Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Bride of RNC Protest Stories

Expand Messages
  • Dan Clore
    News & Views for Anarchists & Activists: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo ***** Canucks protest Republican convention by Dennis Bueckert Canadian Press
    Message 1 of 4 , Aug 29, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo

      *****

      Canucks protest Republican convention
      by Dennis Bueckert
      Canadian Press
      Saturday, August 28, 2004

      OTTAWA (CP) -- Scores of Canadian activists set out Saturday
      to join anti-war demonstrations at the Republican National
      Convention in New York, saying the conflict in Iraq concerns
      them even if they aren't U.S. voters.

      About 140 protesters were to travel in an all-night bus
      convoy leaving Toronto on Saturday evening, while at least
      one other bus was leaving from Montreal, said Jessica
      Squires of the Ottawa-based group Nowar-Paix.

      "We're committed to bringing the message that we support the
      efforts of the American peace movement to end the occupation
      in Iraq," Squires said in an interview.

      "While we may not have a vote in the American election, the
      actions of the American government affect us and the
      communities that we are part of."

      U.S. organizers say demonstrations on Sunday will bring
      together one-quarter million people, comparable to numbers
      at the 1968 Democratic convention during the Vietnam War.

      Reports say 37,000 police will be on hand to keep order. In
      one sign of tension, New York tabloids reported last week
      that anarchists including Canadian Jaggi Singh were bent on
      disrupting demonstrations. Singh has denied any plan to be
      in New York.

      Squires said she isn't worried about getting arrested.

      "The demonstration is completely legal and permitted and
      it's also going to be very big. Any concerns we have about
      police overreaction will be de-emphasized because of the
      sheer size. There's safety in numbers."

      But New York police showed a willingness to get tough Friday
      when they arrested 250 cyclists riding by the convention site.

      Toronto activist Sarah Dover said authorities have granted
      permits for a march to Central Park, but have banned
      marchers from entering the park. "They've given us a permit
      to walk and not a permit to stand."

      She rejected the suggestion that chaotic protests could feed
      public insecurity and boost support for U.S. President
      George W. Bush.

      "If we were to concede to the fear that the authorities have
      been putting out we would be participating in the censorship
      of democracy."

      It promises to be a gruelling trip for the Canadians: all
      night bus ride, a day of marching, and another all-nighter
      on the way home. However, some will stay in New York next week.

      Squires said she doesn't expect to be stopped at the border,
      since activists were permitted to attend demonstrations in
      Washington last year.

      "We don't know what will happen at the border but our
      experience has been, eventually we do get through. Everyone
      will have ID and proof of address and nothing that could
      possibly be construed as a weapon -- no nail clippers, that
      kind of stuff." Even bandanas, which could be used as masks,
      are discouraged.

      Squires also has a word for her own government.

      "The Canadian government did the right thing in not
      participating in the war but we need to be taking closer
      looks at our own foreign policy."

      *****

      Protesters set to hit New York
      Threat of violence worries authorities.
      The Dallas Morning News
      Published Sunday, August 29, 2004

      WASHINGTON -- Hundreds of thousands of protesters will take
      to the streets of New York next week, ringing bells at
      Ground Zero, parading coffins past the Republicans'
      convention hall and engaging in civil disobedience in noisy
      protest of President George W. Bush and the war in Iraq.

      The demonstrators, coming from across the United States,
      will be met by a display of local, state and federal law
      enforcement unprecedented for a national political convention.

      The potential for confrontation -- and even violence --
      looms over this convention in a manner not seen since 1968,
      when the Democratic gathering in Chicago was marred by
      violent clashes between police and protesters.

      "That's what I am afraid of," New Yorker Karyn Tabat said
      Thursday over a salad in a Manhattan pizzeria. "I hear
      what's going on. I hear the defiance of New Yorkers."

      Some 10,000 New York police officers, supplemented by
      federal and regional law enforcement officials and an
      arsenal of high-tech tools, will blanket Manhattan's
      streets, waterways and airspace in the days surrounding the
      convention.

      Their mission: Protect a city that remains a top al-Qaida
      target and maintain order on streets that will be lively
      with Bush opponents, peace and anti-globalization activists,
      anarchists, environmentalists and advocates for the poor.

      "With a big, experienced police force, we can do it," said
      Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, who is deploying nearly a
      third of his 36,500-strong force to convention security.
      "We're ready."

      Police made their first convention-related arrests Thursday,
      taking into custody four people who rappelled from the Plaza
      Hotel's windows to display a huge anti-Bush banner and
      arresting nearly a dozen AIDS activists who stripped naked
      and blocked traffic outside Madison Square Garden.

      City officials have signaled that police will deal
      forcefully with protesters who break the law.

      "If you disrupt traffic, if you behave in ways that are
      against the law, the NYPD will enforce the law, period,"
      said New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

      The massive police presence already is visible, with
      officers swarming Penn Station, the bustling station
      immediately below Madison Square Garden, the convention site.

      Major protests are planned each day, beginning today, the
      eve of the convention, and continuing through the finale,
      Bush's acceptance speech on Thursday. A massive anti-war
      march filing past Madison Square Garden today is expected to
      draw 250,000 people.

      Organizers of key protests insist that the marches will be
      peaceful. Several of the groups have been in negotiations
      with city officials for months, battling unsuccessfully for
      access to Central Park.

      "Right now, the one thing we do know is there are tens of
      thousands of demonstrators who are going to be coming to
      protest Bush's policies and are very sure that they are
      going to be practicing their First Amendment rights," said
      Bill Hackwell, a spokesman for International ANSWER, an
      anti-war group. "And we don't know what the city is going to
      do."

      The FBI anticipates violent protests but doesn't have enough
      evidence to move against any group or individual, the
      bureau's counterterrorism chief, Gary Bald, told reporters
      recently.

      Police, who have prepped for the convention over the past 18
      months, say they have infiltrated some of the protest groups
      and are prepared for any tactics that might be used. The FBI
      has acknowledged interviewing some activists headed to New
      York but strenuously denies infringing on any civil liberties.

      Republicans are laying the groundwork to blame the
      Democratic Party if the protests become violent. Republican
      National Chairman Ed Gillespie, in a New York Times
      interview last week, called the line between protesters and
      the Democratic Party "fairly blurry."

      "I think the Democrats are going to have to be careful about
      not letting the protesters get out of hand," Gillespie said.

      His comments angered Democratic Party chairman Terry
      McAuliffe, who said it was "slander" to imply coordination
      with the protesters. He urged demonstrators to keep things
      civil, saying Democrats benefit if Republicans get their
      message out.

      "We want to let people hear what their message is," he said.
      "They will see what the Republicans truly are."

      Some protest organizers say the police are talking up the
      potential for violence in a bid to suppress demonstrator
      turnout -- a charge the department denies.

      "We do believe in confronting the powers that be, we do
      believe in confronting the state, but we are not out there
      to hurt anybody," said Eric Laursen, a self-described
      anarchist and member of a coalition planning acts of civil
      disobedience on Tuesday.

      He scoffed at a March police memo cautioning that anarchists
      might throw acid in officers' faces, hurl nail-studded
      potatoes and attempt to trip police up with wire. However,
      he said the anarchists might break some laws with planned
      acts of civil disobedience such as blocking access to
      buildings and sit-ins.

      Some fret that the police department, under court order not
      to repeat some of the strong-arm tactics it used during a
      February 2003 anti-war march, might be overly aggressive.

      "The track record of the police department is very
      worrisome," said Bill Dobbs of United for Peace and Justice,
      the coalition organizing today's anti-war march. "We are
      going to hope that they handle this reasonably."

      *****


      http://www.thesunlink.com/redesign/2004-08-29/nationworld/200408297884.shtml
      GOP CONVENTION
      Security precautions send ripples through N.Y.
      By Michael Powell and Michelle Garcia
      The Washington Post

      NEW YORK -- With streets blocked off and police blimps
      flying overhead, rifle-toting National Guardsmen striding
      through Grand Central Terminal and radiation detectors in
      place, this city all but bristles with security and
      anti-terrorist armament.

      Police have doubled the number of undercover officers riding
      the buses and subways, and video cameras provide 24-hour
      feeds from bridges and tunnels. The federal government has
      cleared a seven-mile-radius airspace "frozen zone" over
      Madison Square Garden -- site of the Republican National
      Convention -- and a high-tech, 2,000-square-foot nerve
      center at police headquarters will hold representatives from
      66 federal, state and city law enforcement agencies.

      For months, federal officials have warned of the threat of
      an attempted terrorist strike before the Nov. 2 presidential
      election, with New York City and the Republican National
      Convention presenting prime targets. Homeland Security
      Secretary Tom Ridge insists none of this should rattle New
      Yorkers.

      "Any attempts of a terrorist will be frustrated and repelled
      by multiple layers of security that they will encounter all
      around the city, and for that matter all around the region,"
      Ridge said last week.

      New York may have never been so well guarded. But some New
      Yorkers find the buildup to the GOP convention unsettling.
      In interviews, several dozen spoke of the disruptions caused
      by the phalanxes of police and National Guard troops, by
      protesters bent on civil disobedience, and by the roving
      security details assigned to Republican VIPs. Many
      residents, particularly immigrants, worry that they will
      spend a week as suspects in their city.

      "People are afraid now," said Mohammad Razvi, an auxiliary
      police officer and executive director of a respected
      community group that serves Pakistani and Bangladeshi
      immigrants. "Whenever these terror warnings go up, they are
      like: 'Oh, no, are they going to pick on us again?"'

      About half of those interviewed in recent weeks spoke of
      nagging fears of terrorist attacks. Some Manhattan families
      have decided to leave this week; others without the
      resources to get away say they will avoid Lower Manhattan.

      Assistant Corporation Counsel Gail Donoghue argued the
      city's case in court when civil libertarians challenged the
      Police Department's authority to conduct random searches of
      demonstrators' bags. But she tends to cast a jaundiced eye
      on official assurances of personal safety.

      "If someone's willing to die, they can always pull off an
      attack," she said. "I have to be here, unfortunately. But
      I'm definitely riding my bike that week. I view the subway
      as an unnecessary risk."

      At 90th Street and Park Avenue, Carol Kamine-Brown paused to
      calculate the number of blocks between Madison Square Garden
      and her office, in case something happens. "Well, it's about
      25 blocks -- I guess that's OK," she said. "But I have no
      intention, none, none, none, to go anywhere near the Garden.
      And I plan to ride the express bus in from Brooklyn next
      week instead of the subway."

      Transit officials say that while there may be disruptions,
      subways, commuter trains and buses will run on regular
      schedules, although buses in Midtown will face some
      rerouting. Typically, ridership drops about 10 percent in
      the week before Labor Day, with many New Yorkers on
      vacation. Penn Station, which lies beneath Madison Square
      Garden, will be open, although only one of the six exits
      will remain open for commuters.

      The streets immediately around the Garden will be closed
      frequently, particularly while the convention is in evening
      session. City officials say trucks serving the garment and
      flower districts will be allowed to pass, albeit at odd
      hours. Area business owners have, by and large, spoken of
      security as a necessary intrusion and have resigned
      themselves to long delays.

      All this security comes at a high cost. Mayor Michael
      Bloomberg has acknowledged that the city will spend $65
      million on security, about double his original estimate. And
      the city comptroller, William C. Thompson Jr., has estimated
      that disruptions to business and traffic and transit delays
      could push the total city tab to more than $300 million.

      City officials have talked of security as a straightforward
      matter, suggesting that all New Yorkers should endorse the
      show of force during uncertain times. Bloomberg -- who has
      faced criticism for lobbying so hard to bring the convention
      to New York -- insisted that any disruption would be minor.

      "The measures are going to strike the right balance between
      providing security without inconveniencing New Yorkers," he
      said. "New York City is being well protected on land, at sea
      and in the air."

      But antiwar activists contend that such extensive security
      precautions carry a downside, perhaps scaring off some of
      the hundreds of thousands of potential protesters.

      "We see a lot of misinformation that's building up the
      hysteria," said Jamie Moran, a member of RNC Not Welcome, a
      collective that includes anarchists. "The police and some in
      the news media are attaching terrorist labels to us . . .
      making it look as if the anarchists are an organized crime
      syndicate."

      --
      Dan Clore

      Now available: _The Unspeakable and Others_
      http://www.wildsidepress.com/index2.htm
      http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1587154838/thedanclorenecro
      Lord We├┐rdgliffe & Necronomicon Page:
      http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/9879/
      News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo

      "It's a political statement -- or, rather, an
      *anti*-political statement. The symbol for *anarchy*!"
      -- Batman, explaining the circle-A graffiti, in
      _Detective Comics_ #608
    • ta
      ... Perhaps the Canadians should be more concerned with their own complicity in the war/imperialism business before crossing the border to complain
      Message 2 of 4 , Aug 29, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Dan Clore wrote:
        > News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo
        >
        > *****
        >
        > Canucks protest Republican convention
        > by Dennis Bueckert
        > Canadian Press
        > Saturday, August 28, 2004
        >
        > OTTAWA (CP) -- Scores of Canadian activists set out Saturday
        > to join anti-war demonstrations at the Republican National
        > Convention in New York, saying the conflict in Iraq concerns
        > them even if they aren't U.S. voters.

        <snip>

        Perhaps the Canadians should be more concerned with their own complicity in
        the war/imperialism business before crossing the border to complain about
        America's. From Vietnam to Iraq to Haiti, the Canadians have walked
        hand-in-hand with the US, although usually under the covers, while they
        publicly talk about peace in effort to continue to promote the "Canada the
        Peacemaker" myth.

        While Canada would not officially be recognized as part of the "coalition of
        the willing", they supplied the US with critical air bases for refueling,
        they supplied tactical support during the war, their soldiers manned AWACS
        planes for directing missile hits, and their billion dollar "defense"
        industry was supplying the American government with weapons to kill the
        Iraqis. How a nation can both aid the aggressor and protest him is beyond
        me.

        In addition, Canadian Pension Plan beneficiaries are pouring their
        retirement dollars into American "defense" companies like Raytheon and
        Lockheed Martin, those primarily responsible for building the weapons
        America uses to carry out it's global terror.

        Canada is up to their eyes in American imperialism; obviously they have
        chosen to cozy up the bully on the block, rather confront him, but you can't
        be for "peace" on the one hand, and fuel the bully on the other (all the
        while reaping the benefits of sucking up to the bully).

        Those Canadian protesters would be better served spending their energy
        addressing their own government's hypocritical stances before protesting
        American policy.
      • dave williams
        ... As someone that just so happened to be born on Canadian soil I almost completely agree with this. Canada is bo no means a nation of peace . Let s not
        Message 3 of 4 , Aug 30, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          --- ta <ta33@...> wrote:

          > Dan Clore wrote:
          > > News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
          > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo
          > >
          > > *****
          > >
          > > Canucks protest Republican convention
          > > by Dennis Bueckert
          > > Canadian Press
          > > Saturday, August 28, 2004
          > >
          > > OTTAWA (CP) -- Scores of Canadian activists set
          > out Saturday
          > > to join anti-war demonstrations at the Republican
          > National
          > > Convention in New York, saying the conflict in
          > Iraq concerns
          > > them even if they aren't U.S. voters.
          >
          > <snip>
          >
          > Perhaps the Canadians should be more concerned with
          > their own complicity in
          > the war/imperialism business before crossing the
          > border to complain about
          > America's. From Vietnam to Iraq to Haiti, the
          > Canadians have walked
          > hand-in-hand with the US, although usually under the
          > covers, while they
          > publicly talk about peace in effort to continue to
          > promote the "Canada the
          > Peacemaker" myth.
          >

          As someone that just so happened to be born on
          Canadian soil I almost completely agree with this.
          Canada is bo no means a "nation of peace". Let's not
          forget the aiding that Canada gave during the genocide
          of the east timorese as well. Or the present support
          that Martin (canadian pm) is planning on giving the US
          for their space missile defense program.
          However keep in mind that during the Vietnam war that
          you speak of it was Canada that allowed war refugees
          into their country.
          I will also disagree with you on Canada walking hand
          in hand with the US "under cover". The GOVERNMENT
          normally walks hand in hand with the US pretty openly.
          This is the first time that I can think of that the US
          asked for Canada to be part of a military coalition
          and it was refused. Afghanistan and the 1st Iraq war
          were certainly NOT "undercover" military co-operation
          on Canada's part. It was disgustingly open support
          given by them to the US.


          > While Canada would not officially be recognized as
          > part of the "coalition of
          > the willing", they supplied the US with critical air
          > bases for refueling,
          > they supplied tactical support during the war, their
          > soldiers manned AWACS
          > planes for directing missile hits, and their billion
          > dollar "defense"
          > industry was supplying the American government with
          > weapons to kill the
          > Iraqis. How a nation can both aid the aggressor and
          > protest him is beyond
          > me.
          >
          Are you not American? Are you not against this war?
          How a person can be the leading agressor and still
          protest the war is beyond me. Do you see how
          ridiculous that sounds?


          > In addition, Canadian Pension Plan beneficiaries are
          > pouring their
          > retirement dollars into American "defense" companies
          > like Raytheon and
          > Lockheed Martin, those primarily responsible for
          > building the weapons
          > America uses to carry out it's global terror.
          >
          > Canada is up to their eyes in American imperialism;
          > obviously they have
          > chosen to cozy up the bully on the block, rather
          > confront him, but you can't
          > be for "peace" on the one hand, and fuel the bully
          > on the other (all the
          > while reaping the benefits of sucking up to the
          > bully).
          >
          > Those Canadian protesters would be better served
          > spending their energy
          > addressing their own government's hypocritical
          > stances before protesting
          > American policy.
          >
          You obviously don't believe in the idea of world
          community and think that we're better off just
          sticking within our borders and isolating ourselves. I
          guess you would be opposed to the idea of
          international solidarity. I guess that even the idea
          of world wide workers solidarity would be in
          opposition to your views wouldn't it? Sorry I
          completely disagree. You almost sound nationalistic.
          I would be very open to the idea of Americans
          crossing the border (that I don't respect much anyway)
          onto Canadian soil to protest Canadian policy. I had
          no problem whe the American Noam Chomsky came to
          Vancouver not to long ago. But I guess you think he
          just should've stayed south of the border. I think
          that we all need to work together globally on the
          injustices that are going on in OUR world.
          Would you have also been in opposition to Emma
          Goldman coming to your country and doing what she did
          because there was enough tyranny going on in her
          homeland? I'm sure you would've definatly opposed that
          "damn foreigner" aiding Americans in draft resistance
          during WW1 wouldn't you? Probably you would've
          supported her deportation as well, seeing as you think
          that people from other nations should have no right to
          protest against another nations wrongs as long as they
          have problems in their own country. You wouldn't of
          liked Sacco and Vanzetti (Italians) or alot of other
          immigrant radicals during that time I don't think
          either. They had no business coming here to try to
          make the world fairer in a place that was not their
          nation of birth. Is that what you'd think?
          I guess that the world community shouldn't protest
          the Israeli occupation either should they? They should
          all just isolate themselves within their borders and
          only protest what their own gov't does. Let the
          Palestinians and the Israelites handle that. Is that
          what you think?
          I doubt that you'd be apart of this list if you
          actually thought all of that. So why are you so pissed
          off over this incident?

          -Dave W


          >
          > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
          > --------------------~-->
          > $9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
          >
          http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/2bSolB/TM
          >
          --------------------------------------------------------------------~->
          >
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          > smygo-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >
          >
          >
          >




          __________________________________
          Do you Yahoo!?
          Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
          http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
        • ta
          ... From: dave williams To: smygo@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 9:47 AM Subject: Re: [smygo] Bride of RNC Protest Stories ... As someone that
          Message 4 of 4 , Aug 31, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: dave williams
            To: smygo@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 9:47 AM
            Subject: Re: [smygo] Bride of RNC Protest Stories



            --- ta <ta33@...> wrote:

            > Dan Clore wrote:
            > > News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
            > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo
            > >
            > > *****
            > >
            > > Canucks protest Republican convention
            > > by Dennis Bueckert
            > > Canadian Press
            > > Saturday, August 28, 2004
            > >
            > > OTTAWA (CP) -- Scores of Canadian activists set
            > out Saturday
            > > to join anti-war demonstrations at the Republican
            > National
            > > Convention in New York, saying the conflict in
            > Iraq concerns
            > > them even if they aren't U.S. voters.
            >
            > <snip>
            >
            > Perhaps the Canadians should be more concerned with
            > their own complicity in
            > the war/imperialism business before crossing the
            > border to complain about
            > America's. From Vietnam to Iraq to Haiti, the
            > Canadians have walked
            > hand-in-hand with the US, although usually under the
            > covers, while they
            > publicly talk about peace in effort to continue to
            > promote the "Canada the
            > Peacemaker" myth.
            >

            As someone that just so happened to be born on
            Canadian soil I almost completely agree with this.
            Canada is bo no means a "nation of peace". Let's not
            forget the aiding that Canada gave during the genocide
            of the east timorese as well. Or the present support
            that Martin (canadian pm) is planning on giving the US
            for their space missile defense program.
            However keep in mind that during the Vietnam war that
            you speak of it was Canada that allowed war refugees
            into their country.

            ** TA: And it was Canada who was engaged in espionage with the CIA and
            cooperated with American forces in supplying arms and logistical support to
            South Vietnam, all the while a member of two international truce commissions
            on the Vietnam War as a supposedly neutral party. In addition, Canada
            supplied humanitarian aid to only the South Vietnamese, and in some cases,
            stopped critical medical supplies from being delivered to North Vietnam for
            treating injured and dying civilians. And like in Iraq, Canadian "defense"
            companies sold billions of dollars worth of military products, such as
            ammunition, napalm, and other explosives. They provided another 10 billion
            dollars worth of food and supplies to US troops. Naturally, Canada's economy
            reaped tremendous benefits from supplying the US with the continued means to
            wage its vile and unjust war against the Vietnamese people. Canada was also
            actively allowed the US to test its brutal chemical weapons on their soil,
            including agent orange, and used Canadian property for testing the massive
            carpet bombing campaigns the US carried out against the VC. And finally,
            they supplied 10,000 Canadian troops who fought with the US armed forces in
            the war.


            I will also disagree with you on Canada walking hand
            in hand with the US "under cover". The GOVERNMENT
            normally walks hand in hand with the US pretty openly.
            This is the first time that I can think of that the US
            asked for Canada to be part of a military coalition
            and it was refused. Afghanistan and the 1st Iraq war
            were certainly NOT "undercover" military co-operation
            on Canada's part. It was disgustingly open support
            given by them to the US.

            ** TA: Canada consistently tries to walk the line between peacemaker and
            American lapdog. They don't want to like US policy, but they do like the
            fringe benefits.

            > While Canada would not officially be recognized as
            > part of the "coalition of
            > the willing", they supplied the US with critical air
            > bases for refueling,
            > they supplied tactical support during the war, their
            > soldiers manned AWACS
            > planes for directing missile hits, and their billion
            > dollar "defense"
            > industry was supplying the American government with
            > weapons to kill the
            > Iraqis. How a nation can both aid the aggressor and
            > protest him is beyond
            > me.
            >
            Are you not American? Are you not against this war?
            How a person can be the leading agressor and still
            protest the war is beyond me. Do you see how
            ridiculous that sounds?

            ** TA: What's ridiculous is that many Canadians feel compelled, due to this
            false sense of moral superiority, to protest American policy while ignoring
            (either willfully or subconsciously) their own government's complicity in
            that very policy. I'm not likely to take any advice on gardening from my
            neighbor whose yard is filled with weeds.

            > In addition, Canadian Pension Plan beneficiaries are
            > pouring their
            > retirement dollars into American "defense" companies
            > like Raytheon and
            > Lockheed Martin, those primarily responsible for
            > building the weapons
            > America uses to carry out it's global terror.
            >
            > Canada is up to their eyes in American imperialism;
            > obviously they have
            > chosen to cozy up the bully on the block, rather
            > confront him, but you can't
            > be for "peace" on the one hand, and fuel the bully
            > on the other (all the
            > while reaping the benefits of sucking up to the
            > bully).
            >
            > Those Canadian protesters would be better served
            > spending their energy
            > addressing their own government's hypocritical
            > stances before protesting
            > American policy.
            >
            You obviously don't believe in the idea of world
            community and think that we're better off just
            sticking within our borders and isolating ourselves. I
            guess you would be opposed to the idea of
            international solidarity. I guess that even the idea
            of world wide workers solidarity would be in
            opposition to your views wouldn't it?

            **TA: You obviously have jumped to many conclusions which are not logically
            reached from what I wrote.

            Sorry I
            completely disagree. You almost sound nationalistic.
            I would be very open to the idea of Americans
            crossing the border (that I don't respect much anyway)
            onto Canadian soil to protest Canadian policy. I had
            no problem whe the American Noam Chomsky came to
            Vancouver not to long ago.

            **TA: Protest all you like, but one has to wonder why one is driving
            hundreds of miles to protest things when there is protesting to do right in
            your own back yard. Of course they have the *right* to do whatever, but
            that's not the point.

            But I guess you think he
            just should've stayed south of the border.

            **TA: You guess wrong.

            I think
            that we all need to work together globally on the
            injustices that are going on in OUR world.

            **TA: I think we need to "think globally, act locally" myself. I think we
            need to clean up our own messes before focusing on someone else's.

            Would you have also been in opposition to Emma
            Goldman coming to your country and doing what she did
            because there was enough tyranny going on in her
            homeland? I'm sure you would've definatly opposed that
            "damn foreigner" aiding Americans in draft resistance
            during WW1 wouldn't you? Probably you would've
            supported her deportation as well, seeing as you think
            that people from other nations should have no right to
            protest against another nations wrongs as long as they
            have problems in their own country. You wouldn't of
            liked Sacco and Vanzetti (Italians) or alot of other
            immigrant radicals during that time I don't think
            either. They had no business coming here to try to
            make the world fairer in a place that was not their
            nation of birth. Is that what you'd think?

            **TA: I'm not sure how you arrived at such conclusions based on what I
            wrote. You sound defensive, perhaps indicating your own nationalistic
            tendencies?

            I guess that the world community shouldn't protest
            the Israeli occupation either should they? They should
            all just isolate themselves within their borders and
            only protest what their own gov't does. Let the
            Palestinians and the Israelites handle that. Is that
            what you think?
            I doubt that you'd be apart of this list if you
            actually thought all of that. So why are you so pissed
            off over this incident?

            **TA: what makes you think I'm pissed? I thought it was a worthwhile point
            philosophically, and I see alot of hypocritical moral posturing from
            misguided Canadians who are awfully concerned about American policy, and yet
            seemingly misinformed or silent in regards to their own government's
            actions. That's not to say these protesters didn't come from Ottawa
            protesting the Liberal party's policies before hopping on the bus to NY, so
            who knows.

            -Dave W
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.