RE: [MAPC-coord] action, no action?

RE: [MAPC-coord] action, no action?

born-digital

email

yes

no

2001-10-20

Yup.  That's what I intended.  And here's a copy for "discuss" too.

-----Original Message-----
From: x
[mailto:x]On Behalf Of
x
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2001 10:35 AM
To: x
Cc: x
Subject: Fw: [MAPC-coord] action, no action?


I'm assuming that x intended this reply to go to the lists, not just to
me, so I'm forwarding it along.  (If I'm wrong, I apologize, but with time
being of the essence, I decided to take the chance.)

x

----- Original Message -----
From: "x" <x>
To: "x" <x>
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2001 9:44 AM
Subject: RE: [MAPC-coord] action, no action?


> Yes I have an opinion...  I think our reactionary plans to respond to
> egregious actions on the part of the US are totally off the mark.  Barring
> deployment of tactical nukes to the field, employment of weapons of mass
> destruction, or overt invasion with intent to occupy a country, nothing
the
> US does right now will upset enough of the people to help us gather a big
> rally.  A big rally in my experience in Madison is over 1000 people.  A
> medium size rally is between three or four hundred and a thousand.  How
many
> of us think we can even organize a medium size rally in response to an ill
> defined set of "emergencies" that we intend to react against?  We need to
> look deeper for a strategy and tactics that won't have our best people
> burning out from so much work to so little result.  We need to define a
> program of constant social pressure.  We need to keep the issues squarely
in
> front of the people 7 by 24.  And I think we need to do this without
> alienating and polarizing people.
>
> I think the art event planned for next week is wonderful because it is
> independent of CNN ("all anthrax all the time" as x says).  How much
> tabling do we have the resources to support, week in and week out at both
> unions?  How many other "vigils" like the Quaker sponsored ones on Monday
> and Friday can we organize and support?  A few people here and there all
the
> time is far more effective than poorly attended rallies held in response
to
> ill defined emergencies.
>
> I'm not saying all of our rally activities to date have been ineffective
or
> poorly attended... far from it!  But organizers who can help to channel a
> spontaneous response from the people with a rally will be far more
effective
> than organizers who attempt to drum up a response.
>
> I think we need to refine our approaches:  hold rallies that are well
> planned and/or responsive to a clear need; work with education and
outreach
> to see that tables are planned and manned, ummm... personed; organize in
the
> community around people who may want to respond to the war with peaceful
> activity, but could give a rats ass regarding abstruse economic issues
like
> G8 summits.  Want to educate these people?  Give them time and good
> examples.
>
> Comments?  Thoughts?
>
> -x-
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: x
> [mailtox]On Behalf Of
> x
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 11:35 PM
> To: x
> Cc: x
> Subject: Re: [MAPC-coord] action, no action?
>
>
> Aaaargh.
>
> Part of me says "If we have to ask whether we should hold an emergency
> rally, we shouldn't hold it."
>
> The other part of me feels like a frog in a pot of water on the stove.  If
> the heat is turned up gradually enough, the frog never knows when to jump,
> until it's too late.
>
> I realize that's not very helpful.  Anyone else have an opinion?
>
> x
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "x" <x>
> To: <x>
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 10:34 PM
> Subject: [MAPC-coord] action, no action?
>
>
> > all (this is really a response to x's friday morning
> > call to potential action/questions and marina's friday
> > night hey it looks like we should at least do a picket
> > line sat afternoon emails):
> >
> > if we are going to do this tomorrow, as x is
> > suggesting, i am out, as i have to work, but pls keep
> > me posted, as i will then start the arts chain going.
> > do we want same signs or more? x has sticks and i
> > have cardboard, etc.
> >
> > i wonder if, and this is just a wonder, having even a
> > picket when the action is not being well-publicized is
> > a good idea. i know that there is much going on in
> > this war, like all other us "actions" which is
> > underwritten dramatically, and we need to call
> > attention to it, however, folks are more likely to
> > understand what we are calling for and call with us if
> > it is of a dramatic nature. subjective nature, i
> > suppose. as we all agreed at the last meeting, from
> > here on out it is much more subjective than just the
> > bombing beginning.
> >
> > regardless, i will pass the word if i hear back from
> > more folks.
> >
> > thanks,
> > x
> >
> > --- x <x> wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I'm back from work and the media coverage is
> > > different than this
> > > morning. This morning, TV had reported it as
> > > "deploying ground troops."
> > > Now the media is characterizing it as "a handful of
> > > U.S. special forces."
> > > Given that description, it looks like we do not need
> > > to employ our
> > > emergency response today. What a relief!  However, I
> > > think we need to
> > > be READY if troops are sent in. Given the quick
> > > nature in which this
> > > may happen, I opt for planning our strategy now so
> > > we don't have to
> > > scramble later. I think a picket line would be the
> > > most expedient course,
> > > especially given the fact that we've already had
> > > numerous
> > > rallies. Also, a picket line is a lot less work to
> > > organize than a rally.
> > > Rallies involve amplification, multiple speakers,
> > > musicians, etc. We would
> > > need the following to be ready if we decide on a
> > > picket line: press release,
> > > press contacts, bullhorn or portable sound system
> > > (or both), picket signs,
> > > chant sheets, and MAPC literature. These tasks cross
> > > over multiple
> > > committees so I think we ought to decide now what we
> > > want to do and
> > > start preparing within the committees--then we won't
> > > be in a crisis
> > > mode later.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Peace,
> > > x
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "x" <x>
> > > To: <x>;
> > > <x>
> > > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 10:31 AM
> > > Subject: [MAPC-coord] Re: [MAPC-action] 5pm Action
> > > Protesting Ground Troops
> > >
> > >
> > > > CNN is reporting a small deployment of Special
> > > Forces ground troops,
> > > > probably intended to locate targets for air
> > > strikes rather than to engage
> > > in
> > > > combat.  Fox News is reporting three teams of a
> > > dozen troops each.  One of
> > > > them reported that there had been numerous prior
> > > sightings of U.S. troops,
> > > > but that this was the first official confirmation.
> > >  It's not the top story
> > > > either place.
> > > >
> > > > My recollection from the CC discussions was that
> > > an emergency response
> > > would
> > > > be automatic in the event of a non-Special Forces
> > > ground invasion or a
> > > > *major* deployment of Special Forces, but that a
> > > small Special Forces
> > > > deployment would not necessarily trigger an
> > > emergency action.
> > > >
> > > > I would also note that, in the two hours since Rae
> > > posted this, there has
> > > > been no other discussion of an action on any of
> > > the MAPC lists.  So I
> > > don't
> > > > get the impression that other folks in MAPC have
> > > interpreted this as
> > > > requiring immediate action.
> > > >
> > > > My own feeling -- perhaps influenced by the fact
> > > that I'm sick and can't
> > > > help out regardless -- is that this is not a
> > > significant military
> > > escalation
> > > > and is probably just a public acknowledgment of
> > > what has been happening on
> > > > the ground all along.
> > > >
> > > > x
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "x" <x>
> > > > To: <x>;
> > > <x>
> > > > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 7:53 AM
> > > > Subject: [MAPC-action] 5pm Action Protesting
> > > Ground Troops
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > The media is saying that the US has sent ground
> > > troops into Afghanistan.
> > > > We
> > > > > had planned on a 5pm action on the capitol in
> > > response to this. I think
> > > we
> > > > > should go ahead, but given all the other things
> > > we are doing, we should
> > > > keep
> > > > > it simple.
> > > > >
> > > > > I propose we just have a picket line. The
> > > following things need to be
> > > > done:
> > > > >
> > > > > Get an announcement out to WORT to build the
> > > action.
> > > > > Get a bullhorn.
> > > > > Put together a sheet of chants.
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you think?
> > > > >
> > > > > Unfortunately, I am walking out the door to go
> > > to work, so I can't help
> > > on
> > > > > this. Given the fact its a work day, I suspect
> > > alot of other people are
> > > in
> > > > > the same boat. Can someone step up and run with
> > > this?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > x

Saturday, October 20, 2001 11:55 AM

RE: [MAPC-coord] action, no action?