|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Protest Activity |
|
“PROSPECT FOR PEACE” PROTESTERS MOVE TO MAIN STREET |
Current rating: 0 |
by Ricky Baldwin
Email: baldwinricky (nospam) yahoo.com (verified) |
16 May 2005
|
|
After more than three years of demonstrations on North Prospect against US wars and occupations, the Anti-War Anti-Racism Effort (AWARE) is calling off its protests in the Marketview shopping area -- and moving to downtown Champaign. |
(Champaign) After more than three years of demonstrations on North Prospect against US wars and occupations, the Anti-War Anti-Racism Effort (AWARE) is calling off its protests in the Marketview shopping area -- and moving to downtown Champaign.
Beginning this Saturday, June 4, there will be no more peace protests on North Prospect the first Saturday of the month organized by AWARE. The first Saturday of every month will find peace activists demonstrating in the new public space at One Main, on the corner of Main and Neil Streets in downtown Champaign, from 2-4 pm.
AWARE will also be demonstrating at One Main before that on Saturday May 21 from 2-4 pm.
Protests on North Prospect began soon after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. Protesters didn’t know exactly what the Bush Administration’s response would be, but they were pretty sure it wouldn’t be good. Turned out they were right.
But as the first handfuls of peace protesters gathered on North Prospect week after week in 2001 and into 2002, through the US sabre-rattling, illegal invasion of Afghanistan, and overthrow of the Taliban, little did they know that their numbers would eventually swell above 350 and that a majority of people in the US and the world would soon come to agree with their basic assertions.
Afghanistan
As soldiers executed prisoners on the road to Kabul, others locked captives in shipping crates to suffocate in incredible heat and US officials ordered hundreds incarcerated at the US military base at Guantanamo Bay without charges or legal recourse, protesters hand-painted signs describing these events. Most had not been reported in the local mainstream media, and none was critiqued there in light of clear international law.
But passing motorists often didn’t want to hear about it. Throughout the US war against Afghanistan, the most common response to the protests from passersby (after averted gazes) was obscene gestures and shouts. Numbers at these early demonstrations also remained small -- often half a dozen, and sometimes only one.
It wasn’t easy to keep coming back, but they did.
Later, in October 2002, when protests began against the threatened US attack on its old ally in Iraq, the difference was palpable. First, the numbers of protesters grew rapidly to regularly exceed 100 on a weekly basis. Organizers regularly signed people in individually to have accurate counts. And many passersby began expressing support, including growing numbers who had or almost never participated in any demonstration but who joined what was by then known as “Prospect for Peace”.
Iraq
By the time the really bad weather struck in January and February, the demonstrators had doubled. Protests on North Prospect attracted over 200 in one blinding snow storm when many motorists -- included some on the way to the demo -- were stranded in driveways and stuck in underpasses.
By the big national and international protests against the US invasion of Iraq in February 2002, and the even larger national and international protests in March (drawing over 10 million people in one day), anti-war protesters on North Prospect numbered over 300 every Saturday. One day organizers lost count at 350 who signed in.
At the same time, counter protests had begun nearby in support of the war sponsored by Slot-n Wing and Clear Channel media corporation. Corporate pro-war sponsors funded huge cranes to raise US flags high overhead and loudspeakers, which pro-war leaders used to accuse peace activists of everything from treason to support from unspecified “foreign paymasters”. These drew as many as 200 and lasted for six weeks until President Bush declared the end of the war -- in retrospect a bitter irony.
As the fighting continued in Iraq and Afghanistan, “Prospect for Peace” continued for several weeks until, in the summer of 2002, AWARE attempted to call it off in favor of other activities -- mainly educational events. Many people at the time believed that US troops had been welcomed with open arms, the fighting was over and US troops would soon be returning home victorious.
Either those educational events, and thousands more like them around the country, were enormously successful or the public was simply persuaded by the deepening chaos in Iraq. Suicide attacks have taken higher and higher tolls. Families and friends of US troops in Iraq told more and more tales of death, abuse and substandard preparations. It became clear that the occupation was not welcome.
And there was the nagging question of the much-touted “weapons of mass destruction” and alleged connections between Saddam’s regime and al-Qaida, neither of which panned out. Bush had lied, and many, many people -- US troops and Iraqi civilians, including many children -- had died. Then there was Abu Ghraib.
By late 2004 national polls consistently showed most Americans disagreed with the war in Iraq, and by early 2005 those polls showed not only did most Americans think the war was a bad idea, but it had been wrong in the first place.
Anti-War Majority
In March of 2005 AWARE organized an event marking the second anniversary of the US invasion of Iraq, drawing over 200 people to One Main in downtown Champaign, including dozens of new faces. Two lanes of passing motorists on Neil Street accepted anti-war leaflets at a much higher rate than ever on North Prospect: close to 75 percent. And pedestrians stopped to talk or join the rally.
Since then, AWARE has been trying out the new venue at One Main on the third Saturday of each month as a possible alternative to North Prospect, and everyone has been well pleased. It’s a comfortable, pleasant area with shops and cafes nearby, regularly filled with pedestrian traffic, and the group can have an information table and productive conversations with passersby.
So it’s time for a change. North Prospect has been a valuable, visible site for important dissent against war hysteria and fear-mongering. Many thousands of people who questioned the direction of US policy but thought they were alone have been encouraged to see organized demonstrations of support for peace and sanity there. But One Main is a new space with a new audience and new possibilities for dialogue. All are welcome to join in. |
This work is in the public domain |
Comments
|
Why we still protest |
by Carol
carolinskeep (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
17 May 2005
|
It's been a really good experience protesting out on Prospect, and now out on Main. It's heartening to see just how many folks support us, and to do something instead of giving in to despair.
Here's the text of a flyer we've been handing out:
Isn’t it unpatriotic and harmful to our troops to protest the war?
Many soldiers and top brass oppose the war. Every news source agrees that the war was launched on false premises and outright lies. As Iraq War veteran, Marine Sean Huze has said, “Sending us in harm's way for a lie amounts to a betrayal.” Opposing the architects and leaders of this war and demanding an end to the occupation of Iraq is the patriotic right of every concerned citizen.
Hasn’t this war made us safer against the threat of terrorism?
Even the CIA has concluded that the Iraq war is strengthening existing terrorist networks and creating ranks of new recruits. This stunning admission is in a report released in January 2005 by the National Intelligence Council, the CIA’s think-tank. Commenting on the report, David Low, CIA national intelligence officer for transnational threats stated that the Iraq War has provided terrorists with "a training ground, a recruitment ground, [and] the opportunity for enhancing technical skills." (as reported in the L.A Times and Washington Post)
The war may have been wrong, but won’t withdrawal now lead to complete chaos?
There's no clear answer as to what will happen when the US withdraws, but the presence of the US military has increased violence and chaos in Iraq. US firepower is responsible for most of the 15,000-100,000 Iraqi civilians killed since the invasion, and it is the US military that has carried out illegal detentions and torture of Iraqis as seen at Abu Ghraib. Even before the torture scandal broke, 82% of Iraqis polled by the US occupation authority disapproved of the US occupation of Iraq. (Washington Post, May 2004) The US should withdraw its troops, involve the international community, and pay reparations for losses of life and property.
Okay, so what should the US do to stop terrorism?
Stop military aggression. Pay reparations to rebuild Iraq. Join international bodies such as the International Criminal Court. Stop supporting dictatorships such as in Egypt and Pakistan. Stop uncritical support of Israel. Work to reduce all nuclear weaponry--even our own. Stop torture and illegal detentions. Invest our foreign and domestic spending in health care, job creation, building infrastructure, cultural exchange, and education instead of arms trading and war.
I’m still not sure I trust your information. Where can I find out more and make up my own mind?
Check out the following web sites and decide for yourself:
www.commondreams.org (collection of news articles and essays)
http://optruth.org (web site of veterans from the war)
http://www.mfso.org (military families who disagree with the war)
http://www.ivaw.net (Iraq veterans against the war)
http://www.occupationwatch.org (Baghdad based web site on the occupation) |
|
Re: “PROSPECT FOR PEACE” PROTESTERS MOVE TO MAIN STREET |
by are you for real?
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
23 May 2005
|
|
Say what you will about the Iraq war, but if you're suggesting that the US shouldn't have gone after al Qaeda in Afghanistan after 9/11, you're out of your tree! Frankly, it makes me doubt your motives, and that's probably why people flip you off and spit at you when they drive by. |
|
Not only for real, we're where it's at! |
by Ricky Baldwin
baldwinricky (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
26 May 2005
|
Ha! The thing is, as the article says, people DON'T spit on us or flip us off much any more; the vast MAJORITY SUPPORT US!
True, there isn't as much awareness about what really ahppened in Afghanistan. But as that war drags on (and it still is going on) I think more people are realizing the b.s. we were fed over that war, too (e.g. that the US "went after al Qaida" there instead of using 9-11 as a PRETEXT for toppling an uncooperative government in a strategically important place. Recall that the Afghan gov't OFFERED TO EXTRADICT any criminals involved in 9-11 if the US offered some evidence that they were in fact involved. Bush's response was as telling as it was brutishly arrogant: we don't need evidence; we already KNOW they're guilty. In Afghanistan as in Iraq, his Administration preferred violence and conquest to civilized negotiation and/or diplomacy. -- But even if US motives were pure - a *big if* - that wouldn't justify the abuses in Afghanistan, or the gov't puppetry in the name of democracy.) |
|
Re: “PROSPECT FOR PEACE” PROTESTERS MOVE TO MAIN STREET |
by God, you *are* for real
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
26 May 2005
|
You've got to be kidding me if you actually took the former Afghan non-government (aka the Taliban militia) at their word in exonerating al Qaeda from the 9/11 attacks without criminal "evidence", you child.
Regardless, if you still need that "proof", it is available in abundance now following the criminal investigations of the 9/11 attacks, the Madrid train bombings, the Casablanca bombings, etc (etc, etc, etc); so for the US have waited for the Taliban to surrender bin Laden and his thousands of associates would have been a grave mistake...which was obvious at the time to everyone but people like you - and as I said earlier, makes your motives highly suspect.
You're a garden-variety conspiracy theorist and a loony, and if this informs your view on the Iraq war, we obviously see whose side you're on. Maybe passers-by give you the benefit of the doubt by not spitting on you or flipping you off (hardly a vote of confidence in my book!), but it 's probably only because they don't realize - or can't even fathom - just how absolutely apeshit crazy you and your band of fellow tinfoil hatters could possible be. Please, go play in traffic some more. |
|
Re: “PROSPECT FOR PEACE” PROTESTERS MOVE TO MAIN STREET |
by Ricky Baldwin
baldwinricky (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
01 Jun 2005
|
Blah, blah, blah.
The question, as anyone with a modicum of logical or ethical sense can see, is not whether we have evidence NOW, or whether the Taliban would have turned over bin Laden IF we had provided it. The point is, we didn't, and so no one knows what would have happened. (If it was so easy, why didn't we do it?)
Anyway, a number of governments regularly refuse to extradict suspects to the US because of our Neanderthal insistence on the death penalty. We don't invade any of them. Only Afghanistan, because that's what we wanted to do anyway. Conpsiracy has nothing to do with it. |
|
Re: “PROSPECT FOR PEACE” PROTESTERS MOVE TO MAIN STREET |
by Really, now
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
01 Jun 2005
|
Why?
Because we shouldn't have had to prove anything to the Taliban in the first place;
because the Taliban was likey just stalling (duh), and letting them do so was to our strategic disadvantage;
because when we say "hand him over, now" to someone, we mean hand him over, now;
because treating the Taliban with the legitimacy that we afford to other governments is kind of like, well, treating terrorists like tax cheats and bank robbers, instead of armed combatants at war against us;
because all of this was obvious at the time to anyone who didn't simply intend ill towards the US, like you and your brain-dead band of haters, losers, and crazy people;
because nobody cares what you think - but by all means, knock yourself out. Just make sure that when you tell passers-by that you just want the troops to come home from Iraq safe and sound, please be sure to let them know that you did your absolute best to enbolden our enemies following the 9/11 attacks. Do that, and you'll be wishing for the days of being flipped off and spit on, I guarantee you that.
Seriously, dude, you suck. Self-immolation would be a very persuasive protest tactic. Try it. |
|
Firm American majority thinks war was a mistake |
by gehrig
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
03 Jun 2005
|
CBS News Poll. May 20-24, 2005. N=1,150 adults nationwide.
"Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the situation with Iraq?"
Disapprove: 57%
Approve: 38%
Unsure: 5%
----
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll conducted by the polling organizations of Peter Hart (D) and Bill McInturff (R). May 12-16, 2005. N=1,005 adults nationwide.
"When it comes to the war in Iraq, do you think that removing Saddam Hussein from power was or was not worth the number of U.S. military casualties and the financial cost of the war?"
Worth it: 40%
Not worth it: 51%
Depends: 4%
Unsure: 5%
The "not worth it" category has outweighed the "worth it" category for the last fourteen months.
@%< |
|
