September 11 Digital Archive

[MAPC-coord] Re: [MAPC-action] 5pm Action Protesting Ground


[MAPC-coord] Re: [MAPC-action] 5pm Action Protesting Ground



Media Type


Created by Author


Described by Author


Date Entered


September 11 Email: Body

Just to clarify--apparently my message was perceived by some as being an
attack on an individual--which it most certainly was not intended to be.

I hoped by beginning with the phrase, "the CC may not be aware of this," to
indicate that i was assuming there was a communication issue of some kind.
I'm not casting blame on any individual--it's just growing pains of the
group. Any frustration in my msg is directed at logistical problems in
general, not toward any individual. We're all doing our best and these
issues will be sorted out with time.

Also for future reference, when I do argue against an individual's opinion
or ideas, it probably isn't personal.

I think the main issues that came out of this are
(1) Who calls an action--the CC or AC?
(2) We need a clearer def'n of an emergency
(3) We need phone communication within the AC

in solidarity

On Sun, 21 Oct 2001 16:48:36 -0700 (PDT), x wrote:

>  On Fri, 19 Oct 2001 07:53:59 -0500, wrote:
>  >  I propose we just have a picket line. The following things need to >
>  done:
>  I missed this whole conversation but I have a comment anyway.
>  With all due respect, the folks on the co-ordinating committee may not be
>  aware of this, but I would like to note that the action committee has a
>  for emergency actions, including each of us having specific jobs assigned
>  for every detail.
>  If someone unilaterally comes up with a whole new plan at the last
>  that means starting over from scratch to (1) discuss the plan and (2)
>  people to implement it--all within a few hours. In my opinion: huge waste
>  time.
>  If we are to have emergency actions (which I understand is an if) we need
>  stick to the plan--or make a new one *in advance*--so that the only thing
>  left to do when the action is called, is implement it. I am not attached
>  the existing plan, but whatever the plan is we shouldn't try to alter it
>  the last second.
>  Discussion? Disagreement? Pies in the face? My intent is not to offend
>  to be efficient and avoid saddling any individual with an overwhelming
>  burden of organizing everything.
>  Regarding the very concept of emergency actions, I think the AC was
>  about events that would be so overwhelmingly dramatic/traumatic that
>  would be an overwhelming desire to get out there and do something. I
>  definitely don't think anyone was imagining that there should be
>  actions at every turn. Probably we should remove "invasion" from the list
>  actions and stick to (1) extension of bombing to a new country, (2)
>  or arson in our community or (3) another massive violent attack on US
>  with instant mass casualties. I'm also open to dropping the whole
>  Whatever you all think.
>  X

September 11 Email: Date

Monday, October 22, 2001 4:56 PM

September 11 Email: Subject

[MAPC-coord] Re: [MAPC-action] 5pm Action Protesting Ground


“[MAPC-coord] Re: [MAPC-action] 5pm Action Protesting Ground,” September 11 Digital Archive, accessed February 24, 2020,