After their press conference, will the congressmen and other leaders go to the federal plaza to join community residents in protesting police brutality in Chicago?

How about the commericial relationship between the Chicago Police Dept. and war profiteer Lockheed-Martin to develop the counter-insurgency surveillance and data base technology now being deployed the USMC in Iraq?

www.lockheedmartin.com/news/press_releases/2006/LOCKHEEDMARTINAPPLIESINNOVATIVESURV.html

Or will our anti-war City Council members call for an public investigation of the Chicago Police Department's special operations / SWAT training ties to Blackwater?

www.uslaboragainstwar.org/article.php

Why stop there?

Why not insist they all call for an immediate transition to full communism everywhere, all around the globe? That'll really expose the liberal reformists!

Good grief...we have Ra Chaka speaking on police brutality and Burge at the rally, and I'm sure Jan will mention her new bill curbing Blackwater, and so on...

And thus far none of 'terrible three' are interested in showing up, as predicted, even though we've now got the Richardson and Ron Paul people setting up tables at the rally.

But your disdain here continues to reveal the problem, doesn't it?

Since when is demanding a little (just a little) accountability about peace and justice issues right here at home demanding "an immediate transition to full communism everywhere"?!

Getting a little unhinged here, Carl, aren't we? Or just sick of defending the indefensible? It's all very well to call the Republicans hypocrites when they talk about "spreading freedom," but you lose all credibility when you fail to treat as scathingly the hypocrisy among your allies like O'bomb'em, et al.

You still have given no good reasons, aside from rationalizations, why Durbin, Daley and Obama were invited in the first place, let alone why any of the confirmed speakers in the Chicago area congressional delegation will be honored with a place at the podium -- ALL of whom just voted another $150 Billion to the Iraq/Afghanistan war a few weeks ago.

I sort of doubt that the 8th Day Center for Justice, or some of the other groups that have disendorsed or had public misgivings about this event, would be labeled as raving "communists" (except by the Vatican).

Oh yeah, politicians! Now we're legitimate!

It's great that Ra Chaka is speaking about the Burge police torture cases. An issue that stretches back almost 30 years and deserves to be addressed at every public forum available.

But there's a direct connection between the CPD and Iraq war profiteers that makes the issue locally relevant. -- particuarly when the CPD has come increasingly under fire for the out of control behavior of elite units like the now disbanded Special Operations Squad - whose officers may have been trained by the mercenaries at Blackwater.

So, let's see if Jan calls for an investigation of thee interesting ties. Or will she, like Davidson be content to read about this in the Chicago Tribune.

And it's also ironic that there's evidence available documenting that the CPD has been actively collaborating since 2006 with defense giant Lockheed Martin and the USMC in developing the latest counter-insurgency surveillance and data base technology for the war in Iraq, despite the fact that the Chicago City Council adopted an antiwar resolution. A resolution apparently not worth the paper it was written on, if this is true.

But it's not suprising that evidence suggesting Chicago local authorities are materially contributing or profiting to the war effort might be seen as divisive -- and potentially embarrassing.

Sigh....

Once again, the key task of the day is to stop the war in Iraq, isn't it?

The military-industrial complex and the prison-industrial complex and countless other evils are all linked 'by a thousand threads' to our entire political establishment, to one degree or another. That's ABC.

Everyone has the ability to describe these links on Oct 27 however they want, from the Sparts to the Richardson campaign. And many will do so, on the stages and elsewhere. That's also ABC.

But the message and unity of the day is 'Out Now' and linking slogans. That's ABC, too.

Unless you think the action task OF THE DAY or even this period is overthrowing that establishment and all its complexes NOW! If that's what you think, then make your case. I'd love to see it, and probably pass it on to The Onion.

"Once again, the key task of the day is to stop the war in Iraq, isn't it?"

Yeah, by having Congressmen and women who continue to vote funding for the war given top billing at "pro-peace" press conferences and rallies.

Say, CIA director Michael Hayden is coming to town the following Tuesday. Maybe you could block book him into speaking at the "peace" rally also? It'll greatly enhance the credibility of the event and put real pressure on to stop this war.

Will you explain how you are going to stop the war in iraq. You have been at it for years, the world is still waiting, and the war still goes on. I guess progressives must march and chant to feel good about themselves.

Once again, Art, you reveal the problem.

No differences that make a difference on the war between Hayden of the CIA and Rush, Davis, Gutierrez and Schakowsky? Really? You just make yourself look silly with that position...

No, I wouldn't go for Hayden, but I'd consider any number of top CIA guys who have been 'eased out' over the war.

In the end, a Democratic or Republican President will sign the troop pullout order, and/or a Democratic Congress will cut off the money. The people themselves are the engine for getting from here to there, but we need the order-signers and fund-cutters at the top, too, don't we?

That should be easy to answer. Figuring 'how' all out, step-by-step, is a little harder.

"No differences that make a difference on the war between Hayden of the CIA" and the congresspeople?

Now you're putting words in my mouth, Carl. Hayden hasn't voted any funding for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, whereas the congresspeople voted unanimously for it the last two times.

I was just suggesting that since the primary consideration in choosing press conference and rally speakers seems to be their celebrity status (as opposed to what they've actually DONE against the war), you might want to book Hayden, who's a rising star. After all, that seems to have been the consideration for choosing Daley, who also can't vote against war funding, but is happy to violate the civil liberties of anti-war and police brutality activists time and again in this city.

Actually, it's much more pragmatic, 'Art.'

If you and I, say, and a few other radicals, call a press conference calling on Chicagoans to take to the streets Oct 27 for 'Out Now,' it's hardly 'news' and I seriously doubt if anyone would come, let alone run a story.

But add a few Members of Congress, Alderman, top labor leaders, CBO leaders with a long history here, as well as a few radicals, to deliver the same message, all out for 'Out Now' on the 27th, then at least you have a shot at getting some media coverage.

And thus a bigger turnout--it's a no-brainer to me.

Of course, one never knows.

Brittany may have another fender bender that day, or OJ might get busted for something, and the we're all scooped and marginalized for REAL NEWS!, even with our handful of politicians.

We'll see.

To 'just a question':

To be brief, the war ends when the streets are filled and become ungovernable, when the soldiers and their officers won't fight, and when a veto-proof majority in Congress cuts the money.

Just keep working on any one of them, or any combination of them, that suits you.

Carl, now even you are iterating the Democrats' lies about needing a two-thirds majority. Some of their own presidential candidates are even saying that is hogwash!

I agree with the critics--I'm tired of going to anti-war events where people who directly support the occupation by giving it funding headline and tell everyone what they want to hear. It's insulting.

The war ends when the POLICY MAKERS (not to be confused with "the people") know they cannot stay in office if they continue the war. With little or no anti-war political opposition, they have only changed their rhetoric.

But that won't be the message delivered on 027 will it, Carl? ?

Are you or CAWI going to call for "filling the streets and making them "ungovernable"? Will Danny, or Bobby, or Jan echo that call? And offer to support those active duty soldiers who refuse to fight or antiwar vets who speak out against the war? Will they publically pledge not to authorize another dime in funding for the war? How about joining dangerous radicals like singer Willie Nelson in endorsing Cindy Sheehan's run for Nancy Pelosi's seat in Congress?

Will those local city council members on hand call on for their respective municipalities to adopt resolutions establishing sanctuaries for war resisters at home and halt collaboration with war profiteers like Lockheed, Boeing or Blackwater?

Will Dennis Gannon of the CFL call for industrial action - the kind already carried out by union longshoremen in San Francisco and Tacoma-Seattle who have embargoed arms shipments several times as "hot cargo"?

Fat chance.

Instead, we'll have a "few Members of Congress, Aldermen, top labor leaders and CBO leaders with a long history" treat us to the same arguments advanced in 2004 - the only way to end the war is to elect a Democratic President and secure a Democratic majority in Congress.

Forget about defunding the war, forget about impeachment. Instead we'll be urged to line up behind whatever candidate wins the nomination, including Hillary -- in the hope that just maybe, some troops will return home from Iraq by the end of her first term --- if they're not diverted to Iran instead.

The thing I fear the most (there's that word fear that we're governed by these days!) is that these pro-war politicians are going to come in and assuage the "fears" of those who hate the war and want to believe in "santa claus" - we on the left lose all our peeps to the organized parties of the Dems and the Greens for another election cycle. We spend all our energies organizing once again. Shame on everyone who is allowing this to happen!

Not gonna happen. And here's why. We don't have the draft anymore. We have an army of volunteers... want to bring the system down? Bring the draft back! And yes, the end DOES justify the means.

Goodness, listen to yourselves...

Jan already does call on people to fill the streets, and to keep the demos up and get bigger, and has marched in most demos in this town herself.

Ald. Moore already does call for a complete cutoff of funds, and probably will again on the 27th.

We'll have a number of vets on stage calling for a growth of resistance in the military, and the military families speaker and gold star mothers speaker will deliver another message on cutting off funds.

And I'd be very surprised if more than one speaker didn't talk to the topic of impeachment.

Now Gannon calling for a general strike--that's indeed more than a stretch, but don't you think it's a step in a good direction to get him up there in the first place?

And I'm also applauding those who got arrested at Durbin's office--Operation Occupation has been part of UFPJ's Fall plan from day one. What some of you don't see is that there's more than one way to bring pressure to bear on people like him, including a challenge to deliver a strong message to an 'Out Now' crowd, a challenge he hasn't accepted.

Politicians asking you to vote? How Shocking! But you'll have tables from PDA, Greens, Richardson, Ron Paul of the GOP, and maybe even Kucinich to choose from. Or you can do something else on election day.

No, there's four problems revealed in the comments here.

1. Some of you cling to the desire for a coalition of the left, rather than a coalition of the left and center for 'Out Now.'

2. Some of you think you're immune to the 'illusions' of politicians, while many in the crowd will be suckered like sheep, a rather disdainful view of people instead of simply acknowledging widely different viewpoints among the antiwar masses themselves.

3. At least one of you thinks we gotta make it worse before it gets better, like bring back the draft, making people suffer more, and then drag them in that way. Again, a rather disdainful, elitist view.

4. Finally some of you are TIRED of demos. Well, too bad. All of us are tired, but not that tired that we're going to stop, or let up one bit. Get your butt out there anyway, and bring someone who has never been to one before. Get outside your damned comfort zone of 'tired of marching' people, which is less than 20,000 people in this town, and get into a milieu of people who are critical of this war and have never been to a mass action on the war, and organize them to come.

It does wonders for lifting your spirits and recharging 'tired' batteries.

First, let's be clear: organizers of the Chicago action, out of all of the Oct. 27 actions in the nation, have worked most aggressively to bring in Democratic Party elected officials whose voting record on the war is mixed, at best. Not public pronouncements, but voting records. People who vote are not morons. We have decent bullshit meters that have grown even more attuned since voting in a Democratic congress that has failed to deliver on it's electoral promise to stop the war. The congress COULD do way more, even and including without a veto-proof majority. But it won't, and people like the folks speaking on Monday won't press the leadership to do more by taking more aggressive action themselves.

Also, 8th Day has disendorsed the 10/27 action in Chicago. DISENDORSED. Carl can take credit for the balmy mid-October weather if he wants, or Santa Clause or Nelson Mandela, but that doesn't mean this appropriated credit is deserved. I invite him to find one -- just one -- 8th Day arresstee willing to cosign his assertion that the Durbin arrests earlier this week were part of the Chicago )ct. 27 'plan'.

But really, what's the bigger issue here? The key question is -- does the strategy laid out by Carl's friends, bringing in elected officials at the expense of more radical voices, serve as a more effecive way to reach the 'center' and end the war sooner? Let's unpack this.

Does it advance one of his three prongs -- to make the streets ungovernable? No. In fact, the entire action is designed to make the streets wholly ubergovernable. It is, in fact, an affirmation of permissible dissent.

Does it help the soldiers and their officers refuse to fight? First, there's an intrinsic misreading of history in this statement. For example, during the Vietnam war, it was much more typical for officers to be fragged by rank and file soldiers rather than take the lead and openly oppose the war, but whatever. It's unsurprising that Carl would give 'officers resistance' equal billing with soldiers resistance. But the bigger question is, does an action of this character help inspire troops not to fight? If the vets and soldiers themselves are to be believed, NO. IVAW has, in fact, refused to throw down for this action in Chicago, and has told Carl that they are not interested in being 'token' vets for his assembly.

Third, does this action help create a scenario in wihch a "veto-proof majority in Congress cuts the money." Hard to see how this works, either, since the action basically provides political cover to a group of congressmen who have voted at least once to FUND the war rather than leading in their party, bucking the leadership, and refusing to cast their pro-funding votes.

There is a reason support for this Democratic-majority congress has been tanking -- with its numbers dropping even more precipitiously than George Bush's in recent weeks. Why? Because people recognize that the party and its leaders could be legislatively blocking war funding, and won't.

Besides not meeting Carl's own litmus test for what needs to happen to end this war, there is another grave danger in this action -- namely that it further serves to divide and demoralize the anti-war majority in this nation. It's true that it's been structured to provide a space for labor bureaucrats like Tom Balanoff, who will only step up to the plate when the message has been sufficiently dumbed down to strip any pretense of overly aggressive progressive politics from the agenda. But these guys hardly represent the cutting edge of a movement, particularly when they're perceived by huge swaths of their own rank and file as failing to take the tough stands with management needed to rebuild a fighting labor movement in this country.

But worse, because this action basically functions as a Democratic Party rally for nice-sounding but lame-voting elected officials, it further disrespects an already alienated and frustrated base that is increasingly so disgusted with the hypocracy of electoral politics that they won't even show up at the polls.

This does not lift people's spirits. It further disenfranchises a sweeping anti-war majority in this country whose alienation gives the Karl Roves out there tremendous joy. Why? Because when they perfectly understandably opt out of the voting racket next November, the likelihood of Bush's party, by hook and by crook, 'winning' another national election is that much greater.

And this brings me to a point that I find most baffling in Carl's argument. This kind of approach -- his kind of approach -- does nothing to secure electoral victory for the super-Democratic Party Washington majority he claims is necessary to end the war (it's not, but whatever). In fact, by fostering voter disgust and grassroots alienation, it makes it even more likely that the antiwar base will simply walk away from the elections, as other more progressive constituencies -- from people of color to working class people -- have done in recent decades.

Carl's strategy is a strategy of ego, domination and control, and I might even give that a pass on this occasion if it were also a strategy to advance the struggle to end the war. Instead, it's the opposite, and that's what's really depressing here.

Actually, Davidson, it's more likely if Durbin is a no show, it won't be because he's intimidated or hasn't yet responded to your strategy of 'constructive engagement'. It will be because he can comfortably take your sector of the antiwar movement for granted. So unless there is a immediate and practical advantage to be gained say, focused, national media attention - why bother?

What's your point, 'DD214'?

I've been asserting that Durbin, et al are likely to be 'no shows' from the very beginning, while everyone here is having puppies over the invites.

No that it seems my prediction is likely to be the case, you want to blame me for it?

I'd make an educated guess that Durbin's pissed because, in his mind, he's doing everything he thinks is best to stop a war he hates, that we're not 'practical' enough, and he's puzzled why he can't take us for granted, and that he'd have to change some positions to speak at our rally, probably doesn't want to a this point, but still feels the heat.

To which I say, 'fan the flames' under the feet of the top-ranking centrists, with carrots and sticks, but I've still got the sense to see that they're different on Iraq than Bush, in a way that makes a difference, unlike some who hang out here.

Uh, no, Carl. If Durbin's office gave any thought at all to this, it was to look at your lineup, note that he has a plenthora of friends and supporters already on the stage - indeed the elected officials listed are both unanimous in their support of his reelection and the message of lining up behind the Democratic slate in 2008.

So why bother taking the minimal risk that he might be heckled from the crowd around his record --in front whatever press might be there? It simply isn't worth the effort. Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?

Once again, we see the problem, don't we, 'dd214?'

If you had your druthers, you'd have an antiwar coalition that purged Dems critical of the war and the people leading mass organizations that usually get out votes for them, or at least against the GOP, as well, from the speakers platform, press conferences or some other public role until they passed the ever moving goalposts of your purity tests.

Where would you start purging from our actual roster and where would you end? And Jan doesn't count--we know you all hate her.

That was the M20 benchmark, and quite a few of us want little or nothing to do with it anymore. We have to build even wider alliances than you'll see Oct 27 if we're serious about stopping the war.

You're welcome to the left cul-de-sac.

"If you had your druthers, you'd have an anti-war coalition that purged Dems critical of the war..."

Yes, Carl, when you're building a coalition it's generally wise not to include your enemies inside of it and thus allow them to sabotage your work from within. By voting for war funding every time it counts, by having one's leading presidential candidates all pledge to keep troops in Iraq through the end of their first term (2013), the Democratic leadership and its loyal followers in the Chicago congressional delegation have objectively ranged themselves on the other side, regardless of their rhetoric.

One need look no further than to your own recent behavior, Carl, to see how corrosive it is to include pro-war forces in an anti-war coalition. That you are now repeating the fiction that it takes super-majorities in Congress to stop funding for the war shows just who is influencing whom in your grand coalition. It's something that the Occupation Project (which you claim as such an integral part of your campaign) recently called "THE BIG LIE," noting that in the Senate, for example, "[Democratic Senate leader Harry] Reid alone could refuse to bring a [war funding] bill to the floor, or another senator could put a secret hold on a bill."

In your desperation to court these war-funding politicians and make your grand coalition more palatable to them, you've deliberately excluded many anti-war stalwarts from any meaningful decision-making for October 27. This has in turn whip-sawed against the building of the event as even many local endorsers find it difficult to muster much enthusiasm for it (let alone the dis-endorsers), and thus aren't doing nearly as much work as they might to build for the event.

Evidence of this can be seen in just how little depth there is on the ground in the building of this action. Despite announcing the event way back in June, and having weeks of uncharacteristically favorable weather during which to build for it, I finally saw my first O27 poster on a street pole only last Wednesday, just a week and a half before the event. This, despite the fact that more affluent donors have allowed the project to have paid staff and many times the budgets of other recent anti-war protests. Yes, you'll try and pull a rabbit out of the hat with expensive media buys and repeated email blasts, but that will only partially counter the effect of the alienation -- as evidenced in the unprecedented dis-endorsements -- that many local groups feel from this event.

And yes, Carl, you can point to a laundry list of mostly paper endorsements, but it's turned out that at least a few of those (SDS, for example) were never even paper endorsements, never having been properly authorized in the first place. UFPJ itself continues to pretend to be much, much larger than it actually is by listing groups that never assented to be members in the first place, not to mention groups that long ago went out of business.

Amidst thousands of hits on this site, the fact that no one, besides yourself, has commented in favor of the O27 event or its organizing strategy on this or any of the many other threads, should be telling to you Carl. And you can't claim this is because indy media is "irrelevant," or otherwise why would you spend so much effort posting to it over and over again?

Much of your grand coalition is smoke and mirrors, Carl. What attendance you do get on O27 will be disproportionately that of out-of-towners and suburbanites who don't know the dirty laundry of this project.

MinimumSecurity.net

Carl wrote, "And Jan doesn't count--we know you all hate her."

And with good reason. Jan Schakowsky, along with every other Congressional Democrat allied to the Daley organization, has backed to the hilt the militarization of Chicago Public Schools. Jan's friend and Richie Daley's pal Dick Durbin seeded the naval base at Senn H. S. with $3 million.

Those kids marching around in the new Marine Corps Academy looked really cute-- or was it ominous? It brought to mind the Hitler youth, parading about in brown shirts with flags flying, rifles toted on young shoulders carried in close order drill.

This in addition to Jan voting for the recent war funding authorization, and supporting the Israeli terror regime all the way.

Jan Schakowsky: An Integral Part of Carl's Coalition of the Killing!

Sigh...Just pitiful all around...

Let's see...the local MFSO, 8th Day, CPA, ISO and the local SDS asked to have their names taken of, which we quickly did. No hard feelings, we'll sum it all up later, once all the results are in.

That's five out of 160 or so and still counting.

Meanwhile the regional MFSO and Gold Star Mothers for Peace maintained their involvement, and are on the speakers platform, and know all the details of the discussion here. All sorts of vets groups remain engaged, adding a new one today from NW Indiana, and a vet of both Iraq and Afghanistan will speak.

Paper endorsements?

VFCN upped their level of support once 8th Day made its decision, and Sisters of Mercy, and Several Pax Christi groups, from Chicago and elsewhere, signed on as well.

Milwaukee SDS got the news about SDS here, but is still on board, and sending about three buses at last count.

Paper endorsements?

The Southwest Youth Collaborative signed on today, and is bringing a bus from the South Side, as is Chuy Garcia's and Rudy and Pepe Lozano's groups in Little Village. One of them will be on the speakers platform. SWYC founder, Camille Odeh, will be speaking

Paper endorsements?

UNITE-HERE and other unions are bringing buses from around the Midwest, including several from Cleveland.

Paper endorsements?

The West Suburban Interfaith folks, and Dave Martin, know all about the debate, but they've still lined up six buses in six different burbs to bring mainly new folks.

Just Suburban yokels you can dismiss?

The debate appears on Indymedia in St Louis, but the people there tell me the 'peace train' is full, and they're scrambling to get extra cars, or a bus and more vans. Plus they passed the hat and got us an extra $500.

More paper endorsements?

I could go on and on, but the point is made. With this accusation, you're just fouling your own nest.

The many, many groups who've stuck with us, and helped us grow, will take note of your nonsense, and hold you accountable as well. That's one thing nice about the digital age. It's all in writing. At least mine has my name on it, so people can hold me accountable--good, bad or indifferent. The rest of you can wimpily hide behind your nom d'gueres.

As for the other points...

Paid staff? Three people working constantly since Aug 1 to mid October have gotten exactly $1200 COMBINED! What a joke, and worship of primitiveness and remaining amateurish to boot. And you what to make them feel privileged and corrupt? Take it up with Chaka, if you don't want to deal with me about it.

Professional media? Goodness, I only wish we had the resources for more.

Yes, we've buying a few target radio ads, mainly to Black and Latino communities, plus getting all the free PSAs and talk shows we can. And you're criticizing it? Would you do the same to the immigrant rights folks?

I have a map over here with the neighborhood blocked off that have been flyered and postered. It's not bad. Some have to be done for the third time, because a few malcontents, of whatever persuasion, tear them down.

Between ANSWER and ourselves, I'd say over 25,000 flyers are out as of last week, and more are coming.

But beside trying to split people off and dampen turnout with your tempest in a teapot, what the hell are you doing? Where's your big success?

Jan's part of the 'Coalition of the Killing' now? And your politics are reduced to sophomoric anarchist cartoons? And most of the groups in our coalition are phoney or dead?

That kind of comtempt for friends, that kind of disdain for potential allies, spells out EXACTLY why we had to make this break to get out of your left cul-de-sac. You've exposed YOUR hand.

Smoke and mirrors? The real smoke and mirrors here is how you've inflated yourselves to think you're the real antiwar movement, while the rest of us are sham and hang out with the 'Coalition of the Killing.'

Finally, what's really sad, and to the point that I'm the only one who engages here, is the several times I've mentioned our discussions here in the coalitions planning session, the question is usually posed, by a majority in the room, 'What's Indymedia? I've never heard of it?'

When I explain how it grew out of Seattle, that's is worldwide, and even though many of the posts on it are loopy, it's still important, at least potentially, and when a few brave souls will venture to take a looksee, they always come back and say either 'where do you get the patience' or 'don't you have better things to do?

Why am I the only one? Because I can't find anyone else who wants to bother, not that there aren't very substantial numbers who not only agree with me, but say 'It's about time...'

I know many people here who I have some respect for, even if they've painted themselves in a corner. Maybe because I was a self-proclaimed anarchist myself once, and know some of the thinking and what a trap it is, and feel that someone has to pose the counter-argument, so it might as well be me.

Actually my hunch is that the only folks painted into a corner will be those who are promoting the kind of 'official optimism' characteristic of the PR to date for this event.

But as always, the proof will be in the pudding. Will the Woodlawn Organization bring 2000 protesters out from the South Side as the program chair for the local mobilization has claimed ? Will 30 churches on the S. and West Sides mobilize their congregations to come as a email blast from UFPJ home office asserts? Will thousands of union members march in their union jackets - heralding a new breakthrough in bringing out the membership of organized labor against the war? We'll see.

As for regional turn out, nothing particuarly surprising here - or particularly suggestive of a major breakthrough to the "center-left", despite the hype. The vast majority of the out of state groups endorsing and mobilizing are UFPJ members - not surprising considering that the call for this first Midwest regional mobilization was first advanced during a regional caucus during the national UFPJ conference last summer in Chicago. Contrast these endorsers with the total number of UFPJ affilitates across the Midwest for a more accurate picture of who's on board and organizing transportation for this. The most impressive efforts seem to be in Wisconsin, via the Wisconsin Network for Peace and Justice. As for the St. Louis peace train, these good folks have been bringing contingents to Chicago by train for the M-20 protests for the past several years now, -- without the benefit of a call for a regional mobilization, or the prodding of a national antiwar coalition.

BTW, thanks for the update on the local chapter of Military Families Speak Out also dis-endorsing. I did not know that.

When Congressperson Jan Schakowsky is introduced ISM-Chicago wants everyone to remember that she has been a loyal supporter of the illegal occupation of Palestine since being elected. We hope that Camille Odeh and anyone else speaking on behalf of the Arabs and Muslims in the audience has the moral courage to confront her on stage for her role in the suffering of the Palestinian people.

Saturday is called a day of unity by the liberal organizers. But very obviously, it isn't. Among all the major demonstrations announced on CIMC, only this phony pro-democrap party rally has gotten such a wave of outrage. There have been 15-18 major demos of over 2,000 people, here, since 9-11. Not one has caused this contoversy. The simple fact is Sat. isn't a day of unity but a day on division and hostility.

The answer is not for us to be bullied by peacemakers to shut up. It is to make davison's white middle-america more like those of us that are yelling at his damn pro-war rally. The speaker list includes at least 7 politicians and 6 unions piecards. Don't expect any of them to say shout the fucker down. Instead, expect all of them to say, Vote Democrat. What a fucking farce!

Again, Fred, you reveal the problem we're breaking from, your disdain for 'white middle class America.'

We think we need a big chunk of them to end this war, and a big chunk of them oppose this war, but haven't been mobilized yet.

We're not going to do it all at once, but we've taken up the task.

You, on the other hand, reveal only contempt for such work, and want to keep your 'unity' to a much smaller circle.

Thanks, but no thanks.

As for 'middle class,' I'll match you family histories and current 1040s at 50 paces any day of the week...