|
printable version
- js reader version
- view hidden posts
- tags and related articles
View article without comments
by Paul Rosenberg
Monday, Oct. 29, 2001 at 1:11 AM
rad@gte.net
The official count topped 3,000 people at the rally in Pershing and march through downtown today. Crowds watching the march go by were generally friendly, with plenty of waving and flashing of peace signs.
The official count topped 3,000 people at the rally in Pershing and march through downtown today, with a diverse crowd of different ages, races and religion coming together for justice, rather than more violence against innocents. Speaking before the march, James Lafferty of the National Lawyers Guild told the crowd that "the real patriots are in the streets today,," and that "we're going to beek coming back to the streets of America until America comes to its senses."
In the light of the just-passed "anti-terrorism" bill, Sabina Virgo of AFSCME reminded the crowd that "Washington called the ANC terrorists." Addressing the cause of peace and justice, she said, "We are here today because we don't want more death," and we are obligated because, "it's in our name that millions have become refugees."
The Reverand James Lawson, legendary civil rights leader and former head pastor at Holman United Methodist Church, said tat "for 60 years my nation has called on me to hate and wage war" but that it had "never called on me to bring... or to end racism." In light of actions he cited which the corporate media downplays or ignores, he said, "the United States government is the rouge nation and the terrorist nation in the world today. I say that with grief because this is my country."
Echoing a theme also raised by Sabina Virgo, he streessed the need to reach out and share our message. "We must talk to our families; we must talk to our friends," he told the crowd. "We must see this as a beginning... The end must be when we have millions of people in the streets who deman not war but peace." Our aim should be not a victory for the United States alone, but "a victory for all the people of the world."
Santa Monica Mayor Michael Feinstein, a Green, also struck the theme of the need to reach out and educate those around us. He pointed out that even before September 11, we were suffering from global blowback, as the same problems which first faced Third World workers were increasingly felt by workers in America. On the other hand, he pointed out the discrepancy between the swift reduction in the price of Cipro, in contrast to Al Gore's opposition to lower the price of AIDs drugs for South Africa during the 2000 election campaign, an issue on which he finally reversed himself, but only after intensive pressure from activists.
There were a number of other speakers both before and after the march, which was a very spirited, high-energy affair, winding its way east and sourth through the heart of Saturday's shopping crowds. People watching the march go by were generally friendly, with plenty of waving and flashing of peace signs. There was no sign of the sort of hostility the corporate media might lead one to expect. To the contrary, many onlookers seemed pleased and heartened to see so many people calling for a peaceful approach to securing justice.
Report this post as:
by johnk
Monday, Oct. 29, 2001 at 1:43 AM
It got on channel 4, and there were three protesters who got on. The first one, I missed. The second was Andrea of LAFNB, giving a cogent reponse to why they're there (great haloween makeup too). The third was asked "how do we get the terrorists without using force" and responded with somehting like "I hope the intelligence knows what they're doing."
I think it's a good idea to know some good sound bytes before talking to the press. When I'm inarticulate, I just really screw it up and don't get on air (but that can be a good thing).
One good answer to the third is to redirect (or not answer) the question. Say, "We all want to stop terrorism, and that'll require force, but the issue is how much force and what kind. Does a sustained war based on bad foreign policy really protect us from terrorism? What happens when we run out of military targets, and the threat of terrorism still exists?"
Another answer might be, "Well, not to sound anti-american, but in the middle east, a lot of people see the US foreign policy as terrorist. We fund terrorism, switch alliances, and install puppet dictators, all to keep getting their oil. Maybe they think that using force against the US will stop us doing these things."
Report this post as:
by Justice
Monday, Oct. 29, 2001 at 6:54 PM
The response is that "terrorism"is today's name-calling of political opponents. The United States needs to stop promoting blood for oil wars, which the current war against Afghanistan is, in order to have peace with the world. The evidence that the perpetrators of the 9/11 bombings was an inside job, most likely perpetrated by the CIA and the military, is growing daily. It was another Reichstag Fire, another Nero burning Rome. This is no different from the terror the CIA perpetrates all around the world, for the benefit of the profits of the corporations. In other words, it is time the finger be pointed at the terrorist organizations, like the CIA and the US military, as being the primary terrorists, which they are, and we all have the historical record to prove it. The anthrax crisis is most likely being perpetrated by the anti-abortionists, who have done this against abortion clinics for years, and now have their man in the White House. That story is now coming out in the press.
Report this post as:
|