<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1458" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=142084802-06102005><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>The struggle against racism must be an integral part of the
anti-war movement as such it is important that this coalition take a strong
stance in this regard.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=142084802-06102005><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=142084802-06102005><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN><SPAN class=142084802-06102005><FONT
face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=142084802-06102005><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>At Monday's meeting this important demand must be brought
up for a vote and I strongly encourage everyone to vote in favor of
it.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=142084802-06102005><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=142084802-06102005><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Peter</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> O29-bounces@massglobalaction.org
[mailto:O29-bounces@massglobalaction.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Keith
Rosenthal<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, October 05, 2005 10:47 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
o29@massglobalaction.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> [O29] demands, obtaining a
permit<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Hey,</DIV>
<DIV> I'll just be brief: the demands for the protest have been
voted on in a trickle over the past two months. I believe the first one
was "troops out now" several months ago, followed by "recruiters out of our
schools," last month, followed by a demand on relief for the gulf coast disaster
victims two weeks ago. Second, i don't think a demand on anti-arab racism
is that much different in its importance, relevance, or appeal, than a
demand on military recruiters or funding human need not war. In fact, the
scapegoating and attacks on arabs and muslims has been clearly central to the
war justifications, with barbaric repercussions for arab people in this country
and in the middle east. Right now, many Arab-Americans are afraid to fully
get involved in antiwar activity because they are being wiretapped and
"preventively detained" by the government. One key way to build this
protest, which, we agree, is an urgent and pressing matter, is to be as
inviting as possible to the huge antiwar community that arabs and
muslims comprise. </DIV>
<DIV> Anyway, i certainly will be raising this chant and making
placards for the march with demands against anti-arab racism and i would
strongly encourage others to do the same.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> On another note: what's the status of the permit? Is
there a phone number, fax number, or e-mail we should be flooding with
requests that a permit be granted to us immediately and that the city stop their
<EM>de facto</EM> attempts to deny us our first ammendment right to assembly and
free speech? </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>solidarity,</DIV>
<DIV>keith </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR><B><I>rrm48@aol.com</I></B> wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Hi
,<BR>I know that saying "ditto" to a previous post is not good form on
<BR>Lists. But as one who, because I have to work, wasn't able to attend
<BR>the meeting on Monday I find Christie's Email to the point-- The main
<BR>demands for this action were decided back in August. I think it's
<BR>obvious that defence of the Muslim and Arab communities will be a big
<BR>part of Oct 29th. There will be banners, and certainly speakers, who
<BR>will bring this up. This kind of "Yeah, but what about..." could be
<BR>endless (What about Haiti, Palestine, Hands off Venezuela, Defend
<BR>Anti-Recruitment Fighters etc. etc.). There are many rooms in the house
<BR>of "Bring the Troops home Now"; Money for Human Needs not for
<BR>Occupation; Recrutiters Out of the Schools." When people get there
<BR>those rooms will be filled. As Christie says, at this point we have a
<BR>demonstration to build. By Oct 29th doubtlessly there wil be even more
<BR>issues (i.e.) Relief to New Orleans not Troops to fight the flu!"<BR>Bob
Montgomery<BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: Chrystie Hopkins
<CHRYSTIE@MENISCUSMAGAZINE.COM><BR>To: Keith Rosenthal <KEITHMR81@YAHOO.COM>;
o29@massglobalaction.org<BR>Sent: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 20:36:29 -0400<BR>Subject:
Re: [O29] Arabs and Muslims, "Middle America, " and building <BR>our
movement<BR><BR>Hi Keith,<BR>As one of the people who participated in the vote
on Monday, and who <BR>voted "against", I thought I should respond.<BR><BR>I
voted "no" based on procedure. It was my understanding that the <BR>demands
that the October 29 Coalition set for this rally occurred over <BR>two months
ago. There is still so much to do to get this rally to where <BR>it needs to
be and our energy needs to be focusing on pulling this <BR>thing together, not
voting on additional demands. We do not even have a <BR>permit yet for the
Common, we do not have a finalized list of speakers, <BR>and we need to raise
$13,000. We should all be focusing on making this <BR>rally happen rather then
all of this in-fighting and drawn out <BR>political discussions. We can have
all the demands we want, but without <BR>a permit, or funds, there will be no
organized rally.<BR><BR>I do not think that anyone that was at the meeting on
Monday disagrees <BR>with "Stop the racist scapegoating of Arabs and Muslims".
The vote was <BR>on whether or not we were going back and re-examining our
list of <BR>demands. Clearly, with three weeks to go, we need to move on. I am
sure <BR>that there are other ways that we can bring any additional demands,
<BR>especially this one, to the forefront of our
rally.<BR><BR><BR>Chrystie<BR><BR><BR>On 10/5/05 3:36 PM, "Keith Rosenthal"
<KEITHMR81@YAHOO.COM>wrote:<BR><BR>Hey All,<BR><BR>I just wanted to throw a
couple of thoughts out there regarding the <BR>vote and discussion at Monday's
O29 meeting concerning demands for this <BR>protest -- specifically the
demand: "Stop the racist scapegoating of <BR>Arabs and Muslims" also, since
the political discussion around the <BR>demand was short and choppy in the
meeting, i wanted to respond to <BR>several things here.<BR>I think it was a
mistake that this demand was voted down in a tie vote <BR>(9-9), and some of
the justifications presented for why it should be <BR>voted down have the
potential to set a bad precedent for our movement. <BR>it was stated that we
"don't want a radical protest, which will only <BR>draw 1,000 people," "that
we have to reach out to middle America," and <BR>that we should learn the
lesson of the Vietnam antiwar movement which, <BR>"got the hard-hats to stop
beating up the students, but instead join <BR>the students." i think this
perspective is erroneous and somewhat <BR>mythical.<BR>First of all, i don't
think we should have a laundry list of demands <BR>on the flyer, nor do i
think we should talk about everything under the <BR>sun on the flyer. but i
don't think a demand around arabs and muslims <BR>is "beyond the pale," too
radical, or will bring less people out to the <BR>march. in fact, i think it
can draw in more people pissed about the <BR>Patriot Act, Guantanamo
mistreatment, and, of course, will draw in <BR>Arabs and Muslims, who just
recently have been making pleas to Romney <BR>to stop the plan to wiretap
local Mosques! where is the antiwar <BR>movement on this question of the
supposedly imminent and overwhelming <BR>threat that "Muslim and Arab
extremists" pose to "our freedoms"? the <BR>demand around Palestine at the
September 24th protest certainly did not <BR>make that historic march any
smaller, so why would a demand to stop <BR>anti-Arab racist scapegoating make
our march any smaller?<BR>Second, we ought to be less afraid right now of
being "too radical." <BR>the single-most important figure in revitalizing mass
antiwar activity <BR>recently has been none other than that "raving radical"
Cindy Sheehan, <BR>who supports Palestine, the Iraq resistance to occupation,
refuses to <BR>vote for pro-war Democrats, and calls the current war
"imperialist." <BR>she is resonating with people because the reality is that
right now, in <BR>the aftermath of the sinking occupation of Iraq and the
Hurricane <BR>Katrina disaster, most regular people are growing increasingly
fed up <BR>with this war and with everything having to do with the current
<BR>government. right now, people are increasingly fed up with even the
<BR>Democratic Party for not taking a firm enough stand against Bush and
<BR>the war because of their concern to not alienate "swing-voters in
<BR>middle America."<BR>Finally, who is this mythical "middle America," and
how do we win <BR>them? the reality is that right now, a majority of people
are against <BR>the war and against Bush. according to polls, 1 out of 3
people <BR>consider themselves part of the antiwar movement -- that's 100
million <BR>people nationwide. in boston, that's roughly 200,000 people. once
we <BR>get these people organized, it will be easy from there to win the other
<BR>antiwar 1/3 to our side. also, who are we trying to win to this
<BR>movement? soccer moms (like cindy sheehan)? sure! arabs, muslims,
<BR>blacks, gays, women, students, latinos, workers, etc., (i.e., the
<BR>majority of people)? we must!<BR>And if i may ask, which hard-hats are
beating up antiwar students <BR>today? it's my understanding that the AFL-CIO
is against the war in <BR>Iraq (this includes organized construction workers,
i believe). <BR>remember, we are the majority! soldiers and military families
are <BR>increasingly on our side. now is not the time for conservative,
<BR>cautious moderation, but rather for bold, confident, and aggressive
<BR>steps forward.<BR>During the vietnam war, these so-called "hard hats" (do
you mean <BR>workers, soldiers, what?), were not won over to the side of the
<BR>"students" because the "students" moderated their message. rather, they
<BR>were won over to the antiwar movement because they simply grew more and
<BR>more disgusted with the war and the government and felt they simply had
<BR>to do something about it. in other words, people were going through a
<BR>process where they were beginning to think much more critically about
<BR>the government, if for no other reason than because of the increasing
<BR>reality of what the government was doing to the Vietnamese people and
<BR>to the US soldiers. this is precisely what is happening right now. the
<BR>way we are going to win these people is not by moderating our message,
<BR>but by taking every opportunity to expose every lie, smokescreen, and
<BR>brutality that this government is carrying out in the name of this war
<BR>. . . and in all of our names. in so doing, we will give expression to
<BR>growing millions of people disgusted by the government and simply
<BR>waiting for someone to confidently address the government's barbarity,
<BR>blow-for-blow (e.g., Cindy Sheehan).<BR><BR>In conclusion, i warn against
the broader framework, justification, <BR>and implications used to defeat the
demand on anti-arab racism at <BR>monday's meeting. it sounds dangerously
similar to the logic employed <BR>by Kerry supporters in the last election
that we have to moderate our <BR>message to appeal to "swing-voters in
middle-America" in order to win. <BR>not only did that strategy, in fact, lead
to a defeat for our side, but <BR>it also taught movement activists how to
hold their tongues instead of <BR>raising their voices. as the 2006
congressional elections begin to be <BR>talked about, we would do well to
remember this lesson, and refuse this <BR>time around to repeat our mistakes.
the way to grow is to confidently <BR>fight for our principles and to win more
people to them -- in tandem <BR>with their own developing criticisms of the
war and the government -- <BR>and not by "moderating ourselves," "politically
disciplining <BR>ourselves," or "holding our noses."<BR>Again, this is not to
say that we should have a laundry-list of every <BR>possible demand on the
flyer. but this is to say that we have little to <BR>lose and much to gain by
adding clearly relevant demands and letting <BR>our movement take an
increasingly critical posture towards the <BR>government's various policies
and ideological buttresses. and we ought <BR>to be wary of making arguments
that would set a precedent for our <BR>movement to balk and moderate itself in
order to appeal to some <BR>mythical "middle-America" at the expense of
standing up for our beliefs <BR>and for those who are most oppressed and
victimized by this war and <BR>this
government.<BR><BR><BR>Solidarity,<BR>Keith
Rosenthal<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>--------<BR>Yahoo! for Good<BR>Click here
to donate <HTTP: store.yahoo.com redcross-donate3 />to the <BR>Hurricane
Katrina relief
effort.<BR>--------<BR>_______________________________________________<BR>O29
mailing
list<BR>O29@massglobalaction.org<BR>http://massglobalaction.org/mailman/listinfo/o29_massglobalaction.org<BR><BR><BR><BR>--<BR>Chrystie
Hopkins<BR>Managing Editor<BR>Meniscus
Magazine<BR>www.meniscusmagazine.com<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>O29
mailing
list<BR>O29@massglobalaction.org<BR>http://massglobalaction.org/mailman/listinfo/o29_massglobalaction.org<BR><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<P>
<HR SIZE=1>
Yahoo! for Good<BR><A href="http://store.yahoo.com/redcross-donate3/">Click here
to donate</A> to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. </BODY></HTML>