Lorraine Emmrys, a 46-year-old artist from Sackville, NB, comments on the Quebec police state.

Greetings,

To those of you with whom I haven’t communicated more personally over
the past while, I apologize. Sadly, this letter is not going to fill
you in on the general course of my family's life. Perhaps that will
come later. (Everyone's fine, by the way, at least physically).

I initially wrote this letter last Thursday (April 26), following 3
days of intense emotional upheaval. Now, a week later, I’m a little
calmer, and more optimistic. I’ve edited the letter (essay?) several
times since it was first drafted, but essentially, these are my
reactions to what happened to me and thousands of other people last
week. By sharing it with you I’m hoping to help shatter a few myths,
and to help myself regain my voice.

Chuck and I participated in the protest demonstration against the
FTAA in Quebec City. We went with the intention of peacefully adding
our voices to the growing concern over this process. We assumed we
lived in a free and democratic nation and that we would be afforded
the right to openly express an opinion which differed from the
official government position, and that we would be given the right to
be heard. We were proved wrong on both counts. We were not given the
right to protest peacefully, nor to be heard.

I went to Quebec City concerned. I came back shaken to the roots of
my being and terribly upset about the direction in which our country
is moving. According to the Random House dictionary, a democracy
is "government by the people; a form of government in which the
supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them
or by their elected agents under a free electoral system" and a
police state is defined as "a nation in which the police. . .
suppresses any act by an individual or group that conflicts with
governmental policy or principle." After my experience in Quebec city
I am convinced that our democracy is a sham and that we have taken
the first steps towards a police state.

Contrary to what the national CBC evening television news, other
corporate media sources, and our government would have the world
believe, the 6,000 police were not there to counter and control the
violence of the demonstrators, because the overwhelming majority of
the over 50,000 protesters in Quebec were NOT violent. As in any
gathering that size, there were those who were, but they were the
exception to the rule and could easily have been contained and
controlled with minimal effort and little fuss. They were in no way
representative of the group as a whole, and did not reflect the tone
of the protest gathering.

In fact, I have never been in a gathering of people in which there
was more solidarity and tolerance in the face of such diversity. On
Saturday morning 1200 people filled a huge tent, and 2000 more jammed
the space outside it to listen to speakers representing a wide array
of interests - human rights, aboriginal rights, women's rights,
environment, labour, social justice and more. What united this multi-
faceted group was a common conscience. They were brought together by
the belief that the world has become unbalanced and that the
injustices need to be redressed, not compounded. That every human
being should be treated with dignity. That the intricate
interdependence of life on this planet and the environment that
sustains us all should be respected and cared for. Speakers from all
over the hemisphere and beyond, and representing the full spectrum of
concerns, were given rousing applause, cheers, and standing ovations.
This crowd was spirited, passionate and unequivocal, but not violent.

Those who attended the week-long People's Summit and the
demonstration are not simply weekend protesters and restless youth
looking for a chance to be delinquent. They represent a growing and
powerful movement of informed and seriously concerned citizens, many
of whom, including Chuck and myself, fear that we are fighting for
the very survival of our planet. And for every person who managed to
make his or her way to Quebec city, often overcoming serious
obstacles to get there, there are scores of others who believe as
strongly but were unable to attend or were frightened by the
marshaling of such extensive security forces and what that might mean.

Following the speeches we joined the enormous throng for the march.
The predicted 10 - 20 thousand grew to an astounding number;
organizers quoted a figure of 68,000. It took our group, who were
somewhere near the end, over an hour to move the 2 or 3 blocks to the
starting point of the march! Once again, the same spirit that had
prevailed at the speeches, was upheld throughout this hugely diverse
and animated crowd made up of people from virtually all walks of
life. It was not just the young and radical. There were as many
middle-aged and older people there as the young, although it is the
young who stand to lose the most. I have a lovely photo of a young
man from our group walking along next to a group from the "Raging
Grannies". At one point, where the march turned a corner and I had an
unobstructed view of the sheer magnitude of it all, I was so
overwhelmed by the commitment to peaceful protest and the cohesive
sense of resolve within these countless numbers that I could feel the
tears welling up inside me.

Also contrary to what that Saturday night’s national CBC TV news
coverage would have you believe, there was acceptance of diversity of
tactics. The news painted a picture of division and betrayal within
the group. Not accurate. While there may have been some
disorganization involved (not surprising, given the numbers), it was
known beforehand that groups who wished to approach the perimeter
would be breaking off from the main march, and the "green", "yellow"
and "red" protesters respected each other's choices - the "green"
continuing on away from the perimeter, and the "yellow" and "red"
approaching closer. And to make it perfectly clear, the "red" group,
those most willing to put everything on the line and confront the
walls of riot police face to face, had, for the most part, as non-
violent a mandate as the rest.

But this much consolidated passion brought together by intelligent,
well-educated, dedicated and responsible individuals presents a real
threat to those who have another agenda. If the country were to see
the reality of Quebec city they might start waking up and asking
questions. So the reality must be masked at all costs. How to do
this? First of all you trivialize the march into a "parade"
or "carnival" (words used in our national newspapers and by our Prime
Minister) of festival-goers. Then you vilify the more assertive
protesters by repeatedly headlining the handful who instigated
violence and dismiss them en masse as a group of "hooligans" (again,
not my choice of word). Finally, you put in place a campaign of
unprecedented police aggression which I can only assume is aimed at
achieving 2 goals: to suppress and intimidate the protesters into
leaving, and/or to prove to the world what despicable rabble the
protesters were - just look how much force was needed to subdue them.

I, for one, will not stand aside and allow this to go unchallenged. I
was there. I witnessed the reality first-hand. Let me draw another
picture for you.

First of all, the fence separating our leaders from their citizens,
and what transpired around it, cannot be summarized into a single
event. I am not sure of the exact length of this fence, but someone
told me 4 km, so I'll go with that. Feel free to correct me. Surely
it must be evident to anyone who takes the time to think about it,
that an event occurring at one point along that length doesn't have
to have much in common with what's happening elsewhere. I do not
contradict the assertion that some protester violence occurred at
points around that 4 km stretch. I do, however, after having
witnessed what I did this weekend, feel the need to question a) to
what extent that violence was deliberately planted there, and b) to
what extent many of the known perpetrators were allowed free reign in
order to give the police and the government the excuse and the cover
they needed to launch their campaign of brutality. Regardless, ask
yourself, do a few isolated incidents give the police carte blanche
to indiscriminately and unremittingly lay siege to thousands of
peaceful protesters everywhere for hours on end?

One Morningside listener sent in a comment asking how many among us
had not suffered repercussions in a classroom because of the antics
of one or two - in other words, condoning the police action. Many
people seem to share this opinion. I don’t adhere to this notion of
punishing the many for the actions of the few, but even if I did, the
analogy is completely skewed. Those who feel this way cannot possibly
have an accurate idea of what actually happened. For one thing, to
make it representative of what transpired in Quebec, not the
classroom, not the whole school, but the entire town would have to
pay for the antics of the few in that class. Would that premise be
accepted with ease? Secondly, those bearing the brunt of that type of
punitive action are generally inconvenienced, as in they miss their
recess. They are not subjected to chemical warfare and shot with
rubber bullets.

One of the incidents I witnessed, and which I will share with you,
was of completely unprovoked violence let loose on a quiet crowd
standing and sitting at least 2 blocks away from the fence. From what
I have garnered from others, this scenario was repeated ad nauseam
all around the perimeter.

For those of you who don't know, Quebec city is built on different
levels. The area of Old Quebec where the Summit was taking place is
on the upper level. It is divided from the lower level by a sheer
cliff. At intervals all along this cliff are long, steep sets of
stairs allowing people to get from one level to the other. At the top
of the cliff, and running parallel to it, is a boulevard, which was
closed to traffic on Saturday, and running parallel to this, several
blocks in, was the fence.

We arrived at the top of one of these sets of stairs just as a line
of riot police was forming across the boulevard, effectively cutting
off any means of retreat from that side. Further up the boulevard on
the other side were more police. Straight ahead, several blocks up
the hill, was the fence, with yet another line of police in front of
it. Everything was quiet. I cannot reiterate this enough. No
violence. Not even any chanting or waving of placards. People were
standing about, walking, many were sitting on the boulevard. The
crowd was not unruly, not provocative, not even large.

Without warning, the police at the fence began to advance down the
hill towards the boulevard, lobbing several canisters of tear gas
into the crowd. I stayed only long enough to try and get some photos
(which didn't turn out great - too far away), then retreated down the
only escape route, the steps. But the advance continued, the gassing
continued, and people, blinded and burning, stumbled their way to the
stairwell. Still it didn't stop. It wasn't enough that they had
hemmed in and repeatedly gassed a completely passive crowd and sent
them gasping to the only exit. Once that exit route was filled with
people trying to make their way safely down, the police lobbed tear
gas straight into their midst - onto the stairs. I did get a telling
photograph of this. The gas bomb exploded at the heels of one of the
men in our group - a vegetarian pacifist who practices meditation and
reiki, and who asserted later that what the police needed was our
prayers directed toward them.

These, my friends, are the violent "hooligans" our government would
have you believe prevailed in Quebec - the mobs prepared to bring
down our democracy. Those supposed "hooligans" were people like me,
like Chuck (who, by the way, got caught in the thick of it and,
completely blinded and disoriented, only managed to make his way down
with the help of several other protesters), like Luke (mentioned
above), and like any one of you.

This was only one incident. The same pattern continued all weekend.
We were recounted one incident by an elderly woman who walked with a
cane, who had tried to approach a guard near the fence to offer him a
flower and got gassed for her pains. In the relative quiet of Sunday
afternoon, a friend, in a small lapse of judgement, decided not to
move when a line of riot police came marching down a residential
street. They shot him point blank in the face with pepper spray and
when he was down repeatedly beat and kicked him, walked over him, and
left him lying in the street.

People doing nothing more than exercising their right to be there and
voice their opposition to a document which they see as contributing
to the inequities of the world, were repeatedly gassed. If they were
persistent enough, and wouldn't be chased off by the tear gas, they
got shot with rubber bullets or water canons, or pepper sprayed in
the face. So much gas was used that there was almost nowhere within
that general vicinity of Quebec city that you couldn’t smell or feel
the acrid sting of it. I got one of my worst doses in a quiet
residential area 10 or 12 blocks away from the fence. If you have
never experienced the effects of tear gas, which I sincerely hope you
have not, I can assure you it is miserable. Your skin burns till
you’re sure it’s going to peel off, your eyes sting unbearably, you
feel it invading the linings of your mouth and throat, it hits your
lungs and you choke and gag and feel as though you can’t breathe.

When we returned to the house that night after enduring and being
witness to such unbearably distressing incidents, we were faced with
a newscast which glossed very quickly over the solidarity,
manufactured dissent amongst the participants, magnified the
protester violence and vandalism (of which I could find very little
evidence, by the way), and ended with our Prime Minister
congratulating the police force on the calmness and restraint they
had used in the face of such an unruly mob bent on bringing down our
democracy. Actually, I can't remember anymore if the news piece ended
there, it just feels like that to me. Perhaps that was only the
moment when my heart stopped beating and I could watch no more.

I will never be the same person again. Since returning from Quebec
city I have experienced by turns anger, intense depression, a sense
of powerlessness and frustration, and confusion. My whole
understanding of the country I live in has been turned upside down. I
have been violated, along with everyone else in this country who
thinks he or she has a free voice. Believe me, your voice is only
free as long as it doesn't pose any kind of serious threat to the
status quo, or as long as it's safely hidden so far away no one will
ever hear it. But the Canadian public had begun to rouse itself and
listen to the rumblings being expressed by those dedicated to an
alternate perspective. This was not acceptable to Mr. Chretien, who
laid siege to the perpetrators and then stood up, and usurping our
national television news, urged the general populace back to sleep,
telling them, in effect, to pay no mind, it's only the rumblings of
riotous delinquents and fools. And we are well programmed to view
what we see on the news as fact.

Well, I am not a riotous delinquent, nor am I a fool and I will not
be shut up. I do not accept that my country is becoming one in which
I can expect to be forcibly subdued, and under false pretexts, for
trying to let my supposedly democratic government know how I would
like them to represent me. I know injustice when it hits me in the
back with a baton and chokes me with tear gas for believing in
bearing a responsible attitude towards my fellow human beings and the
living planet around me. And I certainly do not accept that my
government will not be held accountable. I want everyone to know what
went down in Quebec City. I want people to ask "what next?"

Feel free to spread this as far and as wide as you please. I welcome
it.

Lorraine