing organizations and cross-political alliances that are ready and able to step up and fill the void when things go down. Although the mass media tends to focus on the immediate “success” or “failure” of a circumscribed social movement, which it describes in the singular, we would be better served to recognize that whatever happens at a precise moment in time is rooted in a deep history of organizing. Everything that is done “between movements,” including the development of political organizations, movement infrastructure, revolutionary coalitions, and media platforms, is essential to what will happen when things kick off. It is this behind-the-scenes, long-term work that has the potential to have the most significant consequences in the long run.
Political imagination can play an important role in moving movements forward, and we should never be held back by what has been done or what seems possible. This has obviously been one of the key lessons from the yellow vests.
At this point in the conflict, we should ask: How could we imagine increasing the pressure put on the neoliberal state? What about seizing important sites of power, ranging from the Sorbonne to the National Assembly, and transforming them into popular assemblies for public displays of power, and then relinquishing them in the middle of the night to seize others and outstrip the resources of the riot police? Why not re-enact key moments of the French Revolution, for instance, by taking over the Jeu de Paume museum and re-performing the Tennis Court Oath (Serment du Jeu de Paume) and declaring the end of the neoliberal state? Why not take control of one or several of the major TV channels and announce the death of the Macron regime? Isn’t it time to organize councils and declare autonomous communes across France? Given that the state has recently decided on new “emergency measures,” it clearly feels that the people are closing in and that things like this could happen.
The internationalization of the movement is another key form of potential escalation, and it has already begun. What acts of solidarity and intensification might we be able to participate in that could help the movement grow and expand its attack on the foundations of capitalism?
As we know from history, the state will stop at absolutely nothing to maintain its power and secure the interests of the ruling class. It has unleashed an inordinate amount of violence on the citizenry, which it portrays in the media as justified, of course, and this will likely only intensify over time. This has included forming a black bloc of undercover cops to commit acts of violence that could then be blamed on the protestors. We can learn from these types of tactics—if we didn’t know it already—that our enemies have no moral compass and will indiscriminately harm or kill anyone in their way. We should never underestimate their ruthlessness.
The state is very well versed in delay tactics and knows how to work the calendar. In the case of Nuit debout and the May 68 anniversary protests, it mixed together a powerful cocktail of brutal repression, stalling techniques, and cat-and-mouse games with an eye to the approaching summer vacations, when many of the protestors would be free from work or studies and—it was presumed—the occupations would dwindle. In the case of the Occupy movement in the United States, the approaching winter was fundamental to the timing of state repression and illegal evictions. In France right now, impeding vacations are combined with an approaching winter.
Will this, along with a few minor concessions, be sufficient to quell the most recent uprisings and usher in a peaceful new year for the corporate ruling class? Or will the common concerns of working-class people find new tactics and rejuvenate old ones in order to shift what some now consider to be the common course of history, according to which uprisings lead to peak moments and then dissipate? Could the tactic of targeted days of struggle by generalized to time flare ups in the coming weeks or months that will take the government to its knees, perhaps by reworking the calendar to the advantage of the activists, thereby surprising the state once again? Can movements abroad take up these tactics in a meaningful way and connect to the yellow vests movement in a global network of intermittent active strikes, blockades, and savage protests, thereby internationalizing them like the Occupy movement but with a new and evolving set of tactics? For those of us living outside of France, how can we connect to the movement and develop its momentum into an international force to be reckoned with?
No one can tell for sure, of course, where things are headed, and this is one more reason to learn from what is going on and struggle to find ways of contributing to the intensification of a global war against capitalism. Nothing is at stake but a world full of workers and a planet teetering on the edge.
Submission
Happy Holidays Motherfuckers!
We don’t know how to do Christmas. What do you give the greedy scrooges that already take everything? Instead of a goose, we gave gift cards up and glued into ATMs and locks.
*Sung to the tune of Twelve Days of Christmas*
1 parking meter, 1 racist Starbucks, 1 Illegal Tacos
2 OCF cafes, 3 Citibike kiosks
5 realty offices, 110 ATMs
—
Except this wasn’t over 12 days it was in 1 night. This shit was fun and easy. Here’s some things to consider if you want to try this at home.
-Plan and dress for the weather.
-Set high goals.
-Watch each other’s backs.
-Invite more people to participate with you.
-If using cardboard instead of gift cards don’t drop it in a puddle.
-ATMs have high quality cameras, cover up well.
-Bring extra supplies in case an opportunity arises.
-Don’t blow up your spot, look jolly not grinchy.
-Many small groups can cover more ground than one big group.
-For information on sabotaging ATMs read these communiques.
https://phlanticap.noblogs.org/atm-attacks/ https://itsgoingdown.org/striking-back-banks-portland/
On Mikhail, on Alexis, on PZS, on Sebastian!
Solidarity with people facing repression near and far! Solidarity with the Vaughn 17!
Ten years since the insurrection in Greece!
For a Black December!
’Tis the season of rage!
Ghosts of No Christmas Future
Coordinated Cells of Grinches
War on Christmas
Ugly Christmas Sweater Moms
from It’s Going Down
Calling for abolitionists and activists to show up in the courtroom as the second trial of the Vaughn 17 gears up. Jury selection is slated to start on January 7th, 2019. This trial group includes Kevin Berry, Abednego Baynes, Obadiah Miller and John Bramble. The trial will take place at New Castle County Courthouse, 500 N. King St., Wilmington, DE.
On February 1, 2017, inmates incarcerated at James T. Vaughn Correctional Center took control of C-building in a prison uprising, and for a moment were liberated from the carceral state. In the course of the uprising, they released a set of modest demands to improve their living conditions. One prison guard was killed. The state responded with intense repression. The Vaughn 17 were subsequently indicted on blanket charges of riot, conspiracy to riot, kidnapping, assault on an officer, and murder. The state’s case against those charged has no basis in reality and relies heavily on the testimony of a prison snitch. Check out Live from the Trenches: The Vaughn 17 Speak for in-depth background.
The first trial concluded in early November. Of the three on trial, Jarreau Ayers and Dwayne Staats went pro se, or represented themselves. The biggest victory came when Deric Forney was found not guilty of all charges. Ayers was acquitted of the 3 counts of murder but found guilty of the other charges, and Staats was convicted on all but one count of murder. Shortly after the trial, one of the inmates, Kelly Gibbs, was found dead in his cell. Attention on this case is crucial to check the Delaware D.O.C. on the rampant violence committed against inmates.
Dwayne Staats and Jarreau Ayers both wrote about the importance of court support in the fight for liberation:
“‘Actions’ speak louder than words and I heard you loud and clear. Y’all definitely was a source of strength that was heavily relied upon… So your collective spirits are harmoniously in accord with the synergism that enables us to purify our conscious and strengthen our beings with every inhale.” -Dwayne Staats
https://www.instagram.com/p/BriPf-SBrOP/
“Every day the energy y’all provided through your support and letting your presence be known is as much a part of what took place in that courtroom as me and my comrade Staats were!!! The fight behind these walls is often lonely and thankless even by other oppressed prisoners whose minds haven’t yet opened up to their reality!!… The fact that y’all stood in solidarity with us speaks to the truth comrade George Jackson spoke to when he explained the need for (us) those of us behind the wall and those of y’all on the outside to stand in unity! I’m a firm believer in the saying that steel sharpens steel and that the origin of that steel is forged and molded through/in fire! I force that mind frame on my comrades every day and I want y’all to know that we acknowledge that y’all stood in that fire with us! That steel that was forged in those moments helped keep us sharp at every turn!… I ask that y’all stay strong with each other on hard times and continue to force integrity on each other, on us, and most importantly on this system!” -Jarreau Ayers
Court support is meaningful in and out of the courtroom as we show strength in solidarity against state oppression! Organize a crew to hold a banner outside the courthouse. Bring food or hot drinks with information about the case to share on the street outside. Share updates on facebook, instagram, twitter, or other social media. Write letters to those on trial. Inside the courtroom, demonstrate positive energy and strength for the defendants. Connect with friends and families of the defendants and offer support. Let them know they are not alone in the struggle! Raise a fist in solidarity!
To write to the Vaughn 17, check out the addresses listed here.
Submission
I want to go over how the ride went and open a dialogue on the possibilities of bike demonstrations. Even though the demonstration was publicly called for, the location was not immediately posted online, police did not come to the starting location. The starting time of ride at 5PM was an excellent choice because the bikes could easily move through rush hour traffic and avoided a police tail for the entire ride. Police arrived at the end when people were gathered in the street blocking traffic for around 45 minutes. Some of the riders carried black and red flags, flares, or music. The colorful, loud, crowd drew attention in a way that wasn’t seen as threatening by most people on the street, which allowed for paint and flare throwing to take place in a setting without a hostile crowd. The ride went through multiple neighborhoods, disrupting traffic without sacrificing mobility. Chants against capital, and in memory of Pablo, an anarchist killed by a car while making food deliveries were shouted during the ride. During the ride I attempted to thrown paint balls at two symbols of capital. One against a Bank of America failed, the other was against a new luxury housing building. The former failed because I tried to thrown the paint ball from a moving bicycle, while the latter succeeded, that time I stopped and then threw. Throwing accurately from a moving bicycle is a lot harder than stopping for a moment and throwing. I don’t want to make the ride seem more confrontational than it was, most people in attendance were focused on making noise, slowing traffic, and bringing the memory of people killed by cars to the street.
Demonstrations on bikes seem underused among Philly anarchists and have potential for festive and offensive uses. An advantage of the bicycle demonstration is speed, it’s likely that police will not catch up with a demonstration moving through congested traffic faster than a car can. This can allow for offensive actions to be carried out across a large area without as much risk as a demonstration that marches. Using bikes brings up questions that aren’t addressing when marching on foot. The practice of anonymity is complicated when bicycles enter the picture, not everyone has extra anonymous bikes ready to use and potentially abandon. How can a bike be made nondescript?
Carrying the memory of the dead as a weapon
Furthering anarchist dialogue and action
from Anathema
Volume 4 Issue 11 (PDF for reading 8.5 x 11)
Volume 4 Issue 11 (PDF for printing 11 x 17)
In this issue:
from Unicorn Riot
Philadelphia, PA – A new federal lawsuit alleges that a culture of anti-Semitic and racist harassment has been allowed to thrive at the Philadelphia Police Department (PPD).
Court filings submitted on behalf of two Jewish officers claim that the police department and the City of Philadelphia tolerate supervisors who have “created a racist, anti-Semitic, and anti-Jewish environment at their employment at the PPD.” Unknown PPD officers are also believed to be behind graffiti of Nazi symbols and slogans found on a Jewish cop’s locker and inscribed on his patrol car, incidents the lawsuit asserts were never looked into properly.
The primary complaint in the lawsuit was filed on November 19, 2018 on behalf of Stacey Gonzalez and Pavel Reznik, both Philadelphia Police officers and practicing Jews. The lawsuit primarily focuses on conduct by Corporal Karen Church of Philadelphia’s 9th district, who is “known for making racist remarks toward non-white and non-Christian officers” according to a sworn Internal Affairs statement by Officer Gonzalez.
The lawsuit also names the City of Philadelphia and the PPD as defendants, claiming that city administrators essentially signed off on anti-Semitic conduct inside PPD by failing to address the issue when officers brought it to their attention. 10 unknown officers, or John Does, are also named as defendants in the lawsuit.
According to the lawsuit, Corporal Karen Church commented to Officer Gonzales, “Why doesn’t the United States just take a missile and blow up Israel?” Another officer, Sergeant Oneeka Noble, is accused of making anti-Semitic remarks towards Gonzalez during preparations for a Memorial Day barbecue, reportedly telling her “Stacey, don’t bring in no motherfucking Kosher shit“.
Other incidents mentioned in the complaint were events reported by Pavel Reznik, a Russian Jewish police officer who is also party to the lawsuit. Included along with the complaint are photographs being used as evidence exhibits in the case. The photos show Reznik’s police locker with ‘SS’ bolts scratched into it along with the German word ‘Totenkopf’.
Nazi graffiti on the locker of Jewish Philadelphia Police Officer Pavel Reznik
The locker graffiti, which seems to clearly target Reznik as a Jew, is a clear reference to Nazi Germany and the Holocaust. ‘SS’ stands for ‘Schutzstaffel’, the name of an elite Nazi German paramilitary unit created by Adolf Hitler. ‘Totenkopf’ is a German word for “skull” or the “death’s head” symbol which was used by SS units assigned to concentration camps. The ‘Totenkopf’ symbol is still popular today among neo-Nazis and white supremacists.
Another photo included as evidence in the lawsuit shows Reznik’s PPD patrol vehicle with a Star of David and the phrase ‘Hebrew Hammer’ inscribed in the grime that had built up on the side of the car.
A Star of David and the words “Hebrew Hammer” drawn in dust on Philadelphia Police Officer Pavel Reznik’s patrol car
According to the lawsuit, neither of the incidents of clearly anti-Semitic vandalism targeting Officer Reznik were properly investigated by the department.
Reznik wrote in his sworn statement that since he first joined the police academy in 2006, he had become aware that PPD “discriminates heavily against Jews” and claims that officers often made anti-Semitic comments around him such as “We’re just getting ‘Jewed out’.” One exchange is alleged to have taken place in which an officer made a comment about Jewish food and another officer responded, in a joking tone, “Don’t be racist,” to which Officer Marcus O’Shannesy reportedly replied “It’s not racism, it is anti-Semitism.” According to the lawsuit, another police officer named Dougherty also chimed in, saying “Jews can’t cook for shit, their Chanukah food sucks“.
The lawsuit alleges that Reznik faced further retaliation related to his religion. He was reportedly told “That’s some bullshit, no need for you to go home early… what are you, special?” when he asked to be able to attend a Jewish police officer’s honor guard event. He was also denied time-off requests while his wife was pregnant, and made to work shifts while other other officers lower in rank than himself were getting their time-off requests granted.
According to the suit, Reznik has stopped requesting time off to celebrate Jewish holidays because he assumes his requests will be denied and he will face retaliation.
Reznik said he was also subject to harassment based on his Russian nationality and other officers seeing him as an immigrant. He claims that while enrolled at the police academy, a superior told him “I must break you; we must destroy your country” in a mock Russian accent. Reznik also maintains that another officer frequently made derogatory comments about “all the benefits immigrants get, without doing any work“.
In addition to specific anti-Semitic remarks and acts of harassment, Corporal Karen Church and other PPD officials are accused of retaliating against Jewish officers by subjecting them to “unwarranted and disproportionate warnings and punishments … wherein discrimination was exhibited“. Punishments against Jewish cops complaining about anti-Semitism reportedly included being made to stay late while non-Jews were allowed to leave, and being prevented from taking time off for Jewish holidays. “There are always courtesies given to Christians to worship their holidays and leave early, but the rest of us are nailed to the directive when it comes to our holidays,” Gonzalez said in a sworn statement.
After Gonzalez complained about Corporal Church’s “bomb Israel” comment, Church retaliated by making her stay late while other officers were allowed to go home, the suit claims. Church is further alleged to have taken disciplinary action against Gonzalez for leaving work to prepare for Yom Kippur, while non-Jewish officers were said to be running similar holiday errands around the same time and were not disciplined. Church is also said to have refused to let Gonzalez work any half-days during the Jewish holiday, despite allowing Christian cops to take half-days during Christmas and Thanksgiving.
“…PPD supervisors … directed discriminatory and prejudicial acts towards Jewish police officers and would intimidate these police officers by insulting them, requiring them to perform additional work not asked of other officers, (mainly white Christian officers) and precluded them from taking adequate time off for religions holidays, gatherings, and other Jewish religions expressions.” – Gonzalez & Reznik’s complaint
According to Officer Stacey Gonzalez’s sworn statement to PPD internal affairs, she believes the racist and anti-Semitic conduct by Corporal Church was knowingly tolerated by police higher-ups, including former Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey:
“If you know this person has a history of making derogatory comments, you are protecting her if you don’t take any action against [her] … She even stated out of her mouth she was protected by someone on the second or third floor …” – Officer Stacey Gonzalez Internal Affairs interview
In her statement to PPD Internal Affairs, Officer Gonzalez also claimed that the Philadelphia Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), which often negotiates on behalf of officers with grievances, discouraged her from speaking out about her allegations of anti-Jewish discrimination:
“…the FOP (Mike Trask and Roosevelt Poplar) said they weren’t going to have anything to do with it. They said to take it to your people … They stated they didn’t want anything to do with my complaints regarding the Christian holidays.” – Officer Stacey Gonzalez Internal Affairs interview
John McNesby of the Philly FOP, speaking to the Philadelphia Inquirer, claimed that the police union was not involved in, or aware of, the lawsuit about anti-Semitism in the department:
“This is the first I’m being made aware of this … To my knowledge they’ve never contacted [the union] or requested any assistance, which would be their first line of defense … but they took the path that they did, and it’s under litigation and I guess they’ll figure it out on that level.” – John McNesby, President, Philadelphia Fraternal Order of Police
Corporal Karen Church, as well as several other PPD officers named in the new anti-Semitism lawsuit, have all been named in previous litigation over discrimination and workplace harassment in Philly’s police department.
Karen Church and Sergeant Robert Deblasis were both sued in 2011 by Robin Middleton, an African-American Philadelphia Police Officer and Christian Baptist, who said that she was harassed by Church and Deblasis on the basis of both her race and religion. Middleton’s lawsuit claimed that Church, with Deblasis’ knowledge and approval, prevented her from being able to attend religious services. Middleton also claimed that Deblasis routinely called her “the Blessed One” and would make the “sign of the cross” gestures towards her at work. Middleton also alleged that Deblasis and Church retaliated against her for her complaints about this harassment; when she became injured on the job, they refused to provide her with either an injury report or a hospital referral.
Deblasis had also been named in a previous lawsuit that claimed he harassed PPD officers for their involvement in interracial relationships. The new lawsuit contains a statement from Officer Gonzalez to PPD Internal Affairs in which Gonzales claims another officer overheard Deblasis using the phrase “the ‘N’ word” to refer to a black person.
This fresh scandal tying Philadelphia’s police to anti-Semitism and Nazi imagery comes just two years after an uproar involving an officer sporting a Nazi tattoo while on the job. During the 2016 Democratic National Convention, which was hosted in Philadelphia, pictures emerged of Officer Ian Hans Lichterman sporting a forearm tattoo with a Nazi German eagle design under the word “fatherland“.
McNesby & the Philly FOP defended the Nazi tattoo as “not a big deal” at the time, while the police department declined to discipline Lichterman, saying no policies had been violated. The department has since instituted a new tattoo policy and Lichterman was never fired, but ended up leaving PPD to take a new job as a federal police officer guarding the Philadelphia Navy Yard.
Former Ian Hans Lichterman sports a Nazi tattoo while assigned to protests outside the 2016 Democratic National Convention. Photo Source: Evan Parish Matthews/Facebook
Read the full text of the complaint in Officers Gonzalez & Reznik’s lawsuit (with Internal Affairs interview transcripts) below or click here to download the PDF.
from Facebook
Join us for a book launch and discussion on Silvia Federici’s two new books Witches, Witch-Hunting, and Women & Re-enchanting the World
Witches, Witch-Hunting, and Women is feminist call to arms providing new ways of understanding the methods in which women resist victimization and offers a reminder that reconstructing the memory of the past is crucial for the struggles of the present.
Re-enchanting the World: Feminism and the Politics of the Commons centers on women and reproductive work as crucial to both economic survival and the construction of a world free from the hierarchies and divisions of capital.
Silvia Federici is a feminist writer, teacher, and militant. In 1972 she was cofounder of the International Feminist Collective that launched the Wages for Housework campaign internationally. Her previous books include Caliban and the Witch: Women, the Body and Primitive Accumulation and Revolution at Point Zero. She is a professor emerita at Hofstra University, where she was a social science professor. She worked as a teacher in Nigeria for many years and was also the cofounder of the Committee for Academic Freedom for Africa. Her newest books are Witches, Witch-Hunting, and Women and Re-enchanting the World: Feminism and the Politics of the Commons, both published by PM Press in 2018.
[December 12 from 7PM to 9PM at Wooden Shoe Books and Records 704 South St]
You may have missed it, but we put out a newsletter a week ago! You can check it out here.
Topics included: Repentance for missions, God’s wrath, Comrade Alyssa, early Quakers – and more!
from Philly ABC
The December letter-writing event will be a New Year’s card-writing party for all US-held political prisoners. Rather than focusing on a specific set of prisoners, we will send a card to each of the nearly 60 US-held political prisoners sending them season’s greetings. This is a time we set aside annually to send short messages of solidarity to everyone recognized as being held in prison for their political beliefs or actions. This enables us to drop a line each year to prisoners that we have either already featured more in depth at letter-writing events throughout the year or those we will be doing events for in the future. We will also send birthday greetings to those with birthdays in December: Muhammad Burton (the 15th), Connor Stevens (the 17th) and Casey Brezik (the 30th).
While the circumstances of our comrades’ incarceration and the current political climate leave a lot to be desired, much good has also come out of 2018 including the freedom of Debbie and Mike Africa. Long-term prisoners Herman Bell and Seth Hayes were also release on parole this year to return to their families bringing the US-held political prisoner count to below 60. This event is an opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to free the remainder, stay strong and stay in the struggle.
Light refreshments will be provided. Please come join in the festivities!
[LAVA 4134 Lancaster Ave]
Submission
The monument to celebrated colonizer, murderer, and initiator of indigenous genocide, Christopher Columbus, was covered in blood red paint during the late hours of Thursday, November 22nd. This act was taken in solidarity with the national day of mourning. Why should we celebrate a holiday where the theme is so baseless that the affects of its deceit can still be seen today in the suffering, deep poverty, alcoholism, and lack of health care on indigenous reservations… thanks to European settlers like Columbus!
Stop teaching your children to worship monsters. We are tired of your lies. We are coming after your monuments, and it won’t just be the confederate ones in the South! We will continue to paint, topple and toss into rivers all statues that glorify oppressors. Frank Rizzo’s granite head will roll past city hall soon enough.
Love and rage, some anarchists
from Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement
The Delaware courts have issued guilty verdicts for two of the defendants of the first trial group for the Vaughn 17. Only one person, Dwayne Staats, was found guilty of murder, Jarreau Ayers was found found guilty of kidnapping and assault, and Deric Forney was found not guilty of all charges.
Dwayne and Jarreau were forced to represent themselves due to insufficient legal representation. Despite having no physical evidence connecting Dwayne to the murder he was still convicted, based solely on the word of a cooperator.
In the midst of a trial, particularly one of this magnitude, it is easy to get lost in legal arguments, the moralizing, and the grand sweeping statements from the press, prosecutors and politicians. But as the smoke clears and the dust settles, this trial, and the uprising in general is about the inhumane and barbaric conditions inmates in the US are forced to suffer.
The Vaughn 17 were protesting for very basic improvements, which are routinely ignored. Dwayne Staats’ testimony reiterates the painstaking process of attempting to be heard in a society that consistently renders black voices, and especially black incarcerated voices, silent; a society that deems it acceptable to coldly and in a calculated way, rip the humanity the away from those it incarcerates. The Vaughn 17, and many others who were incarcerated at Smyrna prior to the uprising, had protested, cried, and plead to be treated humanely. The uprising was a last resort to ask for better treatment, but the judgement confirmed that those incarcerated should have no voice and should accept this treatment.
While this outcome is a hardly surprising result from white supremacist America, we would like to celebrate the principled stance of the Vaughn 17. They stood strong in their solidarity and did not implicate each other and have successfully politicized their trial. In light of the prisoner led anti-slavery campaign, the Vaughn 17 is proudly poised as an important voice and example in this movement. We will continue amplifying their voices, making their case known and struggle along side them as these trials continue, and they face their sentences.
Dare to struggle! Dare to win!
from Unicorn Riot
Wilmington, DE – The trial of three prisoners accused of involvement in a February 1, 2017 prisoner uprising at the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center finished testimony and closing arguments last week. After a trial lasting about a month, jurors began deliberations on Friday, November 16, and reached a verdict Tuesday afternoon.
In what has become known as the Vaughn Uprising, prisoners took over Building C at the Vaughn prison in Smyrna, Delaware, and took three prison guards and one prison counselor hostage. Demands issued during the hostage standoff included that Delaware Governor John Carney investigate poor living conditions at the facility. One correctional officer who was taken hostage, Steven Floyd, would later be found dead after police re-entered the facility.
On the afternoon of Tuesday, November 20, jurors in the case returned a verdict, according to the Delaware News-Journal:
After a nearly four-week trial, a New Castle County jury found Dwayne Staats guilty of first-degree felony murder, first-degree murder of a law enforcement officer, kidnapping, assault and conspiracy.
Staats was found not guilty of intentional murder in the first degree.
Jarreau Ayers was found not guilty of any of the three murder charges but guilty of kidnapping, assault and conspiracy.
Deric Forney was found not guilty of all charges against him and is set to go free. – Delaware News Journal, November 20, 2018
Below is Unicorn Riot’s full report on the evidence and testimony made in the first Vaughn Uprising case.
Read our first report from the trial, covering opening arguments, here.
The three defendants in the first trial group were charged with riot, three counts of murder in the first degree (Delaware law allows to charge multiple counts based on the same murder), two counts of assault, four counts of kidnapping, and conspiracy to commit riot. 13 other defendants from the uprising are also slated to face trial throughout 2019.
A cooperating defendant, Royal Downs, was also indicted on lesser charges and still awaits trial and sentencing, with results presumably depending on how pleased prosecutors are with his performances at trial.
Defendants Derric Forney, Dwayne Staats, and Jarreau Ayers (left to right). Composite image via WDEL News
Judge William Carpenter’s courtroom held a tense, electric energy at times as two of the defendants – Jarreau Ayers and Dwayne Staats, both of whom represented themselves in court and are already serving life sentences for previous murder cases – each took the stand to testify on their own behalf. Both men denounced the conditions in Vaughn, mocked the contradictions in the prosecution’s evidence, and refused to implicate other prisoners they knew to be involved in the takeover.
It is unclear what punishments the court could impose against the two men, since they both already are sentenced to life without the chance of parole. Conservative Delaware lawmakers recently failed to reinstate the death penalty, which the state’s Supreme Court effectively abolished in 2016. Jarreau Ayers told jurors that the Department of Corrections could still retaliate against them by essentially keeping them in solitary confinement, or “the hole“, for the rest of their lives.
The two men representing themselves added an explicitly political element to the case, allowing details and opinions about prison life to come up in court that probably wouldn’t have been mentioned otherwise. In his closing argument, Jarreau Ayers thanked Judge William Carpenter, saying that Carpenter had been highly conscientious in allowing himself and Dwayne Staats a wide latitude to defend themselves in court. Both men were provided with standby counsel, lawyers who did not represent them but directly assisted them in matters such as evidence and motions.
The third defendant, Derric Forney, serving an 11-year robbery sentence, was barely mentioned at all by the prosecution. A few inmate witnesses claimed to have seen Forney attack and handcuff corrections officer Joshua Wilkinson, although other state’s witnesses testified that they saw the entire attack and Forney was not involved. Forney was represented by defense lawyer Ben Gifford. Forney himself took the stand to say that he was not involved in the uprising. He also shared his trauma of being brutalized by officers who he said went cell to cell violently beating and pepper-spraying inmates after police retook Building C. In closing arguments, Assistant Attorney General John Downs seemed to gloss over the lack of evidence against Forney by calling him a “soldier” in contrast to Ayers and Staats, whom he cast as “leaders“.
A fourth defendant, Roman Shankaras, who prosecutors had accused of being the “mastermind” behind the uprising, had been a part of this first trial group but was later severed from the case. He is expected to face trial sometime in 2019.
While the state showed jurors mountains of evidence, very little of it was tied directly to the defendants. Among primary pieces of evidence against both Jarreau Ayers and Dwayne Staats were radio recordings from the hostage negotiations, in which both men’s voices can be heard. Prosecutors have also used a letter from Dwayne Staats to another inmate, seized during a cell search, in which he appeared to take responsibility for organizing the revolt. Another letter from Roman Shankaras to Royal Downs, an influential prisoner involved in the uprising who later flipped and became a state’s witness, was cited as evidence of a conspiracy.
One defining element of the case is a total lack of any video evidence from inside Building C; no surveillance cameras existed inside Vaughn’s Building C at the time of the uprising when the building was taken over. Some video of inmates and hostages being released from inside the building were filmed by a state police bomb squad robot in the yard outside the building, but no defendants could be seen in the video. Another video the state played for the jury showed police in SWAT gear entering the building during their operation to retake Building C. However, none of this footage showed any of the defendants and offered little insight as to what exactly happened inside Building C.
Some physical evidence was introduced by the state, such as various shanks, fire extinguishers, and mop wringers allegedly used as weapons to subdue prison guards who were taken hostage. However, Delaware State Police Sergeant Andrew Weaver, the main investigator in the Vaughn case, would admit under cross-examination that only some items were sent for forensic DNA testing. Weaver appeared unable to give an explanation for this inconsistent testing of evidence, with untested items including several shanks as well as blood-soaked gloves. Weaver repeatedly denied responsibility for deciding which items were tested, instead referring to the “collaborative effort” by the prosecution team of which he is part.
Sergeant Weaver also told the defense that he only sent in for DNA testing items which he believed to have been used in the attack on Sergeant Floyd. Weaver was unable to offer an explanation as to how he could determine, before testing, which items had or had not been used in the attack. Assistant Attorney General John Downs suggested that some items had not been sent for forensic testing due to concerns about high cost, but multiple state forensic technicians who later testified denied that cost was a consideration in testing evidence for the case. Jarreau Ayers asked Weaver if it was true that “you just left five shanks and a pair of bloody gloves off the list” of evidence to be tested in a case involving the murder of a corrections officer. Weaver did not deny that he left those items off of his list of what was sent for testing.
Other issues with evidence used by the prosecution included a map that jurors were told represented the layout of Building C and showed where pieces of evidence, such as shanks, were recovered. However, upon cross-examination, a state investigator admitted that the map, which he had claimed was simply “not to scale“, in fact left out an entire portion of the building. The defense also pointed out how many evidence items were misrepresented on the map, being shown as found in locations other than where they were actually recovered. Prosecutors quietly dropped any further use of the map from the rest of their case, although Ben Gifford, defense counsel for Derric Forney, referenced it in his closing arguments, calling it a “gem” and reminding jurors that the state had made a false representation of the evidence.
With a total lack of video evidence from inside the prison, and inconsistent testing for DNA and fingerprints, the prosecution’s case relies almost entirely on cooperating inmate witnesses. The state’s primary cooperating witness, Royal Downs, is alleged by the defense to have been an influential gang leader within the prison. At one time, Royal Downs was romantically involved with a female correctional officer who was working at Vaughn, who was eventually fired over her relationship with Downs. Opening arguments by Jason Antoine, defense counsel for Roman Shankaras (who ended up getting severed from the first trial group) alleged that Downs himself could have been the one to order the killing of Sergeant Stephen Floyd.
Several inmate witnesses for the state, including Royal Downs and Walter Smith (aka Abdul-Hafid Al-Salafi), gave the prosecution the kind of evidence they sought, namely claiming that all three defendants were involved in one way or another in the actual assaults on correctional officers. However, other inmate witnesses for the state contradicted much of this testimony.
For instance, Al-Salafi claimed that he saw one of the defendants assault a correctional officer because he was on the phone in the prison’s barber shop at the time, where he was able to see the incident through a window. Other state’s witnesses, such as prisoner Anthony Morrow, testified that they were in the barber shop using the phones at that same time and that Al-Salafi was not there. Notably, no phone records were produced by the state to prove that Al-Salafi even made a call from that phone at that time. State police detective David Weaver admitted under cross-examination that his investigation had pulled records of thousands of prison phone calls from Vaughn, and that he was not aware of any instance of DOC phone records going “missing“.
The defense claims that Al-Salafi, like other cooperating witnesses, is fabricating his testimony in order to curry favor with the Department of Corrections. While prosecutors claimed they had promised inmate witnesses no favors, defense counsel Ben Gifford pointed out the constant courtroom presence of several Delaware DOC officials, who he said easily had the means to reward prisoner witnesses with better living conditions in return for helping them “get justice for their brother” Steven Floyd, the guard hostage who died.
Delaware DOC Commissioner Perry Phelps, Deputy Commissioner Alan Grinstead, Bureau of Prison Chief Steven Wesley, and other state prison officials have been a constant presence at the trial, often taking up an entire row. Many of them were seen actively texting on their phones while inmate witnesses were testifying. Daniel Masi from the Criminal Intelligence section of the Delaware Department of Justice has also been seen in attendance.
The James T. Vaughn Correctional Center in Smyrna, Delaware. Photo via Wikimedia Commons
During his closing arguments, Assistant Attorney General Downs admitted that Building C after the uprising was “a large, contaminated crime scene” and tried to downplay the significance of the inconsistent DNA testing done by investigators in the case. Downs instead asked jurors to rely on eyewitness testimony, saying “this case is about what the witnesses said“, apparently ignoring the blatant contradictions in different versions of events that had been offered by state’s witnesses.
According to the prosecution’s summary of their case in closing arguments, Ayers is guilty because he knew about “the plan“, he told inmates to remove locker boxes from their cells to be used to barricade doors, he “was a shotcaller” among prisoners, and allegedly had keys he was using to let prisoners out of their cells.
The case against Dwayne Staats largely relied on Staats’ own testimony in which he admitted to planning the uprising and taking Counselor Patricia May hostage. Assistant Attorney General Downs also claimed that cooperating witnesses saw Staats with a shank. One inmate witness claims he saw Staats attack Sergeant Floyd, although other state’s witnesses’ testimony contradicted this claim.
After the state rested its case, defendants Jarreau Ayers and Dwayne Staats both took the stand to testify on their own behalf. Ayers shared his version of event surrounding the uprising, saying that he had been involved in planning a peaceful protest over living conditions at Vaughn.
Ayers told the jury that eventually he was cut out of the planning and that those involved in the uprising didn’t inform him of their plans. He said he called his sister shortly before February 1, 2017 and asked her to put money on his commissary because he knew some sort of protest might happen at the facility, and he wanted to have food and supplies stocked in his cell ahead of a potential lockdown. The state has argued that the prison phone call to Ayers’ sister represents his participation in the conspiracy.
Ayers also stated that his only real active role in the uprising was to find inmates with medical conditions and make sure they were released from Building C earlier on in the takeover. He described opening the door to first try to let the inmates out (“nobody wanted to open that door“, he said) only to see a SWAT team charging towards him, leading him to quickly close the door again. He says at that moment, frustrated with the police seeming to break their word, he grabbed a walkie-talkie from Royal Downs. The police outside reportedly told him their attempted charge was a “misunderstanding” and he then re-opened the door to release the rest of the inmates with medical needs.
When Dwayne Staats took the stand, he began by reading jurors portions of a letter he wrote another inmate that had been seized as evidence. Staats told jurors that he planned the uprising as a building takeover well ahead of time, because he decided that something had to be done to bring state officials and the public to pay attention to poor conditions at Vaughn. Staats had previously surprised courtroom observers by admitting during his cross-examination of prison counselor Patricia May that he was the inmate who took her hostage.
Staats spoke about how he saw everyone at Vaughn, not just prisoners in Building C, as “victims” and described inmates, guards, and staff all being subject to a culture of “physical abuse, mental abuse…” and said he saw prison staff routinely “bullied or looked down upon by their own coworkers.”
Staats said that “I didn’t kill anybody, I didn’t even assault anybody” but that he accepted responsibility for anything other than those acts. Previously during his cross-examination of Counselor Patricia May, the prison counselor who was taken hostage during the uprising, Staats surprised many observers in the court by telling Ms. May he “owed” it to her to tell her that he was the one who took her hostage that day.
Staats told jurors that “my goal was to do something to expose this place” so that the public and Governor Carney would pay attention: “It was mainly about the Governor at least acknowledging what as going on.”
Staats told the jury that after his 14 years at Vaughn, “these petitions, lawsuits, peaceful protests…in my eyes, that stuff’s run it’s course.” He also said that he felt the need to create a situation that would get the attention of Delaware’s Governor, because current DOC Commissioner Perry Phelps had previously been the warden at Vaughn for 10 years “So I had to go over their head.”
Staats said his plan to take over Building C to draw attention to conditions at Vaughn was “no rash decision” but rather the result of months of “deep contemplation“.
Staats claimed that his plan for the building takeover only extended so far as getting on the radio with state authorities to express prisoners’ demands. He said he was aware that Correctional Officers might be attacked as part of the takeover, but denied any knowledge of Sergeant Floyd’s death until after the uprising had ended. He claimed to be unaware of several other aspects of events, noting that he was surprised when he heard that some inmates and CO hostages had been released from Building C during the negotiations.
While Assistant Attorney General John Downs seemed on his cross-examination to try to cast Staats as the mastermind of the uprising, Staats downplayed this notion, claiming responsibility while also highlighting what he claimed was the disorganized nature of what took place. “All it took was a little push,” Staats said, adding that it wasn’t “a plot to break out of jail.”
Staats said that state negotiators on the radio promised him a letter of intent from the Governor to look into the demands made by prisoners in the uprising. That letter never came, although Staats hinted that if he had received it, Sergeant Floyd could have been released. (The medical examiner who did Floyd’s autopsy said the CO likely would have survived with his wounds if he had gotten to a hospital earlier, as his wounds weren’t inherently fatal.)
Staats told jurors that while he never received that letter of intent, the same conditions at Vaughn addressed in the uprising’s demands came out in a report on the state’s investigation into Vaughn after the uprising. Staats also seemed to feel somewhat successful in regards to the plan he had executed, saying “a lot of people’s families didn’t know what was going on until the prison got lifted from obscurity.”
Assistant Attorney Generals John Downs and Brian Robertson both both quite agitated during their cross-examinations of both Ayers and Staats, going red in the face with veins visibly pulsing, raising their voices and slamming fists on tables, although these behaviors may have been a deliberate emotional appeal to the jury. With Staats having taken responsibility for a fair amount of the conspiracy alleged by the prosecution, much of the prosecution’s cross-examination of him consisted of Assistant Attorney General Downs angrily repeating his own testimony to him, which he would usually nonchalantly answer in one-word responses like “yeah“.
Staats told jurors that six inmates were involved with him in the plan to take over Building C. But when he was cross-examined by Assistant Attorney Downs, he refused to identify them, answering “I can’t recall” in an ironic quotation of many of the state’s own witnesses. When AAG Downs continued to press the matter, Staats chuckled slightly and told him, “You know, I think me and Mr. Weaver have the same condition.” (Sergeant Andrew Weaver, the Delaware state police investigator assisting prosecutors with the case, had extensive testimony to offer the state but when questioned by the defense claimed to “not recall” or have forgotten many of the details he was asked about.)
Staats also told the Assistant Attorney General that he believed Lieutenant Charles Sennett, one of the first DOC officers to enter Building C, could have freed Ms. May as a hostage and ended the standoff hours earlier, but he chose not to. “The officers left her, the governor didn’t show his face to come get her, but I bet you didn’t care about that.”
In closing arguments by the defense, Ben Gifford, representing Derric Forney, lambasted the state’s “poor, shoddy investigative work” in the Vaughn Uprising case. He told jurors that the lack of proper police work in the case was something Sergeant Floyd “didn’t deserve“:
“What happened to Sergeant Floyd was a tragedy…so was this investigation.” – Ben Gifford, defense counsel for Derric Forney
Staats had previously written in a letter published by supporters of the Vaughn 17 that “the trial is an extension of the uprising.” Building on this theme, he closed out his testimony by telling jurors “I guess y’all witnessing the conclusion. Y’all gon’ put the exclamation mark on the whole thing.”
from Unicorn Riot
Philadelphia, PA – Over a thousand anti-racist protesters gathered on Independence Mall on Saturday to oppose a “We The People” rally organized by right-wing groups tied to groups like the Proud Boys and the Three Percenter militia network.
The rally was organized by a Facebook page called ‘Sports Beer and Politics’, associated with Philly-area far-right organizers Zachary Rehl and Holly Delcampo. Social media postings leading up to the event showed organizers coordinating with members of the violent “western chauvinist” Proud Boys, a group which has been called a “gang” by its founder Gavin McInnes. Members of the neo-Nazi group, Keystone United (formerly called Keystone State Skinheads), had also indicated that they would be attending.
Around 10:30 AM, as both the far-right rally and the counter-protest began, Philadelphia police made their first arrest as officers with bikes pushed anti-racists and journalists across the street to create a wider perimeter. After police forcibly created a control zone, the event largely consisted of two opposing rallies on either side of the street. The far-right group had between 12-50 attendees throughout the day, with the anti-racist counter-protest opposing them made up of roughly 1,000 people.
See our livestream coverage from the event below:
(Correction: At times in our livestream Philadelphia Police Chief Inspector Melvin Singleton is misidentified as Police Commissioner Richard Ross. Any reference to Ross in our stream narration actually refers to Singleton. Unicorn Riot regrets the error.)
Many different Philadelphia groups came out for the event, including several unions, the Philly Coalition for Real Justice, and a coven of witches.
Witches hex Proud Boys in Philadelphia. Photo by Unicorn Riot.
The Philadelphia Flyers’ new mascot, ‘Gritty’, who has become an international antifascist symbol, made several appearances, along with internet sensation ‘Grumpy Cat’:
‘Grumpy Cat’ puppet operated by two people at the anti-racist counter-protest. Photo by Unicorn Riot.
After about an hour of speakers with a sound system and a marching band drowning out the right-wing rally from across the street, two Proud Boys were spotted in the counter-protest crowd. The two men, David Kuriakose and Simon Greenwood, had previously been identified as present at the Proud Boys’ gang beating attacks in New York City outside the Metropolitan Republican Club last month. Kuriakose was charged and arrested for his alleged role in the Proud Boys attack, according to the New York Post. The two men were escorted across the street, after some counter-protesters pushed them and threw items like water bottles.
Proud Boys David Kuriakose and Simon Greenwood ushered out of the counter-protest in Philadelphia by police, as hundreds of people chanted “assholes” at them. Photo at left by Unicorn Riot; New York photos by Shay Horse in upper right & Sandi Bachom in lower right.
Another altercation occurred down the street a few minutes later, in which a man seen hiding his face from cameras appeared to have been headbutted. Police who were already present at the scene quickly made two arrests. An unconfirmed report claims this scuffle was the result of a case of a man being mistakenly identified as part of the far-right rally.
Shortly after that incident, 48-year-old Proud Boy Alan Swinney, wearing body armor and holding a large flagpole, left the right-wing rally area in an apparent attempt to provoke a confrontation with counter-protesters. Quickly surrounded by anti-racists and reporters, Swinney was quickly escorted back into the fenced-off “We The People” rally area by Philadelphia Police as well as federal park rangers (the Independence Visitor Center where the rally took place is under federal jurisdiction).
48-year-old “Proud Boy” Alan Swinney in Philadelphia. Photo by Unicorn Riot.
A few minutes later, a group of the “We The People” rally attendees walked away from their rally location on Independence Mall. The group then walked a few blocks, escorted by dozens of police and about as many counter-protesters, to the old Philadelphia police headquarters. After presenting an award to police inside the building, the group waited around behind their police escort waiting to get picked up. However, the group had a hard time getting a ride, as an Uber driver, and later a taxi driver, both declined to pick up the passengers once counter-protesters told them they were affiliated with the Proud Boys.
Around this same time, Philadelphia police made a major show of force by Independence Mall in order to prevent counter-protesters from approaching far-right rally attendees who were leaving. Video by local reporter Joshua Scott Albert shows officers pushing a man into a tree before hitting him on the head with overhand baton strikes. At around the same time, officers were ushering Alan Swinney, the Proud Boy who had shown up wearing riot armor, into his Uber.
Red liquid that seemed to be blood was seen on the ground shortly after the police beatings. Philadelphia Police did not directly respond to an inquiry about whether overhand baton strikes to the head are consistent with policy, instead directing us to visit a webpage that includes PPD use-of-force directives.
According to Philadelphia Police Public Affairs, a total of four people were detained or arrested on Saturday, November 17: two for failure to disperse, one for disorderly conduct, and another for allegedly assaulting a police captain. No attendees from the far-right rally were cited, detained, or arrested.
The day after the rally, The Philadelphia Inquirer ran a story incorrectly claiming there was “no indication” that Proud Boys or Three Percenters were present at the rally. The story was eventually corrected two days later, but not before a headline on the front page told readers there had been “no sign of hate groups“.
The Inquirer’s curious claim was easily disproven by the documented presence of Proud Boys Alan Swinney, David Kuriakose, and Simon Greenwood. Numerous rally attendees were also photographed with clothes bearing the insignia of the Three Percenter militia movement, which provided security for neo-Nazis at Unite The Right in Charlottesville.
The event’s official organizers, Zachary Rehl and Holly Delcampo, also have their own unique and checkered backgrounds. Zach Rehl is the son and grandson of Philadelphia police officers, a fact he often uses when explaining the pro-police messaging of his events. However, Rehl himself has a criminal record, including a 2015 incident that resulted in him facing charges of aggravated assault, criminal mischief, terroristic threats, assault, reckless endangerment, and drunk driving.
Comments made by Holly Delcampo on Facebook have claimed that anti-racist protester Heather Heyer died in Charlottesville from a “heart attack” and “was not hit by a car“, echoing debunked conspiracy theories spread by the alt-right about the car attack at Unite The Right.
Notably, events organized in 2017 by ‘Sports Beer and Politics’ under a pro-Trump, pro-police banner, were attended by white supremacist extremists who were seen at Unite The Right in Charlottesville.
Unicorn Riot has previously reported on the involvement of “Three Percenters” in attacks and right-wing activity at demonstrations: Three Percenters attacked a Democratic Socialists of America gathering in Kentucky in September 2018; Three Percenter social media amplified false stories that Georgia police used to craft crowd management in April 2018; Three Percenters participated in an August 2018 rally in Portland; and through data requests Unicorn Riot recently determined that in St. Paul, armed Three Percenters were improperly released from police custody after detainment in the summer of 2016.
Live reporting, photo editing and research contributed by Dan Feidt, Unicorn Riot.
Editors note: An earlier version of this story had mistaken Holly Delcampo for another person. Unicorn Riot regrets the error.
