Report: antiwar action, 1/18 in Tucson : AZ IMC

The cops were lying to cover up the fact that they had targeted the black bloc. I was on the curb, holding a sign and a cop came up and engaged me in conversation, saying what a nice day it was, etc. I said, "well, when you guys wear that riot gear it scares peopple. maybe you shouldn't wear it next time." And he said, "well, see, we need it. even today. some people in the crowd threw rocks at the police and attacked other marchers." i said, 'well, I'm not going to go by what you say," and he was taken aback and then was like, 'well you don't have to..." and walked away.

All in all, the cops were rather rude-- in addition to the targeting of the black bloc. When I was on the North side of Speedway, one cop ran his motorcycle into our little gorup of 4 people and parked on the sidewalk. that could have hurt someone. Another cop was riding his bike on the sidewalk behind me and when i questioned him about the legality of riding his bike on the sidewalk, he was all like, "it's a police vehicle," etc.

I have mixed feelings about some black bloc tactics but yesteday was perfectly clear to me: the cops were the ones inciting people. And then the black bloc gets trashed on the news and gets trashed by other activists (I heard long-time activists bemoaning the masked people "running through the crowd.")

It reminds me of what my mother once said to me when I was 16: 'rachel, I always expected that you'd rebel a little, but what you're doing just doesn't make any sense to me," as if i was suppsoed to rebel in "sanctioned" ways. (i think all i did at that time is go to Disneyworld without my mom's permission).

The Protest in Tucson was a huge success, the turnout was awesome and the crowds were jubilant and festive. Yet as the police arrested five of our fellow protesters for merely crossing the cone on Speedway, I stand bitter and angry at the speakers whom instead of denouncing the police for five questionable arrests, praised them stating (paraphrase) “and lets thank the police department for doing a great job today in conducting the demonstration, if it wasn’t for them we wouldn’t be here”. I believe this sort of claptrap is intolerable. Clearly all is well if the police and the protesters carry out the demonstration without violence, but when the police arrest people for questionable reasons and use dubious tactics to carry out those arrests, they should not be praised but denounced and bashed instead. As Tucsonans we are all aware of the police brutality in this town and the pretentious attitude of many officers, as anti-war activists and demonstrators it is obvious that the police and ourselves are on two opposite sides of the spectrum. I believe that the job of the speakers is not to be whinny little liberals who thank public officials for appearing at the demonstration and ‘representing us’, or who thank the police for carrying out questionable arrests and hindering the will of the war protest. The speakers were older men and women who were most likely active in the 60’s and 70’s and who by virtue of old age and a long life have pacified and de-radicalized. The speakers did not address controversial issues such as actions taken by the Military abroad, the arrests and illegal detention of Arab men in the last month across the U.S., the role of the CIA and other covert operations funded by the U.S. government, the role of the corporate media in deflating the numbers of the movement, Hollywood and its patriotic portrayal of anything American, State and American funded torture, the United Nations and its role as a weapon for the U.S. and other veto-carrying nations, the list goes on and on. The fact is that the notions and ideas of the speakers are worn down and have withered away by a life consumed and robbed of its zeal within the jaws of capitalist consumption culture. What the movement needs isn’t a bunch of tired and compliant pacifists, what the movement needs isn’t some mainstream ideas who hold up the flag, call themselves patriotic for fear of losing popular support, and simultaneously denounce the war. What the movement needs is students; young radical minds to address all of the taboo and unmentionable issues that the older generation ignores in their senile stance. What the movement needs is to capitalize on its massive start and keep pushing the envelope within every facet of the struggle, and most importantly, capitalism needs to be addressed. Radical activity is the only way to change things, civil disobedience and massive arrests is the only way to get our voices heard. So, enough with these lethargic and listless olden speakers from another age, we want some charismatic and sweeping young minds whom are not afraid of to speak out against everything. For the next massive march, I ask the organizers to let more radical minds express the unheard issues. Now is the time to push even further, now is the time to cause the biggest stir. If anyone hears this call, email me at indenturedsymbiosis@hotmail.com and I will gladly contact radical minds to speak on behalf of the students and younger generation. I would be willing, as a non-affiliated activist, to address at length a particularly controversial issue.

Thank you
Maximilien Valente

we are very severely compromised

dump the net

Have any of you asked or actually talked to an Iraqi Citizen?
For years the have been persecuted tortured gassed Etc. Saddam is a ruthless dictator. The Iraqi people have begged the world to displace him for over a decade, they hate him.
You foolishly believe that Iraq is full of saddam loving innocent Iraqi citizens....you are wrong.
The only innocent iraqis living in iraq are the ones forced to service and support his regime, most if not all are their against their will.
The war (if you can call it that) Has to do with Saddam his republic Guard and his regime. It has nothing to do with the Iraqi people.
Maybe you should talk to a few Iraqis lucky enough to escape the wrath of saddam that have come here before you spew crap about a situation you know nothing about.
Where is your outrage and protest about Saddams evil? the outrage over the slaughter at his hands? Is it because you are not in Iraq? Could it be you would be shot onsite for protesting against Saddam?
Every excuse you use to protest a "supposed war" in Iraq against the Iraqi people is pathetic, your activism against a war with Iraq is your support of Saddams ruthless Tactics. You cant have it both ways.
Think about it...

As long as our voices are passive and praise the police, as long as all marchers are not defended when targeted by police (i.e. Black Bloc), as long as people are hearded like sheep by cops through our public streets, as long as this is the reality of our protest, our voices will remain muffled and compromised.

I say remain non-violent, but be loud and challenging. Do not sheepishly march under the terms of the police. Do not praise the police after they have targeted fellow protestors as you stood and watched. For the Police Dept. is not on our side. Give everyone a voice -- including the loudest and most radical. And defend those targeted by political profiling.

as long as the loudest don't drown out everyone else, as usually happens. and not eveyone wants to participate with unpredictable 'radicals'.

more than a few spooky, fascist, yuppie liberals
were agressiveley working the crowd saying black bloc provoked cops, deserved arrest

black bloc is vital
though compromised

dump the net

everyone out
pots n pans
fed bldng thurs 01 23 03

Some moron decided it would be a good idea to post under my usual name up a couple comments, just wanted to let people know that wasnt me, just someone to scared to show their identity.

Anti War = Pro Saddam sponsored Terror or are you a hypocrite?
Saddam Oppresses, gasses and kills his people. Your support of NO war is your Support of Saddam Sponsored Terror to his people, The Iraqi Citizens. You cannot boycott and protest a war in the name of saving poor Iraqi or Coalition forces lives and at the same time say you are against the oppression and mass killings of the Iraqi Citizenry. You either agree with the displacement of Saddam or you agree with the mass killings by Saddam of his people which is it?
The War with Iraq is not about Oil, the War with Iraq is not about Imperialistic ways & means, the War with Iraq, Is not about George W Bush.
The military action pending against Iraq for whatever “exact” purpose will indeed when successful liberate the Iraqi people to live in a free/freer Society as witnessed by the Afghani people with the removal of the Taliban in Afghanistan, but then again your selfish protests against the war have nothing to do with peoples Freedom, or a free society unless its your freedom...

FACT: Your protests against this war/military action are not only meaningless but highly hypocritical.

c-"dump the net"

yes, please do
go first, lead the way
or is it, do as i say not as i do.

"American" sorry but I posted first under that handle, check the record. You wouldn't want to confuse people now would you?

to the 1- 20,000 crew,
if flaming the commons is your way of reaching out for PAC then PAC has no cred.

If this current conflict with Iraq was occuring in a vaccuum you might have an arguement. However there is enough historical evidence to discount your arguement. Whenever someone tries to take the official line "Saddaam killed his own people," they never say the last part of the sentence "with our support." The reason why is because it calls into question our very motives for going to war. If you had argued, as my stepfather has, that giving Saddaam chemical weapons was simply a mistake and we learned our lesson after the Gulf war how Saddaam really was, I give you three counter-arguements. First of all, Saddaam killed "his own people" during the 1980's with our support. After the worst atrocities, Bush the elder responded by increasing shipments of weapons of mass destruction to Saddaam. That alone is proof that Bush is not concerned with the welfare of the Iraqi people. More proof is the US reaction when Turkey also killed Saddaams people in the 1990's. Turkey slaughtered the same exact group, to which the US responded by defending its ally rather than condemning the atrocities. The third piece of evidence is declassified documents from the state department and the Pentagon. Don't trust a pentagon PR guy, read the documents yourself. Going back to world war 2 it talks about how important to strategic national interests it is to control the worlds oil supplies. In a recent news article a British official admitted that oil is more important than to British national security than stopping weapons of mass destruction. For a good source, read Chomsky or go to the website http://www.targetoil.com. Daniel Brockert

People of Middle East and South Asian Descent
& Muslims Are Not Our Enemy!
They Are Our Brothers & Sisters!!!

If the war is about oil. We could take all the oil from Saudi Arabia, Or any other country and None of them could stop our war machine. This war is about ridding the world of Evil individuals. Whom have given up their rite to live among the rest of us through their inhumanity to man.Unfortunately there will always be people who do not whish to be bothered whith the heavy lifting unltill they can no longer stand on their own. I am proud of the men and women who are about to do the heavy lifting in Iraq. I thank them. They do this not just. for me or you but for themselves and their children even though they know some of them will surely die. Thats love for humanity. Thats what it is to be an American

...they've been killing them for years'

Julian Barnes
Odd, isn't it, how late the humanitarian argument is popped into the shopping basket, how close to the deadline those intent on war spot, say, the oppression of Afghan women, or the fascistic nature of General Galtieri? Like most of the February 15 marchers, I find "anti-war equals pro-Saddam" mendacious bullshit. I am anti-war in the sense that I am anti this war now, there, by us, with the justifications so far stated. If Saddam is a threat to his entire region, should we not wait for his region to ask our help? If a threat to his people, there is always the old system of assisting an uprising - except there was one after the last war, wasn't there, and we hung its participants out to dry.
I decline to buy the sudden idea of a "humanitarian war" when it will be conducted on current American guidelines: keep US casualties below the level of an average supermarket-mall massacre, bomb from high altitude, road-test the latest hardware, and oops, sorry about that wedding party which just went up in smoke. If, on the other hand, we are now announcing a new and truly ethical foreign policy, in which filthy oppressors worldwide are to be removed in order of filth, I would say that this should be done only with a very high majority vote in the UN, and that former - and current - imperial powers should be extremely cautious in their use of hectoring cant. Those who are anti-war have not somehow been cornered by the question, So, peaceniks, what would you do now? It's quite legitimate to answer, well, we wouldn't be here now, because we wouldn't have started from there then. Instead, a question in return. Saddam disarms voluntarily: do we then invade on humanitarian grounds?

Mohamed Heikal
In the atmosphere of hysteria in the area now, and with the massive build up of men and arms in the region, and with the feeling of widespread frustration engulfing the Arab world, I think what I will say now could seem like a fantasy and yet I dare to say it. Put the breaks on that horrible machine of war. Keep the inspectors. Ease the sanctions. Give the Iraqi people a chance. Using force would be very dangerous. It will unite Islam, Arab nationalism, Bin Ladinism, terror, the Israel-Palestinian conflict - the frustration in the Arab world will be brought together in one charge.

As for sanctions, the problem is that they are helping the regime. I would leave it to the Iraqi people who are coming to the end of their patience. If they were left alone they would take their destiny into their own hands. Sanctions make people dependent on the regime for the distribution of food. If you lifted sanctions you would find that so many things would change. As for the inspectors, they should stay, even though I am completely sure Iraq doesn't have anything. The Americans are all over the area with their U2s and all that and we saw from Colin Powell's presentation to the UN that they are listening to everything; they simply don't have anything.

How do you stop them getting the weapons again? They were quite far away from having the knowledge to build a nuclear bomb, probably 10 years. With the biological and chemical weapons, they have the knowledge but any third-world country has the knowledge. If you ease the sanctions, I don't think there is any harm keeping the system of inspections for a long time to come.

· Egyptian writer and former adviser to Gamal Abdel Nasser

Harold Pinter
"What should we do?" The question should be: "What have we done?" The US and the UK couldn't care less about the Iraqi people. We've been killing them for years, through sustained bombing and the brutal sanctions which have deprived hundreds of thousands of children of essential medicines. Many of them are dying and are dead from the effects of depleted uranium, used in the Gulf war. The west has shown total indifference to these facts.

What is now on the cards is further mass murder. To say we will rescue the Iraqi people from their dictator by killing them and by destroying the threadbare infrastructure of their country is an insult to the intelligent. We have no moral position in this matter whatsoever.

The impending war is about testing new weapons of mass destruction (ours) and control of oil. The arms manufacturers and the oil companies will be the beneficiaries. The United States will be making a giant stride towards controlling the world's resources. The whole thing is about "full spectrum dominance" - a term coined by the US - not me.

Noam Chomsky
Exactly the right question, and in my opinion, we know exactly the right answer to it. It's useful to remember that Saddam Hussein is not the only monster supported by the present incumbents in Washington until he did something contrary to their interests. There's a long list that they supported right to the end of their bloody rule - Marcos, Duvalier, and many others, some of them as vicious and brutal as Saddam, and running tyrannies that compare well with his: Ceausescu, for example. They were overthrown internally, despite US support for them. That's been prevented within Iraq by the murderous sanctions regime, which has devastated the population while strengthening Saddam, and forcing the population to become hopelessly reliant on him for survival.

Solution? Give Iraqis a chance to survive, and there's every reason to believe that they'll get rid of him the way that others have. Meanwhile, strengthen measures to ensure that Saddam, or some replacement, doesn't develop significant military capacity. Not a very serious problem right now, since as is well known, Iraq is militarily and economically the weakest country in the region, but it could be down the road, and in his hands, it would be likely, even without the US and UK to supply him.

· Institute professor at the department of linguistics and philosophy, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Margaret Drabble
Weapons inspections must be part of the answer, and they seem to be having consider able effect. It is true that they are backed up by the threat of force, but this must come from a united United Nations, not from the United States, which is recklessly and deliberately doing its best to undermine the UN's authority.

The unilateral threat of force from the US is arousing global hatred and untold potential violence, with implications far beyond the present situation, and it is putting us all at risk. I see no justification for declaring war on Iraq. The human cost of sanctions is high but less incalculable than the human cost of war. We are told that Saddam is uniquely evil, and his regime uniquely wicked, as though this would justify pre-emptive action against him. But he is also 65 years old and frightened and he and his regime will not live for ever. Nobody expected the Berlin Wall to fall, but it did. And so will Saddam fall. His grip on power must by now be tenuous. The fewer innocent lives he takes with him, the better.

Michael Atiyah
The people of Iraq should be saved from war, from sanctions and from Saddam Hussein - in that order. By all means let the UN keep its inspectors there, increasing them if necessary, and widening their scope to include humanitarian objectives. At the same time, we should lift sanctions on all except the most obviously dangerous materials. This would show that the outside world was genuinely interested in helping the Iraqi people. With the relaxation of tension, with outside aid and with a firm UN presence in Iraq there would be the prospect of internal liberalisation and change, leading in due course to a peaceful change of regime.

Meanwhile relations with the Arab and Muslim worlds would be transformed by a fair settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli problem. All this should be the real UN objective, and it would carry the full force of undivided world opinion.

I am glad that Tony Blair, realising the unconvincing nature of the threat posed by Iraq, has shifted to the high moral ground. I, too, am all in favour of helping the Iraqi people but I would prefer not to kill them first.

· Leading mathematician and former president of the Royal Society

Woody Harrelson
There is no question that Saddam Hussein is a brutal, evil, genocidal tyrant who has pursued weapons of mass destruction and probably lies awake at night dreaming of his own little stockpile and eventual world domination, starting with the Middle East.

The US and British governments understand what weapons of mass destruction he has procured because they sold them to him. They understand that he is the most brutal kind of terrorist - because they created him.

So what should we do?

Stop the sanctions. If we believe in human life, then let the Iraqi civilians have the medicines and things they need to survive. Don't let 5,000 children die per month and add to the 500,000 that have already lost their lives because of the sanctions that have been in place since the Gulf war.

Let the inspections continue. The UN was designed to deal with situations just like these. Let them do their job. What's the hurry? This mad march to war is because the Bush oiligarchy doesn't want to take the time to potentially discover that there are no weapons of mass destruction. No matter what Iraqi's level of compliance, no matter if the UN is with them or not, no matter how many millions take to the streets, they want war.

And most of all, we need to sift through the fear-based media and distinguish between propaganda and fact. Propaganda: this is a war on terrorism. Fact: this is a war for oil. Propaganda: George W Bush declares: "Of course, we prefer a peaceful solution." Fact: 77,000 body bags were just ordered by the Pentagon for potential American "casualties".

Ken Livingstone
All the evidence is that the weapons inspection regime in Iraq is working. After three months the inspectors have found no significant evidence indicating that Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction capable of threatening its neighbours and that would justify war. The inspections should continue to ensure this.

Implementation of UN resolutions must be maintained for Iraq and be extended to other countries in the region. This is particularly the case for Israel, which is in violation of UN resolutions to withdraw from the occupied territories. Selective, rather than general, enforcement of UN resolutions will create permanent instability in the region with global consequences.

Terry Eagleton
We must take seriously the idea that for humanitarian issues we must do this, and the left needs to take into account the fact that if the second UN resolution goes through they will lose a lot of support. However, those on the other side must face questions from us about why we didn't do this five years ago? Why are we clinging to the coat tails of the States when they have never made the humanitarian reasons a priority for war.

Questions such as these assume that there is an answer, that there is black and there is white but there is sometimes a balance of evils. I believe that there are some moral situations that do not have a straightforward answer and I don't have a pat answer for this or any other moral issue.

I am against war because, while the humanitarian argument is strong, the long-term backlash is not a price I am prepared to pay.

I believe the process of containment has worked fine for 12 years and while the things we can do might be inadequate there are options. Giving the weapons inspectors more time and more power is a start; contain and supervise him while we wait for a bullet to get rid of him.

Truth and Freedom

Shake the earth with bombs;
Spill the blood of the evil doers in the world.
Protect the innocent;
Save the citizens from the torture they have endured.
Seek the truth;
Then maybe you will support the U.S. Government for the war?

Women and children gassed;
You’re not human if you don’t find that appalling.
Denounce the Regime;
Death will be almost certain, maybe a bullet through your head.
Only the cruel and the weak won't fight for what is justified;
Do you choose to ignore?

Brave men die for freedom;
That is why you’re able to protest on our streets you congest.
Living in fear;
Before the bombs, silence and pain was nothing new in their land.
Trapped in Saddam’s hell;
Would you want to breathe the air of death and sorrow?

Hear the lies within;
Then see the photo’s of the executions of women and children.
Son of Saddam;
The serial rapist who was/or is to succeed his father.
A country of blood;
Is he the anti Christ or another terrorist of tomorrow?

Think of the people;
Who have suffered under a killing machine Dictator!
A future of murder;
Thirty thousand Iraqi’s or so put to sleep forever after the gulf war.
Truth is everywhere;
So how can you not support the end of a brutal ruler I say?

Humanity is great;
We know it and we know the people who don’t know it.
Evil is to look away;
Passion and kindness is to die for what is right.
Insanity was Hitler;
What would the world be like today if we walked away?