Regardless of one's views on the war, the rule of law and respect for the rights of others are terribly important. People who "reclaim the streets" are doing the same thing as Saddam and his regime, just to a smaller degree. Until people start respecting the rights of others, there will be violence and war. It has to start with you and me.

Craig,

I disagree that street protests are equivalent to the acts of a brutal and cruel dictator. I also don't fully agree with the insurrections' motives or tactics. Yet, the common thread I do have with them is that the indiscriminate killing in Iraq is counter-productive in the long and short term and must be stopped. Our regime has not responded rationally to the will of people at home and internationally. While public opinion should only influence and guide policy and not dictate it, this dissent against the war is broad based, articulate, international, and proactive. At home, tempers escalate when dissidents are ignored or actively opposed as in San Francisco. Consider what would have happened if the police in Ashland responded Thursday with violence or arrests. Protestors would have been radicalized, the ranks would have swelled, and Ashland would have become 'the enemy', street protests would have continued and property damage may have resulted. Instead the police routed traffic around the blockade and didn't make arrests, the protestors statement was heard and in the minor victory, the protestors felt empowered. After victory there was calm.

People have the right to take to the streets. By suppressing that right by using police force, the battle escalates and continues. Mayor Brown could end it all now by dismissing charges against all non-violent, non-destructive protestors, by vocally opposing the war and by creating a means for dissent to be aired in the local and national media. Mayor Brown has the ability to do this yet chooses not to.

I agree with you Craig, that all must respect the human and civil rights of others in order to create a just and sane world. This is why my role in the recent protests has been to monitor protestors and police alike, assuring the police that violence is not being planned, assuring protestors that the police will not use excessive and irrational force, and doing what I can to prevent escalation, violence and excess confrontation from either side. After the deployment of the Douglas County riot squad to face down the school children on March 5th, I realized that things could get out of hand, even in Ashland. Since then, I've met with Chief Fleuter and I act as a liaison between radical and moderate protestors and the police. I believe that this has had significant impact and is effective at maintaining peace here at home.

"I disagree that street protests are equivalent to the acts of a brutal and cruel dictator. "
[Craig] No, they are not equivalent. But they are both based on the same idea that one person has the right to interfere with the lives and property of others. When you block a street, you take from me the right to use that street for the purpose it is intended. You interfere with my ability to go where I want, or to earn a living, or whatever. Saddam just does it at a more dangerous level. The protesters have determined that the war is wrong and they know that absolutely in the same way that the religious right knows that abortion is wrong and Saddam knows that Shiites are bad Muslims. With that absolute knowledge, each of these people feels that their cause justifies interfering with another's lives and property. When I ask myself how I might justify imposing my will on others (and there certainly are times I would like to), I just have not been able to find a basis for that, and I doubt any rational person can. Until we all accept the idea that we just have no right to interfere with the lives and property of others, it all comes down to who has the bigger gang.


"I also don't fully agree with the insurrections' motives or tactics. Yet, the common thread I do have with them is that the indiscriminate killing in Iraq is counter-productive in the long and short term and must be stopped."
[Craig] I also hate the idea of all the killing. But I have always thought there really are two sides to this. If we stop the war, the indiscriminant killing will continue as it has ever since Saddam came to power. I don't know just what the numbers are, but it is at least tens of thousands and there is real risk of it becoming hundreds of thousands if we allow him to continue. It is hard for me to continue to stand by and do nothing. On the other hand I recognize the risks and costs of this war. I even have gone so far as to develop a web site in opposition (http://www.coherentsystems.com/nowar). I'm really torn on the issue, and I have little patience for people who think it is so black and white either way.

"Our regime has not responded rationally to the will of people at home and internationally."
[Craig] My guess is the polls are correct and the current will of the American people supports the war. That does not make it right or wrong, just that the supporters' gang is currently bigger. I don't know about real world opinion. The opponents naturally make more noise and get more attention.

"People have the right to take to the streets."
[Craig] They certainly have the right to express their views in very public ways. I disagree that they have the right to disrupt other people's lives. What I have observed in Ashland, Portland, and other places, is that the police have been very flexible, allowing people to march, but putting a stop to things when the only purpose is to block streets and draw attention.

By suppressing that right by using police force, the battle escalates and continues. Mayor Brown could end it all now by dismissing charges against all non-violent, non-destructive protestors, by vocally opposing the war and by creating a means for dissent to be aired in the local and national media. Mayor Brown has the ability to do this yet chooses not to.

"I agree with you Craig, that all must respect the human and civil rights of others in order to create a just and sane world. This is why my role in the recent protests has been to monitor protestors and police alike, assuring the police that violence is not being planned, assuring protestors that the police will not use excessive and irrational force, and doing what I can to prevent escalation, violence and excess confrontation from either side. After the deployment of the Douglas County riot squad to face down the school children on March 5th, I realized that things could get out of hand, even in Ashland. Since then, I've met with Chief Fleuter and I act as a liaison between radical and moderate protestors and the police. I believe that this has had significant impact and is effective at maintaining peace here at home."
[Craig]
I do appreciate your efforts in this regard. You're right, by keeping things calm, we avoid polarization.

Good for you, John. You're optimistic about toppling the liberal Democratic mayor of San Francisco. ?! Why don't we drop the self-serving "Battle of San Francisco," cripple-the-cities rhetoric and just speak out, demonstrate our opinions whatever they are, persuade the reasonable, and vote our consciences? Do we need to be every bit as intolerant and reactionary as those we disagree with politically and morally? I find it difficult to believe that if you read your own messages you can't see that you're preaching to the choir, that you're propagandizing and antagonizing where you could be effectively and reasonably persuading. You say correctly that the source of legitimate government power derives from the people. Does it derive only from the people who agree with us? In fact, Bush can ignore the peace movement. He can and will ignore any radicalized minority. What he can't ignore is a majority educated and persuaded to oppose his policies. Shouldn't we work on that?

Of course, I could be wrong. Maybe strident declarations of moral superiority and the demonization of the 72% of America that disagrees with us accomplishes your objectives. If so, I just don't understand your objectives. Are we interested in contributing to real and realistic change, or are we all about impressing one another with our anti-establishment credentials? Again, maybe I'm wrong. Just consider the possibility that dialing back the rhetoric might further your goals.

Protest does cause change.
It must get the attention of politicians first, however.
Dissent and protest are part of our American heritage, and not only a right but a duty.
In case you have forgotten,
this is called democracy.

Furthermore, the writer asks, 'Must we be as reactionary as those we disagree with". I would say no, but we do need to be as vocal. After all, look who is now the Resident in the White House.

The problem with those who fear speaking out - and even "taking to the streets" -- is that such misplaced 'politeness' has and will continue to undermine our democracy.

We must speak out.
We must protest.
Is it disrespectful? You bet.
I do not respect George W. Bush.

We not only can, but we must, show our disrespect for those that would strip us of our civil liberties and our democracy.

Jean in "Butterfly" Palm Beach County