In response to Chris: Chris, you have a good point. No, we are not protesting, uniting, rallying, coming together as anti-war, pro-peace, pro-nonviolence, pro-UN, anti-Bush, pro-morals, dissenting citizens to merely achieve honks or a quota against our "competition" (the pro-war people).

To merely get honks, "run a PR campaign," and look pretty means dookie. However, we must not overlook these tools in achieving our end, whatsoever you might think it to be. To some, it is to stop the war. To some, it is to impeach Bush and Stop the War. To some, it is to educate and excite people to impeach Bush, Stop the War, support international law, and radically reform society's institutions and behaviors to create a more utopian life for all.

Still, publicity can be a useful tool. Numbers can be useful. Having people honk may bring hope and inspiration to the uncertain protester who isn't as lit by activism as some of us. Nonetheless, I make the point that we should have a legal right to a safe, secure protest. If we are for peace, and believe that this means no unjust war, and this IS an unjust war, then those who say "Support our Troops: Bomb Iraq" are AGAINST the protest and therefore hostile.

Now, I believe in their right to protest as well. I don't think we should reversely discriminate and strip civil liberties like fascists.

But I would agree, overall and foremost, that the point of a mass meeting of nonviolent, anti-war activists needs to be getting the message across within and outside the rally, focusing on quality, moral issues, and working to reform the wrongs symbolically, indirectly, and as directly as possible.

There's so much more I think we all can say and debate and prompt one another to think and do. That's why we have to continue the protests, come up with new and forgotten and old ideas, and work together with a strong voice and presence so that we are not overlooked. Having the pro-war people next to us, literally, may contribute to the cause being overlooked in some ways. And if the politicians and pro-war and apathetic people continue to overlook us, we must "shout louder" and in new, consistent methods until we are unavoidable. Yet, again, literally shouting is only the beginning.

Though I believe in nonviolence, our resistance can be nonviolent, peaceful, and threatening to our opposition. We must continue to shout and act until they know that "the worst has yet to come." Whether that means a massive strike, elections, demonstrations, civil disobedience, or impeachment, we must use that phrase which the warmongers tell us to make us rally for war and fear, as our tool as well. The difference: the means and end of the people. Yes, indeed, the worst has yet to come. Now, we are left with those thoughts. Where should we go from here? With liberty and justice for all--how?