Damn! BRAVO NEW YORK!

[lonestarnot]

:applause: :patriot: :applause: :applause: :patriot: :applause::applause: :patriot: :applause:
:
ACTION ALERT * UNITED FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE
http://www.unitedforpeace.org | 212-868-5545
To subscribe, visit http://www.unitedforpeace.org/email
============================================

Please forward as widely as possible!

On Tuesday, Sept. 19, President Bush will be speaking at the United Nations as part of an election-year public-relations push on his disastrous Iraq War.

The New York City Police Department has refused to grant a permit to United for Peace and Justice to march anywhere near the United Nations. Based on feedback from our member groups and supporters (http://www.unitedforpeace.org/article.php?id=3383), we have come to a decision: We are marching anyway. Permit or no permit, we will stand up against this immoral war and for our right to dissent.

While the Bush Administration has pursued its belligerent policy of preemptive war abroad, attacking a country that posed no danger to us, our Constitutional rights have been steadily eroded here at home, with peaceful protesters treated as security threats. In New York City, the NYPD and other agencies have systematically declared one location after another off-limits to protest -- no rallies in most of Central Park, no marches on Fifth Avenue, no pickets in Times Square, and so on endlessly.

We know there are serious security issues to consider when the president and other heads of state are in town. But those needs must be balanced against protecting the right to assemble, the right to protest, and the right to dissent. The NYPD said no to every alternative we put on the table and simply refused to give us a permit for a reasonable location for our march next Tuesday.

Enough is enough. We are marching -- marching to demand that the troops come home now, and to assert our right to peaceful protest. Marching without a permit amounts to nonviolent civil disobedience, and those of us who participate in the march on Tuesday will place ourselves at risk of arrest.

We also know and respect the fact that many people cannot participate in an activity that does not have a permit. And so we are seeking a permit for a rally starting at 8:30 a.m. in Herald Square, one of the busiest locations in Manhattan. This will enable anyone who wishes to protest the war and the restriction of our civil liberties to join us without risking arrest.

*******************************************************************************

The NYPD is refusing to allow us to hold a peace march anywhere near the United Nations on Tuesday, Sept. 19, when President Bush will be speaking. We are marching anyway, standing up against this war and for our right to dissent.

We need your support!

* If you can participate in this peaceful civil disobedience action, call our office at 212-868-5545 so we can give you information about nonviolence trainings.

* We are also seeking a permit for a legal rally in Herald Square on Tuesday morning, which everyone can participate in without risking arrest. Check our website at www.unitedforpeace.org for details and plan to join us if you possibly can!

* Forward this message far and wide.

* We need volunteers! If you are in the NYC area, and can spare a few hours helping us spread the word this weekend, please call 212-868-5545 and ask for Nia.

* Support our work to end the war and defend the right to protest by making a financial donation to UFPJ: http://www.unitedforpeace.org/donate

*******************************************************************************

There are important details to work out, but this we know for certain: we will not be silenced, we will call for an immediate end to the war in Iraq, and we will be on the streets of New York City on Tuesday, September 19th!

WE NEED YOUR HELP:
1) Please share this email message as widely as possible. Help make sure that everyone knows about the rally and march on Sept. 19th and the denial of our request for a march permit.

2) Especially if you are in the NYC area, make plans now to join us next Tuesday morning. If you would like to participate in the march, please take a moment to call our office at 212-868-5545 so we can give you information about nonviolence trainings. We would rather take this risk than allow our rights to be undermined.

3) Check the UFPJ website (www.unitedforpeace.org) for updates on the details for Sept. 19th, including the exact time and location of the rally and the plans for the march. If you are looking for or would like to offer a ride to NYC, please visit our ride board: http://www.unitedforpeace.org/transport

4) And, of course, all of this work takes money. Whether or not you are able to participate in person on Tuesday, you can show your support by making a financial donation today! Make an online contribution (http://www.unitedforpeace.org/donate), call our office at 212-868-5545 to make a credit card donation over the phone, or send a check or money order to UFPJ, P.O. Box 607, Times Square Station, NY, NY 10108.

COMING UP: DECLARATION OF PEACE
Just two days after Bush speaks at the United Nations, on Thursday, September 21, the Declaration of Peace campaign (http://www.declarationofpeace.org) will kick off with candlelight vigils around the country and a nonviolent civil disobedience action in Washington, D.C. There will be a wide array of powerful actions for peace all around the country throughout the entire following week.

Check the Declaration of Peace website (http://www.declarationofpeace.org) to find out about events in your area. If you are planning an activity that is not yet listed, please put it on the calendar now. And we urge those of you who can to join the actions in Washington, DC, on Sept. 26th or Sept. 27th.

============================================

Help us continue to do this critical work: Make a donation to UFPJ today -- http://www.unitedforpeace.org/donate

ACTION ALERT * UNITED FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE
http://www.unitedforpeace.org | 212-868-5545
To subscribe, visit http://www.unitedforpeace.org/email

[Nikki Stone 1]

1. Wonder if the Air Force remarks about using microwaves on protesters

is related to this.

[verse18]

2. Probably.

Anyone protesting on that day better have plenty of :tinfoilhat: for protection.

[lonestarnot]

3. heh heh heh.

We can all take the doors off our microwaves and donate them!

[Nikki Stone 1]

6. I don't think the timing is accidental

This must be some important conference

[Greeby]

26. Actually, given what microwaves do to tin foil

That's the worst thing you could do

[Leopolds Ghost]

53. That's what's so Diabolical about it, don't you see??

They figured out how to combat our :tinfoilhat:

And they barely broke a sweat!

I'm so burnt out -- every time we evolve, they adapt! :evilfrown:

So, we need a new icon... what are they using to deflect microwaves?

Gold leaf? :-)

[eppur_se_muova]

84. Possible protection against microwaves: RETROREFLECTORS

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retroreflector

[Red Right and BLUE]

4. If I were there I'd so be in.

BRAVO NEW YORK!

[Robbien]

5. You go NY! The best I can do is sign the petition

http://www.declarationofpeace.org/sign-the-declaration-of-peace

and throw a little bit of cash your way.

You speak for me.

:thumbsup:

[readmoreoften]

7. Can't go. Already facing a l'il jail myself for civil disobedience in NYC.

Good luck to those who do, though! You'll be fine even if you get arrested. The judges in NYC are pretty damn progressive.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

8. I plan on going.

Hell, I've already been arrested at a protest, so I'm not really concerned about that.

[lonestarnot]

9. Damn I wish I could go!

[Raffi Ella]

83. oh man ME TOO!

BRAVO New Yorkers.BRAVO!!

[druidity33]

11. be well...

wish i could be there...

K&R!!!

[ninkasi]

10. The irony of this

While our unelected president speaks to the U.N., arguing that it's absolutely critical to allow us to continue committing carnage in Iraq, thereby bringing democracy to that country, our own government denies us the right to exercise one of the most cherished rights of democracy, peaceful assembly and dissent. If they understood the concept of irony, they might appreciate how deranged they look to the rest of the world. What a sad thing to happen to the form of government our Founding Fathers bequeathed us.

[lonestarnot]

21. Unless we do something, that form of Democracy will only be found in

print.

[DireStrike]

12. Dammit! Tuesday?!

Hmm... well I might be able to make it out for like 5 minutes before I have to turn around and go to school...

I can't afford to miss classes now...

[Fredda Weinberg]

13. I don't see the consortium of groups we had last time and

there's no reason not to get a police permit.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

14. The reason for not having a permit is because the police don't

want to give them one.

[Fredda Weinberg]

16. Nonsense. Cops don't have that discretion in NYC. Been there

done that. United for Peace & Justice doesn't play well with others.

[DireStrike]

17. Yeah, the 2004 protest was just SOOO much of a problem

I can see the cops wanting to stop a march like that, what with all the obedience and parents bringing their babies.

[Fredda Weinberg]

19. There were demonstrations in '04, just not on the great lawn

Which was looking great last time I was there. As I noted, the cops don't have discretion to ban marches - you negotiate and get one.

The last time I checked we were not anarchists and it does not serve our cause to flout the law. Civil disobedience in one thing, but protesting a visit by the questionably legitimate regime's leader is compounding the disruption.

I was in the street April 29, but groups like NOW were participating and had a proper permit to march down Broadway. This one's asking for trouble.

[DireStrike]

20. How do you know that the cops didn't just refuse?

[Fredda Weinberg]

28. Police can't refuse - this has been to court

The only issue is where - but to me, the issue is why march without a proper permit? It's asking for trouble.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

31. Did you approve of the emergency convergence on Times Square

with march to Washington Square Park the night we invaded Baghdad? That didn't have a permit.

[Fredda Weinberg]

33. I approved of all the candlelight vigils n/t

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

39. I'm talking about the night when 10000s of people met in Times Square

and marched to Washington Square Park peacefully, but without a protest.

Or how about the February 15, 2003 march? That didn't have a permit and it also had several hundred thousand people. The only violence I saw (and filmed) came from the NYPD.

[Fredda Weinberg]

40. As I said, I have no problem with spontaneous groups, like

the monthly cycle rides.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

45. February 15th was anything but spontaneous.

It was a worldwide day of protest involving millions of people. The convergence was planned for months. It wasn't a secret that it be happening at 5pm the day the war started. It was spontaneous in the fact that we didn't know the exact date, but it was well-planned.

Both were from this same organization, very large and without permits. If anything, this is going to be a smaller more manageble event.

[Cha]

49. I was at the Feb 15, 2003, NYC,

Protest and No Violence where I was, either.

What a DAY!

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

51. Yes, that day was amazing.

I saw some violence, but it was from the police. The protesters were all very peaceful for a bunch of "anarchists" huh?

[lonestarnot]

23. You sound like a party pooper.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

24. Yes, we can protest, but only if the gov't says it's okay and only in the

free-speech zones. By having the march, even if they do not have a permit, it is an exercise in civil disobedience. Standing in a free-speech zone is not disobedience and if flouting the law makes me an anarchist, than so be it. I'm in good company with such "anarchists" as MLK & Gandhi.

http://www.unitedforpeace.org/article.php?id=3377

...Yesterday we met with the New York Police Department, who informed us they will not allow any marches near the United Nations that day. In fact, they said they would not allow any marches east of Park Avenue, south of 52nd Street, or north of the mid 30s.

The police are invoking "security concerns" to justify shunting us so far away from the site of Bush's speech that we might as well be in another borough. We wouldn't just be out of earshot and out of visual range -- we'd be many long blocks away. Is this what democracy looks like?

We were completely willing to discuss a range of reasonable march routes, but the NYPD refused. Their only proposals were for marches far from the UN or a slot for a short rally at Dag Hammarskjold Plaza, among at least eight other organizations working on an array of issues.

This is another in a long line of actions by the New York City Police Department -- and the federal government -- that undermine our right to dissent. Time and time again, United for Peace and Justice has had to fight to exercise our basic right to peaceful protest. They tried to stop us from rallying in the lead-up to the Iraq War. They tried to sideline our protest against the Republican National Convention to the sun-baked West Side Highway...

Sorry, but I still believe that America is a free speech zone, not just America east of Park Ave, south of 52nd or north of the mid 30s.

[lonestarnot]

25. Absodamnlutely! Anything else is has a puke factor of 10!

[Fredda Weinberg]

27. If you live here, you accept civilized behavior every day

So, UP&J could have a lawful march but chooses to fight in the street instead of the courtroom? I would hope DUers had more sense.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

30. It appears that the city is trying to coral them out of site of the Shrub.

So it looks like they tried to fight in the courtroom and it didn't work, so now it's going to the streets. Personally, I would hope that DUers would have the sense to not be restricted to invisible free speech zones.

[Fredda Weinberg]

32. We won in the courtroom, but UP&J won't accept the procedure

It's their own statement - they didn't get the site they wanted, so they'll violate the perimeter the cops will set around the UN.

[Leopolds Ghost]

57. How would you feel if mods started moving your posts to separate forum

because they didn't like what you have to say?

Imagine DU instituted a new policy of banishing posts to the "Free Speech Forum" where anything is allowed (within the existing DU limits, of course, plus a variety of additional rules.) The determination of which posts to lock and re-open in the Free Speech "dungeon" would be based on whether the moderators feel you are expressing a "disruptive opinion" that is likely to cause controversy and argument.

How would you feel? Would you say, like many Americans, "I don't have a problem with it because I express myself in ways that do not engender hostility. This is DU/America. If you don't like it, leave?"

[lonestarnot]

61. There is not time for court every damn time they want to supress

or socially control a protest.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

62. The site they were given would have hidden their protest from the one

being protested. It loses a bit of the effect along the way.

Civil disobedience is violating the law (in this case the perimeter) in order to do what's right. It's not anarchy no matter how many times you repeat that to yourself.

[Leopolds Ghost]

55. Civilized behavior like the silent acquiescence to Bush's war?

not to mention other wars in the Middle East?

Like the treatment of the homeless and pushing out of the poor to the suburbs on the grounds that New York is such a great place to live, that only the rich can live there, and that's only possible if we don't go back to the BAD OLD DAYS of graffiti on the subway?

How long have you lived in New York that you "expect civilized behavior every day" -- moreso than some old gritty city?

Fair enough, it's your city (now -- all the unruly disobedient types have been forced to move to the suburbs and drive to work on Middle East gasoline privided courtesy of the government Giuliani supports.)

Wasn't it Emerson who said, in "On Civil Disobedience" that if we are silent and obedient when the government does wrong, then we implicitly support the government's actions?

[Leopolds Ghost]

54. I agree with you America is a Free Speech Zone EXCEPT

east of Park Avenue. I will not go that far.

There are some lengths to which I will not go in my thinking. ;-)

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

58. Why, of course! After all, "there ought to be limits to freedom."

Truer words were never spoken by that patriot G.W. Bush

[shadowknows69]

36. Trouble gets noticed

n/t

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

38. The best publicity for a peaceful protest is arrests with handcuffs...

especially if you have the media there.

[Leopolds Ghost]

50. Inigo Montoya says: "these words... do not mean what you think they mean."

"Civil Disobedience" does not mean "Civil Obedience" which you seem to be in favor of.

There were demonstrations in '04, just not on the great lawn -- Which was looking great last time I was there.

Meaning you are more concerned about the quality of the grass? If you feel that way, please don't come to DC. We have something called "the Mall" and I'd hate to see it run like Central Park.

As I noted, the cops don't have discretion to ban marches - you negotiate and get one.

If they don't have discretion, no negotiation is needed. It is a "matter of right"

The last time I checked we were not anarchists

You don't have to be an anarchist to believe in civil disobedience. Hell, you don't have to be an anarchist to agree with our founding fathers (and with Gandhi, and Martin Luther King) that oppressive laws which violate our INALIENABLE human rights -- SHOULD NOT BE OBEYED.

(Agent Mike -- I am paraphrasing Thomas Jefferson, just so you know. I take no position on the issue, myself.)

and it does not serve our cause to flout the law.

Lord knows, if we disobey immoral and unconstitutional laws we will be "just like them" right?

Civil disobedience in one thing,

Civil disobedience, by definition, is flouting the law. Read "On Civil Disobedience" by -- Emerson, I think?

but protesting a visit by the questionably legitimate regime's leader is compounding the disruption.

To traffic, you mean.

According to the Washington Post, that's why our freedoms are fewer than they were in pre-modern times. Us enlightened people have to keep the cars moving and the trains running on time. Anything that disrupts the movement of cars is an unacceptable disruption, so by definition no protest can become disruptive or significant enough to affect US policy. It has to be tightly regulated to avoid TRAFFIC disruption and thereby ensure that the pace of life in the city is maintained, with no unhealthily large concentrations of disruptive individuals. That is the policy framework we're protesting, IMHO. A protest of such a policy framework is necessarily civil disobedience.

I was in the street April 29, but groups like NOW were participating and had a proper permit to march down Broadway. This one's asking for trouble.

Good to know you had an excuse for marching with those UFPJ people.

My attitude when it comes to UFPJ engaging in C.D. is "what took you so long?"

Dems spend all this time yelling about "STOP PANDERING TO THE RIGHT-WING INDEPENDENTS -- THEY WON'T VOTE FOR YOU ANYWAY!!!" Same thing applies here. Anyone who would restrict freedom of assembly in any way is not going to be a steadfast ally on the war or anything else.

The constitution does NOT say "the formation of well-ordered protest marches being essential to the well being of the state, the right to peaceable assembly shall be maintained." It does not qualify the right in any way.

That's because it's an INALIENABLE right which predates the constitution. Folks who would deprive us of inalienable rights because "this is not 1776 -- this is a modern day city we're talking about" -- well, I will just say no more.

[truedelphi]

69. Look this is still the USA and we have to protest

Regrdless of permits issued or not

But sometimes I wonder about the sense of these large scale marches - I mean,
what if we planned a massive protest day but split up - some protesters camp out at one news agency say NBC while others take on CNN and CBS and ABC

Just marching around the streets when we really need to take the media back

When the Phillipines finally returned to the rightful owners (ie the people) the protesters went to the media outlets and took over those most important places

[lonestarnot]

22. UPJ is sick of being corralled into a free speech zone like chickens in a

coop. Nonsense to "doesn't play well with others!"

[Fredda Weinberg]

29. I've exercised my free speech rights demonstrating outside

hotels where * raised $$$. Votermarch got proper permits and we made our point peacefully. Anarchism doesn't serve our cause.

[lonestarnot]

34. anarchism allegations are just simply bullshit.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

37. I'm sorry but you need to learn what civil disobedience & anarchism are.

They are definitely not the same thing, no matter how much you say they are. This march is civil disobedience and civil disobedience can be peaceful. I've trained in and have participated in non-violent civil disobedience and I have the arrest record to show it.

Anarchism is a political system, just like democracy and socialism are. This is just some basic info, but it's really stuff activists should be aware of. There's lots of info out there for you to find.

Civil Disobedience
Civil disobedience encompasses the active refusal to obey certain laws, demands and commands of a government or of an occupying power without resorting to physical violence. Civil disobedience has been used in nonviolent resistance movements in India (Gandhi's social welfare campaigns and campaigns to speed up independence from the United Kingdom), in South Africa in the fight against apartheid, in the American Civil Rights Movement in the fight against segregation and disfranchisement, and in Europe, for example in the Scandinavian resistance to Nazi occupation.
<snip>

Civil disobedience in the United States

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., a leader of the US civil rights movement in the United States in the 1960s also adopted civil disobedience techniques, and antiwar activists both during and after the Vietnam War have done likewise. Since the 1970s, pro-life or anti-abortion groups have practiced civil disobedience against the U.S. government over the issue of legalized abortion. More recently, in the 2000s, people such as Cindy Sheehan have used civil disobedience to protest the war on Iraq.
<snip>

Theories and techniques of civil disobedience

In seeking an active form of civil disobedience, one may choose to deliberately break certain laws, such as by forming a peaceful blockade or occupying a facility illegally. Protesters practice this non-violent form of civil disorder with the expectation that they will be arrested, or even attacked or beaten by the authorities. Protesters often undergo training in advance on how to react to arrest or to attack, so that they will do so in a manner that quietly or limply resists without threatening the authorities.

For example, Mahatma Gandhi outlined the following rules:

1. A civil resister (or satyagrahi) will harbour no anger.
2. He will suffer the anger of the opponent.
3. In so doing he will put up with assaults from the opponent, never retaliate; but he will not submit, out of fear of punishment or the like, to any order given in anger.
4. When any person in authority seeks to arrest a civil resister, he will voluntarily submit to the arrest, and he will not resist the attachment or removal of his own property, if any, when it is sought to be confiscated by authorities.
5. If a civil resister has any property in his possession as a trustee, he will refuse to surrender it, even though in defending it he might lose his life. He will, however, never retaliate.
6. Retaliation includes swearing and cursing.
7. Therefore a civil resister will never insult his opponent, and therefore also not take part in many of the newly coined cries which are contrary to the spirit of ahimsa.
8. A civil resister will not salute the Union Jack, nor will he insult it or officials, English or Indian.
9. In the course of the struggle if anyone insults an official or commits an assault upon him, a civil resister will protect such official or officials from the insult or attack even at the risk of his life.

Gandhi distinguished between his idea of satyagraha and the passive resistance of the west.
<snip>

Anarchism
Anarchism is the name of a political philosophy or to group of doctrines and attitudes that are centered on rejection of government, or the state, as harmful and unnecessary and support its elimination.<1>The term "anarchism" is derived from the Greek αναρχία ("without archons" or "without rulers"). Thus "anarchism," in its most general semantic meaning, is the belief that all forms of rulership are undesirable and should be abolished. The rise of anarchism as a cohesive philosophical movement in the 19th century, with its notion of freedom as being based upon political, economic, and social equality, was a reaction to the rise of bureaucratic nation states and large-scale industrial capitalism.<2>

On its own anarchism does not provide a world view beyond the idea that imposed authority is undesirable and unnecessary. There are a variety of types of anarchism which all emphasize their points of difference.<3> There are dramatic differences on economic arrangements, ranging from advocates of common ownership and distribution according to need, to supporters of private property and free market competition.<4>
<snip>
Sources:
1. Anarchism. Encyclopædia Britannica. 2006. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service. 29 August 2006 <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9117285>. Anarchism is "a cluster of doctrines and attitudes centred on the belief that government is both harmful and unnecessary."
* Anarchism. The Shorter Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2005. P. 14 "Anarchism is the view that a society without the state, or government, is both possible and desirable."
2. "Anarchism arose out of the ideological ferment of the French Revolution and in reaction to both the European bureaucratic nation-state and the advent of large-scale industrial capitalism." "Anarchism," Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia 2006 (UK version) http://uk.encarta.msn.com © 1997-2006 Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved.
3. Kropotkine, Petr Alekseevich. Anarchism: A Collection of Revolutionary Writings, Courier Dover Publications, 2002, p.5
4. Treatments in major tertiary sources include:
* Anarchism, Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia 2006 (UK version) http://uk.encarta.msn.com © 1997-2006 Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved
* Anarchism. Britannica Student Encyclopedia. 2006. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service. 10 September. 2006 <http://www.britannica.com/ebi/article-9272850>.
* Anarchism, The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition 2006, Columbia University Press.

[Fredda Weinberg]

41. You're making the cops you're opponent. Preach all you want

but you're advocating anarchy, not civil disobedience.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

44. Sorry you insist on thinking about it that way, but I can't agree with you

and neither would people knowledgable about civil disobedience.

[lonestarnot]

46. Fredda you are just full of it, to be polite, and I'm not.

polite most of the time.

[personman]

63. Then civil disobediance doesn't exist to you...

or what we call civil disobediance, you call anarchy.

Can you give an example of civil disobediance that IS NOT anarchy to you?

Civil disobediance requires breaking the law, and breaking the law makes law enforcement your opponent.

[Fredda Weinberg]

88. Our African American politicians are regularly arrested

I can't count the times I've seen Charlie Rangel escorted away, Charles Barron - I don't think less of them for taking a principled stand.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

92. So basically...

civil disobedience from NYC's black politicians is a "principled stand," but civil disobedience from an organization you simply don't like for some reason is "anarchy."

Wow. That makes no real sense, but I wasn't really expecting it to.

[readmoreoften]

68. Apparently you've never been involved in a civil disobedience.

people involved in a CD often tell the police beforehand that they are going to violate a rule that they feel is unjust or unfair. They often submit their paperwork and documentation beforehand to expedite their arrest and release from jail. There is nothing "anarchic" about it.

[Fredda Weinberg]

87. We have civil disobedience all the time. This was deliberate

confrontation. As you can see, the authorities are capable of responding in a positive manner.

[readmoreoften]

90. In activist terminology, a CD is pretty much an event where you get...

arrested. If you're not getting arrested then you're not disobeying any laws hence not being disobedient. Normal protests are not "civil disobedience", but simple "speaking out." How can you say that you are involved in CDs but think that disobeying a law is "anarchy"? Such a statement would be another type of CD: cognitive dissonance.

[Leopolds Ghost]

52. Excellent post, thanks! (n/t)

[LostinVA]

59. I would like to be an Anarchist, but I don't own anything black

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

60. I work backstage, so I have a bunch of black clothes.

Maybe you could borrow some?

[LostinVA]

72. That would be cool -- black makes you look thinner, too

Although I DO have a cream-colored cat -- that might not work out too well...

[Leopolds Ghost]

71. You wouldn't fit in New york then, anyhow. ;-)

Not even a little black dress (or black turtleneck for men)? The cops
should arrest you for causing a disruption next time you stroll about
in Central Park after Labor Day, with your bright whites.

Abusing your freedom to violate fashion rules. :evilgrin:

I'll let the previous poster comment on the actual legality of not
wearing black in New York. I'm assuming she might not wear red OR
black, however. Even in New York it's possible to be mistaken for
an anarchist!

[LostinVA]

73. I have alot of grey stuff... make I can be a tepid Anarchist?

[Goldensilence]

81. haha

that one made me spit out my water...thanks...but good points.

[Leopolds Ghost]

89. Only if it contains gold threads to protect you from

Directed Energy Weapons.

Advantage: stylish, you can pretend it's not a political statement.

Disadvantage: Nobody's heard of anarcho-populists in the William
Jennings Bryan mode, but they would not approve of anti-authoritarians,
even tepid ones, wearing gold leaf. "You shall not crucify the nation
on a cross of gold!"

[fudge stripe cookays]

77. Well, see...

Lieberman has become a non-issue for the moment, so Fredda now needs to call the rest of us anarchists to feel important, instead of chiding us for our treatment of poor Joementum.

[Junkdrawer]

76. HERE'S UPJ's STATEMENT ON NYPD NEGOTIATIONS:

In a meeting on Tuesday, Sept. 12th, to discuss the details of a protest against President Bush when he addresses the UN General Assembly on Sept. 19th, the NYC Police Department stunned the representatives of United for Peace and Justice when they said there would be NO marches allowed anywhere near the UN that day.

On August 29th UFPJ hand-delivered a permit request to march on a route that would go from Herald Square at 6th Ave. and 34th Street to the Dag Hammarskjold Plaza, a park across the street from the UN.

Instead of working out details, the police announced that "security concerns" related to the president and other heads of state being in NYC would be their primary responsibility on Sept. 19th, and therefore they would not be allowing any marches in the general vicinity of the UN. UFPJ put forth several proposals for how the police concerns could be met without trampling on the right to peacefully protest, but all were rejected.

United for Peace and Justice is determined to have the strongest possible antiwar demonstration on the streets of NYC on September 19th while Bush speaks at the UN. As we review options and decide how to proceed, we are continuing to call on people to turn out in large numbers next Tuesday, and wherever George Bush shows up!

http://www.unitedforpeace.org/article.php?id=3378

[me b zola]

15. I wish that I could be there!

I'll be damned if I'll let this bastards tell me that I don't have the right to protest!

United for Peace And Justice:yourock:

[Catchawave]

18. Wish I could be there too !

:grouphug:

[shadowknows69]

35. If anyone is going from Upstate and want a traveling companion

let me know.

[Leopolds Ghost]

42. How can one protest loss of civil liberties yet refuse to risk arrest?

I am speaking of the Herald Square notion.

Enough is enough. We are marching -- marching to demand that the troops come home now, and to
assert our right to peaceful protest. Marching without a permit amounts to nonviolent civil disobedience,
and those of us who participate in the march on Tuesday will place ourselves at risk of arrest.

We also know and respect the fact that many people cannot participate in an activity that does not have
a permit. And so we are seeking a permit for a rally starting at 8:30 a.m. in Herald Square, one of the
busiest locations in Manhattan. This will enable anyone who wishes to protest the war and the restriction
of our civil liberties to join us without risking arrest.

How can you protest loss of civil liberties yet refuse to risk arrest?

Isn't that like supermodels doing a hunger strike to protest their exclusion from an Italian fashion runway for being too thin?

(That is a Jay Leno joke, BTW.)

In other words, the loss of civil liberties they are protesting up in NYC is the legality of assembly itself. Why do they assume anyone who would want to attend a UFPJ protest would be so deluded as to declare:

"I have the right not to be put at risk of arrest or else I will not join the assembly to protest the loss of our civil liberties such as freedom of assembly!"

Put it another way, we recently had a thread congratulating Jay Rockefeller for his unwillingness to sign a bill approving illegal wiretaps "UNLESS they are shown to be both effective and legal."

Isn't this the same thing? I.e. many Americans are unwilling to engage in civil disobedience to protest the loss of their freedom of assembly unless someone can prove to them that it's not illegal?

I suspect nobody who actually wants to attend the UFPJ protest would
think that way. They know they are at risk of arrest by definition,
just like the people who marched with M.L. King.

Should we necessarily be cheering UFPJ for being 3, 7, or 40 years
late to the civil disobedience party?

I mean, welcome to the party, it's a good thing -- if they really
intend to do civil disobedience and not just bluff their way to a
compromise with the police department.

Civil disobedience didn't suddenly become acceptable (nay, essential)
merely because the leadership of NYC UFPJ are "finally fed up". UFPJ
and their forebears spent the last 3-7 years trying to make up for the
loss of their own ability to protest. Ultimately, that doesn't work.

And accommodating, nay enforcing restrictions on the effectiveness of their protest by trying to make sure it wasn't "too disruptive" to alienate the center-left. I was at the big UFPJ demonstration in NY before the war began, and again at the RNC, and I have never seen such quiet, "well-behaved" throngs of people going thru the motions while cops pushed and shoved us around. I even ran into folks who were rallying people for the 2002 protest who said stuff like "This isn't going to stop the war from happening, but if we have this many people now, just think of how many people are going to "wake up" when the body bags start coming home!!" I know UFPJ means well, but... totally passive approach never stopped a war. At least follow Gandhi's and Martin Luther King's lead and know the difference between civil disobedience and quiet dissent.

(BTW, That's 3-7 years depending on if you'recounting from the days of the WTO protests, when perceptive people were already reading about candidate Bush's war plans; or the actual start of the Iraq war;
or, if you prefer, 50 years after the start of civil rights demonstrations in the 1960s and UFPJ has finally "had enough" with the cops and is willing to play hardball.)

Hey, if people can criticise Kerry for being late to the party...

[Jcrowley]

66. Knowledgeable

Excellent post

See ya' there

K&R

[wiley]

43. Two Things

I guess Bloomberg is really full of shit, or the SS has the power to even overrule him.

The last round of civil disobedience in NYC during the RNC was an ugly demonstration of police suppression of the basic rights of any American. If you're going to get clubbed in the head, pushed down stairs, kicked by a horse, or just scooped up and put in a filthy holding cell for 48 hours without water, food or representation for just walking past an act of civil disobedience, why even pretend we have the right to freedom of speech or to assemble?

[lonestarnot]

47. exdamnactly!

[AntiFascist]

48. Done n/t

[pbartch]

56. I wish I could march too!!! Any March taking place in OREGON???

WE NEED TO MARCH!!

[mtnsnake]

64. This is great news!

:toast:

[texpatriot2004]

65. Peace and Freedom New York nm

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

67. I've set up an *OFFICIAL* DU Check-in Thread in the NY forum

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=169&topic_id=6663&mesg_id=6663

Any attending DUers please see that thread, so we can organize.

[Vidar]

70. Applauding the New York marchers.

[The Count]

74. Bravo., schmravo. Had they put this BEFORE the primaries, we might have

had an anti-war candidate for senate. Or at least gave him some respectable numbers so they wouldn't all laugh at us for letting Hillary off the hook.
I am tired of seing people in the streets who don't bother to vote. Sorry, I went to all their marches - but no more.

[bdamomma]

75. I hope those protestors/demonstrators kick ass

for anyone who goes, YELL OUT LOUD, THIS IS WHAT DEMOCRACY LOOKS LIKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[jokerman93]

78. IF NOT NOW, WHEN? n/t

[The Backlash Cometh]

79. Watch out they don't use those new mob control weapons on you.

[Surya Gayatri]

80. Go New Yawkers,

you are absolutely awesome. True Big Apple guts in the face of adversity.

Can't be there in the flesh, but will be there in spirit. SG


:yourock: :yourock: :yourock:

edit: typo

[Generic Other]

82. Go New York City

Show Bush what Democracy looks like!!

:applause:

[katinmn]

85. The NYPD reversed its decision today.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2512918

[lonestarnot]

86. They knew the people were comin' Kat! WOOOODAMNWHOOO!

RIGHT ON PEOPLE YOU DID IT! I'M SENDING THIS OUT TO ALL OF YOU PEACE ON EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU AND YOUR FAMILIES! THIS IS THE PEOPLE'S USA AND DON'T YOU BUSHITLER'S FORGET IT!

[Jack Rabbit]

91. !!

Liberty Leading the People (1830) by Eugène Delacroix
From the website of the University of Southern California