Australian police violence against peaceful demonstration


Several protesters were injured. Photo by Josh Lee/Socialist Alternative (reproduced with permission)

By Rachel Evans, in Sydney, Australia:

Eyewitness account of police riot against peaceful Muslim protest in Australia

Sunday, September 16, 2012

I was attending a small but engaging rally against internet spying on September 15, organised by the Pirate Party and others at Hyde Park North, when seven police cars and four-wheel-drives drove into the park and about 20 police officers got out.

Protesting members of the Muslim community shouting “Allahu Akbar!”, marched into the park and police told us to hurry and pack up. More police ran, in phalanx formation towards the Muslim rally.

This rally of 300-400 people included women and children, older men and young Muslims, were protesting against the anti-Islam film Innocence of Muslims, produced in California, which one woman at the rally described as “disgusting”.

I spoke to three young women who were sitting calmly on the ground about why they protested.

“We had to protest this horrible film. If Jesus had been called horrible things in a film, Christians would have protested,” one of the women said.

“The police are being too heavy,” added another woman.

The police lined up, truncheons extended, behind and in front of the Muslim protesters. One police line then advanced on the protesters, yelling. The young men in the protest moved back. A woman with a pram hurried out past the cops.

“Let’s get out of here,” said one of the young women I had been speaking to and they left to get out of the police cordon.

Police cars blocked off Macquarie Street, near the NSW Parliament, and parts of College Street. It was a huge, over the top, show of force by the police. I saw three large police dogs.

The police kept goading the protesters by shoving them back in coordinated waves of advance. The protesters were chanting through megaphones.

Then a bottle was thrown by a young man in the protest and the cops started firing pepper spray into the front row of the protest. They also sprayed it up into the crowd. There were cries of anger and “Down, down USA!” chants.

Some young protesters surged forward and the police used more pepper spray. One man was dragged off after he had an allergic reaction to the spray, according to one of the protesters. Two protesters were injured and taken to hospital, said a young woman.

A group of male protesters then formed into a circle, chanting through the megaphone.

They started praying, angry, but determined. The police stayed back as a police helicopter hummed overhead.

Onlookers came to watch the chanting, also watching the police. Young men washed their faces in the Hyde Park fountain, and came back to chant. I saw a young Muslim woman of high school age crying. The media focused on the most provocative fundamentalist placard, but I saw an older woman giving out a leaflet which said: “Islam = peace” and “Mohammed = humble”.

I met an Iraq war veteran at the rally who said he had left the army because of the crimes the occupation troops committed against the Iraqi people. He said that the community had the right to protest without police violence.

Participants in the anti-spying action filmed the police pepper spraying the protesters and the huge line of police.

One person who had marched with the rally since it started at Town Hall said: “The police didn’t let us march where we wanted to go.”

I think that if the police had left the protesters alone they would have marched, chanted and prayed in peace. Instead, the police goaded the protesters, in particular the youth, and so the police are responsible for the clashes that took place.

Their use of pepper spray and truncheons was extremely aggressive and unprovoked. There was no need to surround the rally and charge the protesters and there was no need for the police to come out in such massive force.

The police would be unlikely to have used this level of force against most other protests of 300 to 400 people. But Muslim protesters get different treatment.

Muslims have been scapegoated and criminalised by state and federal governments and the mainstream media. Muslim communities are the target of intense racism and have been made fair game in this country.

Now the protesters, not the police, are being blamed by politicians and the media of the 1% and even more fear and hate is being whipped up against the Muslim population.

We should condemn the police who brutally provoked these protesters and squandered thousands of dollars in a massive show of police repression in the heart of Sydney.

Hundreds of police in central Sydney last Saturday violently broke up a group of Muslims who joined worldwide protests against the publication of a rabidly anti-Islamic video on the Internet. The media and political establishment followed the police operation with a frenzied campaign denouncing the “violence” of the protesters and demanding anti-democratic measures aimed at criminalising political protest and dissent: here.

It is clear by now that the anti-US protests sweeping the Middle East are about far more than a crude Islam-bashing film: here.

The ban on protests against anti-Muhammad cartoons is a frontal attack on democratic rights in France: here.

12 thoughts on “Australian police violence against peaceful demonstration

  1. The use of pepper spray was “unprovoked?” Inconsistent reporting at best. In a previous paragraph the author said that when a young protester threw a bottle the police retaliated with pepper spray. The remainder of the article is full of hear-say and inuendo. The article is not worth the time I spent on it.

    Like

    • Hearsay? This is an eyewitness report. Only one person throws a bottle, then the police reacts with pepperspray not just against that one person, but against the whole demonstration.

      Like

      • Hearsay – – – yes. The eyewitness is telling us part of the story by saying what he heard people tell him what happened. That is third hand hearsay. The police have been trained not to accept even the first act of violence. Otherwise it provokes additional violence. The demonstrators see a lack of action by authorities as a sign of weakness and then all heck breaks lose; to wit, the murder of the US Embassador to Libya.

        Like

        • “The eyewitness is telling us part of the story by saying what he heard “: eyewithess Rachel Evans is a she, not a he.

          The murders in Libya were an al-Qaedaish militia operation, by ex-NATO allies in the 2011 Libyan war, planned long before the controversy about the Californian anti-Islam film. So, no connection with the demonstration in Sydney at all.

          Like

  2. “The demonstrators see a lack of action by authorities as a sign of weakness and then all heck breaks lose [sic]”. Violent police action against peaceful demonstrators may certainly lead to an escalation of violence. Some of the demonstrators may get the idea that there is free speech in theory; but not for them in practice. On what slippery slope may they land then?

    Like

  3. Pingback: European elections, first results … err … exit poll | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  4. Pingback: European elections, new and improved exit poll | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  5. Pingback: European elections, Dutch results | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  6. Pingback: European Union Internet censorship, video | Dear Kitty. Some blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.