in hindsight there are a couple lessons we can learn from that experience, although generally i think we did a great job.

1) i don’t remember the exchange exactly, maybe you do Bao, but i believe there was an understanding that cops would provide security for both sides. the nature of this security was abstract. disruptors were allowed to come into our protest and try to provoke fights. our organizers did the right thing by engaging one-on-one with the disruptors as a distraction.

later, when we tried to enter apartheid-palooza, as gila mentions, we were denied entrance. should we have called out the hypocrisy earlier on?

2) the UW student council president told the Native student group holding their org’s sign which had the student council logo on it that they had to cover it up b/c the student council didn’t support the rally.

i think we failed to socialize this and force the UW student president to take a position: either he supports anti-racist movements against apartheid, or he supports white supremacy

3) planning the end of a rally is sometimes the hardest thing. after the confrontation with the police and the Zionists i think there were a couple false endings, and the confrontation continued. i’m not opposed to this. sometimes this happens, but the numbers trickled off slowly. what are ways to end that confrontation or such a march in a position of strength.

i’m remembering how some of the RUMs in Detroit during the 60s organized their rallies. they had a number of different targets. after they protested the bosses at Chrysler HQ and the cops showed up, they went down to the union hall for a rally that indirectly challenged the conservative union bureaucracy.

what do others think?

another one from Daily!

The video has not been lost! From Gaza to Seattle, Viva Intifada!