Oakland police spied on anti-war, labor groups

The Northern California office of the American Civil Liberties Union made public a report July 27 that exposed post-9/11 government surveillance by police, the military and a state security agency on individuals, labor unions and anti-war groups who opposed the U.S. war against Iraq.

San Francisco Aug. 5 protest demanding ‘U.S. out of the Middle East.’ WW photo: Joan Marquardt

It turns out that two Oakland police officers were assigned to infiltrate a local anti-war organization—Direct Action to Stop the War.

Established under the direction of the California attorney general’s office, the California Anti-Terrorism Information Center issued a specific advisory five days before the anti-war organization’s April 7, 2003, “National Day of Action” protest demonstration at the Port of Oakland.

Criminal intelligence specialist Mike Mendenhall, listed as the law enforcement contact, was well-informed about the details of the planned demonstration because the two undercover cops were reportedly functioning by then in leadership positions within the anti-war group, enabling them to provide details of the organization’s plans.

The Oakland police had also monitored online postings by the International Longshore and Warehouse Union because of its anti-war stance. The longstanding progressive record of the ILWU workers is well-known.

On the day of the Port of Oakland protest, hundreds of anti-war activists blocked gates at the docks to protest two shipping companies that they said were profiting off the war on Iraq. Eyewitnesses reported that police shot at demonstrators and onlookers—including dockworkers—with wooden bullets, “beanbags” and concussion grenades. Scores were wounded, many in the back.

In response to the unprovoked police brutality, many angry longshore workers walked off the job.

At a demonstration the following month, on May 12, police violence against the protesters caused broken bones and other serious injuries. This is well-documented in eyewitness and photographic detail. A subsequent lawsuit brought against the City of Oakland by injured anti-war protesters and dockworkers on their way to their jobs was settled for about $2 million.

Months after the demonstrations, to add further insult to these injuries, Oakland Deputy Police Chief Howard Jordan was quoted in a transcript from the city police review panel saying that “our ability to gather intelligence on these groups and this type of operation needs to be improved.” And he added:

“I don’t mean same-day intelligence. I’m talking about long-term intelligence gathering.”

On the same day the ACLU report became public, ILWU member Jack Heyman, a participant in the May 17, 2003, Port of Oakland anti-war protest, issued a statement that read in part: “The trade union movement, and particularly the International Longshore and Ware house Union, has faced this kind of ‘iron heel’ policy from the government during the 1934 San Francisco General Strike and during witch hunts of the now-infamous McCarthy period.

“Since Sept. 11, 2001, the U.S. government, under the rubric of fighting the ‘war on terror,’ has ratcheted up port security measures, threatening to occupy the docks with troops in all ports of the West Coast during 2002 longshore contract negotiations.

“In 2003, at the start of the Iraq war, anti-war protesters in the Port of Oakland and longshoremen going to work at marine terminals were shot with ‘non-lethal’ weapons.

“But it will take more than monetary settlements or new laws to defend our civil liberties during this climate of fear and pork-barrel funding for ‘homeland security,’” Heyman concluded. “Defending our democratic rights means exercising those rights in mass demonstrations. That’s how civil rights were won in this country and the Vietnam War was stopped.”