For a week, Miami leaders have been praising police for preventing the type of property damage Seattle had during the 1999 World Trade Organization meeting.

The reasoning goes that since there wasn't $2 million in property damage here, as there was in Seattle, the police obviously did a great job.

It is the classic argument of the ends justifying the means.

OK, we saved some windows, but at what cost? I don't mean just the ridiculous amount of police overtime -- which will run into millions of dollars -- I mean the cost to us as a people. The intimidation, the fear, the contempt shown to the Constitution. Where do we send that bill?

First Amendment rights of free speech and assembly, and Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure, did not exist last week in Miami.

People were stopped and searched and arrested without cause. No one wants to believe the police would do such things. It is more comforting to believe that in every case where the police used force or arrested a person, the protesters must have done something to deserve it. The alternative, after all, is too scary to imagine.

But it happened. We've heard story after story. Not isolated incidents, but repeated tales of misconduct.

And we heard it not just from young people with face piercings, but from working people and senior citizens who came here to peacefully protest and were needlessly pepper-sprayed and assaulted by police.

Just look at Police Chief John Timoney's actions on Nov. 20. A Herald reporter spent the entire day with him and watched as Timoney, for no good reason, grabbed a kid and stood by as two other officers dumped the kid's backpack onto the sidewalk to see if he had any rocks inside the bag. He didn't.

Later, Timoney rode his bicycle over to someone being arrested for throwing something at officers. The chief shoved his finger in the guy's face as he was being handcuffed and said: ``F--- you!''

I realize most people's first reaction is to think that's great. How colorful. We all root for Dirty Harry. We all like the idea of a tough cop out there protecting us. But in reality, Timoney isn't tough. He's a bully. In fact, he's the worst kind of bully there is -- a bully with a badge.

Is this really the person we want setting the tone for a department with a history of lawlessness and civil rights abuses? Have we forgotten the Miami River Cops who ripped off and drowned dopers? The killing of Leonardo Mercado? The use of throw-down guns to cover up bad shootings?

A Herald photographer watched as a squad of police officers approached a small group of people standing in the street near the arena late in the afternoon of Nov. 20. They weren't doing anything, but the police wanted them to move. As the group started to walk north, the officers told them to move quicker and began chasing them. One of the officers started blasting a woman in the back with balls of pepper spray. He shot her six times in the back.

Let's be clear: In my opinion, anyone who attacks a police officer, throws something at a police officer, spits at a police officer should be arrested. I have no respect for anyone who would do such things.

But I have even less respect for an officer who abuses his power for indiscriminate revenge. And that is exactly what happened last week.

And here's a news flash for everyone: The anarchists won.

Their goal wasn't to cause $2 million in property damage. If they had wanted to do that, they could have gone to South Beach and torn things up. Their goal was to equate the free-trade talks with repression. And we obliged them by turning downtown into an armed camp with 3,000 cops in riot gear.

The city and Miami-Dade County will now face an onslaught of civil rights lawsuits. Newspaper and TV reports on these suits over the next two years will conjure up images of Miami as a Third World dictatorship.

And all of this for a watered-down agreement on free trade that will never bring the number of jobs to this area that's been promised.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. NoNonsense English offers this material non-commercially for research and educational purposes. I believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, i.e. the media service or newspaper which first published the article online and which is indicated at the top of the article unless otherwise specified.