@annie – yes that’s the Flora. It was a variete theater in the 20s. Google has more pics
—
NY: Police Memos Say Arrest Tactics Calmed Protest

In five internal reports made public yesterday as part of a lawsuit, New York City police commanders candidly discuss how they had successfully used “proactive arrests,” covert surveillance and psychological tactics at political demonstrations in 2002, and recommend that those approaches be employed at future gatherings.
Among the most effective strategies, one police captain wrote, was the seizure of demonstrators on Fifth Avenue who were described as “obviously potential rioters.”
…
The reports also made clear what the police have yet to discuss publicly: that the department uses undercover officers to infiltrate political gatherings and monitor behavior.
Indeed, one of the documents — a draft report from the department’s Disorder Control Unit — proposed in blunt terms the resumption of a covert tactic that had been disavowed by the city and the federal government 30 years earlier. Under the heading of recommendations, the draft suggested, “Utilize undercover officers to distribute misinformation within the crowds.”

The Flora folks (and I) have also some experiences with such tactics. We did win anyhow 🙂
In the NY piece they don´t talk about provocators. I am sure they had some too.

Posted by: b | Mar 17 2006 23:41 utc | 4

b –
that’s what i thought, but wondered if perhaps i misunderstood. i admire your willingness to put yourself and your camera within “firing range”. i find that when i bring my camera and/or my dog with me to protests/marches i am become more cautious about my position. again, great shot, great reflexes. my guess i you consider the bruises well worth it – both for participating as i assume you were and for the image. it will serve as an inspiration to me to get out there again tomorrow. this past week has been a tough one with the dem senators basically ignoring a key call to action from russ feingold and the netroots. i have attended protests for the last several years, written letters, sent emails, called my representatives and as of this week i feel that none of it works. i have never felt so defeated or defeatist. your post is making re-think part of that position. thank you,

Posted by: conchita | Mar 18 2006 2:09 utc | 6

Big antiwar march in London today – I’m going to try to get down to Trafalgar Square this afternoon, but I’m moving house Monday and haven’t finished packing yet.

Posted by: Dismal Science | Mar 18 2006 10:41 utc | 8

You know, at least those anti-Mohammed cartoon protestors were rioting about something fairly straightforward.
I do regard protests for dismissal protection as very straightforward.
Villepin’s and the rights argument is of course that without dismissal protection there will be more jobs. Now how does that work? Any proof for that? There is none. But without dismissal protection there will be higher profits because the “production factor” human being can be hired and fired at will unlike any machine.
After years of lowering wages and removing “structural restrains” (i.e. worker protection) how many more jobs were generated in France and Germany?
I am quite thankful for the French workers and students to take up this fight and for wining it (they will!).

Posted by: b | Mar 18 2006 13:29 utc | 10

The only other answer is for the government to print (or borrow) more money, cranking up the inflation rate in attempt to create more jobs on an artificial job market. They tried that in the socialist economies of Eastern Europe, and we saw what became of it.
Thats what they are doing in the U.S. since some 1995 :-/. We will see what will become of that.

Posted by: b | Mar 18 2006 14:34 utc | 12

btw folkls, here’s some news on some protestors in the USA that had me blinking and shaking my head.
At first I thought it was a parody page from Landover Baptist parody website, but I guess it’s on the level:
God’s IED’s?

Posted by: ralphieboy | Mar 18 2006 15:29 utc | 14

The other side of dismissal protection, as argued by William Pfaff in the International Herald Tribune. Short version: it allows for “uncertified” – school drop outs – to get work.
Bernhard, do you think Pfaff has a point?

Posted by: Hamburger | Mar 18 2006 16:06 utc | 16

Don’t rely on that database alone. It has no listing of the major demo here in LA today… Google might be a better bet.

Posted by: Anonymous | Mar 18 2006 16:47 utc | 18

@Hamburg – the Pfaff piece.
He writes:

The continuing demonstrations, and the break- in and occupation last weekend of part of the Sorbonne in emulation of Paris 1968, are all about a new job contract meant to encourage businesses to hire young people lacking the right credentials, and teach them on the job, with the prospect of a regular job contract to follow.
It offers advantages but also provides that if things don’t work out during the first two years, or the business ceases to be able to afford him or her, the new employee can be fired with proper notice but without being given formal cause.

Dear Mr Pfaff is giving very false impressions here. “It’s all done for those poor bastards that don´t have a certificate and therefore can´t get a job”.
Bullshit! Why are the students of the Sorbonne demonstrating? Because they don´t have certificates?
This is not done to “help” 20% of young people who do not have a job and don´t get one because jobs get outsourced to elsewhere. The law is done to squeeze those 80% who do get a job and now need to fear to get fired without even a bit of explanation. Maybe otherwise they would ask for a decent wage?
The question again: How is this new law creating one more job? Mr Pfaff is not answering that one.

Posted by: b | Mar 18 2006 17:04 utc | 20

I kind of agree with Ralphie boy, a job for some time is better than none, and seen under that light the objections to the Villepin proposal in France (young ppl hired in regular jobs could be fired within a two year span without cause) seems ridiculous.
However, the protests – exactly like the blaze in the ‘immigrant’ quartiers, with he torching of cars, etc. – springs from an accumulation of woes. Basically, it is protest against ‘précarité’ – the difficulty, or impossibility, for young ppl to find jobs that are decently paid and correspond, in some way, to their aspirations, and the studies / qualifications they have acquired.
Unemployment for them is 22% but that does not take into account all those who are working ‘temp’ (bad job, dismally low pay, no security), are in CDD (contracts for a limited time, e.g. 6 months), or doing stage – internship, limited time, symbolic pay, or even no pay at all (the idea is to get professional experience, put it on your CV, etc.); those who work ‘black’ (cash hand to hand, no tax, a grave offense in France) or ‘grey’ — the example is from CH, not from France: you are hired for one day a week work in a supermarket, get proper pay, the benefits that go with it, etc., and are, on the other side of the book, asked to clean on Sat and Sun, and paid as ‘temp’ under a slightly different name that the computers won’t catch.
And all that is without counting girls who are exploited in some of these procedures, and become ‘servants’ while hired as ‘controller’ or ‘consultant’. And those who see no way out except to ‘scam’ the state – studying all the laws and and directives and making a profession out of exploiting the system (child care payments, etc, etc.), knowing exactly how to spout PC stuff to social workers. That is almost a full time job and requires a cell phone, and in many areas, a car. A pretty face and a snivelling baby help as well.
And what about those whose parents support them? Refuse to see their children draw unemployment, pay for housing, extra education, trips, language courses, etc. etc. (That is a middle class thing of course.)
And those in third, fourth, fifth year of ‘generalist’ University studies – letters, humanities, sociology, psychology, management studies, history, and even economic science? They are being good pupils, good sons and daughters, good citizens, responsible people, but they suspect they will not be able to find a job, so no housing, and soon, no marriage.
So, it is surprising the protests are not wilder.
In case anyone thought France is doing worse for its young people than other ‘old EU’ countries, it is not so. France is at the top of the list, after Germany and Switzerland. The situation in Spain and Italy, for example, is far far worse.
There aren’t enough jobs, it is as simple as that. Gvmts. (France, Italy, Switzerland – very different) have slowly elaborated mechanisms that reserve properly paid, or highly paid, or just plain secure (such as postman), employment for those who have dependents, children, teens, young adults, to bring up, as well as old people who need constant care.

Posted by: Noisette | Mar 18 2006 17:36 utc | 22

it seems like there is a shift in the works to accomodate the growing masses. and that shift is not towards a secure future. it is the general acceptance of less is all you’re getting. under the guise of security, accepting less will never amount to more. we have been conditioned to thinking an education will assure some stability but that is not the case anymore. especially since big business is breaking away from accountability, pensions, healthcare etc. across the board. these apprenticeships are a shift into almost slave labor if the cost of living keeps rising. what’s the choice? no job or a job that doesn’t cover one’s expensis? living at home. more workers per household to make ends meet. once the way has been paved for the corporations to abandon accountability (happening) small business is next.

Posted by: annie | Mar 18 2006 20:09 utc | 24

solving problems and working flexibly & independently.
still an uphill battle
NET LOSSES
new yorker

Until recently, companies that provided Internet access followed a de-facto commoncarriage rule, usually called “network neutrality,” which meant that all Web sites got equal treatment. Network neutrality was considered so fundamental to the success of the Net that Michael Powell, when he was chairman of the F.C.C., described it as one of the basic rules of “Internet freedom.” In the past few months, though, companies like A.T. & T. and BellSouth have been trying to scuttle it. In the future, Web sites that pay extra to providers could receive what BellSouth recently called “special treatment,” and those that don’t could end up in the slow lane. One day, BellSouth customers may find that, say, NBC.com loads a lot faster than YouTube.com, and that the sites BellSouth favors just seem to run more smoothly. Tiered access will turn the providers into Internet gatekeepers

Posted by: annie | Mar 18 2006 21:25 utc | 26

Quote:
The modern labor market calls for people who are adept at learning new skills as they are needed, at solving problems and working flexibly & independently. These skills are not being taught. Neither are the business & entrepreneurial skills that more and more people need to get by.
***
Here I agree with you Ralph. But is this fair? See, to obtain “initial” skills one has to go and educate him self in university education .This will cost him initially tens of thousands dollars in fees and books etc. (not to mention fact that he can’t work at the same time and is “losing money” so to say).All though more and more students MUST work AND STUDY lately to cover a cost of living even in countries where government is still helping with loans and assistance for students like here in Australia. And it’s hard. Then, that same university graduate is in a position to find his first job and this is not an easy task not having famous “experience” so they have to settle for small salaries. After that they are asked to perpetually re-educate him self and not just to learn new skills but sometimes to actually learn to do totally different job. Well OK most of the time company will pay for it (for now) but I can even see it in future as a cost of the employee in order to cling to his job.
I understand that terrific progress and speed of it demand this but it’s really is going to be a hell for next generation. I feel sorry for them. I don’t see really how society expects them to have families and to be balanced and healthy people while they need to live under this kind of presser. We are damned. Western civilization will disappear thanks to progress…it’s kind of creepy.

Posted by: vbo | Mar 19 2006 2:00 utc | 28